客家地區的「隱形化」發展歷程：以中壢為例

The Process of the Invisiblization of Hakka Area, take Zhongli as an Example.

范鉅昌(Chu-chang Fan)

指導教授 ： 張翰璧

國立中央大學/客家學院/客家研究碩士在職專班/碩士(2014年)

摘要

中壢客家語言使用選擇逐漸變遷、逐漸隱形於公共場域的現象大體而言乃早期為數眾多的軍營與部隊遷入中壢，在人數上稀釋中壢客庄的人口比例，此一時期也包含在政策面上受推行國語政策影響，使客家人在日常用語選擇多了官方語言。其後源自於工業化、都市化下受經濟影響而觸發社會轉型及另一波近代人口移動，中、南部閩南族群大量搬遷至中壢，閩南語在市井語言的使用選擇中扮演關鍵影響因素，逐漸改變客家人語言在公共場域的使用頻率，本來在經濟上、政治上沒有優勢的客家如今甚至逐漸在人數上也無優勢，出現了各行各業中的客家人在日常生活用語選擇中不再只有客語。
本文對中壢客家地區語言使用選擇變遷的脈絡分析甚為清晰，但成因不同於投身都市客家族群的隱形化現象，本文稱中壢的語言隱形化現象謂之第二類客家隱形化現象。然則對於語言使用選擇的變遷是否涉及族群認同？經研究語言隱形化對於一般客家人在客家認同上並未顯現出危機，客家人選擇語言的內心運作，並不以族群認同為出發點。顯示客家人在語言使用選擇不涉及族群認同，多以經濟上的經驗、需求、情境、溝通方便為最主要之考量，也發現語言隱形化下的客家語言在族群認同功能不彰的情況下，客家人更需要依賴超脫語言以外的族群認同方式，主觀認同論的出現恰能滿足當代客家族群所需，因此語言本作為族群認同原生論的核心，逐漸轉移成為建構論的核心，在建構論中並與文化、共同祖先等可辨識的特徵內化為個人主觀認同的基礎後，個人再從歷史的、社會的或心理上形成的價值觀、人生觀等從而對族群形成主觀的認同，以滿足當代客家人因應時代、社會變遷的需求。
如今包含政府及民間團體紛從建構的面向、情境的塑造、文化符號的包裝下，使當代客家人不斷調整個人的主觀認同，期盼能對客家族群產生認同感、光榮感、歸屬感。也在所有元素重新包裝的建構過程使每個客家人能夠在心中形成積極對客家族群主觀的認定。因此族群認同的方式的改變在當代已由原生論推向主觀建構論。

關鍵字

語言使用 ； 隱形化 ； 族群認同 ； 中壢客家

並列摘要

The change of the choice of usage of language among Hakka people in Zhongli area began as early when a lot of soldiers moved into this area and decreased the ratio of Hakka people here. In this stage, it was also influenced by the policy of the promotion of the so-called “National Language”. The Hakka people here had an extra option of language -- the official language, to use in their daily life. After that, Taiwan had undergone a large scale of industrialization and social transformation due to the development of economy, many Min-nan people from central and south part of Taiwan moved to Zhongli. Min-nan language played a very important role in the choice of daily use language for civilians and gradually changed the frequency of usage of Hakka language in public occasions. Hakka people were originally minority in terms of economy and politics, then they were also minority in terms of population, too. Hence, the options for daily-used languages for Hakka people here were no longer Hakka language only.

In this research, I made a clear analysis of the process of the change of choice of daily-used languages made by Hakka people in Zhongli area. The reason here is not the same with the one that caused invisblization of Hakka people in urban life. In this essay, I will call the invisblization of Hakka people in Zhongli area the type 2 invisiblizaiton of Hakka people. But is the choice of daily-use language related to ethnical recognition? According to my research, the invisiblization of Hakka language does not result in crisis of ethnical recognition. The main reason for Hakka people to make the choice of daily-used language is not ethnical recognition. The main considerations are usually necessity and convenience for communication. I also found that Hakka people need factors other than language to form ethnical recognition since language can’t provide what they need. The emergence of Constructionsim satisfied the need of modern Hakka people. And language itself had been transformed from the core of Essentialism to the core of Constructionism. In Constructionism, language, along with other identifiable features such as culture and common ancestors, help modern Hakka people form their ethnical recognition. Based on that, modern Hakka people strengthen their ethnical recognition through historical, social and psychological value so they can react to the rapid change of society.

Nowadays, both the government and NGOs are trying hard to help Hakka people adjust their recognition through construction, formation of social circumstance, and promotion of cultural symbols. Hopefully, modern Hakka people can identify themselves as Hakka and feel proud of their culture. To sum up, the way people identify themselves has gradually changed from Essentialism to Constructionism.

並列關鍵字

use of language ； invisiblizaiton ； ethnical recognition ； Hakka people in Zhongli area

參考文獻

羅香林，1973，《客家源流考》。

徐正光，1998，《台灣客家族群關係研究的回顧》。客家文化研究通訊 。

王保健，2012，＜「客家文化重點發展區」的發展途徑＞。城市學學刊2012年9月第三卷第二期：頁37。

黃河、陳信木，2002，《全國客家認同與客家人口之抽樣調查研究》。行政院客家委員會。

楊文山，2004，《全國客家人口基礎資料調查研究》。台北：行政院客家委員會。