1 / 29

Language Variation in a Chinese Region and its Implications for Teaching Chinese as a World Language

This study explores the language variation in a region in China and its implications for teaching Chinese as a world language. The findings provide pedagogical implications for teaching Chinese in U.S. schools.

cgardner
Download Presentation

Language Variation in a Chinese Region and its Implications for Teaching Chinese as a World Language

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Language Variation at a Region in China and Its Implications for Teaching Chinese as a World Language Florida Foreign Language Association (FFLA) Orlando, FL (October 18-20, 2018) Mengyao Liu, M.S.Hilal Peker, Ph.D. mengyao.liu@palmbeachshools.orghilalpeker@utexas.edu Jupiter Middle School of Technology Bilkent University

  2. Statement of the Problem

  3. https://v.qq.com/x/page/k01457o9r49.html • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Mk6xX2vZHA

  4. Why we did the study? • Number of studies on English language variation vs. Chinese language variation. • Classroom implication (Chinese as a foreign language)

  5. LITERATURE REVIEW • Sociolinguistics: the relationships between language and society • The goal being a better understanding of the structure of language and of how languages function in communication (Wardaugh, 2007). • Sociolinguistics is intended for achieving a better understanding of the nature of human language by studying language in its social context and/or to achieve a better understanding of the nature of the relationship and interaction between language and society (Chambers, 2002, 2003; Downes, 1998). • Regional vs. social language variation (Wardaugh, 2007; Labov, 1972) • Social structure is reflected in the linguistic behavior of the speech community and social variation can produce linguistic variation (Trudgill, 1974).

  6. Theoretical Background

  7. Theoretical Framework • Sociocultural Theory (Vygotsky, 1978). • Human learning is described as a social process. • Social interaction plays a fundamental role in the development of cognition& communication.

  8. Purpose of the Study • To examine Chinese language variation among different society levels in Tianjin, China. • To provide pedagogical implications for teaching Chinese as a foreign language in U.S schools.

  9. Research Questions

  10. Research Questions Is there an association between store classification in terms of SES and • body language use; • greeting amount; • employee’s greeting in dialect; • bargaining; • employees’ use of dialectal interaction; • customers’ use of dialectal interaction?

  11. Methodology

  12. Participants: 244 customers & 56 employees • Setting: 5 different types of stores in Tianjin, China (according to SES) • Data Collection: Observation & Field Notes • Data Analysis: SPSS (Chi-Square Test of Independence) & Thematic Coding • The Galaxy shopping mall • YuetanDeparment Store • S.deer (Binjiang Rd.) • CR Vanguard (Nanlou St) • XiaohaidiVetgetable market

  13. Data Analysis and Results

  14. QuantitativeDataResults

  15. Data Result Table 1. Chi-Square Test of Independence

  16. FINDINGS • Chi-Square Test of Independence Analyses indicated that there are statistically significant relationship between the store types and the following factors: • body language use, greeting amount, employee’s greeting in dialect, bargaining between costumers and employees as well as the proportion of employees’ use of dialectal interaction.

  17. QualitativeData Results

  18. Qualitative Data Results • Four main themes that emerged from the qualitative analysis: • a) directness, • b) short greeting, • c) long greeting, • d) deep greeting.

  19. Discussion & Conclusions

  20. DISCUSSION • Lower level store  less body language to greet costumers • Higher level store  enthusiastically as soon as the customers walked in. These greetings did not include any dialectal lexical items. • Lower level stores small greeting amount and sometimes costumers could not find the employee when they tried to ask some questions. • Higher level stores  highgreeting amount. • Lower level storesa variety of dialectal language • Higher level stores standard Mandarin Chinese • Lexical items used in the registers of individuals bargaining were not found in the everyday speech of the higher class individuals (Koka, 2014). • The proportion of employees’ use of dialectal interaction varied depending on the store types that were distributed according to income levels, which explains SES status factor in individuals’ choice of lexical items.

  21. IMPLICATIONS, LIMITATIONS FUTURE RESEARCH • Small sample size • Not enough literature review on Chinese language variation • Case study • * Creating awareness of language variation studies • * Daily language that may be included in Chinese curriculum used in the U.S. • * Teacher qualifications (Standard vs. Dialects) • * Practical skills for people traveling to China

  22. References • Allen, P. (1968). /r/ variable in the speech of New Yorkers in department stores. Unpublished research paper. SUNY: Stony Brook. • Barber, B. (1957). Social stratification. New York: Harcourt, Brace. • Chambers, J. K. (2002). Studying language variation: An informal epistemology. In J. K. Chambers, P. Trudgill, & N. Schilling-Estes (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change (pp. 3-14). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing. • Chambers, J. K. (2009). Sociolinguistic theory: Linguistic variation and its social significance. (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. • Downes, W. (1998). Language and Society (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University • Press. • Ferguson, C. A. (1959). Diaglossia. Word, 15, 325-40 • Fischer, J. L. (2015). Social influence on the choice of a linguistic variant. Word, 14(1), 47-56, DOI: 10.1080/00437956.1958.11659655 • Gumperz, J. J. (1958). Dialect differences and social stratification in North Indian Villages. American Anthropologist, 60(4), 668-682. • Hudson, R. (1996). Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 
 • Johnson, K. E. 2009. Second language teacher education: A sociocultural perspective. New York, NY: Routledge. • Koka, N. A. (2014). A sociolinguistic investigation of social stratification and linguistic variation among the Kashmiri speech community. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5(5), 1071-1084. • Llamas, C. (2007). A place between places: Language and identities in a border town. Language in Society, 36(4), 579-604. • Labov, William. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press/Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 
 • Labov, W., Cohen, P., Robins, C., & Lewis, J. (1968). A study of the non-standard English of Negro and Porto Rican speakers in New York City (Cooperative Research Project Final Report No. 3288, volume 2). Philadelphia, PA: US Regional Survey, 204 N. 35th St. Philadelphia 19104. • Mantero, M. (2002). Scaffolding revisited: Sociocultural pedagogy within the foreign language classroom. Retrieved from Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) database https://eric-ed-gov.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED459623 • Noels, K. A. (2014). Language variation and ethnic identity: A social psychological perspective. Language & Communication, 35, 88-96. • Nuthall, G. (1997). Understanding student thinking and learning in the classroom. In B.J. Biddle, T.C. Good & I. Goodson (Eds.), The International Handbook of Teachers and Teaching (pp. 681-768). Dortrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. • Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 345-375. • Southwood, F. (2013). Towards a dialect-neutral assessment instrument for the language skills of Afrikaans-speaking children: The role of socioeconomic status. Journal of Child Language, 40(2), 415-437.  • Trudgill, P. (1974). Social differentiation of English in Norwich. London, UK: Cambridge University Press. • Trudgill, P., & Hannah, J. (2008). International English: A guide to the varieties of Standard English (5th ed.). London, UK: Hooder Education Press. • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. • Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). The instrumental method in psychology. In J. Wertsch (Ed.), The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology (pp. 3-35). NY: Sharper: Armonk. • Wang, L., Bruce, C., & Hughes, H. (2011). Sociocultural theories and their application in information literacy research and education. Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 42(4), 296-308. • Wardhaugh, R. (2007). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. • Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf. • Zhan, C. (2011). Language variation and the implication for language teaching. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(8), 1028-1030. • Zhan, C. (2013). Speech community and SLA. Journal Of Language Teaching & Research 4(6), 1327-1331.

  23. Questions mengyao.liu@palmbeachshools.org & hilalpeker@utexas.edu

More Related