Bilingualism

This section explores previous studies that analyse the behaviour of Bilinguals. The primary question of our research is to evaluate to what extent does language limit our thought, and therefore influence or dictate our behaviour.

Importantly, if linguistic determinism effectuates, how do bilinguals reconcile between the two distinctive sets of thought embedded in two sets of language with different grammatical structures, rules and inventory of vocabulary? Also, do bilinguals switch between sets of language and thought in their natural communicative exchanges? Finally, does advocacy of bilingualism encourage prejudice against monolinguals? If so, are bilinguals' social identity superior to that of monolinguals?

1. Definition of Bilingualism and Context (Hong Kong)

The definition of Bilingualism is well-developed by scholars and it is not indisputable. According to the Cambridge English dictionary, bilingualism is defined as "being able to use two languages equally well". It implies a speaker's uncompromising level of competence in employing two languages, which corresponds with Bloomfield's (1935) view that bilinguals have "native-like control" of both tongues. A contrasting definition comes from Macnarama (1967), who measures proficiency with four domains: reading, writing, listening comprehension and speaking. She proposes that bilingualism is the minimal ability to perform one of the four skills.

According to an annual global English standard test conducted by Education-first, a Swedish company, the ranking of English proficiency level of Hong Kong people has dropped from fourth in 2014 to sixth this year. Despite the decline in language ability as reflected from the report, there is nonetheless an upward growth in the HKDSE English language result, according to the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority.

2. Bilingualism and Thought

Lera Boroditsky (2001), Does Language Shape Thought?: Mandarin and English Speakers’ Conceptions of Time, Cognitive Psychology 43, 1–22 (2001)

In Lera Boroditsky's (2001) "Does Language Shape Thought?: Mandarin and English Speakers' Conceptions of Time", she takes advantage of the domain of time, an abstract, non-sensory subject yet specified by spatial metaphors e.g. looking forward, ahead of time, falling behind. Interestingly, time was described differently in Mandarin Chinese and English. In addition to using front/back (horizontal) terms to talk about time in both languages, speakers of Mandarin also systematically use up/down (vertical) terms e.g. shang and xia. Boroditsky sheds light on the effect first language thinking has on second language understanding grounded in such difference. Her research is inspired by Benjamin Lee Whorf's theory of linguistic determinism, which asserts a positive relationship between language and thought. She proposes that these "spatial metaphors provide relational structure to aspects of time" (Boroditsky, 2000) where physical experience does not tell. By this language-encouraged mapping of time, speakers would tend to think about time as vertical or horizontal.

Three experiments are conducted to find out the correlation between spatial metaphor and the habit of thoughts. The first experiment aims to find out whether using spatial metaphors have effect on immediate and long-term implications for how people think about time. The Mandarin and English speakers are asked to answer True/False of a spatial priming question (e.g. Fig. 1a&b) followed by a target question (e.g. March comes earlier than April). Her hypothesis claims that if horizontal spatiotemporal metaphors are assessed by activating horizontal spatial knowledge, then the reaction time of answering the target question after looking at a horizontal spatial prime will be shorter than that of after looking at a vertical spatial prime. The results suggest that speakers do follow the preponderance of spatial metaphors of a language in their habit of thought.

Fig. 1a Example of a horizontal spatial priming question.

Fig. 1b Example of a vertical spatial priming question.

Experiment 2 aims to testify the influences of second language learning have on thoughts. Mandarin-English bilinguals with Mandarin as their first language are chosen and grouped in terms of the age they are first exposed to English education. It is found that vertical bias was greater for Mandarin speaker who learn English as second language later in life, yet the length of exposure to English is immaterial. That says, the longer the time a speaker is exposed to pure Mandarin experience, the higher the propensity they have towards vertical bias.

In experiment 3, native English speakers were trained with Mandarin speaker's way of talking about time i.e. vertically before attempting another set of question. It is found that the response time after viewing vertical primes are very similar to those of the Mandarin speakers. This confirms the results in experiment that linguistic bias is based on language, independent from cultural differences.

To conclude, there are two main findings in this study: 1) acquiring concepts require experiences with the language and 2) language is especially powerful in shaping abstract thoughts that sensory information is scarce or inconclusive. Therefore Boroditsky conditions the application of linguistic relativity to abstract thoughts and survives Rosch's criticism of the theory as untenable.

This study answers the first question of our research i.e. How does bilinguals reconcile between two sets of language and their prescribed thoughts? by showing us the differences between first language thinking and second language using. Although bilingualism is broadly defined as equal linguistic competence of two languages, it is nonetheless not always the case in reality. In Hong Kong, speakers are often nurtured in their mother tongue i.e. Cantonese in family and received English education in school, which qualify them as bilinguals. Depending on the length of exposure in a pure native language linguistic environment, speaker will be correspondingly attuned to think by their mother tongue even when the question is asked in a second language.

3. Bilingualism and Prejudice

"Second Language as an Exemptor from Sociocultural Norms. Emotion-Related Language Choice Revisited" - Gawinkowska, Paradowski, & Bilewicz

This study aims to ascertain whether multilingual individuals use native or non-native language to convey politically incorrect ideas, and the possible reasons behind such usage.

This study is grounded in the Emotion-Related Language Choice (ERLC) theory, which posits that multilingual individuals tend to express certain emotions in different languages to better describe how they feel. The following research reinforce ERLC. Firstly, it is suggested that since the emotional content of these multilingual individuals’ first language (L1) is richer than that of their other languages (L2) (“higher emotional spontaneity”), they tend to use L2 when expressing negative emotions as it carries less emotional impact. ERLC is then applied in the context of swear words. Studies show how swearing in a non-native language could be a means of escaping the restrictions of correctness: since the swear words of L1 could be taboo in the individual’s society or culture, swearing in another language circumvents such restrictions and becomes more socially acceptable.

The researchers put forth two hypotheses. The first is that these individuals would tend to swear in L1 to better convey their emotions. Alternatively, they would be hindered by the social and cultural practices that normatively restrict usage of swear words in L1, and therefore would tend to swear in L2 instead to escape social norms.

To test the hypotheses, the researchers divided the respondents into two groups, and asked one group to translate text from Polish (their native language) to English, and vice versa for the other. The text included “ethnophaulisms” – in essence ethnic slurs for social out-groups – and general swearwords. They were then asked to rate the offensiveness of the words. The results revealed that the ethnophaulisms were rated less offensively if they were translated into English, such findings absent in the data analysis of general swearwords.

The findings confirm the second hypothesis: when multilingual individuals use a foreign language to convey politically incorrect ideas, they are exempted from the social norms that preclude them from expressing the same idea in their native language. This circumvention potentially makes it easier for individuals to offend out-groups. It follows that in general, multilingualism might erode the concept of political correctness.

Mingyue Gu (2011) Language choice and identity construction in peer interactions: insights from a multilingual university in Hong Kong, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 32:1, 17-31

In this study, Gu explores how college student speakers from Hong Kong and Mandarin construct their identity through analysing their interaction. The study subjects are Hong Kong and Mainland China students from Hong Kong Education University, a multilingual college. She conducted two rounds of interview: 1) individual interviews with 5 HK and 5 Mainland students respectively, and 2) four group interviews with 10 HK and 10 Mainland students to solve the incongruities reflected in 1).

There are several findings in the study. Both Hong Kong and Mandarin speakers acknowledge the tendency of their counterpart to speak in their own native language, despite they all prone to code-mix with English, which makes it difficult for them to develop a friendship or to be included in their counterpart's core group. One of the Mainland students, Zhu (Fig. 2), lays out a "three-stage process" from initial keenness to identify with the local, to feeling excluded and "othered" and eventually they recluse from the local group to stick with other Mainland students.

Fig. 2 Comments of Zhu, a mainland student

Apart from the propensity to speak in their own native language, which shuts the door to solidarity, significant differences in study habits, socialisation and cultural practices also further polarise the two groups under the same roof. For instances, Hong Kong students' habit of "deadline fighting", a Kongish term that describes the practice of finishing deadline at the last minute, is unacceptable in Mainland students' perspective. Mainstream entertainment of youngsters in Hong Kong like shopping or singing karaoke is also not favoured by Mainland students who spend more time in academic work. These distinctions of lifestyles drive the two groups further apart.

Remarkably, Gu finds that Hongkongese's competence in speaking Putonghua does not boost the convergence of the Putonghua-speaking group with the local or establish a closer relationship with them. Instead, as HK students note, the choice of speaking in Putonghua to communicate with Mainland students is a "respect for their language" and that Cantonese should only be used to speak "when talking with Hong Kong students". Surprisingly, the choice of a second language does not enhance accord between the groups, but rather it acknowledges an irreconcilable distance, emphasises the differences and disregards their common root as Chinese.

Prejudice arises when a sense of superiority motivates Hong Kong speaker to distinguish themselves from the Mainlander by asserting the identity of "Hongkongese" rather than a "Chinese". As seen in Fig.3, Ruby's (a HK student) representative comment that sets Hongkongese apart from Mainland China negates association with China by characterising the uncivilised aspects of Mainlanders that are contrasted with Hongkongese's civility and affluence.

Fig. 3 Example of a HK student's, Ruby, comment on the reason for HK's lack of sense of belonging to China.

An exception to the non-participation of Mainlanders are the group of Guangdong students. Their bilingualism positions them at an in-between status, enabling them to mix well with both groups of student. In Fig. 4, a Guangdong student Zheng expresses his indeterminate sense of belonging with both cultures. Essentially, with their immersion in HK culture i.e. television program and music taste from birth, they acquire similar core values and lifestyles as Hongkongese, which allow them to easily conceal their Mainlander identity from the local students. Yet while being equally proficient in Putonghua, they could also communicate well with the Mainland students and they are heavily influenced by the Confucian values developed from national education. In this context, bilingualism is used as a strategic tact to identify with different groups of people. One must attain certain level of proficiency in the language as well as its respective culture in order to call no suspicion, especially from HK students who evidently refrain from including Mainland students in their group.

Fig. 4 Example of Zheng, a Guangdong student, comments on the ambiguous identity he experiences

To conclude, the researcher notes that all these subjects are teachers-to-be. It would be desirable to encourage collaboration between the two groups of students who possess valuable and diverse linguistic and cultural resources. Their teaching approach towards cultural content in the curriculum in the future remains a possible investigation issue as their cultural stereotypes have to be negotiated in order to reach consensus.

This study relates to our research topic as it reflects how bilingualism might be a tool to divide and demarcate differences, instead of unifying or minimising conflicts. This is true especially in the case of Hong Kong and Mainland students. By our observation in the University of Hong Kong, where students' population is culturally diverse, it is not difficult to see the clear line drawn between Mainland students and local students with their own circles and affiliations. They also seldom interact with the other groups. Undeniably, the use of Cantonese and Putonghua is politically influenced. Though the study does not explicitly bring out the political dimension, it is possible to say that the grievances towards China's sovereignty is directed to those who speak the same dialect as the rulers of the SAR.

To conclude, this study gives us insights into the relationship between bilingualism and culture. Using a common dialect or language does not necessarily entail that the cultural values embedded in the speakers match with one another. Indeed, it echoes with the first literature review that the longer you're immersed in a pure first language environment, the more likely you'll adopt the first language set of thinking.

Google Sites

Report abuse