Language use difference and social group differentiation: Immigrants’ negotiation of an imposed category of lau in bilingual Guangzhou

Jing Huang
{"title":"Language use difference and social group differentiation: Immigrants’ negotiation of an imposed category of lau in bilingual Guangzhou","authors":"Jing Huang","doi":"10.1515/GLOCHI-2018-0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This study is situated in a bilingual community of Guangzhou where the local speech Cantonese used to have comparable power to the Chinese common language Putonghua regarding the range of domains, but recently a local concern has emerged over the declining status of Cantonese in association with the large number of immigrants and the vigorous implementation of the state language policy of Putonghua Promotion. This concern has been demonstrated in Guangzhou locals’ boundary-making practices and the categorization of immigrants in relation to language practices. This study aims to investigate the ways in which immigrants take up stances (Du Bois 2007; Alexandra, Jaffe. (ed.). 2009. Stance: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.) to negotiate their identities in response to an imposed category of lau. Immigrants’ narratives of and comments on language use in their interactions with natives are analysed, at both semantic and formal levels, from a perspective of Critical Discourse Studies (e.g. Martin, Reisigl & Ruth Wodak. 2015. In Ruth Wodak & Michael Meyer (eds.). Methods of critical discourse studies, 3rd edn. 23–61. London: Sage, Fairclough, Norman. 2015. Language and power 3rd edn. London: Routledge.). As the analysis shows, immigrants negotiate the imposed identity category through coming to terms with the underlying language beliefs, negatively evaluating the social actors who categorize them, recontextualising the category, and combining Putonghua and Cantonese in one language unit to indicate the symbolic oppositions between social groups and languages.","PeriodicalId":12769,"journal":{"name":"环球中医药","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"环球中医药","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/GLOCHI-2018-0014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study is situated in a bilingual community of Guangzhou where the local speech Cantonese used to have comparable power to the Chinese common language Putonghua regarding the range of domains, but recently a local concern has emerged over the declining status of Cantonese in association with the large number of immigrants and the vigorous implementation of the state language policy of Putonghua Promotion. This concern has been demonstrated in Guangzhou locals’ boundary-making practices and the categorization of immigrants in relation to language practices. This study aims to investigate the ways in which immigrants take up stances (Du Bois 2007; Alexandra, Jaffe. (ed.). 2009. Stance: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.) to negotiate their identities in response to an imposed category of lau. Immigrants’ narratives of and comments on language use in their interactions with natives are analysed, at both semantic and formal levels, from a perspective of Critical Discourse Studies (e.g. Martin, Reisigl & Ruth Wodak. 2015. In Ruth Wodak & Michael Meyer (eds.). Methods of critical discourse studies, 3rd edn. 23–61. London: Sage, Fairclough, Norman. 2015. Language and power 3rd edn. London: Routledge.). As the analysis shows, immigrants negotiate the imposed identity category through coming to terms with the underlying language beliefs, negatively evaluating the social actors who categorize them, recontextualising the category, and combining Putonghua and Cantonese in one language unit to indicate the symbolic oppositions between social groups and languages.
语言使用差异与社会群体分化:双语广州移民对法律强制范畴的谈判
本研究是在广州的一个双语社区进行的,在这个社区中,粤语曾经在领域范围上与中国通用语言普通话具有相当的权力,但近年来,随着大量移民和大力推行普通话的国家语言政策,粤语地位的下降引起了当地人的关注。这种关注在广州当地人的边界划定实践和与语言实践相关的移民分类中得到了体现。本研究旨在探讨移民采取立场的方式(Du Bois 2007;亚历山德拉,杰夫。(ed)。2009. 立场:社会语言学观点。牛津:牛津大学出版社),以协商他们的身份,以回应一个强加的法律类别。本文从批评话语研究(如Martin, Reisigl & Ruth Wodak. 2015)的角度,从语义和形式两个层面分析了移民在与当地人互动中对语言使用的叙述和评论。露丝·沃达克和迈克尔·迈耶主编。批评话语研究方法,第3版。23 - 61。伦敦:Sage, Fairclough, Norman. 2015。语言与权力第三版。伦敦:劳特利奇)。正如分析所示,移民通过与潜在的语言信仰达成协议,负面评价对他们进行分类的社会行为者,重新将类别语境化,并将普通话和广东话结合在一个语言单位中,以表明社会群体和语言之间的象征性对立,从而与强加的身份类别进行谈判。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7587
期刊介绍:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信