This paper employs Kecskes’ socio-cognitive approach to analyze the varied speech styles and cognitive dynamics of the Chinese character (Lee) in John Steinbeck’s East of Eden. The discussion of the novelistic dialogue segments has shown that the Chinese interlocutor’s verbal strategies vary from pidgin to English or a combination of the two, which are predominantly hearer-centered and marked by deliberate and conscious attempts on the part of the speaker to meet the cooperation principle. Lee’s movement between different communication modes is partially predetermined by the disparate power relations between the interlocutors and partially determined by his own communicative needs, thus producing a unique pattern that governs his language use in the given intercultural communicative process. In particular, pidgin is used as a self-protection mechanism, a buffer and a way of identification by the Chinese character, which informs the wider socio-historical context of Chinese immigrants’ victimization of racial discrimination in the American society at the turn of the twentieth century. Just like his shifting verbal strategies in intercultural communication, Lee’s cultural identity is also characterized by fluidity in the in-between space of two cultures.

This article discusses Steinbeck’s linguistic creation of Chinese personae in his fiction, which develops from the early practice of using silence in ‘Johnny Bear’ (1938) to chronologically progressive engagement with Chinese Pidgin English (CPE) in Cannery Row (1945) and East of Eden (1952). This change is evident from the increase of CPE dialogues in his later works and best exemplified in the turn to taking non-standard English as a key concern by investing style-shifting with stylistic and thematic meaning in East of Eden. Silence and implicatures are strategically employed in ‘Johnny Bear’ to keep the narrative suspense and broach the antinarratable subject of interracial romance and illegitimate pregnancy so as not to offend the reader. Steinbeck’s later experimentation with CPE demonstrates conformity and discrepancy with sociolinguistic observations, whilst in his representation of CPE the author uses metalanguage to guide readers towards a better understanding of this language variety and a sympathetic interpretation of the Chinese characters. Existing alongside real sociolinguistic systems, the ficto-linguistic system in Steinbeck’s fiction subtly critiques the supposedly ‘correct’ language expected of ethnic groups and skilfully denounces discriminatory racial distinctions. The author’s incorporation of Chinese presence and CPE into his writings serves the grander scheme of scrutinizing American identity and society.

No abstract

No abstract