Language Ideology and Linguistic Differentiation

Friedrich discussed the role of ‘inventive individual’ in understanding particular cultural phenomena that embody political economy, the definition of which is given as such:

Political economy involves resource allocation in the sense…involves the generic economic processes of the production, distribution, and consumption of

170

goods, including 'non-material' ones, and the patterns and culture of power that control or influence these processes (Friedrich 1989, 298).

And the ‘inventive individual’ plays the role in which:

…they give critical margins of understanding, insight, and intuition into 'how the political economy works' and how it lived out in real life (e.g., Mintz 1974) - margins that elude the rigidly sociocentric or socioeconocentric modes of research (Ibid., 299).

Friedrich further referred the exchange of messages to exchange of commodities in an economic determinant relationship, and thus suggested that the way people speak naturally embodies a sort of ‘ideology’. For ‘ideology’ he listed three types of explanation (Ibid., 300):

(1) notional ideology (ex. religion, myth)

(2) ideology for maintaining or changing a sociopolitical order (e.g. nationalism; anthropologist's culture )

(3) ideology for masking a structure of domination

The language complex in Xiangxi is very complicated due to its ethnic composition and regional history. Friedrich pointed out that language is related to ideology and political economy in many ways, often through practices of individuals. Shen Congwen’s writing, as an exemplar of this notion, circulates an image of the Xiangxi language complex and, as a result, reflects the hidden relationships in Early Modern Xiangxi’s political economy. Xiangxi is a very special area as one looks into nationalism in China: for a long time it had been the margin of ancient Chinese empires. In the process of China’s modern nation-building, both the external influences and the social transformations taken place inside China had incurred many profound changes to Xiangxi’s political economy and its people’s language ideologies. The image of the Xiangxi language complex circulated by Shen Congwen’s literature is especially interesting in the way that it embodies this symbolic geography.

More than half a century has passed since the establishment of the current modern nation, the People’s Republic of China; it is probably very meaningful to look upon the current situation in Xiangxi as a sample of modernization and nationalism in a multi-ethnic region in central China. Collaborated with information gathered in my

171

recent fieldworks in Xiangxi, the differentiation of language ideologies in Xiangxi speech communities will be explored in this section. For this purpose, I will discuss language rights and the influences of language standardization on Xiangxi speech communities. And before the discussion, the concepts of language ideology and linguistic differentiation will be examined first.

Paul Kroskrity studied language ideological change in the Western Mono community of central California, and in his study he outlined the development of the concept of language ideology:

When Michael Silverstein first defined linguistic ideologies as 'sets of beliefs about language articulated by users as a rationalization or justification of perceived language structure and use' (Silverstein 1979, 193), he did so not merely to acknowledge the existence of such folk beliefs about language but to demonstrate both their potential and actual potency...The comparatively short history of language ideological theorizing thus originates with an emphasis on speakers' awareness of language and transformative potential of this consciousness as a form of agency(Kroskrity 2009, 190–191).

This discussion emphasizes that the study of language ideology considers not only the speakers’ feelings towards language(s), but more importantly, their realizations and judgments of language(s) which would potentially transform into their agency of making social changes. Kroskrity has summarised some language ideologies which are applicable in current situation in Xiangxi. For example, he indicates:

…in contrast to standardizing linguistic regimes that either seek to eliminate or supplant variation due to region, ethnicity, class, and so on, Western Mono communities have promoted a language ideology of variationism in which dialectal variation is not hierarchized but is instead naturalized as the expected outcome of family and individual differences (Ibid., 193).

Even within Xiangxi the distribution of languages varies between small geographical units. Some places are densely inhabited by the Hmong, but more are mixed dwelling places. Multilingualism is very common in most places, and it enters daily utterances and the code-switching in daily contacts or literature as a feature of locality. In some cases mobile merchants recognize each other by using Hmong

172

language though they are mostly Han people – they need this language to trade for special products which can only be found in Hmong open-air markets (see Figure 4.1).149 _{In other cases Hmong students who only know Hmong language and a little}

bit standard modern Mandarin learned from primary schools have to speak only standard modern Mandarin at high school with other students who speak local dialect (South-western Mandarin) after class.

Figure 4.1 Hmong Open-air Markets, 2011-2012

Kroskrity also pointed out that the currently dominant ideology which relates a specific language to certain identity is not a universal truth (Ibid., 194). From my

149

Hmong open-air markets are held in certain days of every mouth according to Hmong calendar, which is a legacy of late 18th century markets located near the sentry posts on the border wall for ensuring governmental supervision of Hmong-Han trading (see 2.3.2). The markets are still very popular among Hmong people though modern shops are available for daily convenience. The markets days are occasions of gathering and other social activities. Some Hmong merchants’ families also consider these markets events particularly suitable for youths to learn trading and meet mobile merchants.

173

observation most Hmong families in Xiangxi consider a language to be a tool of communication rather than a symbol of identity. When the local government officially promoted Hmong language classes in educational institutions, many parents opposed these new lessons and insisted that their children should be better educated in modern standard Mandarin and English – for those primary schools providing Hmong lessons usually delay their students’ English education to middle school stage, which, according to their parents, would cause disadvantages in their performance in the university entrance exam. However, the oppositions never mean that these families despised Hmong identity. On the contrary they attach tremendous values to their children’s sense of honor as a Hmong person. These children are naturally socialized to be caring the need and honor of their families and Hmong clans, but it does not seems to be a big deal that they grow up in an environment of modern standard Mandarin. Besides daily conversations in Hmong language, they watch TV and play computer games in web cafes in small towns which are all operated in modern standard Mandarin, not to mention their school education. Old and middle-age Hmong people told me that the younger generations are losing their ability to comprehend certain Hmong idioms and proverbs. And it is certain that they are unable to carry on the beautiful Hmong song tradition. But they never complained about this, simply saying ‘each generation has their own style of living’ (每个时代都有自己的 活法).

Accordingly, the linguistic differentiation – discriminating different languages and associating each with certain identity or characteristics – in most circumstances is a reflection of hegemonic supervision. Judith Irvine and Susan Gal researched language ideology and linguistic differentiation in mid-nineteenth century Macedonia – a heterogeneous area as a frontier of European complex confronting Asian influences. In this study they identified three semiotic processes by which the social change highly related to political economy – linguistic differentiation – works. They are:

(1) Iconization, which ‘involves a transformation of the sign relationship between linguistic features (or varieties) and the social images with which they are linked’;

174

(2) Fractal recursivity, which ‘involves the projection of an opposition, salient at some level of relationship, onto some other level’;

(3) Erasure, ‘the process in which ideology, in simplifying the sociolinguistic field, renders some persons or activities (or sociolinguistic phenomena) invisible’ (Irvine and Gal 2000, 37-38).

Through examining the three processes of linguistic differentiation taking place in religious, folkloric, institutional and daily contact aspects in nineteenth century Macedonia, Irvine and Gal proposed that the relationship between linguistic practices and social categories in this region differed fundamentally from the expectations of Western Eur opeans. By implication, the understanding of relationship between speech forms and ideology (in Friedrich’s sense) needs to be widened and examined carefully in its regional, historical and social contexts.

Following Irvine and Gal, I will examine two aspects of Xiangxi’s linguistic differentiation: language rights and the influence of language standardization in Xiangxi speech communities. But firstly, I will briefly review the theoretical framework of these two aspects.