It has been suggested that the dynamics of acculturation affect the lives of both immigrants and members of the host societies where immigrants live (Berry, 1984; 1997). Whether or not a pluralistic-multicultural policy exists and is accepted by members of the established and emerging communities will affect the strategies of acculturation that are used by immigrant groups and individuals. This paper examines the attitudes of young Canadians and immigrants to Canada regarding the nature of Canadian identity and their sense of ethnicity. Along with an assessment of their strategies of acculturation and self-reports of the meaning of being Canadian and ethnic are examined.

Introduction

Common sense suggests, and developmental psychology confirms, that by the time persons grow to adulthood, their sense of who they are--or psychosocial identity--is already formed. Adults immigrants, who are often selected on the basis of their educational qualifications and occupational skills, would not only have a well developed occupational identity, but also a personal and cultural one by the time they set their feet on Canadian soil. If, as a nation, we had accepted a melting pot model, we would have liked immigrants to trade most aspects of their cultural and social identity for Canadian content--save perhaps their occupational identities. Indeed, we would prefer to have them bolster rather than shed their occupational identities, join our labour force, and contribute to our common wealth. However, having adopted a multicultural policy, Canada does not ask each immigrant to trade all old ways for new. We would rather have all newcomers selectively retain some valuable aspects of their ancestral legacy so as to enrich the cultural fabric of our society.

It is but natural that the first generation of immigrants must first adapt to the local weather, food, language and accent, work place and technology, and a myriad of other aspects of individual and social life. Once "settled" in some social niche more or less securely, the first generation is ready to turn to the "finer" aspects of the ancestral culture: literature and specialised knowledge, fine or performing arts, religious and spiritual values, and so on. It is in cherishing such aspects of ancestral cultural legacy that immigrants retain what we often call an "ethnic" identity. In many instances, individuals make strong commitments and great sacrifices to the preservation, learning, and propagation of some favourite art, science, religion, or spiritual pursuit typical of their ancestral culture. While various aspects of ancestral culture are collectively shared in ethnic communities, individuals within each community tend to vary widely in terms of which specific aspects of ancestral or Canadian culture are combined to forge unique personal identities. In this paper, we intend to present some data to show how individuals combine specific meanings, values, and other elements of ancestral and national cultures to locate themselves in the multicultural mosaic of Canada. Since it is impossible to consider each individual in terms of his or her unique sense of identity, we will offer a broad typology in terms of relative preferences for ethnic versus national identity elements.

Since acculturation is an ongoing process that continues across life cycles and also across generations, it is necessary and useful to distinguish between some common differences between the more recent and older immigrants, and between those of first and second generation. The members of the first generation are often involved in building institutional structures to protect and preserve their cultural identities: churches or temples, art organisations, schools, clubs, and so on. Multiculturalism will not go very far unless the finer aspects of their ancestral cultures, often preserved at a great cost of sweat and toil by the first generation, are passed on to the next. Canada would hardly have been a technically advanced democratic society today unless the lessons of European Enlightenment and the French Revolution had not been passed to the successive generations by the early European settlers. In as much as the "founding nations" have preserved the traditions of British Common Law and the Napoleonic code, of Shakespeare and Montaigne, we now have entrenched values and institutions that define the identity of the Canadian "mainstream." The second generation immigrants of all backgrounds benefits from our schools, media, literature, arts, and host of other sources in the developing the "Canadian" part of their identities. On the other side, at home and through the "ethnic" institutions created by their forebears, members of the second generation get to develop an ethnic aspect of their identities. The dual cultural upbringing at home and outside helps develop hyphenated identities like Scottish-Canadian, Chinese-Canadian and so on.

For Canadian born youth, developing hyphenated identities that combine common national identity elements with ethnic elements is both an opportunity for enrichment, as well as a formidable challenge full of conflicts. Given that youth and early adulthood is a critical period for identity formation, our research is focused on differing ways in which youth make a choice between national and ethnic identity elements. In conceptualising a broad typology based on differing preferences for ancestral versus national identity, we follow the work of John Berry of Queens University.

Berry's framework is based upon the multicultural ideology where individuals and groups are given the opportunity to chose among various elements of traditional and host cultures to form their own unique blends of identity and culture. Arising from answers to two fundamental questions, Berry's scheme of Acculturative Attitudes enables psychologists and social scientists to assess and understand the diversity of identities to which various immigrant and Canadian born individuals ascribe. First, he asks: "Is it considered to be of value to maintain cultural identity and characteristics?" and secondly, "Is it considered to be of value to maintain relationships with other groups?" By answering yes or no to these two questions a person can be placed into the resulting four-fold classification scheme (see Figure 1) of Integration, Separation, Marginalisation and Assimilation.

By implicitly or explicitly answering yes to both questions the individual or group is said to have adopted an Integrative approach to acculturation. Such an approach suggests the integration of various facets of identity. Here the person has adopted identifications with traditions and values from two or more cultures usually engaging in activities from these traditions, and often synthesising them into a novel style of living through these traditions. Berry (1984, 1997) points out that this is a style that is most desired by the "multicultural assumption" of maintenance and contact that leads to a positive identity and tolerance of others.

The second alternative occurs when the first question is answered yes and the second question is answered no. This is the case for Separation, when a group is in an inferior position of power, or for Segregation when the group's relative dominance (in terms of social and economic systems) is that of a superior position. Essentially this style involves the maintenance of traditional cultural behavioural patterns, values and identities without the acceptance of the behaviours, values or identities of other groups.

The third acculturative attitude generated from Berry's conceptual framework is Marginalisation. This attitude occurs when both of the two definitive questions are answered no. Berry points out that marginalisation:

A newer articulation of the Deculturation option was presented by Tonks (1990, 1998) where it was pointed out that this Acculturative Style involves a loss of concern with ethnicity and culture per se. This reincarnated style of Deculturation can also be differentiated from Marginalisation as a style that does not involve an element of "acculturative" stress. This attitude accompanies individuals who "opt-out" from having any traditional cultural ties with associated practices and beliefs while not falling prey to an "acute crisis" characterised by stress. This Deculturated attitude has been endorsed by those who express a desire to maintain no ties with traditional cultural identities in exchange for the ever-changing world of commerce, science, and technology. With moderate to high positive correlations with Assimilation (r = .364; r = .505) and Marginalisation (r = .324; r = .267), and negative correlations with Separation (r = -.481) and Integration (r = -.441), Deculturation shows signs of representing an independent attitude or a subculture within mainstream Canadian Identity (Tonks, 1990: 1998).

The final acculturative attitude is Assimilation, an option that occurs when the first question is answered no and the second one is answered yes. Assimilation refers to the classic "melting-pot" outcome of acculturation whereby groups and individuals forego the maintenance of their traditional ethno-cultural heritages and take on the cultural ways of the host society. This traditionally was the official Canadian policy prior to the 1971 introduction of the Policy on Multiculturalism, and it continues to be the official Policy of the United States.

Empirical Studies
Acculturative attitudes were assessed using a version of Berry's acculturative attitude survey which examines agreement and disagreement with attitudes representing these styles across twenty domains of cultural life. These domains vary across such areas as food and clothing, values and child-rearing styles, music, language, dating and marriage (See appendix A for a list of these domains). The attitude scale scores are derived from 5-point likert scales which provide a composite score between 20 and 100 for each attitude.

Study One: Indo-Canadian Youth in Greater Vancouver

For a sample of 111 Indo-Canadian youth with a mean age of 19.6 years (ranging 14-25) consisting of 50 males and 61 females it was found that Separation was the only attitude to significantly differ (F_(1,109) = 5.548, p=.020) across generations. Table 1 provides a summary of these data indicating that the first generation had a greater preference for Separation (mean of 58.97) than did the second generation (mean of 56.14).

Table 1: Summary Statistics for Generation vs. Acculturative Attitudes of Indo-Canadians
 

Generation		Integ	Assim	Separ *	Margin	Decult	N
First	Mean S. D.	77.69 10.03	59.17 6.5	58.97 6.24	51.5 5.79	59.46 7.12	68
Second	Mean S. D.	80.86 8.15	59.49 7.03	56.14 6.04	50.60 5.83	58.79 6.63	43
Total	Mean S. D.	78.91 9.44	59.29 6.68	57.87 6.29	51.17 5.80	59.19 6.91	111

This was followed up with an analysis of acculturative attitudes for those who came to Canada early (prior to age 10-or were born here) vs. those who came late (at age 10 or later). Table 2 summarises these results, indicating that, once again, Separation was the only attitude to vary significantly significant (F_(1,109) = 12.363, p=.001) across these two groups where the recent immigrants showed a greater preference for Separation (with a mean of 62.93 vs. 57.08).

Table 2: Summary Statistics for Arrival vs. Acculturative Attitudes for Indo-Canadians
 

Arrival		Integ	Assim	Separ ***	Margin	Decult	N
Early	Mean S. D.	79.03 9.72	59.03 6.81	57.08 5.87	50.99 6.03	58.80 6.85	96
Late	Mean S. D.	78.20 7.65	61.00 5.68	62.93 6.76	52.60 3.83	61.73 6.63	15
Total	Mean S. D.	78.91 9.44	59.29 6.68	57.87 6.29	51.17 5.80	59.19 6.91	111

Study Two: Youth from a variety of backgrounds in Greater Vancouver

A similar pair of analyses were carried out for a more recent sample of 128 Canadian and foreign born youth with a mean age of 20.63 years (ranging from 17-25) consisting of 22 males and 106 females. Table 3 presents these data, indicating that the attitude of Separation was significantly (F_(1,122) = 5.454, p=.021) more widely accepted by first generation (mean of 61.35) youth than by second generation youth (mean of 58.84).

Table 3: Summary Statistics for Generation vs. Acculturative Attitudes of Mixed Canadians
 

Generation		Integ	Assim	Separ *	Margin	Decult	N
First	Mean S. D.	82.94 7.36	55.67 4.28	61.35 5.65	48.88 7.34	57.06 6.06	48
Second	Mean S. D.	80.30 8.17	56.68 6.52	58.84 5.95	46.62 6.99	57.47 7.40	76
Total	Mean S. D.	81.32 7.94	56.29 5.76	59.81 5.94	47.49 7.18	57.31 6.89	128

Likewise, their time of arrival to Canada (prior to or after age 10) was also analysed, as presented in Table 4. These data indicate that along with Separation (F_(1,122) = 12.810, p=.000), Marginalisation (F_(1,122) = 4.508, p=.036) also varied significantly.

Table 4: Summary Statistics for Arrival vs. Acculturative Attitudes of Mixed Canadians
 

Arrival		Integ	Assim	Separ ***	Margin *	Decult	N
Early	Mean S. D.	80.74 8.14	56.67 6.28	58.74 5.99	46.70 7.33	57.85 7.46	92
Late	Mean S. D.	83.00 7.20	55.19 3.79	62.91 4.64	49.78 6.28	55.78 4.67	32
Total	Mean S. D.	81.32 7.94	56.29 5.76	59.81 5.94	47.49 7.18	57.31 6.89	128

In addition to these analyses, ANOVA for "Ethnicity" vs. Acculturative Attitudes was also done for this sample. Here, Ethnicity was a grouping variable that was composed of answers two questions. First, given the forced choice among the "identity" alternatives of "Canadian", "Ethnic" or "Ethnic-Canadian", participants were asked to check one of these options as their identities. Secondly, they were also asked to provide a label to identify the "ethnic group" to which they felt a sense of belonging.

As seen in Table 5 (Appendix B) there was a wide variety of labels provided for participants from each of the three forced choice "identity" options. By sorting participants into "ethnicities" based upon both their choice of "identity" and ethnic label, the five groups (Canadian, Canadian-Ethnic, Ethnic, Ethnic-Canadian, and "other") were constructed.

There were 29 participants in the ethnicity "Canadian" who chose Canadian as both their "identity" and as their Label. In constrast, there were 21 participants who chose the identity "Canadian", but provided an "ethnic" or hyphenated label (for example Chinese or Scottish-Canadian). The third group were 19 individuals who chose Ethnic as their identity and provided an "ethnic" label, while 18 others chose ethnic-Canadian as their identity and provided hyphenated labels (e.g., Indo-Canadian). Finally there were 26 individuals who either did not check one of the identity options or did not provide a label to identify their ethnicity and were classified as "other".

Analysis of variance was also performed on the acculturative attitude scores across these groups of "ethnicity." As seen in Table 6, the Acculturative Attitudes of Assimilation (F(_4,108)=2.429, p= .052), Integration (F(_4,108)=2.889, p= .026), and Separation (F(_4,108)=6.288, p= .000), were found to vary significantly across these groups of Ethnicity.

Here it is reported that Canadians showed the highest mean scores (59.10) for Assimilation while Ethnic-Canadians had the lowest mean score (54.39). With respect to Integration, the Canadian-Ethnics had the highest mean score (84.24) while the Canadians had the lowest mean score (77.59). Finally, the group of "others" had the highest mean score for Separation (63.12), closely followed by the Ethnic-Canadians, while the Canadians had the lowest mean scores (56.31) for Separation.

Table 6: Summary Statistics for "Ethnicity" vs. Acculturative Attitudes of Mixed Canadians
 

Ethnicity		Integ *	Assim *	Separ ***	Margin	Decult	N
Canadian	Mean S. D.	77.59 8.91	59.10 6.39	56.31 4.83	45.41 7.70	60.10 8.056	29
Canadian -Ethnic	Mean S. D.	84.24 7.20	55.71 6.05	59.33 5.72	46.19 8.52	56.00 6.80	21
Ethnic	Mean S. D.	81.24 5.59	56.21 7.86	59.16 57.10	49.00 7.80	57.74 7.18	19
Ethnic -Canadian	Mean S. D.	81.22 7.71	54.39 3.48	62.12 5.63	49.83 6.69	55.44 4.77	18
"Other"	Mean S. D.	83.35 6.46	55.35 4.05	63.12 5.63	47.62 5.91	56.54 5.93	26
Total	Mean S. D.	81.36 7.98	56.37 5.92	59.85 5.96	47.37 7.41	57.38 6.86	113

The meaning of being Canadian and Ethnic

The final set of data presented are the reports of the most common expressions of the meaning of being Canadian and Ethnic for this sample of mixed immigrant and Canadian born youth. These expressions are responses to the question "What does it mean to be Canadian?"

Table 7: The 19 Most Frequent Answers to 'What does it mean to be Canadian?'
 

Frequency

Statement

42 (8) (6) 21 18     18 15 11 10 10 9 8             7 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 6

- (Non)-American:  - Different from US ((more so than similar) in constitutional priorities, inner cities, health care, persona, political corruption, right wing evangelical maniacs, friendlier)  - Distinct from US: more humble, polite, caring, mild, socially conscious - Freedom: (to be who or what one wants, of choice from governmental controls, career, speech, school, work, play, and beliefs)  - Diverse people (mix), more diverse than we think, diversity is our uniqueness, being diverse, Many different backgrounds, traditions, beliefs & types of Canadians (races), many distinct societies, many cultures shared by all, exposed to many traditions  - Proud: (7 - Proud of being Canadian ) - World: (4 - Model for the world in peace-keeping (multiculturalism, diversity, low crime) traditions ) - Multicultural (diverse ethnic) country, multicultural environment  - Equal rights against discrimination, to education, to vote, to express my feelings, non-dominance of any one race, to jobs - Tolerant: tolerance (acceptance) of different: traditions, religions and beliefs  - Respectful: to animals, environment, forestry, others, different cultures, traditions, & religions  - [I'm unclear about my relationship to Canadian Identity]: Canadian Identity means not much to me, difficult to say how I fit in to Canadian identity, hard to say why I am proud to be Canadian, I feel in a state of limbo, I feel that I don't fit in, don't think about Canadian Identity often, don't think Canadian is something I need to define myself, don't think of myself as being Canadian, I find it difficult to say who I am because of diversity  - Knowing: politics, the native cultures, knowledgeable, may or may not know cultural histories, & traditions of Canada  - Living in Canada  - Medical and Social System protects everyone (lucky to have) to have this welfare system & State, even kept by conservatives - Not a specific, unique or distinct (concrete) culture, way of being, or ethnicity  - Beautiful (spectacular) country, land, mountains, sea, prairies, rivers  - Fear [lament] losing identity socially, culturally (through free-trade), that national pride Will end with reform (& American media)  - Influential persons (Robertson Davies, Joni Mitchell, Oscar Peterson, Pierre Trudeau, & the guy who invented insulin)  - Others: (E.g., More caring than others ) - People:(3- people can retain their (Indo-Canadian) culture)

As can be seen from Table 7, the most frequent statements about being Canadian include: being Not American, having freedom, diversity, being proud, tolerant, and multicultural.

For this same group of participants, when asked: "What does it mean to be ethnic?" they responded most frequently with being born or growing up in a place or culture, identifying with or feeling a part of a group, having parents who are of an ethnicity, and speaking a traditional language. Table 8 reports the 20 most common Answers to this question.

Table 8: The 20 Most Frequent Answers to 'What does your Ethnicity mean?'

Frequency

Statement

20 13 11 11 9 8 8 7 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

- Born: (9 - Born in Canada) - Grew up / Raised / Brought up: (3 - Raised in Canada (Canadian culture) ) - I am: (2 - I am Canadian ) - Parents: (2 - Parents born (& Raised) in Windsor Ont ) - Feel: (2 - I feel a need to acquire history (& language)) - Live(d, ing): (2 - Lived in Canada (for 14 years, since age 5) ) - Speak(ing): (Speak Chinese more than English) - Proud: (3 - Proud of advances from China, (Hong Kong, Canada)) - Following both cultures (both life-styles, Following traditions, I follow French Canadian traditions, Follow mainly European practices) - Participating in holidays (Festivals, Chinese Cultural events, New Year, Jewish holidays )  - Visit(ing): (family (2 - in Poland), the Czech Republic, Italy many times) - Must respect the land (trees, mountains, waters)  - Great-grand-parents immigrated from: Ireland, Scotland, Austria & USA  - Being able to speak both languages (i.e., mandarin) - Eat "East-Indian" food, British Food, Polish Food a lot  - Grandparents are Scottish, German, & French  - Influenced by school (media, peers) - Knowing about Chilean culture (music, food)  - Love Spanish way of life (culture & art)  - Support: Canada, China, Hong Kong

 

Summary and conclusions

Based upon these two samples of immigrant and Canadian born youth it is clear that first generation youth, in particular those who came to Canada at age 10 or later, have a great preference for separation than do Canadian born youth and those who came to Canada prior to age 10. Furthermore, Marginalisation, and presumably acculturative stress, are more likely to be seen in the acculturative styles of youth who arrive in Canada after age 10 than those who were born here or came as children. These results indicate that recently immigrated youth are more likely to hold on to traditional culture and may experience alienation and challenges to their identities than are Canadian born (second generation) youth and earlier immigrants.

In considering various classifications of "Ethnicity", it was also demonstrated that "Canadians" are more likely to endorse Assimilation and less likely to endorse Integration and Separation. In contrast, "Canadian-Ethnics" showed the most endorsement of Integration and "Ethnic-Canadians" were least likely to endorse Assimilation, being the among the most likely to endorse Separation. These results suggest that there are many different preferences for acculturative styles where Canadians are less interested in traditional culture than are other "hyphenated-Canadians." In conjunction with the reported meaning of being Canadian these data also suggest that multiculturalism, tolerance and diversity are among the most common expressions of what it means to be Canadian. Additionally, participants in this sample have reported that being born in Canada or elsewhere contributes to one's Ethnic Identity (as a Canadian or "--Canadian"), but that growing up in a culture and having parents and grandparents who support traditional languages and cultural practices are also important.

In conclusion, the many youth that participated in these studies indicate that there are some differences between immigrant and Canadian born (first and second-generation) youth acculturative attitude styles. Multiculturalism appears to have played a role in the maintenance of traditional cultural practices for many Canadian youth in spite of the fact that there are many others who have lost ties to traditional cultural practices and identities. While some new immigrants to Canada may have feelings of alienation and marginalisation, and also desire to hold on to traditional culture without accepting Canadian cultural practices, many others, who have been here for longer periods of time, tend to prefer the integration of traditional and mainstream Canadian ways. The pluralistic multiculutral policy that was adopted in 1971 appears to have nurtured a diverse collection of acculturative strategies and ethnic identities for these youth.

Berry, J.W. (1984). Multicultural policy in Canada: A social psychological analysis. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 16, 353-370.

Berry, J.W. (1987). Finding identity: Separation, integration, assimilation or marginality? In L. Driedger (Ed.), Ethnic Canada: identities and inequalities. Toronto: Copp, Clark & Pitman.

Berry, J.W. (1989). Imposed etics-emics-derived etics: The operationalization of a compelling idea. International Journal of Psychology, 24, 721-735.

Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, Acculturation, and Adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46, 5-68.

Berry, J.W., Kalin, R. & Taylor, D., (1977). Multiculturalism and ethnic attitudes in Canada. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services.

Erikson, E.H. (1968). Identity, youth and crisis. New York: Norton.

Tonks, R.G. (1990). Identity formation and acculturation in second generation Indo-Canadian youth and young adults. Unpublished Master's thesis, Simon Fraser University.

Tonks, R.G. (1998). Towards a hermeneutical understanding of identity and ethnicity in Canada. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C.
 
 
 
 

Appendix A: Code sheet of acculturative domains and examples of questions.
 
 

Child rearing: 28s; 11a; 21i; 63m; 56d.

Clothes: 8i; 70d; 83s; 97a.

Dance (entertainment): 9i; 32d; 33s; 74a; 77m.

Dating: 15m; 18a; 43i; 64s; *d.

Festivals (culture): 24m; 41a; 62i; 84s; 35d.

Food: 4s; 30a; 53m; 93i; 39d.

Friendship: 1s; 3m; 59i; 94a; 80d.

Furniture: 13s; 27a; 57m; 87i; 67d.

History: 22m; 48a; 61i; 96s; 46d.

Language: 23a; 38i; 79s; 91d; 95m.

Lifestyle: 16s; 36i; 58a; 69d; 82m.

Magazines: 6d; 19a; 40s; 52m; 89i.

Marriage: 31s; 100i; 12m; 50a; 60d.

Music: 14m; 25a; 47s; 78i; 10d.

Names: 49s; 54a; 66i; 73m; 99d.

Newspapers: 34m; 65s; 71i; 92a; 26d.

Organizations: 76i; 75d.**

Proximity: 55s; 85i; 90a; 17m; 2d.

Society: 7s; 29i; 20a; 72m; 81d.

Values: 5s; 37a; 44i; 51d; 68m.

Work: 42a; 45s; 86m; 98d; *i
 
 

65. Reading an ethnic newspaper can provide news of the community and the old country while it also makes reading other Canadian newspapers unnecessary.
 

30. If I had a choice between eating only Canadian or food from my ethnic tradition, I would choose to eat only Canadian food because I enjoy it much more.

1. Most of my friends are of my ethnic group because I feel very comfortable around them, but I don't feel as comfortable around Canadians from other cultural groups.

82. I am disturbed by having to worry about proper lifestyle and whether we are like ethnics or Canadians.

81. It is more important for everyone to share scientific knowledge and master technology rather than try to preserve our out-dated cultural traditions.
SD D N A SA
1 2 3 4 5

Table 5: Categories of Identity by Self-Chosen Labels of belonging to Ethnic Group
 

Identity	Canadian	Ethnic	Ethnic-Canadian
L a b e l p r o v i d e d   (n = )a	Canadian 36 Chinese 7 Chinese-Canadian 4 Scottish 3  Indo-Canadian 3 English 2 Dutch-Canadian 2 French-Canadian 2 Hong-Kong 2 African-Indian Afro-Asian-Canadian Anglo-Canadian British-Canadian Canadian-Finnish Czech-Chilean Dutch Dutch-Christian Dutch-French-Canadian East-Indian English-Canadian Filipino-Canadian German-Canadian Irish / Scottish /  - Australian / American Irish-Canadian Italian Italian-Scottish Japanese-Canadian Jewish Mixed (Japanese-Czech) Portuguese-Indian Scottish-Norwegian Scottish-Swedish Sierra-Leonean Ukrainian-Russian Vietnamese WASP-Canadian	Chinese 10 Finnish Native Indian Ceylonese Australian Norwegian -  Vietnamese Japanese Indonesian-Chinese Philippean Singaporean-Chinese	Chinese-Canadian 5 Chinese 4 Japanese-Canadian 2 Canadian-Chinese 2  Canadian & Indo- Canadian  Canadian-Chilean Chinese/Cambodian /Vietnamese Filipino-Canadian Greek-Canadian Hungarian Indo-Canadian Malaysian Malaysian-Chinese- Canadian Persian-Canadian Polish-Canadian Scottish-Canadian Turkish-Canadian
Totals	88	19	27