Mayan Languages in the United States

  • María Luz GarcíaEmail author
Reference work entry


The family of Mayan languages is composed of some 30 distinct languages that are natively spoken in Mexico, Guatemala, Belize, and Honduras. In recent years, speakers of these languages have immigrated to the United States in rapidly increasing numbers and have formed communities in rural and urban locations throughout the country. This chapter considers the place of Mayan languages in Maya communities throughout the USA from both an institutional and an interactional perspective. In schools, courts, and social services, the formal codification and informal effects of dominant language ideologies have had serious consequences for the speakers of Mayan languages. Meanwhile, ideologies and practices of language use vary across communities with different histories and different dynamics, as speakers of Mayan languages come into contact with native speakers of other Mayan languages, Spanish, or English. This chapter concludes with reflections on the implications that the growth of Maya communities in the USA has for the continued vitality of Mayan languages and their place among communities of speakers.


Maya Immigration Diaspora Linguistic ideology Institutional language 


  1. Aissen, J., England, N. C., & Maldonado, R. Z. (Eds.). (2017). The Mayan languages. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Andrapalliyal, V. (2013). The CPS took my baby away: Threats to immigrant parental rights and a proposed Federal Solution. Harvard Law & Policy Review, 7, 173–197.Google Scholar
  3. B’atz, G. (2014). Maya cultural resistance in Los Angeles: The recovery of identity and culture among Maya youth. Latin American Perspectives, 41(3), 194–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baquedano Lopez, P., & Janetti, G. (2017). The Maya diaspora Yucatan-San Francisco: New Latino educational practices and possibilities. In S. Salas & P. R. Portes (Eds.), US Latinization: Education and the New Latino South (pp. 161–183). Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  5. Barrett, R., & Cruz, H. (2016). Healthcare interactions in indigenous Mesoamerica. South Eastern Medical Interpreters Asssociation continuing education seminar. Lexington.Google Scholar
  6. Barrett, R., Cruz, H., & García, M. L. (2017). Difficult interpretations. Anthropology Newsletter, 58(4), e142–e145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bishop, L. M., & Kelley, P. (2013). Indigenous Mexican languages and the politics of language shift in the U.S. In C. Benson & K. Kosonen (Eds.), Language issues in comparative education (pp. 97–113). Rotterdam: Sense.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Briggs, L. (2012). Somebody’s children: The politics of transnational and transracial adoption. Durham NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brody, M. J. (2017). Court interpretation of an indigenous language: The experiences of an unexpected LSP participant. In M. K. Long (Ed.), Language for specific purposes: Trends in curriculum development (pp. 157–167). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Can Pixabaj, T. (2007). Jkemiik yoloj li uspanteko: Gramática uspanteka. Guatemala: Cholsamaj.Google Scholar
  11. Can Pixabaj, T. (2015). Complement and purpose clauses in K’iche’. Doctoral dissertation. The University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  12. Fink, L. (2003). The Maya of Morganton: Work and community in the Nuevo new south. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gentry, B. (2015). Exclusion of indigenous language speaking immigrants in the US immigration system, a technical review. Ama Consultants.Google Scholar
  14. Haviland, J. B. (2003). Ideologies of language: Some reflections on language and US law. American Anthropologist, 105(4), 764–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Huitzil, C. M. (2014). Lost in translation: transnational indigenous migrants re-defining social services in Los Angeles, California (Masters Thesis). Austin: The University of Texas at Austin, Texas ScholarWorks. Available at
  16. Lydgate, J. J. (2010). Assembly-line justice: A review of operation streamline. California Law Review, 98(2), 481–544.Google Scholar
  17. Mateo Toledo, B. (2008). The family of complex predicates in Q’anjob’al (Maya): Their syntax and meaning. Doctoral Dissertation. The University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  18. Mateo Toledo, B. (2012). Complex predicates in Q’anjob’al (Maya): The verbal Resultative. International Journal of American Linguistics, 78(4), 465–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mateo Toledo, B. (2017). Q’anjob’al. In J. Aissen, N. C. England, & R. Z. Maldonado (Eds.), The Mayan languages (pp. 533–569). New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Newdick, V., & Romero, O. (2019). Interpretation is an act of resistance: Indigenous organizations respond to “Zero tolerance” and “family separation.” Forum, 50(1), 30–34.Google Scholar
  21. Romero, S. (2012). “They Don’t get speak our language right”: Language standardization, power and migration among the Q’eqchi’Maya. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 22(2), E21–E41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Romero, O. (2015). Indigenous migrants and language barriers in the US. Diálogo, 18(2), 157–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Vázquez Álvarez, J. 2011. A grammar of Chol, a Mayan language. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Texas Austin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Eastern Michigan UniversityYpsilantiUSA

Personalised recommendations