– Why is it necessary to consider empirical data about immigrants away from the major cities? How would such insight allow research to better understand new immigration patterns?
I was interested to find that most new immigrants settle in suburban areas rather than large cities. In the case of Mexican immigrants, this trend is due to flagrant anti-immigrant sentiments. It is interesting to note that the immigrants in these new gateway locales do not form long-term relationships with native-borns because they are often transient. The large number of school aged children however draws upon the necessity to accommodate such students. The uniqueness of settling is such areas, however, lies in the ability of immigrants to carve out their own position and define their own reputation, sans preconceived notions about their place in society from others. Settling in a smaller town with fewer resources means greater interaction between immigrants and native born residents.
I also found the discussion of immigrant replenishment to be quite thought-provoking. I had not previously considered this concept, but the implications of the interaction between new immigrants and integrated coethnics is interesting to consider. According to Waters and Jimenez, immigrant replenishment allows integrated second and third generation individuals to connect with coethnics, and renew their sense of ethnic identity. These interactions also allow those that are settled access to ethnic raw materials.
Evidence of language assimilation in the third generation – that is, loss of the mother tongue – is one that I find quite shocking. Although it does seem intuitive that the immigrant generation would be dominant in their native tongue, the second generation would be bilingual, and the third generation would be English speaking only, I find loss of the mother tongue to be a loss of an integral part of culture. Although language assimilation is important, maintaining one’s own language is also an integral part of remaining connected to one’s roots.
