Maria Adamuti-Trache (University of British Columbia – CANADA)

1. Draft copy only: Do not quote without permission (maria.trache@ubc.ca)
Language acquisition among adult immigrants in Canada
Maria Adamuti-Trache
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, CANADA
ABSTRACT
Gaining proficiency in one of Canada’s official languages is perhaps the most important task of
immigrants during their first years in the new country. In this paper, I put forward the idea that
ability to communicate in one of Canada’s official languages is not only a condition for full
social and economic integration of immigrants, but it also facilitates immigrant understanding of
culture and customs, and finally contributes to shaping a sense of belonging to the host country.
First, this study demonstrates the variability in pre-migration language capital among recent
adult immigrants to Canada and the increase in language capital within four years of arrival.
Second, it examines various opportunities for language acquisition and it identifies vulnerable
groups such as women, older immigrants and less educated immigrants who have limited access
to such opportunities. Third, the analysis points to the relationship between language capital and
immigrants’ socio-economic integration. The study emphasizes the centrality of practice (i.e.,
formal and informal education and training, labour market participation, social networking) to
language acquisition and immigrant integration within the host society.
BACKGROUND
Language proficiency is acknowledged as one of the most important factors contributing to the
successful economic integration of migrant populations; more generally, it is a critical ingredient
underlying social integration and civic participation. In Canada, only the Federal Skilled Worker
applications are evaluated through an immigration point system that includes some procedures to
determine language proficiency in English or French (i.e., up to 24 of the total of 100 points are
awarded for language proficiency in one or both of English and French). However, the Canadian
immigration policy did not make the official language competence compulsory and a skilled
immigrant could qualify without meeting this criterion. The efficacy of immigrant selection and
settlement policies has been highly contested. Since April 2010, amendments to the Canadian
immigration policy require that language proficiency is no more self-reported by applicants, but
proofs of English and French language ability will be provided at the time of application. The
change applies to the Federal Skilled Worker and Canadian Experience immigration classes,
which actually constitute the main source of skilled immigrants to Canada. The current study is
based on the Longitudinal Survey of Immigrants to Canada that covers the period 2000-2005
when proof of language skills was not required.
Brief literature review. Language skills are a form of human capital: “they are embodied in
the person; they are productive in the labor market and/or in consumption; and they are created at
a sacrifice of time and out-of-pocket resources” (Chiswick & Miller, 1995, p.248). In an era of
increasing global migration, foreign language competencies are essential skills that immigrant
workers and their families need in order to build successful lives in the destination countries.
1

2. Fluency in the host country language is a function of three fundamental variables: exposure to
the language (e.g., “linguistic distance”, school instruction in the destination language, duration
in the host country, intensity of exposure), efficiency in language acquisition (i.e., depends on
factors like age at immigration, linguistic distance and level of education) and expected returns
to language investment economic incentives from language fluency (e.g., higher wages).
Standard human capital models would suggest that acquisition of host country language capital
requires time and investment (Dustman, 1999); and one’s decision to invest depends on potential
future benefits, on the cost of skill acquisition, and on the individual’s efficiency acquiring
language capital which in turn depends on the stock of human capital gained in the past (e.g.,
level of education, pre-migration language skills).
Neither the immigrant nor the host society can control all the above factors (e.g., linguistic
distance). However, both parts should strive to create ways to improve language fluency through
practice in the destination language, which would ‘naturally’ occur through participation in the
labour market, bridging to the host society, pursuing education and training. From Bourdieu’s
sociological perspective (1990), the accumulation and conversion of forms of capital is only
possible through practice in a social field – in this case, both acquisition or enhancement of host
country language capital and its subsequent conversion into human capital are conditional upon
immigrant active engagement with host country institutions.
Recent immigrants to Canada have to overcome language, cultural and social barriers when
entering new workplaces and communities. For instance, data from the Longitudinal Survey of
Immigrants to Canada (LSIC) administered in 2000-2001 show that a majority (82%) of new
immigrants reported they were able to speak one of the two official languages (Statistics Canada,
2005). Language skills were more likely to be reported among the working-age immigrants (25-
44 years old) with university education (92%). With respect to language skills acquisition,
almost all immigrants (95%) thought it was important or very important to improve their
language skills. Within 6 months of arrival 67% of immigrants had plans to improve their
English and many enrolled in training. Among the most common methods of learning English
(all provinces except Quebec) were language classes or training (60%), media (39%) and self-
learning (30%), as well as through interactions with family and friends, or at school and work. In
addition, there is a clear trend toward pursuing Canadian post-secondary credentials which offers
an indirect way to improve host country language skills. LSIC data show that 89% of recent
immigrants acknowledged the worth of taking further education; about two-thirds of them had
educational plans at arrival, and 40% of immigrants were interested in university studies
(Statistics Canada, 2005). Obtaining further education after arrival in Canada is a strategy
embraced in particular by immigrants who have completed university education in their countries
of origin (Adamuti-Trache, 2011; Adamuti-Trache & Sweet, 2010; Green & Green, 1999).
Anisef, Sweet and Adamuti-Trache (2009) also found that high self-perception of language
proficiency in one of the two official languages is associated with immigrants’ engagement in
post-secondary education after arrival to Canada and impacts significantly on the employment
outcomes of recent immigrants.
There is evidence that inadequacy of language skills leads to the unsuccessful economic
integration and also controls the type of social interaction and civic participation of immigrants.
As Lancee (2008) demonstrates, there is a significant relationship between language proficiency
and structural bridging social capital which consists in the collection of ties established among
people (i.e., host society) that are embedded in institutions where more likely resources can be
2

3. exchanged. As a result, bridging networks are likely to affect employment and income. Bonding
social capital that emphasizes ties within family and ethnic community may not lead to direct
economic outcomes but helps the growth of bridging capital. Boyd (2009) employs data from the
2002 Canadian Ethnic Diversity Survey to examine whether lack of language proficiency affects
membership in a variety of organizations as well as immigrants’ feeling of belonging. While
participation in non-ethnic associations is indeed lower for immigrants who are less proficient in
the host language (i.e., both mother tongue and language used mostly at home other than
English/French), these immigrants are active in ethnic or immigrant associations, and do not
have negative feeling about belonging to Canada.
Purpose. The study extends the existing research literature in several ways. First, I will
examine the role of self-reported language ability in the immigrant settlement process – touching
on social, economic and emotional domains of individual adaptation. Second, the strategies
employed by immigrants to improve their language competence in English or French will
provide information to better understand funded language training programs and how these are
augmented by the initiatives and personal situations of individual immigrants who pursue
language in various settings. The study has the following key research objectives:
• To examine differences in language ability (e.g., speaking skills) at arrival by various
individual and immigrant-specific factors (e.g., gender, age, pre-migration level of
education, immigration class, country of origin).
• To examine immigrants’ engagement in various forms of formal and informal language
training or other forms of practice (e.g., formal post-secondary education) that contribute
to the development of language capital within 4 years of arrival.
• To assess changes in language capital (i.e., self-reported language proficiency) over four
years of arrival while controlling for individual factors.
• To examine the effect of language proficiency on immigrants’ participation in society
(e.g., employment, social network) and sense of belonging after 4 years in Canada.
Data. The analysis is based on data from the Longitudinal Survey of Immigrants to Canada
(LSIC) following a representative sample of new immigrants and refugees who landed between
October 2000 and September 2001. The surveys were conducted 6 months, 2 years and 4 years
after their arrival. The study includes only respondents who had never lived in Canada before
applying for immigration and were 20 to 59 years old at arrival. The age selection ensures that
youth 19 years old or less who are still eligible to enroll in high school as regular students were
excluded; I also excluded the older immigrants who were roughly out of the working age
population by 2005, the time of the last LSIC interview, and possibly had fewer incentives for
language training. A total of 6090 immigrants were selected which represents about 87% of
respondents who participated in all 3 interviews. The study follows Statistics Canada
recommendations for the analysis and presentation of LSIC data. Analysis is conducted with
normalized weights obtained from LSIC survey weights.
Variables. The outcome variable is the self-reported speaking proficiency in one of Canada’s
official languages – it is based on the English scores for all provinces except Quebec, and the
best of the English or French scores for Quebec respondents (Adamuti-Trache, 2011). For each
wave, a four-category variable indicates whether the immigrant reported: could not speak (0),
spoke the language poorly (1), spoke fairly well (2), spoke well (3), spoke very well or
3

4. English/French was his/her mother tongue (4). Although immigrants whose mother tongue was
one of Canada/s official languages did not have to answer the question, they were assigned to the
highest level (Grondin, 2007). Language speaking proficiency in wave 1 (i.e., low/high by
aggregating first two and last two groups) is also used as an explanatory variable of different
language acquisition patterns. The analysis includes individual variables such as gender, age
(i.e., 6 groups) and highest educational attained (i.e., high school or below, college/trades,
university), immigrant-specific factors (Adamuti-Trache & Sweet, 2010) such as region of last
permanent residence and immigration class (i.e., economic-principal applicants, economic-
spouse/dependants, family immigrants, refugees). The ‘source country’ variable carries a cultural
dimension (Reitz, 2007); it also informs on the ‘linguistic distance’ between the country of origin
and the host country. The immigration class contains information on immigrant human capital
because most economic immigrants have been assessed under the point system.
An important set of variables describes the steps taken by immigrants to improve their language
skills. The information is cumulated over all waves and variables describe whether immigrants
took language classes, learned from family/friends or at work, improved through self-study or
media. While language training represents non-formal learning, all other forms of language
acquisition are typical informal learning ways in which learners engage purposefully. It is also
expected that language skills improve through practice in educational institutions even if the
learner engages in such activities to pursue a post-secondary credential. The analysis will be
based on variables to describe involvement with any of these activities within four years of
arrival. Finally, improved language skills are expected to lead to immigrants’ better economic
integration (i.e., employment status), the formation of host country social capital (i.e., diverse
friends network outside ethnic community) and a growing feeling of belonging to the destination
country. These outcomes will be discussed based on the Wave 3 data (4 years of arrival).
Outline. This is an empirical exploratory analysis that consists in four parts. First, descriptive
statistics will contrast language ability profiles in Wave 1 by social structural factors and prior
level of education, as well as immigrant specific factors. Second, I will provide data to compare
immigrant engagement with various modes of language acquisition during the first four years in
Canada by social structural factors, prior level of education and language skills at arrival. Third, I
will make use of the longitudinal design of LSIC and conduct a multivariate analysis of language
proficiency growth by examining the effect of social structural factors (gender and age), prior
level of education and language skills at arrival (Wave 1). Finally, I will briefly examine how
language ability in Wave 3 relates to employment status, social capital and feeling of belonging.
FINDINGS
1. Language capital. Wave 1 data allow to assess immigrants’ language capital close to arrival.
Percentage of immigrants across four levels of proficiency in one of Canada’s official languages
are shown in detail (i.e., cannot speak and speaks poor are aggregated to avoid small sample size
for some groups); the contrast will be mostly made between poor speakers (i.e., low language
skills) and good speakers (i.e., high language skills). Table 1 shows that about two thirds of adult
immigrants speak well or very well one of Canada official languages. Gender differences in
language capital indicate that men self-report higher proficiency: 71% of men as compared to
55% of women are good speakers. Almost one quarter of women cannot speak or have a poor
command of the language. Age at arrival is associated with language capital. Except the age
4

5. group 20 to 24 that is about half distributed across the low and high skill levels, there is a quite
clear increase in the proportion of immigrants with low language skills by age. About two thirds
of the immigrants 50 years old and above reported having poor mastery of one of Canada official
languages. As expected language proficiency is increased with level of education. While only
one-third of the immigrants with high school education or less reported good language skills, this
proportion is 59% and 73% among those with college and university experience, respectively.
Table 1. Distribution of immigrants by speaking language abilities in Wave 1 (row %)
Low skill level High skill level
N Cannot speak Fairly well Well Very well &
a
& Poor Mother tongue
ALL 6090 17 19 26 38
Gender Male 3000 11 18 29 42
Female 3090 23 21 22 33
Age 20-24 570 20 26 24 30
25-29 1170 12 19 28 41
30-34 1610 11 20 30 40
35-39 1130 15 21 28 37
40-44 750 20 18 22 40
45-49 460 22 17 19 41
50-59 410 50 14 11 25
Pre-migration education
High school or below 1150 45 23 14 18
College 1010 20 22 20 39
University 3960 9 18 30 43
Region of last permanent residence
US/UK/NZ/AUS 320 4 7 14 76
WSN Europe 390 15 14 23 48
E Europe 460 10 26 39 25
Central/South America 340 14 16 17 53
Middle East 600 16 21 23 41
E/SE Asia 2000 20 25 34 21
South Asia 1450 24 17 21 38
Africa 520 6 10 14 70
Immigration class
Economic- Principal applicant 2450 4 14 32 50
Economic- Spouse/Dependant 1770 20 24 23 33
Family 1460 31 20 19 30
Refugee 410 36 30 20 14
a
The 2 categories are aggregated because some groups have small sample size.
Region/country of last permanent residence is associated with immigrant language capital at
arrival. Obviously, those coming from Anglophone countries or from African countries that have
either British or French heritages, have high proficiency in one of Canada’s official languages
(i.e., up to 90% and 84%, respectively). Good language skills are also noticeable from
immigrants from Western/South/Northern Europe and Central/South America who may have had
access to training or more contacts with the North American culture. Eastern Europeans show the
5

6. most centered distribution: many immigrants had exposure to one of Canada’s official languages,
but a relatively low proportion report very good language skills. While language skills are quite
polarized among immigrants from South Asia (e.g., 38% have very food skills, but also 24%
cannot speak or speak the language poorly), immigrants for East and South East Asia show the
highest percentage of low skill level (a total of 45%) and the lowest percentage of immigrants
who speak the language very well (21%). Finally, there is a clear relation between language
skills at arrival and immigration class. Over 80% of the economic immigrants principal
applicants report high language proficiency as compared to about half of the spouse and
dependant economic immigrants or family immigrants, and about two-third of the refugees. This
is not surprising since selection criteria for skilled workers include a language proficiency
component. Most of these individuals will likely carry the burden of social and economic
integration for their families. However, other immigrant groups are vulnerable in terms of pre-
migration language capital. Women, older immigrants, those with lower levels of education,
immigrants from Asia, family immigrants and refugees will likely need significant support to
acquire language skills.
2. Steps taken to acquire language proficiency. Typical ways to improve language skills are
language classes, self-study, media, family/friend interactions, work interactions, as well as
participation in formal education (e.g., post-secondary education). Although questions about
language practices were asked in each wave, this analysis is based on overall responses across all
waves. For instance, participation in language training classes means that the immigrant reported
taking language classes at least once within 4 years of arrival. Table 2 contrasts the percentages
of immigrants who engaged in these language practices by demographic factors and prior level
of education, as well as language proficiency at arrival. In general, immigrants with lower skill
level at arrival are more likely to engage in various forms of language acquisition, except for
pursuing post-secondary education which is controlled by admission requirements, so mostly
good speakers can access this opportunity. Media seems to be a popular way to acquire language
skills among a majority of immigrants.
Table 2: Percentages of immigrants who took specific steps toward improving language
a
skills by individual factors and Wave 1 language skill level
Language classes Self-Study Media
b b
W1 Language skill level Low High Low High Low High
ALL 70 36 45 37 77 60
Gender Male 64 33 46 38 77 60
Female 74 41 44 37 78 60
Age 20-24 70 46 39 35 81 58
25-29 74 40 48 39 82 62
30-34 76 39 51 42 82 64
35-39 79 36 56 38 83 62
40-44 77 32 53 33 82 52
45-49 58 25 29 29 68 53
50-59 41 16 23 22 51 48
Pre-migration education
High school or below 59 33 29 28 66 52
College 75 29 55 28 83 52
University 76 38 54 40 83 63
6

7. (Table 2, con’t)
Family/Friends At Work PSE
W1 Language skill level Low High Low Low High Low
ALL 47 36 46 47 36 46
Gender Male 42 33 60 42 33 60
Female 50 39 38 50 39 38
Age 20-24 55 40 55 55 40 55
25-29 52 35 55 52 35 55
30-34 47 36 46 47 36 46
35-39 45 40 49 45 40 49
40-44 43 31 49 43 31 49
45-49 44 33 38 44 33 38
50-59 42 31 26 42 31 26
Pre-migration education
High school or below 50 38 39 50 38 39
College 53 35 51 53 35 51
University 42 36 51 42 36 51
a
Percentages are calculated as the ratio between the number of immigrants answering Yes and
the total number of immigrants in each group.
b
Low= Cannot speak & Poor & Fairly well; High= Well & Very well & Mother tongue.
Language classes. Formal language training is considered by 70% of the poor speakers as
compared to 36% of the good speakers. Gender and age differences are significant: women and
young immigrants are more likely to take language classes. Participation in language training by
prior level of education reveals that exactly the groups that need training the most (i.e., those
with high school or below) are less likely to consider this step. Apparently, older immigrants and
those with lower level of education who were identified as having insufficient language capital at
arrival are not sufficiently engaged with language training within four years of arrival.
Self-study. This is an important form of informal language training that seems to be considered
by 45% of the poor speakers and 37% of the good speakers. Gender differences are not
noticeable, but interesting patterns are visible by age and education level. For instance, among
the poor speakers, active self-learners are the working age immigrants (25 to 44) and those with
prior post-secondary education. To note that self-study is identified as a step to language
improvement only by 29% and 22-23% of the immigrants aged 45-49 and 50-59, respectively.
Media. This is the most popular informal learning tool recognized by 77% of the poor speakers
and 60% of the good speakers. However, it is acknowledged only by half of the immigrants aged
50 to 59. The younger and the more educated immigrants, regardless of language skill level at
arrival, are likely to benefit from this informal leaning tool.
Family/friends. Overall, poor speakers seem to rely more on family/friends interaction to learn
the language as compared to good speakers (47% vs. 36%). This is particularly true for women
regardless of language skill level at arrival. It is also true for immigrants with lower levels of
education, especially poor speakers. The younger immigrants also feel they learn from the
interactions with family and friends more than the older immigrants, who might have a friends
network that is less ethnically diverse.
7

8. Work. Acquiring language skills at work certainly depends on whether the immigrant is
employed and whether English or French are the languages used in the workplace. Overall, about
45-46% of immigrants believe that the work environment helped them improve their proficiency
and there are no differences by language skill level at arrival. However, gender, age and level of
education differences are significant, especially among poor speaker immigrants. While 60% of
men who are poor speakers believe they improved their language skills at work, this is reported
by only 38% of women in the same language skill group. Similarly, 55% of the 20 to 29 years
old immigrants as compared to 26% of the 50 to 59 years old immigrants, and 39% of those with
high school education or below as compared to 51% of those with post-secondary education,
recognize that language improvements occurred at work. These patterns are clearly controlled by
employment patterns as well as type of jobs held by immigrants (e.g., manual jobs may not
require good language skills and offer few opportunities for improvement).
PSE participation. Although formal education aiming to degree completion is not a direct step
to language improvement, it may engage the learner in language practice more than any other
activity. There is no surprise that only 24% of the poor speakers as compared to 45% of the good
speakers engage in PSE because participation is not only a matter of choice but also of meeting
admission requirements. It is still remarkable that one quarter of the adult immigrants who do not
have remarkable language skills at arrival succeed to pursue PSE within four years. Women and
older immigrants, especially those with low language skills, are less likely to engage in PSE.
However, PSE participation rates are quite high among university-educated immigrants,
regardless of language proficiency.
3. Change in language proficiency. Time since arrival in the host country (i.e., duration of
exposure) and steps taken to improve language skills or participation in education, work and
social networking (i.e., intensity of exposure) allow immigrants to become gradually more
comfortable with the host country language. Improvement of spoken language skills is visible in
Figure 1 showing the average scores at each interview time for immigrants with low and high
skill level at arrival.
Fig.1: Mean language scores by W1 skill level
4
High
3
Low
2
1
0
Wave1 Wave2 Wave3
Poor speakers become over time more confident regarding their language abilities while good
speakers become more exigent. For the poor speakers, the major change occurs within 2 years of
arrival when they reach on average level 2 (speaking fairly well). No significant changes are
observed for the good speakers. Figure 1 shows that change in language proficiency occurs
during Wave 2, and next skills remain quite steady.
8

9. A one-way repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare the effect of gender, age at
arrival, prior level of education and language skill group at arrival on self-reported language
ability in Wave 1, Wave 2 and Wave 3. All tests of between-subjects effects (i.e., gender, age,
prior level of education, language proficiency at arrival) are statistically significant (p<0.001).
The tests of within-subject effects show statistically significant changes in language proficiency
over time (p<0.001). Significant interaction terms indicate that the changing patterns in language
proficiency are affected by gender, age, prior level of education and language skills at arrival
(the latter effect is portrayed in Figure 1). The interaction effects between language skills at
arrival and one of the individual variables are shown in Figures 2-4.
Fig.2: Mean language scores by W1 skill level and gender
4
High_Male
3 High_Female
Low_Male
2
Low_Female
1
0
Wave1 Wave2 Wave3
Fig.3: Mean language scores by W1 skill level and age
4
High 20-24
25-29
30-34
3 35-39
40-44
45-49
2 50-59
Low 20-24
25-29
30-34
1 35-39
40-44
45-49
50-59
0
Wave1 Wave2 Wave3
Fig.4: Mean language scores by W1 skill level and prior
level of education
4
High_University
High_College
3
High_HS/Below
Low_University
2 Low_College
Low_HS/Below
1
0
Wave1 Wave2 Wave3
9

10. More specifically, Figure 2 confirms no significant gender although male immigrants improve
slightly more their skills (i.e., the slope of change between Wave 1 and Wave 2 is greater for
men). Figure 3 describes the effect of age on language proficiency growth. For the high skill
level, the most pronounced drop is noticeable for the 45 to 49 years old. For the low skill group,
the slope of change is greater for all age groups except immigrants aged 45 to 49 and 50 to 59.
The older group also experiences a slight drop in perception of language speaking skills in Wave
3. Finally, Figure 4 shows the effect of prior level of education on language proficiency growth.
While there is little variability in the change patterns for the good speakers, there is a clear effect
of prior level of education on the slope lines with university-educated immigrants experiencing
the greatest language proficiency growth in Wave 2.
4. Language and immigrant integration. Acquisition of language capital is expected to affect
the economic, social and cultural integration of immigrants. Data show that the percentage of
adult immigrants who report speaking well and very well one of Canada official languages grows
from 64% in Wave 1 to 75% in Wave 3; the percentage not speaking the host country language
dropped from 17% top 10%. Table 4 presents evidence that language proficiency in Wave 3 is
associated with indicators of immigrants’ integration and their sense of belonging to Canada.
Table 3. Integration outcomes and speaking language abilities in Wave 3 (row %)
N Cannot speak Fairly well Well Very well &
& Poor Mother tongue
ALL 6090 10 15 28 47
Employment status (W3)
Employed 4380 7 14 28 51
Unemployed Searching jobs 770 15 15 31 38
Unemployed-No job search 950 19 19 24 39
Pre-migration work experience accepted
Had not worked before 980 24 21 26 29
Never tried or looked for job 1310 15 20 31 34
Have tried, did not succeed 1850 6 16 29 50
Work experience accepted 1950 3 9 27 61
Friends network (ethnicity) W3
No new friends 800 19 15 24 42
All/Most ethnic friends 2900 13 20 32 35
About half ethnic friends 810 2 12 29 56
Few/None ethnic friends 1580 2 8 24 67
Membership in organizations (W3)
No 4290 12 16 29 44
Yes, ethnic/religious/cultural 570 7 14 29 50
Yes, not ethnic/religious/cultural 1240 3 8 26 63
Sense of belonging to Canada (W3)
1 Not strong at all 90 11 22 22 44
2 210 10 14 33 43
3 1040 12 16 30 42
4 2280 9 18 29 44
5 Very strong 2410 10 12 26 52
10

11. First, about 72% of the adult immigrants were employed in Wave 3. Among them, 79% reported
speaking an official language well and very well at the time of the interview. The least proficient
are immigrants who are unemployed and not looking for a job, although 30% of the unemployed
searching for jobs have low language skill level and likely few employment chances. One issue
much discussed in the literature is related to barriers experienced by immigrants to have their
prior work experience recognized (see e.g., Anisef, Sweet & Adamuti-Trache, 2010). The current
analysis shows that about 37% of adult immigrants never worked prior to migration or never had
a chance to either work in Canada or to negotiate their work experience within 4 years of arrival.
Among these immigrants, there are noticeably high percentages with low language skills. On the
contrary, those who interacted with the employers and negotiated their work experience,
successfully or not, are much more proficient. In particular, 88% of the adult immigrants whose
work experience was accepted in Canada have good mastery of one official language.
Building social capital in the host country is facilitated by ability to communicate outside own
ethnic group. As shown in table 4, there is a tendency among adult immigrants to maintain
friendships within their ethnic group (i.e., over 60% of immigrants did not make friends or have
all or most ethnic friends). One third of these immigrants who rely on bonding friendship
networks are poor speakers after 4 years in Canada. On the contrary, about one quarter of all
immigrants have few or no ethnic friends. Only 10% of these immigrants who rely on bridging
friendship networks are poor speakers. The data clearly show that type of friends network is
associated with language proficiency. Membership in organizations is relatively low for adult
immigrants: 20% participate in non-ethnic organizations, 9% in ethnic groups and over 70%
have no organization affiliation in Wave 3. The low participation could be associated with the
economic difficulties experienced by adult immigrants that delay their involvement with
activities outside the economic realm. However, there is a clear relation between membership in
organization, particularly non-ethnic, and language proficiency which suggests that language
skills may affect immigrant social integration.
Finally, sense of belonging to Canada is likely to be enhanced when immigrants are capable to
adopt and share cultural values, and this attitude is favoured by an active knowledge of language.
Table 4 shows that in general, adult immigrants have a high sense of belonging to Canada (mean
score is about 4.1 on a 1-5 scale). Data show that sense of belonging to Canada and language
skills are related but not in a linear manner. For instance, one can notice the lowest percentage of
immigrants with high language skills (67%) among those whose feeling of belonging is not
strong at all. The proportion of good speakers is increased among those who feel more attached,
reaching 78% of those who have very strong sense of belonging. However, 76% of those who
score 2 out of 5 (quite low attachment) are good speakers too.
DISCUSSION
This paper is grounded in Chiswick and Miller’s (1995) argument that acquisition of language
capital is affected by various pre-migration and post-migration factors. The LSIC data show that
adult immigrants to Canada have a quite significant stock of host country language capital,
although there are noticeable differences by gender, age, education, country of origin and
immigration class. Significant associations between these factors and language proficiency at
arrival show that adult immigrants do not form a homogeneous group. In short, by acquiring
proficiency in one of Canada’s official languages, newcomers gradually understand the norms of
11

12. the host society, become culturally, socially and economically integrated as citizens, and likely
grow a sense of belonging to Canada. The broad purpose of this paper is to examine the process
of language capital acquisition, steps taken by immigrants to improve their language skills, and
whether or not language skills impact on the socio-economic integration and sense of belonging
of adult immigrants within four years of arrival to Canada.
The second perspective of this paper is that language capital, like any other form of human
capital, can be acquired only through social practice. The study brings evidence that in terms of
formal and informal language training, or participation in formal post-secondary education that
should also have some language acquisition effects, adult immigrants are not equal. The most
disadvantaged social groups in terms of initial language capital like older or less educated
immigrants are also less likely to access formal education and training opportunities, or unable to
make use of other informal learning tools (e.g., self-study, media). As a result, many cannot
access labour market opportunities which in turn limit their chances to practice the language and
gain new skills.
There is clear evidence that adult immigrants improve their language skills over time. The gain is
obvious for immigrants with initial low stock of language capital; and a slight drop in self-
reported skills is evident for those with high language proficiency at arrival. In addition,
acquisition of language skills is visible during the first two years in Canada, reaching a plateau
over the next two years for most immigrant groups. This should be of concern, considering that
the skill level attained by the least language proficient immigrants it still low (only speaking
‘fairly well’).
The ability to communicate allows for full social and economic integration of adult immigrants;
through understanding of culture and customs, a gradual integration contributes to shaping a
sense of belonging to the host country. The paper emphasizes the centrality of practice (i.e.,
formal and informal education and training, labour market participation, networking) to language
acquisition and immigrant integration in the host society. It also points to vulnerable immigrant
groups who have limited access to opportunities such as women, older immigrants and less
educated immigrants.
12

13. REFERENCES
Adamuti-Trache, M. (2011). First four years in Canada: Post-secondary education pathways of
highly-educated immigrants. Accepted in Journal of International Migration and Integration.
Adamuti-Trache, M. & Sweet, R. (2010). Adult immigrants’ participation in Canadian education
and training. Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education, 22(2), 1-26.
Anisef, P., Sweet, R. & Adamuti-Trache, M. (2009). Impact of Canadian PSE on recent
immigrants’ labour market outcomes. Ottawa: Citizenship and Immigration Canada. Available
at: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/research/impact_postsecondary.asp
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Boyd, M. (2009). Official language proficiency and the civic participation of immigrants. Paper
presented at Metropolis Language Matters Symposium, Ottawa, Canada. Retrieved July 15 2010
http://canada.metropolis.net/events/metropolis_presents/LanguageSeminar/Presentations/Boyd_
Civic_Participation_paper_e.pdf
Chiswick, B. R. & P. W. Miller (1995). The endogeneity between language and earnings:
International analyses. Journal of Labor Economics, 13(2), 246–288.
Dustmann, C. (1999). Temporary migration, human capital, and language fluency of migrants.
Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 101, 297–314.
Green, A. G., & Green, D. A. (1999). The economic goals of Canada’s immigration policy,
Canadian Public Policy, 25(4), 425-451.
Grondin, C. (2007). Knowledge of official languages among new immigrants: How important is
it in the labour market? Catalogue no. 89-624-XIE. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.
Lancee, B. (2008). The economic returns of immigrants’ bonding and bridging social capital:
The case of the Netherlands. International Migration Review, 44(1), 202-226.
Reitz, J. G. (2007). Immigrant employment success in Canada, Part I: Individual and contextual
causes. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 8, 11-36.
Statistics Canada (2005). Longitudinal survey of immigrants to Canada: A portrait of early
settlement experiences. Catalogue no. 89-614-XIE, Ottawa: Statistics Canada, Minister of
Industry.
13