China English or Chinese English

Abstract

In the last 20 years, the term ‘China English’ has been advanced as the most appropriate name for the variety of English that better expresses Chinese sociocultural realities and distinguishes the variety from the pejoratively perceived ‘Chinese English’ or ‘Chinglish’ (Du & Jiang, 2003; Jiang & Du, 2003; Meilin & Xiaoqiong, 2006). The demarcation between ‘China’ and ‘Chinese’, it is argued (Wang, 1991; Li, 1993; He & Li, 2009), is necessary if English as used by Chinese speakers is to gain recognition as something other than ‘bad’ English. Although no consensus regarding the definition of China English has yet formed among those who argue for the adoption of ‘China English’, characteristics of the variety can be inferred and the characteristics are used to confirm that ‘China English’ as a legitimate variety does exist, that it exhibits features of linguistic creativity rather than interference, suggesting a nativized educated variety (Berns, 2011). However, in my view, arguments in favor of a new term, ‘China English’, have more to do with renaming and rebranding and less with providing new insights into the nature of this English.

COVID-19-Combating English with Chinese Characteristics in the CAT’s Translations

“…China English has been acknowledged and discussed by some scholars. For example, Eaves (2011) discussed the extensive use of English in China’s bilingual public signs, believing that “[w]ith so many learners there, it stands to reason that a variety of English peculiar to China would eventually develop, and there is much evidence to suggest that it has already begun.” Bolton and Graddol (2012) pointed out that there were about 400 million English learners in China in 2010, and “[t]he current popularity of English in China is unprecedented, and has been fueled by the recent political and social development of Chinese society.” Botha (2014) discussed the use of English in China’s universities which is “dramatically altering the linguistic nature of students’ educational as well as their personal lives”; Yiyang (2019) argued that it is necessary to use the term “China English” instead of the “pejoratively perceived ‘Chinese English’ or ‘Chinglish’,” holding the view that “’China English’ as a legitimate variety does exist”; Du et al (2020) examined the Chinese graduate students’ use of China English in the United States to “transform an Inner Circle academic space into one in which different varieties of English can be an effective communicative resource.”…”

The China English fallacy

“…The term Chinese English was voted out mainly because it carries or signals connotation of 'bad English or beginner's English or, at most, an interlanguage which needs to be improved' (Jiang, 2002: 6). The favoring of the term China English over others, especially Chinese English, raises concerns for world Englishes researchers who would regard the term Chinese English as a neutral and disciplinarily consistent identifier of the Chinese English variety (Bolton, 2006;Yiyang, 2019;Xu, 2020). Through the Kachruvian lens of viewing English varieties, Chinese English is terminologically commensurate with other English varieties such as British English, American English, Indian English, Nigerian English, Japanese English and Korean English, to simply name a few.…”

“…The main reason I am hesitating to concur with the adoption of China English is that such a terminological makeover not only heightens the linguistic stigmatization but also further mystifies the very existence of the Chinese English variety (Yiyang, 2019). The CEM's endeavor of validating special treatment for China English will inevitably and unfortunately typecast the English variety in China as a 'unicorn variety' among world Englishes, suggesting that it is seen as a unique and rare phenomenon rather than a naturally occurring variation within the construct of world Englishes.…”