Question 1
Status and function of Cantonese
Cantonese is one of the famous and dominant local languages among the regional minority Chinese in Hong Kong. Today, Cantonese is ranked as the most critical dialect family, among others, Putonghua (Fung & Tang, 2016). Cantonese has gained the rank of prominence due to interrelationship which exists between it and the British crown colony of Hong Kong community. The tremendous growth of Hong Kong into a highly-urbanized, modern, educated, international-influential, and prosperous society has accelerated the status of Cantonese as a prestigious language in the insights of the Cantonese- speakers in Hong Kong. Most of Hong Kong people prefer using Cantonese as a useful language to communicate and share. Presently, under the trilingual and bi-literate policies, Cantonese has gained its legal status.
The Cantonese language in Hong Kong play a dormant role on the sociolinguistic development. Firstly, Cantonese is used as a means of government administration and education. Over the years, Hong Kong has become a capitalist society for over 50 years. The government information such as water, electric, gas, and phone bills in letter form from banks and credit cards are in Cantonese language. For everyday government administration, informal communication with friends and colleagues who work as civil servants in Hong Kong seems to be dominated by Cantonese style or mixed code. In education, the Cantonese style is used in kindergarten and secondary level. Secondly, Cantonese is used in print media, electronics, and employment. Presently, Cantonese is considered to be the everyday language of communication inside and outside home territories. In reflection of media, the Cantonese style is used in radio broadcasting. For example, in the current 13 radio stations in Hong Kong, of which six stations broadcast in Cantonese, two in bilingual, four in English, and one in Putonghua.
Question 2
Differentiation between variant and variable and their importance in sociolinguistic
In sociolinguistic, variable and option are essential elements in studying linguistic. The study of variation in qualitative or quantitative perspectives is crucial in understanding and defining the object of investigation. A variable is the general feature of the objective investigated Hansen (Edwards, 2015). There are two ways in which variables can be identified in sociolinguistic. The first convention is to write in parenthesis, while the second convention refers to vowel variables through systems of keywords. The linguistic variable can exist at different levels of grammar, starting from phonetics to discourse, and from phonology to syntax. The variable must co-vary.
For instance, variable in linguistic involves social, and regional differences in the way language is used. On the other side, the variant is the actual instantiations of the linguistic variable in speech (Dinkin, 2016). For instance, the relationship between the concept of variable and option is similar to the correlation between the actual phoneme and the actual phonetic in linguistics. For example, how the Chinese language in Hong Kong is absorbed within the community significantly differs in different nations such as England that strain to learn the language.
The language variant and variable are considered to play a vital role in language acquisition and teaching. It contributes to cultural values even though there are different ways of using the language functions. For example, language variable helps to learn pronunciation (accent) and vocabulary in grammar. Variation investigates how language changes through observation. The variant and variable also collects the elements into more straightforward items to handle more complex systems.
Question 3
The language ideologies connect the implicit and explicit relationships and assumptions about language in the economic, social, and political interests. The use of different styles as a means of instruction has been an issue in Hong Kong. The idea of Covarrubias tries to streamline the medium of instruction policy to be adopted in sociolinguistic. Covarrubias (1983) proposed four dominant language ideologies that stimulate the actual decision-making in language planning in different societies. The language ideologies aimed include linguistic pluralism, linguistic assimilation, vernacularization, and internationalism. Firstly, linguistic pluralism is the practice where more than one language is recognized in the society. The method can take different forms depending on territories. For instance, Hong Kong, a British colony, formulated a language policy that favored Cantonese or English to be a medium of instruction in most primary and secondary schools. Variation in language helps different groups to understand various government activities.
Secondly, linguistic assimilation refers to the attitude that everyone, regardless of culture, should learn the preferred dominant language in the state. This language ideology was aimed at suppressing the minority languages. There was an emphasis on the dominance of language that can be easily assimilated by a large population. Hong Kong absorbed Cantonese and Putonghua languages that were popular with the most china population. There was much effort to promote mother-tongue has a medium of instruction. The medium of instruction policies favored the dominance of native language in practice. Thirdly, vernacularization refers to the restoration of the native language and assimilation as the formal language—for example, Cantonese in Hong Kong. Lastly, internationalization refers to adopting a foreign language, widely assimilated for education, and as an official language. Most secondary and tertiary schools use English to communicate as well as writing. For instance, Hong Kong uses the English language as an official language in different sectors such as education, higher commerce, and the judiciary. Presently, Hong Kong is a multi-linguistic society. The language policy reforms try to bring balance between three principal languages used in Hong Kong: Putonghua, English, and Cantonese.
Question 4
‘Hong Kong English does not exist, has never existed, and will not exist in the foreseeable future.’
The development of English as one of the dominant international language and its expansion into multicultural and multilingual dimension has raised new sociolinguistic issues. Different linguistic scholars have different positions on the progress and status of the English language in Hong Kong. The linguists argue that the various economic and political changes may intend to affect the development of Hong Kong identity and that the Hong Kong English may finally become the public reality in terms of academics.
The changing pattern of the English language assimilation in Hong Kong can be well understood by looking at the historical perspective that examines the similar language development between the native and foreign languages. Therefore, there is a disagreement on the non-existence of the English language in Hong Kong. Hong Kong English is influenced by the native language, such as Cantonese and Putonghua. Linguistic scholars argue that Hong Kong has sufficient conditions that can stimulate the growth of a variety of English language because the technology that resulted in globalization. Though there is a steady rise in Putonghua language as a medium of interaction in different regions in Hong Kong, English is in the right position to exist in the foreseeable future. Sincerely speaking, Hong Kong is a British colony and has an English background. Therefore there English language lived during the colonial period. The Chinese language also has unmarked English as a language of interaction from the historical perspective. There is much indication of the development of Putonghua in Hong Kong, but less social functions are assigned to it. This situation gives English a suitable ground to develop and being assimilated by most sectors such as government and education.
There is a lot of concern about the growth of Hong Kong English despite the critics on the influence of the English language on Chinese culture in Hong Kong. English has become a global language, and the need for the civilized nations, such as China, to adopt it for educational and commercial purposes. English language has been considered to be the second most used language in Hong Kong. The emergence of Hong Kong English has been motivated has the best medium of interaction globally. The use of the English language in education, employment, media, and the government has suppressed the critic on the impact of English in Hong Kong.
For instance, most educational institutions in Hong Kong use the English language as a mode of interaction hence boosting the diversification of English in China (Li, 2018). Today, English is transformed into an official language in Hong Kong, China, that has continued in different sectors such as electronics, print media, education, and commerce. Through statistics, there is much demonstration the Hong Kong English spoken people is highly acceptable to listeners from different domains. This explains why most china people are happy to part of this variety. Despite the acceptance of the English language, the language is more politicized in Hong Kong. Significantly, the use of the English language by the Hong Kong government in various judicial functions boosts the existence of English. Most of the HKSAR legislative council is bilingual in English and Cantonese. As a result of the dominant assimilation of Hong Kong English from the colonial and post-colonial periods, there is clear proof that the English language existed and will exist in the foreseeable future in Hong Kong.
References
Hansen Edwards, J. G. (2015). Hong Kong English: attitudes, identity, and use. Asian Englishes, 17(3), 184-208.
Dinkin, A. J. (2016). Variant-centered variation and the same conspiracy. Linguistic Variation, 16(2), 221-246. MacKenzie, G. H. (2018).
Evans, S. (2015). Testing the dynamic model: The evolution of the Hong Kong English lexicon (1858-2012). Journal of English Linguistics, 43(3), 175-200.
Fung, C. H. M., & Tang, G. (2016). Code-blending of functional heads in Hong Kong Sign Language and Cantonese: A case study. Bilingualism: Language and cognition, 19(4), 754-781.
Li, D. C. (2018). Two decades of decolonization and renationalization: the evolutionary dynamics of Hong Kong English and an update of its functions and status. Asian Englishes, 20(1), 2-14.