齊孝陽/華北水利水電大學(xué)國際教育學(xué)院

An Analysis of the Factors Which Influence People Shift Between Using of the Standard Mandarin and the Local Hua County Dialect, in Case of the Diglossic Situation in Hua County, Henan Province in China

齊孝陽/華北水利水電大學(xué)國際教育學(xué)院

【Introduction】In a society which use two or more linguistic varieties, different individuals chose appropriate variety for interaction with regards to different social contexts. For example, Holmes (2001:37) cites the example of the Chinese students who came form Canton province and share a flat in London using Cantonese for discussing cooking and switching to English whilst they discuss about their studies. This language use and language choice is very common experience among the people who are multilingualism or had acquired more than one language varieties.

【 key words 】 henan dialect; Social factors; Dual language

Those coexistence of different linguistic varieties has deeply influenced people's linguistic behaviour and common attitudes. People may have different language attitudes toward different language varieties, such as a tendency to enforce one variety, or support, tolerate or reject one or more variety, or give different status to different varieties. The reason can be reflected by certain social factors which involves the users of language, the social context and the purposes of the interaction (Holmes, 2001).

This essay aims to map and analyse the process of usage of the local dialect Henan in Henan province in China. It also discusses the reason why people make the shift between the local dialect and the standard Mandarin, and show different language attitudes of different aged of people toward those two varieties.

1.Language varieties: the local dialect and standard dialect

According to Holmes (2001), variety refers to a set of language forms used in particular social situations that includes different dialect, accents, linguistic styles and even different languages. For dialect, Wolfram (1997:107) argues that local dialects have more complex of characters of "pronunciation, grammatical and semantic". He also points out that (1997) the members of one group use one particular dialect, while a different group use another different dialect. Edwards (1976) argues that dialect has the symbolic value for identifying different social groups. The greater distances between language users, social classes, background informations, the more linguistic distinctivenesses in interactions. Edwards believes that the continuing divergences of local dialect can strengthen the solidarity and identity of a group.

The standard dialect refers to the codified language which is different from colloquial speech and associate with the public affairs of language that could be communicate across or above other varieties (Edwards, 1976). Wardhaugh (2010:31) states that standard language is the variety which generally used in print written form, which may involves "spelling books, dictionaries, and possibly a literature". It may appear in speaking which has the characters of uniformity and consistency that resembles the writing language occasionally. Furthermore, Quirk (1968) believes that standard language provide the common currency of interaction and communication that has the authority among other language varieties. In addition, Fairclough (2001) demonstrates that the standardization of one language variety enables it take participate in a more wider ideological dimensions, such as political, social and cultural, which is beyond the linguistic meaning. It is the common sense that standard language variety has been used across other varieties.

2. The two dialects in a diglossic linguistic situation

In the society which has a local dialect and standard variety, people may use particular varieties in different specific situations. My hometown, the Hua County in the Henan province of China, has about 1.24 million people. The local dialect in it refers to the Henan dialect, while the standard dialect refers to the standard Mandarin. Generally, the local residents acquire both the varieties expect that some elderly illiterate people can only speak local dialect but can understand standard Mandarin during conversations.

Diglossia is another sociolinguistic term which refers to the situation that two distinct varieties have separate functions that exit in one society (Wardhaugh, 2010). Ferguson (1959) initially finds that diglossia involves two language varieties, in which the primary dialect has a high functions that could be used in the education or written literature as a High variety (H). While the local dialect considered to be the Low variety which generally used for ordinary conversation. Fchiffman (1997) contributes that those High and Low varieties are relate with each other. The High valued variety dominates the formal social context such as the public speeches, religious texts and activities, and other prestigious usages. For the Low valued variety, it generally used for informal interactions, jokes, markets, letters, soup opera and other domains in which the H variety is not used.

3.The using process of the standard Mandarin and the local Henan dialect

As Wardhaugh (2010) explains, the key characteristic of diglossia is that the two language varieties have separately functions respectively. In the case of the diglossic situation in Henan province in China, standard Mandarin served the High valued variety, while the local Henan dialect can be seen as the Low valued variety.

Some researchers (Clyne, 1997; Fishman, 1977; Bratt Paulston, 1994) have observed the usage of the two or more varieties provide the relevant factors which may affect people's choices between them. This session will map the usage of the standard Mandarin and the local Henan dialect in terms of those factors, and analyse the reasons of people's language choices.

3.1 The interlocutor of the interaction

The interlocutor is an important factor may influence the choice between varieties. For the local Henan dialect, it is normally used between friends, family members and neighbours. There was once a popular custom in my grandmother's village (which is located in the southern part of Hua County) that almost every villager would hold their bowls, sitting togehter under a big tree located in the middle of the village during the lunch time. The topic of discussion would always be about the crops of harvest, with everybody speaking the local dialect. It is also the same in the capital of Hua County in Henan, people use local dialect to local shopkeeper when buying vegetables and fruits or to the local people they meet in street. This usage of local dialect can be attributed to the familiarity of the interlocutors. Since the local dialect is usually acquired at home which full of familiar surroundings (Ferguson, 2003), people prefer to using the most familiar language to communicate with those who have intimate relationships with them.

However, for the standard Mandarin, it is not so widely used as the local dialect. It is generally used in supermarkets or some branch stores of new or famous brands. The staff in such place use standard Mandarin to consumers to express their friendly and politeness. In addition, this standard dialect usage could avoid disputes between staff and consumers to a certain extent. Since Wardhaugh (2010:86) points out that the H variety is more "beautiful, logical and expressive" than L variety.

Another situation refers to made conversations with people who come from outside. My mother, who is a businesswoman, tends to answer her mobile phone in standard Mandarin every time, even some calls were from family members. According to her, this could reduce the awkwardness when her clients came from other provinces. As for the accommodation theory (Giles et al, 2001), which refers that individuals modify their linguistic behaviour in order to "achieve a desired social distance" or social relationship with their interlocutors, if the family members called my mother, she will switch to local Henan dialect immediately. In spite of this, my mother's phone answering behaviour still causes some embarrassment at the beginning of the conversation.

Further more, Gal (1979) stresses the age of the interlocutor could also be involved in the process of choosing language variety. He adds that the older generation tends to keep using the local dialect than the younger generation. It can be seen that people should choose appropriate language according to the background informations of interlocutors (Sankoff, 1980).

3.2 The setting or social context of those two varieties

Holmes (2001) indicated that the social context which refers to where the interactions happen is also a significant role for determine which language variety should be used. Clyne (1997) also illustrates that certain venues like garden, street, school and so forth are more private or more public than other locations. For the Local Henan dialect, people tend to use it for ordinary communication in daily life, such as chatting with family at home, greetings with neighbour in the street, gossiping with close friends in restaurants, talking to a friend through telephone, bargaining with the local hawkers in front of concourse. The using of local dialect tends to appeared almost everywhere in the Hua County.

In contrast, the venues where standard Mandarin is used are more exclusive and limited. According to one of my friends, who teaches English at high school level, standard Mandarin is used during the class time, between teachers and students. But during the break, the students and teachers would switch to local Henan dialect, even when students ask questions which involves the academic context and the teachers will response in local dialect. This code switch between those two dialects occurs because of the social settings. Both teachers and students are aware that class is a formal and impersonal setting, and hence the usage of standard Mandarin, where as people prefer local dialect for interaction in relaxed and informal social context during intervals.

The difference in the usages of local dialect and standard Mandarin is also be related to the functional scales of the social dimensions as argued by Holmes (2001). According to Holmes (2001), language not only can communicate information of referential kind, but also can express feeling of the speakers. Normally, the less referentially oriented communication is, the more it tends to convey speakers' feelings. As the gossipping or chatting which involve the local dialect provided above, people can express their strongly feelings toward those referred to. For the same reason, teachers and students use standard Mandarin in class for it emphasis on the exchange of the high content information. For the conversations which occur during the break periods, students and teachers could also reinforce the close and friendly relationships through informal and relaxed interaction through local variety.

However, as part of the educational reforms introduced last year, both the students and teachers are required to use standard Mandarin during class break periods. My seven-year-old cousin uses standard Mandarin in school all the time even during break. But he never use it at home. This may be linked to the "solidarity" factor implied by H or L varieties (Schiffman, 1997). As Schiffman demonstrates (1997:213)

H variety could be used in an appropriately in a given situation, however, the L variety could signify a solidarity that is "reserved only for members of a particular in-group". My cousin tends to keep this solidarity of family members as she said: "I don't want to be different from others."

3.3 The social status of the participant relationships

The social status of the participants in the interaction could also affect the choice between the local Henan dialect and standard Mandarin. As Holmes (2001:134) points out that "a person's dialect reflects their social background". In this diglossic linguistic situation, the Henan local dialect tend to be seen as the L variety which normally be linked with lower class who normally have the coarse and "ugly" or "incorrect" language and behaviour (Montgomery, 1995:64). On the contrary, the standard Mandarin which labelled as the H variety has the characters of "prestigious and powerful" (Wardhaugh, 2010:86), and it generally be associated with people who have high "social prestige, wealth, and education" (Holmes:135).

This different social status has clearly reflected in the political meetings and speeches. Once I had an opportunity to attend a political meeting which discussed the inventions and manufacturing of new products in Hua County. The co-chairman of the product department kept using standard Mandarin in his speech. This may be because he wanted to provide a formal and impersonal tone for his speech. The usage of standard Mandarin also indicated his high social status, for everyone listened to him quietly with respect.

However, when the Chairman gave his report, he used the local Henan dialect even his position is higher than that of the cochairman. People's attention began to be distracted from his speech, and they started whispering, text messaging, and even smoking. The chairman became very angry and expressed his sarcasm in local dialect in order to maintain order. The quietness and embarrassed atmosphere continued until the end of the meeting. The reason of the usage of the local dialect by the chairman can be related to the gender difference of the participants. Holmes (2001) demonstrates that men prefer to use local variety which tends to convey the macho connotations of masculinity and toughness. Holmes (2001) suggests that the local dialect is regarded as positively and highly form by male, even if that men do not want to openly admit it. The chairman used the local dialect to show his power and toughness, and the angry satires which forced others to subordinate to him had built up his social status upon others.

3.4 Topic

Different topics may determine people's language variety choices (Holmes, 2001). Clyne (1991a) points out that the experiences which associate with language varieties will cause some people to switchvarieties to talk about particular topics. Haugen (cited in Clyne, 1997:309) cite certain examples to demonstrate those language behaviours, such as when people talk about their "jobs, leisure activities, new technological developments, or particular forms of sport".

In the diglossic linguistic environment in Hua County in Henan province, people use local dialect in interactions of almost all examples that provided above. However, for the standard Mandarin, the most classic and significant usage refers to the topic of love. As Myers-Scotton (1997) suggested that people select appropriate variety to suit their intentions, therefore the variety of standard Mandarin which has the properties of standardization and high literary heritage (Ferguson, 2003) is more suitable for express love.

In the case of Hua county, text messages or write email in formal standard Mandarin are very popular ways for express affection for others. The reason for this could be relate to the lack of the L variety (Schiffman, 1997). The local Henan dialect has few words or patterns to say love. Even it can borrow linguistic norms from the standard Mandrain, it sounds odd and may suggests its only the blandishments and delicate flatteries of the speaker. One of my female friends wanted her fiance to rewrite her love letters for compensation, that he was only speak the informal norms that "let's try to be together, ok?" in Henan dialect when they decide to start their affection. Another reason for her fiance using the local dialect to express his love lightly may relate to the typical characters of the people: forbearance, endurance and introvert nature, or the residents do not have the habit to express feelings freely. Since the local variety mainly servers the colloquial functions, people generally to draw help from standard Mandarin to write love letters or text messages to show affection.

4.The differences between local Henan dialect and the standard Mandarin

Ferguson (2003) demonstrates a number of variables and features as the differences between the H and L varieties. In the case of local Henan dialect and standard Mandarin, as the examples analysed above in section 3, it can be seen that people can use those two varieties for different purposes.

As the prestige examined in this diglossic situation, the standard Mandarin which considered as the H variety has greater prestige than the local Henan dialect which labelled as the L variety that is felt to be less worthy.

Moreover, the standard Mandarin still has the different literary heritage with the local Henan dialect. In the case of Hua County diglossic situation, the majority of literature is in H variety the standard Mandarin whereas nearly no written uses of L variety exist. In actual fact, some traditions of TV shows or films use the Henan dialect to reinforce the characters as liar, thief, uneducated and vulgar people.

In addition, the grammars of standard Mandarin appeared to be more complex than the grammars of local Henan dialect. On the contrary, Henan dialect has some vocabularies that standard Mandarin lacks, such as the slangs, enigmatic folk similes. For example, the word "good" in standard Mandarin is "Hao", while in Henan dialect is "Zhong". This word is the typical vocabulary which can distinguish people from other provinces as Wolfram (1997) points out that the sh versus s pronunciation of the Hebrew word shibboleth to distinguish people between Ephraimites and Gileadites.

Besides, the differences in intonation between standard Mandarin and Henan dialect are also significant. Those two varieties are often somewhat shared the same lexicon and phonological elements as Schiffman (1997) suggests, but has different intonation even associate with the same vocabulary. Once there were advertisements of instant noodle and beer contributed in Henan dialect with the particular intonation to show closeness and trust.

5.Different language attitudes toward Henan dialect

Meyerhoff (2006) indicates that language convey the in formation which can suggest their own attitudes. Holmes (2001) also contributes that language attitudes not only reflect people's views about those who use the language, but also involves the contexts and functions that have been associated with. The attitudes to language can strongly influence people's linguistic behaviour. However, as the overlap between language attitudes and behaviour as mentioned by Bainbridge (2001a), people do not act resemble as what they think.

With regards to the diglossic linguistic situation in Hua County, different groups of people have different attitudes toward the local Henan dialect, and these attitudes reflect the usage of the local variety. With the statement of Eckert (1997:151) shows that "aging is central to human experience", age could be an significant linguistic variable in the study of sociolinguistic variation.

5.1 The language attitudes of elderly people

For elderly generation those who was 60 or above, almost do not use standard Mandarin through their whole lives. Most of the old residents of Hua County were not well educated and even illiterate. Shiffman (1997) argues that the illiterates are restricted to the do the domain of L variety, and they prefer keep silent rather than exhibit inappropriate language patterns in H variety situations. In the Hua County, majority people have the positive attitude to the usage of standard Mandarin. The standard Mandarin functions the high variety which is associated with high educated and social status people for them. However, Edwards (1992) notes that the older speaker have the most locally based social networks and less geographically mobile. Therefore, they may hold a more conservative toward language using. The local dialect for them could be seen as the "salient indices" of identity (Myers-Scotton, 1997), therefore they do not think to change their dialect. My grandmother who was 92 years old could understand standard Mandarin very well but never want to switch from the local dialect to it. As she said that the local dialect represented a lot of memories for her.

5.2 The middle aged people's attitudes to the Henan dialect

For the middle aged people in Hua County, there are differences of attitudes toward local dialect between male and female. As Holmes (2001) observes, women generally prefer using standard variety than men, and whereas men use more local variety than women. It is true that my mother prefers to use standard Mandarin rather than local dialect, while my father tends to use the local Henan dialect all the time. Despite the circumstance which is to communicate with her consumers from other provinces, my mother appeared to use the standard Mandarin all the time. Especially when she just finished a phone call in standard Mandarin, she will keep in speaking it to family members for continuation.

Holmes (2001) explains that women seek the standard language as a helpful tool to claim high social status. Using the standard Mandarin means dignity and property. Another reason proposed by Holmes (2001) is that women are designated the role of modeling correct and better behaviour in the society. They serve as the models for children's speech (Holmes, 2001:158). It is a common phenomenon that young mothers switch to standard Mandarin when they talk to their children, no matter that the child responses in local dialect.

5.3 The language attitudes of the adolescence toward Henan variety

The linguistic attitudes towards Henan dialect is complicated among the adolescent people.

For those who do not well educated, they tend to view the local dialect as the subordinate and variety in linguistic situation. This can be relates to Edwards' (1976) indication, which is that the L variety has a "social inferiority", this may lead the speaker who using the local dialect feel inferiority in an argument which the interlocutor using the standard variety. An explanation for bestow the favor on the standard Mandarin, Homels contributes that the standard variety has a cover prestige which refers to ratings of the high scales of educational and occupational statusin society. Those unwell educated young people admire and identify the standard Mandarin as the good speech and best accent which could made them belong to a high social status group.

Another part of the uneducated or non-socialised youth prefers using local dialect due to the toughness attached to it (Cheshire, 1982). Those young people generally quit school at a very early age and do not have enough concern and love from family. They link the local dialect with weapons, criminal activities, arguments and swearing. They remain using the local Henan dialect even they may have the negative attitude on it.

The third group of young people refers to those who have well educated and may decent job as well. Those people tend to have the positive attitudes toward standard Mandarin and negative attitude on local variety. As the previous studies (Lambert, 1972; Giles and St Clair, 1979) estimated that speakers using the standard form are thought as more cleverer and competent than the same speakers using a local dialect form, those high educated may want to show their intelligence by using standard Mandarin.

There is also another young aged group who has the positive attitude to the local Henan dialect and kept using it. As Clyne (1997) suggests, the highly educated people can learn the H variety more easily and do not need the L variety so much in interaction, and it is inevitable that they stop using the minority language. However, Brenzinger (1997) argues that this process of language lost will stimulate people's language maintenance as reaction. Those people also have the high educational attainment saw the local dialect as the core value of their cultures. As Edwards (1976) points out that language is a powerful symbol of identity for a group. Those people stress the covert prestige of the Henan dialect and using it to express their group solidarity and identity.

6.Conclusion

This essay evaluated the different language using processes of the local Henan dialect and the standard Mandarin in the diglocissic situation of the Hua County in Henan province in China. It can be seen that the H variety which is the standard Mandarin servers distinct functions from the L variety that the local Henan dialect. The factors which involve the interlocutor, the settings and social contexts, the social status of speakers and the topic can be taken as the significant variables for determining the usage of those two varieties. In addition, the reason why people switch from standard Mandarin and vice versa was provided. Furthermore, with the different attitudes that given by different aged of people, different language behaviours had evaluated that people who saw local Henan dialect as a symbol of group identity viewed with positive attitude, whereas that people who saw standard Mandarin associate with high social status and educated tend to viewed the standard Mandarin positively.

However, the distinctions between the local Henan dialect and standard Mandarin is not isolated. In a more open language environment and society, social and linguistic segregation becomes blurred. People have more social and geographical mobility than before, it became even harder to predict or conjecture the background information of the interact participants. No one can predict whether the local dialect can take place of the standard dialect or vice versa, or they can coexist as the situation of commentary.

Limitation of this essay refers to the unscientific study and unstructured descriptions of the linguistic experiences in the Hua County. The language attitudes of those two varieties may be limited to consider age as the variable.

[1]Bainbridge, W.S. (2001a) Attitudes and behaviour. In R. Mesthrie (ed.) Concise encyclopaedia of sociolinguistics. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 6-10.

[2]Bratt Paulston, C. (1994) Linguistic minorities in multilingual settings. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

[3]Brenzinger, M. (1997) Language contact and language displacement. In F. Coulmas (ed.) The handbook of sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blactwell Publishers Ltd,

[4]Cheshire, J. (1982) Variation in an English dialect: A sociolingusitic study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[5]Clyne, M. (1991a) The Australian experience. Cmbridge: Cambridge University Press.

[6]Clyne, M. (1997) Multilingualism. In F. Coulmas (ed.) The handbook of sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blactwell Publishers Ltd, 301-314.

[7]Eckert, P. (1997) Age as a sociolinguistic variable. In F. Coulmas (ed.) The handbook of sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blactwell Publishers Ltd, 151-167.

[8]Edwards, W. (1992) Sociolinguistic behaviour in a Detroit inner city black neighborhood. Language and Society, 11:95-115.

[9]Edwards, A.D. (1976) Language in culture and class. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.

[10]Edwads, J. (1985) Language, society and identity. Oxford: Blackwell.

[11]Fairclough, N. (2001) Language and power (2nd ed.). London: Longman.

[12]Fchiffman, H.A. (1997) Diglossia as a sociolinguistics situation. In F. Coulmas (ed.) The handbook of sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blactwell Publishers Ltd, 205-216.

[13]Ferguson, C.A. (1959) Diglossia. Word. 15: 325-365. In P.P. Giglioli (1972) (ed.) Language and social context. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 232-283.

[14]Ferguson, C. (2003) Diglossia. In C. Bratt Paulston and G.R. Tucher (ed.) Sociolinguistics: the essential readings. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 345-358.

[15]Fishman, J.A. (1977) The social science perspective: keynote. In J.A. Fishman (ed.) Bilingual education: current perspectives. Washington, DC: Georgetown University, 1-49.

[6]Gal, S. (1979) Language shift: social determinants of linguistic change in bilingual Austria. New York: Academic Press.

[17]Giles, H. and St Clair R. (1979) Language and social psychology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

[18]Giles, H, Shephard, C.A. and Le Poire, B.A. (2001) Communication Accommodation Theory. In Robinson, W.P. and Giles, H (eds.) The new handbook of language and social psychology. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 33-56.

[19]Holmes, J. (2001) An introduction to sociolinguistics (2nd ed.). Essex: Pearson Education Limited.

[20]Lambert, W. (1972) A social psychology of Bilingualism. In J. Pride and J. Holmes (eds.) Sociolinguistics. London: Penguin.

[21]Meyerhoff, M. (2006) Introducing sociolinguistics. London and New York: Routledge.

[22]Montgomery, M.(1995) An introduction to language and society (2nd ed.). London: Routlegde.

[23]Myers-Scotton, C. (1997) Code-switching. In F. Coulmas (ed.) The handbook of sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blactwell Publishers Ltd, 217-237.

[24]Quirk, R. (1968) The use of English. London: Longmans.

[25]Sankoff, G. (1980) The social life of language. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania press.

[26]Schiffam, H.F. (1997) Diglossia as a sociolinguistic situation. In F. Coulmas (ed.) The handbook of sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blactwell Publishers Ltd, 205-216.

[27]Wardhaugh, R. (2010) An introduction to sociolinguistics (6th ed.). Essex: Wiley-Blackwell Publication.

[28]Wolfram, W. (1997) Dialect in society. In F. Coulmas (ed.) The handbook of sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blactwell Publishers Ltd, 107-126.

很多掌握多種語言的人（包括同一語言種類里的不同方言，例如漢語里的普通話、地方方言包括粵語、河南方言等）會(huì)根據(jù)特定社會(huì)場(chǎng)合與環(huán)境，選擇適合的語言來進(jìn)行交流。本篇文章在以河南省滑縣為例，分析人們?cè)谶x擇使用普通話和選擇滑縣方言時(shí)，會(huì)受到哪些社會(huì)因素的影響。文章發(fā)現(xiàn)對(duì)話人、交談場(chǎng)合、交談雙方的社會(huì)地位和身份、交談的話題、以及不同年齡的人們對(duì)待方言的態(tài)度都會(huì)影響人們決定選擇哪一種語言（方言）作為交流工具。

河南方言；社會(huì)因素；雙語言