Share This Article:

Construction of Cross-Cultural Identity by Language Choice and Linguistic Practice: A Case-Study of Mixed Hong Kong-Mainland Identity in University Contexts

Abstract Full-Text HTML Download Download as PDF (Size:746KB) PP. 208-215
DOI: 10.4236/ojml.2013.33028    5,677 Downloads   8,638 Views   Citations

ABSTRACT

Studying relations between language and speaker’s identity is an interdisciplinary field that involves intersections among language, culture, and society. By examining the language choice and linguistic practice, especially code-mixing and code-switching, of the Mainland China students who are studying in universities of Hong Kong, we reveal a mixed Hong Kong-Mainland identity in these students: those who hold a Mainland-oriented identity tend to have a Putonghua-dominated language choice and linguistic practice, whereas those who embrace a Hong Kong-oriented identity tend to prefer a Cantonese-dominated choice and practice. This mixed identity helps better conceive the social image of Mainland immigrants in Hong Kong and discuss the cross-cultural identity formed by linguistic practice.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

Gong, T. , Shuai, L. & Liu, J. (2013). Construction of Cross-Cultural Identity by Language Choice and Linguistic Practice: A Case-Study of Mixed Hong Kong-Mainland Identity in University Contexts. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 3, 208-215. doi: 10.4236/ojml.2013.33028.

References

[1] Blot, R. K. (2003). Language and social identity. London: Praeger.
[2] Bolton, K., & Luke, K. K. (1999). Language and society in Hong Kong: The social survey of languages in the 1980’s. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong, Social Sciences Research Centre.
[3] Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
[4] Bucholtz, M. (2004). Styles and stereotypes: The linguistic negotiation of identity among Laotian American youth. Pragmatics, 14, 127-147.
[5] Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K. (2005). Identity and interaction: A sociocul tural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies, 7, 585-614. doi:10.1177/1461445605054407
[6] Chen, H. Y. (2005). The social distinctiveness of two code-mixing styles in Hong Kong. In J. Cohen, K. T. McAlister, K. Rolstad, & J. MacSwan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th international symposium on bilingualism (pp. 527-541). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
[7] Cheung, Y.-S. (1985). Power, solidarity, and luxury in Hong Kong: A sociolinguistic study. Anthropological Linguistics, 27, 190-203.
[8] Gibbons, J. (1987). Code-mixing and code-choice: A Hong Kong case study. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
[9] Ho, J. W. Y. (2007). Code-mixing: Linguistic form and socio-cultural meaning. The International Journal of Language, Culture and Soci ety, 21, 23-30.
[10] Hong, C. (2007). Hong Kong stories: Mainland students come to Hong Kong. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong, Journalism & Media Studies Centre (http://jmsc.hku.hk/hkstories/content/view/214/73/).
[11] Irvine, J. T. (2001). “Style” as distinctiveness: The culture and ideology of linguistic differentiation. In P. Eckert, & J. Rickford (Eds.), Style and sociolinguistic variation (pp. 21-43). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[12] Johnstong, B., & Bean, J. M. (1997). Self-expression and linguistic variation. Language in Society, 26, 221-246. doi:10.1017/S0047404500020911
[13] Li, M., & Bray, M. (2007). Cross-border flows of students for higher education: Push-pull factors and motivations of Mainland Chinese students in Hong Kong and Macau. Higher Education, 53, 791-818. doi:10.1007/s10734-005-5423-3
[14] Maass, A., & Arcuri, L. (1996). Language and stereotyping. In C. N. Macrae, C. Stangor, & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Stereotypes and stereo typing (pp. 193-226). New York: Guilford Press.
[15] Mau, W.-Y. A. (2005). Cantonese: Language or dialect? MA Disserta tion. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong.
[16] McNamara, T. (1997). Theorizing social identity. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 561-567.
doi:10.2307/3587838
[17] Miller, J. M. (2000). Language use, identity, and social interaction: Mi grant students in Australia. Research on Language & Social Interac tion, 33, 69-100. doi:10.1207/S15327973RLSI3301_3
[18] Muysken, P. (2000). Bilingual speech: A typology of code-mixing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[19] Norton, B. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 9-32. doi:10.2307/3587803
[20] Ochs, E. (1993). Constructing social identity: A language socialization perspective. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26, 287-306.
doi:10.1207/s15327973rlsi2603_3
[21] Pennington, M. C. (1998). Language in Hong Kong at century’s end. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
[22] Thomason, S. G., & Kaufman, T. (1988). Language contact, creoliza tion, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
[23] Tong, Y.-Y., Hong, Y.-Y., Lee, S.-L., & Chiu, C.-Y. (1999). Language use as a carrier of social identity. International Journal of Intercul tural Relations, 23, 281-296. doi:10.1016/S0147-1767(98)00039-X
[24] Trueba, H. (1989). Raising silent voices: Educating the linguistic mi norities for the 21st century. New York: Newbury House.

  
comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2019 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.