Abstract: Since the mid-1960s, the issue of "ethnic identification" had been debated among scholars, in particular between Raul Naroll (1964) and Micheal Moerman (1965), that "culture-bearing units," such as language and cultural practice, are not appropriated for identifying the distinction between ethnic groups. “Is language such a critical element of demarcation for ethnic identification?” “Why does language is so important for identifying and maintaining the Hmong ethnic identity in your field sites?”
Language is one of the most significant markers of ethnicity, rather than being an inevitable 'culture-bearing-unit' for ethnic identification. In other words, language alone cannot be the demarcating unit for ethnic identification, not even with some of the other factors which Naroll (1964) introduces. The ideal way to demarcate ethnic identification and delimit ethnic boundaries is with those crucial culture-bearing-units and the ethnic people themselves, but the demarcation of ethnic units (or ethnic identification) is complex and nowadays it is quite political. I will discuss this point of view further and will introduce Hansen’s comparative analysis (1999) on the ethnic groups of the Naxi and Tai cases in the southwest China as pieces of evidence for this discussion. This case is especially applicable because one of the compared ethnic groups is of the Tai tribe. Thai Lue originated from the examined region of southwest China, and the tribe is a focus of the debate between Naroll and Moerman about the 'culture-bearing-unit;' whether language and six other culture-bearing-units can be demarcating units for ethnic identification or not. Especially, a mother tongue for an ethnic group is the most influential principle and element for ethnic identification because it entails shared histories and as cultural repository containing emotions, not just phonological or other linguistic traits. One of the most important roles of language is delivering information from a person to a person, and generation to generation. But mother tongue has another important function that is transmitting ethnic identity to the next generations. In this sense, mother tongue is the core element of delimitation of ethnic identification even though it is not the only and absolute element for the process.
Through this study, we will find that while culture-bearing-units are crucial ethnic demarcating units, the ideal type of the ethnic demarcation is by the ethnic people themselves rather than by scholars and outsiders. As we scrutinize the dynamics and process of ethnic identification and demarcation, we will find how complex and political the process is. And based on this discussion, we will practically study language and ethnic identity related issues in the Hmong villages in Chiang Rai, Thailand. And furthermore, we will address script-related issues and power relations between the state policy and the community, as well as the Hmong villages’ negotiations on language and education while they cope with hidden oppression and conflict on mother tongue-based multilingual education.
Keywords: ethnic identification, mother tongue-based multilingual education.
Title: Ethnic Identity and Language: Can Languages Be “Culture Bearing Units” for Ethnic Identification? Through the Study of the Northern Thailand’s Hmong Case
Author: Ju-Hong Yun
International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research
ISSN 2348-3156 (Print), ISSN 2348-3164 (online)
Research Publish Journals
