Analyzing Ethnic Orientation in the quantitative sociolinguistic paradigm

• Ethnic Orientation categories show uncorrelated aspects of behaviour and identity.
• Ethnic Orientation factors do not apply universally across linguistic variables.
• Generations are distinguished by Ethnic Orientation.
• A speaker’s language choice for media does not influence linguistic performance.
• Multivariate analyses offer a more nuanced picture than individual correlations.

Ethnic Orientation, defined as speakers’ sociolinguistic practices and attitudes, does not affect all communities, languages, or linguistic variables equally. We illustrate that the types of differences that emerge depend on methodological decisions, particularly at the analysis stage. We provide examples of inter-community differences including some that emerge differently depending on the method of analysis. This is accomplished by comparison of Heritage Language patterns among groups of Toronto residents: speakers of Heritage Cantonese, Italian, Russian, Ukrainian and Polish; and English patterns in Chinese-descent and Italian-descent Torontonians, comparing across three generations since immigration. We examine the variables pro-drop and Voice Onset Time in the Heritage Language data. The Canadian Vowel Shift and consonant cluster simplification are examined in English. We show that no Ethnic Orientation facets correlate to all types of linguistic variation. The relationships found between linguistic variables and Ethnic Orientation variables suggest Ethnic Orientation is a key factor in modeling variation in Heritage Language communities – their variation should not be attributed solely to subtractive processes like incomplete acquisition or attrition.