An Investigation of Language Endangerment from the Perspective of Speakers’
Choices — a Case Study of Nantong Dialect
by
Xiong Ying
Under the Supervision of
Professor Chen Xinren & Dr. Don Snow
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Master of Arts
English Department
School of Foreign Studies
Nanjing University
May 10, 2010
I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and that, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by
another person or material which has to a substantial extent been accepted for the
award of any other degree or diploma at any university or other institute of higher
learning, except where due acknowledgement has been made in the text.
Signature: ____________
Name:
Xiong Ying
Date:
May 10, 2010
Acknowledgements
I would like to take this opportunity to express my heartfelt gratitude to those
who have offered me all kinds of help in completing this thesis.
My greatest thanks should first be extended to my supervisor, Dr. Don Snow, who
has helped me all the way through the design, development and revision of the thesis,
by reading my drafts patiently time and again and offering valuable advice either on
proposal designing and thesis revision. It is due to his sincere encouragement,
insightful suggestion and patient guidance that this thesis can finally assume its shape.
I am also indebted to Professor Chen Xinren, who has acquainted me with the theories
in linguistics and given me valuable advice on choosing thesis topic and how to
analyze the data.
Thanks should also go to my classmates who have provided me with good
suggestions on how to improve my ideas during the one-year seminar. They are Dai
Caihong, Chen Ting, Hu Junhua, Wu Qi, Yuan Yuan, Zhang Xue and Zhou Lijian,
Finally, I want to give special thanks to my parents for their love and support all
these years and to my husband and son for their warm encouragement at any time.
X. Y.
ii
南京大学研究生毕业论文英文摘要首页用纸
THESIS:
An Investigation of Language Endangerment from the Perspective of
Speakers’ Choices—a Case Study of Nantong Dialect
SPECIALIZATION: English Linguistics and Literature
POSTGRADUATE:
Xiong Ying
MENTORS: Professor Chen Xinren & Dr. Don Snow
The majority of languages in the world are now faced with the threat of
extinction. Linguists express their great concern over the language endangerment
issue and advocate that endangered languages, like endangered species, should be
saved at all costs. They argue that the value of saving languages mainly lies in two
facts: we need linguistic diversity and languages are strong markers of identity. They
have proposed five key measures to save endangered languages. However, linguists
are looking at this issue from their own perspectives. They neglect one important
factor, i.e. speakers. In this paper, taking Nantong dialect as a case study, we examine
how local speakers feel toward the decline of their dialect and whether they think
something should be done to revitalize it. We go deep into the inner reasons for
speakers’ attitudes. In this way, we try to find out whether linguists’ arguments for the
value of saving languages and their revitalization measures are applicable to Chinese
dialects and how far we should go in saving endangered languages/dialects. The
major findings are summarized as follows:
1. Nantong dialect is receding in the face of Mandarin. It can be identified as being
between definitely endangered and severely endangered with regard to
intergenerational language transmission, shifts in domains of language use and
response to new domains and media.
2. From the interviews, it can be seen that the majority of local speakers are using
Nantong dialect without caring much about promoting it. Three reasons are
responsible for their negative attitudes toward the dialect: Nantong dialect is
perceived as of less utility than Mandarin; Nantong dialect is perceived as of less
beauty, lower status and more difficulty than Mandarin; local speakers enjoy a
tradition of welcoming language contact of any kind.
3. Generally speaking, the local speakers are not in favor of the revitalization
measures proposed by linguists. They do not think these measures necessary or
practical though it is interesting that many are open to the idea of elective courses
about Nantong dialect.
These findings suggest that there is a great discrepancy between what the linguists
believe and what the local speakers think. Linguists believe that languages are worth
saving mainly because we need linguistic diversity and languages are strong markers
of identity and that something should be done to save endangered languages at all
costs. However, in the case of Nantong dialect, linguistic diversity and identity fail to
be the key factors in sustaining Nantong dialect. Moreover, the revitalization
measures proposed by linguists are not favored by speakers either. This indicates that
the linguists’ arguments for the value of saving endangered languages may not be
applicable to Chinese dialects since preserving a particular Chinese dialect means
preserving a distinct pronunciation and a small number of distinct vocabularies and
the dialect may not be seen as the only or strongest identity marker by speakers. In
this context, whatever effort the linguists make, it may come to nothing. Therefore, it
may be reasonable to suggest that linguists, as outsiders, can try to help speakers to
maintain their language, but only if the speakers want to. Instead of saving
endangered languages at all costs, what the linguists can do is document the language
and hope that the descendants may later find some use for their material.
Key Words: language endangerment, linguistic diversity, identity, speakers’ choice
南京大学研究生毕业论文中文摘要首页用纸
毕业论文题目：
从说话者选择的角度探讨语言濒危现象
——以南通话为例
英语语言文学
专业
2007 级
指导教师 （姓名、职称）
：
硕
陈新仁
士生姓名：熊英
教授
Dr. Don Snow
和濒危物种一样，世界上的大量语言正濒临灭绝。语言濒危现象引起了语言
学家的高度重视，他们认为语言的多样性和物种的多样性同样不可或缺。同时他
们还认为语言是一个集团身份的标识，语言的灭亡意味着身份的丢失。因此他们
号召大家应该不惜一切代价拯救濒危语言，这一号召得到了世界诸多语言机构的
呼应。然而语言学家仅是从自己研究的角度论证了拯救濒危语言的必要性，他们
忽略了在语言保护过程中起决定性作用的因素，即说话者的态度。在中国，由于
国家大力普及普通话，地方方言的使用相应地日渐衰落。本文以南通方言（南通
市区话）为例，针对南通话日渐衰落的现象，对二十位南通当地人进行了面对面
的采访。主要了解他们对待这一现象的态度以及抱有这种态度的内在原因，同时
还了解他们是否认为有必要去复兴南通话。我们将说话者的态度与语言学家的观
点进行对比，以此论证语言学家的观点是否适用于中国的汉语方言环境，以及我
们究竟应该在多大程度上来进行濒危语言的拯救工作。主要的发现如下：
1．南通话正在衰落。在家庭里，父母更多地使用普通话与孩子交流，普通话不
仅进入家庭，而且成为各种正式场合的使用语:如学校、工作单位、新闻媒体
等。根据联合国教科文组织制定的六项测量语言濒危程度的指标，南通话可
鉴定为严重濒危。
2．90%的受访者清楚地表明他们并不在乎南通话的衰落，部分人甚至表示可以
弃用南通话，改讲普通话。他们认为：学好普通话是当今社会的需要，普通
话水平的高低会对学习和工作产生直接的影响；南通话对于外人来说是非常
晦涩难懂的语言，听起来不如普通话或吴语好听，而且讲普通话意味着一个
人受过良好的教育或是有一份体面的工作。另外，南通由于位于江淮官话和
吴方言的交汇地，南通人长期处于多种方言相互接触的环境中，因而他们对
于普通话的接受速度更快。同时，他们并不认为他们会因为不讲南通话而丢
失南通人的身份，他们认为一个人的成长地是比语言更重要的身份标识。
3．大部分的受访者不赞同语言学家提出的关于拯救语言的五项措施，他们认为
在当地实行这些措施是不实际或没有必要的。不过有趣的是，他们认为将南
通方言作为一门选修课程倒是一项不错的建议。
以上发现表明，说话者对语言濒危现象的看法与语言学家的看法可能会有很
大的出入。语言学家用以支撑自己观点的两个要素——语言多样性和语言是身份
的标识都没能得到说话者的认同，而且语言学家提出的拯救濒危语言的措施也没
有得到说话者的支持。在这种情况下，无论语言学家为拯救濒危语言作出多大的
努力，其效果也将是不明显的。这就说明了为什么语言规划和拯救措施有时达不
到预期的效果。我们认为，由于说话者对其语言的态度是决定语言兴衰的关键因
素，因此语言学家作为局外人并不能改变语言的命运，他们可以做的事情就是将
语言记录下来，以期日后能有所用。
关键词： 语言濒危， 语言多样性， 身份识别， 说话者的选择
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................. ii
Table of Contents............................................................................................................................... ii
Lists of Tables and Figures .............................................................................................................. v
Chapter One
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................1
1.1
Issue under Investigation ................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Significance of the Present Study..................................................................................... 2
1.3
Overall Structure of the Thesis ......................................................................................... 3
Chapter Two
LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................5
2.1 Language Endangerment: Definition and Assessment ..................................................... 5
2.1.1 Definition of language endangerment ...................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Assessment of degrees of language endangerment ............................................. 6
2.2
Introduction to Language Endangerment Research...................................................... 9
2.3 Arguments for the Value of Saving Languages .................................................................. 9
2.3.1 The need of linguistic diversity ................................................................................ 10
2.3.2 Languages as strong markers of identity ............................................................... 12
2.4 Arguments for What Should Be Done ............................................................................... 15
2.4.1 The documentation of endangered languages ......................................... 15
2.4.2 The promotion of endangered languages in schooling .............................. 16
2.4.3 More presence of endangered languages in the media ............................. 17
2.4.4 The active role played by governments at all levels .................................. 18
2.4.5 The improvement of local speakers' living conditions ................................ 19
2.5 Speakers' Attitudes toward Language Endangerment and Maintenance .............. 20
2.6 A brief Introduction to Nantong Society .......................................................... 21
2.7 Introduction to Nantong Dialect ..................................................................... 22
2.7.1 The linguistic uniqueness of Nantong dialect ........................................... 22
2.7.2 Vitality of Nantong dialect ..................................................................... 24
Chapter
Three
METHODOLOGY............................................................ 26
3.1 Research Questions ......................................................................................................... 26
iii
3.2 Subjects.............................................................................................................................. 27
3.3 Instruments ........................................................................................................................ 28
3.4 Data Collection and Analysis........................................................................................... 28
Chapter Four
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................ 30
4.1 Endangerment Degree of Nantong Dialect ................................................................... 30
4.1.1 Intergenerational language transmission ........................................................... 30
4.1.2 Shifts in domains of language use ...................................................................... 34
4.1.3 Response to new domains and media ............................................................... 35
4.2 Local Speakers’ Attitudes toward the Decline of Nantong Dialect............................. 36
4.2.1 Classification of the local speakers’ attitudes .................................................... 36
4.2.2 Factors that lead to the local speakers’ negative attitudes ............................. 37
4.3 Local Speakers’ Attitudes toward the Revitalization Measures................................ 42
4.3.1 The five major revitalization measures ............................................................... 42
4.3.2 Local speakers' attitudes toward the five measures ........................................ 43
4.4 Insights for the Study of Language Endangerment .................................................... 46
4.4.1 The vadility of linguists’ arguments for the value of saving endangered
languages ............................................................................................................... 46
4.4.2 How far we should go in saving endangered languages ......................... 49
Chapter Five
CONCLUSION ..................................................................... 51
5.1 Major Findings of the Study ........................................................................................... 51
5.2 Limitations of the Study .................................................................................................. 53
5.3 Directions for Further Research ................................................................................... 53
References
Appendix : Questions of the Interviews
iv
Lists of Tables and Figures
Tables
Table 2.1 Intergenerational Language Transmission .............................................................. 6
Table 2.2 Proportion of Speakers within the Total Population
............................................................................................................................................................. 7
Table 2.3 Shifts in Domains of Language Use .......................................................................... 7
Table 2.4 Response to New Domains and Media ...................................................................... 8
Table 2.5 Accessibility of Materials for Language Education and Literacy ........................ 8
Table 4.1 Dialects Young Parents Speak to Their Children at Home.................................. 31
Table 4.2 Distribution of Speakers’ Attitudes toward the Decline of NT Dialect ............ 37
Figures
Fig. 1: Geographic Distribution of NT Dialect and Its Surrounding Dialects
......................................................................................................................................... 23
v
Chapter One
Introduction
On January 21, 2008, the Eyak language of Alaska died with its last fluent speaker
Marie Smith Jones. The world mourned the loss of another language. Unfortunately,
Eyak is not alone among the languages in the world in being near extinction. As
Michael Krauss (1992) predicts, “The coming century will see either the death or the
doom of 90% of mankind’s languages.” Stark as it sounds, his prediction seems to be
turning into a reality. Considering linguists’ estimation that there are around 6,000
languages in the world, even if half of them become extinct during this century, “at
least one language must die, on average, every two weeks or so” (Crystal， 2000: 19).
1.1 Issue under Investigation
Languages, like species, arise, flourish, decay and become extinct, and this is a
process that has been going on since the beginning. However, language extinction on
a massive and unprecedented scale is recent. By some counts, only 600 of the 6,000 or
so languages in the world are ‘safe’ from the threat of extinction. By the end of this
century, the world will be dominated by a small number of major languages.
Witnessing the rapid demise of most of the world's languages, linguists express their
great sorrow and feel it their responsibility to do something. Krauss (1992) in the
same paper poses the question: “What are we linguists doing to prepare for this or to
prevent this catastrophic destruction of the linguistic world?” Linguists around the
world did respond to him. In 1993, the United Nations adopted the “Endangered
Languages Project” including the “Red Book of Endangered Languages.” In 1995 an
International Clearing House for Endangered Languages was inaugurated at the
University of Tokyo. The same year, an Endangered Language Fund was set up in the
1
USA. “There has never been such a universal upsurge of professional linguistic
concern” (Crystal， 2000: preface). Linguists spare no effort to publicize the fact that
language endangerment is a serious problem threatening the human world and call for
the world to take measures to save endangered and dying languages.
However, linguists are looking at this issue from their own perspectives. Their
passionate engagement in language revitalization and eagerness to preserve languages
prevent them from taking into consideration one important factor, i.e. speakers. A
language is not a self-sustaining entity and can only exist where there are speakers to
speak and transmit it. If the speakers choose not to transmit their language to children
and switch to another language, their mother tongue will inevitably decline and even
die out. Speakers’ choices are the key factor in the fate of a language.
In the age of globalization, the world is undergoing a process by which regional
economies, societies, and cultures have become integrated through a globe-spanning
network of communication. It is the same with languages. Speakers of small
languages tend to abandon their mother tongues and switch to more dominant ones.
When speakers voluntarily give up their own language and switch to another one, they
are always accused by linguists of committing language suicide. However, things are
not that simple. People do not kill themselves on a whim. Suicide is indicative of
mental and often physical illness brought about by undue stress. Likewise, people do
not abandon their languages for no good reason. There must be a complicated
mechanism underlying speakers’ attitudes. Taking Nantong dialect as a case study, we
will examine how local people feel toward the decline of their mother tongue and
whether they think something should be done to revitalize it. We will go deep into the
inner reasons for speakers’ attitudes. In this way, we will try to find out whether
linguists’ arguments for the value of saving languages and their revitalization
measures are applicable to Chinese dialects and how far we should go in saving
endangered languages.
1.2 Significance of the Present Study
The significance of the present study lies in two facts. One is that we are looking
2
into a dialect rather than a minority language. The other is that we add a new
perspective, i.e. speakers’ attitudes, to the research topic.
When it comes to language endangerment, attention is always paid to endangered
minority languages. Dialects are neglected as research subjects. However, “dialects
are just as complex as languages in their sounds, grammar, vocabulary, and other
features.” “Dialect death is language death, albeit on a more localized scale” (Crystal,
2000: 38). In China, the language of the Han Chinese is classified into seven groups:
Mandarin, Wu, Gan, Xiang, Min, Hakka and Yue (Cantonese), which are known in
Chinese as fangyan, usually but somewhat inaccurately translated as “dialect.” To a
large degree, these various varieties share a common written form (although there are
written forms of Cantonese, Min and some Wu dialects, the speakers of these dialects
usually use the same written form of Chinese) and are mainly distinct in their
pronunciations and vocabularies. Standard Mandarin, known as Putong Hua, is the
“common speech.” “While none of these major varieties is endangered, there are local
Han varieties, which are.” Within the major fangyan, there are various “tuyu” or
“tuhua” (local vernaculars), many of which are “receding in the face of nearby urban
varieties and/or standard Mandarin, though people retain an ability to switch back and
forth” (Bradley, 2005: 6). Therefore, Li Jingfang (2005) suggests that when discussing
language endangerment issue in China it is necessary to add a new concept, i.e.
“endangered dialects.”
Linguists have advocated that languages are worth saving and should be saved at
all costs. They are looking at this issue from their own perspectives. In this paper, we
try to reexamine this issue from speakers’ perspectives. We will try to find out
whether there is a discrepancy between speakers’ perspectives and linguists’ and what
factors are responsible for this discrepancy. What is more, based on this study, we can
judge whether the linguistic diversity argument and identity argument are applicable
to Chinese dialects. In other words, we will try to check the validity of linguists’
arguments about the value of saving languages and what should be done.
1.3 Overall Structure of the Thesis
3
The thesis consists of five chapters. The beginning chapter provides a general
description of what the issue is and why this issue is significant. Chapter Two gives a
review of the relevant literature, which includes definition of the major terms,
linguists’ arguments about the value of saving languages and what should be done,
and a summary of information on Nantong society and Nantong dialect. Chapter
Three describes the methodology adopted in the present study, including the research
questions, subjects, instruments, data collection and data analysis. Chapter Four
presents the results of the study and discusses the major findings in the sequence of
the research questions. The last chapter is the conclusion part, summarizing the whole
study, pointing out the limitations of this study and discussing the implications for
existing studies.
4
Chapter Two
Literature Review
This chapter is organized in seven sections. First, the definition and assessment of
language endangerment are introduced. The second section is a brief introduction to
language endangerment research. The third and fourth sections elaborate the linguists’
arguments for the value of saving endangered languages and what should be done.
The fifth section explores the role of speakers’ attitudes in language endangerment
and maintenance. The sixth section gives a brief introduction to Nantong society and
the last section gives a brief description to Nantong dialect: its linguistic uniqueness
and vitality.
2.1 Language Endangerment: Definition and Assessment
2.1.1 Definition of language endangerment
Linguists define the term “language endangerment” in different ways.
In the document “Language Vitality and Endangerment” issued by UNESCO in
2003, “language endangerment” is defined in this way: “A language is endangered
when it is on the path towards extinction. A language is in danger when its speakers
cease to use it, use it in an increasingly reduced number of communicative domains,
and cease to pass it on from one generation to the next. That is, there are no new
speakers, either adults or children.”
Instead of giving a general definition to this term, other linguists (Bauman, 1980;
Kincade, 1991: 160-3; Krauss, 1992: 4; Wurm, 1998: 192) find it necessary to
compare levels of language endangerment when defining it. Of them, Wurm’s
five-level model of status is most typical: potentially endangered languages begin to
lose child speakers; endangered languages have few or no children learning the
5
language, and the youngest good speakers are young adults; seriously endangered
languages have the youngest good speakers age 50 or older; moribund languages
have only a handful of good speakers left, mostly very old; and extinct languages
have no speakers left.
Mari Rhydwen (1998) also provides a relevant perspective: “Loss of language is
what happens when people change their behavior and stop transmitting their language
intergenerationally. It is intimately connected with people and it cannot be treated
simply as an intellectual puzzle to be solved.”
Despite the different definitions, scholars are talking about virtually the same
thing. They are describing different variables contributing to language endangerment.
UNESCO experts attribute language endangerment to reduced number of speakers,
decreasing communicative domains and lack of intergenerational transmission. Wurm
highlights that whether or not a language is endangered or to what degree it is
endangered is determined mainly by its number of users and users’ average age.
Rhydwen’s definition is ecological in character, focusing on the relationships between
people, their environment, and their thoughts and feelings.
2.1.2 Assessment of degrees of language endangerment
In accordance with these definitions, six factors are identified to evaluate a
language’s vitality and state of endangerment. The six major evaluative factors are: (1)
intergenerational language transmission; (2) absolute number of speakers; (3)
proportion of speakers within the total population; (4) shifts in domains of language
use; (5) response to new domains and media, and (6) materials for language education
and literacy (UNESCO, 2003: 8). The following scales can be used to appraise
degrees of endangerment. (UNESCO, 2003: 7-11)
Table 2.1 Intergenerational Language Transmission
6
Degree
Endangerment
of Grade Speaker Population
Safe
5
Unsafe
4
Definitely
Endangered
Severely
Endangered
Critically
Endangered
3
Extinct
0
2
1
The language is used by all age groups, including
children.
The language is used by some children in all domains;
it is used by all children in limited domains.
The language is used mostly by the parental
generation and upwards.
The language is used mostly by the grandparental
generation and upwards.
The language is known to very few speakers, of
great-grandparental generation.
There are no speakers left.
Table 2.2 Proportion of Speakers within the Total Population
Degree
of Grade Proportion of Speakers within the Total
Endangerment
Reference Population
Safe
5
All speak the language.
Unsafe
4
Nearly all speak the language.
Definitely endangered
3
A majority speak the language.
Severely endangered
2
A minority speak the language.
Critically endangered
1
Very few speak the language.
Extinct
0
None speak the language.
Table 2.3 Shifts in Domains of Language Use
Degree
of Grade
Endangerment
Safe
5
Unsafe
4
Definitely
3
endangered
Severely
endangered
Critically
endangered
2
Extinct
0
1
Domains and Functions
The language is used in all domains and for all
functions
Two or more languages may be used in most social
domains and for most functions; the ancestral language
usually is rare in the public domain
The ancestral language is used in home domains and
for many functions, but the dominant language begins
to penetrate home domains.
The language is used in limited social domains and for
several functions.
The language is used only in very restricted domains
and for a very few functions.
The language is not used in any domain at all.
7
Table 2.4 Response to New Domains and Media
Degree
Endangerment
of Grade New Domains and Media Accepted by the
Endangered Language
Safe
5
The language is used in all new domains.
Unsafe
4
The language is used in most new domains.
Definitely Endangered 3
The language is used in many domains.
Severely Endangered
2
The language is used in some new domains.
Critically Endangered
1
The language is used in only a few new domains.
Extinct
0
The language is not used in any new domains.
Table 2.5 Accessibility of Materials for Language Education and Literacy
Degree
of Grade Accessibility of Written Materials
Endangerment
Safe
5
Unsafe
4
Definitely
3
Endangered
Severely
2
Endangered
Critically
1
There is an established orthography and literacy tradition
with fiction and non-fiction and everyday media. The
language is used in administration and education.
Written materials exist and at school children are
developing literacy in the language. The language is not
used in written form in the administration.
Written materials exist and children may be exposed to
the written form at school. Literacy is not promoted
through print media.
Written materials exist but they may be useful only for
some members of the community. Literacy education in
the language is not a part of the school curriculum.
A practical orthography is known to the community and
some material is being written.
Endangered
Extinct
0
No orthography is available to the community.
Two things are worth mentioning here. One is that this assessment system also
applies to the evaluation of dialect vitality. The other is that none of these factors
should be used alone to assess a language’s vitality since a language that is ranked
highly according to one criterion may deserve immediate and urgent attention on
account of other factors.
8
2.2 Introduction to Language Endangerment Research
The last two decades have witnessed rapid development in the field of language
endangerment. Linguists attach more and more importance to the study of endangered
languages as they are vanishing at an unprecedented speed. Numerous scholarly
works as well as papers have been published. Among them, the most influential ones,
to name a few, include Endangered Languages by Lenore A. Grenoble & Lindasay J.
Whaley (1998), Language Endangerment and Language Maintenance by David and
Maya Bradley (2002), Language Death by David Crystal (2000), Vanishing Voices by
Daniel Nettle & Suzanne Romaine (2000) and Language Endangerment and
Language Revitalization by Tasaku Tsunoda (2006). The first two are collections of
papers by different authors, providing a diversity of opinion and subject matter. The
books by Crystal and Nettle & Romaine cover similar ground--for example, they both
exploit why we should care about language death and what can be done, although the
former is more popular while the latter more academic. Tsunoda has a comprehensive
literature review of the language endangerment issue in his book, which can serve as a
manual for those interested in this topic.
Although the works mentioned above deal with a variety of aspects of the
language endangerment issue, in accordance with our goal of research, in this section
we will mainly address two relevant questions: Is language endangerment a problem?
What should be done to revitalize endangered languages? Linguists have been
endeavoring to answer these questions. Although opinions are divided, most linguists
believe that language endangerment does matter and we need to and can do something
to reverse this process.
2.3 Arguments for the Value of Saving Languages
To the question “Is language endangerment a problem” or “Should we care”, the
answer given by linguists is a resounding YES. Crystal (2000: preface ix) advocates
that “everyone should be concerned, because it is everyone’s loss” and that “the plight
of the world’s endangered languages should be at the top of any environmental
linguistics agenda.” Fishman (2000: 23) sounds even more anxious in his statement
9
that “when the words of all people become one, then the world will come to an end.
Our language is holy, and when it is gone, the good in life will be gone with it.” Since
linguists hold dear the value of linguistic diversity and of languages as identity
markers, their opinions stand squarely on the shoulders of two strong arguments: we
need linguistic diversity and languages are strong markers of identity.
2.3.1 The need of linguistic diversity
2.3.1.1 Linguists’ arguments for linguistic diversity
The value of linguistic diversity has been argued for by linguists, e.g. by Bradley
(2001: 52), Dorian (1993: 5-6), Hale (1992b, 1993:17, 1998), Krauss (1992: 8,
1996:20, 2001:31), Mithun (1998), Miyaoka (2001: 10), Pawley (1991: 10-11),
Thieberger (1990: 341), Trudgill (1991: 66), Tsunoda (1997: 12-13), Woodbury (1998:
234), Wurm (1997, 38) and Yamamoto (2001:335). This view can be classified into
three types: a) linguistic diversity for biodiversity; b) linguistic diversity for the
science of linguistics; c) linguistic diversity for cultural diversity.
a) Linguists tend to draw an analogy between linguistic diversity and biodiversity.
Krauss (1992: 4) compares languages no longer being learned as a mother-tongue by
children to species lacking reproductive capacity. Nettle and Romaine (2000) have a
particular interest in the relationship of language to ecology. They liken languages to
the miner’s canary: where languages are in danger, it is a sign of environmental stress.
The UNESCO expert group on endangered languages clarifies the need to parallel
conservation linguistics with conservation biology (UNESCO, 2003: 7). And Michael
Krauss (2001: 74) has introduced the term “logosphere” to describe the web linking
the world’s languages, analogous to “biosphere”, the web linking the world’s
ecosystems.
The research done by Nettle and Romaine goes a step beyond analogy. Their
research has shown quite striking correlations between areas of biodiversity and areas
of highest linguistic diversity. Accordingly, they introduce the term biolinguistic
diversity: “the rich spectrum of life encompassing all the earth’s species of plants and
animals along with human cultures and their languages” (Nettle and Romaine, 2000:
10
13). Crystal (2000: 32) concludes that the arguments which support the need for
biological diversity also apply to language. To put it another way, the language issue
should attract public attention in the same way as the issue of the environment. (The
contrast in the public awareness of biological and of linguistic diversity can be found
in Hale, 1992a: 1; Krauss, 1992: 7; Rhydwen, 1998: 101-2.)
b) As Nettle and Romaine (2000: 10) state, “linguists need to study as many
different languages as possible if they are to perfect their theories of language
structure and to train future generations of students in linguistic analysis.” Therefore,
Krauss (1992: 8) says: “Obviously, for scientific purposes, it is most urgent to
document languages before they disappear. The urgency increases with the proximity
to extinction. And, within that framework, the more isolated a given language is
genetically or typologically, the more urgent is the need for its documentation.”
c) Another important connection to linguistic diversity is cultural diversity. Crystal
(2000: 34) argues that “if the development of multiple cultures is so important, then
the role of languages becomes so critical, for cultures are chiefly transmitted through
spoken and written languages.” Therefore, Hale (1998: 192) argues that “[language]
endangerment and progressive extinction amount to a catastrophe for human
intellectual and cultural diversity, a disaster comparable in its extent to losses in other
aspects of our environment.”
2.3.1.2 Problems with the linguistic diversity argument
The value of linguistic diversity seems to be one of the linguists’ favorite reasons
for their concern with language endangerment. However, “the value of linguistic
diversity has turned out to be a tricky issue and it needs to be considered carefully.”
(Tsunoda, 2006: 153).
Tsunoda is reasonable. In fact, “the arguments which support the need for
biological diversity cannot apply to language” (Ludden, 2007). Ecology diversity is
the product of biological interdependence and the more complex the ecological
system, the better able it is to withstand disruption. Linguistic diversity, on the other
hand, is a product of social, political and economic isolation. In the time of isolation,
11
each community readily kept to its own language. As smaller social units integrate
into larger social units, the language of the dominant group tends to take over,
whether by force or by choice. However, in the time of globalization, it is not easy for
a community to isolate itself. This is especially true of China, which attaches great
importance to economic development. Spreading Mandarin as the unified language is
one of the ways to promote economic development and therefore, Chinese dialects are
unavoidably receding in face of Mandarin.
In the second type, the linguistic diversity argument is in the main concerned with
the science of linguistics. That could have been interpreted as only self-serving, i.e.
for the survival of linguistics and linguists. Consequently, this argument may not be
supported by community speakers.
Also, this argument may not be applicable to dialects in the Chinese context (here
“Chinese” refers to the language of Han Chinese). As mentioned in the previous
chapter, most of the Chinese dialects are mainly distinct in pronunciation. There are
also lexical differences, i.e., different dialects may use different terms to refer to the
same thing. Therefore, preservation of a Chinese dialect is preservation of a distinct
pronunciation or vocabulary. Then we cannot help wondering whether the diversity of
pronunciations or vocabulary is as worthy of preservation as that of languages argued
for by linguists.
2.3.2 Languages as strong markers of identity
Before we begin the discussion, it is necessary for us to clarify what identity
means. According to Crystal (2000:39), identity is what makes the members of a
community recognizably the same and it is a summation of the characteristics which
make us what we are and not something else—of ‘us’ vs. ‘them’. This summation of
characteristics includes a variety of cultural factors, such as race, religion, social class,
language, music, painting, crafts, costumes and so on.
2.3.2.1 Linguists’ arguments for language as an identity marker
Linguists virtually unanimously agree that language is an identity marker.
12
However, whether language is the most important component of identity is often a
question that gives rise to debate. Tsunoda (2006: 163) reformulates this question as
follows: “Is it possible to be Xmen without Xish?” Controversial as the question is,
some linguists firmly hold that we are what we speak. Of them, Miyaoka (2001: 8)
vehemently argues that: “Once an ethnic group loses its language, even if some
fragments of its material culture (e.g. ethnic costumes, crafts, or whatever) live
on, …the culture may possibly have been lost or, at least, may not be functioning as
an organic whole any longer. In this sense, language may be said to be the last
stronghold of a culture.” Crystal obviously agrees with Miyaoka by stating that
“rituals, music, painting, crafts, and other forms of behavior all play their part; but
language plays the largest part of all” and that “language is the primary index, or
symbol, or register of identity” (2000: 39, 40). Tovey, Hannan, and Abramson
(1989:34) take a similar stance regarding Irish. Nettle and Romaine (2000: 22-23)
report on a Maori leader, Sir James Henare, who expressed sentiments about the
Maori language by saying that “The language is the life force of our Maori culture
and mana [power]. If the language dies, what do we have left to us? Then, I ask our
own people who are we?” Bloch and Trager (1942:5) go much further: “Language …
is not only an element of culture itself; it is the basis for all cultural activities.”
Although Bloch and Tager make an overstatement with the use of “all”, they try to
highlight the way a community is heavily dependent on language for communicating
and interpreting its behaviour. And Crystal (2000: 39) drives this point home:
“Ultimately, to make sense of a community’s identity, we need to look at its
language”.
The view of language as an identity marker is also shared by other researchers, e.g.
Bradley (2001: 152), Crowley (1993: 67), Dixon (1980: 79, 476), Dorian (1999a: 31),
Edwards (1984: 289), Giles, Bourhis, and Taylor (1977: 22), Rouchdy (1989a: 95-96),
and Thieberger (1990: 337-341) (cited from Tsunoda 2006: 141).
2.3.2.2 Problems with the identity argument
The linguists have been trying to convince us that languages are essential to
13
identity and therefore, in order to keep identity, languages must be preserved.
Linguists hold that this is also true of dialects. “Dialects, as shared speech forms, also
serve an identity function, which is probably the strongest factor in valuing dialects. ”
(Tullock, 2005: 15) Like the linguistic diversity argument, the argument for
languages/dialects as identity markers is also the favorite one among linguists.
However, there are two problems with this argument.
First, the presupposition of this argument is that the identity a particular language
represents must be kept. However, there are cases in which speakers are willing to
change to a new identity by switching to another language. For example, in the South
West of the Pakistani Punjab region, there are about 40 millions speakers of a
language called Siraiki. But in order to gain higher social status and better work
treatment, they tend to switch to use English or Urdi (Pakistan’s official language). If
the presupposition is not always true, this argument will lose its solid foundation and
may not hold water. To be specific, if speakers want to change to a new identity, they
may voluntarily choose to abandon their mother tongue and switch to another
language.
Second, while there is often an intimate link between language and identity,
language is not the only important identity marker. Race, social class and religion are
among the other identity markers. For example, the Hui people (回族) are a Chinese
ethnic group typically distinguished by their practice of Islam. While most Hui speak
Mandarin as their first language, they practice Islam and have their distinctive cultural
characteristics. As Muslims, they follow Islamic dietary laws and reject the
consumption of pork, the most common meat consumed in Chinese culture, and have
also given birth to their variation of Chinese cuisine, Chinese Islamic cuisine. Their
mode of dress also differs in that adult males wear white caps and females wear
headscarves or occasionally veils, as is the case in most Islamic cultures. Therefore,
Thieberger (2000: 311) states that “speaking a particular language may be part of
one’s identity, but you do not lose your identity when that language is no longer
spoken.”
As Bradley (2002: 1) states, “whether the group sees their language and its
14
maintenance as a key aspect of the group’s identity” is crucial to language
endangerment. In our study of Nantong dialect, we will examine the local speakers’
attitudes toward their language and identity to see whether the speakers regard
Nantong dialect as the key aspect of their identity and how important the Nantong
identity is to them. Based on this study, we will find out whether linguists’ argument
for language as a strong identity marker is approved by the local speakers of Nantong
dialect.
2.4 Arguments for What Should Be Done
Based on the arguments for the value of saving languages, linguists come to the
conclusion that we must do something to save endangered languages. The measures
proposed by linguists can be summarized as follows: 1) endangered languages should
be documented; 2) endangered languages should be promoted in educational systems;
3) endangered languages should have more presence in modern media; 4) the
government should play an active role in revitalizing endangered languages; and 5)
local speakers’ living conditions and human rights should be improved and respected.
2.4.1 The documentation of endangered languages
Linguists have been conscious of the urgency of documenting endangered
languages. “For scientific purposes, it is most urgent to document languages before
they disappear. The urgency increases with the proximity to extinction. And, within
that framework, the more isolated a given language is genetically or typologically, the
more urgent is the need for its documentation” (Krauss, 1992: 8). For a long time,
linguists have endeavored to document endangered languages by recording their
grammar, lexicon, and corpus of texts. To these traditional methods, contemporary
linguists add documentation on audio- and videotape, which allows endangered
languages to be documented on a larger scale. For example, German scholars plan to
use 4,500 discs to record 230 regional languages and dialects used in German during
1915-1944 (Xu Shixuan, 2003: 146).
Writing down a language includes devising sound and spelling systems, compiling
15
dictionaries and editing textbooks. It is a step that linguists should be trained to do.
Huang Xing (2003) and Zuo Xiulan (2007: 85-86) review China’s efforts to create
and improve writing systems for minority languages. They both emphasize that
introducing writing systems and developing orthographies can increase the mass
literacy in local regions and thus serve the preservation of endangered ethnic
languages. However, this is not applicable to Chinese dialects. As mentioned in the
previous chapter, virtually all Chinese dialects share a common written form.
Therefore, there is no need to devise new writing systems for dialects. But devising a
sound system for a particular dialect has been done by some linguists. For example,
Gu et al. (2006) established sound systems for dialects located in the boundary region
between Jianghuai Mandarin and Wu. However, whether this practice is welcomed by
local speakers remains a question. If not, the speakers will not safeguard or use the
documentation and the linguists’ efforts may come to nothing.
2.4.2 The promotion of endangered languages in schooling
Linguists hold that endangered languages should have more presence in schooling,
which is called mother-tongue education. Mother-tongue education not only refers to
education in endangered languages but also to the teaching of these languages as
school subjects. In this way, children will have more opportunities to be exposed to
their mother tongues, whether in speech or writing. American Indian communities see
formal education not only as a way to lead into the mainstream culture but also as a
way to maintain contact with community values and traditions, i.e. as the best way to
learn the best of two cultures. This kind of bilingual education is considered by some
linguists to be the best way to revitalize endangered languages (Yamamoto, 1992; Xu
Shixuan, 2002; UNESCO 2003).
Linguists also point out that it is important to train local speakers to be language
teachers. Giving basic linguistic and pedagogical training to local intellectuals is one
of the most efficient measures recommended by linguists home and abroad (UNESCO,
2003; Li Jingfang, 2005; Sun Hongkai, 2001; Xu Shixuan, 2003). “Teacher-training is
a critical need, in most endangered situations. Ideally, these teachers would come
16
from the population of fluent speakers left within the indigenous community, and their
training would prepare them to cope with the non-speakers who will form the bulk of
the next generation” (Crystal, 2000: 137). Himmelmann (1998) also suggests that
documentation requires community involvement and preparation of suitable materials
for community use.
Although linguists sound reasonable, it may be difficult to put their ideas into
practice. For example, in China, Standard Mandarin, as the official language, is
promoted all over the country. Education in a local dialect is obviously against this
trend. Thus, it can be expected that this idea will be rejected by both schools and
speakers. However, whether the teaching of dialects as school subjects is acceptable is
less predictable and we will examine this in our study of Nantong dialect.
2.4.3 More presence of endangered languages in the media
Linguists are aware that endangered languages should have more presence in mass
media so that they can be promoted in people’s daily life. Mass media includes TV,
radio, movies and newspapers. In China, early in 1950, sixteen minority languages
began to be used as the program languages of CCTV for those regions or areas with
large minority populations. Now more than twenty minority languages are used on
China’s national radio broadcasting, over thirty on local radio broadcasting. There are
10,430 translated movies and TV programs in minority languages (Zuo Xiulan, 2007:
89). These are considered as effective ways of maintaining the vitality of ethnic
languages. However, considering that there are more than 120 ethnic languages in
China, there are in fact only a very small percentage of ethnic languages that can have
access to media. As mentioned in the introduction chapter, little attention has been
paid to dialect death. Therefore, it might be more difficult for an endangered dialect to
have a regular presence in media.
With the rapid development of information technology, the Internet has become an
indispensable part of people’s life. Linguists also recognize its important role in
revitalizing endangered languages. As Crystal states, “information technology
(IT)—and the Internet in particular—offers endangered languages which have been
17
written down a fresh set of opportunities whose potential has hardly begun to be
explored.” His logic is that while only the ‘better-off’ languages could afford to make
routine use of radio, television or newspaper, everyone is equal with the Internet.
Therefore, “it is perfectly possible for a minority language culture to make its
presence felt on the Internet.” (Crystal, 2000: 142) He also suggests that software
developers need to become more multilingual and more comprehensive coding
conventions for non-Roman alphabets need to be implemented.
However, this is easier said than done. In China, so far only five minority
languages--the Mongolian, Tibetan, Uygur, Korean and Yi languages--have had coded
character sets and national standards for fonts and keyboard (Zuo Xiulan, 2007: 86).
Therefore, Crystal’s statement that every language is equal with Internet may not be
true. This is also proved by Chinese dialects. As already mentioned, virtually all
Chinese dialects share a common written form and are distinct in pronunciation and
vocabulary. Therefore, to have more presence in Internet -- for example, to establish
websites written in dialects or to develop multi-dialectal software -- is not practical
for Chinese dialects.
2.4.4 The active role played by governments at all levels
Linguists propose that governments at various levels should be actively involved
in revitalization projects and carry out language policies in favor of endangered
languages.
First, the government can establish laws or plan policies regarding the protection
of endangered languages. For example, in October 1990, the American Senate passed
the Native American Languages Act, known as Public Law 101-477 (Yamamoto,
1992: 16). Zuo Xiulan (2007: 87-89) reviews the policies carried out by Chinese
government in favor of the use of minority languages. According to her, the minority
people in China are entitled to using their own languages in various fields such as
political selection, administrative management, lawsuits and arbitration, education,
publications and the mass media.
Second, the international world can frequently hold academic conferences or
18
forums to put linguists’ minds together. UNESCO takes the lead in this respect.
In
November 1993, the General Assembly adopted the “Endangered Languages Project”
including the “Red Book of Endangered Languages.” In 1994, in accordance with
UNESCO’s decision, the International Clearing House for Endangered Languages
was established in Tokyo. From November 2001 to March 2003, a group of linguists
and language advocates worked in collaboration with UNESCO to formulate ways of
assessing language vitality and produced a set of guidelines (UNESCO, 2003: 1).
Third, governments can set up national or regional institutes devoted to the study
of endangered languages. Quite a few institutes of this kind have been established in
the western world: The Indigenous Language Institute in the state of New Mexico,
America; Ad Hoc Committee on Endangered Languages in Canada; The Foundation
for Endangered Languages in Britain; Society for Endangered Languages in German
and so on (Xu Shixuan, 2003: 134).
It is not hard to see from the above that governments around the world are in the
main concerned with endangered minority languages. Little attention has been paid to
dialects. We are curious to know how speakers will react if governments take
measures to revitalize dialects.
2.4.5 The improvement of local speakers’ living conditions
In linguists’ opinions, improving local speakers’ living conditions is the
prerequisite for language maintenance. As Mari Rhydwen (1998: 105) argues, “when
basic needs for shelter, food, safety and health are unmet, even thinking about
language maintenance or revival seems like an irrelevant luxury.” Grenoble and
Whaley (1998: 52) make a similar point: economics “may be the single strongest
force influencing the fate of endangered languages.” Due to the economic
disadvantage of certain communities, their languages and cultures may be stigmatized
as being traditional, backward, narrow and inferior. These languages and cultures are
always marginalized, deprived of resources for their development and use.
The point is that if the community is poor, its speakers are liable to shift to a more
powerful language. However, as mentioned in 2.6, Nantong city is an economically
19
healthy city, and thus it should be wealthy enough to guarantee the use of its language.
In other words, if Nantong dialect is losing its vitality, it should not be mainly for an
economic reason. Then this leaves us with a question, i.e., if Nantong dialect is on the
decline, what are the factors that contribute to its decline? We will try to answer this
question in this study.
2.5
Speakers’
Attitudes
toward
Language
Endangerment
and
Maintenance
Members of a speech community are not usually neutral towards their language.
They may see it as essential to their community and identity and promote it; they may
use it without promoting it; they may be ashamed of it and, therefore, not promote it;
or they may see it as a nuisance and actively avoid using it (UNESCO, 2003: 14).
Linguists agree that speakers’ attitudes toward their own language play a decisive
role in the process of language endangerment and language maintenance. As Bradley
(2002: 1) states, “the crucial factor in language [endangerment and] maintenance is
the attitudes of the speech community concerning their language.”
However, what linguists can’t reach agreement on is how they should react to
speakers’ negative attitudes toward their mother tongue. Linguists hotly debate over
whether they should change speaker’s attitudes or whether communities should be left
to make their own decisions. A defense of the former view is presented by Crystal
(2000: 102-115), Nicholas Ostler (1996: 1), Nancy Dorian (1981, 1993) and so on.
Their argument goes as follows: “At some points in their history, members of a
community may opt to give up their language, [and shift to a dominant language to
pursue] a perceived, reasonable, economic goal. The problem comes when that goal
changes or when it is achieved, and so no longer important. [At that time], the old
language is no longer there” (Ostler, 1996: 1). Experts believe that “community
members abandon their language because they do not have enough knowledge about
the long-term consequences of the ‘choices’ they make” (UNESCO, 2003: 15).
Therefore, they hold that linguists should adopt a broader outlook and keep these
languages safe in case that someday speakers change their minds and want to take up
20
their languages again. However, other linguists argue that whether or not to revitalize
a language should be determined by the local community itself and linguists as
outsiders can do nothing but document languages for future use. Bradley argues that
“unless the group itself choose to keep their language, we [linguists] can do nothing
but document the language and hope that the descendants may later find some use for
our material” (Bradley, 2002: 8). Similar opinions are shared by Ladefoged (1992)
and Dai Qingxia (2004). As Dai (2004: 22-23) argues, endangered languages, unlike
endangered animals and plants, cannot be preserved in a particular zone and it should
be up to the community to decide whether or not to maintain their mother tongue;
therefore, the linguists’ main task is to document endangered languages rather than
make every effort to revitalize them.
Both sides have their own arguments. And then which side is more reasonable?
We will try to answer this question in our study of Nantong dialect.
2.6 A Brief Introduction to Nantong Society
Nantong City is one of Jiangsu’s thirteen prefecture-level cities. The
prefecture-level city of Nantong administers three municipal districts and six
county-level cities or counties. The three districts are Chongchuan District, Gangzha
District (崇川区和港闸区) and the Industrial District, known as Nantong. The six
county-level cities or counties include: Tongzhou city (通州市), Haimen city (海门
市), Qidong city (启东市), Rugao city (如皋市), Hai’an county (海安县) and Rudong
county (如东县). In this paper, when “Nantong” is mentioned, it refers to the
municipal area.
Located on the northern bank of the Yangtze River near the river mouth, Nantong
is a vital river port bordering Yancheng to the north, Taizhou to the west, Suzhou to
the south across the river, and the East China Sea to the east. As one of China’s first
fourteen coastal cities permitted to open to international trade and economy, Nantong
has a national reputation of "the First Window on the Yangtze River" and is one of the
national tourist centers. The city is listed on the China’s Top 100 Counties
21
(county-level cities) for its comprehensive strength in economy. With the completion
of the Sutong (Suzhou-Nantong) Yangtze River Bridge in April 2008, the city is
becoming even wealthier due to economic growth and foreign investments in the
Yangtze Delta Economic Zone.
Since Nantong City is located on the northern bank of the Yangtze River, people
in Nantong City are usually labeled as “Jiangbei Ren” (江北人, literally referring to
people who live in the northern areas to the Yangtze River). “Jiangbei Ren”, in
contrast with “Jiangnan Ren” (江南人, literally referring to people who live in the
southern areas to the Yangtze River), is always used to address people in a
contemptuous way since the northern part of Jiangsu Province used to be distressed
areas and are now not as economically developed as the southern part.
2.7 Introduction to Nantong Dialect
2.7.1 The linguistic uniqueness of Nantong dialect
Nantong city and its six counties (or county-level cities) are rich in diversity of
languages. These languages are classified into four groups: Qihai Hua (启海话),
Tongdong Hua (通东话), Ruhai Hua (如海话) and Nantong Hua (南通话) (Bao 2002).
About 2 million people in southern parts of Tongzhou, Haimen and Qidong speak the
Wu dialect, which is often referred to as "Qihai Hua", meaning Qidong-Haimen
speech. It is about the same as the dialect spoken on the island of Chongming, which
is a part of Shanghai city. People in northern parts of these counties speak "Tongdong
Hua", meaning Eastern Tong Talk. People in Rugao, Hai'an and Rudong speak “Ruhai
Hua”, which belongs to Jianghuai Mandarin (江淮官话). People in the city of
Nantong speak Nantong dialect. Fig. 1 demonstrates the geographic distribution of
Nantong dialect and its surrounding dialects.
Nantong Hua or Nantong dialect defies easy classification. As mentioned above,
Nantong is bordering Taizhou to the west, where Jianghuai Mandarin is spoken; and
Suzhou to the south across the river, where Wu dialect is spoken. In other words,
Nantong is located in the boundary region where Jianghuai Mandarin and Wu interact
with each other. Therefore, Nantong dialect is in various ways transitional between
22
these two dialects. On one hand, Nantong dialect contains many words unique to
ancient Wu and sounds like Wu in some vowels and tones; on the other hand, for a
long time in history, Nantong dialect has been influenced by Jianghuai Mandarin. As a
result, Nantong dialect has seven tones while Mandarin only has four. This makes
Nantong dialect sound distinctively different from its surrounding dialects and hardly
intelligible to other dialects. Linguists have been debating whether Nantong dialect
belongs to Jianghuai Mandarin or Wu dialect and some even argue that it defies any
classification due to its unintelligibility. However, according to Simmons, Shi and Gu
(2006: 207), despite the common features it shares with Wu, Nantong dialect still falls
into the category of Jianghuai Mandarin.
Besides its unique pronunciation, Nantong dialect is also distinct in some
vocabulary. For example, “wang li wang kong” (忘里忘空), a word which originates
from Buddhism and now cannot be found in other dialects, is still used in Nantong
dialect, meaning “changing without any reason or evidence”.
Fig. 1: Geographic Distribution of NT Dialect and Its Surrounding Dialects
23
2.7.2 Vitality of Nantong dialect
As mentioned in 2.1.2, the absolute number of speakers and the proportion of
speakers within the total population are two important indicators of language vitality.
According to the statistics in 2008, the population of Nantong is 875,200, one-seventh
of the total population of Nantong City at the prefecture level. To be honest, we still
have no way to identify the accurate number of those who are still speaking Nantong
dialect now. But one thing we can be sure about is that this number must be much less
than 875,200. Absolutely speaking, there might be still a large number of speakers of
Nantong dialect. However, compared with the total population of Nantong City and
that of China (approximately 1.4 billion), this language group is quite small. “A small
speech community is always at risk. A small language group may easily merge with
the dominant society, giving up its own language and culture.”
Materials for language education and literacy are also essential for language
vitality. Nantong dialect used to have a good oral tradition in that the local opera
(Tong Opera) and many children’s folk songs are sung in it. Books and materials on
these topics can still be found. In recent years, the uniqueness of Nantong dialect has
intrigued some linguists, among whom we can find Bao Mingwei, Gu Qian, Richard
Simmons and Tao Guoliang. In their works, such as “Study of Dialects in Nantong
City” (Bao Mingwei 2002), “Chinese Dialect Geography – Distinguishing Mandarin
and Wu in Their Boundary Region” (Simmons, Shi Rujie & Gu Qian, 2006) and
“Dictionary of Nantong Dialect” (Tao Guoliang, 2007), these scholars have made
great effort to transcribe the pronunciation of Nantong dialect by adopting the
international phonetic alphabet. Although these books can be used as learning
materials, they may be useful only for some members of the community who have
interest in their mother tongue; for others, they may just have a symbolic significance.
Also, as we have mentioned, literacy education in local dialects are unlikely to be
accepted in the school curriculum. Therefore, in this respect, Nantong dialect cannot
be said to be safe.
As mentioned before, standard Mandarin (Putong Hua) is promoted all over China.
A general trend is that the use of standard Mandarin is on the increase while the use of
24
dialects is declining. Nantong dialect is also unavoidably receding in the face of
standard Mandarin. Also, given that only those who live in the urban area of Nantong
city speak Nantong dialect, the language group of Nantong dialect is quite small. And
there is a lack of materials for Nantong dialect education and it is unlikely for the
dialect to be accepted in the school curriculum. All these lead to the decline of
Nantong dialect. However, since Nantong is a well-developed society in economy and
culture, Nantong dialect still has a solid economic foundation and it may not fall
sharply. Therefore, Nantong dialect is neither vital nor about to die. This intrigues us
in exploring to what degree Nantong dialect is endangered. We are also eager to know
what speakers’ attitudes are toward the decline of their own dialect and how much
they are interested in language revitalization efforts. Based on this study, we are
aimed at finding out whether or not linguists’ arguments for languages being worth
saving and for revitalization efforts are applicable to Chinese dialects and how far we
should go in saving endangered languages/dialects.
25
Chapter Three
Methodology
This chapter consists of four sections. Section One raises research questions to be
addressed in this study. Section Two provides the background information on the
subjects involved. Section Three describes the instrument. Section Four introduces the
procedure by which the data were collected and analyzed.
3.1 Research Questions
The present study aims to find out whether endangered languages are worth
saving and whether something should be done to revitalize endangered languages. As
mentioned in the previous chapter, the answer given by linguists is a resounding YES.
However, what do speakers of a particular language think about it? We will take
Nantong dialect as a case study to examine the local speakers’ attitudes toward the
decline of their mother tongue and how they react to the revitalization measures
proposed by linguists. We will check whether the speakers’ attitudes are consistent
with those of linguists. If not, who should be the final decision maker for the fate of
the local language? Specifically, the three research questions are as follows:
1. Is Nantong dialect on the decline and to what degree is it endangered?
a. To what degree is Nantong dialect endangered with regard to
intergenerational language transmission?
b. To what degree is Nantong dialect endangered with regard to shifts in
domains of language use?
c. To what degree is Nantong dialect endangered with regard to response to
new domains and media?
26
2. What are the local speakers’ attitudes toward the decline of the dialect? Why?
a. How many types of attitudes do the local speakers harbor and which one
is dominant?
b. What are the factors that lead to this dominant attitude?
3. What are the local speakers’ attitudes toward the revitalization measures
proposed by linguists? Do they think it necessary or practical to carry out
these measures to revitalize Nantong dialect?
a. What are the five major revitalization measures proposed by linguists?
b. How do speakers react to these measures?
By probing into these questions, the study was intended to find out whether
linguists’ arguments about the value of saving endangered languages and what should
be done are applicable to Nantong dialect. We will provide some insights for linguists
into whether their arguments are always true and how far we should go in trying to
save endangered languages/dialects.
3.2 Subjects
The 20 subjects are local speakers of Nantong dialect, who are now living or
working in Nantong. Since intergenerational language transmission is the most
influential factor that contributes to the language vitality, young parents were selected
as the subjects of the study. They are aged between 29 to 44 and their children’s age
ranges from 4 to 11. In other words, the parents were born in 1960s or 1970s and the
children were virtually all born in this century.
Of these 20 subjects, 13 are female and 7 male. We selected more female subjects
than male ones because mothers usually spend more time interacting with children at
home. If mothers do not speak the local dialect to their children, it is quite possible for
the children not to speak it.
For the sake of a variety of opinions, subjects from different careers were chosen.
Among the 20 subjects, there were four school teachers, four IT engineers, three
office ladies, three saleswomen, two civil servants, two researchers and two bank
27
officers.
These subjects all have a relatively good education background. Of the 20 subjects,
five graduated from 2-year colleges; six from 4-year universities; six have master’s
degrees and three doctoral degrees. Well-educated subjects were selected because they
take the lead in the social development and their choices reflect the trend of future
development of the society.
3.3 Instrument
The instrument for this study is face-to-face interview. Although face-to-face
interviews, compared with surveys, take much more time and do not allow a wide
range of subjects, they are more suitable for our study. When conducting face-to-face
interviews, we can ask follow-up questions any time we feel it necessary and thus the
interviewees can express their ideas more clearly. Since our study is probing into the
speakers’ attitudes toward their mother tongue, their clear expression of ideas is very
important.
3.4 Data Collection and Analysis
The interview questions (see Appendix) are all open questions, which can be
summarized into three categories. In the first category, we tried to get some
background information on Nantong dialect, for example, how widely and where it is
used; whether it is used in homes, schools or working places. By asking these
questions, we tried to draw a social map of the use of Nantong dialect. In the second
category, the interviewees were asked about whether they are aware of the decrease in
the use of their mother tongue and how they feel about it and why. The questions of
the third category are concerning the speakers’ attitudes toward the linguists’
proposals. The five proposals were presented to the interviewees and they talked
about whether and why they think each of the proposals necessary or not.
From the answers to the questions of the first category, we can get some idea
about the degree to which Nantong dialect is endangered. Based on the questions of
the second category, we come to know about speakers’ attitudes about the decline of
28
their mother tongue, negative or positive. From the third category, we can find out
whether or not speakers think it necessary to revitalize endangered languages. Based
on the data, we tried to find out whether linguists’ arguments for the value of saving
languages and what should be done are approved by the local speakers of Nantong
dialect and how far we should go in trying to save endangered languages/dialects.
29
Chapter Four
Results and Discussion
This chapter reports the findings of the present study. It consists of four sections.
The first three sections answer the three research questions, respectively. The first
section answers the question concerning how endangered Nantong dialect is. Then,
toward the endangerment of Nantong dialect, what attitudes do the local speakers
harbor? This will be answered in Section Two, which presents three types of local
speakers’ attitudes and explores the factors that lead to the dominant attitude. The
third section reports what local speakers think of the five revitalization measures most
frequently proposed by linguists. The last section discusses what insights these results
can provide for linguists: whether their arguments for the value of saving endangered
languages and what should be done are applicable to Chinese dialects and how far we
should go in saving endangered languages/dialects.
4.1 Endangerment Degree of Nantong Dialect
As discussed in 2.1.2, six factors are used to assess language vitality. Based on
what we have already known of Nantong, we can expect that Nantong dialect is
receding, but it is not so obvious. In the second chapter, we have assessed the vitality
of Nantong dialect with regard to three factors: the absolute number of speakers,
proportion of speakers within the total population and materials for language
education and literacy. In this section, we examine the remaining three factors to
decide how endangered Nantong dialect is.
4.1.1 Intergenerational language transmission
The most commonly used factor in evaluating the vitality of a language is whether
30
or not it is being transmitted from one generation to the next (Fishman, 1991).
According to Krauss (1992:4), “languages no longer being learned as mother-tongue
by children are beyond mere endangerment, for they are already doomed to extinction,
like species lacking reproductive capacity.” With regard to intergenerational language
transmission, endangerment can be ranked on a continuum from stability to extinction
(see table 2.1 in Chapter Two).
Then, where is the position of Nantong dialect on this continuum? To make it
easier to answer, we reformulate this question in the following way: what dialect do
young parents speak to their children at home? The results are shown in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1 Dialects Young Parents Speak to Their Children at Home
Mostly Mandarin, NTD Only Total
Occasionally NTD
Dialect
Mandarin Only
Number
14
3
3
20
Percentage (%)
70
15
15
100
NTD= Nantong dialect
As we can see from Table 4.1, of the 20 interviewees, 14 persons speak to their
children only in Mandarin (70%), 3 mostly in Mandarin but occasionally in Nantong
dialect (15%) and the remaining 3 use Nantong dialect only (15%). Following is a
more detailed description of each situation.
Clearly, the majority of the 20 young parents are speaking to their children in
Mandarin at home. From the interview, we could see that these parents have similar
reasons for their choices. They all want to create a good Mandarin-learning
environment for their children since they are much aware that nowadays a good
mastery of Mandarin is required in daily communication, education and employment.
For example, one of the parents mentions: (Note: Since the interviews were
conducted in Chinese, the quotes of the informants are translated into English based
on the notes.)
31
I speak to my child totally in Mandarin because I hope that he can speak
Mandarin without any local accent. In this way, I can enhance the
opportunities for my child to get a better education and thus help him get
ahead in the majority society.
We also asked these 14 interviewees whether they feel it a pity if their children
cannot speak Nantong dialect, because a dialect may be a strong marker of one’s
identity. Around a third of the interviewees express their regret over it and worry that
the children may lose a sense of belonging without being able to speak their mother
tongue. Although they feel it regrettable that the children cannot speak Nantong
dialect, they say that this is the reality and they are willing to accept it. The other ten
interviewees make it explicit that this is not a pity at all. They say that even if the
children cannot speak Nantong dialect, it does not mean that they will necessarily lose
a sense of belonging. According to them, in the context of Nantong, identity may be
more equal to where one was born and brought up than to what language he or she
speaks. One of the interviewees gives us an example and states:
One of my colleagues came to work in Nantong ten years ago and got
married to a local girl. Now he can speak Nantong dialect fluently, but he
never thinks that he is a native of Nantong. However, although my
daughter cannot speak Nantong dialect, she still thinks of herself as a
native of Nantong. It is just because she was born and brought up here.
From the data, we could also see that there are another two reasons for these
interviewees’ choices.
One is due to the fact that the parents prefer to speak Mandarin themselves.
Virtually all the 14 interviewees mention that their mother tongue is not refined,
sounds unpleasant and is difficult for outsiders to understand. One interviewee shares
his experience with us:
I went to college outside Nantong. Whenever I called my family in the
dormitory and talked with them in Nantong dialect, my roommates would
play a joke on me and asked me whether I was quarrelling with someone in
Japanese. They say that they can not understand a word and ask me why I
32
sound so angry whenever I speak Nantong dialect. I think it is all because
of the hard intonation of Nantong dialect. So I would not speak it in public
if I do not have to.
Also, more than half of the 14 interviewees have mentioned that speaking
Nantong dialect makes them feel inferior to those who speak Mandarin or Wu dialect.
What makes them feel uncomfortable is that even people in Qidong and Haimen, who
speak a variant of Wu dialect, would look down upon them and call them ‘Jiangbei
Ren’ (see 2.6) although Qidong and Haimen are counties that are affiliated with
Nantong city. Therefore, they say that they would like their children to speak
Mandarin from the very beginning so that they would not be treated unfairly.
The other can be attributed to exogamy: one of the parents is a native of Nantong
while the other is from a different area. With the development of Nantong society,
exogamy is increasing. Of the fourteen interviewees, five married non-natives of
Nantong. Since their dialects are unintelligible to each other, the parents have to adopt
Mandarin as the medium of daily interaction. Naturally, when they have children, they
speak to their children in Mandarin too.
It can be seen from the above that there are mainly three reasons for parents to
choose to talk to their children in Mandarin only: 1) Mandarin has a higher utility
value than Nantong dialect; 2) the interviewees disfavor Nantong dialect because it is
unrefined and it reminds them of their less privileged identity; 3) the parents speak to
each other in Mandarin at home.
In the second situation, 3 out of the 20 parents mostly use Mandarin but
occasionally speak Nantong dialect to their children. Interestingly, all the three
interviewees told us that they didn’t begin to speak Nantong dialect to their children
until the children were over 6 years old. They did so because at this time, the children
have had a good mastery of Mandarin and speaking Nantong dialect would not
interfere with their acquisition of Mandarin. Thus, the parents chose to speak Nantong
dialect to their children from time to time in hope that their children will have a basic
understanding of their mother tongue.
In the third situation, three parents choose to only speak Nantong dialect to their
33
children. For this choice, the parents have different reasons. One attributes her choice
to her own speaking habit. Another does this on purpose. She says that this may
increase the use of Nantong dialect. She hopes that her child can speak their mother
tongue fluently because Nantong dialect, as she says, “serves as a link between us and
our hometown.” The third parent is a teacher of Chinese at Nantong University. With
his good knowledge of Chinese dialects, he has deeper reasons for his choice.
According to him, Nantong people should be proud of their mother tongue since its
uniqueness cannot be paralleled by any other dialect (for the discussion of the
uniqueness of Nantong dialect, see 2.7.1). He states that it is lamentable that most of
the children are giving up their unique mother tongue and thus their unique identity.
He also argues that it is because Nantong dialect is pronounced in a distinct way from
Mandarin that speaking Nantong dialect will not pose a threat to the mastery of
Mandarin and it is quite possible for children to be bilingual. Therefore, he suggests
that parents should speak Nantong dialect to their children at home and allow children
to learn Mandarin later at school.
As seen above, since the majority of the parents choose to speak Mandarin to their
children, Nantong dialect is being learned by a small number of children. Most of
the children cannot speak their mother tongue though they may be able to understand
it well. Thus, Nantong dialect is mostly being spoken by parents and the older
generation. In accordance with Table 2.1, Nantong dialect could be characterized as
“definitely endangered” (Grade 3) with regard to Intergenerational Language
Transmission.
4.1.2 Shifts in domains of language use
Where and with whom a language is used and the range of topics speakers can
address by using the language has a direct effect on the transmission to the next
generation (UNESCO, 2003: 11). Then, in what domains Nantong dialect is used is
also of our concern.
It can be seen from the interviewees’ responses that Mandarin is invading home
domains while Nantong dialect is losing ground. This can be seen as a strong
34
indication that Nantong dialect is losing its vitality as “the domestic domain,
researchers agree, is the last bastion” (Coulmas, 2005: 163). We could also learn from
the data that Mandarin not only penetrates home domains but is also the language
employed in schooling and education, workplaces and other formal domains.
As concluded in the last section, Nantong dialect is now mostly being used by
parents and the older generation. Even so, the parent generation does not use their
mother tongue in all cases. According to the interviewees, they speak Nantong dialect
with their family, friends or acquaintances in informal situations and usually shift to
Mandarin in formal circumstances. For example, food market is one of the informal
situations. Three interviewees mention that when they bargain with vendors in the
food market, they usually speak Nantong dialect so that the vendors dare not cheat
them on price. However, in working places, they usually speak Mandarin with their
colleagues because more and more immigrants move into Nantong and work here.
Now even with the local colleagues, they would speak Mandarin too. One of the
interviewees says that he speaks with the local colleagues in Mandarin because “if we
speak the dialect in the face of other colleagues, they may think that we are talking
about personal things.” The interviewees also tell us that in schools of Nantong,
curriculum is taught in Mandarin and students are required to speak Mandarin
whether in or after class. Therefore, sometimes the children would ask their parents to
speak Mandarin with them since they have formed the habit of speaking Mandarin in
school.
As seen from the above, Nantong dialect is apparently suffering dwindling
domains. With regard to table 2.3, it could be ranked as “definitely endangered”
(Grade 3).
4.1.3 Response to new domains and media
With the development of the local society, new domains of language use have
emerged. The arrival of new types of media--internet, radio and television
satellites--forces language adoption of technical norms for facilitating the transfer of
computerized data.
35
From the data, we could see that Nantong dialect is seldom used in the new types
of media except that a news program on the local TV channel is broadcast in Nantong
dialect. The interviewees tell us that this news program not only reports what is
happening inside and outside Nantong but also has some localised columns such as
providing tricks to solving the problems that frequently arise in the daily life, talking
about the mother tongue and inviting audience to sing songs in Nantong dialect. They
say that this program is quite popular with the elderly; however, that is where the use
of Nantong dialect in the media ends.
With regard to this factor, Nantong dialect can be labeled as “severely
endangered” (grade 2).
Based on the analysis of the above factors together with those mentioned in the
second chapter, we can draw conclusions as follows: (1) the use of Nantong dialect is
shrinking; (2) Nantong dialect can be ranked as between definitely endangered (grade
3) and being severely endangered (grade 2). In addition to these six factors, another
important factor evaluating language vitality is community members’ attitudes toward
their own language. Since this is closely related to the second research question, we
will discuss it separately in the next section.
4.2 Local Speakers’ Attitudes toward the Decline of Nantong Dialect
4.2.1 Classification of the local speakers’ attitudes
When we looked at the data, we could see that toward the decrease of Nantong
dialect and the increase of Mandarin, the local speakers hold different attitudes. To
sum up, these attitudes can be classified into three types: (a) it is lamentable to
witness Nantong dialect declining and we must revitalize it at all costs; (b) it is
regrettable that Nantong dialect is endangered but it is a natural process and we need
not interfere; (c) language unification is good news and we should welcome it.
The following table demonstrates the distribution of the three types of attitudes
among the 20 interviewees.
36
Table 4.2 Distribution of Speakers’ Attitudes toward the Decline of NT Dialect
Attitudes
Lamentable
Natural
Good
Total
Number
2
12
6
20
Percentage (%)
10
60
30
100
As we can see from Table 4.2, of the 20 interviewees, only 2 are in favor of taking
measures to revitalize Nantong dialect. They say that Nantong dialect is one of the
heritages of the local culture and speaking it makes them feel good. Most of the
interviewees hold the second type of attitude. Toward the decline of their mother
tongue, their feelings are complex. On one hand, they feel it a pity that Nantong
dialect is on the decline because this will bring about the gradual loss of the local
culture. On the other hand, they also admit that this is the result of the social
development and they would accept it as a natural process. They agree that since
language is just a tool of communication and if the dialect cannot meet
communication needs any longer, it could be abandoned. Those who hold the third
kind of attitude share similar ideas with the second group. What is different is that the
third group firmly holds that it is good for the world to have fewer languages for the
convenience of communication.
4.2.2 Factors that lead to the local speakers’ negative attitudes
Members of a speech community are often not neutral towards their language.
They may see it as essential to their community and identity and promote it; they may
use it without promoting it; they may be ashamed of it and, therefore, not promote it;
or they may see it as a nuisance and actively avoid using it (UNESCO, 2003: 14).
As seen from the above, only 10% of the interviewees are in favor of promoting
Nantong dialect. 90% are using it without caring much about promoting it or even
choosing to abandon it. Obviously, the negative attitudes are pervasive. Then what are
the factors that may lead to local speakers’ negative attitudes? To put it another way,
what factors may lead to speakers’ choice to shift from Nantong dialect to Mandarin?
37
In accordance with the interviews, some factors underlying speakers’ choice may be
found.
Factor 1: Local speakers’ perceptions of Nantong dialect with regard to
its utility
What do local speakers think of the utility of Nantong dialect? Their subjective
assessment of their mother tongue’s utility will influence their language choice.
According to Coulmas (2005: 164-165), the actual and the perceived utility value of
languages in contact situations is a valid predictor of language shift and maintenance.
In fact, the perceived utility value is widely considered a better predictor than the
actual one because people act on the basis of perceptions, assumptions and
assessments rather than facts, most of which are unknown to them. If the speakers
assume that their mother tongue is of less utility, they will certainly shift to the
dominant language of more utility value.
14 out of the 20 interviewees say that they find Mandarin more useful than
Nantong dialect. They find that with the development of the society, Nantong dialect
cannot meet the communication needs any longer. According to the interviewees,
more immigrants are moving into Nantong and working in various fields; these
immigrants become their new friends, colleagues, customers and even teachers of
their children. Since most of these immigrants cannot understand the local dialect,
Nantong dialect becomes a hindrance to the locals’ effective communication with
them. The 14 interviewees all agree that speaking Mandarin can remove this
hindrance and facilitate the locals’ interaction with the increasingly open network.
One of the interviewees, who used to speak Nantong dialect, mentions:
Some of my colleagues are coming from the other places of the country
and they cannot understand Nantong dialect yet even after they have lived
here for years. So I adapt myself to speaking Mandarin and have made
friends with them.
Also, in Nantong, Mandarin is the language employed in government official
38
business, court proceedings, schooling and education, media and other formal
situations. Nantong dialect is mostly used at home or between acquaintances. With the
prevalence of mass media, Mandarin expands even more quickly in Nantong. One of
the interviewees states:
Virtually all TV programs use Mandarin and children can naturally
acquire Mandarin by watching TV. Even my grandparents are learning to
speak Mandarin so that they can enjoy TV or radio programs better.
In addition, Mandarin, as the interviewees agree, is the gateway to the mainstream
society. One of the interviewees shares with us his opinion:
Since Nantong is a small city, we hope that our children can study and
work in big cities, say Beijing, Shanghai or Nanjing. If they become
metropolitan, they have to speak Mandarin well, otherwise they may not be
able to achieve a good academic performance nor find a good job and they
may be laughed at by their classmates or colleagues. But even if they
cannot speak Nantong dialect, it will not affect any phase of their social
life.
As seen from the above, 70% of the interviewees think that Mandarin is of higher
utility value than Nantong dialect since Mandarin is a language used to communicate
with outsiders, used in formal domains and used to help the children get ahead in
mainstream society. The imbalance of the actual and perceived usage of Mandarin and
Nantong dialect accounts for the local speakers’ negative language attitudes.
Factor 2: Local speakers’ perceptions of Nantong dialect with regard to
its beauty, status and difficulty
How do local speakers view Nantong dialect? Specifically, how do local speakers
think about the relative beauty, difficulty and status of Nantong dialect compared with
Mandarin? This will greatly affect their choice of language shift or language
maintenance.
Of the 20 interviewees, only 3 claim that they like Nantong dialect. They say that
39
“speaking Nantong dialect makes us feel kind of intimacy and warmth”. Another 3
interviewees show indifference toward their mother tongue and say that they neither
like it nor dislike it.
The remaining 14 interviewees clearly express their dislike for Nantong dialect.
The interviewees generally think that Nantong dialect sounds unrefined and not as
pleasant to the ears as Wu dialect and Mandarin. They are afraid that they would be
mocked at if they speak Nantong dialect in front of those who speak Wu dialect or
Mandarin. One of the interviewees states:
Speaking Nantong dialect always makes us feel provincial. I am afraid
of being mocked at when speaking it in public and thus I usually speak
Mandarin instead. By speaking Mandarin, we can avoid being labeled as
Jiangbei Ren or rustic people.
They say that they prefer to speak Mandarin rather than Nantong dialect not only
because Mandarin sounds more refined than Nantong dialect but also because
Mandarin has a much higher prestige and speaking Mandarin indicates better
education, decent jobs and higher social status. One of the interviewees explains:
In the past, the residents of Nantong used to speak Nantong dialect. If
one spoke Mandarin, he or she either graduated from university or moved
to Nantong from a larger city and worked here as a leader of some
department. Therefore, Speaking Mandarin used to be an indicator of good
education and higher social status. Hence, when we speak Mandarin, we
usually have a better feeling about ourselves.
Whether they like or dislike their mother tongue, all these interviewees agree that
Nantong dialect is difficult for outsiders to understand. They humorously say that
Nantong (南通) dialect means “nantong (难通)” dialect, difficult to get across to
others. As mentioned in 4.1.1, an interviewee gives his personal experience for
example. When he speaks Nantong dialect, he is considered to be speaking Japanese
and his roommates cannot understand what he says at all. This might not be an
exaggeration. We find popular statistics posted on some websites (e.g.
http://www.douban.com/group/topic/1459152), in which Nantong dialect tops the list
40
of the ten most incomprehensible dialects in China. Therefore, in order to facilitate
the communication with others, the speakers tend to shift to Mandarin willingly or
reluctantly.
Generally speaking, the interviewees think that Nantong dialect is an unrefined
language, difficult to understand and of less prestige. For this reason, they do not
show much affection for their mother tongue. That leads to their indifference to the
decline of Nantong dialect.
Factor 3: Local speakers’ willingness to accept other dialects
In the interviews, we find that local speakers of Nantong dialect hold an open
attitude toward the use of Mandarin and other dialects in Nantong. As we already
know of Nantong, Nantong dialect is surrounded by several varieties of Wu and
Jianghuai Mandarin and it has long been interacting with these languages. Speakers of
Nantong dialect can understand Jianghuai Mandarin and some Wu dialects without
much difficulty and sometimes are even able to speak them. Therefore, it may not be
surprising to find that people in Nantong can readily accept Mandarin and other
dialects.
The interviewees tell us that most of the natives of Nantong, whether
young or old, now can speak Mandarin fluently and they feel proud if they can speak
Mandarin well; also, the elderly are tolerant of the younger’s speech, which is distinct
from what they speak and has converged towards the lexicon and pronunciation of
Mandarin.
It can be seen that people in Nantong welcome language contact of any kind and
are willing to accept the change in their mother tongue. It may be because of this that
people in Nantong can accept a change in their identity more easily.
From the interviews, we could also see that the local speakers have a tendency to
accommodate to the speech of the interlocutor they are speaking with. Thus, as more
outsiders move in, more and more of the speech will not be in Nantong dialect. The
speakers also begin to choose not to transmit their language to children.
In conclusion, most of the local speakers don’t care much about the decline of
their mother tongue and some even welcome it. Their voluntary shift to Mandarin
41
may be attributed to their negative perceptions of Nantong dialect with regard to its
beauty, status, difficulty and utility. Also, thanks to their long tradition of language
contact, they are ready to accept Mandarin without much struggle.
4.3 Local Speakers’ Attitudes toward the Revitalization Measures
4.3.1 The five major revitalization measures
As described in Chapter 2, the measures proposed by linguists to revitalize
endangered languages can be summarized as follows: 1) endangered languages should
be documented and written down; 2) endangered languages should be promoted in
educational systems; 3) endangered languages should have more presence in modern
media; 4) the government should play an active role in revitalizing endangered
languages; 5) local speakers’ living conditions and human rights should be improved
and respected.
As mentioned in the second chapter, virtually all Chinese dialects share the same
writing system. Hence, there is no need to devise a new writing system for Nantong
dialect. Therefore, with regard to the first proposal, we raised the following question:
“Do you think it necessary to write down the sounds of Nantong dialect? Why?”
To promote endangered languages in educational systems, there are two ways:
education in endangered languages and the teaching of these languages as school
subjects. Therefore, with regard to this proposal, we raised two questions: “Do you
approve of teaching school curriculums in Nantong dialect? Why?” and “Do you
approve of teaching Nantong dialect as a school curriculum? Why?”
With regard to the third proposal, we asked the interviewees whether they favor
increasing the presence of Nantong dialect in the media, for example, increasing TV
programs or commercials in Nantong dialect. With regard to the forth proposal, we
asked the interviewees whether they think it necessary for the government to carry out
policies regarding the protection of Nantong dialect and promote its use in more
domains.
As mentioned in the second chapter, Nantong is a relatively wealthy city.
Therefore, we left out the fifth proposal.
42
To sum up, in our interview, the five revitalization measures are specified as the
following questions:
1. Do you think it necessary to write down the sounds of Nantong dialect? Why?
2. Do you approve of teaching school curriculums in Nantong dialect? Why?
3. Do you approve of teaching Nantong dialect as a school subject? Why?
4. Do you favor increasing the presence of Nantong dialect in media? Why?
5. Do you think it necessary for the government to carry out policies regarding the
protection of Nantong dialect and promote its use in more domains?
4.3.2 Local speakers’ attitudes toward the five major measures
Toward these five suggestions, local speakers show different attitudes. Of the 20
interviewees, only three approve of the first proposal. No one thinks the second
proposal is necessary or practical. Around one third of the twenty interviewees are
supporters of the third and forth proposals. Only four interviewees favor the last
proposal.
As for the first proposal, seventeen out of the twenty interviewees think that it is a
waste of time, energy and money to devise orthography or sound system for Nantong
dialect. They state:
It is not worthy of significant time and energy to record the
pronunciation of a small dialect like Nantong dialect given that there are
many other urgent problems to solve such as environmental pollution,
education and medical reforms. Also, if linguists are to write down the
sounds of Nantong dialect, it means that they will also write down the
sounds of other Chinese dialects. That will be a heavy task. In fact, the
Chinese dialects mainly differ in their pronunciations. The difference is
either big or subtle. Is it really important to record the varieties of
pronunciations of one language? We think this will be only meaningful to
linguists and scholars. For us, the ability to read and write Mandarin is
enough and we will not spend extra time learning to read or write a dialect
that is of little use.
The rest three interviewees show agreement with this proposal. They say that
Nantong dialect boasts a unique pronunciation and writing it down can preserve
43
language diversity even if one day it loses all the speakers. However, most of the
interviewees do not agree with them. They state:
As long as a language has speakers, it can survive and there is no need
to write down the sounds. If a language has no speakers, it means that this
language has lost its vitality and been abandoned by its community. Even if
its sounds are written down, this language cannot be said to be alive.
Languages that are not alive cannot constitute linguistic diversity.
It is not surprising to find that none of the interviewees thinks it practical to teach
the school curriculum in Nantong dialect. They say that this will greatly affect their
children’s academic performance. These parents say that one of the aims of schooling
should be to help children form the habit of using the standard language and if the
students are instructed in dialects, schools will apparently fail to achieve this goal.
One of the interviewees, a teacher teaching Chinese, says:
You see, in Nantong and other cities, the slogan ‘Please speak
Mandarin’ can be seen at every corner. We have to take a national
Mandarin Proficiency Test and are not qualified to be teachers unless we
reach Grade 2 Level A or above (there are four levels: Grade 1 Level A,
Grade 1 Level B, Grade 2 Level A and Grade 2 Level B, of which Grade 1
Level A is the top level). It is clear that a good mastery of Mandarin is both
important to teachers and students in school. We cannot imagine using
Nantong dialect to instruct students.
Compared with the second proposal, 7 out of the 20 interviewees think that
teaching Nantong dialect as a school subject is more acceptable. According to them,
teaching Nantong dialect as a course can not only promote children’s understanding of
their mother tongue but also will not affect their acquisition of Mandarin. They say
that understanding Nantong dialect can give children better insights into the local
customs and culture. Despite their approval of this proposal, they add that this course
should not become a burden on students and hence it had better be an elective one,
open to those who are interested in dialects. However, the remaining thirteen
interviewees do not favor this proposal. They hope that their children can learn more
English than Nantong dialect. They say that it is important for the children to learn
44
English well so that they can have more opportunities to stand out whether in
examination or job hunting. One of the parents says:
If our children go abroad to pursue their study, a good mastery of
English is especially important. Thus, if the school is to provide an extra
language-learning course, we would like it to be English.
Around two thirds of the interviewees do not favor increasing Nantong dialect in
media while six think having more Nantong dialect in media can be a good way to
revitalize it. Both sides give the example of a local TV news program ‘To Sum Up (总
而言之)’, which is broadcast in Nantong dialect. The supporters say that this program
is quite popular with the elderly, who learn from it what is happening inside and
outside Nantong; sometimes, the children also watch it together with their
grandparents and in this way, they can naturally acquire Nantong dialect. Therefore,
they think that broadcasting news in Nantong dialect is a good way to promote its
transmission and revitalization. However, the opponents say that this kind of news
program always confines its topics to trivial things that happen in the daily life and
thus can only attract a small audience like the elderly. Also they say that the
announcer sometimes sounds funny and awkward when he has to “translate” a word
that the local dialect does not contain. Although they have disagreement on the
presence of Nantong dialect on TV, virtually all the interviewees agree that it is not
practical to have more Nantong dialect on the Internet. They say that people surf on
Internet to find information that is either useful or interesting to them, but Nantong
dialect is neither useful nor interesting to the average people; if people have no
interest in it, more Nantong dialect on the Internet will lead to nothing.
The last proposal is supported only by four interviewees. Most of the local
speakers hold that the decline of Nantong dialect is a natural process and the
government should not intervene. They say that if the government tries to promote the
use of Nantong dialect in more domains, this may instead cause people’s antipathy to
their mother tongue. Also, they are aware that in reality, the government is
endeavoring to promote Mandarin all over the country in hope that it can facilitate the
45
communication between people from different places of the country. Therefore, they
think that it is not very possible for the government to encourage people to speak
dialects rather than Mandarin.
In conclusion, to revitalize Nantong dialect, there are five major measures. No one
agrees that school curriculum should be instructed in Nantong dialect. 17 out of the 20
interviewees are not in favor of creating orthography or a sound system for Nantong
dialect. Around one third of the interviewees think that teaching Nantong dialect as a
school course is acceptable but emphasize that it should not be taken as an obligatory
one. Promoting Nantong dialect in the media is also only supported by around one
third of the interviewees. Governments’ intervention is not welcomed by most of the
interviewees. As seen here, the local speakers generally disapprove of these measures.
4.4 Insights for the Study of Language Endangerment
As seen from the discussion in the previous two sections, 90% of the interviewees
don’t care about the decline of Nantong dialect and some even regard it as good news;
most of the interviewees don’t think it necessary or practical to take measures to
revitalize Nantong dialect. They choose to speak Mandarin more and Nantong dialect
less to their children and in most occasions.
As mentioned in Chapter Two, linguists’ belief that languages are worth saving is
primarily based on two arguments: we need diversity and languages express identity.
It is true that diversity and identity are important to human welfare; however, the
arguments for their correlation with languages are not universally tenable. It can be
seen from the case of Nantong dialect that linguists’ arguments are not applicable to
Chinese dialects. Also, their revitalization measures are not favored by Chinese
dialect speakers. Based on the case of Nantong dialect, we try to look into the validity
of linguists’ arguments for the value of saving languages and how far we should go in
saving endangered languages.
4.4.1 The validity of linguists’ arguments for the value of saving
46
endangered languages
As mentioned in 2.3.1.2, the linguistic diversity argument is in the main concerned
with the science of linguistics. That could have been interpreted as only self-serving,
i.e. for the survival of linguistics and linguists. Consequently, this argument may not
be supported by community speakers. This is proved by the case of Nantong dialect.
As seen in 4.3.2, 17 out of the 20 interviewees are not in favor of writing down the
sound system of Nantong dialect. They say that this is only helpful for linguists to
carry out their study and the ability to read and write Mandarin is enough for speakers.
Without the support of speakers, even if the sound system is written down, it cannot
help a lot in revitalizing the endangered language.
Also, the linguistic diversity argument is not applicable to dialects in Chinese
context (here “Chinese” referring to the language of Han Chinese). As mentioned in
Chapter Two, most of the Chinese dialects are distinct in pronunciation only and
therefore, preservation of a Chinese dialect is to preserve a distinct pronunciation.
However, considering that there are more than 120 ethnic languages in China and they
are struggling to survive, the preservation of a distinct pronunciation of Han Chinese
will not be so important.
Linguists regard language as the primary index, or symbol, or register of identity.
They firmly believe that if a language dies, the identity it represents will necessarily
vanish. However, the interviews show that this may not be the case. It could be seen
from the interviews that identity is not a major factor in sustaining Nantong dialect.
There are three reasons for this:
1)
It can be seen from the interviews that some speakers of Nantong dialect
voluntarily switch to Mandarin not only because Mandarin has a higher
utility value than Nantong dialect but also because Nantong dialect, as they
think, is an indicator of their less privileged identity. Quite a few
interviewees have mentioned that they hate being labeled as “Jiangbei
Ren” and therefore they try to avoid speaking Nantong dialect. It can be
clearly seen that these speakers do not favor their identity and thus do not
think preserving this identity is very important. Naturally, they would not
47
care about whether the dialect that represents this identity is falling down
or not. However, when the linguists argue that languages are worth saving
because they are strong markers of identity, they undoubtedly assume that
people do not want to change their identity and always hope to keep it. But
the case of Nantong dialect defies linguists’ assumption and suggests that
speakers may not favor their identity and are willing to switch to a new one.
If the presupposition of linguists’ argument is not always true, their identity
argument cannot hold water either.
2)
Certainly, not all the speakers think poorly of their identity. There are those
who have positive attitudes toward their identity. But even if they favor
their identity, it does not mean that they like their mother tongue. They
have mentioned that Nantong dialect does not sound as pleasant as Wu
dialect or Mandarin and speaking it makes them feel rustic. They also
regard Nantong dialect as a hindrance to their communication with
outsiders. Therefore, even if they favor their identity, their dislike for their
mother tongue may also lead them to the choice of switching to Mandarin.
3)
Also, although the linguists highlight that identity is a strong marker of
identity, it can be seen from the responses of the interviewees that they do
not think the inability to speak Nantong dialect will necessarily lead to the
loss of their Nantong identity. They have mentioned that in the context of
Nantong, identity may be more equal to where one was born and brought
up than to what language he or she speaks (see 4.1.1). Their remarks
suggest that speakers do not always see language as the only or the
strongest marker of their identity. This further proves that linguists’
assumption that losing a language means losing the identity it represents is
not always the case.
As seen from the above analysis, the linguists’ identity argument does not apply to
Nantong dialect in that some of the speakers of Nantong dialect do not favor their
identity; they do not like Nantong dialect itself and they do not see Nantong dialect as
the only or the most essential marker of their identity.
48
In conclusion, linguists’ arguments for the value of saving languages do not apply
to Chinese dialects as seen in the case of Nantong dialect. Since their arguments are
not tenable, we cannot help wondering how far we should go in revitalizing
endangered languages.
4.4.2 How far we should go in saving endangered languages
Linguists advocate that endangered languages should be saved at all costs and
propose several key measures to revitalize endangered languages. However, their
revitalization measures are not favored by the speakers of Nantong dialect. The local
speakers generally think that these revitalization measures are not feasible and it is not
necessary to spend much time, energy or money to carry out these measures. Then,
how far should we go in revitalizing endangered languages? Save them at all costs or
depending on what the situation is?
Although linguists agree that speakers’ choice is indeed critical, they highlight that
it must be informed choice. “It is no solution giving parents the right to make choices
about the linguistic future of their children if they do not have the information they
need on which to base that choice” (Crystal, 2000: 11). Linguists believe that “ we
should adopt a broader outlook, allowing our knowledge of the long-term linguistic
issues involved to justify [speakers’] continued interest in their language and warrant
attempts to change their minds” (Crystal, 2000: 102). Clearly, linguists believe that
they have more knowledge than speakers and thus can make more sensible language
choices.
However, as we can see from the case of Nantong dialect, the parents do not lack
the information they need on which to base their choice. They have carefully
considered whether they should transmit Mandarin or Nantong dialect to their
children. They choose to speak Mandarin instead of Nantong dialect to their children
because Mandarin has a higher utility value than Nantong dialect and Nantong dialect,
as they think, is not refined and difficult to understand. More important, they have
their opinions on the linguistic diversity issue and the relationship between language
and identity.
49
As their argument goes, as long as a language has speakers, it can survive and
there is no need to write it down; if a language has no speakers, it means that this
language has lost its vitality and been abandoned by its community and even if it is
written down, this language cannot be said to be alive. They hold that languages that
are not alive cannot constitute linguistic diversity. Also, thanks to the long tradition of
language contact, it is easier for them to accept another language and switch to it.
They say that even if their children cannot speak Nantong dialect, it does not mean
that they will lose their Nantong identity. As one of the interviewees says: “In China,
identity may be more equal to where you were born and brought up than to what
language you speak.”
Also, the speakers of Nantong dialect have carefully considered what should be
done to revitalize their mother tongue. They do not think linguists’ revitalization
proposals are applicable to such a Chinese dialect as Nantong dialect. They say that
writing down Nantong dialect is to write down a distinct pronunciation of Chinese
and recording the varieties of pronunciations of Chinese is not worthy of much time
and money. They also say that teaching school subjects in Nantong dialect is not
realistic in China where people are urged to speak Mandarin by the state government.
Nor do they think it is practical to give Nantong dialect more presence in the media
especially on Internet. Most of the local speakers hold that the decline of Nantong
dialect is a natural process and the government should not or cannot intervene.
Therefore, speakers have rationally considered their choices. It may not be true
that languages should be saved at all costs as linguists have advocated. The speakers
are entitled to decide whether a language should be saved and to what degree it should
be revitalized because they are the people who know best about their language and the
language situation. Linguists, as outsiders, can try to help people to maintain their
languages, but only if the speakers want to. As Bradley says, “Unless the group itself
choose to keep their language, we can do nothing but document the language and
hope that the descendants may later find some use for our material” (Bradley, 2002:
8).
50
Chapter Five
Conclusion
This chapter serves as a conclusion of the whole study. Section One summarizes
the major findings in this study. The limitations of the present study are presented in
Section Two and suggestions for further research are given in Section Three.
5.1 Major Findings of the Study
Taking Nantong dialect as a case study, the present research aims to examine how
local people feel toward the decline of their mother tongue and what they think should
be done to revitalize it. By comparing the attitudes of linguists and those of speakers,
we are trying to explore whether linguists’ arguments for the value of saving
endangered languages are universally valid and how far we should go in saving
endangered languages. The major findings are summarized as follows:
1. Nantong dialect is receding in the face of Mandarin. It can be identified as being
between definitely endangered and severely endangered with regard to
intergenerational language transmission, shifts in domains of language use and
response to new domains and media.
2. From the interviews, it can be seen that the majority of local speakers are using
Nantong dialect without caring much about promoting it. Three reasons are
responsible for their negative attitudes toward their mother tongue: Nantong
dialect is perceived as of less utility than Mandarin; Nantong dialect is perceived
as of less beauty, lower status and more difficulty than Mandarin; local speakers
enjoy a tradition of welcoming language contact of any kind.
3. Generally speaking, most of the interviewees are not in favor of the revitalization
measures proposed by linguists. They do not think these measures necessary or
51
practical though it is interesting that many are open to the idea of providing
elective courses about Nantong dialect.
These findings suggest that there is a great discrepancy between what the linguists
believe and what the local speakers think. Linguists believe that languages are worth
saving mainly because we need linguistic diversity and languages are strong markers
of identity and that something should be done to save endangered languages at all
costs. However, in the case of Nantong dialect, linguistic diversity and identity seem
to fail to be the key factors in sustaining Nantong dialect. For one thing, speakers do
not think it worthy of great effort to preserve Nantong dialect given that preserving it
just means preserving a distinct pronunciation of Han Chinese and a small number of
different vocabularies. For another, speakers do not see their dialect as the only or the
strongest identity marker and instead they place more value on where they were born
and brought up when it comes to identity. Moreover, the revitalization measures
proposed by linguists are not favored by speakers either. This indicates that the
linguists’ arguments may not be applicable to Chinese dialects and therefore may not
be universally valid.
Although the linguists believe that they are endowed with the knowledge of
long-term linguistic issue, their arguments for whether to revitalize endangered
languages and what measures to be taken are not without flaws. In contrast, local
speakers do not make choice on a whim and instead they base their choice on rational
considerations. They voluntarily shift to Mandarin because Nantong dialect is
perceived as of less utility value and lower prestige and cannot cater to the needs of
communication in the modern society. They do not think it necessary to do something
to revitalize their mother tongue because it will be a hindrance in assimilating to the
majority. Also, speakers are the people who know best about their language and the
language situation. Therefore, it is quite reasonable for speakers to decide what to do
with their mother tongue. Linguists, as outsiders, can try to help people to maintain
their languages, but only if they want to.
52
5.2 Limitations of the Study
First, we have interviewed a small number of subjects in this study and the
subjects selected are restricted to those who have a relatively good education
background. The tentative conclusion drawn might be affected by the insufficiency of
the sample data.
Second, the only data-collection method is interviews. Surveys might be a useful
addition to interviews to examine some facts such as what language to be used at
home, when and where to speak Mandarin/Nantong dialect and so on. In this way, the
results will be more convincing.
5.3 Directions for Further Research
The present study offers insights for us to reconsider the language endangerment
issue. While the linguists eloquently advocate that endangered languages are worth
saving and must be saved at all costs, we begin to think carefully about whether their
assertion is applicable to all situations. Our study shows that linguists’ arguments may
not be applicable to Chinese dialects. But do they apply to the dialects of other
languages? This still remains a question. This study may serve as a starting point to do
research of this kind in depth.
53
References
Bao, M.W. [鲍明炜]，2002，南通地区方言研究. 南京：江苏教育出版社。
Bauman, J.A. (1980). A guide to issues in Indian language retention. Washington:
Center for Applied Linguistics.
Bernard, H.R. (1992). Preserving language diversity. Human Organization, 51, 82-89.
Bloch, B. & G. Trager. (1942). Outline of linguistic analysis. Baltimore: Linguistic
Society of America.
Bradley, D. (2002). Language Attitudes: the key factor in language maintenance. In
Daivd & Maya Bradley (Eds.), Language Endangerment and Language
Maintenance (pp. 1-10). London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon.
Bradley, D. & M. (2002). Language Endangerment and Language Maintenance.
London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon.
Coulmas, F. (2005). Sociolinguistics: The Study of Speakers’ Choices. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Crystal, D. (2000). Language Death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dai, Q.X. [戴庆厦], 2004, 中国濒危语言个案研究. 民族出版社。
Dorian, N.C. (1981). Language death: the life cycle of a Scottish Gaelic dialect.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Fishman, J.A. (1991). Reversing Language Shift: Theoretical and Empirical
Foundations of Assistance to Threatened Languages. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Fishman, J. A. (2000). Reversing language shift: RLS theory and practice revisited. In
Kindell G. & M. P. Lewis (Eds.), Assessing ethnolinguistic vitality: theory
and practice; selected papers from the Third International Language
Assessment conference, 1-25. Publications in Sociolinguistics, 3. Dallas:
SIL International.
54
Grenoble, L.A. & L.J. Whaley. (1998). Toward a typology of language endangerment.
In Grenoble and Whaley (Eds.), Endangered languages: language loss and
community response (pp. 22-54). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hale, K. (1992a). On endangered languages and the safeguarding of diversity.
Language, 68, 1-3.
Hale, K. (1992b). Language endangerment and the human value of linguistic diversity.
Language, 68, 35-42.
Hale, K. (1998). On endangered languages and the importance of linguistic diversity.
In Grenoble & Whaley (Eds.), Endangered languages: language loss and
community response (pp. 192-216). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Himmelmann, N.P. (1998). Documentary and descriptive linguistics. Linguistics, 36,
161-195. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Huang, X. (2003). Minority language planning of China in relation to use and
development. Retrieved Aug. 10, 2009, from
http://pnglanguages.org/asia/ldc/parallel_papers/huang_xing.pdf
Kincade, M. D. (1991). The decline of native languages in Canada. In R.H. Robins
and E.M. Uhlenbeck (Eds.), 157-176. Endangered Languages. Oxford:
Berg.
Krauss, M. (1992). The world’s languages in crisis. Language, 68, 4-10.
Ladefoged, P. (1992). Another view of endangered languages. Language, 68, 809-811.
Li, D.C.S. (2003). Between English and Esperanto: what does it take to be a world
language? International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 164, 33-63
Li, J.F. [李锦芳]，2005，中国濒危语言研究及保护策略. 中央民族大学学报 （3）：
113-119。
Luisa, M., M. Krauss, and A. Yamamoto. (2001). The World Languages in Crisis:
Questions, Challenges, and a Call for Action. Presented for discussion with
participants at the 2nd International Conference on Endangered Languages
of the Pacific Rim, Kyoto, Japan. In: Conference Handbook on Endangered
Languages of the Pacific Rim, Osaka, Endangered Languages of the Pacific
Rim Project, 75-78.
55
Miyaoka, O. (2001). Endangered languages: the crumbling of the ecosystem of
language and culture—an introduction to the Kyoto conference. In Osamu
Sakiyama (Ed.), Lectures on endangered languages (pp. 3-17): from Kyoto
Conference 2000, Sapporo, Endangered Languages of the Pacific Rim.
Nettle, D. & S. Romaine. (2000). Vanishing voices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ostler, N. (1996). Tongues ancient and postmodern. Iatiku 3. 1-2.
Pawley, Andrew. (1991). Vanishing languages of the Pacific: What price progress?
Slightly revised text of seminar talk to Department of Linguistics, The
Faculties, The Australian National University.
Rhydwen, M. (1998). Strategies for doing the impossible. In Nicholas Ostler (Eds.),
Endangered Languages: What Role for the Specialist? 101-106. Bath, UK:
Foundation for Endangered Languages.
Simmons, R.V., Shi, R.J. [石汝杰] & Gu, Q. [顾黔], 2006, 江淮官话与吴语边界的
方言地理学研究.上海教育出版社。
Sun, H.K. [孙宏开]，2001，关于濒危语言问题. 语言教学与研究（1）：1-7。
Tao, G.L. [陶国良]，2007，南通方言词典.江苏人民出版社。
Tovey, H., D. Hannan, and H. Abramson. (1989). Why Irish ? Language and identity
in Ireland today. Dublin: Bord na Gaeilge.
Tsunoda, T. (2006). Language Endangerment and Language Revitalization. Berlin
and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
UNESCO Ad Hoc Expert Group on Endangered Languages. Language Vitality and
Endangerment. Retrieved Aug. 7, 2009, from
http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/doc/src/00120-EN.pdf
Woodbury, A.C. (1993). A defense of the proposition, ‘When a language dies, a
culture dies’. In Robin Queen & Rusty Barrett (Eds.), Proceedings of the
first annual Symposium about Language and Society-Austin (SALSA 1,
Texas Linguistic Forum 33), 103-29.
Woodbury, A.C. (1998). Documenting rhetorical, aesthetic, and expressive loss in
language shift. In Grenoble & Whaley (Eds.), Endangered languages:
language loss and community response (pp. 234-258). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
56
Wurm, S.A. (1998). Methods of language maintenance and revival, with selected
cases of language endangerment in the world. In Kazuto Matsumura (Ed.),
Studies in Endangered Languages, 191-211. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.
Xu, S.X. [徐世璇], 2002, 语言濒危原因探析——兼论语言转用的多种因素. 民族
研究（4）：56-64。
Xu, S.X. [徐世璇], 2003, 濒危语言问题研究综述. 当代语言学(3): 133-148。
Xu, S.X. [徐世璇], 2006, 濒危语言资料的记录和留存. 广西民族大学学报（5）：
11-15。
Xu, S.X. [徐世璇], 2007, 论濒危语言的文献记录. 当代语言学（9）：44-51。
Yamamoto, A. (1992). Local reactions to perceived language decline. Language, 68,
10-17.
Zuo, X.L. (2007). China’s policy towards minority languages in a globalising age.
Transnational Curriculum Inquiry 4 (1). Retrieved Aug. 10, 2009, from
http://nitinat.library.ubc.ca/ojs/index.php/tci
57
APPENDIX
采访问题：
个人信息：
性别：
是否有小孩：
年龄：
小孩的年龄：
教育程度：
1. 在南通， 您一般在什么场合使用南通话/普通话？哪种语言使用的机会更多？
2. 在中小学里，学生之间普遍使用南通话还是普通话交流？
3. 在家里您平时选择用什么语言和孩子交流？为什么会有这种选择？
4. 在南通，您是否觉得使用南通话的人正逐渐减少而使用普通话的人在逐渐增多？
如果是这样，南通话正逐渐被普通话所取代，那就意味着南通方言正日渐衰落，甚
至有一日会面临消亡的危险。对此现象，您的态度是什么？为什么会持这种态度？
5. 对于是否有必要采取措施及采取何种措施来挽救濒危语言，语言学家们意见不一。
部分语言学家建议可以采用以下方法来延缓语言的衰落，请问您是否赞同实施这些
措施？为什么？
建议 1： 像普通话那样，将方言的发音和词汇记录下来，让人们能够读写方言。
建议 2： 在学校用本地方言授课，增加方言的使用机会。
建议 3：
。在学校开设方言课程，系统地讲授方言知识。
建议 4： 在电视、广播等媒体中多使用方言，如用方言播新闻、作广告等。
建议 5： 政府应该制定相关的语言保护政策，促使人们在各种场合多使用方言。
APPENDIX
Questions of the Interviews
Personal Information:
Gender:
Age:
Education:
the Age of Child (if any):
1. In Nantong, on what occasions do you speak Nantong dialect/ Mandarin? Which
language do you speak more often?
2. In school, what language do students use, Mandarin or Nantong dialect?
3. At home, in what language do you communicate with your child? Why?
4. Do you think the number of speakers of Nantong dialect is on the decrease? How
do you feel toward the decline of Nantong dialect? Can you explain the reasons
for your attitude?
5. Linguists have proposed five measures to revitalize endangered languages. Do
you think these measures necessary or practical? Why?
Proposal 1: Writing down the sounds of Nantong dialect
Proposal 2: Teaching school curriculums in Nantong dialect
Proposal 3: Teaching Nantong dialect as a school subject
Proposal 4: Increasing the presence of Nantong dialect in media
Proposal 5: Carrying out policies regarding the protection of Nantong dialect and
promote its use in more domains
2