10th AILA-Europe Junior Researcher Meeting in Applied Linguistics University of Duisburg-Essen September 10, 2018
Chinese pluricentricity - fiction or reality? Master’s thesis by Sandra Kaltenegger, BA BA University of Vienna, Centre for Teacher Education, Language Teaching and Learning Research Unit Research question: To what extent is the notion of pluricentricity applicable to the Chinese language?
1. Language Policy 2. Standard – Language – Variation 3. The Chinese Language
10.09.2018 Page 2 1. Language Policy (1/3)
1.1. Language Planning – Solving Language Problems
• 1960s: new nations are confronted with language problems academia can provide a solution through planning on governmental level • Assumption: language planning activities are ideologically neutral & drive modernization • Types of language planning Corpus planning (Kloss 1969) Status planning (Kloss 1969) Acquisition planning (Cooper 1989) Diffusion planning (Spolsky & Shohamy 2000) • Goals for language planning = only linguistic goals
10.09.2018 Page 3 1. Language Policy (2/3)
1.2. Language Policy – Influencing Language Behavior
• 1990s: research field opened to concepts of human social organization e.g. ideologies, power, representation • Agents: governmental level -> grass-root level, individuals, families etc. Target groups: entire states -> schools, religious institutions etc. Approach: prescriptive -> descriptive (Cooper 1989) • New focus: study of language behavior
10.09.2018 Page 4 1. Language Policy (3/3)
1.3. De Facto Language Policy – Uncovering Hidden Mechanisms
• 2000s: differentiation between overt policies and covert policies • Overt policies: explicit, de jure, codified Covert policies: implicit, de facto, grass-roots (Schiffman 1996; Shohamy 2006) • Language ideology identified as driving force behind both types (Shohamy 2006) • Five kinds of language ideology hierarchy of languages standard language ideology one nation-one language ideology mother tongue ideology ideology of purism (Weber & Horner 2012)
10.09.2018 Page 5 2. Standard – Language – Variation (1/6)
2.1. Language
2.1.1. Kloss‘ understanding of Language – Abstand and Ausbau • Abstand languages: great distance from another language, standardization irrelevant
bipartite: yes no
• Ausbau languages: independent language due to human intervention
continuum: varieties standardization prozesses different languages of the same language
10.09.2018 Page 6 2. Standard – Language – Variation (2/6)
2.1. Language
2.1.2. Fishman‘s Adaptation of Kloss – Ausbau and Einbau • No space for Abstand in a theory on language policy • Ausbau: „the concern for fostering dissimilarity-focused interventions“ Einbau: „the concern for fostering similarity-focused interventions“ (Fishman 2008: 19; emphasis in original) • Still only a language-internal definition of language (language-internal characteristics and mutual intelligibility paramount)
10.09.2018 Page 7 2. Standard – Language – Variation (3/6)
2.1. Language
2.1.3. Croft‘s Alternative – Language Definition Based on Language Attitudes • Language-external approach relies on language attitudes (human factor paramount) • Croft (2000: 18) A language is defined as such when„every speaker perceives every other speaker as someone he or she should be able to communicate with by using what they perceive as the same language“.
10.09.2018 Page 8 2. Standard – Language – Variation (4/6)
2.2. Standard Language
2.2.1. Defining Standardization • Milroy & Milroy 1985: „the process of language standardisation involves the suppression of optional variability in language“ (1985: 8) • Creation of non-standard varieties • Stages of standardization selection, codification, elaboration, acceptance (Haugen 1966)
10.09.2018 Page 9 2. Standard – Language – Variation (5/6)
2.3. Standard Language Variation
2.3.1. Defining Pluricentricity • A language is pluricentric, when it is standardized and used in more than one region • grammatical, lexical, phonological, graphemic, prosodic, and pragmatic differences • e.g. English: British, American, Indian, Nigerian, … • Centers: mostly independent countries -> „self-governing entities“ • Criteria for pluricentricity 1) occurrence, 2) official status or strong ethno-linguistic awareness (Muhr 2016: 20-21)
10.09.2018 Page 10 2. Standard – Language – Variation (6/6)
2.3. Standard Language Variation
2.3.3. The Asymmetrical Relation between Pluricentric Standard Varieties • Orientation of standard variety exonormative endonormative (Stewart 1968: 534) • Orientation scale: full exonormativity to full endonormativity codices (dictionaries, grammars, pronunciation guides) model speakers (e.g. teachers, ministers, broadcasters) (Ammon 1989)
10.09.2018 Page 11 3. The Chinese Language (1/6)
3.1. Contextualization and Conceptualization
• Over 1 billion speakers • Official language in China, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore • Sinitic, i.e. Chinese, as a language group within the Sino-Tibetan language family • No further classification with denomination „language“ The Sino-Tibetan language family (Mair 1991: 8–9; visually edited by author)
10.09.2018 Page 12 3. The Chinese Language (2/6)
3.1. Contextualization and Conceptualization
• Commonly divided into 7 Fāngyán (方言): dialects / languages Mandarin,官話, Guānhuà 71,5% Min/Hokkien, 閩, Mǐn 4,1% Wu, 吳, Wú 8,5% Hakka, 客家, Kèjiā 3,7% Yue/Cantonese, 粵, Yuè 5,0% Gan, 贛, Gàn 2,4% Xiang, 湘, Xiāng 4,8% (Kurpaska (2010: 58) & Ramsey 1987: 87) • Topolect (Mair 1991), regionalect (DeFrancis 1984) -> regiolect “standard-divergent varieties with broader regional distribution that can be located between dialects and standard varieties” (Lenz 2009: 302) • Fāngyán = Fāngyán • Difference: 20% in grammar, 40% in vocabulary, 80% in pronunciation (DeFrancis 1984: 63; based on Xu 1982) Geographical distribution of the seven major Fāngyán (Ramsey 1987: figure 6)
10.09.2018 Page 13 3. The Chinese Language (3/6)
3.4. Chinese Pluricentricity
3.4.1. Indications of and Elaborations on Chinese Pluricentricity in the Literature • No consistent opinion on Chinese pluricentricity in the general literature about Chinese • Bradley (1992) Mandarin: Guóyǔ (Taiwan), Pǔtōnghuà (China) and Huáyǔ (Singapore) Cantonese has a developed standard • Tien (2012 & 2016) Mandarin & Hokkien (Singapore, Fujian province, Taiwan & Chinese communities) Chinese script (Beijing – simplified, Taibei – traditional) phonetization system (Beijing – Hànyǔ Pīnyīn, Taibei – Wade-Giles, Zhùyīn Fúhào)
10.09.2018 Page 14 3. The Chinese Language (4/6)
3.4. Chinese Pluricentricity
3.4.2. Step I: What Is Chinese? • Defined as a single language (due to language attitudes) but differentiate between Fāngyán • Fāngyán can cover the whole spectrum non-standard to standard language
10.09.2018 Page 15 3. The Chinese Language (5/6)
3.4. Chinese Pluricentricity
3.4.3. Step II: Which Fāngyán Have Explicit and/or Implicit Norms? • Mandarin explicit norms • Cantonese implicit norms, used in a wide range of domains, study (Groves 2010) indicates belief in norms • Hokkien some explicit norms in Taiwan mostly implicit norms
10.09.2018 Page 16 3. The Chinese Language (6/6)
3.4. Chinese Pluricentricity
3.4.4. Step III: Which Fāngyán are Pluricentric? • Mandarin – official recognition everywhere Mainland China (fully endonormative, many dictionaries) Taiwan (more endonormative than exonormative, own dictionaries) Singapore and Hong Kong (no own dictionaries, exonormative varieties) -> Global Chinese Dictionary (2010): recognizes the different varieties • Cantonese – partial official recognition • Hokkien – partial official recognition Hong Kong (more dominant) Taiwan (more endonormative?) Guangzhou (less dominant) Singapore Fujian Province -> all in a non-dominant position
10.09.2018 Page 17 Research question: To what extent is the notion of pluricentricity applicable to the Chinese language? CHINESE MANDARIN
Mandarin Cantonese Hokkien Scripts Phonetization systems
Mainland China Hong Kong Fujian Simplified (Mainland China) Hànyǔ Pīnyīn (Mainland China)
Taiwan Guangdong Taiwan Traditional (Taiwan) Zhùyīn Fúhào (Taiwan)
Singapore Singapore Wade-Giles (Taiwan)
Hong Kong
10.09.2018 Page 18 謝謝！
07.09.2018 Page 19 Bibliography Ammon, Ulrich. 1989. Towards a Descriptive Framework for the Status/Function (Social Position) of a Language within a Country. In: Ammon, Ulrich (ed.). Status and Function of Languages and Language Varieties. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, 21–106. Bradley, David. 1992. Chinese as a pluricentric language. In: Clyne, Michael (ed.). Pluricentric Languages. Differing Norms in Different Nations. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 305–323. Cooper, Robert. 1989. Language Planning and Social Change. Cambridge: University Press. Croft, William. 2000. Explaining Language Change. An Evolutionary Approach. Harlow: Longman. Crystal, David. 2008. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. 6th edition. Oxford: Blackwell. DeFrancis, John. 1984. The Chinese Language. Fact and Fantasy. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Fishman, Joshua A. 2008. Rethinking the Ausbau-Abstand dichotomy into a continuous and multivariate system. In: International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 191, 17–26. Groves, Julie May. 2010. Language or dialect, topolect or regiolect? A comparative study of language attitudes towards the status of Cantonese in Hong Kong. In: Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 31/6, 531–551.
10.09.2018 Page 20 Bibliography Haugen, Einar. 1966. Dialect, language, nation. In: American Anthropologist, 68, 922–935. Kloss, Heinz. 1967. ,Abstand Languages' and ,Ausbau Languages'. In: Anthropological Linguistics, 9/7, 29–41. Kloss, Heinz. 1969. Research Possibilities on Group Bilingualism: a report. Quebec: International Center for Research on Bilingualism. Kurpaska, Maria. 2010. Chinese Language(s): A Look Through the Prism of The Great Dictionary of Modern Chinese Dialects. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Lenz, Alexandra N. 2009. Emergence of varieties through restructuring and reevaluation. In: Auer, Peter & Schmidt, Jürgen Erich (eds.). Theories and Methods. Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter. Mair, Victor H. 1991. What Is a Chinese “Dialect/Topolect”? Reflections on Some Key Sino-English Terms. In: Sino-Platonic Papers, 29, 1–31. Milroy, James & Milroy, Lesley. 1985. Authority in language. Investigating language prescription and standardization. London/Boston/Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
10.09.2018 Page 21 Bibliography Muhr, Rudolf. 2016. The state of the art of research on pluricentric languages: Where we were and where we are now. In: Muhr, Rudolf (ed.). Pluricentric Languages and Non-Dominant Varieties Worldwide. Part I: Pluricentric Languages across Continents. Features and Usage. Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang, 13–38. Ramsey, Robert S. 1987. The Languages of China. Princeton/ New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Schiffman, Harold F. 1996. Linguistic Culture and Language Policy. New York: Routledge. Shohamy, Elana. 2006. Language Policy: Hidden agendas and new approaches. New York: Routledge. Spolsky, Bernard & Shohamy, Elana. 2000. Language Practice, Language Ideology, and Language Policy. In: Lambert, Richard D. & Shohamy, Elana (eds.). Language Policy and Pedagogy. Essays in Honor of A. Ronald Walton. Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1–41. Stewart, William A. 1968. A Sociolinguistic Typology for Describing National Multilingualism. In: Fishman, Joshua A (ed.). Readings in the Sociology of Language. The Hague/Paris: Mouton, 531–545.
10.09.2018 Page 22 Bibliography Tien, Adrian. 2012. Chinese Hokkien and its lexicon in Singapore: Evidence for an indigenised Singapore culture. In: Muhr, Rudolf (ed.). Non-dominant varieties of pluricentric languages. Getting the Picture. In memory of Michael Clyne. Wien et. al.: Peter Lang, 453–472. Tien, Adrian. 2016. Perspectives on „Chinese“ pluricentricity in China, Greater China and beyond. In: Muhr, Rudolf (ed.). Pluricentric languages and non-dominant varieties worldwide: part I: pluricentric languages across continents: features and usage. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 41–60. Weber, Jean-Jacques & Horner, Kristine. 2012. Introducing Multilingualism. A social approach. New York: Routledge. Xu, Shirong. 1982. ’Guójiā tuīxíng quánguó tōngyòng de Pǔtōnghuà’ – dù ‘Xiànfǎ xiūgǎi cáo’ān’ dì èrshí tiáo [‘The state promotes Putonghua which is universally used throughout China’ – On reading Article 20 of the ‘Draft of the Revised Constitution’]. In: Wénzì Gǎigé, 2, 15–16.
10.09.2018 Page 23