国家意识

总体国家安全观视域下中国周边国家语言冲突探析

展开
  • 同济大学,上海, 200092
沈骑,同济大学外国语学院长聘教授。主要研究方向为语言政策与规划。电子邮箱:qishen@tongji.edu.cn;|彭永超,同济大学语言规划全球治理研究中心科研助理。

网络出版日期: 2023-12-29

基金资助

国家语委重点科研项目“语言安全关键问题研究”的阶段性成果(编号ZDI145-11)

A Study on Language Conflicts in China's Neighboring Countries from the Holistic View of National Security

Expand

Online published: 2023-12-29

摘要

语言冲突是国家语言安全研究的重要议题之一。在总体国家安全观视域下,国家语言安全能力建设不仅应关注国家语言能力和语言资源研究,也需要加强对中国周边国家的语言冲突问题的研究,服务于国家总体安全能力建设。本文首先厘清语言冲突的概念,根据语言规划的相关理论构建分析框架,并通过语料库研究方法构建语言安全数据库。研究发现:在特征方面,地位规划及少数民族语言教育所导致的语言冲突表现为多层级语言观的复杂对立,而与本体规划和外语教育相关的案例则主要反映层级内部语言观的矛盾。在成因方面,主体民族、部分精英群体以及少数民族语言和外语教育中的问题观是中国周边国家语言冲突的主要源头。重视周边国家语言冲突问题,强化国家语言安全能力的建设,有助于提升和拓展总体国家安全能力。

本文引用格式

沈骑, 彭永超 . 总体国家安全观视域下中国周边国家语言冲突探析[J]. 当代外语研究, 2023 , 23(6) : 66 -77 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2023.06.007

Abstract

Language conflict constitutes one of the central concerns in research on national language security. Under the holistic view of national security, the development of national language security capabilities should encompass not only an exploration of national language capabilities and language resources but also a significant focus on investigating language conflicts in China's neighboring countries. This expanded perspective serves to enhance the construction of holistic national security. This study first clarifies the concept of language conflict, and then conceives an analytical framework based on relevant theories of language planning. A language security database is then built through corpus method. The study finds that: in terms of characteristics, language conflicts arising from status planning and minority language education demonstrate complex inter-level oppositions of orientations in language planning, while cases related to corpus planning and foreign language education primarily reflect intra-level contradictions of these orientations. In terms of causes, the primary sources of language conflicts in China's neighboring countries include the language-as-problem orientation held by dominant ethnic groups, certain elite groups, and manifested in acquisition planning of minority and foreign languages. Paying attention to language conflicts in neighboring countries and strengthening the construction of national language security capabilities will help improve and expand holistic national security capacity.

参考文献

[1] Baumgartner J. 1989. The controversy about the national language: Some observations[J]. Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society 17(2): 168-172.
[2] Calvet L. J. 1987. La Guerre des Langues Politiques Linguistiques[M]. Paris: Payot.
[3] Cooper R. L. 1989. Language Planning and Social Change[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[4] Das Gupta J. 1970. Language Conflict and National Development: Group Politics and National Language Policy in India[M]. Berkeley: University of California Press.
[5] Dua H. R. 1996. The politics of language conflict: Implications for language planning and political theory[J]. Language Problems and Language Planning 20(1): 1-17.
[6] Grivelet S. 1995. Reintroducing the Uighur-Mongolian script in Mongolia today[J]. Mongolian Studies 18:49-60.
[7] Haji-Othman N. A. & J. Haji-Othman. 2014. English in Brunei: Challenges and future directions[J]. World Englishes 33(4): 486-497.
[8] Haarmann H. 1990. Language planning in the light of a general theory of language: A methodological framework[J]. International Journal of Sociology of Language 86: 103-126.
[9] Hult F. M. & N. H. Hornberger. 2016. Revisiting Orientations in Language Planning: Problem, Right, and Resource as an Analytical Heuristic[J]. Bilingual Review/La Revista Bilingüe 33(3): 30-49.
[10] Kingston L. N. & A. E. S. Hanson. 2022. Marginalized and Misunderstood: How Anti-Rohingya Language Policies Fuel Genocide[J]. Human Rights Review 23:289-303.
[11] Landau J. M. & B. Kellner-Heinkele. 2011. Language Politics in Contemporary Central Asia: National and Ethnic Identity and the Soviet Legacy[M]. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
[12] Liddicoat A. J. & R. B. Baldauf Jr. 2008. Language planning in local contexts: Agents, contexts and interactions [A]. In A. J. Liddicoat & R. B. Baldauf Jr (eds.). Language Planning and Policy: Language Planning in Local Contexts[C]. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 3-17.
[13] Nelde P. H. 1997. Language conflict [A]. In F. Coulmas (ed.). The Handbook of Sociolinguistics[C]. Oxford: Blackwell. 285-300.
[14] Oberschall A. 1978. Theories of social conflict[J]. Annual Review of Sociology 4: 291-315.
[15] Rahman T. 1996. Language and politics in Pakistan[M]. New York: Oxford University Press.
[16] Ruiz R. 1984. Orientations in language planning[J]. NABE Journal 8(2): 15-34.
[17] Ruiz R. 2010. Reorienting language-as-resource[A]. In J. E. Petrovic (ed.). International Perspectives on Bilingual Education: Policy, Practice, and Controversy[C]. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing. 155-172.
[18] Song J. J. 2012. South Korea: Language policy and planning in the making[J]. Current Issues in Language Planning 13(1): 1-68.
[19] 方小兵、 张立萍. 2022. 语言政策与规划核心术语[M]. 北京: 外语教学与研究出版社.
[20] 黄行、 许峰. 2014. 我国与周边国家跨境语言的语言规划研究[J]. 语言文字应用(2): 9-17.
[21] 何俊芳、 周庆生. 2010. 语言冲突研究[M]. 北京: 中央民族大学出版社.
[22] 李宇明. 2016. 语言竞争试说[J]. 外语教学与研究(2): 212-225,320.
[23] 沈骑. 2022. 语言安全与语言规划研究[M]. 上海: 复旦大学出版社.
[24] 沈骑、 周燕、 郑咏滟等. 2023. 国家语言安全多人谈[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报(3): 164-177.
[25] 王建勤. 2010. 美国“关键语言”战略与我国国家安全语言战略[J]. 云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(2): 7-11.
[26] 张治国. 2018. 语言安全分类及中国情况分析[J]. 云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(3): 35-44.
文章导航

/