Mega Explorer

Can Hong Kong Cantonese become an international language?

Whenever people come across my meetup group called “The Hong Kong Cantonese Code-mixing Group” that I started on meetup.com recently, they often find it quite intriguing that I am trying to promote Hong Kong Cantonese into a world-class international language, as it sounds like an idea taken to such an extreme that is beyond imagination. It’s as if I’m giving people an impression such as “Wow! What a grand vision this is! I have never imagined Hong Kong Cantonese would become a world-class international language! By the way, why the extra words ‘world-class’?” While the words ‘world-class’ could seem a bit redundant at first hand, but if I were to answer this question precisely, I would have to say that I added the words ‘world-class’ because my aim isn’t just to promote Hong Kong Cantonese into an international language, but also one that has a prestigious status like the Queen’s English in the UK. This may seem laughable and absurd, as there aren’t notably different accents in Cantonese that denote different levels of social class. But from the perspective of sociolinguistics, we can see that Hong Kong people’s habit of inserting English words into their mother-tongue conversation, known as “code-mixing” in academic terms, nevertheless enacts a de facto concept of social class into the Cantonese language. So the question is, if code-mixing has enhanced Hong Kong Cantonese to a new distinct variety that incorporates the concept of class, shall we promote this variety to gain a wider recognition, or even to a point where it can achieve a world-renowned status one day?

Graphical representation of Cantonese tones (Source: Cantonese Tones)

When people talk about the next most common language of the world nowadays, Mandarin would usually be one of those among the top of the list that people have in mind. Without even going into the relatively lower difficulty for foreigners to pick up the language compared to Cantonese, Mandarin is the language spoken by the world’s greatest economic power, which means it has a very high practical value for those who conduct businesses. But what about Cantonese? What would be the reasons for people learning Cantonese other than to work in Hong Kong or in the southern part of China? In a recent article that I’ve read on SCMP by Luisa Tam, it seems to highlight the fact that the Cantonese language is not ‘particularly gentle or pleasant on the ear’, which aligns exactly with what a lecturer used to say during my years studying for a bachelor’s degree in Translation. Basically, it was a very similar retelling of a story about a western person who had come to Hong Kong, listened to the way Cantonese speakers spoke, and then thought, “Why are these people arguing?” But apart from this, what I found the most amusing about the article was that the journalist gave the analogy that if Mandarin had a singsong tone like classical music, then Cantonese would have to be belted out like rap music.

Korean star Rap Monster — Rap Monster Korean star (Image Source)

So if you’re new to Cantonese and have read up to this point, you might be now wondering whether Cantonese is really worth learning anymore, especially when it seems to have an argumentative tone intrinsically attached to it. But what if I told you that the English-mixed version of Cantonese is a new distinct variety that is not the same? In the article that I have written on whether Hong Kong Cantonese has evolved to a new stage, I have mentioned that the younger generation nowadays are incorporating a lot more English words and phrases into their Cantonese conversation than before, and revealed that there are quite concrete explanations as to why people choose to express an item in English rather than in Cantonese instead. Even though this work is still under progress here, we can already see that there are many code-mixing usages that have existed for a long time since the past generation, as if they have been hardcoded into the Hong Kong Cantonese language. In addition to the prime example of ‘Auntie’ or ‘Uncle’ from my previous article, if we were to replace a code-mixing usage such as the English word “present” (verb) with the equivalent phrase in Cantonese ‘匯報’, it would probably sound too old-fashioned and take us a whole century back!

So if code-mixing has become the norm in the development of a language, what would it mean for the status of the language? Well, in our case, if the usage of English has become well-integrated in Hong Kong Cantonese, we can say that Hong Kong Cantonese has also become more international as it is being influenced by English. As of now, foreigners may only sense our internationalism through our short English utterances in our mother tongue Cantonese language, but in the years to come, our language may have a chance to evolve into code-switching (the insertion of a foreign language inter-sententially) if we utilise more English words, phrases, and clauses in our increasingly globalised workplaces. But the question is, will this evolution make Hong Kong Cantonese become more international or the other way around? That is, when we come to think of it at a deeper level, code-switching at the sentence level may mean that the two languages are becoming more separate than before, rather than one language being influenced and enhanced by another language in the case of code-mixing. So does that mean Hong Kong Cantonese is in a pretty good spot right now? No matter what, let’s keep moving forward in our language development and not backwards in time! 🙂

Can code-mixing be a form of language that can be appreciated?

code-mix-art-1 — A Hong Kong mother says to her child when she introduces her friend, “Son, call Auntie right now!” Son says to her mother’s friend, “Hello, Auntie.” (Calling someone ‘Auntie’ or ‘Uncle’ is known as a cultural custom for showing your respect for a senior who you have just met. Source: SCMP article by Luisa Tam)

When foreigners come to Hong Kong and hear us talk in our mother tongue language Cantonese in a style that is mixed with English (known as “code-mixing“), it often gives people the impression that we are international citizens who are quite used to using English in our daily lives. But at the same time, people tend to question whether this conversation style is a good or a bad habit, as it is often seen as a way to raise one’s social status more than anything else. Recently, I have read a few ‘rant articles’ on the internet regarding code-mixing: one written by a mainland Chinese person and the other by a Taiwanese person, who have both expressed their utter dissatisfaction at the use of code-mixing by a Hong Kong person and a Taiwanese person respectively. This made me reflect on myself, as I am also a native Hong Kong person who attained quite a habit of code-mixing from studying overseas in Canada. So I asked myself, “Is code-mixing really that bad and inappropriate? And if it drives people nuts, should I stop talking in this style? Because to be honest, I really don’t mix English words into my Cantonese conversation for the sake of raising my social status, but I have just gotten used to this talking style for a long time, as if this habit of code-mixing was in my blood since I was born!”

code mix pic2 — I would like to say, “This is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put!” (Quote from Winston Churchill)

Perhaps the first thing that we should do before we make a real judgement on someone is to identify the intention behind their use of language. But when it comes to doing such a thing, it can be extremely difficult because we may have already formed a stereotypical image of a person from their language community in our own minds, based on our past experiences. In addition, it is very easy for us by human nature to make generalisations, whether they’re of things or people, especially when our past experiences were unpleasant. At times, we may even manifest our feelings and thoughts solely based on those past experiences, which can lead to a whole language community being mocked or even discriminated. As a result, the entire language community can take a hit in reputation if we spread the word to others, and those other people may spread the word to even more people, and so on. But as we are living in year 2020 where the world has become vastly globalised compared to just a few decades ago, can we now say that we can make a fair judgement on a person solely based their language spoken?

codemix pic3 — A classic example of code-mixing in Hong Kong Cantonese. An extra “you” for politeness! 🙂

In a place like Hong Kong where it’s famously known as an international finance centre with an influx of foreigners all the time, it makes a lot of sense that we native Hong Kongers have adopted so much foreign vocabulary in our local language, as we are very used to accommodating to speakers of other languages during a conversation. However, it is interesting to see that our daily primary language of use is still Cantonese, even though our official languages are both Cantonese and English. If we look at the government statistics, we can see that there is still about 88% of the population in Hong Kong that speaks Cantonese, which means that the culture of Hong Kong still primarily revolves around the Cantonese language. Yet, compared to the other Asian communities nearby Hong Kong, we tend to be a lot more open-minded on the habit of code-mixing in our daily conversation, which one could say is related to our overall English proficiencies being higher than average. But the question is, why do people have such a negative impression of code-mixing?

hong kong code-mix pic 4 — Similar to Urban Dictionary, this is a Hong Kong Cantonese code-mixing dictionary that I have started on my website recently. (Click here to view)

In an article that I have previously written here, I have mentioned that it takes a lot more skill to code-mix than it is to utter loan words in one’s mother tongue language, as code-mixing in the strictest sense involves correct pronunication of foreign words, which requires adequate cultural literacy in a foreign language. But the thing is, as code-mixing is a mixture of two entirely different languages, can one say that code-mixing could be a legitimate kind of language, especially if there are no rules and constraints involved? Interestingly enough, I have recently gathered evidence of possible explanations behind code-mixing usages of Hong Kong Cantonese in my Hong Kong Code-mixing Dictionary project here. Furthermore, code-mixing terms in Hong Kong Cantonese have already long existed back in the colonial days from our past generation, as terms such as ‘auntie’ or ‘uncle’ are ones that a person must know in order to show respect for someone that they have just met (not even for a person who doesn’t speak Cantonese!), especially when the other person is more senior and of higher authority. Nonetheless, the most important question boils down to: should we allow this habit of code-mixing to continue or cease for the future development of Hong Kong Cantonese? This, I would say, is at the heart of whether code-mixing can become a form of language that can be appreciated, as different people may have different opinions on how language should be developed based on their own past experiences, cultural upbringing, education background, etc.

*For a thorough explanation of my recent language project on Hong Kong Cantonese, please go to: https://www.megaexplorer.net/hklang.html

Has Hong Kong Cantonese evolved to a new stage?

Hong Kong code-mixing

Code-mixing, an academic term that refers to the insertion of foreign words into one’s mother-tongue conversation, has always had a bad rap in the eyes of educators. Yet, it is an emerging trend among the younger generation nowadays due to globalisation at workplaces and the abundance of English learning resources and media in English medium on the internet. Not only do people code-mix words nowadays, but phrases and clauses are also beginning to be more common in Hong Kong Cantonese speech. So can we now say that English is well integrated into Hong Kong Cantonese such that it is now imperative that you should know how to code-mix English words into your Cantonese conversation as a Hong Kong person? And if our new form of Englishised Cantonese is representative of who we are as Hong Kongers, how shall we convince other nations that it is indeed ‘the language’ that we speak?

linguistics pic

In the realm of linguistics, all languages are equal. As long as the popularity of a language rises to a point where there are enough language users, a language can become nativised and turn into a new distinct variety of its own. An exemplar of this would be Singaporean English, where it has not only become nativised, but also a part of people’s everyday life conversation. So this begs the question: Can a code-mixed language become nativised? This question may seem absurd and laughable, but there are countries where code-switching (switching between languages at the sentence level) has become a part of people’s everyday lives, such as the Philippines. However, compared to code-switching, code-mixing may only seem like a mere embellishment of a language, especially when the language user is only utilising English to display a high social class. In other cases, it could even just be as result of necessity at the globalised workplaces in Hong Kong today. Nonetheless, it has become quite the trend of the way young people speak nowadays and if this defines who we are as Hong Kongers from a linguistics perspective, should this code-mixed language be promoted to gain a wider recognition, or even taken further for development to incorporate even more English words and phrases?

Hong Kong code-mixing dictionary

If we were to imagine that our code-mixed Cantonese language became a legitimate kind of language, one that would be used in formal writing or even in government documents, what would it look like? First of all, there would need to be grammarians, linguists, and other language experts to come up with rules and constraints of using this language. In addition, we would have our own dictionary with entries on how to code-mix each English word into our Cantonese language, as well as precise descriptions on the inferred meaning which should be different from the same thing being expressed in Cantonese entirely. This could be hard, especially when the speaker is merely code-mixing English words to display a high social class, and sometimes, code-mixing could only be as a result of language deficiency of the speaker not knowing how to say something in Cantonese entirely. But is it worth taking a look at this language phenomenon anyway, as there have already been code-mixing phrases brought down to our Hong Kong Cantonese language from our past generation since the colonial days?

Hong Kong code-mixing lingua franca

While one could say that the Hong Kong Cantonese language was just largely due to the influence of the English culture, we can see that there are words taken from the English language in order to maximise communicative efficiency, as Hong Kong is a fast-paced urban city. For example, we use generic words such as ‘suppose’ and ‘expect’ to take the meaning of different Chinese verbs, and nouns such as ‘case’ and ‘project’ to take the meaning of different Chinese nouns. Moreover, there are features that are exclusively available in English that can make the speaker sound more formal and indirect. For example, the word ‘prefer’ can allow the speaker avoid from saying ‘I like this item more’ directly, the adverb ‘somehow’ can allow the speaker avoid from saying “I don’t know why” to save face in a formal situation, and the verb ‘depends’ can also make the speaker sound more formal and seem less hesitant in making a decision. Nonetheless, code-mixing is still a very complex phenomenon, as the speaker’s intention for incorporating English words into their mother-tongue conversation can be different every time, depending on the context. But the question is, how shall we explain to foreigners that our Englishised Cantonese language is not merely due to the influence of the English culture, but also has a degree of logic and pragmatism, and most importantly, matches our cultural identity as Hong Kong citizens? This may not be that difficult, if we gather our strengths to analyse as many code-mixing samples as possible, in order to uncover the existence of a code-mixed language.

* For my latest project on code-mixing in Hong Kong, please go to: https://www.megaexplorer.net/hkdict.html

試問香港廣東話是否發展到一個新的地步嗎?

Hong Kong code-mixing

在教育界人士的眼中，中英夾雜，或在學術上叫“語碼轉換”，從來都被看為較負面的語言習慣。然而，由於香港的工作間越來越全球化，以及網上的英語學習資源和英語媒體的數量日日增加不盡，中英夾雜的語言現象在香港年青人的日常對話中便變得越來越普遍。香港人已經不單只擅長於在對話裡夾雜英文詞彙，還有較長的英文詞組及子句。試問作為一位香港人來說，若果英語已經融合於我們的廣東話之中，夾雜英語可算是成為了我們語言的重要元素之一？加上，若果我們英語化的廣東話能夠代表我們香港人的話，我們應該怎樣說服外國人這正是我們的“語言”呢？

Linguistics concept

若果我們細想一下香港的中英夾雜廣東話成為了一個合法的語言，即是可用於正式文體，猶如政府公函裡，試問那個時候的情景會像怎樣呢？首先，我們需要聚集一班文法學家、語言學家及其他語言專家來製定出中英夾雜的語法規則和限制。另外，我們還會出版一個夾雜字典，教導學者怎樣有規律地夾雜英文詞彙。這可能會相當困難，尤其是當說話者只是利用英語來表現自己的高尚身份，或者只是根本原於語言缺失。不過，由於香港的殖民地時代已經帶下來許多中英夾雜詞語，這個夾雜現象或許值得我們探索一下呢？

Hong Kong code-mixing dictionary

在語言學之中，所有語言都是平等的。只要某種語言的使用者數量達到某一個程度，該語言就會“本土化”成為一種新的語言類別。新加坡的英語就是一個挺好的例子，我們可看見英語不但本土化，還成為了本土人的日常對話。這引出一個問題：試問一個夾雜（code-mix）的語言能夠本土化嗎？這個有可能是一個很荒謬和可笑的問題，但是在某些國家，例如菲律賓，“語碼轉換”（code-switch）成為了人們的日常對話形式。不過，相比於“語碼轉換”，夾雜只可能是一種語言修飾，尤其是當說話者利用英語來表現自己的高尚地位。在其他情況之下，夾雜只不過是工作間的日常所須。然而，夾雜成為了現代香港年青人的對話形式。因此，從語言學的角度來看，若果中英夾雜能夠定義“香港人”的話，我們就應不應該把我們的夾雜語言推廣，甚至把它再進一步發展和接納更多英語詞彙呢？

Hong Kong code-mix lingua franca

對於一般人而言，香港廣東話出現了中英夾雜只不過是受了英語文化的影響。不過，我們還看見廣東話接納了某些英語詞彙後是能夠提升溝通效率的。例如，我們喜歡利用一些通用詞語來代替不同的但意思相近的中文詞彙，猶如動詞“suppose”和“expect”、名詞“case”和“project”等等。另外，英語擁有一些獨有的功能，能夠使說話者在正式場合顯得莊重得體。例如，“prefer”能夠讓說話者避免直接說“我比較喜歡這樣東西”、 “somehow”能夠讓說話者在正式場合避免說“我不知道原因”，“depends”能夠讓說話者顯得較莊重和避免給別人猶豫的感覺。儘管如此，由於說話者的夾雜動機會因語境而改變，中英夾雜仍然是一個非常複雜的語言現象。無論如何，我們應該怎樣跟外國人解釋我們的夾雜現象不只是受了英語文化影響，而是用處還有一些邏輯和實際原因，還有最重要的是，中英夾雜是形合我們香港人的文化呢？因此，若果我們能夠聚集力量去分析每一個夾雜現象的原因，我們或許有一天會發現到“夾雜語言”是存在的。

Why is Hong Kong English not considered as a proper form of English?

Out of all the different varieties of English, the earliest varieties of English, namely British and American, still seem to have the highest status in the world and being taken as a model for English as an Second Language (ESL) learners to this very day. However, English has also branched out into other native varieties such as Australian, Canadian, New Zealand, etc, as well as non-native varieties such as Singaporean and Indian. But when English spreads into Asia, it seems as though English can hardly integrate with the Asian languages. As such, Chinese English is often labelled as ‘Chinglish’, Hong Kong English as ‘Honglish’, Japanese English as ‘Japanglish’, and so on. But does that mean these Asian varieties of English can never develop into a nativised form like Singaporean English or Indian English? At present, even though English is an official language of Hong Kong, English does not seem to be a language that Hong Kong people regard as a huge part of their cultural identity, as the daily primary language of use at work and home is Cantonese. So the question is, if our English proficiency has a direct correlation with our association with a particular culture, does that mean Hong Kong English can never become nativised unless we incorporate English culture into our daily lives?

Whenever we are being evaluated of our English proficiencies, we are often judged harshly in each and every way, from grammar to accentuation to conversational tone, style, formality, etc, as English is the international language through which foreigners communicate with us. But what makes Hong Kong English sound so improper that people would not accept it as a proper form of English? First of all, the sound system of Cantonese is fairly limited, and we do not have different forms of a word such as adding ‘ed’ for past tense or ‘s’ for plural, etc. Hence, whenever we make such grammar mistakes, people tend to treat it as improper, as if we are too lazy to add those particles to the ends of those words. But why do these things matter so much if we are still able to get our message across to the listener? After all, it is just a social impression that we generate, and yet, it is something that people judge us by.

Perhaps the first thing that we should ask ourselves is that if language is just an impression, then why does impression matter? For instance, impression is when you go to work and get yourself dressed properly. Impression is when you present yourself well when you first greet somebody. Impression is when you show good table manners when you have a meal with somebody, and so on. So if the secret to learning a language is in generating an impression, then should this be something that we focus more on, rather than the technicalities of speaking a language? This may sound absurd, but if we were to imagine that this were the method of attaining proficiency in a certain variety of English, such as the Queen’s English in the UK, how would it be taught? I can imagine the teacher giving instructions such as “In order to attain this English accent, you have to have your head held high. Real high.”

So if learning a language were entirely abstract, what would it mean for students who are pursuing their English studies in a non-native English speaking country? Would students be hopeless if they learn English from a non-native speaker? For one thing, we must be aware that there are still other countries where English is commonly used, even though the sound system still more or less adheres to that of the local dialect, such as in India and Singapore. So if people from such nations can be proud of their English variety, why can’t we be? We may be criticised in terms of tense and mispronunciation, but if we never use or practice it enough, our form of English can never develop. Nonetheless, the popularity of a language boils down to the extent we associate ourselves with the language’s culture, as language and culture are often interwined. So can English be more than just a workplace language in Hong Kong? If the answer is that language and culture cannot be separated, and that speaking another language will make us become more like someone from another culture, such as following another set of beliefs and value system, then maybe speaking a foreign language can only go so far in becoming a small part of a local language’s culture.

What is the most effective way of learning English as an ESL learner?

As English as a Second language (ESL) learners, we tend to hear a lot from people around us that we should read a lot of English books when we are small, in order to become fluent in English. As the term for ‘studying’ in Chinese is ‘讀書’, which means ‘to read a book’, it undeniably makes a lot of sense that studying should always be revolved around ‘the book’. So even when parents would really like to send their children overseas to study in an English-speaking environment, the Chinese term ‘讀書’ still seems to tell us that we should always stick to a book whenever we study, as if it is the ideal, traditional way of doing it. But if that is the case, does it mean that we should always spend a lot more time reading a book whenever we study? Or is studying so much more than that?

Whenever people ask me why my English seems so fluent or why I have a native English accent, people tend to get the impression that I must have studied English in a foreign country at a very young age, as if I never needed to spend much effort in studying English, like the language was spoon-fed to me entirely. However, even though I had the privilege to study in an English-speaking environment at the age of 7, it actually took me a lot of time for me to develop an interest in books. In fact, it wasn’t until my senior years of high school when I became very interested in reading books as a hobby, such as Sophie’s World and books by Steven Hawkings. As I was brought up in a family where hardly anyone had the privilege to finish school and knew much about education, it just always occurred to me that homework was more of a chore than anything else, even though I always tried my best to finish them. So the question is, if you had the privilege to attain fluency in an English-speaking environment at a young age, does it mean that you can get away with reading books?

While language fluency may be a God-given gift bestowed upon us, language proficiency may still be something that one needs to earn through studying hard, especially by reading books. But at the same time, one can be very proficient in English, while fluency can still be a struggle. So what is it that we should focus more on when we study? First of all, we should know that fluency comes from interacting with people because by definition, it is the ability to speak or write a language well. In other words, it is essential to have fluency in order to communicate well with others. However, a person may still be lacking in proficiency even if they have fluency, if they lack a certain level of vocabulary. So is reading books an essential thing for ESL learners to improve in English? Or is practicing English conversation a better option for developing both fluency and proficiency?

The reality is that all education systems tend to have a ‘good student model’ that expects students to do well on tests and exams. However, in order to avoid rote-learning and to put our knowledge to good practical use, we must constantly stay connected with people around us. Thus, we can have all the proficiency we can attain in a language, but if we do not have adequate fluency, we may still fail to communicate with others. On the other hand, having great fluency to a native level can make a person feel prideful and forget about the importance of learning from books because at times, we may not be immersed in an environment where there are bright minds or teachers who know how to instill wisdom unto their students. So what is the most effective way of learning English as an ESL learner? It may be a difficult question as each and every one of us prefers a different learning style, but if we can look at all the learning styles as a colourful spectrum that is fun and appealing to explore, we may get closer to finding the answer within ourselves.

Should code-mixing be seen a sign of language deficiency or rather… a skill?

As English as a Second Language (ESL) learners, whenever we speak in English and inadvertently switch to speaking in our mother-tongue language, people tend to get the impression that it is as a result of us not being able to express ourselves in English. But what about code-mixing (an academic term that means the speaker inserts words from a foreign language into their mother tongue conversation)? According to education experts, code-mixing is often regarded as a bad habit or even ‘language pollution’ because it is understandably ridiculous that students are not to be encouraged to speak or write in dual languages in tests or exams. However, an interesting phenomenon is that Hong Kong local primary and secondary school students are having such a habit of code-mixing in their Chinese oral exams. So the question is, if the environment of Hong Kong is conducive to code-mixing in the Hong Kong Cantonese language, should code-mixing be promoted as an important characteristic of the language, such that we should even take it further for development?

Most Hong Kong people would say that code-mixing is just a necessity, which is as a result of attaining communicative efficiency in speech. If we take a look at some research papers written by scholars, such as the one here by Patrick Chu from Chinese University of Hong Kong, the “principle of economy” has been shown to be the major reason behind the choice of using English words over Chinese words, due to a lower number of syllables in English. However, there are also cases where both the Chinese word and English word have the same number of syllables, or where the English word has a higher number of syllables than the Chinese counterpart. This means that English has either a strong influence over Chinese or there just isn’t an equivalent word in Chinese that can express the same thing in English. But one thing that has to remain true for code-mixing to happen or exist is that a foreign language must have gained a certain degree of acceptance in the local culture’s dialect.

But why do we not ever consider code-mixing as a legitimate kind of language? First of all, the speaker remains in the same language medium as though nothing much is changed. Secondly, the syntax and grammar adheres to that of the mother-tongue language, making the foreign language appear more of something like a salad dressing, than it is really being integrated with the mother-tongue language. So unless we code-switch inter-sententially (an academic term that means the speaker switches from speaking sentences from their mother tongue language into a foreign language, and then back and forth) and utilise more expressions from the foreign language, the speaker might just appear pretentious when he or she only uses common English expressions for code-mixing, such as “I mean”, “I prefer”, “basically”, “generally”, “I suppose”, etc. In fact, the recent fake ABC phenomenon in Hong Kong is an exemplar of how code-mixing using common expressions in English can be exploited for the sake of displaying a high social status, rather than utilizing the foreign language’s vocabulary to explain a complicated concept, along with inferring a genuine sense of integration with the foreign language’s culture.

So should code-mixing be encouraged for those who lack cultural literacy in a foreign language? No matter what, we should realize that code-mixing should also involve proper pronunciation of English words because unlike loan words, which are borrowed and taken from a foreign language and became fully integrated into the mother tongue language, code-mixing should follow the sound system of the foreign language entirely. Eg. ‘Sha lup’ should be pronounced as ‘shut up’, ‘cervix’ as ‘service’, ‘peen’ as ‘print’, ‘fan’ as ‘friend’, etc. The same applies for English words that are integrated into the Cantonese sound system rather than the original English pronunciation such as ‘tay屎’ (taste), ‘high卡屎’ (high class), ‘穿屎’ (twins), ‘煙科屘唇’ (information), etc. Hence, code-mixing is actually not such an easy skill because the speaker requires a certain degree of literacy in the foreign language in order to attain proper pronunciation of the foreign words. So shouldn’t code-mixing be seen as an improvement or enhancement of your mother tongue language as it requires some skill to be done properly? As for now, people don’t tend to see it that way, but maybe some day when the world is globalised to a much greater extent, they will.

試問“語碼轉換”應該被視為語言缺失，還是一種技能呢？

作為以英語為第二語言學者，當我們說英語無意地轉回說母語的時候，人們總覺得這是因為我們不能夠流利地用英語表達自己。相反，若果我們說母語時“語碼轉換”（或稱“轉碼”，在學術上指說話者在說母語時夾雜外語的詞彙。）的話，那又算不算是語言缺失呢？對於教育界人士來說，由於教育制度從來都沒有提倡過用雙語作答試題，說母語時“語碼轉換”都通常被視為不良好的語言習慣，甚至阻礙語言發展，或造成“語言污染”。不過，現時香港的中學及小學生仍然在中文口試裡中英夾雜，可說是挺有趣的現象。因此，試問若果香港的語言環境根本是有助於中英夾雜，我們應不應該把“語碼轉換”推行為香港廣東話的重要元素之一，甚至把這元素再更進一步發展呢？

對於一般香港人而言，“語碼轉換”只不過是日常所需的，務求溝通時簡潔流暢。若果我們參考一些學者的學術研究的話，例如中文大學Patrick Chu的研究，我們可以看見由於“語碼轉換”採用許多對應的英文字比中文字的字數都是較少的，“principle of economy”（意思即是“節省原則”），就是說話者“語碼轉換”的最大原因。不過，有時候“語碼轉換”的對應英文字比中文字的字數是相同的，或甚至有時候字數還是較高的。這現象可代表到中文沒有更貼切的對應字詞，或者英文的勢力本身對中文就有龐大的影響。畢竟，若果“語碼轉換”要有生存空間的話，外語必須在本地文化之中達到一定程度的接納。

但是為什麼我們從來都沒想過“語碼轉換”能夠成為一種得到認可的語言呢？首先，說話者留在同一個語言頻度裡，彷彿沒什麼變動。另外，語法和句子結構都跟從母語的模樣，使外語顯得像醬汁加上沙律一樣，不能夠真正融合在母語中。因此，除非我們“句外轉碼”（意思：在學術上指說話者在說母語時由一句母語轉換到另一句外語。），使用更多外語的詞彙及表達方式，說話者很可能只會顯得比較做作。例如，”I mean”、”I prefer”、”basically”、 “generally”、”I suppose”等等的日常英語，若果字詞沒帶有什麼特別的西方文化，為什麼不用母語中文來表達呢？其實，近年來香港大學生群出現的偽ＡＢＣ現象正是描述得到“語碼轉換”能夠被說話者濫用至極，務求用英語來突顯自己的高尚身份和氣質。不過，對於真ＡＢＣ或者真正從外國回流的人士來說，“語碼轉換”就能夠使用得非常自然，並且會傾向於用英語來解釋較複雜的概念或帶有外國文化的東西，使聆聽者感覺到說話者真正地融合到外國文化。

歸根究底，若果說話者沒有外國的文化素養，我們應該還提倡“語碼轉換”嗎？無論如何，我們要意識到“語碼轉換”其實利用到規範的英語，不像借入的外來詞彙，和母語完全結合成一體。例如，“sha lup”的讀音應該發成“shut up”，“cervix”應發成“service”，“peen” 應發成“print”，“fan” 應發成“friend”等等。同樣地，我們不應該再把某些英語字詞發成我們母語的聲調，猶如 “tay屎”(taste)、“high卡屎”(high class)、“穿屎” (twins)，“煙科屘唇” (information)，等等。因此，由於說話者的外國文化素養要達到一定程度才能夠把外語字詞標準地發音，“語碼轉換”其實並非一種易精通的技能。那試問“語碼轉換”應不應該被視為母語的改善和增強版呢？雖然現時人們都好像比較注重純正的語文，但是當未來變得越來越全球化的時候，人們對“語碼轉換”的印象可能會有所改變。

Why does English sound like an upper class language for ESL learners?

When it comes to learning the English language, it seems as though it is not only the difficulty of it that creates a barrier for people, but also there seems to be the notion of social class attached to the language, as many people have varying degrees of proficiency and speak in different tones and accents, generating different social impressions, with some considered as more prestigious than others. Even among our own friends and relatives, we may often hear English words inserted within their conversation, as if uttering them can help display a person’s social class and intellect. But for our mother tongue Chinese language, it seems as though the notion of social class is not so conspicuous to the point where people would want to acquire a certain accent in order to achieve a similar effect. So if English is the only language that provides me the opportunity to enter a world of social hierarchy, does that mean I am never able to raise my social class if I am not able to speak English well?

The reality of speaking English is that most people can already tell a lot about you from the way you speak it, such as where you have lived before, what kind of culture you grew up with, or even what kind of house you live in! But for our native language Chinese, it is not as noticeable because unlike English, we do not have vowels that can sound very different, depending on where a person comes from. For example, the vowel ‘a’ in ‘awesome’ sounds very different in American English than it is pronounced in British English. In fact, the vowels in English are the most difficult to master for ESL learners. However, English does allow people to have a lot of room for mistakes or mispronunciation, which is why most people can still understand you if you only have a basic grasp of English.

But isn’t it really awesome that English is so accommodating that we don’t have to make the effort to speak so standardly most of the time? When foreigners learn our mother tongue language Cantonese, it’s so much more difficult for them because it’s either they get the pronunciations correct or incorrect, with almost no room in between for mistakes that are acceptable. Even for people who are living on the same continent as us, such as people from mainland China, Cantonese is still very difficult for them because of the number of tones in Cantonese – nine compared to four in Mandarin. What makes it even more difficult is that Cantonese has these abrupt consonants at the end of a character called stops (入聲) or checked syllables. In essence, it’s as if we do not much room for outsiders to learn our language, as mispronunciations in Cantonese, such as pronouncing the tone of a character wrong, can result in words having a different meaning, leading to misunderstandings for the listener. So let us imagine for a while that if English were a language like Cantonese, how much more frustrated would we be when we are learning it?

But after all, once we have grown up and got ourselves to working life, it’s extremely difficult to allocate time to learn something unless we have to. Apart from the major factor of difficulty, learning a language also involves a person’s inclination, such as emotional attachment and cultural preferences, as people often find it much easier to talk comfortably and make jokes in their native tongue than in a foreign language. Moreover, language constitutes a huge part of our identity, and even if there are class differences between languages, we may just find it a lot more natural to talk in a language that belongs to us than any other language. In the end, speaking a language is about being true to who we are at heart, and not trying to speak another language just for the sake of displaying to others your social status. But how shall we nurture the young people of our current generation to survive in this world that is becoming increasingly globalized and multicultural? Perhaps we can take it a step at a time, like climbing a ladder…

為什麼英語聽起來好像一種高級階層的語言？

當我們學習英語的時候，除了難度是一個重大的障礙之外，由於英語世界裡有許多人擁有不同的口音、音調和語言程度，說話時對人們產生出不同的印象，種種的英語類別彷彿也能夠分成不同的社會階級。即使在我們的朋友和親戚的圈子中，我們也時常聽見許多英文字加插在日常對話之中，彷彿這樣說話能夠表現自己的社會階級和智慧。不過，在我們的母語中文裡，由於有較少的口音類別，社會階級的概念就好像不太著顯。所以問題就是，若只有英語是一個存在社會階級觀念的語言，若我不能夠說流利英語的話，這就代表我不能夠表現自己在社會的等級嗎？

在現實世界中，當我們說英語時，人們就已經能夠憑你的口音猜出許多關於你的資料，例如你在哪裡生活過、在什麼文化和環境長大，甚至你住過什麼類型的屋子！但是在我們的母語中文裡，我們就好像沒有那麼多種類的口音。相比英語來說，中文是沒有類似英語的元音那麼變化多端的，還會因應一個人來自哪裡而發音不同。例如，“awesome〞（意思：“很厲害”）這個英文字裡的元音“a”，在美式英語和英式英語比較之下，發音的差別是很大的。其實，對於以英語為第二語言的學者來說，英語裡的所有發音之中，元音可說是最難掌握的。不過，由於英語有較大的發音空間，即使你發音不太標準的話，人們都能夠聽得懂你在說什麼。

因此，由於英語的發音空間那麼大，能夠容納不同能力的學者，英語算不算是一個很厲害的語言呢？當外國人學習我們的母語時，由於廣東話是一個聲調語言，發音不準確會令字詞意思扭曲，學習的難度可說是很高的。即使是住在同一個國家的內地中國人，由於廣東話比普通話有較多的聲調，學習廣東話也是非常之困難的。另外，廣東話的最困難之處就是有許多“入聲”的字詞。概括來說，由於發音錯誤可令字詞的意思扭曲，廣東話本身就好像沒有太大的空間給外來者學習。若我們試想一想英語就像廣東話是一個聲調語言，我們學習的過程會不會變成更加痛苦呢？

儘管如此，當我們長大成人出來工作的時候，除非我們必須要學會一門技術而為了賺錢生存，我們就很難分配時間去做一些與工作無關的事情。除了英語有相當的難度之外，我們的語言發展總是傾向於我們平時喜愛的文化和嗜好，猶如我們平時都比較習慣說母語，因為用母語和別人溝通和說笑話都比較自然得多。另外，語言亦是我們的身份。雖然說流利英語能夠顯現一個人的高尚氣質，但是我們用母語說話時卻是最自然和出自於自己本身的文化身份。最終，和別人溝通時利用的語言應該出自於自己的本身，而不是為了顯現給其他人自己在社會的高級身份。不過，我們怎樣才能夠培養我們年輕的新一代，在這個越來越全球化和多元文化的世界裡生存呢？或許，我們可以一步一步來，彷彿爬梯一樣…