5.2 The Blueprint: An Analysis of a „Top-down‟ Perspective of English
5.2.2 Language rationalization behind bilingualization
This section discusses how English abilities are described, and how bi-/multilingualism are conceptualized in the Blueprint and how these acts are ideological. As an official document, the Blueprint serves as a window to observe how the institute situates English in the Taiwanese context and how in return Taiwan is situated in this social world where English is described to have its currency. The contextualization refers to defining the use of English by relating it to the social contexts where it occurs, including the ways how English is describe, how other languages are made absent, and how individuals are required to change
established language ideologies
the ideological stances others‘ discourse: The Blueprint
established language ideologies
ideological stances others‘ discourse
169
their linguistic behaviors in the Blueprint. The following subsections present four major themes of English-related rationalization, including the analogy of English competence as power, the analogy of a trend under globalization to a global trend, parallel language ideology in multilingualism and the ideology of homogenization at the national level behind multilingualism.
5.2.2.1 The analogy of English to power
The ability to speak English is discursively related to power 力 li ‗power‘ in the Blueprint. Instead of using 英語能力 yingyu nengli, which refers to English competence, the Blueprint phrases English competence as 英語力 yingyu li. The phrase materializes English
competence from an abstract, non-concrete proficiency to physical power. The discursive strategy to objectify abstract entities is also seen in 競爭力 jingzheng li and 軟實力 ruan
shili. English proficiency is mostly related to competitiveness, which is phrased as jingzheng
li. Jingzheng li is composed of two lexical elements, 競爭 jingzhen ‗competition‘ and 力 li
power.‘ Jingzheng li therefore is understood as the ability to compete. In the Foreword alone,
the first section of the Blueprint, the concept that English ability leads to competitiveness is mentioned five times. The use of li to describe English competence is also seen in the phrase 軟實力 ruan shili ‗soft power.‘ The phrase ruan shili is mentioned three times in the
Blueprint. An example is shown in Excerpt (40) below.
170
(40) 為於此基礎上，進一步提升國人運用英語的軟實力
(the Executive Yuan 2018, 1) (―Building upon these foundations, the next step is to improve the soft power
of our people‘s English proficiency.‖)
(the Executive Yuan 2018, 1) The analogy of language competence to strength reveals an overall positive image of English that the top-down perspective projects. In a word, it remains unknown whether mentioning the three types of li is a deliberate discursive strategy. Nonetheless, the three types of li do invite readers to link all three yingyu li, ruan shili and jingzheng li together. The ability to compete in a non-physical sense pictures the existence of the labor market where possessing English makes a person more powerful, desired and well-prepared. This is also evidenced in the promotion rationales. The 4th rationale ―打造年輕世代的人才競逐優勢‖ dazao nianqing
shidai de rencai jingzhu youshi ―forging competitive advantage for young talents‖ specifies
that Singapore, India and Romania attract international conglomerates because of their excellence in English. The attachment of English competence to power can be taken as price-tagging in labor market (Bourdieu 1977; 1986; 1991).
5.2.2.2 The analogy of a trend under globalization to a global trend
A noticeable observation lies in how English, the sense of globalness and power are discursively linked together in the Blueprint. The Foreword states clearly that the bilingual nation policy is motivated by the trend of globalization. The globalness of English does not merely refer to the observation that English is recognized as the global language. Also, the
171
conceptualization that English represents global competitiveness is described to be universal
across the globe, as Excerpt (41) shows below.
(41) 「英語力」已是敲開全球化大門的必備關鍵能力，如何提升國民英語力以增 加國際競爭力，已成為非英語系國家共同的重要課題，臺灣自然無法置身事 外。
(the Executive Yuan 2018, 1) (―Therefore, how to raise citizens‘ English ability to a more internationally
competitive level has become a vital issue common to all non-English speaking countries. Taiwan certainly cannot except itself from this.‖)
(the Executive Yuan 2018, 1) The ideology of ‗globalness‘ of English is manifested in the explicit metadiscourse that the spread of English is universally valued. This naturalized connection between a social practice and globalization corresponds to what Fairclough (1992a; 2006) calls ‗globalist discourse.‘
This analogy probably also accounts for the phenomenon that though globalization is perceived to be a form of hegemony, entering global markets and joining global competition are still reckoned to be desired and even obligatory. It will be discussed in Section 5.3 that a globalist discourse rationalizes English necessitation.
5.2.2.3 Parallel language ideology in bilingualization
The Blueprint emphasizes 雙 語 化 shuangyu hua ‗bilingualization,‘ particularly evident in the 8 common strategies and 16 individual strategies. The term 雙語化 shuangyu hua is mentioned in six common strategies and three individual strategies. The term 雙語
shuangyu occurs in one comment strategy and seven individual strategies. The Blueprint also
172
notes in the third rationale that the bilingual language policy is promoted along with local languages (The Executive Yuan 2018, 3). Therefore, the Blueprint promotes two strands of parallel linguistic practices, between the default common language and English, and between official languages and indigenous languages. The bilingualization of Mandarin Chinese and English and the promotion of English and native languages manifest parallel language ideology. It refers to the rationalization that multiple languages are given equal prominence and recognition by strategically making these languages simultaneously available.
Nevertheless, the parallel language use is more of a language ideology than linguistic practice.
Hultgren (2016) discusses the parallel language use in Nordic policy discourse and states that parallellingualism (158) is an underspecified notion. A consequence of underspecification is treating two languages as equally mandated. The underspecification, as will be shown later, causes the bilingualization between Mandarin Chinese and English to be perceived as mandated proficiency in both languages across domains. This contradicts with the Blueprint‘s emphasis of exploiting the instrumental functions of English. Simply put, on the one hand, the metaphorical extension of English as power distinguishes English from other languages in Taiwan. On the other hand, bilingualism or parallellingualism seems to advocate mastery in both languages. The interpretations expectedly lead to further reflections. It will be discussed in Sections 5.3 and 5.4 that mandatory competence across domains is reflected on.
173
5.2.2.3 The ideology of homogenization
Cooper‘s (1989) famous quote on language planning ―who plans what for whom and how?‖ (31) shows that language planning and policy is an attempt, though not necessarily
successful (Spolsky 2004), at changing the current language use of a given social unity. The second rationale to reduce urban-rural divide with digital technology accentuates how the lack of English is considered disadvantageous, problematic and necessary to fix. It presupposes that English is an unevenly distributed resource and that children can 享受
xiangshou ―enjoy‖ (3) this resource with the help of digital technology. Besides, the rationale
also entails a mandated universality of English learning intra-nationally. On the one hand, as discussed previously, learning English is described to be a universal trend. On the other hand, it is not equally available to every individual. If English is connected to globalization, proficient English speakers are probably left unaffected. Those who are considered disprivileged without English competence are influenced the most. This rationalization
embodies what Hobsbawm (2007) states, ―the impact of this globalization is felt the most by those who benefit from it least‖ (4). A tension emerges in how rationalizations of English and
its resource are believed to spread.
The section looks into rationalizations of English in the Blueprint, which represents a top-down perspective of profiling English in Taiwan. English ability is assimilated to li
‗power‘ in the globalized labor market. English becomes an asset in free-trade market,
174
strongly sought, not equally accessible to everyone, and required to make available from a
top-down execution. Several ideological contestations deserve the attention. An emphasis on the instrumental value of English ―decouple language from identity‖ (Duchêne & Heller 2012,
13). The entirely instrumental function also shows that English still serves distinct functions from other languages in Taiwan. Yet, bilingualism could also be interpreted as mastery and obligation to use both languages across social contexts. The meaning-making of globalness leads to the conceptualization that English is similarly desired and learned in every non-English speaking country. However, the perceived universality both within and across nations collides with it being a form of capital which not everyone gets to deploy (Bourdieu 1977; 1986; 1991). Its function to mark social distinction and to make an individual more privileged in the labor market seems to contradict with the government‘s effort to boost societal competence in English. These contradictions all feed on further discussions, as will be presented in the next two sections.
5.3 Discourse of YouTubers‟ Vlogs: Discourse of Self-media
An analysis of vlog discourse situates the study with the strand of discourse analysis in social media. As far as media language is concerned, newly-rising YouTube discourse poses an empirical niche. As far as language planning and policy is concerned, YouTubers are both passive because they are affected by language implementation and active because they
175
potentially influence the audience‘s attitudes toward language implementation. YouTubers‘
discourse probably best illustrates the idea that language policies concerns multilayered discourse (Baldauf 2006; Wodak 2006; Johnson 2013; Lawton 2016) in addition to the dichotomous top-down and bottom-up distinction (cf. Kaplan & Baldauf 1997) as Sections 5.1 and 5.2 have presented. YouTubers‘ discourse explicates a market-oriented perspective of language use because they benefit from the new form of knowledge economy by making information available through discourse (Heller 2010a).
As a new occupation, YouTubers illustrate the commodifying process of language because ―the circulation of goods that used to depend (mainly or exclusively) on the
deployment of other kinds of resources now depends on the deployment of linguistic resources‖ (Heller 2010a, 102). The discourse in the two vlogs respectively by RD and SS77
is analyzed because of the following empirical concerns. First, as previously mentioned in Method, they are among the most viewed clips on the bilingual nation policy. Besides, the two vlogs are respectively monologic and dialogic. Analyzing the discourse in both the vlogs reduces possible biased findings caused by the vlogs being monologic or dialogic (cf.
Frobenius 2011; 2014). Most importantly, RD‘s and SS77‘s perspectives differ. Running an English learning channel, RD speaks for those who ‗get‘ what English learning is about. He is also seen as an individual who benefits tremendously from possessing this linguistic capital (Bourdieu 1986; 1991). SS77, a civic commenter, takes a more reserved stance. Although the
176
study makes no attempt to evaluate the Blueprint, how the vlogs transmit related information and how their rationalizations influence their stancetaking is worth the attention. The section starts with discussing how English is ‗profiled‘ in discourse about other countries and about Taiwan in Section 5.3.1. Put differently, the competence of citizens‘ English proficiency becomes a feature of a nation with which people talk about a country. The observation shows a different discursive representation that English is considered globally dominant. This study then addresses how vlogs construct English learning experience as ingroup knowledge in
Section 5.3.2.
5.3.1 „Profiling‟ English
The entrenched association between English and globalization contributes to making English a ‗profile‘ feature to characterize a country. To be specific, individuals get to know a country and its people not merely in terms of population, history and geography, but also with regard to how its people speak English. Such discourse embodies the hegemony of English because English is taken as a language supposedly spoken by all corners of the world.
The long-held belief that English is globally dominant can be manifested in explicit metadiscourse regarding how English is associated with national competitiveness, development, and its people‘s proficiency. This established language ideology is seen in
177
SS77‘s own perspective on official bilingualism14, as shown in (42), and in his description that Japanese speak better English, as presented in (43).
(42) SS77‘s vlog, from 00:05:20 to 00:05:28.
136 SS77 我個人是覺得
(‗Personally,‘)
137 就台灣是個「海島國家」
(‗judging from the fact that Taiwan is an island‘)
138 很依賴「世界貿易」
(‗that relies heavily on world trade‘)
139 還有希望跟更多國家做交流的觀點來看
(‗and that yearns for more frequent contact with more countries,‘)
140 雙語國家這個政策方向感覺是還滿不錯的！
(‗the bilingual nation policy sounds quite great.‘)
141 只是我也滿懷疑最後執行下來
(‗Though I also doubt‘)
142 到底能不能達成這個政策的初衷
(‗whether the policy can achieve what it has originally intended to do.‘) (43) RD‘s vlog, from 00:05:45 to 00:05:58.
246 SS77 但其實 (.) 實際上去日本玩就會發現
(‗But actually [when you] travel in Japan, [you] will know‘)
247 他們年輕人英文超級好的
(‗that young people speak great English.‘)
248 RD 恩恩
(‗Hmm.‘)
249 SS77 我覺得這跟 (.) 國際化其實是有點關係
(‗I think this has something to do with internationalization.‘)
250 他們生活中有非常多的外來的旅客
(‗They have a lot of foreign tourists.‘)
251 RD 對 (.) 對
(‗Right. Exactly.‘)
252 SS77 然後你走在路上你就是會被問
14 The study distinguishes between societal multilingualism and official bi/multilingualism. As Taiwan is essentially multilingual, the terms bilingualism and multilingualism itself is underspecified and confusing.
Therefore, societal bi/multilingualism is used to refer to the current state of language use in Taiwan whereas official bilingualism refers to the debate about English in language planning.
178
(‗And you come across [foreigners] asking you [for information/directions].‘)
253 RD 恩
(‗Hmm.‘)
254 SS77 然後你英文就開始變好
(‗And your English starts to improve.‘)
SS77 states in (42) that Taiwan‘s reliance on international trade makes official bilingualism look 還滿不錯的 hai man bucuo de ‗quite great‘. By saying so, he chains international trade
and cross-border contact with the use of English. SS77 also reveals in RD‘s vlog, shown in (43), that young people in Japan speak better English. He attributes their great English to 跟 國際化其實是有點關係 gen guoji hua qishi youdian guanxi ‗have something to do with internationalization‘ (line 249). SS77 reasons that Japanese come across foreign visitors
frequently and that frequent encounters with foreigners motivate Japanese to speak better English (lines 250-254). It remains unknown whether Japanese do frequently come across foreigners on street. The three events, namely, internationalization (line 249), running into foreign visitors (line 250), and speaking better English (line 254), are phrased as sequential, particularly with the use of 然後 ranhou ‗then‘ in lines 252 and 254 (C.-c. Wang & Huang
2006). This association also presupposes that foreigners can speak English. The presupposition reveals how the notions of ‗foreignness,‘ ‗internationalization,‘ and ‗speaking English‘ are bundled together (see the related discussion about ‗foreign‘ labels and linguistic performance in Lee and Su (2019)). Encounters with foreign visitors asking for information are phrased as a motive that urges Japanese to improve their English. J.S.-Y. Park (2009) has
179
discussed the similar scenarios in South Korea where South Korean are required to obtain English just in case they run into a foreigner. This ‗obligation‘ to speak English to foreigners, rather than foreign visitors speaking local languages, reveals the anxiety which non-native English-speaking countries face. Blommaert et al. (2005) have suggested that space can work as an agent that determines regimes of language use and competence. Studies have also shown that various sociopragmatic concerns determine language choices (Rampton 1995;
Eckert 2000; Myers-Scotton & Bolonyai 2001). The overgeneralization of feeling obligated to speak English in a non-Anglophone country accentuates how dominant English is in crosslinguistic interaction.
The perceived global status of English is also observed in how different countries are understood and described in relation to the spread of English. Such discourse suggests that English can be used as a reference to say something about a country. Regardless of the different status individual countries give to English, the act that one can always understand a country concerning the spread of English presupposes that the dominance of English reaches everywhere. SS77‘s examples of Nordic countries, Ghana and Singapore, are presented in (44) and (45).
(44) SS77‘s vlog, from 00:03:36 to 00:03:44.
94 SS77 好比說是瑞典啊 (.) 丹麥這些北歐國家
(‗Take Nordic countries like Sweden and Denmark for example.‘)
95 英文也都不是他們的官方語言
(‗English is not their official language,‘)
180
96 但他們的人民也能具備不錯的英語能力
(‗but their people also have fairly good command of English.‘)
97 而且 (.) 國家競爭力也都還滿強的
(‗And these countries are also globally competitive.‘) (45) SS77‘s vlog, from 00:05:47 to 00:06:15
150 SS77 像是迦納這個西非國家
(‗Like Ghana, this West African country‘)
151 因為之前曾被英國殖民
(‗was previously colonized by the British,‘)
152 所以獨立後也一直以英語作為官方語言
(‗so English has served as the official language after Ghana‘s independence.‘)
153 即使它在西非算是發展相當不錯的國家
(‗Even though the country develops fairly well in Western Africa,‘)
154 但是在這種語言政策的數十年影響下來
(‗under the influence of such a language policy for decades,‘)
155 國內許多人民也都變得不太會使用自己原有的語言
(‗their people become less proficient in their native languages.‘)
156 這也使得迦納政府在幾年前曾提出一條政策
(‗This caused the government of Ghana to propose a policy a few years ago,‘)
157 規定公立的中小學教育不再使用英語授課
(‗and to stop primary and secondary public schools from lecturing in English.‘)
158 目的似乎就是要保存自身的語言文化
(‗The policy seems to aim to preserve their languages and cultures‘)
159 對抗殘留許久的殖民化陰影
(‗and to fight against the colonization legacy.‘)
The two excerpts from SS77 regard how people in these countries speak good English, a scenario Taiwan has long sought to achieve. Nordic countries in Excerpt (44) serve as an example of how their people speak great English and enjoy national competitiveness without legitimizing English. It needs to be pointed out that the understanding however remains stereotypical. Phillipson (2001) reflects on the laissez-faire attitudes toward English in
181
Denmark and calls for an imperialistic awareness of English. The laissez-faire perspective values the harmonious, idealized function division between English and one‘s native
languages. It neglects the potentially threatening influence English should have to indigenous languages. Bolton and Kuteeva (2012) investigate how using English as a medium of instruction in Swedish tertiary education is pragmatic on the one hand but threatening on the other. These counties also face their own issues with regards to language policies about English. Ghana, as seen in (45), is described to be caught in possible native language demise as a consequence of the British colonization. The country‘s current development is related to
languages. It neglects the potentially threatening influence English should have to indigenous languages. Bolton and Kuteeva (2012) investigate how using English as a medium of instruction in Swedish tertiary education is pragmatic on the one hand but threatening on the other. These counties also face their own issues with regards to language policies about English. Ghana, as seen in (45), is described to be caught in possible native language demise as a consequence of the British colonization. The country‘s current development is related to