Communication and modernity: A study of language reform in China

Changfu Chang, Purdue University

Abstract

This study was of the discourses on language reform during three moments of Chinese history. The three moments, in broad strokes, were: (1) the vernacular moment in the first two decades of the 20th century, (2) Mao's, or the communist's, efforts in language reform roughly from the early 1930s to the late 1950s, and (3) the discussions in the Post-Mao era on language reform since the late 1970s to 1999. Discourses on language reform in these different periods were guided by different frameworks based on different influences from the West and different understandings of modernity. In the vernacular movement, language reform was set against a broad new cultural movement and aimed at creating a new culture and a new mind, for without a common language, according to John Dewey, individuals could not relate to each other, and therein existed the problem for China. Contrary to the Deweyean idea of empowering the individual, Mao's, or the communist's emphasis on language reform was on political interests, responding to various social movements or tasks. The aim of language reform was to mobilize the masses upon the premise that individualism should be combated. While many arguments were couched in similar terms, they were by no means addressing the same issues or concerns. The third movement happened in the 1980s and the 1990s. The argument for language reform—In this case, for adopting a romanized orthography—was set against computer use and the information age. Because Chinese characters were not compatible with the computer, reformers believed that a writing system that cannot communicate with machines should be abandoned. This approach brought one into company with scientism. To put these discourses into a sense-making perspective, this study employed Habermas's theory of modernity, and other modernization theories when necessary, to describe the strengths and weaknesses of the discourses. This broader perspective was used to explain some of the issues more completely than did DeFrancis's nationalism perspective.

Degree

Ph.D.

Advisors

Webb, Purdue University.

Subject Area

Communication|Journalism

COinS