1887
image of Wrestling between English and Pinyin
  • ISSN 1569-2159
  • E-ISSN 1569-9862
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper examines the code choice and contestations on street name signs in China to find out the dynamics of language politics and the language ideological debates. In China, Hanyu Pinyin and English compete for visibility on street signs, though only Pinyin is the legally-endorsed alphabetic form for place names. Spolsky’s ( ) tripartite language policy model is adopted to analyse the management, practice and ideologies regarding the code choice on street name signs in Chinese cities. It shows that Pinyin has been promulgated as domestic standard fused with national interests in the official discourse, while English win the favour of the general public and some international-oriented cities due to its pragmatic value and the symbolic capital associated with it. The resilient approach taken by the top authority suggests that the traditional model of language management relying on political authority and ideological hegemony is hard to work its way out nowadays.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.19072.sha
2020-01-15
2020-04-08
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Baudrillard, Jean
    2018The Consumer Society: Myths and Structure (revised edition). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ben-Rafael, Eliezer
    2009 “A Sociological Approach to the Study of Linguistic Landscapes.” InLinguistic Landscape: Expanding the Scenery, ed. byElana Shohamy, and Durk Gorter, 40–54. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Berg, Per Olof, and Emma Björner
    (eds.) 2014Branding Chinese Mega-Cities: Policies, Practices and Positioning. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. 10.4337/9781783470334
    https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783470334 [Google Scholar]
  4. Blommaert, Jan
    (ed.) 1999Language Ideological Debates. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110808049
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110808049 [Google Scholar]
  5. 2005Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511610295
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610295 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bolton, Kingsley, and David Graddol
    2012 “English in China Today.” English Today28(3): 3–9. 10.1017/S0266078412000223
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078412000223 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chappell, Hilary
    1980 “The Romanization Debate.” The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs8: 105–118. 10.2307/2158952
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2158952 [Google Scholar]
  8. Chen, Ping
    1999Modern Chinese: History and Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139164375
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139164375 [Google Scholar]
  9. Chinanews.cn
    Chinanews.cn 2006 China to Reconsider the Translation of the Street Names. Retrieved fromarabic.china.org.cn/english/culture/189267.htmon8August 2019.
  10. Cooper, Robert
    1989Language Planning and Social Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Cortazzi, Martin, and Lixian Jin
    1996 “English Teaching and Learning in China.” Language Teaching29: 61–80. 10.1017/S0261444800008351
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800008351 [Google Scholar]
  12. Ding, Wenlei
    2004 “Lost in Translation.” Beijing Review36: 1–6. Retrieved fromwww.bjreview.cn/EN/200436/Cover-200436%28A%29.htmon7December 2017.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Foucault, Michel
    1980Power/Knowledge. New York: Pantheon.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Gasque, Thomas J.
    2000 “Structure and Controversy: What Names Authorities Adjudicate.” Names48 (3–4): 199–206. 10.1179/nam.2000.48.3‑4.199
    https://doi.org/10.1179/nam.2000.48.3-4.199 [Google Scholar]
  15. Ge, Xiaoqin
    2009 “Zhongguo diming yingyi pinyinhua zhi wenhua fansi [Reflections on the Romanization of Chinese Geographical Names].” Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages32(2): 61–66.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Ge, Xiaoqin, and Zhengming Ji
    2006 “Diming yingyi hequhecong [Translation of Geographical Names: Where to Go].” Shanghai Journal of Translators3: 57–59.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Guo, Jianzhong
    2007 “Jiedao lupai shuxie de guojia biaozhun yu guoji biaozhun [National Standards and International Norms of the Alphabetical Writing System of Road Signs].” Chinese Translators Journal5: 68–71.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Hu, Guangwei
    2003 “English Language Teaching in China: Regional Differences and Contributing Factors.” Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development24: 290–318. 10.1080/01434630308666503
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630308666503 [Google Scholar]
  19. 2005 “English Language Education in China: Policies, Progress, and Problems.” Language Policy4: 5–24. 10.1007/s10993‑004‑6561‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-004-6561-7 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hui, Xiaojing
    2010 “Lumingpai gai jiazhu pinyin haishi yingwen? Wangyou: biaoshi “pinyin shui kan” [Pinyin or English, Which Should be Added on Road Name Signs? Netizens: “Who Bothers to Read Pinyin”].” Wuxi Ribao, December23 2010 Retrieved onDecember4 2017 fromwww.wxrb.com/node/news_quwen/2010-12-23/JAIAEFEED793827.html
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Kallen, Jeffrey
    2009 “Tourism and Representation in the Irish Linguistic Landscape.” InLinguistic Landscape: Expanding the Scenery, ed. byElana Shohamy, and Durk Gorter, 270–283. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Kothari, C. R.
    2004Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. New Dehli: New Age International (P) Ltd. Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Li, Songqing
    2016 “English, Advertising and Positioning: The Impact of English on Chinese People’s Daily Lives.” Journal of World Languages2(2–3): 77–93.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Liu, Fei.
    2015 “Zhongwen diming yingyi de kunhuo [Confusions of the English Translation of Chinese Place Names].” People’s Daily (Overseas), 10June 2015 Retrieved frompaper.people.com.cn/rmrbhwb/html/2015-06/10/content_1575268.htmon25July 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Nahir, Moshe
    1984 “Language Planning Goals: A Classification.” Language Problems and Language Planning8: 294–327. 10.1075/lplp.8.3.03nah
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.8.3.03nah [Google Scholar]
  26. Neethling, Bertie
    2016 “Street Names: A Changing Urban Landscape.” InThe Oxford Handbook of Names and Naming, ed. byCarole Hough, 144–157. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Rose-Redwood, Reuben, Derek Alderman, and Maoz Azaryahu
    (eds.) 2017The Political Life of Urban Streetscapes: Naming, Politics, and Place. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315554464
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315554464 [Google Scholar]
  28. Shohamy, Elana
    2006Language Policy: Hidden Agendas and New Approaches. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203387962
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203387962 [Google Scholar]
  29. Spolsky, Bernard
    2004Language Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 2009Language Management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511626470
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511626470 [Google Scholar]
  31. (ed.) 2012The Cambridge Handbook of Language Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511979026
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511979026 [Google Scholar]
  32. 2014 Language Management in the People’s Republic of China. Language90(4):165–179. 10.1353/lan.2014.0075
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2014.0075 [Google Scholar]
  33. Sun, Donghu
    2005 “Beijing diming luomahua pinxie de miuwu [Absurd Spellings in Roman Letters of Placenames in Beijing].” Urban Problems4: 70–73.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. UNGEGN (United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names)
    UNGEGN (United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names) 2001 Consistent Use of Place Names. Accessed onDecember1 2017 viahttps://unstats.un.org/UNSD/geoinfo/UNGEGN/docs/pubs/UNGEGNbrochure_en.pdf
  35. Wang, Ted
    2016 “Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Standard Spoken and Written Chinese Language.” Chinese Law and Government48(4): 275–278. 10.1080/00094609.2016.1118307
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00094609.2016.1118307 [Google Scholar]
  36. Woolard, Kathryn A.
    1992 “Language Ideology: Issues and Approaches.” Pragmatics2(3): 235–249. 10.1075/prag.2.3.01woo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.2.3.01woo [Google Scholar]
  37. Xing, Jie
    2013 “Youguan daolu mingcheng gonggong biaoshi yingyu shuxie biaozhun de zhengyi [Controversies of English Translation of Street Names on Public Signs].” Chinese Translators Journal5: 108–112.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Yamane, Taro
    1973Statistics: An Introductory Analysis. New York: Harper and Row.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Yan, Weiqi, and Jijun Cao
    2015 “Lupai biaoshi, yong “Rd” haishi “Lu” [Rd or Lu on Road signs].” Guangming Daily, 3April 2015 Retrieved fromepaper.gmw.cn/gmrb/html/2015-04/03/nw.D110000gmrb_20150403_7-09.htm?div=-1on1August 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Ye, Zhangyong, and Yang Shen
    2015 “Guojihua beijingxia woguo diming tongming yinyi fangan xingsi [Perceptions on Pinyin Transcription of Generic Terms in Chinese Geographical Names].” Shanghai Urban Planning Review6: 121–124.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Zhou, Youguang
    2001 “Language Planning of China.” Journal of Asian Pacific Communication11(1): 9–16. 10.1075/japc.11.1.03you
    https://doi.org/10.1075/japc.11.1.03you [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.19072.sha
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.19072.sha
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: public signs; Pinyin; English; language politics; street names; language ideology
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error