The dynamics of (im)mobility: (in)transient capitals and linguistic ideologies among Latin American migrants in London and Madrid.1

Rosina Márquez Reiter and Luisa Martín Rojo

Abstract

This chapter provides an initial examination of therelationship between language and social mobility in theLatin American communities of London and Madrid. The researchis based on the immigrants' experience in diaspora and ontheir understanding of their roles and expectations asreported by them in the corresponding sociolinguisticinterviews. The analysis captures some of the linguistic andlegal barriers that these migrants face in their respectivereceiving societies. They also show how these intersect withtheir previous values and circumstances, and the effortsmigrants make to gain capitals and integrate. Thus, thechapter considers the role of national linguistic markets inthe face of increased diversity and questions whether thesetransformations should be understood locally, nationally ortransnationally.

Latin Americans in London and Madrid

Latin Americans migrants in the UK are primarily concentrated

in London, in the boroughs of Haringey and Southwark where

most of their circa 113,500 members live. Although the size

of the community is similar to that of other ethnic groups in

London (UK Census, 2011), the Latin American community has

only recently received official recognition, albeit only in

Southwark so far.2 In spite of their current statistical

invisibility, London now has the largest Latin American

populations in Europe, second only to Spain (McIlwaine et

al., 2011).

Latin Americans started arriving in the UK from the

1970s onwards, with Colombians and Ecuadorians constituting

the majority in the 1980s and 1990s, primarily as a result of

political unrest in their countries of origin. Since 2000,

Latin American migration to the UK has been principally

motivated by economic factors with relatively recent

secondary migration from Spain (McIlwaine et al., 2011).

As part of their lives in diaspora, they have created

distinctive commercial and media spaces in the city,

particularly in the areas of Elephant and Castle (Southwark)

and Seven Sisters (Haringey) where there is a significant

degree of ethnic concentration. These transnational spaces

specialise in the selling of homeland products from

gastronomic items to quintessential Latin American fashion

and beauty items (e.g. Colombian levanta colas jeans, placenta

base hair treatments, and so on.) as well as in the provision

of related services such as money transfers and the sale and

management of real estate in Latin America. Indeed, these

areas have been transformed into vibrant Latin quarters and

play an important role in urban regeneration projects (Román

Velasquez, 2013). Many Spanish-speaking migrants rely on them

to connect with their homeland and to facilitate social

interaction, given their sometimes irregular status and their

general inability to speak English or access affordable

English lessons (Greater London Authority, 2011). 85% of

Latin Americans are reported to be in work though more than

half of them occupy elementary positions as domestic and

office cleaners, food preparation assistants and so on

(McIlwaine et al., 2011). Spanish-speaking Latin Americans

report relying on their intra-ethnic contacts as their

primary means of gaining mobility. Indeed, many of them have

obtained employment through a community gatekeeper, typically

a Colombian or an Ecuadorian regular3 migrant who arrived in

the 1980s and controls access to the labour market by

satisfying London’s labour demand for elementary occupations

with a local supply of ethnic migrant workforce. For these

jobs, therefore, knowledge of English, unlike Spanish, is not

strictly necessary.

On the other hand, Latin Americans are highly visible in

Spain, particularly in Madrid where, as a whole, they

constitute the most populous migrant group with circa

300,000.00 registered migrants (Consejería de Asuntos

Sociales, Comunidad de Madrid, 2013). Ecuadorians and

Colombians are the most numerous with over 80,000 and 54,000

nationals, respectively. Other prominent Latin American

communities include Peruvians, Bolivians, Dominicans,

Paraguayans and, to a lesser extent, Hondurans, Mexicans,

Nicaraguans and Salvadorians (ibid). These figures, however,

do not take into account irregular migrants or those who

entered the country with EU documents as returned descendants

of European migrants or those who have to date obtained

Spanish citizenship; in the 90s, for example, over 70% were

granted citizenship. Thus, the true figures are likely to be

higher.

Similar to the employment situation of Latin Americans

in London, most Latin Americans in Madrid occupy elementary

positions with low salaries and suffer exploitative

conditions. However, those who migrated to Madrid in the

1980s, particularly Argentinians, Chileans, Colombians and

Uruguayans were able to occupy professional positions, with

some of them setting up small businesses. Recent changes in

the Spanish economy have meant that many of these 1980s

migrants have had to find seasonal unqualified work or return

to their countries of origin (García Ballesteros et al.,

2009). Over 30% of Latin Americans in Madrid are reported as

unemployed.4

Demographically, they are more widespread than in

London, despite high concentrations of given groups in

certain areas (Consejería de Asuntos Sociales, Comunidad de

Madrid 2013). The districts of Cuatro Caminos and Tetuán are

amongst those that have attracted the highest number of Latin

American migrants (de la Fuente Fernández, 2009). They

feature an array of Latin American shops and community

associations. Hence, they have been selected for the purpose

of this study. It is worth noting at this point, however,

that the comparative angle of this study stems mainly from

the sites where the data were gathered. It does not

necessarily apply to the migratory or work experiences of the

migrants. Nor does it apply to the languages or language

varieties they speak or to those spoken in the receiving

community. Inevitably, however, our concluding remarks relate

to the findings obtained in both locales.

The aim of this chapter is to provide a first

examination of the relationship between language and social

mobility in the Latin American communities of London and

Madrid. To this end, we explore the ways in which this

relationship is interpreted in the two locales drawing on

Bourdieu’s (1986) notion of capital, and the notion of

capitalisation (Martín Rojo, 2010). According to Bourdieu

(1986), capital is present in three fundamental guises: (i)

as economic capital, which is immediately and directly

convertible into money and may be institutionalised in the

form of property rights; (ii) as cultural capital, which is

convertible, under certain conditions, into economic capital

and may be institutionalised in the form of educational

qualifications; and (iii) as social capital, made up of

social obligations (‘connections’), which is convertible,

under certain conditions, into economic capital and may be

institutionalised in the form of a title of nobility.

With this in mind, we seek to contribute to a better

understanding of the relationships between language(s),

language varieties and social mobility. In so doing, we will

consider: a) the extent to which the homogeneity of national

linguistic markets is challenged by the increasing visibility

of diversity, thus resulting in the nation-state's decreasing

ability to control linguistic practices, and (b) whether

changes in the assessment of languages in linguistic markets

and given domains can be understood at a local, nation-state

or transnational level or at all three.

Methodology and analytic framework

The London data were collected during the months of November

and December 2012 and the Madrid data in January and February

2013. The fieldwork entailed prior informal discussions with

migrants in London and Madrid. This helped us to devise the

interviews and pointed us to potentially relevant

observational phenomena. The interviews were coupled with

document analysis, and non-participant observation with the

corresponding fieldnotes, and were conducted in shops and

community associations in Elephant and Castle, Seven Sisters,

Cuatro Caminos and Tetuán. Aided by two Colombian female

consultants in London and a Dominican female consultant in

Madrid, we conducted 17 in-depth interviews in London and 7

in Madrid with (ir)regular migrants, men and women in their

30s, 40s and 50s.

The interviews offered us a window into some of the

linguistic and legal barriers that Latin American migrants

face in the receiving society. They also allowed us to

capture the ways in which the migrants feel these barriers

intersect with their (previous) values and circumstances, and

the efforts they make to gain capitals and to integrate.

The analysis of the interviews, understood as situated

interactions (see, for example, de Fina, 2011), focuses on

the participants’ discursive representations, reflections and

rationalisations of their linguistic practices in diaspora,

and the ways in which they, either implicitly or explicitly,

relate them to the value assigned to different languages in

the linguistic markets in which they participate. To this

end, we draw on concepts from sociolinguistics and analytic

tools from general discourse analysis. In the next section we

offer an overview of citizenship policies, language valence

and mobility in London and Madrid. In section 4, we analyse

how the interviewees in their interactions with the

interviewers represent the role of language in societal

integration and mobility in the Latin American communities in

both cities. Finally, in section 4, we provide some

concluding remarks and discuss some of the key questions

raised by this research.

Citizenship policies, language valence and mobility in two

global European cities

Some of the results of our fieldwork show a contradictory

picture in terms of the importance generally attributed to

the migrants’ need for competence in the official language of

the receiving community and the migrants’ own valorisations

and rationalisations of their needs for mobility purposes.

Let us consider some of the complexities encountered in this

respect in each of the locales examined.

London

Latin American migrants' competence in English is typically

linked to their immigration status and year of arrival.

Migrants who arrived in the 80s and 90s, primarily as asylum

seekers, were given the right to remain in the country while

their cases were considered and were offered support

throughout this process. This generally entailed free -of -

charge English tuition (ESOL), subsidised accommodation and

often some form of (temporary) income support. 80s and 90s

arrivals generally have regular status, at least those from

our sample do; they also report having an (upper)

intermediate level of English, and occupy positions of

leadership within the community, that is, they own, lease

and/or manage small shops which cater for the needs of the

community; in addition, they often have supplementary jobs,

for example, as cleaning or hospitality supervisors outside

the Latin American community. Non-refugee migrants from the

80s and 90s report having had to pay for English tuition

given their conditions of entry into the UK, declare a

similar level of competence in English, have regular status

and also tend to occupy positions of leadership in the

community.

After the 1990s, on the other hand, arrivals often

entered the UK on a student visa for which they needed to be

enrolled in an English language school on a full-time basis;

under these conditions, they were also allowed to work up to

15 hours per week. Recent changes in immigration law have

meant that only those students registered on recognised UK

degrees courses are allowed to work, typically up to 20 hours

per week (www.gov.uk/recognised-uk-degrees) and those at

language schools who wish to then study at a UK university

have to renew their visas on a yearly basis; for renewal to

be effected progress on their IELTS5 scores and regular

attendance are required and monitored. Yet, recent secondary

economic migrants from Spain, despite their EU status, report

their inability to access affordable English tuition due to

high costs and their need to work on a full-time basis.

In view of the above, many post 1990s migrants,

including secondary migrants from Spain, have sought mobility

through intra-ethnic contacts within the community. The

majority have had to rely on the community gatekeepers’

contacts outside the Latin American market for jobs,

accommodation and, in the case of many irregulars, the

renting of valid national insurance numbers without which

work outside the confines of the Latin American diaspora is

not often possible.

Madrid

Latin American immigration has a long and important

tradition in the Community of Madrid and, more generally, in

Spain. It has gone through various phases in which the

cultural, socioeconomic and national profiles on both sides

have significantly changed (Ramirez, 1996). The mid 70s saw

increased migration from Argentina, Chile and Uruguay owing

to political upheavals. In the early 1990s, immigration from

Argentina continued to stand out, and to a lesser degree from

Peru, Venezuela and the Dominican Republic. In the middle of

that decade, the Argentine presence decreased in the

statistical records, partly because these migrants obtained

Spanish nationality (70 % of Argentine residents obtained

nationality during that time) and then migration from other

Latin American countries increased, also with a high rate of

nationalization. By the end of the 90s, the number of

migrants from Ecuador and Colombia increased to the extent

that they represented 29.8 % and 17.2 %, respectively, of the

total of Latin American migrants. Today, Ecuadorians

constitute the most numerous Latin American group. Finally,

the current economic crisis has seen many Latin Americans

return to their counties of origin or migrate towards other

countries of the EU such as the UK.

These Latin American flows have evolved at the same time

as legislative changes in relation to regularization and

citizenship in Spain. Additionally, Spain’s entry, alongside

other countries, into the EU has resulted in the tightening

of migration in the form of new restrictions, restrictions

which had erstwhile been particularly flexible for migrants

from former Spanish colonies. It is thus difficult to trace

Latin American immigration to Spain, particularly in the 70s

and 80s. In fact, the pace of nationality concessions to

Latin Americans has resulted in their statistical

invisibility.6 This helps to explain the reason why Latin

Americans, though very numerous, are statistically surpassed

by other migrant groups (Martínez Buján, 2003). Additionally,

Latin Americans also have special regularisation conditions

in that a familial relationship with Spaniards or with

previous Latin American migrants settled in the country, or

even with both, is one of the conditions that facilitates

regularisation.7

Data available from the last decade show 85.5 % of

Latin Americans work in the service sector (e.g. domestic

service and care of dependent persons). Such employment is

poorly paid, undervalued and often reserved for women

(Martínez Buján, 2003). Latin American workers occupy an

intermediate position with a rate of unemployment higher than

the locals (30% vs. 18% among locals in 2009), albeit lower

than migrants from other counties (consider the rate of 50%

of (un)employment among the Moroccan population in 2009, the

statistically largest migrant group, see Moreno Fuentes and

Bruquetas Callejo, 2011: 45-46). This is often attributed to

a shared language and culture8. Although Latin Americans

speak different varieties of Spanish form those spoken by

Spaniards and these are judged as lower prestige in the

metropolis, to speak Spanish represents an advantage for

schooling and entering the labour market given that, for now,

linguistic competence in the national language (variety) is

not required to obtain citizenship.

Recent years have witnessed an increase in migration

from Latin America, offering us a communicative landscape

where Spanish voices are transformed through contact with

other voices in different domains and social spaces. Latin

American varieties are now used to connect with Latino

consumers by Spanish companies (particularly, banks and

communication companies). Latino voices are also present in

music and arts, and among the youngest generations. What’s

more, even a new discourse has been produced by Spanish

Iinstitutions such as the Royal Spanish Academy of Language

and the Cervantes Institute, in which Spanish is represented

as a "common motherland”. This inclusive view of the

language could nevertheless be an argument to promote the

maintenance of the local form of Spanish as the encompassed

and standard variety (del Valle and Gabriel-Stheeman, 2004;

del Valle, 2007; Moreno Cabrera, 2008). When these normative

positions are coupled with assimilation policies, such as the

compelling use of local varieties of Spanish at schools, it

is evident that differences between varieties of the same

basic language could have an equivalent or even greater

effect in preventing social or occupational mobility, or

both, than other languages.

Having provided an overview of some of the contextual

elements affecting the social mobility of the migrants we

interviewed in the two locales, we now turn our attention to

the relationship between language and Bourdieu’s notion of

symbolic capital (Bourdieu, 1998) bearing in mind the

migrants’ status and entry into the UK and Spain, two of the

factors that became relevant in our fieldwork.

Language, social integration and mobility

Despite differences in the speakers’ linguistic repertoires,

in their reported practices, as well as in the social and

political contexts between the two sites of this research,

significant similarities have been identified, particularly,

in the ways the participants exploit their linguistic

capital:. These include using it as a means to make

connections with others, achieve qualifications and obtain

employment; in short, to acquire a social position. This is

not surprising given that, as part of the migration process,

people who settle in a new land need to access the labour

market, social services and education. It is here that

language demands become socially relevant (Martín Rojo,

2010).

Linguistic differences between one language, variety or

accent and another, that is, between English and Spanish, and

between varieties of Spanish, can become differences in

symbolic capital. In other words, their use will be demanded

and legitimate within a given social field (Bourdieu, 1998),

such as the job market, service provision, trade, and the

like. Therefore, in this chapter, we seek to shed light on

the linguistic resources seen by the participants as capital

and as legitimate resources in given social fields.

Fragmented9 linguistic markets

London

As revealed in the London interactions, migrants in positions

of leadership conceive of bilingualism in English and Spanish

as a form of capital. Knowledge of English is seen as

instrumental for mobility, in particular to liaise with the

outside market so as to maintain financial prosperity at home

and within their (diasporic) community. This valorisation is,

however, eroded in the case of their interpersonal

relationships given the cultural segregation of the

community.10 In these cases, the importance of Spanish, unlike

English or indeed bilingualism in English and Spanish, is

articulated as an essential resource for group membership and

internal financial networks, that is, as social capital.

This is illustrated in extract 1, where Pedro, a

Colombian who came to London in the 1980s and who now owns a

butchers shop, regards bilingualism in English and Spanish as

capital primarily within the field of business.

Extract 1

R= researcherI= interviewee

1 R:

Y por qué le parece importante seguir estudiando inglés,Why do you think it’s important to continue studying English,

2 I:

Uh porque se puede uno desempeñar y avanzar más(.) no, de prontoUm because you can perform and progress more (.)right,perhaps(a client comes into the shop and the shop owner serves him)

345

I:

Se puede tener unos negocios más (.), pensar en ampliaciones(.) yo manejo más que todo latinos(.) pero se puede ampliar el negocio (.) uno monta un negocio grande para todos(.) porque las relaciones comerciales tienen también que mejorar(.) entonces,You can have more businesses (.) think about expanding (.) I principally deal with Latinos(.)but the business could be expanded(.) you can set up a bigger business for everyone (.) because business relationships have to improve (.) as a result,

English is the language that allows you to progress

(“desempeñar y avanzar más”), to orient yourself professionally

and go beyond your existing networks to “expand your

business”, and improve “business relationships”. Thanks to

Pedro’s successful migratory experience, he now runs his own

business in an area and shopping center where Latin Americans

make up the majority of customers. English is the language

used to communicate with his suppliers, but his profits

primarily come from his Latin American customers. In other

words, as a tradesman he has not managed to establish his

business outside a closed, and to some degree segregated,

market. Pedro is aware that, in order to grow economically

and be able to supply the needs of clients from the local

community as well as those of the Latin American migrants, he

needs to increase his linguistic capital and English is seen

as the instrument for doing so.

The question of linguistic capital is thus closely

related to that of value because, just as in the currency

markets, in the linguistic market dialects, styles and

languages themselves do not share the same exchange value. In

Pedro’s example (Extract 1), the value of English is clearly

portrayed by its exchange value: It gives access to an

extended market and more clients. The scaling (Irvine and

Gal, 2014) that Pedro refers to by means of comparative

elements, such as “more” and “bigger”, indexes a connection

between the ability to speak English well and increasing

business opportunities. In fact, in the course of the

interviews, the participants demonstrate that they are fully

aware of the value of languages in London’s linguistic

market, at least in the fields of business and work. Their

linguistic choices and reported practices can be seen to be

shaped by this knowledge. As Extract 2 shows, Carolina, a

Colombian 1980s migrant, who owns and runs a repairs and

alterations shop, and claims to be bilingual in English and

Spanish, albeit with only working competence in English,

speaks of a labour market stratified by language.

Accordingly, the cleaning sector holds the lowest status and,

from there up, higher positions require competence in

English. Put differently, she relationally maps Spanish and

English with occupational mobility and progression,

respectively.

Extract 2

1 R:

usted cree que para tener un trabajo mejor hay que hablar inglés,Do you think that to get a better job one needs to be able to speak English,

2 I:

ClaroOf course

3 R:

que los trabajos de la gente (.) qué trabajos pueden hacer,That people’s jobs (.) what types of jobs can they have,

45

I:

los trabajos como no sea a limpiar (.) si yo tengo que hablar inglés (.)qué trabajos puede hacer como no sea limpiando (.)jobs unless it’s cleaning (.) yes you have to speak English (.) what jobs can be done unless it’s cleaning (.)

6 O sea donde uno vive tiene que hablar la lengua(.) that ‘s it↑(.)I mean you have to speak the language of the place where you live(.) that’s it (.)↑

If, for Pedro in Extract 1, English was associated with

”business” and seen as an instrument to gain further

mobility, for Carolina, it is associated with “work”.

Monolingualism in Spanish reduces one’s options (“como no sea

limpiando” -Extract 2, L.5). “Como no” introduces an exception

to an implicit rule: Without English it’s impossible to work/get a job.

Both examples 1 and 2 present an opposition between moves in

interviewees’ trajectories- expansion and mobility vs.

blockage, associated with English competence vs. lacking

competence- in getting access to an open market in commercial

activities and to higher status in a stratified labour

market. So the speakers are aware of the values of Spanish

and English in the receiving community and consider English

to be a prerequisite for both social and further occupational

mobility (“donde uno vive tiene que hablar la lengua”- Extract 2, L.

6).

Extract 3 taken from an interview with Nora, a recent

secondary migrant from Spain, further illustrates the ways in

which competence in the language of the receiving society is

viewed as capital. Nora, who works as a cook for a restaurant

in one of the Latin quarters, is in a regular position given

her status as an EU citizen, and can thus, theoretically

speaking, access the external labour market outside the Latin

American community. Despite this, she explains that her main

constraint towards achieving further mobility resides in her

inability to speak English.

Extract 3

1 R:

Y dime aquí te parece que necesitas inglés para trabajar,And tell me do you think you need English here to work,

2 I:

Sí claro que sí (.)porque si supiera el inglés tendría un trabajo mejor que este,Yes of course (.)because if I spoke English I would have a better job than this,

3 R:

Aha cómo qué (.) por ejemplo qué harías,Um like what (.) for example what would you do,

4 I:

Pue:s trabajaría en- en- me han salido [trabajos],=So:I’d work in-in-I’ve been offered [Jobs],=

5 R:

[Aha ]

6 I:

=Pero me han exigido el inglés y como no sé hablar[el ingléspues]=but they required English and as I cannot speak [English then]

78

R:

[Como qué] trabajo por ejemplo(.) para que necesites el inglés,[like what]job for example (.) forYou to need English,

910

I:

Me han salido- para trabajar en por ejemplo en- una oficina de limpieza pero así me exigen el- el inglés, por ejemplo… si yo supiera el inglés(.)Que podría trabajar,I’ve been offered- to work for example in-cleaning an office but in any case they requireEnglish, for example…if I spoke English (.) I could work,

For Nora, therefore, English is considered to be

economic capital. Competence in English, beyond any of the

qualifications she may or may not have, is seen as the main

means of obtaining a better life in the city, as an essential

tool for tapping into the economic resources that London has

to offer. Mastering English is presented as a compelling

demand in the labour market, but one she cannot meet: they

required English and as I cannot speak …. And, as in examples 1 and 2,

the mobility limitation effect associated with the lack of

English capital is also confirmed in this example: if I spoke

English I would have a better job than this. Given the exchange value of

the English language, she would be empowered if she had

access to this capital: I could work. Nevertheless, this

requirement needs to be added to that of having resolved her

legal situation. 

In extract 4, Viviana, who had lived in Spain for a

number of years, though not long enough to be granted a work

permit, now finds herself in the UK in an irregular position

without having achieved a good level of English. Thus, she

had to resort to her social capital within the Latin American

community to gain occupational mobility.

Extract 4

1 R:

hablabas inglés cuando viniste,and did you speak English when you arrive,

2 I:

No (.)es que sabía ni decir hola(.) (no es que ahora hable mucho)No (.) I didn’t even know how to say hello (.) (not that I speak much now)

3 R:

y fue un problema eso para encontrar trabajo lo de:,and was this a problem to find work as:,

45678910

I:

eh… no para encontrar trabajo realmente no (.) no lo ha sido(.) porque bueno realmente siempre trabajé en medio de latinos (.1)de hecho mi jefe (.)la chica para la que trabajoes latina(.) o sea yo no tengo ningún problema en cuanto a eso (.1)trabajos en casas donde los dueños de las casas son ingleses(.) son americanos (.) o bueno son de por acá de Europa pero(.)o sea gente que no habla español (.)pero igualno tengo problema porque normalmente no los veo (.1)y si losveo es solamente el saludo (.)de pronto me piden cosas que ya son básicas

um…no not really to find work(.) it hasn’t been a problem(.) because in fact I’ve alwaysworked surrounded by Latinos (.) in fact my boss (.) the girl I work for is Latin (.) so I don’t have a problem in that respect (.1) jobs in households where the ownersare English (.) American (.) or even from here Europe but (.) I mean they don’t speak Spanish (.) but in any case I don’t have a problem because I normally don’t see them (.1) and if I see them I simply exchange hellos (.) sometimes they ask me to do things but they arebasic

In extracts 3 and 4, we see how both interviewees, Nora and

Viviana, are relegated to the lowest rungs of the work ladder

because they do not comply with either of the two

requirements (linguistic capital and legal status). In spite

of this, both have a job, and have reached a position of

subsisting in a sub-market within the community. Spanish,

then, is for them, as well as for all the migrants

interviewed, regarded not only as social capital in that it

is a sine qua non for group membership and social networking,

but also as an enabler for job performance in an in-group and

delimited market, which seems to exist within the nation-

state labour market. In the same way, the use of Spanish

allows Pedro (see Extract 1) to have a profitable business,

although his customers were socially compartmentalized (I

principally deal with Latinos). Within the Latino universe in London,

in different social fields such as the business and the

labour market, Spanish is also a source of economic

resources, which is convertible into economic capital.

The exchange value of Spanish as economic capital raises

significant questions within current debates about the nature

of the linguistic marketplace in late modernity, particularly

in relation to the decreasing ability of the nation-state to

control diversity and in relation to global changes in local

places (Heller, 2011). For Bourdieu, there is a relatively

unified linguistic market, which coincides with the nation-

state and configures a hierarchical discursive space:

languages valued more or less highly, dialects and uses can

be employed in some spheres but are rejected in others

(Bourdieu, 1991, p. 45). Nevertheless, in every field of

activity and depending on the power of the field, this order

can be readjusted. However, increased mobility coupled with a

heightened demand for elementary positions in developed

capitalist economies have played an important role in

(further) isolating and ghettoising the lower end sub-market.

In this distribution, the impact of an international division

of core and periphery labour can be observed as it overlaps

with national labour markets, and places migrants in lower

positions. Labour markets have become racially and ethnically

stratified in metropolitan global cities (see, for example,

Grosfoguel, 2011)

Our examples reveal how local labour and linguistic

markets are shaped by global economic processes and mobility.

They show how transnational workers accommodated in local

economies at the lower ends of the labour hierarchy, through

the compelling demand of the requirements of linguistic

capital and legal status. In this context, new spaces for

economic and linguistic exchange are seen to emerge as

subfields (such as in-group markets and commercial malls).

These enclaves thus become sites for the maintenance of the

migrants’ way of life through their social networks, as well

as places where individual businesses flourish. They thus

offer a subsidiary labour market in which Spanish, a migrant

language, which has no visibility in the nation-state

linguistic market, emerges as a new, less valued, but

convertible capital. In other words, it becomes an economic

capital in that it is a job enabler and a social capital in

as much as employment opportunities are obtained through

social networks. What seems to be especially significant,

however, is that, in the sites we examined, the logic of the

market and the valuation of the languages both reproduce two

different logics: that of the receiving country, by means

of which English is the most valuable language, and that of

the country of origin, Spanish (in several varieties), which

is not only social but economic capital in all the economic

activities produced and organized around the mall. The

distortion in the national logical is illustrated by some of

our participants’ valorization of what is understood as Paisa

and Caleño Spanish among Colombians in London, over Bogotano

Spanish and other prescribed prestigious varieties.

It is evident that not all members of the Latin American

community in London enjoy the same linguistic capital;

neither do they find themselves sharing the same starting

point in terms of improving these resources. Thus, they do

not have the same opportunities for capitalisation (Martín

Rojo, 2010).

The observed inequality in the distribution and access

to capitals does not always seem to be acknowledged in the

interviews. On the contrary, those who have enjoyed a

successful migratory trajectory consider the difficulty of

combining work and the study of English to be a weakness or a

mere excuse. These criticisms are based upon an individualist

ideology that supposes that prosperity, success and upward

social mobility can be achieved through hard work. Carlos

(Extract 5), a Communications graduate who works as a butcher

and owns a number of shops in the shopping centre and is

responsible for managing an overnight cleaning service for

which several of his compatriots work provides a pertinent

example.

Extract 5

1 I:

Hay que hacer las dos cosas a la vez (trabajar y estudiar).One has to do both at the same time (work and study).

23

R:

Es que algunas personas nos dicen que no consigue reunir lasdos cosas (.), trabajar y estudiar.Some people tell us that it’s not possible to do both (.)to work and study

4 I:

Es mentira(.) querer es poder y cuando se quiere se logra losobjetivos.It’s not true (.) where there’s a will there’s a way and when you want something you

achieve it.

What Carlos insinuates here is that those who failed did

not invest enough, and they simply didn't try hard enough

(“es mentira”, Extract 5, L.4). In a number of interviews with

migrants in positions of leadership, we encounter the same

reference to the “lie”, allegedly told by those with

difficulties, but there is not a single example containing

reference to the different kinds of justifiable obstacles,

such as lack of financial means or a weak economic position.

Neither did the interviewees acknowledge the effects of

discrimination or restrictive immigration policies, which,

over the years, have become tougher and increasingly

demanding in terms of legal requirements. Inequalities of

social class, both in the country of origin and in the

receiving society, are voiced within the group itself, again

from the standpoint of the distribution of linguistic

resources. Such inequalities can be seen to be legitimated

and naturalised in discourses that represent them as the

consequence of individual success or failure (see Heller,

1992, 1995).

Madrid

Our observations and interactions in Madrid indicate that the

economic principles of market segmentation also operate in

the Spanish capital, albeit knowledge of the language of the

receiving society should not, in this case, constitute an

obstacle to mobility given that Spanish-speaking Latin

Americans speak the same basic language (Márquez Reiter,

2011). Notwithstanding this façade of commonality resulting

from colonialism, the nuances of the standard varieties of

Spanish spoken by Latin American migrants in Madrid are

generally reported as one of the various elements of

difference, mobilised by the locals, to rationalise the

segregation and exclusion from positions for which many

migrants feel they are better qualified to occupy than the

locals. They are also identified by the migrants to

rationalize the multiple exclusions they encounter in their

daily lives.

The linguistic advantage (i.e. the sharing of a basic

language) they thought they had, prior to migrating to

Madrid, is not activated in diaspora. It is in fact eroded as

it is not associated with a speech style or indeed a Spanish

dialect with trading currency in the receiving society. It is

positioned by the locals as an emblem of linguistic error or

impreciseness, or both, and is often linked to backwardness

and typically constructed as a barrier to mobility. This was

particularly salient in jobs in which language transmission

played a strong role as Juan, the interviewee, explained in

Extract 6. Juan is a regular Dominican migrant who occupies a

position of responsibility within a Centro de Participación e

Integración de la Comunidad de Madrid (CEPI), primarily

oriented towards the Dominican community. A reported lack of

legitimacy in language transmission was also articulated in

Extract 7 by Dora, an irregular Honduran migrant who was

employed as a nanny because of her competence in English and

of the fact that she was a qualified school teacher back

home.

Extract 6

12345

I:

Sí. se llama María °la profe esa.° (.) me dijo una vez en la clase era de:- (1.0) de habla. de habla y me dice: (.) es que tú tienes que <vocalizar más>así como una formade burla, o sea- y- yo me sentí totalmente fatal, (.) °y yo° y usted<tiene que entenderme más> (.) así que ahora me voy de >aquí ahora< ((risa)) (.) y todo el mundo eh::: perovamos en plan de:-

Yes her name is Maria° that teacher°. (.) she’s told me once in the lesson was about-(1.0) speech. About speech and she says to me: (.) you have tu <vocalise more> like that like making fun o me, I mean-I-I felt really bad, (.) ̥and I̥ and you<have to understandMe more>(.)so now I’m leaving>right now<(( laughter))(.) and everyoneOy:: come on like:-

Extract 7

123456

I:

Dora me decían a mí cuando estaba trabajando (.) tienes que pronunciar la ce la zeta porque si no mi hijo va a hablar como tú me decía y yo, (1.0) pero >si usted me contrató sabiendo que yo era hondureña y que yo hablaba distinto<, (.)o sea yo cuando leo con el niño, yo le pronuncio (.) bien porque lo sé. (.) o sea sé que así se pronuncia (.) pero en mi dialecto y en mi forma de ser >yo jamás voy a decir eso<. (.) o sea, ella me decía Dora esta cosa< OK (.) no. se dice vale. (.) vale.

Dora they said to me when I was working (.) you need to pronounce the ce the z becauseOtherwise my son will speak like you she told me and I, (1.0) but >if you hired me knowing thatI was Honduran and that I speak differently <, (.) I mean when I read to the child, IPronounce (.) correctly because I know it. (.) I mean I know that this is the way it’s pronounced (.) but in my dialect and in the way I am>I will never say that<(.) I mean, she told me Dora this<OK(.) no you say vale. (.) vale

That Juan is Dominican and does not speak the local

standard variety endows him with a necessary credential to

perform his job at the CEPI (called CEPI Hispano-Dominicano)

where he works. Indeed, Juan provides us with an example of

the way in which symbolic capital is converted into

institutional cultural capital. Put differently, Juan’s

ethnolinguistic identity is a source of commodification in

the receiving community.

The experiences of both Dora and Juan (Extracts 6 and 7)

bring to light the ways in which varieties of Spanish which

are seen to ‘deviate’ from the local standard are not

conceived of as capital in the field of education. Instead,

they are seen as disabling access to a desired mobility. They

also show that the process of nativisation of the ex-colonial

language (see, for example, Anchinbe & Mforteh, 2013), where

Spanish is in Latin America the legitimate official language

the majority have to manipulate in their day lives, is in

fact challenged and ridiculed by citizens in the metropolis.

Ex-colonised citizens are not considered legitimate speakers

of their own language and, as result, they do not have the

right to transmit it (c.f. Pennycook, 2007).

As it emerges in our fieldwork, this partly stems from

the continual re-establishment by the locals of hegemonic

linguistic ideologies in the migrants’ everyday activities

and the migrants’ own re-inscription of these very ideologies

in diaspora, resulting from their formal education back home.

It also corresponds to the centripetal forces exerted by

many of the Spanish institutions and affiliated partners in

former Spanish colonies allegedly linked to Spain by the

unifying force of a language in common (cuando leo con el niño, yo le

pronuncio bien porque lo sé o sea sé que así se pronuncia Extract 7, L.3-4)

. The delegitimatisation of the migrants’ standard Spanish

varieties and, by default, of their personae is evidenced in

their daily working and leisure activities. More frequently

than they care to remember, some of our participants report

either being corrected by the locals or being subjected to

forms of verbal public abuse, or being exposed to both.

As shown by Dora and Juan, Latin American migrants are

not only conscious of this exclusion and of (latent) forms of

colonial racism but also of the fact that they are

reactivated by increasing human mobility and the

establishment of ex-colonized ‘subjects’ in the heart of the

metropolis (Groosfoguel, 2011). Furthermore, they recognise

the role that racism plays in the stratification of the

labour market and the ways in which it disables their desired

social mobility.

Concluding remarks

The analysis of the interviews shows how linguistic and

migratory paths overlap opening up a multitude of options.

Latin American migrants in London and Madrid are able to

navigate the linguistic markets of the various social fields

in accordance with their own social position and the economic

and symbolic capitals at their disposal or within their

reach. In the extracts from the interviews examined, the

participants reflect upon how these impact on their own

experiences, on the social networks of which they are part

and on their participation in the labour market. Thus, some

migrants report becoming bilingual in English and Spanish

while others report speaking only one of these languages.

Yet, others, like Dora and Juan, report using a language

variety devoid of trading currency in certain social fields

such as education, albeit varieties which are (potentially)

commodifiable in the area of migrant service provision.

In line with some of the research conducted in North

America (see, for example, Goldstein, 1997; Portes, 1995) and

Europe (see, for example, Dûchene, 2011; Hewitt 2012), we

have seen how speakers of certain languages and language

varieties tend to populate certain jobs but not others. What

is more, we have observed the ways in which Latin American

Spanishes are considered to be legitimate in niche markets

primarily resulting from globalisation and the new economy

(e.g. servicing the needs of migrants in Madrid, populating

elementary jobs with an intra-ethnic workforce that require

knowledge of the language).

We have also seen that the nation-state and local logics

are insufficient to explain the valuation of languages in

particular social fields and sub-fields, such as the malls,

where we conducted some of the interviews, and in the

economic activities produced around them. In both London and

Madrid, the logic of the market and the valuation of the

languages reproduce the logics of the receiving country while

it distorts the national logics. Thus, we have seen how

Spanish represents not just social and cultural capital, but

also economic capital in the field of business within the

intra-ethnic community. Thus, "the limits of the nation-state

are stretched, but not (yet) undone" (Duchene & Heller, 2011,

p. x). As we have shown, this is primarily due to the

interwoven relationship between market and cultural

segregation. This is because migration is associated with

globalisation and with increased mobility that shapes and is

shaped by transformations in the national language markets,

equivalent to those that occur in other economic, social and

cultural areas. Lacking the required language capital and

legal status gives access only to low-skill, menial work, or

to a position of subsisting in a sub-market within the

community. These constraints encourage the emergence and

maintenance of a hierarchically organized labour market.

The discourses produced in the interviews show a situation

of discrimination and marginalization, and the migrants'

perceptions of where and for whom this inequality is reinforced

or diminished. Thus, we have seen how linguistic and legal

barriers intersect with migrants’ previous personal

circumstances and values and their current individual efforts

to gain new capital and to integrate. Consequently, market

dynamics logics are still bound to socioeconomic inequality.

Indeed, our interviews reveal that that not everyone has had

the same opportunity to acquire the linguistic varieties

and/or forms with the highest market value. The process of

determining the value of bilingualism and of English and

Spanish as an asset has been differently conceived of with

reference to regular and irregular migrants and, well-

established and wealthy vs. less well-off migrants. For those

who have access to education and relatively highly valued

jobs, and to social and labour networks beyond the intra-

ethnic community – i.e. wealthier and regular migrants –

hierarchicalized bilingualism is seen as an unavoidable

requirement where the national language(s) or standard

variety of the receiving country seem to be assigned value as

a source of profit.

We have also seen how access to this form of asymmetric

bilingualism generates inequality and tensions within the

Latin American minority. A common denominator across the

London migrants, irrespective of their immigration status or

year of arrival, or both, is their management of Spanish as

symbolic capital. Nevertheless, its “conversion” into

cultural, social and economic capital would appear to depend

on the level of access that the speakers have to the market

in question.

References

Anchimbe, E. A. &  Mforteh, S. A. (Eds.) (2011). Postcolonial Linguistic Voices: Identity Choices and Representations. Berlin: Moutonde Gruyter.

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociologyof Education (pp. 241-258). New York: Greenwood.

Bourdieu, P. (1991).The Production and Reproduction of Legitimate Language.In: Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action. Front Cover. Pierre Bourdieu. Stanford University Press.

Cachón Rodríguez, L. (2002). La formación de la “España inmigrante”: Mercado y ciudadanía. REIS (Revista Española de

Investigaciones Sociológicas) 97, 95–126.

De Fina, A. (2011). Researcher and informant roles in narrative interactions: Constructions of belonging and foreign-ness. Language in Society 40,. 27–38.

De la Fuente Fernández, R. (Ed.) (2009). Migración y política: LatinoAmericanos en la Comunidad de Madrid. Madrid: Trama.

Del Valle, J. & Gabriel-Stheeman, L. (Eds.) (2004). La batalladel idioma. La intelectualidad hispánica ante la lengua. Madrid /Frankfurt: Iberoamericana./Vervuert.

Del Valle, J. (2007). La lengua, ¿patria común? Ideas e ideologías del español. Madrid / Frankfurt: Iberoamericana / Vervuert.

Duchêne, A. (2011). Néolibéralisme, inégalités sociales et plurilinguismes : l’exploitation des ressources langagières et des locuteurs. Langage & Société, 136, 81-106).

García Ballesteros, A; Jímenez Basco, D. & Redondo González, A. (2009). La inmigración latinoamericana en España en el siglo XXI. In Investigaciones Geográficas, Boletín del Instituto de Geografía,70 (pp. 55-70). México: UNAM.

Goldstein, T. (1997). Two Languages at Work-Bilingual Life on the Production Floor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Grosfoguel, R. (2011). Decolonizing Post-Colonial Studies andParadigms of Political-Economy: Transmodernity, Decolonial Thinking, and Global Coloniality. In TRANSMODERNITY: Journal of Peripheral Cultural Production of the Luso-Hispanic World, 1(1). Available at [ http://escholarship.org/uc/item/21k6t3fq].

Heller, M. (1992). Linguistic minorities and modernity: A sociolinguistic ethnography. London: Continuum.

Heller, M. (1995). Language choice, social institutions and symbolic domination. Language and Society, 24 (3), pp. 373–405.

Heller, M. (2011). Paths to Post-Nationalism: A Critical Ethnography of Language and Identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Heller, M. & Duchêne, A. (2011). Language in Late Capitalism: Pride and Profit. London: Routledge.

Hewitt, R. (2012). Multilingualism in the workplace. In M.Martin-Jones , A. Blackledge & A. Creese (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Multilingualism (pp. 267-280). Oxon/New York: Routledge.

Información de población extranjera empadronada en la Comunidad de Madrid. Enero 2013.Consejería de Asuntos Sociales. Comunidad de Madrid.

Irvine, J. & Gal, S. (2013). Paper presented at the Society for Linguistic Anthropology Presidential Conversation onLanguage and Mobility: Rethinking the Population, Practice and Places of “Migration”. AAA Annual Conference, Chicago, 22nd November.

London Enriched: The Mayor’s Refugee and Migrant Integration Strategy. Greater London Authority (2011)

McIlwaine, C., Cock, J. C., & Linneker, B. (2011). No Longer Invisible: The Latin American Community in London. Trust for London:London

Márquez Reiter, R. (2011). Mediated business interactions. Intercultural communication between speakers of Spanish. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Martín Rojo, L. (2010). Constructing Inequality in Multilingual Classrooms. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Martínez Buján, R. (2003). La reciente inmigración latinoamericana a España”, Serie de Población y Desarrollo. CEPAL-CELADE, ONU, Santiago de Chile.

Moreno Cabrera, J.C. (2008). EL nacionalismo lingüístico. Barcelona:Península.

Moreno Fuentes, F. J. & Bruquetas Callejo, M. (2011). Inmigración y Estado de bienestar en España. Barcelona: Obra

Social 'la Caixa', 2011.

Penycook, A.(2007). Global Englishes and Transcultural Flows. London: Routledge.

Portes, A. (Ed.) (1995). The Economic Sociology of Immigration. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Ramírez Goicoechea, E. (1996). Inmigrantes en España: vidas y experiencias. Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas. Why is Goicoechea in italics???

Restifo, S., Roscigno, V. & Qian, Z. (2013) "SegmentedAssimilation, Split Labor Markets, and Race/EthnicityStratification: New York in the Early TwentiethCentury" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the AmericanSociological Association Annual Meeting, Hilton San Francisco, SanFrancisco, CA, Aug 08, 2009 <Not Available>. 2013-12-29<http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p308535_index.html>

Román Velasquez, P. (2013). The role of Elephant and Castle in raising theprofile of Latin Americans, Symposium: Juana in a Million: Making Latin Americans Visible in London, Southwark Playhouse, Friday 6th June 2013

Spanish Civil Code (2002). Boletín Oficial del Estado de 8-10-2002.

1This research was made possible thanks to the funding provided by the SpanishMinisterio de Ciencia e Innovación within the Plan Nacional de I+D+I 2008-2011 tothe project ‘New speakers, new identities: Linguistic practices and ideologies inthe post-national era’ (NEOPHON; ref. FFI2011-24781), led by Joan Pujolar(Universitat Oberta de Catalunya). This research has also benefited from thecontributions of colleagues involved in the ISCH COST Action Network IS1306 “NewSpeakers n a Multilingual Europe: Opportunities and Challenges”.2www.southwark.gov.uk/news/article/953/ southwark_becomes_first_council_to_officially_recognise_its_latin_american_community, accessed on 14/09/2012.3 The term (ir)regular is used instead of (i)llegal to denote a stance. ‘(Ir)regular’ has of late been used in migration studies much in the same way as ‘(un)authorised’ seems to gaining ground on the other side of the Atlantic. 4 www.publico.es accessed on 12/09/2013. 5 The International English Language Testing Service (IELTS) is the most recognisedstandard language proficiency test for study and work in the UK.6 Migrants from former colonies could obtain Spanish nationality after legally and continuously residing in Spain for a period of 2 years. Spanish nationality can be acquired by residence in Spain. To apply for naturalisation by residence it is necessary for the individual to have lived in Spain for ten years, or five years ifthe individual is a refugee, or two years if the individual is a national of a country of Iberoamerica, Andorra, Philippines, Equatorial Guinea, Portugal, or if the individual is a Sephardi Jew (Spanish Civil Code, 2002: article 22).7 In fact, authors, such as Martinez Buján (2003) consider these special conditionsare part of an intent on favouring Latino American immigration over Maghrebian workers, a highly stigmatised group in Spanish society.8 In contrast with this unemployment rate of the 30% among Latin Americans in 2009,the rate among locals was 18% in 2009. This rate was significantly higher in the case of Moroccans and workers from other African Countries (around the 50%), and higher than the rate among migrants from Asia. In this case, the unemployment rate is even lower than in the case of nationals. Researchers explain these differences with reference to the kind of activities migrants develop, their educational trajectories, and the impact of racism and ethnic prejudices in the receiving society (Moreno ad Bruquetas, 2011). Unemployment rates among immigrants in December 2009, were as follows: Morocco 3,14; Rumania 2,07; Ecuador 1,52; Colombia 0,96; and Argentina 0,33, Source: Data from the State Agency for employment, in Moreno Fuentes, F. J. and Bruquetas Callejo, M. (2011: 61).9“Fragmented” refers to economic spaces split along ethnolinguistic lines (cf Restifo, Roscigno, & Qian,, 2013; , Cachón, 2002).10An example of cultural segregation emerged in an interview with a secondgeneration migrant who, unlike many of those in our sample, had a UK degree inaccountancy and had secured a job at a global bank in the City of London in thatcapacity. In spite of this, she reported that none of the workmates with whom sheused to socialise were White Britons but were instead British Asian and/or BritishNigerian.