論英文社會形象及其意識形態：與英文所有權之關聯

Language Ideology of English: Its Relation with Linguistic Ownership

李婉歆(Wan-Hsin Lee)

指導教授 ： 蘇席瑤

國立臺灣師範大學/文學院/英語學系/碩士(2012年)

摘要

本研究旨在探究全球化影響之下英文在臺的社會形象(social images)、觀感(perceptions)、以及臺灣民眾的英文意識形態(language ideology of English)，由過去文獻已知英文被賦予十分正面的社會價值(e.g. Chen 2006; Lee 2008; Tsai 2010;Wang 2000)。然而，過去研究鮮少探討臺灣民眾對英文的意識形態，或以英文能力為變因，討論不同的英文觀感和意識形態。藉由訪談，本研究討論英文的意識形態如何因為英文所有權，即能力與否，而有顯著差異。
本研究共有38 位受訪者，其中，有14 位英文使用者(English users)和24 位非英文使用者(non-English users)。訪談的總時數是24 小時18 分鐘。鑒於近期的研究顯示，訪談內所透露出的互動和訊息不應被視為不自然(artificial)和線型(linear) (e.g. De Fina 2011; Worthem et al. 2005)，本研究把訪談語料依其結構和相關性分成兩大類。第一類為受訪者對訪談問題的直接回應(direct responses)，第二類則是由訪談問題所導出受訪者相關的過往經驗、反映及想法(semi-directresponses)。相較於直接回應，部份相關的回應有較高的可靠性，因為受訪者對於對話內容以及訪談流程的干預明顯降低。
研究結果指出，在訪談的直接問答之間，所有受訪者皆強調英文的必要性，
此主流意識形態可從受訪者對學習英文的肯定及對於英文能力不足者的貶抑
(deprecation)窺知。此初步的研究結果大致呼應已知的文獻，代表英文以及它被賦予的正面形象已是廣為認同、接受、並視為理所當然的社會價值體系裡一環。除此之外，受訪者所透露出對於英文在就業上的幫助也顯示英文在臺灣社會有著高工具性(instrumental)，並在個人職業生涯扮演舉足輕重的角色。這象徵英文是一種資本(capital)。由於英文被視為職場和學術利器的形象鮮明，雖英文使用者和非英文使用者看似對英文抱有相同概念(conceptulization)，英文使用者和非使用者無可厚非地在全球化的社會之下定位不同。
相較之下，間接回應顯示英文的接受度在非正式或同儕對話中反而明顯降
低，且個人的英文能力和英文的所有權並非自稱。英文使用者和非英文使用者都會以主觀的條件審視英文及說話者進而認證或否定英文的所有權。此外，雖英文被視為必要，但是，對話的情境決定語言的選擇(code choice)，不適當地顯露英文能力反而容易招致負面觀感。研究結果也顯示英文使用者和飛英文使用者都會為了語用的需求在日常對話中穿差英文，但有趣的是受訪者皆一致認定英文使用者在非正式場合下有責避免使用英文。研究結果發現，英文能力與否影響說話者
在言談中的定位，同時也影響英文的意識形態。
本研究以英文能力為變因探導英文的社會形象和意識形態，由於時間和區域
限制和等因素，未能收集多方語料以更深度探究本文的研究目標。在未來研究中若能補足語料收集上的不足，將會對此研究方向及結果有所助益。

關鍵字

意識形態 ； 語言態度 ； 全球化

並列摘要

The study investigates language ideology of English through a qualitative analysis of interview data. It has been well-established that English is highly valued owing to its instrumental values (Chen 2006; Lee 2008; Tsai 2010; Wang 2000). Nonetheless, seldom did past studies address the ideological aspects and the possibility of English competence as a variable in shaping different language ideology. The study is aimed at looking into how English is conceptualized.
The study has collected data through interviews. Among all the 38 informants who participated in the study, there are 14 English users and 24 non-English users.The total length of the interviews is 24 hours and 18 minutes. In the light of recent studies in critical analyses of interview data (e.g. De Fina 2011; Worthem et al. 2005), the study categorizes data into two major categories. Direct responses are the informants’ straightforward replies to the interview questions. Semi-direct responses refer to the informants’ reflections on events and further thoughts evoked by the interview questions, but not necessarily directed at answering the questions.
It is found that English is predominantly considered essential. The prevailing language ideology of conceptualizing English as a necessity is apparent in the
informants’ overt affirmation of English acquisition and the deprecation of incompetence. The findings suggest that the appropriation of English may be perceived to be an established and prescriptive social norm. it could be postulated that English is linguistic capital, an accumulated labor which could transfer to interests
and values (Bourdieu 1977, 1986, 1991). Though the necessity of English is reinforced by both English users and non-English users, they positioned themselves
different from the other party.
Though English has been overtly affirmed, the appropriation of English and the concept of English ownership are context-specific and dependent on others for the recognition. Standard language ideology, the preference for an idealized linguistic form (Lippi-Green 1997), is found to be a subjective criterion held by English users and non-English users to evaluate English and its user. Consequently, self-claimed competence in English and ownership, the legitimacy of the language (Widdowson 1994; Higgins 2003; Norton 2003), could be easily challenged and further invalidated by others. Moreover, English is perceived to be context-specific, implicating that the allocation of functions of English is distinctive compared with Chinese and other
indigenous languages. The display of English competence is significantly oppressed in local contexts, possibly attributable to the public market values of English. The
dispreference postulates that meeting linguistic norms in local contexts maybe equally stressing to that in public contexts (Woolard 1985). Remarkably, the burden of the
accommodation falls chiefly on English users. The finding indicates that competence in English is a significant variable in influencing language ideology of English as
English users and non-English users position themselves differently. Analytically, semi-direct responses show that the proximity of English is context-specific. Methodologically, the examination of the semi-direct responses demonstrates the necessity of analyzing interview data critically.
The study has attempted to shed some lights on language ideology of English. Yet, naturally occurring data would definitely reveal more authentic information with higher reliability in terms of English use. Additionally, the recruitment of informants was confined in terms of the regional restrictions and the imbalanced number of
informants in each social category. With these limitations taken into consideration, a well-developed account would surely be yielded.

並列關鍵字

language ideology ； language attitudes ； globalization

參考文獻

Lee, Yi-Chien. 2008. Parental Involvement and Support for Taiwanese Children’s English Language and Literacy Learning. Unpublished Dissertation. Boston College.

Blommaert, Jan. 2009. A market of accents. Language Policy 8, 2: 243–259.

Blommaert, Jan, James Collins, and Stef Slembrouck. 2005. Spaces of multilingualism. Language & Communication 25, 3: 197–216.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977. The economics of linguistic exchanges. Social Science Information 16, 6: 645–668.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.