Before proceeding to the actual results of the dimensions and types of adaptation I review some basic variables of the target group, as well as some other findings that are discussed in cross-cultural adaptation studies.
8.1.1 LANGUAGE ABILITY
In cross-cultural adaptation theories language knowledge is unanimously considered to be an important ability (e.g. Masgoret & Ward, 2006; Ward &
Kennedy, 1993b). Defining language ability in the study at hand was, however, more problematic than usual, due to the unique nature of the Brussels region.
As mentioned earlier, both French and Flemish are official languages in Brussels, but the official language in the surrounding suburban areas varies from commune to another. For example in Kraainem and Wezembeek-Oppem, popular areas among foreign expatriates, the official language is Flemish. I decided to take this into account in the interview, and at the beginning of the interview the respondents were asked their language ability in all the languages they spoke and the level of that ability. I report briefly the overall language ability of the respondents in three languages mostly used by the Finnish expatriates in the Brussels area: French, Flemish and English.
All 52 respondents reported that they spoke fluent English. 22 respondents (42%) were also fluent in French, and 5 persons (10%) were fluent in Flemish, of which one also spoke fluent French. However, almost all respondents spoke at least some French or Flemish, or some both. It may be more illuminating to see how many did not speak French or Flemish. 6 respondents (12%) told they did not speak the languages of the country. All the others had at least some kind of ability (20 persons, 39%), of which many were studying one or other language at that time, and as mentioned above, half of the respondents spoke either French or Flemish fluently (Table 2).
Table 2 Language ability, French or Flemish
Knowledge of French/Flemish N %
Does not speak 6 11.5
Basic knowledge to moderate 20 38.5
Speaks fluently 26 50.0
Total 52 100.00
72
8.1.2 FRIENDSHIP NETWORKS AND SOCIAL SUPPORT
Another basic variable crucial in adaptation studies is the nature of social networks, also conceptualized as social support. In Brussels, where one-third of the inhabitants are foreigners, and half of the population of foreign origin, the concept of social networks needs to be examined taking into consideration the highly multicultural nature of the place. The division into those who have locals as friends and those socializing with expatriates would not greatly illuminate the social relationships. In the current study I chose to see more closely whether the respondents have other nationalities than Finns as their friends (enquiring into relationships with Belgians, as well), or if they lived in a Finnish enclave, and if so, the reasons for this.
Altogether three groups were formed: persons who mainly socialized with other Finns in their free-time (17 persons, 33%), those who clearly had multicultural friendship networks (33 persons, 64%), and those who had no friends in Brussels at all, 2 persons (4%) (Table 3).
Table 3 Friendship networks
Friendship network in Brussels N %
No friends 2 3.8
Mainly Finnish friends 17 32.7
Multicultural friendship network 33 63.5
Total 52 100.0
The majority of respondents had multicultural friendship networks, and practically all these individuals had at least one or two Belgians in that network, as well. Some individuals mainly had Belgians as friends, but in general the international social network was composed of several different nationalities. It appeared from the texts that if the interviewed had multicultural social networks, and yet no Belgians were amongst them, it was more due to the fact that there were simply no Belgians in their circles of life (e.g. work, or the school that the children attended).
Taking a closer look at those who socialized mainly with other Finns, several reasons came up. I will explain these here, since they clarify the nature of the ‘expatriate bubble’. The three main reasons for only having Finnish friends were small children in the family, language problems, and workload.
The biggest group were those spouses who stayed home with small children, and some of them, but not all, felt their inability to speak fluent French or Flemish restricted them from going out and trying to make friends with others than Finns. Staying within Finnish network was described as the easiest and
73
most convenient way of building a social network at the time. Almost all these individuals had come to the country with a baby, and they had no previous contacts to anybody in Belgium. The other major group were individuals who said their work took up all their time. Some said that they had very little social life outside work; others said they had no time to make friends, and socialized with the people the spouse had got to know. In such cases, the spouse was home with small children and had got to know other Finns. Insufficient foreign language skill (of the country) was also an additional reason for some who worked long hours. Yet another reason, which combined with the former reasons, was that arrival had taken place less than a year ago, and a good social network had not yet been built up. Most individuals in this group did have some acquaintances with other nationalities, but all their friends were Finns. There were also several persons who had a multicultural work environment, but who socialized only with Finns in their free time.
The main reasons having only Finnish friends or having no friends at all, can be described as a triangle (Figure 4); the tree reasons were small children at home, long working hours and language problems. For some it was one of these reasons, whereas for others it was a combination of two of them, and for some it was the all three reasons.
Figure 4 Reasons for having only Finnish friends or no friends small
children
language problems
Finnish friends or
solitude
workload
74
An important detail, connected to social networks in Belgium, were the social contacts expatriates kept up with both their home country as well as with other countries. There were numerous comments about distant social relationships the respondents were keeping up through various devices:
telephone, skype, e-mails, messengers, etc. The contacts were quite regular since the means of communication have become easier, opportunities to choose the ways one communicates have broadened, and the prices of these means have lowered dramatically. While it is no doubt advantageous to everybody to have this possibility to communicate nationally and globally, it may have a different meaning for some who have less face to face contacts in a new country. For some individuals contacts with their own countrymen in Brussels provided social support, and for others contacts with multiple nationalities in Brussels. Furthermore, distant contacts with the home country as well as with other countries could provide social support to individuals.
This was mentioned by many individuals who had satisfactory social networks in Belgium, but the significance was highlighted by those who had not managed to make friends while living abroad.
Yet another source of social support mentioned was the family. 13 of the 40 (33%) who were in a relationship reported that support from one’s spouse was significant. Many of these also mentioned that family cohesion had increased abroad.