The notion of translanguaging has long been differentiated from that of code-switching, in that one key issue of translanguaging is how to make the best use of all linguistic, cognitive and semiotic resources available in... [ view full abstract ]
The notion of translanguaging has long been differentiated from that of code-switching, in that one key issue of translanguaging is how to make the best use of all linguistic, cognitive and semiotic resources available in meaning-making and knowledge construction. While Kongish has been acknowledged as a distinctive basilectal variety of Hong Kong English, the identification of different languages as discrete structural entities or grammars of Kongish is challenging. A paragdigm shift, therefore, is attempted to re-examine and reconceptualise Kongish as a digital translanguaging practice manifested as a popular written convention in computer-mediated communication.
To validate the hypothesis that the use of Kongish is a translanguaging practice, the blended data collection method (Androutsopoulos, 2012) is adopted. The blended data consists of both the screen data (all comments received on the Facebook page of Kongish Daily in a two-year span) and the data collected through direct contact with the selected users (responses from two rounds of focus-group interviews). The screen data is chronologically sorted, reviewed and sampled by the themes relevant to their usage of Kongish (Androutsopoulos, 2007a) in a bid to capture the reflections on the speakers’ deployment of linguistic repertoire, or more specifically, their idolects, from the insiders’ perspective.
The results suggest that speakers of Kongish have no apparent consideration of the languages used, nor are they consciously aware of the instances of language choices. It is implied that in the absence of the acknowledgement of discrete language entities, the use of Kongish may exhibit an integration of the full linguistic repertoire and language experience built on the appreciation of it as a means of effective and unfettered communication, without the consideration of “watchful adherence to the socially and politically defined boundaries of named languages” (Otheguy, Garcia & Reid, 2015). It is further suggested that the interpretation and deployment of Kongish require exposure to Hong Kong social context transcending the culturally-defined named language boundaries. This translanguaging practice may demonstrate the linguistic competence to make the best use of all linguistic, cognitive and semiotic resources available when putting proficiencies in individual languages aside.
