Today in Guangzhou, Tomorrow in Hong Kong? A Comparative Study of the Language Situation in Two Cities

Many in Hong Kong voice concerns about the fate of Cantonese, including nativists (“localists”) and the general public. Guangzhou is seen as a harbinger of diminishing Cantonese in Hong Kong. News and commentaries paint a gloomy picture of Cantonese in Guangzhou. Yet rarely do we read about surveys...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Barry Sautman, Xinyi Xie
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2020-08-01
Series:Journal of Current Chinese Affairs
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/1868102620983939
id doaj-8b2cb99c555c450e8eca11965b7f36a0
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8b2cb99c555c450e8eca11965b7f36a02021-02-24T01:33:31ZengSAGE PublishingJournal of Current Chinese Affairs1868-10261868-48742020-08-014910.1177/1868102620983939Today in Guangzhou, Tomorrow in Hong Kong? A Comparative Study of the Language Situation in Two CitiesBarry Sautman0Xinyi Xie1 Division of Social Science, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Hong Kong Division of Social Science, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Hong KongMany in Hong Kong voice concerns about the fate of Cantonese, including nativists (“localists”) and the general public. Guangzhou is seen as a harbinger of diminishing Cantonese in Hong Kong. News and commentaries paint a gloomy picture of Cantonese in Guangzhou. Yet rarely do we read about surveys on the range of Cantonese use and identity in Guangzhou. Neither do we see analyses on how the social context differences between Hong Kong and Guangzhou may have contributed to the two cities’ unique language situations. Our study delineates the Guangzhou and Hong Kong language situations, comparing mother tongues, ordinary languages, and language attitudes. Cantonese is unrivalled in Hong Kong and remains vital in Guangzhou. We put the two cities’ different use frequency and proficiency of Cantonese and Putonghua (“Mandarin”) in the sociocultural context of motivation and migration. We conclude that some claims of diminishing Cantonese are unsupported. We also address how likely it is that Cantonese will diminish or even be replaced in Hong Kong.https://doi.org/10.1177/1868102620983939
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Barry Sautman
Xinyi Xie
spellingShingle Barry Sautman
Xinyi Xie
Today in Guangzhou, Tomorrow in Hong Kong? A Comparative Study of the Language Situation in Two Cities
Journal of Current Chinese Affairs
author_facet Barry Sautman
Xinyi Xie
author_sort Barry Sautman
title Today in Guangzhou, Tomorrow in Hong Kong? A Comparative Study of the Language Situation in Two Cities
title_short Today in Guangzhou, Tomorrow in Hong Kong? A Comparative Study of the Language Situation in Two Cities
title_full Today in Guangzhou, Tomorrow in Hong Kong? A Comparative Study of the Language Situation in Two Cities
title_fullStr Today in Guangzhou, Tomorrow in Hong Kong? A Comparative Study of the Language Situation in Two Cities
title_full_unstemmed Today in Guangzhou, Tomorrow in Hong Kong? A Comparative Study of the Language Situation in Two Cities
title_sort today in guangzhou, tomorrow in hong kong? a comparative study of the language situation in two cities
publisher SAGE Publishing
series Journal of Current Chinese Affairs
issn 1868-1026
1868-4874
publishDate 2020-08-01
description Many in Hong Kong voice concerns about the fate of Cantonese, including nativists (“localists”) and the general public. Guangzhou is seen as a harbinger of diminishing Cantonese in Hong Kong. News and commentaries paint a gloomy picture of Cantonese in Guangzhou. Yet rarely do we read about surveys on the range of Cantonese use and identity in Guangzhou. Neither do we see analyses on how the social context differences between Hong Kong and Guangzhou may have contributed to the two cities’ unique language situations. Our study delineates the Guangzhou and Hong Kong language situations, comparing mother tongues, ordinary languages, and language attitudes. Cantonese is unrivalled in Hong Kong and remains vital in Guangzhou. We put the two cities’ different use frequency and proficiency of Cantonese and Putonghua (“Mandarin”) in the sociocultural context of motivation and migration. We conclude that some claims of diminishing Cantonese are unsupported. We also address how likely it is that Cantonese will diminish or even be replaced in Hong Kong.
url https://doi.org/10.1177/1868102620983939
work_keys_str_mv AT barrysautman todayinguangzhoutomorrowinhongkongacomparativestudyofthelanguagesituationintwocities
AT xinyixie todayinguangzhoutomorrowinhongkongacomparativestudyofthelanguagesituationintwocities
_version_ 1724253481041133568