Language attitudes toward English in Taiwan as a field of inquiry have been panoramically explored. Many studies (e.g Tsai 2010; Wang 2000) have established that English is highly favored in the society due to its instrumental functions to achieve upward social mobility. Additionally, the studies have also pointed out that proximity of English is less likely to directly associate with its use values due to its clear instrumental values. Put differently, exchange values of English surpass its use functions. Chen (2010) also pinpointed that English is spoken in limited domains.
Quantitative analyses allow a general survey of the appraisal of English in Taiwan. The justifications are supported by detailed interpretations and objective accounts. However, qualitative analyses supplement to the known facts and allow a close-up examination to the issues discussed. Quantitative analyses describe phenomena whereas qualitative analyses explain these phenomena. The section is aimed to compare the results in this study with those in previous quantitative studies.
As English is a marker to social differentiation, it is thought to be more closely associated with some social attributes than others. In a quantitative study conducted by Wang (2000) to investigate the relations between English and demographic factors, factors such as gender, geographical areas, occupations, education are found by Wang to significantly affect attitudes toward English. The study also finds that education and English competence is related. In Tsai’s (2010) panel data, English can account for and contribute to status attainment. It has also been discussed that English is indexical to socioeconomic status. Chen (2010) finds that English is a marker of authority and social upward mobility, suggesting that English will remain an asset highly favored due to its symbolic values. These well-developed claims are discussed, compared, and further developed with empirical data and results in the study.
106
6.1.1 Connections between English competence and education
Education has always been viewed as one of the chief factors influencing competence of English. Wang (2000) proposes the correlations between English and education levels, stating that the higher one’s education level, the more frequent the use of English. The present study also finds the two are related and the associations can be approached from different dimensions. First, the more proficient in English one is, usually the better educated the person is. Second, the correlation between English and education levels is a concept prevailing in the society. Furthermore, how English use is defined can significantly influence the investigation of the relation between English use and education.
When Wang (2000) states that “the higher their level of education, the more often they use English” (74), it is slightly indicated that education levels and English use are in causal relations. The fact that there is a correlation between English and education as an idealization can be observed in Ophelia’s anxiety of her incompetence.
The encounter with a foreigner described by her which has been discussed in Introduction and Section 5.2 has revealed some stereotypical assumptions. Ophelia, a non-English user and a journalist-to-be in her late twenties, was later interviewed to describe how the idealization of the positive correspondence between English and education pressures her, presented in (30).
(30)
1 OPHELIA 某種程度上 (13:29)
‘To a certain extent,’
2 我現在唸的學校在臺灣是 (.) 算還可以的學校
‘The university that I attend is relatively prestigious.’
3 對 (.) 就是 (.) 是還可以 (.) 還不錯的學校
‘Right. It’s a pretty good one.’
4 然後我 (.) 很多時候做很多事情說很多話
107
‘When I say something and do something,’
5 我都會去在意說 (.) 我是不是傷害了我的學校的形象
‘I am always haunted by the fear if I disgrace my school,’
6 或者是說 (.) 顛覆了別人對於這個學校學生的想法
‘or debunk the expectations people have to students in this university.’
7 ANN 嗯
‘Hmm.’
8 OPHELIA 所以我做事情反而會更戰戰兢兢
‘So I am meticulous about things that I do.’
9 或是講話會更 (.) 謹慎一點
‘I am very careful about every word I say.’
10 ANN 嗯
‘Hmm.’
11 OPHELIA 包括說 (.) 像我對於自己英文可能沒有很好這件事情
‘Even the fact that I may not be a good English user’
12 會感到很難過的是
‘frustrates me a lot,’
13 我好像 (.) 毀了我的學校
‘because I feel like I destroy the reputation which the university is known for.’
((omitted))
14 然後
‘And then,’
→ 15 就是我做很多事情都會去擔心到說
‘When I work on things, I always wonder if,’
16 那個 (.) 學校的校譽是不是被我破壞了 (.) 或什麼的
‘I disgrace my school, something like that.’
17 對啊
‘I do wish to become a proficient English user’
21 是我想要去符合說 (.) 嗯
‘I want to fit in, erm,’
108
22 當我告訴人家我的學歷 (.) 我的學校的時候
‘When I tell other people the name of my school,’
23 然後
‘and then’
24 我所做的一切 (.) 跟我表現能力都是符合他們期待的
‘everything I do and my abilities fit what they expect.’
Together with the Facebook message discussed in the introduction, it can be observed that Ophelia was extremely insecure in terms of her English competence. When English is involved, her high education often makes her anxious (lines 11 to 13). She was afraid that she may ruin the prestige which the school is known for due to the stark contrasts between her incompetence and high expectations held by general public. She repetitively emphasized the great worry in lines 5, 13, and 16. Her anxiety shows that the correlation between English and education is highly qidai ‘expected’
(line 24), and that the stereotype of the correlation is prevalent.
One more dimension which worth the attention is that the relation between English and education levels is the indeterminacy language use. Wong (2000) refers English use to frequencies of speaking, writing, reading and listening to English. Yet, the question was too vague as English use can refer to use English from lexicon to discourse. Moreover, how frequency is coded is also influential. Furthermore, it will be argued in the later section that English use should be perceived to be parallel to Chinese use and use of other indigenous languages. It will also be argued that English as style may have little to do with language proficiency. Additionally, it is found that individuals use English frequently regardless of proficiency levels for the role which English plays in daily conversation is mostly stylization (Bakhtin 1986). Mostly through codeswitching, individuals constructed another persona to vivify and dramatize the tension in utterances. The use of English is complementary in Chinese- and Taiwanese-dominated local contexts.
109
I would also like to propose that the use of English sometimes has little to do with competence in English. English use should be perceived differently from how we conceptualize the use of Chinese or Taiwanese in daily communication. In fact, it does not take a proficient English speaker to use English. Therefore, the question relies heavily on how English use is defined.
6.1.2 Exchange values and use values of English
It is found that English is still predominantly conceptualized as instrumental, the finding corresponding to those of past studies (e.g. Chen et al. 2005; Chen 2006;
Tsai 2010; Wang 2000). Competence in English can be exchanged for job positions, opportunities, higher income and etc. When interviewees were asked about advantages that English could bring, job concerns are usually among the first reasons provided by interviewees for English necessitation. As far as non-English users are concerned, instrumental values of English are unquestionable and highly desired.
Excerpt (31a) and (31b) are edited and reproduced from (6) and (8) in Section 4.1.
(31)
a. VIOLET 在職場上會吃虧 (03:54)
‘(Incompetence) puts you at a disadvantage in workplace.’
b. 1 DAWN 就是要找打工的工作的時候吧
‘When you look for a part-time job,’
2 ANN 嗯
‘Hmm.’
3 DAWN 然後 (.) 就是 (.) 他們如果知道你 (.) 就是要唸外文系或
什麼的
‘And if they know that you are going to major in English,’
→ 4 他們就會比較 (.) 好像比較願意使用你 (.) 這樣子
‘they seem more willing to use you.’
110
The two excerpts demonstrate that English and one’s profession are considered to be closely related. The rationalization also indicates that English has clear and prescriptive values which individuals could specify and pinpoint. However, the awareness of instrumental, rather than interpersonal, values of English points to two questions. First, as discussed by Grin (2001) and Park (2011), there are difficulties to justify the correspondence between English competence and socioeconomic status.
Though the study does not address the issue in depth, it has been pointed out several times that there are possibilities of discrepancies between how English is conceptualized and how it actually functions in the society. Moreover, even with the acknowledgement that English is instrumental, it may not necessarily entail that instrumental values are strong incentive and that use values are overlooked.
Among all the non-English users, only few indeed showed their interests in picking up English again. The majority of non-English users only reported to aim at acquiring basic English and placed great emphasis on oral skills. Even though non-English users all seemed to conceptualize English as instrumental, there was a gap between viewing English as necessary and shedding the need for themselves to acquire it. The labor market in Taiwan bestows values to certificates in not only English but nearly all expertise. As cultural capital (Bourdieu 1986), certificates have strong symbolic and economic interests. By the same token, certificates of standardized English proficiency assessments such as TOFEL and ILETS are valuable.
However, no non-English users ever mentioned that they yearn to obtain certificates in order to facilitate job-hunting and promotion. On the contrary, many non-English users expressed their desire to possess basic skills.
(32)
1 HELEN 其實最主要是 (03:37)
‘Chiefly,’
111
2 我覺得 (.) 學習是要有 (.) 一定程度的興趣
‘I think that learning relies heavily on a certain amount of interests, ’
‘I really wish to learn English well,’
7 但是又興趣又不夠
‘but I am not that interested in it.’
8 ANN 嗯 (.) 所以你想要把它學好背後的原因就是
‘What are your reasons for learning English?’
→ 9 嗯 (.) 可以使用
‘To be able to use it freely.’
10 然後 (.) 就業上 (.) 能夠 (.) 能夠有幫助
“And it could help job-hunting and promotion.”
(33)
‘I just wish to be able to speak English.’
8 ANN 會講就好
‘You wish to be able to speak English.’
Helen, a middle-aged accountant in a publishing company, believed that
112
learning yao you yiding chengdu de xingqu ‘relies heavily on a certain amount of interests’ (line 2). She also stated that one of the reasons for picking up English again is to use English freely. The public servant, Egan, denied the need to learn English because he only wished to be able to speak basic English (line 7). The two excerpts showed that though English is popularly conceptualized as instrumental, the instrumental functions nat not necessarily motivate non-English users to acquire it.
Instead, what can be observed in the excerpts is the interviewees’ emphasis on both exchange values and use values. The finding may be accounted for by the increasing number of English users. The number of English users in Taiwan, though small, is steadily increasing. English as linguistic capital was once unevenly distributed in the society. With the number of users steadily growing, English is gradually owned by more and more agents. The values that were once exclusive become relatively dispersed. Consequently, English becomes more and more fundamental.
The finding that English has high instrumental values corresponds to the quantitative studies. However, it is found through interview that the conceptualization may not directly correspond to English learning.
6.1.3 English as stylization
English is thought to serve functions in restricted and formal domains (Chen 2010; Tsai 2010) and yet it is conceptualized to have great symbolic values. The contradiction between restricted domains and amplified symbolic values demonstrate that perceived values of English outshine its functions in communication. Nonetheless, the claim that English is used in limited domains is a result yielded from comparing English to local languages. In other words, English is used in relatively limited domains compared with Chinese and Taiwanese. Yet, it is less appropriate to compare
113
these languages altogether because English it plays a different role from Chinese or Taiwanese when it comes to pragmatic functions. The comparison of these languages in terms of domains presupposes that individuals are equally eloquent in all these languages and that different language in different domains are a matter of language choice. Moreover, domains can be either public or private. When patters of language use are generalized, languages are inevitable ranked. Nonetheless, it has been stated that the relations between English and indigenous languages, Chinese in particular, is not about one high language and the other low languages. Overall, the comparison is less appropriate.
English is exploited even in informal and local contexts by both English users and non-English users to construct another persona to intensify and dramatize expressions and intonations that Chinese and Taiwanese could not achieve. The excerpt (34) is a reflection on daily English use by a non-English user, Lyn, who is in her mid twenties. Lyn stated that she consciously adopted English to precisely
‘something that I feel that I need to say in foreign tongue’
3 才可以表達情緒的時候
114
‘(English) can be manipulated to show exaggerated feelings.’
10 但是這是中文做不到的事
‘But you cannot do it in Chinese.’
11 可是當它- 當你用英文的時候
‘You would think that OK is acceptable and clear.’
15 那你說可以啊可以
‘But when you say keyia keyi,’
16 好像就覺得說 (.) 咦 (.) 是不是話中還有話
‘it feels like the expression seems to mean a lot more.’
17 ANN 嗯
‘Hmm’
18 LYN 對啊 (.) 語意不一樣
‘Yeah. (Expressions in English) have different meanings (from the Chinese counterparts).’
Lyn first replied that she uses English to precisely express her emotions (lines 1 to 3).
She further remarked that English exaggerates and dramatizes expressions in a way which Chinese could not do (lines 9 and 10). It has to be noted that it only requires basic competence and few fixed expressions to exploit codeswitching for pragmatic concerns. The excerpt demonstrates that the concept of domains by Fishman (1972) may be too rigid to frame English use in Taiwan and that the use of English may not be closely related to proficiency levels.
English users also consciously manipulate English to present another usually
115
more ironic and humorous persona. Jodi also claimed that she uses foreign expressions to dramatize her reactions and intonations. As can be seen, Jodi reported to use English for fun (line 5) and dramatization (line 7). English in Chinese- or
‘What goals do you attempt to achieve by using English?’
4 什麼樣的動機讓你去 (.) 講話的時候用英文
‘Like, when I try to sound dramatic.’
8 ANN
((laughs))
9 JODI 就是會 (.) 有點類似那種學那種美劇的 (.) 講話的方式
‘I will speak English in a way similar to what we hear in American TV series.’
10 ANN 嗯
‘Hmm.’
11 JODI 就是 (.) 就是可能講一講講一講
‘So maybe I am talking (in Chinese) for a while,’
12 然後就說 What? Are you nuts? 之類的
‘And then I will be like “What? Are you nuts?”’
13 ANN
((laughs))
14 JODI 就是這種 (.) 時候會用
‘I use English in situations like this.’
A question regarding the functions and perceptions of English use in local contexts deserves attention. It has been discussed in Section 5.3 that English is
116
dispreferred in local contexts. Yet, it is also found that both English users and non-English users consciously exploit English for language play. As far as English users are concerned, they could even skillfully use English to distance themselves from the addressees, as Jodi later remarked in the interview. English serves pragmatic and metapragmatic functions. However, these functions seem divergent and even contradictory. English in local contexts could both be both dispreferred and used for fun. Different perceptions of English use in local contexts may be attributable to codeswitching, linguistic units which are replaced with English counterparts.
Free switch, which refers to stylistic code change without any specific function (Montes-Alcala, 2005), may be more likely to trigger the perceptions that the speaker is being pretentious. On the other hand, language play maybe at the sentence level.
For example, sentences like Are you OK? and What? Are you nuts? in (34) and (35) respectively are clausal codeswitching. Using English as an ingroup code to distance from hearers involves convergence and divergence between exchanges and in discourses. It indicates that codeswitching at different levels may have different functions and trigger different perceptions for hearers. The study does not deal with English use in naturally occurring data. The discussion thus remains tentative. It requires further exploration of different functions, along with its perceptions, in naturally occurring data to yield a well-developed account.
The concept of domains confines the use of English as an instructional language in school and a communication tool in workplace. However, it is found that English use is a resource for stylization to construct another persona. Furthermore, both English users and non-English users are capable of manipulating English for pragmatic reasons. In fact, to achieve comprehension, basic vocabulary is expected to be used more frequently in language play. Hence, English use could be seen as complementary to Chinese- and Taiwanese-dominated conversation in local domains.
117