Journal of Asian Pacific Communication - Volume 23, Issue 1, 2013

The world of animation is usually scrutinized through cartoons emanating from the United States, Japan, and, perhaps, France. That is partly as it should be, but missing from the lineup is China. In quantity (more than 220,000 minutes annually) and quality (particularly from 1955 to 1988), China has been a top-level animation producer. However, because of a number of factors, Chinese animation is not well known beyond the contours of the country. Reasons might be the long, closed-society period, the same time when some of the world’s most artistically exquisite animation was produced in China; the use of a less than universal language (although the Japanese animation industry overcame this problem); the concentration on overseas production for U.S. and European studios, done for the most part anonymously, and until recently, the absence of effective promotion globally of indigenous content.

Cinema in the Malay Archipelago can be said to have first come into being with the wayang kulit (Malay shadow play) due to the similar apparatus utilized, i.e., a white screen; the projection of moving images with the accompaniment of dialogue, sound effects, and music. Wayang kulit can also be designated as the first “animated cartoon” because the shadow puppets’ arms and mouth are made to move through manipulation of the articulating parts as in the technique of cutout animation. The main difference between the two art forms is that while wayang kulit movements are created in real time, cutout animation would be laboriously created frame by frame under an animation camera. None of the traditional art forms of Malaysia was any inspiration for early animators (as Chinese shadow puppets had been for the making of Lotte Reiniger’s The Adventures of Prince Achmed, a silhouette animation film made in 1926). The inspiration was only to emerge very much later in the works of film and animation school students’ almost a half century after the first animation film was made in the country.

Vague language (VL, e.g. kind of), an integral part of language, has been attracting increased attention in linguistic studies. VL is a versatile tool of communication in presenting the world in an imprecise but powerful manner. This study explores an overlooked issue: the relationship between the sensitivity of topics and the use of VL, particularly between topical sensitivity and the form and function of VL items. The corpus consists of semi-controlled spoken interactions between Western Australian tertiary students who were asked to converse on two topics: asylum seekers (touchy) and weekend activities (less touchy). The findings reveal the impact of sensitivity, manifested by different VL frequencies (macro level) and forms (micro level) used in the different topics. More VL, and particular forms of VL (e.g. I think, some, or something), were used in the asylum seeker discourse. As the level of topical sensitivity increases, the level of vagueness in talk-in-interactions also increases: that is, the level of sensitivity, VL frequency, and specific VL items are positively related. Showing how participants use VL in responding to different degrees of sensitivity, this study enriches the scarce literature by providing fresh insights and new resources in this important research area. It is expected that the impact of touchy topics may be applicable to other areas of linguistic studies.

The purpose of this article is to provide a specific case study of the contradictory discourses concerning Lao as the national language, as the official language, and as the medium of instruction. Through the diglossia framework or Lao as a touch stone, the article investigates how non-mainstream and ethnic minority students use the national language in comparison to their mother tongues and other languages at schools. The result shows that students often use their mother tongue and other non-national language to negotiate their social positions among the majority and the dominant groups.

This study examines acts of disagreement presented in televised dispute mediation in China, to identify and account for characteristic features of the ways in which Chinese mediators convey disagreement. The research reveals that mediators’ disagreements lack many of the common features of everyday conversation, and use both non-straightforward and straightforward ways of expression. The preferred methods of expressing disagreement are salient features of Chinese discourse, and differ from those used in western mediation.