Identities constructed in difference: English language learners in China

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152 www.elsevier.com/locate/pragma

Identities constructed in difference: English language learners in China Michelle Mingyue Gu * B4-2/F-15, English Department, Hong Kong Institute of Education, Taipo, Hong Kong, China Received 19 August 2008; received in revised form 15 May 2009; accepted 1 June 2009

Abstract A large number of studies have been carried out on second/foreign language learners’ identities, but there seems to be insufficient research on the constitutive effect of discourse on L2 learners’ identities, especially among English learners in China. Informed by discourse theory, this study explored how college students’ identities were discursively constructed in and through their English learning experiences. This study identified the discursive strategies of establishing oppositions and differences that the students adopted in identity construction as they interacted within the specific learning community, the surrounding social environment and an imagined global community. The paper starts by discussing the constructs that guide the study and then provides an interpretation of the extracts from interviews and diary studies in a way that takes account of the socio-cultural context in which the investigation takes place. # 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Identity; Difference; Discursive construction; English language learners; China

1. Introduction Since the implementation of its Open Door Policy and shift towards a market economy in the mid-1970s, China has experienced exceptional economic expansion, becoming recognized as one of the fastest-growing economies in the world. At much the same time, China has entered a brave new era of widespread English language learning and teaching, complemented by panoply of significant socio-cultural reforms. Even as far back as the 1980s, China possessed the largest number of English language learners anywhere in the world, with an estimated 50 million Chinese studying English as a Foreign Language (EFL) (Crystal, 1985). In China, a country at the ‘periphery’ (Kachru, 1985), the estimated number of EFL learners rose from 100 million in the 1990s (Zhang, 2003) to the current figure of between 200 and 350 million, a number that may well exceed the total of English speakers in the USA. Over the past decade, a number of studies have argued that L2 learning will influence learners’ identities (e.g., Belz, 2002; Block, 2007; Chik and Benson, 2008; Gao et al., 2007; Kanno, 2003; Pavlenko and Lantolf, 2000; Norton, 1995, 2000; Norton and Toohey, 2001; Pavlenko, 2003), and that ‘‘prolonged contact with an L2 and a new and different cultural setting causes irreversible destabilization of the individual’s sense of self’’ (Block, 2002:4). The context of China, which hosts the world’s largest assemblage of English learners and where rapid socio-cultural, political and * Tel.: +852 64096792; fax: +852 29487270. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected]. 0378-2166/$ – see front matter # 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2009.06.006

140

M.M. Gu / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152

economic changes are occurring, appears therefore an appropriate location for a study investigating the impact of English language learning on learners’ identities. This paper, drawing on poststructuralist theory which postulates that identity is varied, shifting and subject to change, and that language and identity have a mutually constitutive effect (Butler, 2005; Pavlenko, 2001), and informed by discourse theory (Fairclough, 2003; Laclau and Mouffe, 1985; Phillips and Jorgensen, 2002), investigates the identity construction of tertiary English learners in mainland China. 2. L2 learning and identity An increasing number of studies in this area adopt the poststructuralist approach to formulate the concept of identity in L2 learning. According to Danielewics (2001:10), identity refers to ‘‘our understanding of who we are and who we think other people are’’. Such researchers (e.g., McKay and Wong, 1996; Norton, 2000; Siegal, 1996) find the concept of ‘subjectivity’ essential for an understanding of identity in the field of L2 learning. Appropriating the poststructuralist theory of subjectivity, Weedon (1997:32) defines this as ‘‘the conscious and unconscious thoughts and emotions of the individual, her sense of herself and her ways of understanding her relation to the world’’. Weedon (1997:108) notes that subjectivity defines an individual as changing, dynamic and contradictory over historical time and social space, and suggests that identity construction ‘‘occurs through the identification by the individual with particular subject positions with discourses’’. Taking this position, identity consequently reflects an individual’s relationship with the external environment and is regarded as dynamic, multiple and fluid, constructed through the complex and recurrent interactions between the individual and the social. In addition to the intricate perspectives described above, poststructuralist theory also emphasizes the mutually constitutive effect between language and identity. That is to say, ‘‘language is the place where actual and possible forms of social organization and their likely social and political consequences are defined and contested. Yet it is also the place where our sense of ourselves, our subjectivity, is constructed’’ (Weedon, 1997:21). Initial studies of learner identity, conducted in countries where English represents a dominant means of communication, focused predominantly on immigrant learners’ experiences of studying an L2 in their host countries or other similar locations (e.g., Belz, 2002; Kanno, 2003; Norton, 1995, 2000; Norton and Toohey, 2001, 2002; Pavlenko, 2001, 2003). The majority of these studies, employing the poststructuralist approach, tend to reveal the multiple, varied and contradictory nature of L2 learners’ identities. Relatively few studies of EFL learners’ identity construction in their homeland contexts have been conducted. In the case of mainland China, Gao et al. (2002) recently presented a complex picture of the development of three college learners’ L2 identities. They argued that EFL learning can be ‘‘part and parcel of students’ self identity construction’’ (Gao et al., 2002:115) and illustrated how individual learners exercised different degrees of agency in the construction of self-identity. Furthermore, the general belief that a shift from nationalism to transnationalism is an inevitable consequence of the widespread of English in the process of globalization has motivated a growing body of research into the impact of English learning on learners’ national identities (e.g., Block and Cameron, 2002; Joseph, 2004; Pennycook, 1998, 2007; Phillipson, 1992, 2008; Risager, 2006). Perceiving the spread of English as a further manifestation of ‘linguistic imperialism’, some researchers (e.g., Phillipson, 1992, 2008; Skutnabb-Kangas, 2000) maintain that, as a primary tool for globalization, English plays an invasive and aggressive role that conflicts with the linguistic and cultural integrity of other nations. Joseph (2001), however, considers the history of Scotland, Ireland and Wales, and finds that, although English is widely used in these places and has become the main medium of communication and expression, strong national identities have been preserved for hundreds of years; moreover, English may even stimulate a reactive awakening of national identity if imposed too harshly. He maintains, therefore, that ‘‘the spread of English does not necessarily entail the erosion of national or sub-national identities or cultures’’ (Joseph, 2001:232). A further group of researchers, even suggest that young learners of English can develop bicultural identities which entail both a local identity and a global identity that ‘‘gives them a sense of belonging to a worldwide culture’’ (Arnett, 2002:777). Ryan (2006:42) has further expanded this concept of ‘‘L2 learners’ global imagined identity’’ to describe one aspect of the identity of learners who study English as an L2 in their countries of birth. Indeed, Ryan (2006:31) observes that whether the culture accompanying the language of globalization subtracts from or adds to the individual’s existing cultural identity is crucial in determining learner willingness or unwillingness to acquire that culture’s language, and that ‘‘if English really is integral to the globalization processes and learners also feel a part of these processes, then an element of the ‘foreignness’ . . .or threat, is removed’’.

M.M. Gu / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152

141

Agency has also emerged as an important construct through which researchers seek to understand L2 identity and relationships between individuals and the social contexts in which they learn and use second languages. The perspective adopted in this study views agents as being able to reflect upon and to seek to create the social arrangements that facilitate the realization of their own interests and ambitions (Norton and Toohey, 2001; Toohey and Norton, 2003) and which, at the same time, sees structure as being always anterior to learners and providing an enduring context for them. This active notion of agency enables researchers to explore how learners critically examine the social world, consequently exerting power to maintain or modify it. Conversely, social structure, with its anteriority and endurance, has a shaping effect on human agents. A review of the relevant literature reveals aspects of L2 identity still require further investigation and research. First, most empirical studies on identity in the field of language learning focus on the experiences of immigrant learners in host countries where the learners are immersed in the target language and culture, while relatively few studies examine the influences affecting the identity construction of L2 learners who study a second language in their native or home countries, where the L1 not the L2 is the dominant means of communication (e.g., Gao et al., 2002). Second, there is debate over the role of English in shaping learners’ national identity in the process of globalization (e.g., Joseph, 2004; Pennycook, 1998, 2007; Phillipson, 1992, 2008; Risager, 2006) and, by its very nature, the present study under discussion here might serve as an empirical attempt to resolve some of the dilemmas. Third, the operation of discourse at the microlevel, which allows for the exploration of the mediating role of language in identity construction, has not received sufficient attention. This study, therefore, explores the discursive construction of EFL learners’ identity in China and investigates the contextual and social influences on identity development. I do not see this identity development as a one-way process. Rather, I recognize individuals as social agents who create and change things with their pre-positioning in social events and texts (Fairclough, 2003), and who continuously develop a sense of self in and through their engagement with the world (Archer, 2000). In this way, identities are socially constructed and individually enacted in distinctive ways. To address the above issues, the following research question is posited: How do tertiary students in China discursively construct their identities during their English learning experiences? 3. Discourse and identity The mutually constitutive effect between language and identity has been recognized by poststructuralists (e.g., Pavlenko, 2001; Weedon, 1997). Moreover, as Luk and Lin (2007:50) have emphasized, a person’s identities are not pre-decided, fixed and static but are ‘‘highly fluid, sometimes incoherent, fragmented, multiple, and conflicting’’. Perhaps even more importantly, identities are performed in situated episodes of talk (Pennycook, 2003). As Pennycook (2003:528) states, ‘‘it is not that people use language varieties because of who they are, but rather that we perform who we are by (among other things) using varieties of language’’. To explore the discursive strategies that L2 learners may use to establish their identities in different contexts in this study, I employ Laclau and Mouffe’s (1985) discourse theory, Fairclough’s (1992, 2003) critical discourse analysis and Connolly’s (2002) ideas on identity and difference. I draw on Laclau and Mouffe’s (1985) view of discourse as critical to the construction of the meaning of the social world, and that, as ‘‘the fixation of a meaning within a particular domain’’ (cited in Phillips and Jorgensen, 2002:26), it is never permanent, but formed and transformed through interaction with other discourses. As a supplement to Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse theory, Fairclough’s discourse theory (1992, 2003), which emphasizes the interaction between the individual and the social and offers detailed analytical tools for discourse, is employed in this study. According to Fairclough, discourse is a ‘‘[way] of signifying experiences from a particular perspective (1993:138), and is an important form of social practice that ‘‘both reproduces and changes knowledge, identities and social relations including power relations, and at the same time is also shaped by other social practices and structures’’ (1992, cited in Phillips and Jorgensen, 2002:65). According to Fairclough (2003:161), ‘‘achieving social identity in a full sense is a matter of being capable of assuming social roles but personifying them, investing them with one’s own personality (or personal identity), enacting them in a distinctive way’’. In analyzing the data, I draw on Fairclough’s concept of identity to gain insights into the role discourse plays in the formative processes of learners’ identity construction. I also utilize the idea that identities are constructed through difference in that ‘‘it may be impossible to reconstitute the relation to the second without confounding the experiences of the first’’ (Connolly, 2002:44). Besides, the idea of a logic of equivalence is also employed when looking at identities. Laclau and Mouffe (1985) theorize the construction of antagonistic relations in political processes to posit a logic of equivalence, which ‘‘consists in the dissolution of the particular identities of subjects within a discourse by the creation of a purely negative identity that is seen to threaten

142

M.M. Gu / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152

them’’ (Howarth, 2000:107). According to Clarke (2008), ‘chains of difference’ are created in the logic of equivalence as the latter strives to surmount difference, but because of the diffuse nature of meaning and identity, a logic of equivalence is always operationalized through the construction of negative opposing meanings. Fairclough (2003:100) suggests that equivalences and differences can be regarded as ‘‘a general characterization of social processes of classification: people in all social practices are continuously dividing and combining – producing (also reproducing) and subverting divisions and differences’’. According to Connolly (2002:44), ‘‘identity and difference are bound together.’’ As Connolly (2002) further elaborates, ‘‘it may be impossible to reconstitute the relation to the second without confounding the experiences of the first. And that may help to explain the tenacity of resistance to reconstituting the tenor of these relations.’’ Also as Danielewicz (2001:120) notes, ‘‘some identities will be created through dissimilarity and difference, in opposition to persons and positions’’. To summarise the current data analysis procedures, I draw on Fairclough’s idea of intrapersonal identity and Laclau and Mouffe’s (1985) logic of equivalence to gain insights into the role discourse plays in the formative processes of learner identity construction. Further discursive strategies, such as the use of pronouns for indexing self and positioning the other, together with rhetorical devices that serve as a more general means of negotiating different positions, will be elaborated in the following data analysis section. 4. The study This section will first introduce the selection of informants and the research setting, and then describe the data collection process, followed by the methods of data analysis. 4.1. The participants The four participants, Jocelyn, Lisa, Helena and Jane (all pseudonyms), were in their third year at a key university in China when this study started. Jocelyn and Lisa were studying in the English Department, and Helena and Jane in the Bioscience Department. The division of college students in China into English and non-English majors is a significant categorization affecting future English learning opportunities. The two groups differ in English proficiency levels, career orientations, chances of interacting with English L1 speakers, and exposure to western cultures, due to the different curriculum designs for different majors. Therefore, this study recruited students from these two groups of learners. I approached some the students from the two departments and explained the research purpose. Jocelyn, Lisa, Helena and Jane volunteered to participate in the study (Table 1). 4.2. Data collection This investigation was conducted between September 2004 and August 2006. It used periodic interviews, triweekly diaries, online chatting and email correspondence to capture the process of identity construction among the learners. I interviewed the students every four months about their language learning experiences in college in Chinese. The interviews were semi-structured with a range of open questions. These periodic interviews provided opportunities to confirm and check the themes continually emerging. The participants also wrote tri-weekly diaries, in which they noted down their reflections on English learning. Diary entries about what the participants felt, thought and did in English-related activities revealed additional aspects of their experiences and served to cross-reference the interview

Table 1 Participants’ profile. Name

Major

Origin

Learning history

Jocelyn

English

Small-size city

Lisa

English

Big city

Helena Jane

Bioscience Bioscience

Countryside Countryside

A high-achieving language learner in middle school and college; wide interests in politics and Chinese culture; English is her first choice of major A French culture fan; advertising was her first choice of college major, but she was recruited to the English Department as her score was not high enough for her first choice; Less exposure to western cultures and low interest in English before entering college Born into a Christian family; positive attitudes towards western cultures

M.M. Gu / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152

143

data. The diaries enabled the language learners to introspectively and/or retrospectively observe and reflect on their experiences (Allwright and Bailey, 1991). Combining individuals’ records of language learning events together with their introspections, the diary data can throw light on some aspects of language learning that are usually not easily detected (Bailey, 1991). In the email correspondence and online chat, our topics were not limited to English learning, but touched on many areas, such as experiences of growing up, interpersonal relationships, future concerns and so on. 75% of the diary entries were written in English although I indicated to the participants that they could use whichever language they felt most comfortable with when writing diaries. However, this percentage did not undermine the quality of the data; Kramsch and Lam (1999) argue that the written mode in a second language is capable of securing a confident and accurate representation of language learners’ identity. However, by coincidence, all the excerpts from diary entries in this paper were originally written in English, which obviates the possibility of potentially different discursively constructed subject positions arising from writing in the profoundly differing languages of English and Mandarin. I translated all the interviews and the diaries that were originally written in Chinese into English verbatim to maintain their original flavor. However, when transcribing and translating the interviews, I was aware that both talk and transcription are social acts and transcribers bring their own perspectives and language ideology to the work of transcribing talk, which means there is no ‘‘objectivity’ when ‘writing’ a talk (Roberts, 1997). I did not attempt to precisely represent pauses, fillers and vocatives in the translated version of the transcriptions, as I was using critical discourse analysis to explore the construction of the social in language, not using conversation or psychology analysis (Kvale, 1996). I did pay strict attention to preserving and recording grammatical and language features (tense, use of modality, hedges, subjunctive mood, etc.) in translating and transcribing the interviews, as these were critical to my analysis. I also checked the translation of key passages with other researchers who have expertise in both English and Chinese. Kvale (1996) proposed two metaphors for an interview: first, the ‘miner’ metaphor, where the interviewer seeks the true thoughts, beliefs, etc. of the interviewee; or second, the ‘traveler’ metaphor, where the interviewer and interviewee co-construct the meaning of the interview. The former relates more to a psychological-individual perspective, whereas the latter relates more to a socio-cultural perspective. The interview in this study is situated more in the ‘traveler’ metaphor. Therefore, in this study, as a site where speakers can do ‘‘discursive work to address dilemmas and resolve contradictions in order to construct coherent identity’’ (Taylor, 2003:194), the interview language can be regarded as a part of self-positioning. 4.3. Data analysis The process of data analysis was ongoing, recursive and iterative, and operated in tandem with the data collection synchronically. This data analysis was characterized by a gradually evolving process in which the dataset, theoretical framework, coded categories and research question was constantly evaluated, re-evaluated and reformulated. The qualitative research software NVivo1 was used in the first stage of this study as a significant analytical tool for categorizing and coding data, while allowing for a range of possibilities in ways to approach and handle the data. As soon as an interview was conducted or a diary entry was received, the data would be subject to preliminary analysis; this initial analysis often generated new questions, which were then posed in subsequent interviews or email correspondence. Data from different sources were treated together for cross-referencing purposes. After transcription and translation, the interviews, diaries and emails were coded thematically. After transcription and translation, to gain insights into the part played by discourse in the process of identity construction and to examine the discursive strategies the participants used to construct their identities, Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis framework was used as a main analytical tool. Drawing on analytical tools from Fairclough (2003), I examine the construction of identities through the participants’ modality. Modality choices are important in the process of constructing identities, as ‘‘what you commit yourself to is a significant part of what you are’’ (Fairclough, 2003:166). Modality expresses the speaker/writer’s degree of affinity with or affiliation to a proposition or a text participant. In other words, modality reflects the extent to which speakers/writers commit to representations in terms of truth or necessity (Fairclough, 2003). In English, deontic modality is often realized through modal auxiliary verbs such as ‘must’, ‘may’, ‘can’, and ‘should’, modal adjectives such as ‘possible’ and ‘probable’, as well as model adverbs such as ‘probably’, ‘obviously’ 1

NVivo 7 is a computer program assists the researchers to manage and analyze qualitative and textual data. Overall NVivo 7 is very useful in combining analysis with linking, searching and modeling.

144

M.M. Gu / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152

and ‘definitely’, to indicate necessity, obligation, and permission. Taking the following statement as an example, ‘‘you should be out in the fresh air after school!’’. In Chinese, there are corresponding verbs realizing the deontic modality. For example, the literal translations for ‘must’, ‘may’, ‘can’ and ‘should’ are ‘ ’, ‘ ’, ‘ ’, and ‘ ’. Adverbs like ‘ ’, ‘ ’, and ‘ ’ in Chinese mean respectively ‘probably’, ‘obviously’ and ‘definitely’. Epistemic modality deals with the degrees of certainty with and commitment to truth and the reliability of the sources of knowledge supporting one’s claims (Chafe and Nichols, 1986). It is often achieved through tense, hedges, subjectively or objectively marked claims, intonation and tag questions. Hedges, such as ‘a bit’, ‘or something’, ‘sort of’ and ‘kind of’’ ‘it seems’ or ‘it appears’ help the speaker distance him/herself from the proposition. For example, ‘‘It is kind of hard to imagine’’. In Chinese, there are hedges like ‘ ’, ‘ ’, ‘ ’, ‘ ’ to represent the meanings of ‘a bit’, ‘kind of’, ‘or something’, ‘it seems/appears’ First- and third-person statements also produce different modality effects. In Chinese, the first-person and the third-person statements also exist and convey much the same sense of affinity as in English. Tense is another typical device. For example, the categorical assertion ‘is; expresses a higher degree of affinity with the truth of a claim than a hypothetical statement, as in the following examples, ‘‘It is a different culture’’, and ‘‘it would be a different culture’’. The literal translation of ‘is’ is ‘ ’, which also expresses a higher degree of affinity, while the a lower degree of affinity can be expressed through ‘ ’ or ‘ ’ which means ‘would be’ or ‘might be’ in English. In Chinese, adverbials can indicate the tense. For example, ‘ ’ (now, right now, nowadays, etc.), ‘ ’ (today, at present, currently, etc.) imply present time, and ‘ ’ (at that time, then, etc.), ‘ ’ (in the past, in days past, when I was young, etc.), and ‘ ’ (used to) signify time gone by. Evaluation is another device to realize modality. Evaluation involves statements about desirability and undesirability. All the evaluations occurring in interviews and diaries in Chinese were translated literally in English. The logic of equivalence, which is established by placing words of similar ideological import throughout one’s text to strengthen a particular ideological effect (Laclau and Mouffe, 1985), was also considered. For example, in Jane’s statements, ‘‘We Chinese can just learn something from them rather than follow their ways completely because only a nation with unique characteristics can be recognized in the world family’’ and ‘‘now I realize we are different from them in terms of social and cultural backgrounds’’, Jane constructed an ‘us’ community among Chinese people and establishes an ‘other’ community of Westerners here. The use of first-person pronouns such as ‘I’, ‘we’ and ‘us’ were examined against and contrasted with the third-person pronouns such as ‘they’, ‘them’, ‘him’ and ‘her’, to see how the participants established their own subject positions by constructing differences between different groups (Gu, 2009). Three major themes relating to the English learners’ construction of identity were identified: (a) identity in a learning community, (b) identity in local social discourse, and (c) identity on the global stage. After the data analysis was completed, I presented the findings to the participants and asked them to correct any misrepresentation of what they had intended to express. Unless otherwise indicated, all excerpts in this paper are translated versions from the original Chinese. 5. Findings 5.1. Identity in a learning community All four learners were found to adopt discursive strategies to position themselves in the department communities by establishing differences in varying ways. The two English majors, Jocelyn and Lisa, tried to legitimate their own beliefs through stating their own value systems or appealing to authority. For example, Jocelyn contrasted her own beliefs towards life and learning with those of ‘‘many students’’ in the English department: More and more people are just dawdling everyday and don’t really work hard on English although they are English majors. Some of them don’t make any progress in English even after they have been in university for over two years. . . They have no sense of responsibility and no one claims she wants to do something for the country and society. I wish to be able to make society become better. I think my English proficiency would help me play a role in the nation’s progress. So I work very hard on English. I hope one day my voice can be heard. (Interview 4) In the above excerpt, Jocelyn resorted to strong moral evaluations to legitimate her own beliefs. For example, ‘‘dawdling’’, as a pejorative term to negatively evaluate the behavior of others, was adopted to describe the behavior of some students in Jocelyn’s department, who ‘‘don’t really work hard on English’’, and have ‘‘no sense of responsibility’’. Jocelyn established the difference between herself and many of her classmates, since she stated that

M.M. Gu / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152

145

her English learning was related to her potential role of advancing the nation. Difference was constructed in the different attitudes towards English learning between Jocelyn and her classmates. In contrast to Jocelyn, Lisa didn’t feel a great deal of dissonance with the mainstream beliefs and values apparent within the English Department, which was reflected in her use of legitimating strategies to justify the values and beliefs of the community, and her use of a logic of equivalence to construct oppositions between the mainstream and the marginalized in the discourse of the department. For example, in the following excerpt, Lisa set up a binary opposition between two kinds of identities that she was able to discern amongst students of the department. I am happy and feel at ease in our department. We don’t spend much time sitting at our desks and studying English, but as the English saying puts it, ‘‘all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy’’; we want to be fun and cool. So we play a lot. Those students who focus too much on study are definitely not in our group and we think they are kind of dull. (Interview 2) In the above excerpt Lisa established two kinds of identities in almost polar opposition: on the one hand, ‘‘focus too much on study’’, ‘‘kind of dull’’, identify ‘‘them’’; on the other hand, ‘‘we’’, ‘‘fun and cool’’ and ‘‘play a lot’’ identify ‘‘us’’. Through this discursive strategy, Lisa constructed an ‘otherization’ of ‘them’ when talking about students who do not belong to her particular group and who ‘‘concentrate too much on study’’. Lisa identified herself with classmates in the mainstream discourse by constantly using ‘‘we’’. Lisa also derived legitimacy for not spending much time studying English from the English proverb ‘‘all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy’’ to rationalize behavior such as ‘‘play a lot’’. The two learners from the Bioscience Department were found to adopt similar strategies to those of Jocelyn and Lisa, but had different identity formation histories. Helena described herself as a ‘‘marginal person’’ among her classmates because she could not fully integrate into the community. In the following extract, she employed the logic of equivalence to differentiate herself from the mainstream students in the Bioscience Department: As a country girl, I am lonely and often feel isolated. I am introverted and not good at communicating with others. Most of my classmates are from cities and they are talkative, active, confident, energetic and very sociable. (Interview 2) Two kinds of identities were constructed in opposition here. One was the identity of Helena, who was a girl from the countryside and often felt ‘‘lonely’’ and ‘‘isolated’’. The other was that of her urban, and perhaps urbane, fellow classmates, who were ‘‘talkative’’, ‘‘active’’, ‘‘confident’’ and ‘‘energetic’’. While her fellow classmates were ‘‘very sociable’’, Helena herself found it ‘‘not easy to get along with others’’. Helena’s marginal status was thus discursively shaped through the construction of these oppositions. She was not confident of her communication skills, which limited her capacity to practice English. Indeed, she said, ‘‘I am very passive in communication and this has prevented me from practicing how to express myself both in Chinese and English’’ (Interview 2). Although also from the countryside, Jane constructed a quite different identity from Helena. Jane reported that differences existed between herself and the community but she didn’t feel in any way excluded or marginalized: I don’t feel inferior at all although I am from the countryside. . .I cannot speak English well and I know little about the academic world. But I believe in God and believe that all men are created equal. (Interview 4) The repetitive ‘‘I’’ statements in the above text constructed an identity that was in opposition to that of the mainstream members. The adversative statement introduced by ‘‘but’’ indicated that she was still able to find a legitimate position in the community through a profound belief that ‘‘all men are created equal’’. Jane tried to accommodate to and maintain the beliefs of the mainstream community, yet at the same time she constructed her own beliefs, which were not consistent with those of the majority. As she said: My classmates are crazy about studying English to prepare for the TOEFL and GRE. I think that is good, but I would like to practice my communicative competence in English because I think that is the most meaningful part of learning a foreign language. (Interview 3) Whereas Jane claimed that studying English hard mainly for the purpose of passing TOEFL and GRE was ‘‘good’’, she contrasted this with ‘‘the most meaningful’’ aspect of studying a second/foreign language, that is, becoming able to communicate well with others in that language. Here the use of the adjectives ‘‘good’’ and ‘‘the most meaningful’’ still established an opposition discursively, although this was moderated through varying degrees of positivity in her

146

M.M. Gu / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152

orientation to others rather than merely standing in stark contrast between positivity and negativity. Such fine evaluative judgments were used here to legitimate both her beliefs and those of her classmates. Jane subtly established her own beliefs, which were somewhat different from those of her classmates, while still affirming her positive attitudes towards the behavior of ‘‘others’’. 5.2. Identity in local social discourses The findings indicated that the participants negotiated the predominant discourses of the society that were frequently at odds with or contradictory to their own personal values. In their discursive comments, the participants’ identities were constructed. For example, personal success is represented through two oppositional discourses in Jocelyn’s following account: A person who is upright, and becomes successful all by herself won’t be regarded as capable by other people in the present day society. Instead, one who is skilful in establishing a network, to create a good relationship with the boss will be seen as capable, no matter whether he has a good moral qualities or not. Sometimes behind socalled ‘success’ there are some shady dealings. It’s established on many illegal things and others’ pains. But the social environment provides such kinds of people with opportunities to be successful. I think there is a cultural and moral devastation. So sometimes I just wonder about the real meaning of my hard work in studying English and doubt whether hard-work can really bring me to success. (Diary 6, original in English) According to Jocelyn, success as defined by and through social discourse implied that, no matter whether a person had good qualities, as long as he was ‘‘skilful to set up a network, to make a good relationship with the boss’’, he would be seen as capable. She used adjectives like ‘‘dirty’’ and ‘‘illegal’’ to elaborate what lay hidden behind ‘‘so-called’’ success. The use of the nominalization ‘‘cultural and moral devastation’’ metaphorically constructed the social process as an entity. However, the reasons for the devastation, such as what undue role had been played by social connections, and/or what power relations existed at the national and local levels, were missing. It was probably because Jocelyn was still unable to comprehend intricate social phenomena and relations as she had not fully entered society. Jocelyn discovered a conflict between the values she had held dear since childhood and those prevalent in society. ‘‘When I was young, I was educated to be honest and to struggle for success all through my own efforts. But now I find that people’s real values in society are very different from what I have been educated to believe and different from what I learnt from books.’’ Jocelyn’s own beliefs and values were constructed through difference when she discursively constructed the contrasting definitions of success held by society at large and by herself. This conflict in values led to Jocelyn’s confusion regarding her hard work in learning English, as she realized that hard work alone could not offer her the ‘success’ needed in the dominant social discourse (Interview 2). Helena’s attempts to negotiate her own place were evident in the following texts: Now I am thinking of pursuing a PhD degree. But you know, female PhDs are considered as the third gender and are regarded as boring and not knowing how to enjoy life. This is pure prejudice, I believe. Maybe I will continue the PhD study; I am not sure, but I don’t think PhDs are the sole priority of males. (Interview 5) In the above excerpt, Helena commented on society’s attitude towards female PhDs. Gender bias was a problem that had troubled her since childhood (Interview 1). Although Helena thought it was a clear case of prejudice, she was still tentative when she needed to make the decision. This to a certain extent reflected Helena’s inner conflicts and the conflicting discourses impinging on her identity construction. This also influenced her English studies: If I pursue a PhD degree, I should focus on the academic English language in our field. What is needed is accurate and professional language. If I work after finishing my/the postgraduate studies, I should practice business English and English in daily use. What is needed is fluent and native-like language. Now I have no focus, and I don’t think I have mastered either aspect well. (Interview 5) In ‘‘now I have no focus’’, Helena’s uncertainty and ambiguity regarding the dominant ‘prejudicial’ social discourse was reflected. Through her words, Jane showed appreciation of the rapid social development, while concurrently establishing her own identity and philosophy of life at a distance slightly removed from the prevalent social values. Jane did not experience conflicts with some social norms in as strong a way as Jocelyn and Helena did. Also unlike Lisa, who

M.M. Gu / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152

147

constructed an identity that was not socially acceptable, Jane strategically positioned herself in the social setting, as can seen be seen in the following extract: I like the rapidly developing society of China nowadays. We young people have a lot of opportunities. English ability is becoming even more important in China today. A university graduate cannot find a good job unless she has very good English proficiency. English communicative competence is very important because almost all big companies use English as the medium of email communication and as the language of documentation. . .It is after I enter university from the countryside that I first realize how important spoken English is and I want to improve it. (Diary 12, original in English) Jane positioned herself within the community of Chinese young people by using the first person pronoun ‘‘we’’. It seemed that, although Jane sensed disharmony between her own goals in life and what was socially acceptable, she was materially strategic in aligning emotionally her own efforts in English learning with the prevailing social setting. 5.3. Identity on a global stage As the participants had greater exposure to western cultures because of their enhanced English proficiency, all tended to develop a stronger sense of being Chinese. They gradually developed a sense of belonging that transcended the specific learning community and national socio-cultural context and extended to a global community. In establishing an identity within the global community, they were trying to determine the unique characteristics of being Chinese, of Chinese history and culture as well as establishing pertinent differences between China and the rest of the world, particularly the English speaking world. Interestingly, in constructing a global identity, some students compared the English and Chinese languages in terms of value and function, against a backdrop of history and culture, in China and beyond. This supports Silverstein and Urban’s (1996:2) theorization of language ideologies which holds that text is ‘‘useful to participants in a culture as a way of creating an image of a durable, shared culture immanent in or even undifferentiated from its ensemble of realized or even potential texts’’. This also echoes Fishman’s (1996) emphasis on the reciprocal relationship between language and culture, entities which are closely associated and symbolize each other. The increasingly influential role of Chinese language in the world accompanying the rapid development of Chinese society and its obvious potential to become a central world power had been noted by the students. The following quotation offered a typical example: Maybe now Chinese still cannot compare with English. English is the language of globalization, but China is getting stronger and I think it is very possible that one day Chinese will become one of the dominant languages in the world. I know there are more and more Confucius Institutes in universities in the US. Is this a sign that Chinese is becoming more and more important? (Interview 6) Jocelyn compared the current position of Chinese and English and pointed out the social and political ideologies embedded in language learning. China’s rapid development also gave her confidence in Chinese becoming a powerful language, in contrast to the dominant status of English. Jocelyn’s above excerpt also echoed this sentiment. In like manner, Lisa indicated that the English language was ‘‘not born to be superior’’ and that the spread of English could not be separated from globalization: We need not to compare which language is better, Chinese or English. That so many people in the world learn English as the second language is only because of globalization. If Chinese is the core language of globalization, the situation will be the same. (Diary 1, original in English) The categorical assertion here that the dominance of English ‘‘is only because of globalization’’ reflected her wish to defend her constructed identity against the perceived threat of English as acrolect. The students appeared to draw on their cultural identity as a Chinese and their identity as an English user to position themselves in the global community. The students’ ‘pride in China’s resurgence also pushed them to discover a greater awareness and appreciation of the colorful culture and ancient civilization of China. For example, Jocelyn said, Chinese culture is so dazzling and colorful that if we have to spend our whole life studying it, we could only touch a tiny part of it. However, I still believe that only when we Chinese understand and feel proud of Chinese culture, will it gain the full appreciation of Westerners. (Diary 8, original in English)

148

M.M. Gu / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152

Jocelyn’s strong affinity with this necessity was shown in the use of ‘‘have to’’ instead of ‘could’, ‘might’ or ‘should’. In the final sentence, Jocelyn used a personalized ‘‘I believe’’ to express her commitment to truth, and also said ‘‘we Chinese’’ to indicate her solidarity with Chinese-ness and to establish a dichotomy between Chinese and foreigners. Furthermore, her positive evaluation of Chinese culture was shown in the adjectives ‘‘dazzling’’ and ‘‘colorful’’. Jocelyn’s national identity appeared to serve as a resource for her to imagine communicating with people from rest of the world. Lisa indicated that only a person with historical and cultural roots could gain a legitimate position in the global community: I love western fashion and cultures, which makes me happy. English is a key for me to explore more. However, I will never forget I am a Chinese, whichever part of the world I will live in the future. A person with no historical roots will become a person from nowhere. (Interview 5) Lisa set up a dichotomy between what English and Chinese meant to her: English was a tool for her to expand her horizons, while the Chinese language and culture represented her fundamental origins. Helena differentiated between maintaining Chinese ‘‘roots’’ and being ‘‘totally absorb[ed]’’ by western values and ideologies, but didn’t see English as a threat to national identity: Now I am not a follower of western cultures any more, and I have doubts about the possible effect of the widespread use of English nowadays. I don’t want to see the young generation lose their Chinese roots and totally absorb western values and ideologies. . . But I would say that we need to study English well. (Interview 5) Jane had held positive attitudes towards the English speaking community since childhood, but in the process of her learning English, we were able to discern how her national identity was being constructed: One English speaking friend used to influence me. Now I realize we are different from them in terms of social and cultural backgrounds. We Chinese can just learn something from them rather than follow their ways completely because only a nation with unique characteristics can be recognized in the world family. (Interview 4) Jane’s sense of national identity was obvious when she said ‘‘we Chinese’’. In contrast to the construction of an us/ other relationship between herself and her classmates when she delineated her position in the department community, Jane constructed an ‘us’ community among Chinese people and established an ‘other’ community of Westerners here. Her shifting, multiple and inherently conflicted identities were discursively constructed in the texts. As we have seen repeatedly in previous statements, Jane indicated the importance of sustaining Chinese traditions and culture in order to achieve a legitimate position in the world. Overall, and consistent with the pattern we have observed in the other learners, this indicated her construction of identity through difference. 6. Discussion The interaction between the individual and the social has been enlightened by employing the notion of discourse (Fairclough, 1992, 2003; Laclau and Mouffe, 1985; Phillips and Jorgensen, 2002) and by focusing on its constitutive effects on social reality, that is, interpersonal relationships, intrapersonal identity and the underlying system of knowledge and beliefs. It is through discourse that the individual engages with the social and it is also through discourse that the social is expressed by the individual. As such, learners’ identities are constructed through their discursive comments. As has been found in studies on L2 learner identity in other contexts (e.g., Block, 2002; Gao et al., 2002; Norton, 2000), the informants’ identities are changing, multiple and fluid. The informants were found to experience and express opposing and contradictory identities. For example, Jocelyn didn’t occupy a legitimate position in the department community and criticized the prevalent values in society, but when faced with a group of English speakers, she reverted to a more nationally oriented standpoint. Perhaps, going somewhat beyond the findings of previous studies, the findings of the present study indicate that the construction of all the L2 learners’ identities involved the establishment of an opposition. This resonates with Connolly’s (2002) argument regarding the dependency of identity on difference, ‘‘identity is always connected to a series of differences that help it to be what it is’’ (xiv–xv).

M.M. Gu / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152

149

Fig. 1. English learners’ identity and context.

However, the rapid economic and socio-cultural developments in China and the increasingly powerful position of China on the world stage, result in English learners in China experiencing a more complicated process of identity construction. As illustrated in Fig. 1, the English learners showed different discursive strategies in their struggle to acquire a sense of legitimacy as they located themselves in multiple contexts. It is important to note that the three layers of contexts were only separated for analytical purpose, and that they interacted with individual English learners in a simultaneous and interrelated way. At the level of the learning community, the students’ L2 identities are established through ‘chains of equivalence’ between their beliefs and those of ‘others’. It is interesting to note that a marginal position in a learning community does not appear to inhibit individual learners’ learning behaviors. Jocelyn’s statements created a tension between her own beliefs and values and those held by the mainstream discourse in the English Department. However, she also found impetus in the contradictions, in that being identified as a very competent English user would make it possible for her to achieve recognition for herself and her beliefs. Jane strategically positioned herself within a community with whose discourse she was not familiar and for which she did not feel any particular resonance. While acknowledging her appreciation of her classmates’ being ‘‘crazy about studying English to prepare for the TOEFL and GRE’’, Jane clearly indicated that practicing ‘‘communicative competence in English . . . is the most meaningful part of learning a foreign language’’. It seems that, in all the learners’ cases, they have utilized ‘difference’ to either distinguish their own stance from that of other members or to sustain the mainstream values and beliefs of the learning community. This re-affirms Connolly’s (2002) argument regarding the dependency of identity on difference: Identity is always connected to a series of differences that help it to be what it is. . . You need identity to act and to be ethical, but there is a drive to diminish difference. . . a pressure to make space for the fullness of self-identity for one constituency by marginalizing, demeaning, or excluding the differences on which it depends to specify itself. (xiv–xv) At the level of the socio-cultural context of China, participants’ negotiation with some accepted and prevalent social values is represented in ‘chains of equivalence’ between elements of behavior they regarded as appropriate and of which society approved – based on their own interpretation of society. It is found that sometimes the learners’ construction of identity in opposition to the predominant social values restricts their English learning. For example, the tension between the English language, with its colonial associations, and the knowledge that needed to be learned in the same language restricted Lisa’s possible choices. She made a ‘hard’ opposition between her and everything related to English. For Helena, the conflicting social discourses made it difficult to decide whether she should pursue a PhD or start work after getting her master’s degree. She thus constructed two oppositions between being ‘‘accurate and professional’’ and ‘‘fluent and native-like’’ in terms of English proficiency. However, the division Helena made

150

M.M. Gu / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152

between these aspects of English proficiency was likely to lead to her feeling forced to choose one chain of equivalence over another, ignoring the fact that these aspects of language proficiency are not mutually exclusive, but rather, mutually supportive. We can see that the students develop an increasing awareness of the importance of the symbolic resources of being Chinese in establishing a legitimate position in an imagined global community. It seems that the rapid development of Chinese society and China’s burgeoning potential to become a central world power has provided an impetus for learners to establish or assert their national pride and feel a part of the country as it develops. As shown in existing identity studies (e.g., Phillipson, 1992; Skutnabb-Kangas, 2000), EFL learning entails a complex process of shaping learners’ national identity. The participants appears to strive to position themselves in the global community as Chinese with a strong sense of national identity and a lively appreciation of their cultural and historic roots, and to view English proficiency as a means for self-statement and to create a good national image. Referring back to Ryan’s (2006:31) observation that ‘‘if English really is integral to the globalization processes and learners also feel a part of these processes, then an element of the ‘foreignness’, therefore the threat, is removed’’, the findings here indicate that despite setting up oppositions between English and Chinese cultures and languages through contrast and comparison, the participants did not categorise the two cultural and language systems as in any way antagonistic. Rather, they strove to resolve difference through some form of reconciliation between Chinese identity and global identity. 7. Conclusion The participants’ English learning experiences reflect those of many college English learners in China. What we can find, perhaps, is that English learning at the tertiary level is both a process of acquiring language skills, and a process of understanding who the learners are and how they are related to the learning community, the national sociocultural context and the imagined global community. The findings raise the questions how, in the era of globalization, and in face of China’s swift development, do Chinese English learners negotiate the complicated and changing social context and position themselves somewhere between English speaking cultures and the mother tongue and culture, and how do they secure for themselves a legitimate position in the global community? The learners’ individual differences that are demonstrated when they construct L2 identities means that their seeming homogeneity in gender, cultural and linguistic background and their position in similar learning communities and broader social environments do not pre-determine a similar path of identity construction. This strongly suggests that it would be desirable to pursue more in-depth case studies, tracing identity development over a prolonged period and viewing the individual learner as a reflective agent. The contradictions found in individual learners’ identities indicate that it is important for English teachers in China not just to simply train students’ language skills, but be aware that L2 learning is intricately related to learners’ identity construction and then to re-examine their pedagogical practices in order to assist students to incorporate their English learning into their career design and their imagined lifestyle. Further empirical research into identity and EFL learning in China will therefore help to reveal how the increasingly important status of China and the Chinese language might intertwine with the experience of Chinese students who are learning English. Acknowledgements I wish to show my gratitude to two anonymous reviewers, as well as Professor Phil Benson, Dr Matthew Clarke and Dr Philip Glenwright for their valuable comments on the earlier version of this article. References Allwright, Dick, Bailey, Kathleen M., 1991. Focus on the Language Classroom. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Archer, Margaret S., 2000. Human Agency: The Problem of Agency. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Arnett, Jeffery Jenson, 2002. The psychology of globalization. American Psychologist 57, 774–783. Bailey, Richard, 1991. Images of English: A Cultural History of the Language. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. Belz, Julie, 2002. Second language play as a representation of the multicompetent self in foreign language study. Journal of Language, Identity and Education 1, 13–39. Block, David, 2002. Destabilized identities across language and cultural borders: Japanese and Taiwanese experiences. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics 7, 1–19.

M.M. Gu / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152

151

Block, David, 2007. Second Language Identities. Continuum, New York. Block, David, Cameron, Deborah (Eds.), 2002. Globalization and Language Teaching. Routledge, London. Butler, Judith, 2005. Giving an Account of Oneself, first ed. Fordham University Press, New York. Clarke, Matthew, 2008. Language Teacher Identities: Co-constructing Discourse and Community. Multilingual Matters, Clevedon. Chafe, Wallace, Nichols, Johanna, 1986. Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology. Ablex, Norwood, NJ. Chik, Alice, Benson, Philip, 2008. Frequent flyer: a narrative of overseas study in English. In: Kalaja, P., Menezes, V., Barcelos, A.M. (Eds.), Narratives of Learning and Teaching EFL. Palgrave, London, pp. 155–170. Connolly, William, 2002. Identity/difference: Democratic Negotiations of Political Paradox (expanded ed.) University of Minnesota Press, London. Crystal, David, 1985. How many millions? The statistics of English today. English Today 1, 7–9. Danielewicz, Jane, 2001. Teaching Selves: Identity, Pedagogy and Teacher Education Albany. SUNY, New York. Fairclough, Norman, 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Polity Press, Cambridge, UK. Fairclough, Norman, 1993. Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: The universities. Discourse and Society 4, 133–168. Fairclough, Norman, 2003. Analyzing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. Routledge, London. Fishman, Joshua, 1996. Language and culture. In: Kuper, A., Kuper, J. (Eds.), The Social Science Encyclopedia. second ed. Routledge, London and New York, p. 452. Gao, Yihong, Li, Yuxia, Li, Weina, 2002. EFL learning and self-identity construction: three cases of Chinese college English majors. Asia Journal of English Language Teaching 12, 95–119. Gao, Yihong, Zhao, Yuan, Cheng, Ying, Zhou, Yan, 2007. Relationship between English learning motivation types and self-identity changes among Chinese students. TESOL Quarterly 41, 133–155. Gu, Mingyue, 2009. College English learners’ discursive motivation construction in China. System 37, 300–312. Howarth, David, 2000. Discourse. Open University Press, Buckingham. Joseph, John E., 2001. Globalization and the spread of English: the long perspective. Journal of Southeast Asian Education 2, 212–240. Joseph, John E., 2004. Language and Identity: National, Ethnic, Religious. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. Kachru, Braj, 1985. Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism. In: Quirk, R., Widdowson, H.G. (Eds.), English in the World: Teaching and Learning the Language and Literatures. Cambridge University Press Cambridge, for the British Council, pp. 11–30. Kanno, Yasuko, 2003. Imagined communities, school visions, and the education of bilingual students in Japan, Journal of Language. Identity and Education 2, 285–301. Kramsch, Claire, Lam, Wan Shun Eva, 1999. Textual identities: the importance of being non-native. In: Braine, G. (Ed.), Non-Native Educators in English Language Teaching. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 57–72. Kvale, Steinar, 1996. Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Laclau, Ernesto, Mouffe, Chantal, 1985. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. Verso, London. Luk, Jasmine, Lin, Angel, 2007. Classroom Interactions as Cross-cultural Encounters: Native Speakers in EFL Lessons. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. McKay, Sandra Lee, Wong, Sau-Ling Cynthia, 1996. Multiple discourses, multiple identities: investment and agency in second-language learning among Chinese adolescent immigrant students. Harvard Educational Review 66, 577–608. Norton, Peirce Bonny, 1995. Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly 29, 9–31. Norton, Bonny, 2000. Identity and Language Learning: Gender, Ethnicity and Educational Change. Pearson Education Limited, Harlow. Norton, Bonny, Toohey, Kelly, 2001. Changing perspectives on good language learners. TESOL Quarterly 35, 307–321. Norton, Bonny, Toohey, Kelly, 2002. Identity and language learning. In: Kaplan, R.B. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 115–123. Pavlenko, Aneta, 2001. In the world of the tradition I was unimagined’’: negotiation of identities in cross-cultural autobiographies. The International Journal of Bilingualism 5, 317–344. Pavlenko, Aneta, 2003. ‘‘I never knew I was a bilingual’’: reimagining teacher identities in TESOL. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education 2, 251–268. Pavlenko, Aneta, Lantolf, James, 2000. Second language learning as participation and the (re) construction of selves. In: Lantolf, G. (Ed.), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 155–177. Pennycook, Alastair, 1998. English and the Discourses of Colonialism. Routledge, London. Pennycook, Alastair, 2003. Global Englishes, rip slyme, and performativity. Journal of Sociolinguistics 7, 513–533. Pennycook, Alastair, 2007. Global Englishes and Transcultural Flows. Routledge, London. Phillips, Lousie, Jorgensen, Marianne W., 2002. Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Phillipson, Robert, 1992. Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Phillipson, Robert, 2008. The linguistics imperialism of neoliberal empire. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies 5, 1–43. Risager, Karen, 2006. Language and Culture: Global Flows and Local Complexity. Multilingual Matters, Clevedon. Roberts, Celia, 1997. Transcribing talk: issues of representation. TESOL Quarterly 31, 167–171. Ryan, Stephen, 2006. Language learning motivation within the context of globalization: an L2 self within an imagined global community. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies 3, 23–45. Siegal, Meryl, 1996. The role of learner subjectivity in second language sociolinguistic competency: Western women learning Japanese. Applied Linguistics 17, 356–382. Silverstein, Michael, Urban, Greg (Eds.), 1996. The Natural History of Discourse. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London. Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove, 2000. Linguistic Genocide in Education—Or Worldwide Diversity and Human Rights? Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. Taylor, Stephanie, 2003. A place for the future? Residence and continuity in women’s narratives of their lives. Narrative Inquiry 13, 193–215.

152

M.M. Gu / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 139–152

Toohey, Kelleen, Norton, Bonny, 2003. Learner autonomy as agency in sociocultural settings. In: Palfreyman, D., Smith, R.C. (Eds.), Language Autonomy across Cultures: Language Education Perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingtoke, pp. 58–72. Weedon, Chris, 1997. Feminist Practice and Poststructuralist Theory, second ed. Blackwell, Malden, MA. Zhang, Hang, 2003. Chinese Englishes: history, contexts, and texts. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, PhD, IL, Unpublished. Mingyue Gu (Michelle) recently completed a doctorate at the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China. She is currently a post-doctoral fellow at the English Department, Hong Kong Institute of Education. Her research interests include language and identity, discourse theory and discourse analysis, teacher education and second language learning motivation.