Trilingual Education in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region: Challenges and Threats for Mongolian Identity

Part of the Education Dialogues with/in the Global South book series (EDGS)


Multilingualism is a growing trend globally, as local languages are complemented by national, regional, and international languages in education systems. Without careful sustenance, local identity can suffer under the hegemony of powerful languages and cultures. This chapter analyzes the models of trilingual education implemented in three primary schools in the Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region (IMAR) in the People’s Republic of China. These schools aim to maintain the linguistic heritage of the Mongolians while preparing students to participate in the social, economic, and political activities of the country through Chinese and English. This chapter uses a "Southern" knowledge perspective to identify the factors influencing the choice of models of trilingual education in the schools and the challenges for the sustainability of the Mongolian language and identity.


Language Policy Minority Language City School Main Medium Accretive Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We are grateful for the support of the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong (General Research Fund 840012). Views expressed are those of the authors.


  1. Adamson, B. 2004. China’s English: A History of English in Chinese Education. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Adamson, B., and A. Feng. 2014. Models for Trilingual Education in the People’s Republic of China. In Minority Languages and MultilingualGoogle Scholar
  3. Education, eds. D. Gorter, V. Zenotz and J. Cenoz, 29-44. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  4. Adamson, B., and A. Feng. 2015. Trilingualism in Education: Models and Challenges. In Trilingualism in Education in China: Models and Challenges, eds. A. Feng and B. Adamson, 243–258. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Adamson, B., A. Feng, and Y. Yi. 2013. A Framework for the Study of Policy Design and Implementation of Models of Trilingual Education. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  6. Cormack, M. 2005. The Cultural Politics of Minority Language Media. International Journal of Media and Culture 1: 107–122.Google Scholar
  7. Dong, F., Y. Narisu, X. Wang Gou, and J. Qiu. 2015. Four Models of Mongolian Nationality Schools in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. In Trilingualism in Education in China: Models and Challenges, eds. A. Feng and B. Adamson, 25–45. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  8. Fishman, J.A. 2001. From Theory to Practice (and Vice Versa): Review, Reconsideration and Reiteration. In Can Threatened Languages be Saved? ed. J.A. Fishman, 451–483. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  9. Governmental Statistics in the IMAR. 2010. Baotou Sixth National Census Data. ggy.asp?mid=113. Accessed 24 June 2011.
  10. Kramsch, C., and Anne Whiteside. 2008. Language Ecology in Multilingual Settings. Applied Linguistics 4: 645–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lam, A.S.L. 2005. Language Education in China: Policy and Experience from 1949. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Moseley, C. 2007. General Introduction. In Encyclopedia of the World’s Endangered Languages, ed. C. Moseley, vii–xvi. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Osnos, E. 2008. Crazy English: The National Scramble to Learn a New Language Before the Olympics. New Yorker April 28, 2008. Accessed 7 Oct.
  14. Skutnabb-Kangas, T., and R. Phillipson. 2008. A Human Rights Perspective on Language Ecology. In Ecology of Language, Vol. 9 of Encyclopedia of Language and Education, eds. A. Creese, P. Martin and N. Hornberger, 3–14. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centennial CollegeHong KongChina
  2. 2.Education University of Hong KongHong KongChina

Personalised recommendations