Theoretical framework of nationalism and authenticity

Anderson (Reference Anderson1983) discusses the imaginative aspect of national identity, through which people imagine themselves being a member of a community with others whom they have never met. For example, netizens who are unlikely to know each other in real life were seen to form rivalries and alliances based on their collective knowledge of language use (Gao, Reference Gao2012a; Yan, Reference Yan2015). Hall's observation of national identity is also enacted through national culture, in which meanings produce ‘“the nation” with which we can identify; these are contained in the stories which are told about it, memories which connect its present with its past, and images which are constructed of it’ (Reference Hall, Hall, Held and McGrew1992: 293). National identity is also relational and power driven in that it builds on the discourse of sameness that separates the majority group that share a common historical background from the group that do not share that sameness (Costelloe, Reference Costelloe2014). In discourse on Othering, national identity produces discourse that tends to portray certain groups of individuals as violent, chaotic, and uncivilized beings, thus making a clear demarcation between the Master and the inferior others. In the case of the English practice of naming, what is at stake is how the discourse of Othering forces individuals to abide by the Chinese naming practice, bringing to the foreground one's Chinese national identity, in a way that benefits interest groups, maintains the current social hierarchy, and fosters a submissive attitude among individuals (Holliday, Hyde & Kullman, Reference Holliday, Hyde and Kullman2004).

An equally important framework in examining netizens’ attitudes towards the English name Angelababy is the discourse of authenticity. According to Buendgens-Kosten (Reference Buendgens-Kosten2014: 457), the notion of authenticity in its broadest scope refers to being real or ‘trueness to origin’, which paves the way for the pervasive discourse of native speakerism in ELT that prioritizes native English speakers and their cultures over the subalterns. Lowe and Pinner (Reference Lowe and Pinner2016), in their detailed analysis of the interplay between native-speakerism and authenticity, suggested that authority, culturism, and cultural capital are three components that play into a classic definition of authenticity, which values being real. In their work on contemporary identity development, Blommaert and Varis (Reference Blommaert and Varis2015: 7) conceptualized the construct of authenticity as enoughness, which is defined as ‘the benchmark for being admitted into an identity category (as a ‘real’ or ‘authentic’ member) is “having enough” of the features specified for them’. This conception highlights the contested and dynamic character of identity work, as individuals seek to obtain enough symbolic elements in the identity category to which they wish to belong.

Current research on English naming practice in the Greater China region mostly focuses on its pedagogical, cultural, and language learning implications (Chien, Reference Chien2012; Huang & Ke, Reference Huang and Ke2016); very few studies have examined the critical aspect of adopting an English name. Thus, the current study aims at investigating netizens’ attitudes towards the English name Angelababy via an online ethnographic perspective. To operationalize this study, the following research question is posed:

Findings

In the current section, we first provide seven extracts from netizens who are against the use of English names in China, analyzing these extracts from the perspective of nationalism discourse and illustrating the interplay between English names, power, and discourse. The remaining seven extracts are viewed and discussed through the lens of authenticity discourse. Through the extracts, we display the elements that constitute the form of authentic English names.

Discourse of nationalism

One of the dominant themes in the data is a strong relationship between naming practices and the construct of nationalism, as evidenced by the netizens’ frequent references to China, Chinese language, and Chinese cultural artifacts. For example, the netizen's comment in Extract 1 politicizes the relationship between Mandarin Chinese and the Chinese territory, indicating that if one gives up using Chinese, then one loses his or her claim to ownership of its land. Additionally, there is concern over the growing use of English in the Chinese music industry. As part of Chinese cultural artifacts, music production serves the interest of nationalism discourse; it is bounded in space and homogenized in language. The power-laden view of music therefore places constraints on the production and distribution of English-language-based music.

Extracts 2 and 3 reveal three crucial elements, including institutional discourse, language standardization, and desire for the West, which could facilitate our understanding of the Angelababy case and the overwhelming criticism put forward by Chinese netizens regarding using English names in China.

In Extract 2, the netizen introduces the notion of the nation-state by saying that only Chinese characters should be acknowledged as legitimate language in media coverage in China. Being part of institutional discourse, the media plays an important role in defining social reality and influencing individuals’ social practice (Mayr, Reference Mayr2008). Through nation-state discourse such as Extract 2, language becomes a crucial ingredient in the creation of the mechanism that legitimizes certain dominant groups while marginalizing the subordinated ones. The institutionalization of language therefore is inextricably connected to power and reproduces hegemony, truths, and knowledge that allow the construction of one social reality, favorable to the ruling class.

Extract 3 argues for the use of Chinese names by tying together language standardization and being Chinese, which are two important constructs that operationalize within the discourse of nationalism and the development of one's national identity. Furthermore, Extract 3 makes the claim that using names in English, which is a language practiced in the West, could be considered to represent one's conscious desire for the West. From a language education/practice perspective, desire lies at the center of language learning/teaching, policy making, teacher education, curriculum development, and the arrangements of the larger social, economic, and political world (Motha & Lin, Reference Motha and Lin2014). The position and construction of desire in Extract 3 is thus partially shaped by English-language commodification, the drive of neoliberal discourse, globalization forces, and one's lack of these linguistic and economic resources.

To reinforce the discourse of nationalism and the significance of using Chinese names, Extracts 4 and 5 construe a nation that is different from the past, where China was weak and submissive. These comments are critical in the sense that they problematize hegemonic knowledge production from the Global North and mobilize their own decolonial option, which is prohibiting the use of English for personal names in public. However, they also adhere strongly to the nation-state discourse that espouses monolingualism. Through the narration of its rich cultural heritage and long history, the Chinese language becomes further embedded in the netizens’ naming practices, in which adopting only Chinese names is considered normal and legitimate.

In the above comments, netizens critique the English name Angelababy through the framework of nationalism. Within the discourse on Othering and in the larger social world, where using Mandarin Chinese is considered the norm, individuals who use English names assume a lesser role that makes them become more ‘visible’ or ‘distinct’, and thus vulnerable to the discourse of nationalism that regulates individuals’ naming practices.

As we have articulated briefly in the introduction, language is crucial to nationalism, which demands monocultural and monolingual ideologies in times of economic development. In Mainland China, this is seen in the promotion of the official language Putonghua in education, mass media, legal documents, and other institutional policies and in the marginalization of minority/regional languages (Tse, Reference Tse2014). Interestingly, however, a number of other comments indicate that the English naming practice is acceptable so long as such users adopt an appropriate English name. This stance differs from the nationalist cohort in the sense that the former builds on the notion of legitimacy through the realness of English names, which we claim to be closely connected to the construct of authenticity.

Discourse of authenticity

The above extracts produce knowledge about authenticity in the English naming practice by discussing the importance of normality and the problematic aspects of the name Angelababy. Although the extract did not delineate what normal English names are, Extract 6 uses the British actor Rosamund Pike's Chinese name 裴淳华 as a well-informed and authentic foreign name example. In this case, 裴 is a common family name, and 淳华 are two Chinese characters that are used as her given name. Both 淳 and 华 have been adopted as one's given names. Similarly, a normal English name should have a family name and a given name; additionally, they need to be shared by a wide population. Extracts 7 further elaborates the relationship between an authentic English name and English-language competence. The underlying assumption is that if someone is proficient enough in the English language, he or she would notice problems with the name Angelababy.

Extracts 8 and 9 both touch on the notion of authenticity regarding the name Angelababy. As one of the very few comments that showed a preference for Angelabbay over the actress's Chinese name, Extract 8 identifies ‘baby’ as Western, which is more impressive than the Chinese name Yang Ying. Similarly, Extract 9 considers native-speaking language teachers to be a legitimate source for determining the credibility of the name Angelababy.

The foregoing extracts point out that only authentic English names would be viewed as normal in China. To demonstrate their point about the relationship between identity and authenticity, Blommaert and Varis (Reference Blommaert and Varis2015) gave the example of identifying oneself as the working-class British youth culture chav, which, among other features such as smoking and drinking, could only be authenticated by wearing Burberry products. This is a process referred to as dosing, in which a sufficient number of semiotic features is deployed to legitimize someone as authentic. The same concept could be applied to examine authentic naming practice, in which certain linguistic elements co-construct a name as authentic. Based on the extracts in this section, these elements include one's English-language proficiency, whether the name follows English naming practice where both family name and given name are displayed, the habitual use of both family name and given name by a substantial population, and the approval by Westerners, particularly native English speakers.