Uniformity or diversity
Chinese netizens' reactions to language policy through the lenses of critical discourse analysis and systemic functional linguistics
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21175449 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Feng Liang (0000-0002-2097-2099, University of Cincinnati, corresponding author), Dong‐shin Shin (0000-0002-3435-112X, University of Cincinnati) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 16 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 205-224 |
| Publication date | 2019-07-03 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Critical Inquiry in Language Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1542-7587 • E-ISSN: 1542-7595 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/15427587.2018.1527696 |
| OpenAlex | W2895786142 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 24 |
The authors examine how the Mandarin-Cantonese relationship has been ideologically and discursively perceived and constructed in China’s language policy and planning, and Chinese people’s reaction over the years by drawing on theories in critical discourse analysis, systemic functional linguistics, and language ideology. Data collection includes language policies, government officials’ dissemination, and Chinese citizens’ online comments, which are analyzed at ideological, discursive, and linguistic levels. The findings suggest that both the language policies and the officials were driven more by an ideology of uniformity that elevates Mandarin as opposed to other local dialects such as Cantonese. The authors also identify three main categories of competing ideologies underpinning Chinese netizens’ reactions. Reactions aligned with the centripetal ideology favor sustaining the unity of China against a sense of superiority of Cantonese speaking people. Neutral reactions emphasize the ease of communication and language identities without being inclined to the extreme of aggressive Mandarin popularization. Positions aligned with centrifugal ideology uphold Cantonese as a unique language and maintaining Cantonese as a right and duty. The authors conclude with a discussion of whether promoting diversity and linguistic rights can achieve uniformity in a dialogic way
China · Critical discourse analysis · Dialogic · Discourse analysis · Ideology · Language ideology · Language planning · Language policy · Linguistics · Mandarin Chinese · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Systemic functional linguistics · Discourse Analysis in Language Studies · Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies · Law · Multilingual Education and Policy · Philosophy
The Dialogic Imagination
The Relationship between Putonghua and Chinese Dialects
The Language of Evaluation
Language Policy and Language Planning
The Language of Schooling
Critical discourse analysis
Linguistic Anthropology
Unpacking the Ideology of Cosmopolitanism in Language Education
Critical SFL Praxis With Bilingual Youth
Selections from the Prison Notebooks
Qualitative Research
Analysing Discourse
Don't touch my language
Language Policy
The ideological framing of ‘dialect’
Cantonese is not a dialect’
Representing the imagined city
China’s assimilationist language policy
Unity in disunity
An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,43 |
| Citation span | 2019 - 2026 (8) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |