The focus of the study is to investigate how proficiency of English as a social variable affects individuals’ conceptualizations of English. The study is aimed at looking into (1) general language ideology of English, (2) language ideology revealed through semi-direct responses to interview questions, (3) proficiency as a social variable in influencing language ideology of English, and (4) the conflicts between the two types of language ideology. The data were gathered chiefly through interviews.
In total, thirty eight informants participated in the study. Among the 38 interviewees, fourteen are English users and twenty four of them are non-English users. They were presented questions regarding personal information, English use, and attitudinal perceptions of English.
129
The data were identified as two major types. The conceptualizations of English in direct responses to interview questions have been presented in Chapter 4. The conceptualizations correspond largely to what has been found in past studies. The second category regards conceptualizations revealed through semi-direct responses. In this category, interviewees were usually narrating an event related to what they have been inquired. The interview data were taken as non-linear.
7.1.1 Language ideology of English as a necessity
English as a necessity is found to be the foremost language ideology of English in Taiwan. All the interviewees overtly affirm the necessity for Taiwanese to acquire English. The prevailing language ideology is also apparent in informants’ positive perceptions of proficient English users and deprecation of incompetence in English. It is found that English users are conceived as more privileged than non-English users.
This prominence of English in Taiwan is still mostly attributed to symbolic and instrumental values which English is thought to possess. Through implementation of language policies and the exposure to Western culture, English projects strongly positive images. Additionally, as a language required at a global scale, English is thought to be as a pre-condition to upward mobility. Consequently, English contains rich indexical values. The values of English further accelerate and reinforce the positive images that English projects or is thought to project.
English as a necessity is the foremost language ideology held by both English users and non-English users. In fact, English users and non-English users bear similar conceptualizations of English. Yet, English affects how English users and non-English users position themselves in relation to each other in globalized contexts. Therefore, English users and non-English users are different in reasons and ways how English is
130
considered positive. English filters out non-English users’ engagement in activities mediated via English at global scales. Though both English users and non-English users view English as something necessary, English users do not connect English and globalization in direct and causal relations. At a local level, English is linguistic capital because it project predominantly positive images and indexes to socioeconomic status. English users are thus appreciated and considered more competitive in labor market by non-English users. However, English users are less willing to recognize themselves as more privileged are more inclined to perceive English to be a neutral tool for the development of international perspectives.
Comparatively, non-English users hold a more deeply-rooted notion of English being instrumental.
7.1.2 Language ideology in semi-direct responses
Compared with explicitly described language ideology which corresponds largely to public market values, language ideology emergent in interaction reveals individuals’ inclination toward private market values. Both English users and non-English users are pressured to display competence at a global context. The responsibility for accommodation shows that English at a global scale is internalized.
Owing to conceptualizations of English being foreign and global, individuals usually roll their eyes when hearing English in private contexts. Contexts determine the preferred codes and rule out other languages. Standard language ideology, individuals’
preference for an idealized language form, is manipulated by hearers to either recognize or invalidate one’s legitimacy of English. These findings demonstrate that recognition of competence is context-sensitive (Blommaert et al. 2005) and that English is not as wholeheartedly valued and embraced as the majority of informants
131
have claimed.
Similar to language ideology in direct response to interview questions, English users and non-English users again demonstrate seemingly identical ideology in semi-direct responses. Ownership of English plays a determinant role in shaping the conceptualizations of English. Compared with non-English users, English users are more conscious about the appropriateness of English use even though it has been proposed in the previous chapters that English use and codeswitching may not have much to do with speakers’ proficiency levels. In standard language ideology, English users exploit their legitimacy of English to recognize or incapacitate others’
ownership by identifying how not-American one’s English is. On the other hand, non-English users, who do not claim ownership over English, judge English by identifying how local it is. Despite the fact that standard language ideology is mutually shared by both parties, ownership of English determines how individuals evaluate English. In accommodation to both public and private contexts, English users seem to be loaded with more obligations to abide and conform to codes in various contexts. It shows that meeting private market values is as demanding as meeting public ones.
7.1.3 Proficiency as a variable
Proficiency levels are found to influence language ideology. First of all, English functions as a marker which differentiates English users and non-English users and makes the differentiations socially meaningful. Furthermore, both English users and non-English users position themselves differently in relation to the other.
Consequently, non-English users admire English users while English users are busy preventing themselves from looking arrogant. Second, although both English users
132
and non-English users hold standard language ideology, they differ from each other in how they apply the ideology to evaluate English they hear. Furthermore, ownership of English also refers to the allocation of responsibilities of conforming to linguistic norms in social contexts. These indicate that proficiency is a significant social variable in influencing language ideology of English.
7.1.4 Discrepancies of language ideology between direct and semi-direct responses
The discrepancies between two levels of language ideology, discussed in Chapter 4 and 5 justifies the necessity to identify different levels of meanings. The major difference between two types of ideology lies in the fact that acculturation of English which has been reiterated in direct response to interview questions is somewhat less emphasized in semi-direct response. One account for such discrepancy points to the degree of consciousness. Individuals are conscious of public market values. Therefore, they could usually specifically and explicitly illustrate their conformation to public market values. During the narrations and the intervals in interviews, relatively relaxed banters may lower interviewees’ acuteness in meeting public market values. Consequently, interviewees may reveal language ideology different from what they explicitly described. The more relaxed contexts may be the reason why excerpts shown in Chapter 5 are mostly narration of events and free chats.
The conflicts between two types of language ideology may be attributable to degree of consciousness.