We in Hong Kong : claiming to speak for the community

Roger BERRY

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)Researchpeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In the run-up to the handover in Hong Kong in 1997 there was much debate about its future identity. Many “experts” and politicians put forward views that purported to be representative of Hong Kong people. One linguistic feature in this debate was the use of the pronoun we when referring to the entire community. This paper reports a survey which examined the use of this “generic” we and other first person plural pronouns in political comment in the South China Morning Post both before and after the handover. Generally, it was found that generic we was a common feature of such writing and appeared to be the default interpretation. There was no evidence that the amount of “claiming to speak for the community” had decreased after the handover. The shifting of the reference of first person plural pronouns within articles was rare. One unexpected finding was the frequency with which generic we appeared to be anaphoric in nature, referring back to an explicit introductory noun phrase.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)5-24
Number of pages20
JournalAsian Englishes
Volume2
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 1999

Fingerprint

Hong Kong
human being
community
politician
expert
linguistics
China
interpretation
evidence
Pronoun
First Person
Noun Phrase
South China
Politicians
Linguistic Features
Anaphoric

Cite this

BERRY, Roger. / We in Hong Kong : claiming to speak for the community. In: Asian Englishes. 1999 ; Vol. 2, No. 2. pp. 5-24.
@article{204f61cc8e1c44808a69833709eadfda,
title = "We in Hong Kong : claiming to speak for the community",
abstract = "In the run-up to the handover in Hong Kong in 1997 there was much debate about its future identity. Many “experts” and politicians put forward views that purported to be representative of Hong Kong people. One linguistic feature in this debate was the use of the pronoun we when referring to the entire community. This paper reports a survey which examined the use of this “generic” we and other first person plural pronouns in political comment in the South China Morning Post both before and after the handover. Generally, it was found that generic we was a common feature of such writing and appeared to be the default interpretation. There was no evidence that the amount of “claiming to speak for the community” had decreased after the handover. The shifting of the reference of first person plural pronouns within articles was rare. One unexpected finding was the frequency with which generic we appeared to be anaphoric in nature, referring back to an explicit introductory noun phrase.",
author = "Roger BERRY",
year = "1999",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/13488678.1999.10801029",
language = "English",
volume = "2",
pages = "5--24",
journal = "Asian Englishes",
issn = "1348-8678",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "2",

}

We in Hong Kong : claiming to speak for the community. / BERRY, Roger.

In: Asian Englishes, Vol. 2, No. 2, 01.01.1999, p. 5-24.

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)Researchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - We in Hong Kong : claiming to speak for the community

AU - BERRY, Roger

PY - 1999/1/1

Y1 - 1999/1/1

N2 - In the run-up to the handover in Hong Kong in 1997 there was much debate about its future identity. Many “experts” and politicians put forward views that purported to be representative of Hong Kong people. One linguistic feature in this debate was the use of the pronoun we when referring to the entire community. This paper reports a survey which examined the use of this “generic” we and other first person plural pronouns in political comment in the South China Morning Post both before and after the handover. Generally, it was found that generic we was a common feature of such writing and appeared to be the default interpretation. There was no evidence that the amount of “claiming to speak for the community” had decreased after the handover. The shifting of the reference of first person plural pronouns within articles was rare. One unexpected finding was the frequency with which generic we appeared to be anaphoric in nature, referring back to an explicit introductory noun phrase.

AB - In the run-up to the handover in Hong Kong in 1997 there was much debate about its future identity. Many “experts” and politicians put forward views that purported to be representative of Hong Kong people. One linguistic feature in this debate was the use of the pronoun we when referring to the entire community. This paper reports a survey which examined the use of this “generic” we and other first person plural pronouns in political comment in the South China Morning Post both before and after the handover. Generally, it was found that generic we was a common feature of such writing and appeared to be the default interpretation. There was no evidence that the amount of “claiming to speak for the community” had decreased after the handover. The shifting of the reference of first person plural pronouns within articles was rare. One unexpected finding was the frequency with which generic we appeared to be anaphoric in nature, referring back to an explicit introductory noun phrase.

UR - http://commons.ln.edu.hk/sw_master/6917

U2 - 10.1080/13488678.1999.10801029

DO - 10.1080/13488678.1999.10801029

M3 - Journal Article (refereed)

VL - 2

SP - 5

EP - 24

JO - Asian Englishes

JF - Asian Englishes

SN - 1348-8678

IS - 2

ER -