Hong Kong
The Chinese government summarizes its relationship with Hong Kong as "one country, two systems." Actually, the opposite is true: for all intents and purposes, the countries are separate, yet both seem driven by a rapacious capitalism that the Hong Kong-ese have made their trademark. "Two countries, one system" would be more apt.
Hong Kong, like its sister Macao, is a Special Administrative Region of China. The two countries have separate customs arrangements, separate visa policies, separate currencies, separate laws, and separate political structures. They speak separate languages (though Cantonese is of course widely spoken in China's Guangdong Province), and write in seperate character systems. China does appoint some of Hong Kong's government officials and is responsible for its defense, but in effect China and Hong Kong are not the "same" country.
Hong Kong is busy, brash, and vertical; there are skyscrapers everywhere. At times being a pedestrian here means traipsing through a succession of high-end shopping malls, and it may even be possible to traverse the city without setting one foot on the ground.
As a US citizen, I was able to enter Hong Kong from Shenzhen without a visa, yet for most Chinese this simply isn't possible. Hong Kongers, it seems, feel more comfortable around "foreigners" than their co-ethnicists who occupy the vast continent beside the territory. When my boss once asked an Englishman whether the Chinese were allowed into the territory, he was told, "of course not! They'd break it".
Yet something tells me this is an incomplete picture. Hong Kong Chinese chafed under British rule for a century and a half and exulted when the territory reverted to Chinese control in 1997. Beijing for its part is careful not to change anything, as Hong Kong hums along fine on its own. Billboards around the city boast of being Asia's "world city", and in a sense HK is more international than most other places. However, it is blissfully self-contained; a necessity for a place that stuck to money-making while its giant neighbor experienced the trauma of Maosim in the post-war period.
In any event, my time here will be brief; I arrived at about eleven this morning, and will catch the six o'clock ferry back to Shenzhen. In the meantime, I'm off to do things I can't do in the "real" China; buy magazines and books in English, eat roast beef sandwiches, and ignore all the Mandarin I've ever learned.
November 14th, 2008 - 03:40
It really gets me when someone made comments like this Hong Kong Ren as if the fact that any people in this world want a good life is a myth that is totally reprehensible. I guess people really love to feel superior or better somehow than others one way or the other. I just don’t understand. Not that I’m from mainland, I really don’t like anybody who talks like this.
btw, you call Cantonese a language? Then all rednecks in MI speaks a different language.
Enjoy Hong Kong! Be sure to visit the Hong Kong Museum of Theater and Movie. You’ll love it out of disappointment.:-P
November 15th, 2008 - 12:52
Marco, the difference between “language” and “dialect” has more to do with politics than any linguistic criteria with a solid scientific base. Spanish and Portuguese are officially considered separate languages, and yet they are mutually comprehensible. The “separate” Scandinavian languages Danish, Norwegian and Swedish are in reality one single dialect continuum stretching from the German border to Nord Kapp. In fact, historically Europe was more a patchwork of dialect continua, with the ‘French’ and ‘Spanish’ dialects spoken either side of the Franco-Spanish border having more in common with each other than with the dialects spoken in their respective national capitals. If we were to ignore the politics and deal purely with the evidence, we would conclude that æ±‰è¯ is best translated as the Sinitic family of languages, and that Mandarin and Cantonese are separate languages within that family, each with their own dialects.
The same does not apply to the varieties of American English I presume you imply with your “rednecks in MI” comment. You’d find yourself in slightly firmer rhetorical ground if you chose one of the extremely obscure English dialects/languages found in odd little remote pockets of America’s East Coast.
November 17th, 2008 - 22:27
Chris, agreed. Actually, to prove languages have everything to do with politics, one needs to look no further than Chinese. Sorry, “the Sinitic family of languages” just doesn’t cut it for me, I much prefer Chinese. Ever since 秦始皇unified the language around 200BC, there’s always been a new capital, a new palace and a new official language based on the local dialect around the capital area for each and every dynasty. Mandarin is based on the Beijing dialect and the complete pronunciation guideline did not come out until 70s or 80s. That said, the real issue, I think, is Matt touch a raw nerve, namely claiming Hong Kong is essentially a separate country. I can give you all the reasons that why some Chinese are even more sensitive to the identity of Hong Kong than that of Taiwan, but again I am sure you are well aware of all that.
November 18th, 2008 - 15:36
Tong Lambert,
Hong Kong IS essentially a foreign country. I wasn’t making a normative statement; quite the contrary, I think the conditions under which Britain obtained Hong Kong in the first place were ghastly and I’m pleased that it is under Chinese sovereignty.
But for the reasons I described Hong Kong is different; in terms of law and development, it and China are more different than any two contiguous European countries.
November 21st, 2008 - 22:08
Come on ppl! I have to clarify that I can’t care less if you think Hongkong is a foreign country or not. AND I do think China and Hongkong is different. But on the issue of defining terms on politics, I would expect you claim Hongkong is part of China.(Note: by politics). You merely define language on politics when it’s convenient in contrast with the sovereignty. What I meant to point out that Cantonese IS a dialect. By saying Cantonese is a language in the context of politics, you assume that there are two different Cantoneses existing: one in HongKong and one in Guangdong where it’s originated. This is apprarently not true. This is only on Cantonese which originated in Guangdong.Cantonese in the context of Chinese recognition has more to do with geography and demographics rather than politics. This applies to many different dialects in most dynasties throughout Chinese history.
PS: looks like your definition of one country varies a lot!It could be economic development,politics, language or anything else when it’s convenient.
November 22nd, 2008 - 17:40
Marco, what on earth are you on about? I don’t think Matt is dumb enough to think Hong Kong is in any real sense a separate country. I read his statement as saying that for all practical purposes it might as well be: crossing borders, visas, education, healthcare, economic and political systems… in many respects Hong Kong is as different from the Mainland as it is from Canada. Indeed, in many of these respects, it has more in common with “the West” than with the Mainland. Obviously, though, legally, historically, culturally and linguistically it is a part of China- distinct from the Mainland given it’s unique history from 1840 onwards and the circumstances leading to its return to China, but nonetheless clearly a part of China.
I never said that Cantonese is a language in the context of politics. Politics demands Cantonese be labelled a dialect, just as politics demands Spanish and Portuguese and on the other side of Europe the Scandinavian dialect continuum be lablelled separate languages, but if all linguistic criteria were applied objectively without political interference, Cantonese would be termed a language. And this has nothing to do with any silly split between Guangdong and Hong Kong, but everything to do with the simple fact that although Cantonese (regardless of where it is spoken) and Mandarin are being clearly related, they are not at all mutually intelligible. The Xiang dialects are another Sinitic language (if we continue to keep politics out of the equation), but no one would be stupid enough to pretend Hunan was in any way separate from China.
December 13th, 2008 - 05:20
save to my Bookmarks