Quantifying and qualifying identity in post-colonial Hong Kong: Towards the post-structuralist’s account

Abstract

The study of language and identity attracts attention from numerous disciplines such as social psychology and sociolinguistics. Recent research has seen a move beyond the structuralist’s idea of identity as static categories to a post-structuralist’s interpretation of identity as a site of conflict/struggle, and as a dynamic and ever-emergent construct. The present study aims to investigate the identity struggle experienced by participants across generations in post-colonial Hong Kong (HK). Shaped by its past as a British colony, HK people claim a dual/mixed identity, seeing themselves as both ‘Hongkongers’ and ‘Chinese’. This allows them to claim their ethnic heritage with the wider Chinese population, but also to differentiate themselves from Chinese outside HK. Data obtained from 65 HK participants born in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s through quantitative measures (an ethnic group affiliation questionnaire) and qualitative measures (e.g. field notes) reveal their ambivalence about their own identity. Participants acknowledge an ethnic affiliation with Chinese, but the majority concurrently resists being aligned completely with Chinese mainlanders. Using HK as a case study, this paper problematizes the hard-and-fast ‘cataloguing’ of people into categories, in line with the move into the post-structuralist’s account.