Drawing on ethnographic analysis of a Confucius Institute and two private schools, this article analyzes how diverse Chinese language institutes in Costa Rica have sought to capitalize on a growing local interest in learning Mandarin Chinese. It argues that a shifting global geopolitics has increased the perceived value of Chinese language acquisition and, thus, the stakes for language institutes seeking to assert their cultural authority as legitimate purveyors of Chinese and Chineseness. Through analysis of these schools’ projected identities and pedagogical styles, I show how they distinguish themselves from one another on the basis of public versus private ownership, choice-based versus authoritarian instructional style, and Taiwanese versus Mainland or diasporic roots. Building on the concept of the “Sinophone,” I highlight both the diversity of the forms and locations of Chineseness these initiatives represent and their implications for who can legitimately speak for China in Costa Rica.
本文从民族志研究的角度考察了哥斯达黎加的一所孔子学院和两所私立学校,进而显示了不同的语言学校是如何应对和利用当地逐渐增强的中文学习的兴趣的。中国在全球地缘政治中的决定性地位提高了学习中文的重要性,而中文学校又是中国文化和“中国性”的正当提供者。因此,对文化权威的争夺对中文学校来说变得更加重要。通过分析当地三所中文学校对自身形象的定位以及教学理念的不同,本文指出,这些学校将自己与竞争者区分开来的标准主要来自三个方面:是公立学校还是私立学校,授课风格以学生为中心还是以老师讲课为主,是台湾机构还是中国大陆或华侨机构。在“华语语系”理论的基础上,这篇文章突显了不同语言机构所代表的“中国性”在形式与地理坐标上的多样性,以及这种多样性暗指的谁具有在哥斯达黎加代表中国的合法性。
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
Alexander, Colin. 2014. China and Taiwan in Central America: Engaging Foreign Publics in Diplomacy. Palgrave MacMillan Series in Global Public Diplomacy. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ang, Ien. 2001. On Not Speaking Chinese: Living Between Asia and the West. London: Routledge.
Barmé, Geremie. 2010. “China’s Promise,” The China Beat, January 20. Accessed 4/26/16. http://www.thechinabeat.org/?p=1374.
Cerdas, Daniela. 2016a. “Mandarin llega a las aulas de colegios pobres.” La Nación, March 17. Accessed 5/24/17. http://www.nacion.com/nacional/educacion/Mandarin-llega-aulas-colegios-pobres_0_1549045129.html.
Cerdas, Daniela. 2016b. “Enseñanza del mandarín se amplía a cuatro colegios más.” La Nación, August 4. Accessed 5/24/17. http://www.nacion.com/nacional/educacion/Ensenanza-mandarin-amplia-colegios_0_1577042294.html.
Churchman, Kevin. 2011. “Confucius Institutes and Controlling Chinese Languages.” China Heritage Quarterly, No 26, June. Accessed 4/26/16. http://www.chinaheritagequarterly.org/articles.php?searchterm+026_confucius.inc&issue=026.
DeHart, Monica. 2017. “Chino Tico Routes and Repertoires: Cultivating Chineseness and Entrepreneurism for a New era of Trans-Pacific Relations.” Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Anthropology. Early View published online April 6, 2017. doi: 10.111/jlca.12273.
DeHart, Monica. 2015. “Costa Rica’s Chinatown: The Art of Being Global in the Age of China” City & Society 27(2): 183-207.
Ding, Sheng and Robert Saunders. 2006. “Talking Up China: An Analysis of China’s Rising Cultural Power and Global Promotion of the Chinese Language,” East Asia, Summer 23(2): 3-3.
Education First. 2015. English Proficiency Index. Accessed 3/13/15. http://www.ef.edu/epi/.
Erard, Michael. 2006. “Saying ‘Global’ in Chinese” Foreign Policy, May/June, 45. Accessed 6/23/16. http://foreignpolicy.com/2009/10/19/saying-global-in-chinese/.
Furman, Nelly, David Goldberg and Natalia Lusin. 2007. “Enrollments in languages other than English in United States institutions of higher education, Fall 2006,” Modern Language Association Web publication. Accessed 4/26/16. https://apps.mla.org/pdf/06enrollmentsurvey_final.pdf.
Gil, Jeffrey. 2011. “A comparison of the global status of English and Chinese: Towards a new global language?” English Today 105, 27(1) March, pp. 52-59.
Groppe, Alison. 2013. Sinophone Malaysian Literature: Not Made in China. Amherst, NY: Cambria Press.
Guadiano, Nicole. 2014. “House panel investigates ‘Confucius Institutes’” USA Today. December 4. Accessed 4/26/16. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/12/04/house-china-confucius-institutes/19909507/.
Hanban. 2017. Official website. Accessed May 26. http://english.hanban.org/node_10971.htm.
Hartig, Falk. Chinese Public Diplomacy: The Rise of the Confucius Institute. New York: Routledge.
Hubbert, Jennifer. 2014. “Ambiguous States: Confucius Institutes and Soft Power in theus Classroom.” Political and Legal Anthropology Review 37(2): 329-349.
Hughes, Christopher. 2014. “Confucius Institutes and the University: Distinguishing the Political Mission from the Cultural,” Issues and Studies 50(4): 45-83.
Instituto Confucio. 2017. “Nuestro Instituto.” Official website. Accessed May 23. http://www.institutoconfucio.ucr.ac.cr/.
Krupa, Peter. 2007. “New Boost for Booming Trade with China” The Ticotimes News, June 8. Accessed June 23. http://www.ticotimes.net/2007/06/08/new-boost-for-booming-trade-with-china.
Kurlantzick, Joshua. 2007. Charm Offensive: How China’s Soft Power Is Transforming the World. Binghamton, NY: Yale University Press.
Levin, Matt. 2011. “Do You Speak Mandarin?” The Ticotimes News. Accessed June 23. http://www.ticotimes.net/2011/07/07/do-you-speak-mandarin.
Li Wei. 2016. “Transnational Connections and Multilingual Realities” in Li, W. ed. Multilingualism in Chinese Diaspora Worldwide: Transnational Connections and Local Social Realities. Routledge Critical Studies in Multilingualism. New York and London: Routledge Press, pp. 1-12.
Lo Bianco, Joseph. 2007. “Emergent China and Chinese: Language Planning Categories” Language Policy 6: 3-26.
McDonald, Edward. 2011. “The ‘中国通’ or the Sinophone?” Towards a Political Economy of Chinese Language Learning,” China Heritage Quarterly No 25, March.
McKeown, Adam. 2001. Chinese Migrant Networks and Cultural Change: Peru, Chicago, Hawaii 1900-1936. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Ma, Laurence J. C. and Carolyn Cartier. 2003. The Chinese Diaspora: Space, Place, Mobility, and Identity. Boulder and New York: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Odinye, Sunny Ifeanyi and Ifeoma Ezinne Odinye. 2012. “Rise of China and Spread of Mandarin in 21st Century” Quarterly Journal of Chinese Studies 1(4): 2224-2716.
Ross, Amy. 2013a. “Interés en negocios y cultura acerca a ticos al mandarín.” La Nación, June 3. Accessed May 24, 2017. http://www.nacion.com/nacional/comunidades/Interes-negocios-cultura-acerca-mandarin_0_1345465557.html.
Ross, Amy. 2013b. “Mandarin gana terreno en escuelas privadas de Costa Rica.” La Nación, June 3. Accessed May 24, 2017. http://www.nacion.com/nacional/comunidades/Mandarin-escuelas-privadas-Costa-Rica_0_1345465586.html.
Sahlins, Marshall. 2015. Academic Malware: Confucius Institutes. Chicago: University of Chicago, Prickly Paradigm Press.
Shakya, Tsering. 1994. “Politicization and the Tibetan Language” in Resistance and Reform in Tibet, Robert Barnett and Shirin Akiner, eds. London: C. Hurst & Co Publishers Ltd., pp. 157-165.
Shih, Shu-Mei. 2007. Visuality and Identity: Sinophone Articulations across the Pacific. Asia Pacific Modern Series. Berkeley, CA: University Presses of California, Columbia and Princeton.
Stambach, Amy. 2014. Confucius and the Crisis in American Universities: Culture, Capital, and Diplomacy in U.S. Public Higher Education. New York: Routledge.
Wang, Gungwu. 1993. “Greater China and the Chinese Overseas,” The China Quarterly 136, Special Issue: Greater China (Dec)926-948. Universal de idiomas. 2016. Official website. Accessed January 16. http://www.chino.co.cr/.
Xinhuanet. 2016. “Escuelas secundarias públicas de Costa Rica empiezan a impartir clases de Chino,” Hanban official website. Accessed June 26. http://spanish.hanban.org/article/2016-03/29/content_635884.htm.
Yeh, Emily. 2013. Taming Tibet: Landscape Transformation and the Gift of Chinese Development. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Zhu Hua and Li Wei. 2014. “Geopolitics and the Changing Hierarchies of the Chinese Language: Implications for Policy and Practice of Chinese Language Teaching in Britain.” The Modern Language Journal 91(1): 326-339.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 259 | 0 | 0 |
Full Text Views | 901 | 157 | 15 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 439 | 74 | 8 |
Drawing on ethnographic analysis of a Confucius Institute and two private schools, this article analyzes how diverse Chinese language institutes in Costa Rica have sought to capitalize on a growing local interest in learning Mandarin Chinese. It argues that a shifting global geopolitics has increased the perceived value of Chinese language acquisition and, thus, the stakes for language institutes seeking to assert their cultural authority as legitimate purveyors of Chinese and Chineseness. Through analysis of these schools’ projected identities and pedagogical styles, I show how they distinguish themselves from one another on the basis of public versus private ownership, choice-based versus authoritarian instructional style, and Taiwanese versus Mainland or diasporic roots. Building on the concept of the “Sinophone,” I highlight both the diversity of the forms and locations of Chineseness these initiatives represent and their implications for who can legitimately speak for China in Costa Rica.
本文从民族志研究的角度考察了哥斯达黎加的一所孔子学院和两所私立学校,进而显示了不同的语言学校是如何应对和利用当地逐渐增强的中文学习的兴趣的。中国在全球地缘政治中的决定性地位提高了学习中文的重要性,而中文学校又是中国文化和“中国性”的正当提供者。因此,对文化权威的争夺对中文学校来说变得更加重要。通过分析当地三所中文学校对自身形象的定位以及教学理念的不同,本文指出,这些学校将自己与竞争者区分开来的标准主要来自三个方面:是公立学校还是私立学校,授课风格以学生为中心还是以老师讲课为主,是台湾机构还是中国大陆或华侨机构。在“华语语系”理论的基础上,这篇文章突显了不同语言机构所代表的“中国性”在形式与地理坐标上的多样性,以及这种多样性暗指的谁具有在哥斯达黎加代表中国的合法性。
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 259 | 0 | 0 |
Full Text Views | 901 | 157 | 15 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 439 | 74 | 8 |