GENERATIONAL DIFFERENCE

To challenge the monopolistic correlation between language choice and identity construction, we are comparing Roka, a Nepalese Hong Kong-born kid, and Chris, a middle-aged Nepalese immigrant for generational differences that affect their language choice. 

There are key findings that supported a generational difference. First and foremost, although they both identify themselves as Hong Kongers, they were born in different places. Roka was born in Hong Kong, while Chris migrated to Hong Kong in 1980s and did not receive any form of local education. Thus, Roka commands fluent Cantonese while Chris possess very limited proficiency of Cantonese. For both, Nepali is the first language they acquired, but for Roka Nepali is not his preferred language.

Despite the huge background and linguistic discrepancy, they both identify themselves as Hong Kongers. We are highlighting some reasons that possibly affected their language choice and their perception of mother tongue, aiming to strengthen the point that the correlation between language and identity is not monopolistic and guaranteed.

Pragmatic Choice
For Roka and Chris, they demonstrated an interesting contradiction. For Roka, Nepali is a pragmatic choice, whilst for Chris English and Cantonese are pragmatic choices. 

For Roka, he speaks Nepali to satisfy the expectations from the elders, and he avoids using it in other scenarios. For Chris, it is the direct opposite that he learnt some degree of Cantonese in order to facilitate communication with neighbours or doing trades with local merchants in wet markets and stores, who are old and do not understand English.  

From this it can be observed even though both interviewees regard themselves as Hong Kongers, their language choice and perception can be very different given different context. 

​

Mother tongue vs preferred language 
From both interviewees, it is observed that parents in Nepalese Community tends to require their children to learn Nepali, their national language. For Chris, he strives to create opportunities in which he can utilize Nepali, therefore he teaches his children Nepali, hoping that Nepali can be prioritized in family communication. He also actively finds Nepalese social circle in which he can uses Nepali. From this, it can be observed that a person’s identity can affect one’s language preference in certain scenarios.

For the same reason, Roka learnt Nepali before he attended school, where he learnt Cantonese. However, this failed to construct his Nepalese identity. To his parents, Nepali is their heritage language and preferred language. The cultural and historical attachment to Nepali displayed by his parents failed to inherent in Roka, and given the minor status of Nepali being a heritage language, Roka has limited occasions in which Nepali is his preferred choice of language. Roka uses Nepali when he speaks to elders in Nepalese community and to the younger ones, he prefer using English, a language more acknowledged in Hong Kong. This reflects that the chronology of language acquisition and exposure to a small Nepalese community could not have strong enough influence in him to compete with other factors that contributed to his Hong Konger identity.