Indigenous Sami language transmission across generations: The influence of ethnic context and parental language input patterns

Abstract

Aims:

This study investigates the intergenerational transmission of Sami languages across three generations, focusing on the influence of parental language input patterns and ethnic contexts on the child’s indigenous language acquisition.

Design:

Employing a longitudinal design, this research utilized quantitative data on language competence in grandparents, parents, and children. Data were collected through questionnaires distributed to mothers before childbirth and when the child was 5 years old.

Data and Analysis:

The study is based on the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study (MoBa) and uses data from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway (MBRN). The sample includes 169 Sami children. The Chi-square test of independence and Firth logistic regression were used to examine group differences in language transmission.

Findings:

Parental Sami language input and indigenous ethnic context significantly contribute to the transmission of Sami languages. The likelihood of Sami languages being passed on from parents to children was notably higher than from grandparents to parents, indicating a potential generational shift in language transmission.

Originality:

This is the first national-scale study in Norway investigating the impact of parental language input patterns within an indigenous setting in various ethnic contexts. By examining Sami language transmission over two generational shifts, this study provides insights into the dynamics of indigenous language transmission and its changes over time.

Significance/Implications:

This study confirms the importance of parental language input and the significance of ethnic context for indigenous language transmission. Some children learned the indigenous language even without parental input, emphasizing the importance of the educational system and broader society, as well as family in indigenous language revitalization.

Keywords

Intergenerational language transmission bilingualism indigenous minority language Sami languages ethnic context parental language input patterns language choice language revitalization MoBa MBRN

Indigenous language transmission across generations

The preservation of heritage language is of great importance for indigenous people, as language serves as a primary medium through which individuals come to know, comprehend, and interpret the world, and thereby become integrated into the indigenous culture (Verdon & McLeod, 2015). The research on acquisition of indigenous languages has been underrepresented in the field of linguistics (Lieven & Stoll, 2010), but has gained increased attention over the past years (Kelly et al., 2015). The aim of this study is to investigate transmission of indigenous languages across generations.

Heritage language refers to a minority language, either immigrant or indigenous language, acquired within the family context during childhood (Benmamoun et al., 2013). Heritage language proficiency is associated with a wide range of benefits, including the development of a positive ethnic identity (Kvernmo & Heyerdahl, 2004; Nystad et al., 2017), better quality of life (McIvor, 2005) and improved overall well-being (Bals et al., 2011; De Houwer, 2020a). It has also been linked to decreased rates of self-harm and suicide observed among some young indigenous groups (Hallett et al., 2007).

The loss of an indigenous language is a loss of global knowledge and cultural heritage (Nettle & Romaine, 2000). Policymakers like United Nations (UN) acknowledge this and have proclaimed the period 2022–2032 as The International Decade of Indigenous Languages (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO], 2022). Interruption of language transmission across generations is a crucial mechanism in language attrition (Fishman, 1991). Thus, intergenerational language transmission is a key strategy for indigenous language revitalization (Norris & Adcock, 2023). In this study, we will analyse survey data on the Sami in Norway to examine variables that facilitate intergenerational transmission of indigenous languages.

The Sami languages

The Sami languages are a group of related Finno-Ugric languages spoken by the indigenous Sami people, who traditionally inhabited Sápmi, a region spanning from the mid to the northern parts of Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Kola Peninsula in Russia (Todal, 2018). Today, ten distinct variants exist, with transitions that cross state borders: North Sami, spoken by 90% of Sami speakers, is the most vital but still classified as endangered by UNESCO (2021). Lule Sami, South Sami, and Inari Sami, are definitely endangered, whereas Pite Sami, Ume Sami and Skolt Sami are critically endangered. Kildin Sami is severely endangered, and Ter Sami and Akkala Sami are nearly extinct (Duolljá et al., 2018; UNESCO, 2021). Given this situation for these indigenous languages in Northern Europe, it is important to establish knowledge about factors that facilitate language transmission.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Norway (2023) has documented the devastating impact of forced assimilation policies on Sami culture and languages. Similar documentation processes are under way in Sweden and Finland. According to the Norwegian report, a significant number of Sami children were raised detached from their cultural heritage or felt compelled to hide their ancestry. Consequently, in many families, the transmission of the Sami languages to subsequent generations ceased. Presently, it is estimated that only one-third of the Sami population of approximately 80–100,000 individuals, retains proficiency in a Sami language (Engan et al., 2020; Wikipedia, 2024). The majority reside in Norway (Rasmussen & Nolan, 2011), with the highest density in the northern regions, particularly in certain parts of Finnmark, Norway’s northernmost county. A notably number of Sami people also live in urban centres across the Nordic countries (Meld. St.12., 2023–2024, p. 12).

Recent decades have seen a growing effort to revitalize Sami culture and languages. At the governance level, initiatives have been implemented to strengthen the Sami languages, particularly through promoting Sami language learning for children and youth (Meld. St.13., 2022–2023, p. 8). Among Sami speakers, bilingualism is very common and is valued for facilitating participation in both the Sami and the majority societies (Kvernmo & Heyerdahl, 1996; Nystad et al., 2014).

Factors facilitating Indigenous language transmission

Children raised bilingually often develop comprehension in both languages; however, there is a risk that the heritage language may not be actively spoken by the children (De Houwer, 2020b). A variety of factors are associated with successful transmission of heritage language. These encompass characteristics intrinsic to the child, the quality and quantity of language input the child is exposed to, as well as broader environmental factors that indirectly influence language acquisition (Paradis, 2023). In the present paper, we will address parental language input patterns and ethnic context as our main topics and discuss some currents within the wider society that might affect intergenerational transmission of Sami languages.

Parental language input patterns

The language pattern employed by the parents at home, i.e., the combination of language(s) a child is exposed to by their parents, plays a significant role in shaping the child’s language preferences. De Houwer (2007) showed that children are most likely to acquire the heritage language when both parents consistently communicate in that language, or when one parent uses the heritage language while the other uses a combination of the heritage and the majority language. In these two scenarios the likelihood of the child using the heritage language exceeded 90%. When one parent spoke the heritage language and the other the majority language, or both parents used a mix of the two, the probability of successful heritage language transmission decreased to between 70% and 80%. The most significant drop however, to 36%, occurred when one parent exclusively communicated in the majority language while the other used a mix of the heritage and majority language. De Houwer’s (2007) study thus shows that the amount of parental input in the heritage language relative to the majority language influences language transmission of the heritage language. Fufen et al. (2017) support this conclusion and note that the discontinuation of heritage language transmission is more likely to happen when both parents predominantly converse in the majority language.

Given the described importance of parental input patterns, it is interesting to examine some of the factors that influence parents’ choice of home language and thereby might affect language transmission. Professionals such as teachers, speech therapists, and health care providers can play a proactive role in supporting heritage language transmission (De Houwer, 2020b). However, parents may face advice from professionals who discourage bilingualism, especially in cases of developmental concerns (Byers-Heinlein & Lew-Williams, 2013). As De Houwer (2020b) notes, such recommendations from professionals are hard for parents to ignore and may thus influence parents’ choice of home language.

Furthermore, there is reason to believe that choosing an indigenous language as the home language is more likely when both parents are fluent in this language (Caminal & Di Paolo, 2019). Kvernmo (1998) found that in nearly all of the families where both parents were Sami lingual, Sami was the main language at home. In contrast, in homes where only one parent could speak Sami, fewer than half of the families used Sami as the main language. However, Kircher (2022) notes that the use of a specific language in conversations between parents does not necessarily correspond to the choice of language when communicating with their child.

Ethnic context

Research on individual differences in heritage language use frequently centres on immigrant children. These children acquire the minority heritage language at home and are exposed to the majority language by the broader community (Paradis, 2023). The transmission of indigenous languages is subject to similar influences as those affecting immigrant language transmission, but it is also shaped by additional elements, including the ethnic context (Kvernmo & Heyerdahl, 2004; Yoshioka, 2010).

The Sami population in Norway lives in all parts of the country, often immersed in Norwegian culture and language, a situation that parallels the experiences of immigrants. However, in the Sami core area in Finnmark, the northernmost county in Norway, the ethnic context is quite different, as a significant majority of the inhabitants are Sami (Meld. St.12., 2023–2024, p. 12). Here Sami is established as the majority language within the local community and dominates both public and private spheres. Furthermore, traditional Sami customs and ways of life are more commonly maintained.

An ethnic context in which the heritage language is spoken in the local community and in educational settings enhances heritage language exposure and thereby complements parental language input (Alba et al., 2002; Gathercole & Thomas, 2009). In line with this, Kvernmo and Heyerdahl (1996) found that Sami adolescents living in areas where Sami language dominate were more likely to have Sami as their mother tongue compared to adolescents growing up in areas dominated by Norwegian language.

North-, Lule- and South Sami languages hold co-official status alongside Norwegian as the administrative languages in Norway, but Norwegian predominates nationwide. According to De Houwer (2020b) several studies indicate that in cases where children are raised bilingually, the language less utilized in public settings is at substantial risk of not being spoken by the child. In the Sami core area in Norway, it is required to provide public services in Sami languages (Meld. St.12., 2023–2024, p. 16). Consequently, the presence and use of the Sami language in these communities are reinforced through various means, including Sami media and public services, street signs displayed in Sami language, and instructions in Sami language in both kindergartens and schools (Meld. St.12., 2023–2024, p. 17). Hence, language acquisition among children in the Sami-dominated context could be considered akin to that of minority languages in regional bilingual contexts, such as Catalan in Catalonia, Spain, and Welsh in Wales, UK. Conversely, the language acquisition among Sami children living in a Norwegian-dominated context resembles the situation of heritage languages among immigrant populations. One key difference, though, is that even in the Norwegian-dominated contexts, it is often possible to attend Sami kindergartens and learn the minority indigenous language in an educational and social setting with other children.

A very large proportion of the children in Norway attends kindergartens. Kindergartens, subsidized by the government, are considered accessible to all, regardless of income. While socioeconomic status (SES), often measured by parents’ education level, may serve as a proxy for language input quality (De Cat, 2021) and can influence indigenous language transmission (Yoshioka, 2010), it is less likely to impact the transmission of the Sami languages. The Sami population spans the entire SES spectrum, and many are highly educated, especially the women. Despite, as a group, having slightly lower income and more often facing financial challenges than the rest of the population (Meld. St.12., 2023–2024, p. 25), language transmission appears to be influenced by factors other than education level. For instance, in traditional reindeer herding, where the Sami language remains robust, higher education is not essential. Societal changes have also heightened awareness across all social strata about the importance of preserving Sami language and culture. Moreover, the subsidization of kindergartens helps to mitigate the potential effects of SES on language development, akin to the situation in Sweden, where Bohnacker et al. (2021) reported no SES impact on bilingual development.

The wider society

De Houwer (2020b) notes that currents in society and political factors may affect language transmission. For the Sami people, coercive assimilation practices resulted in a pronounced loss of indigenous language competence. In Norway, this was especially evident in the south of Sápmi and in the coastal area (Rasmussen & Nolan, 2011).

The Nordic governments have now abandoned their assimilation policies, and the Sami population is recognized as an indigenous people with the right to learn their own languages. Alongside these political changes, public attitudes towards the Sami identity appears to have become more positive, and revitalization of Sami culture is in progress. This shift may have influenced the inclination and conscious attitude of Sami parents wishing to transmit their heritage language to their children. Adults who did not learn a Sami language as children now wish to take the language back (Pasanen, 2022). There is also a growing trend among parents to enrol their children in kindergartens and primary schools with Sami language instruction and curricula (Sønstebø, 2022). This trend continues into secondary education, as an increasing number of students choose to include Sami language studies in their academic pursuits (Sønstebø, 2022).

Whether these changes in society have entailed an increased transmission of the Sami language across generations has not been thoroughly investigated, with scant data on the consistency of transmission patterns across different generational strata.

Aims of the study

Several factors influence language acquisition among Sami children. Before entering school, Sami children in Norway may be monolingual Sami speakers, bilingual Norwegian/Sami speakers, or monolingual Norwegian speakers. The present study addresses intergenerational transmission of the indigenous Sami languages and is guided by the following three research questions: (1) What impact does parental language input patterns have on the child’s ability to speak a Sami language? (2) How does the ethnic context influence the child’s ability to speak a Sami language? (3) Does the pattern of Sami language transmission from parents to children align with the transmission from grandparents to parents?

Methods

Data source

This study was based on data from The Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study (MoBa). MoBa is

population-based pregnancy cohort study conducted by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. Participants were recruited from all over Norway from 1999 to 2008. The women consented to participation in 41% of the pregnancies. The cohort includes approximately 114.500 children, 95.200 mothers and 75.200 fathers. MoBa is regulated by the Norwegian Health Registry Act. (NIPH, 2019, p. 1)

In MoBa, mothers completed various questionnaires. In this study we used the responses to questionnaires provided during pregnancy (Q1) and when the child was 5 years old (Q5Y), with data collected for 41609 children (Magnus et al., 2016). All MoBa-questionnaires and description of the items are available at the MoBa website (NIPH, 2005). We also included data from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway (MBRN), which ‘is a national health registry containing information about all births in Norway’ (NIPH, 2019, p. 2).

Sample

The sample of this study consists of all Sami children whose mothers completed Q5Y. A child was defined as Sami if the mother or father, or one of the grandparents had Sami language as their mother tongue, as reported at Q1. This yielded a sample of 172 children, 81 living in North Norway (the counties of Nordland, Troms, or Finnmark) and 91 living in other parts of Norway. The focus in this study is Sami language transmission based on the child’s spoken language competence at 5 years of age. For three of the children no spoken language was reported. They were excluded from the analysis, leaving us with 169 children in the sample.

Measurements

The child’s Sami language competence

The Sami languages spoken in Norway and relevant to this study are North Sami, Lule Sami, and South Sami. In this study we refer to them jointly as Sami languages. The child’s Sami language competence was defined as the child speaking a Sami language by the age of 5. The mothers were asked ‘What language(s) does the child speak?’ with multiple response options. Most relevant for this study was the option ‘Other Nordic languages (Icelandic, Finnish) or Sami’. To ensure that we did not include children speaking Finnish or Icelandic, we rated children as non-Sami speakers if parents had reported ‘Other mother tongue’ (and not ‘Sami’ as their mother tongue) in Q1. In cases where data were missing, we used the language the child spoke with siblings at Q5Y, applying the same criteria as previously described.

Sami mother tongue and parental input patterns

The number of grandparents and parents with a Sami language as their mother tongue (Sami mother tongue) were based on reports from the mothers (Q1/Q5Y). Sami language input from the parents was determined based on mother’s answers to the questions ‘What language do you speak with your child?’ and ‘What language does your spouse/partner speak with the child’ (Q5Y). The mothers answered on a 5-point scale from ‘Only Norwegian’ to ‘Only other language’, as shown in the mid-column of Table 1. The question concerning language input from the father was phrased in terms of the mother’s spouse, reflecting the focus on language spoken within the home. For simplicity, we will use the term ‘father’ rather than ‘mother’s spouse’’, since in this sample, 88.2% of the mothers were cohabiting with the child’s father.

Table 1.

Mothers’ and the fathers’ language use recoded to reflect Sami language use when speaking with their child.

Recoded: Sami language use when speaking with the child		Question in Q5Y:‘What language do you/your spouse speaks with your child?’	Mother		Father
Recoded: Sami language use when speaking with the child			n	%	n	%
0	No Sami	Only Norwegian	134	79.3	137	84.6
1	Mixed Sami and Norwegian	More Norwegian than other languages	9	5.3	5	3.1
		As much Norwegian as other language	9	5.3	5	3.1
2	Mainly Sami	More other language than Norwegian	26	15.4	20	12.4
		Only other Language	26	15.4	20	12.4
	Total		169	100	162	100

For parents with Sami mother tongue, their language use was recoded from the 5-point scale into a 3-point scale indicating the use of Sami language when speaking with the child, as depicted to the left in Table 1. For parents with any mother tongue other than a Sami language, all response options were recoded to 0 ‘No Sami’ from the respective parent.

Sami language use by the mother and the father was combined for each child, resulting in six different Sami language parental input patterns. Mothers who did not live with the father and had not reported language use for a partner, were categorized only by their own language use, as the relevance in this study was Sami language exposure at home relative to Norwegian language. Due to low counts, we further grouped these parental input patterns by level of Sami language input, as detailed in Table 2. This is in line with earlier research on parental input patterns (De Houwer, 2007).

Table 2.

Parental input patterns: Number and percentage of children experiencing the different levels of Sami language input by parents.

Level of Sami input	Combination of the mother’s and father’s Sami language use when speaking with their child		n	%
None	0 + 0	No Sami language input from the parents	121	71.6
Low	1 + 0	Mixed Sami and Norwegian language input from one parent + No Sami language input from the other	12	7.1
Moderate	1 + 1	Mixed Sami and Norwegian language input by both parents	4	2.4
Moderate	2 + 0	Mainly Sami language input by one parent + No Sami language input by the other	21	12.4
High	2 + 1	Mainly Sami language input by one parent + Mixed Sami and Norwegian language input by the other parent	0	0.0
High	2 + 2	Mainly Sami language input by both parents	11	6.5
Total			169	100

Ethnic context

Data from the MBRN showed that 21.3% of the mothers in our sample lived in the Sami Language Administrative Area in Finnmark when the child was born. In this study, we defined this Sami core area as the Sami-dominated context. Other parts of Norway were defined as Norwegian-dominated context. Kindergartens can be a part of the ethnic context and play a crucial role for language development. 95.2% of the children in this sample attended kindergarten. Unfortunately, data on which of these children were enrolled in Sami kindergartens is not available.

Other factors

SES was measured by parent’s reported education. We used the highest level of education in the household, finished either by the mother or father before the child’s birth.

Assessment for language delay was used as a measure assuming these children might have developmental difficulties severe enough that this potentially could affect parental choice of home language.

Statistical analysis

Chi-square test of independence was used for group comparisons of categorical variables in the initial analysis. In analyses where several cells exhibited low counts and violated the assumptions for the chi-square distribution, the two-tailed Fischer-Freeman-Halton Exact Test (FFHE) was used (Pallant, 2020). Effect size for variables with more than two categories was measured by Cramer’s V, denoted as φc (Pallant, 2020).

Logistic regression was used to assess the impact of various variables on a child’s ability to speak a Sami language. Firth logistic regression was performed when we exhibited low counts in some of the categories. This analysis reduces possible bias due to rare outcomes and small cell numbers when using traditional maximum likelihood analysis of a binary outcome variable (Firth, 1993).

SPSS version 29.0 was used to all the statistical analysis, except Firth logistic regression preformed in STATA version 18. The significance level was set at 0.05.

Ethics

This study was approved by The Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics South-East, REK 2018/129 and by the Data Protection Services for Research, SIKT number 821995. Indigenous people have historically faced adverse experiences with racism in research. Growing recognition of these issues has led to the development of ethical frameworks in order to ensure that the Sami people are treated respectfully, and to raise awareness of the diversity and distinctiveness of Sami culture and communities (Drugge, 2022). In this study, we included a reference group consisting of Sami parents, grandparents, health practitioners, and researchers to guide the research process, and we adhered to the ethical guidelines for Sami health research in Norway (Sámediggi, 2019). The Expert Ethics Committee for Sami Health Research has approved the study and have given a collective consent on behalf of the Sami population, SEK 005/22.

Results

Description of the sample

Children’s language competence is shown in Table 3. In total, 27.8% of the children spoke a Sami language as (one of) their mother tongue(s).

Table 3.

The children’s language competence at age 5 years.

Language	n	%
Sami	8	4.7
Norwegian	115	68.0
Sami and Norwegian	37	21.9
Norwegian and other language	7	4.1
Sami, Norwegian, and other language	2	1.2
Total	169	100

As shown in Table 4, all the children in our sample had at least one grandparent with a Sami mother tongue. While 32% of the children had parents with a Sami mother tongue, 28.4% of the children had one or two parents who spoke a Sami language to them, i.e., not all the parents chose to speak the indigenous language to their children.

Table 4.

Number and percentage of children whose grandparents and parents have a Sami mother tongue.

Number of grandparents with a Sami mother tongue	Children		Number of parents with a Sami mother tongue	Children
Number of grandparents with a Sami mother tongue	n	%	Number of parents with a Sami mother tongue	n	%
0	0	0.0	0	115	68.0
1	111	65.7	1	41	24.3
2	43	25.4	2	13	7.7
3	5	3.0
4	10	5.9
Total	169	100.0		169	100.0

For the parents with a Sami mother tongue, both mothers and fathers were more likely to mainly use a Sami language in the Sami-dominated context, as shown in Table 5. The influence of ethnic context overall on language choice is significant among mothers, but not among fathers.

Table 5.

Language choice among mother and fathers with Sami mother tongue in different ethnic contexts.

Ethnic context		Sami language use when speaking with the child							φc
Ethnic context		No Sami		Mixed		Mainly Sami		Total
		n	%	n	%	N	%	n
Mother	Norwegian-dominated	4	21.1	8	42.1	7	36.7	19	.61***
Mother	Sami-dominated	0	0	1	5.3	18	94.7	19	.61***
	Total	4	10.5	9	23.7	25	65.8	38
Father	Norwegian-dominated	2	18.2	3	27.3	6	54.5	11	.41 n.s.
Father	Sami-dominated	0	0	2	12.5	14	87.5	16	.41 n.s.
	Total	2	7.4	5	18.5	20	74.1	27

Note. Only parents with Sami mother tongue included (in total 67 parents, but n = 65 in this analysis due to missing data on ethnic context for two parents). Fischer Freeman Halton Exact test; ***p < .001, n.s.= non-significant; Cramer’s V denoted by φc indicate effect size.

Other factors

In this sample, 37.1% of the children had at least one parent with a master’s degree, 37.7% with a bachelor’s degree and 25.2% with lower education (24.0% finished high school/junior college and 1.2% had no education beyond secondary school). There were no differences in parents’ level of education between parents in Sami-dominated and Norwegian-dominated contexts. Parents’ education level was not associated with the child’s Sami language competence.

The proportion of children assessed for language delay was 7.1%, with no differences between children in the different ethnic contexts. Assessment for language delay was not associated with the child’s Sami language competence.

Parental input patterns and ethnic context

As shown in Table 6, the proportion of children who could speak a Sami language varied across the different parental input patterns and ethnic context.

Table 6.

Successful language transmission: Percentage of children speaking a Sami language exposed to different parental input patterns across ethnic contexts.

Parental input patterns	Sami-dominated context	Norwegian-dominated context	Allethnic context
Levels of Sami input	% (n/n total)	% (n/n total)	% (n/n total)
None	27.3 (3/11)	4.5 (5/110)	6.6 (8/121)
Low	100.0 (3/3)	55.6 (5/9)	66.7 (8/12)
Moderate^a	83.3 (10/12)	75.0 (9/12)	80.0 (20/25)
High	100.0 (10/10)	100.0 (1/1)	100.0 (11/11)
Total	72.2 (26/36)	15.2 (20/132)	27.8 (47/169)

Note. Percentages are calculated based on the total number of children in each category (parental input patterns by ethnic context).

1 missing information for the variable ethnic context.

To further investigate the combined influence of parental input patterns and ethnic context on the child’s Sami language competence, we used Firth Logistic regression. As shown in Table 7, parental input patterns and ethnic context significantly predicted successful Sami language transmission from parents to child. If the family lived in a Sami-dominated context, the odds for children speaking a Sami language were nearly five times higher than for those who lived in a Norwegian-dominated context. All the three patterns of Sami language input increased the odds for children speaking a Sami language. The confidence intervals for the OR were wide and overlapping, due to low numbers in some of the cells that combined ethnic context with input pattern. Further analysis revealed that there was no significant difference between the low and moderate, and low and high parental input patterns. This means that the strong effect of parental input patterns emerged because the none-group differs from the other parental input patterns.

Table 7.

The child’s Sami language competence predicted by parental language input patterns and ethnic context.

Variable	Odds ratio	SE	z	95% CI Lower Upper
Parental input patterns^a
Low	23.5	16.6	4.5***	5.9	94.0
Moderate	32.1	19.8	5.6***	9.6	107.4
High	107.3	163.8	3.1**	5.4	2136.8
Sami-dominated context	4.8	3.0	2.5**	1.4	16.6

Note. Firth logistic regression χ²(4, n = 168) = 52.1, p < .001; CI = confidence interval for odds ratio.

None as reference category.

p < .01, ***p < .001.

Language transmission between generations

Of the 54 children having parents with Sami mother tongue (cf. Table 4), 74.1% were reported to speak a Sami language. Among the 191 mothers and fathers who themselves had parents with Sami mother tongue, 35.1% reported Sami as their mother tongue. In both generations, transmission of the Sami language increased by the number of parents in the household with a Sami mother tongue, as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Transmission of Sami language. Percentage of mother and father in total (parent generation) and children speaking a Sami language given the number of their parents having Sami mother tongue.

Firth logistic regression was used to examine the association between number of parents and generational affiliation. The interaction between number of parents having Sami mother tongue and generation did not improve the model significantly and was excluded from the final model displayed in Table 8. Having two parents, as opposed to one parent with a Sami mother tongue, increased the odds for speaking a Sami language by 16.7. Generational affiliation exhibited an odds ratio of 11.4, indicating a highly more likely language transmission from parents to children than from grandparents to parents.

Table 8.

Language transmission predicted by number of the parents having Sami language mother tongue and generation affiliation.

Variables	Odds ratio	SE	z	95% CI
				Lower	Upper
No. of parents with Sami language mother tongue^a
0	0.0	0.00	−7.5**	0.0	0.1
2	16.7	6.2	7.6**	8.1	34.5
Generation: Child^b	11.4	0.3	6.4**	5.4	24.1

Note. Firth logistic regression χ²(3, N = 507) = 122.98, p < .001.

One parent as reference category.

Parents as reference category = from grandparents to parents compared to child = from parents to child.

p < .01.

Discussion

The present study examined the intergenerational transmission of Sami languages. Parental input patterns and living in a Sami-dominated context were found to be associated with Sami language acquisition for 5-year-old children. The study revealed a disparity in transmission success across generational shift, with parent-to-child transmission being more successful than grandparent-to-parent transmission.

The impact of different parental input patterns is well-documented (Paradis, 2023), and a main effect was also observed in the present study. Initially, our results appeared similar to those of De Houwer (2007), where increasing and more consistent minority language input from parents enhanced language transmission rates. However, further analysis revealed that the differences in children speaking Sami across low, moderate, and high levels of parental Sami input were not significant. The only significant differences were between the none input level and the other levels, but not among the low, moderate, and high levels themselves. Nevertheless, we do not claim that such differences in the transmission of indigenous Sami languages do not exist; rather, our study may not detect them due to the low number of children exposed to some of the parental input patterns in combination with different ethnic contexts. Despite this, our study highlights the substantial impact of even low levels of parental Sami language input on children’s language acquisition. The odds for children speaking Sami increased more than 20 times with low level compared to none, implying that parents who do not use the Sami language consistently with their child still can play a crucial role in language transmission. Even some indigenous language input seems to be valuable and suggests that Sami parents without a Sami language as their mother tongue, but with a desire for their child to learn a Sami language, can contribute by acquiring some proficiency in the indigenous language and partly speaking it to support their child’s use of the Sami language.

We also found that some of the children acquired Sami language skills without reported parental Sami input. Sami kindergartens most likely played an important role, but unfortunately, we lack data on what kind of kindergarten the children attended. Nevertheless, this finding suggests that children can learn an indigenous language even if their parents are not fluent or native speakers. This highlights the potential for language revitalization through increased access to indigenous languages in kindergartens and in society at large. Such efforts are particularly important when few in the parent-generation are proficient in the endangered language (Todal, 2018). A notable example is the Inari Sami revitalization in Finland, where they successfully combined language nests for children with intensive Sami language training for adults, not only aimed at enabling parents to speak the Sami language, but also at ensuring the availability of qualified personnel in kindergartens and schools to foster children’s learning and use of the indigenous language (Olthuis et al., 2013; Pasanen, 2018). Another example is the effort to revitalize South Sami language by implementation of partial immersion tuition in kindergarten and internet-based teaching in schools (Todal, 2006, 2018).

The majority of children in our study, though, did not acquire a Sami language if it was not spoken by their parents at home. This underscores the critical role of parental language input in the transmission of the Sami language, consistent with Fishman (1991), who emphasized that intergenerational continuity and the active passing of the language from parents to children are essential for language maintenance. In line with this, some scholars have suggested that language policy should prioritize family-related interventions (Forrest, 2018). While nearly all parents with Sami mother tongue in our study used a Sami language with their child, those living in a Sami-dominated context were more likely to mainly use a Sami language with their child compared to those living in Norwegian-dominated context. This suggests that the ethnic context influences parental language choice and supports the notion that increasing indigenous language exposure in local communities, as well as ensuring parental input at home could be beneficial for the revitalization of indigenous languages.

The literature on intergenerational language transmission of minority languages describes a decline in minority language use in later generation, leading to gradual language loss over time (Alba et al., 2002). However, our results showed that growing up having parents with a Sami mother tongue affected the generations differently. The children were more likely to themselves become Sami speakers compared to their parents. Thus, it seems that the current parent-generation more often passes the language on to their children compared to the grandparent-generation. Particularly striking is the difference observed in families with one parent having a Sami mother tongue. While we do not have data on whether grandparents spoke Sami to their children, Tove Skutnabb-Kangas (in Olthuis et al., 2013, p. 16) notes that in earlier decades, families often adopted the majority language if one of the spouses was not Sami. In contrast, our findings show that most Sami-speaking parents in this study spoke Sami to their children, even in families where only one parent had Sami as their mother tongue. The observed change in language transmission between generations may be attributed to societal shifts that have rendered Sami identity and culture more favourable, thereby enhancing the social acceptability and desirability of speaking Sami languages, most likely also affecting parents’ language choice. The results can be interpreted as an indication of an ongoing language revitalization process.

Limitations and recommendations

This study cannot be utilized to estimate the prevalence of the Sami languages due to the selection process in MoBa (Nilsen et al., 2009). Another limitation pertains to the somewhat narrow definition of Sami people. We recommend that future studies also include individuals with great grandparents who had Sami at their home language and add questions on self-defined ethnic identity, aligning the inclusion criteria with the definition used to determine who can vote in the Sami Parliament election in Norway (Sámediggi, 2020).

The low number of persons speaking Sami in this sample makes it hard to detect smaller effects, as already mentioned in our comments on parental input patterns. The results from this study stating no differences between groups should therefore be interpreted with caution.

Sami language transmission was deemed successful if the child could speak the Sami language. However, there may be children who understand some Sami, but do not spontaneously speak it yet at 5 years. These children may have a substantial passive knowledge of the language and could potentially become users of the language with the right support from family, community and the education system. For subsequent research, we recommend including measures of both passive and productive language competence, to provide a more comprehensive measure of language acquisition.

Conclusion

This study represents the first known investigation of intergenerational Sami language transmission on a national scale in Norway, considering both parental input patterns and ethnic context. Both parental usage of a Sami language and living within a Sami-dominated context contribute to increase transmission of the Sami languages. This highlights the importance of parental language use, as well as the broader societal responsibility to promote indigenous languages within local communities and integrate them into educational settings such as kindergartens and schools. By including information about language proficiency for both grandparents, parents, and children, we have been able to observe potential generational shifts in language transmission, revealing a more robust transmission of Sami languages to the current generation than to the previous generation. This gives a hopeful perspective for the revitalization of the endangered Sami languages.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by The Northern Norway Regional Health Authority (Helse Nord RHF) and The University Hospital of North-Norway (UNN HF). The authors extend their gratitude to the reference group of Sami persons guiding the research process, and to UiT The Arctic University of Norway for facilitating the conduct of this study. This study is based on The Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study (MoBa), which is supported by the Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services and the Ministry of Education and Research. We are deeply grateful to all the participating families in Norway who take part in this ongoing cohort study.

Author contributions

Anita Mikalsen Vaskinn: Administration, definition of aims, research questions and framework, data curation, initial statistical analysis, interpretation of the results, writing the original draft and final editing.

Bjørn Helge Handegård: Formal statistical analysis, validation and interpretation of the results, review and editing draft.

Kristine Bentzen: Concept clarification, interpretation of the results, review and editing draft.

Siv Kvernmo: Project manager, definition of aims, research questions and framework, interpretation of the results, review and draft editing.

Data availability statement

‘Data from the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study and the Medical Birth Registry of Norway used in this study are managed by the national health register holders in Norway (Norwegian Institute of public health) and can be made available to researchers, provided approval from the Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics (REC), compliance with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and approval from the data owners. The consent given by the participants does not open for storage of data on an individual level in repositories or journals. Researchers who want access to data sets for replication should apply through helsedata.no. Access to data sets requires approval from The Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics in Norway and an agreement with MoBa’ (NIPH, 2019, p. 5).

NIPH. (2019). MoBa publication guidelines. Norwegian Institute of Public Health. /

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was funded by The Northern Norway Regional Health Authority (Helse Nord RHF) and The University Hospital of North-Norway (UNN HF).

Ethical approval and informed consent statements

The current study was approved by The Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics South-East, REK 2018/129, and by the Data Protection Services for Research (SIKT) number 821995. The Expert Ethics Committee for Sami Health Research has approved the study and given their collective consent, SEK 005/22. ‘MoBa has conducted a Data Protection Impact Assessment in accordance with the new Personal Data Act, which has been approved by the Data Protection Officer at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health’ (NIPH, 2017).

NIPH. (2017). Information for MoBa researchers.

ORCID iDs

Anita Mikalsen Vaskinn

Kristine Bentzen

Siv Kvernmo

Author biographies

Anita Mikalsen Vaskinn is a clinical child and adolescent psychologist at the University Hospital of North Norway (UNN HF) with extensive experience in mental health care. She holds an MBA and is currently pursuing a doctoral degree.

Bjørn Helge Handegård is an experienced statistician and senior lecturer at UiT, The Arctic University of Norway. He mentors researchers, advises on study planning, analyzes data, and teaches statistical methods.

Kristine Bentzen is a professor of Nordic linguistics at UiT, The Arctic University of Norway. She works on syntax, language acquisition, bilingualism, Norwegian and Sami languages.

Siv Kvernmo is a professor emeritus in child and adolescent psychiatry of Sami origin, with extensive experience in mental health care. Her research has extensively focused on Sami children and adolescents’ mental health, exploring the relationship between mental health/well-being, and cultural factors such as ethnic language, ethnic identity, and acculturation.

References

Alba

Logan

Lutz

Stults

(2002). Only English by the Third Generation? Loss and preservation of the mother tongue among the grandchildren of contemporary immigrants. Demography, 39(3), 467–484. https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.2002.0023

Bals

Turi

A. L.

Vittersø

Skre

Kvernmo

(2011). Self-reported internalization symptoms and family factors in Indigenous Sami and non-Sami adolescents in North Norway. Journal of Adolescence, 34(4), 759–766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.08.005

Benmamoun

Montrul

Polinsky

(2013). Defining an ‘ideal’ heritage speaker: Theoretical and methodological challenges reply to peer commentaries. Theoretical Linguistics, 39(3–4), 259–294. https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2013-0018

Bohnacker

Haddad

Öberg

(2021). Arabic-Swedish-speaking children living in Sweden: Vocabulary skills in relation to age, SES and language exposure. Journal of Home Language Research, 4(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.16993/jhlr.370

Byers-Heinlein

Lew-Williams

(2013). Bilingualism in the early years: What the science says. Learning Landscapes, 7(1), 95–112. https://doi.org/10.36510/learnland.v7i1.632

Caminal

Di Paolo

(2019). Your language or mine? The noncommunicative benefits of language skills? Economic Inquiry, 57(1), 726–750. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.12542

De Cat

. (2021). Socioeconomic status as a proxy for input quality in bilingual children? Applied Psycholinguistics, 42(2), 301–324. https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271642000079X

De Houwer

. (2007). Parental language input patterns and children’s bilingual use. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28(3), 411–424. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716407070221

De Houwer

. (2020a). Harmonious bilingualism: Well-being for families in bilingual settings. In Andrea

C. S.

Susana

A. E.

(Eds.), Handbook of home language maintenance and development (pp. 63–83). De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/doi:10.1515/9781501510175-004

10.

De Houwer

. (2020b). Why do so many children who hear two languages speak just a single language? Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht, 25(1), 7.

11.

Drugge

A.-L.

(2022). Sámi research ethics under construction. In Valkonen

Aikio

Á.

Alakorva

Magga

S.-M.

(Eds.), The Sámi world (1st ed., pp. 465–478). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003025511-32

12.

Duolljá

S.-E. K.

Gaski

Theil

(2018, May 21, 2024). Samisk (Sami languages). https://snl.no/samisk

13.

Engan

Tørdal

R. M.

Abusland

. (2020). Samiske språk. Norwegian Digital Learning Arena. https://ndla.no/subject:1:605d33e0-1695-4540-9255-fc5e612e996f/topic:1:fa404de7-b027-4a38-8d23-33493a3a9a69/topic:1:3dd5fe5b-6c59-4245-81ec-340e70059fea/resource:26501c1b-b001-4d54-9f76-ba1f406bd6f5

14.

Firth

(1993). Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika, 80(1), 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/80.1.27

15.

Fishman

J. A.

(1991). Reversing Language Shift: Theoretical and empirical foundations of assistance to threatened languages. Multilingual Matters.

16.

Forrest

(2018). The intergenerational transmission of Australian Indigenous languages: Why language maintenance programmes should be family-focused. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 41(2), 303–323. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2017.1334938

17.

Fufen

Schjølberg

Tambs

(2017). Parental input patterns and transmission of high-status heritage languages: English and German as heritage languages in Norway. Journal of Home Language Research, 2, 63–81. https://doi.org/10.26021/791(http://hdl.handle.net/10092/14580)

18.

Gathercole

V. C. M.

Thomas

E. M.

(2009). Bilingual first-language development: Dominant language takeover, threatened minority language take-up. Bilingualism, 12(2), 213–237. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909004015

19.

Hallett

Chandler

Lalonde

(2007). Aboriginal language knowledge and youth suicide. Cognitive Development, 22, 392–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2007.02.001

20.

Kelly

B. F.

Kidd

Wigglesworth

(2015). Indigenous children’s language: Acquisition, preservation and evolution of language in minority contexts. First Language, 35(4–5), 279–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723715618056

21.

Kircher

(2022). Intergenerational language transmission in Quebec: Patterns and predictors in the light of provincial language planning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(2), 418–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2019.1691499

22.

Kvernmo

(1998). Language and ethnic identity in indigenous adolescents. In Lippe

A. L. v. d.

Skoe

E. E. A.

(Eds.), Personality development in adolescence: A cross national and life span perspective. Routledge.

23.

Kvernmo

Heyerdahl

(1996). Ethnic identity in aboriginal Sami adolescents: The impact of the family and the ethnic community context. Journal of Adolescence, 19, 453–463. https://doi.org/10.1006/jado.1996.0043

24.

Kvernmo

Heyerdahl

(2004). Ethnic identity and acculturation attitudes among Indigenous Norwegian Sami and Ethnocultural Kven adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 19(5), 512–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558403259991

25.

Lieven

E. V. M.

Stoll

(2010). Language. In Bornstein

M. H.

(Ed.), Handbook of cultural developmental science (pp. 143–160). Psychology Press.

26.

Magnus

Birke

Vejrup

Haugan

Alsaker

Daltveit

A. K.

Handal

Haugen

Høiseth

Knudsen

G. P.

Paltiel

Schreuder

Tambs

Vold

Stoltenberg

(2016). Cohort profile update: The Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (MoBa). International Journal of Epidemiology, 45(2), 382–388. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyw029

27.

McIvor

(2005). The contribution of Indigenous heritage language immersion programs to healthy early childhood development. Research Connections Canada, 12, 5–20.

28.

Meld.St.12. (2023-2024). White paper 12: Public health and living conditions in the Sámi population. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/meld.-st.-12-20232024/id3029679/

29.

Meld.St.13. (2022-2023). White paper 13: Sami language, culture, and community life. Competence and recruitment in kindergarten, primary education, and higher education. https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/b821abc5741f4047a69af6de618cb172/no/pdfs/stm202220230013000dddpdfs.pdf

30.

Nettle

Romaine

(2000). Vanishing voices: The extinction of the world’s languages. Oxford University Press.

31.

Nilsen

R. M.

Vollset

S. E.

Gjessing

H. K.

Skjærven

Melve

K. K.

Schreuder

Alsaker

E. R.

Haug

Daltveit

A. K.

Magnus

(2009). Self-selection and bias in a large prospective pregnancy cohort in Norway. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 23(6), 597–608. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3016.2009.01062.x

32.

Norwegian Institute of Public Health. (2005). Questionnaires from MoBa. https://www.fhi.no/en/studies/moba/for-forskere-artikler/questionnaires-from-moba/

33.

Norwegian Institute of Public Health. (2019). MoBa publication guidelines. https://www.fhi.no/globalassets/dokumenterfiler/studier/den-norske-mor-far-og-barn–undersokelsenmoba/info-til-forskere/publication_guidelines_moba_2025.pdf

34.

Norris

M. J.

Adcock

(2023). First- and second-language speakers in the home: Perspectives on the state and revitalization of Indigenous languages in Canada. In Derhemi

Moseley

(Eds.), Endangered languages in the 21st century (1st ed., pp. 82–101). Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003260288-7

35.

Nystad

Spein

A. R.

Balto

A. M.

Ingstad

(2017). Ethnic identity negotiation among Sami youth living in a majority Sami community in Norway. International Journal of Circumpolar Health. https://doi.org/10.1080/22423982.2017.1316939

36.

Nystad

Spein

A. R.

Ingstad

(2014). Community resilience factors among indigenous Sámi adolescents: A qualitative study in Northern Norway. Transcultural Psychiatry, 51(5), 651–672. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363461514532511

37.

Olthuis

M.-L.

Kivelä

Skutnabb-Kangas

(2013). Revitalising indigenous languages: How to recreate a lost generation (1st ed., Vol. 10). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847698896

38.

Pallant

(2020). SPSS Survival Manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS (7th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003117452

39.

Paradis

(2023). Sources of individual differences in the dual language development of heritage bilinguals. Journal of Child Language, 50(4), 793–817. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000922000708

40.

Pasanen

(2018). This work is not for pessimists. Revitalization of Inari Sámi language. In Pasanen

Huss

Roche

Hinton

(Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Language Revitalization (1st ed., pp. 364–372). Routledge. https://doi-org.mime.uit.no/10.4324/9781315561271-46

41.

Pasanen

(2022). It should be her language: New speakers of Sämi languages transmitting the language to the next generation. In Valkonen

Aikio

Á.

Alakorva

Magga

S.-M.

(Eds.), The Sámi world (1st ed., pp. 430–445). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003025511-30

42.

Rasmussen

Nolan

J. S.

(2011). Reclaiming Sámi languages: Indigenous language emancipation from East to West. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2011(209), 35–55. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2011.020

43.

Sønstebø

(2022). Samisk statistikk 2022/Sámi statistihkka 2022 (Tall Som forteller, Issue). https://www.ssb.no/befolkning/folketall/artikler/samisk-statistikk-2022/_/attachment/inline/f875051e-8543-463f-bb4f-e58045a99dbb:1b198daa0fe0ec2b8700eb521ea17e420c14009e/RAPP2022-05_web.pdf

44.

Sámediggi. (2019). Etiske retningslinjer for samisk helseforskning [Ethical Guidelines for Sámi Health Research]. https://sametinget.no/barnevern-helse-og-sosial/etiske-retningslinjer-for-samisk-helseforskning-og-kollektiv-samtykke/

45.

Sámediggi. (2020). Innføring i Sametingets valgmanntall [Introduction to the Sámi Parliament Electoral Register]. https://sametinget.no/politikk/valg/sametingets-valgmanntall/innforing-i-valgmanntallet/

46.

Todal

(2006). The Southern Saami language in Svahken Sijte. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 180, 147–158.

47.

Todal

(2018). Preschool and school as sites for revitalizing languages with very few speakers. In Huss

Roche

Hinton

(Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language revitalization (1st ed., pp. 73–82). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315561271-10

48.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Norway. (2023). Sannhet og forsoning – grunnlag for et oppgjør med fornorskningspolitikk og urett mot samer, kvener/norskfinner og skogfinner [Truth and reconciliation – A basis for addressing the assimilation policies and injustices against the Sámi people, Kven people and Forest Finns – English summary] (pp.76–90). https://www.stortinget.no/globalassets/pdf/sannhets--og-forsoningskommisjonen/rapport-til-stortinget-fra-sannhets--og-forsoningskommisjonen.pdf

49.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2022). About the IDIL2022-2032. https://idil2022-2032.org/about-2022-2032#rationale

50.

UNESCO. (2021). Worls Atlas of languages. https://en.wal.unesco.org/

51.

Verdon

McLeod

(2015). Indigenous language learning and maintenance among young Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. International Journal of Early Childhood, 47(1), 153–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-015-0131-3

52.

Wikipedia. (2024). Samiske språk [Sami languages]. https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samiske_spr%C3%A5k

53.

Yoshioka

(2010). Indigenous language usage and maintenance patterns among Indigenous people in the era of Neoliberal Multiculturalism in Mexico and Guatemala. Latin American Research Review, 45(3), 5–34. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0023879100011092