Transcript World Englishes_B Development

World Englishes
Jennifer Jenkins
A resource book for
students
B. Development
Implications and
issues
B1: The legacy of colonialism

The devaluing of local language and culture
-
Assumption of the inferiority of the indigenous language and
culture vs. the superiority of the colonisers and their language
Lack of confidence with L2 users of English, inferiority complex
(Medgyes 1994)
-

The loss of ethnic identity
-
Destruction of the ethnic identities of colonised peoples
Loss of indigenous languages (heritage languages) as markers
of identity
Loss of place (ethnic homeland) as markers of identity
-
B1
B2: Characteristics of pidgins and
creoles

Lexis


Drawn from lexifier language (usually a European language)
Systematic and rule-governed
Concepts encoded in lengthier ways
Extensive use of reduplication

Pronunciation

Fewer sounds
Simplification of consonant clusters
Conflation
Large number of homophones





B2
Characteristics of pidgins and creoles

Grammar


Few inflections in nouns, pronouns, verbs and adjectives
Simple negative particle for negation
Uncomplicated clause structure

Development of pidgins  creoles

Assimilation and reduction
Expansion of vocabulary
Development of tense system in verbs
Greater sentence complexity




B2
Characteristics of pidgins and creoles

Social functions

Wide range of social functions beyond the original purpose to
serve as basic contact languages
Literature (written and oral)
Education
Mass media
Advertising
The Bible





B2
B3: The English Today debate





English  Englishes
Outer Circle Englishes still regularly regarded as
Interlanguage: learner language which has not yet
reached the target
Fossilised language: language used when learning
has ceased short of native-like competence
Expanding Circle Englishes even less accepted
B3
The English Today debate
Controversy between Randolph Quirk and Braj
Kachru, English Today journal, early 1990s
 Non-native Englishes as ‘deficit’:
Quirk: ‘Language varieties and standard language’



Non-native Englishes are inadequately learned versions of
‘correct’ native English forms
Non-native Englishes are not valid as teaching models
Non-native Englishes as ‘difference’:
Kachru: ‘Liberation linguistics and the Quirk Concern’



Criticizes Quirk’s deficit linguistics position
Highlights four false assumptions of Quirk’s argument
B3
B4: The legitimate and illegitimate
offspring of English





The naming of the New Englishes
World Englishes scholar Mufwene (1997)
Criticism of western linguists’ terminology
Based on mistaken belief of language contact:
mother language gives birth to daughter language
without any language contact
Language contact also a feature of ‘legitimate’
Englishes
B4
The legitimate and illegitimate
offspring of English





Innovation – Deviation – Mistake
Distinction by Kachru (1992)
Innovation: concerned with creativity, which is often
not granted to Outer and Expanding Circle speakers
Deviation: involves a comparison with another
variety
Mistake (‘error’): relates to acquisitional deficiency
B4
B5: Standards across space
Three ‘standard’ Englishes:
Britain, North America and Australia
 similarities and differences
- across the three standards
- across varieties of English within Britain and
North America
B5
Vocabulary
= most noticeable level of divergence
NAmE and BrE
 Early settlers introduced new words via
–
–
–

Extending meaning of existing English words (e.g. corn,
robin)
Creating new words (e.g. buttle)
Borrowing from indigenous languages (e.g. moccasin,
squash, toboggan)
Developments since independence of US
–
technological innovation (e.g. NAmE: windshield, hood,
trunk vs. BrE: windscreen, bonnet, boot)
B5
Categories of lexical differences
in EngEng and USEng
Trudgill and Hannah 2002:




Same word, different meaning
Same word, additional meaning in one variety
Same word, difference in style, connotation,
frequency of use
Same concept or item, different word
B5
Australian English

Borrowings from aboriginal languages (e.g.
kangaroo, boomerang)
some now widely known; especially for fauna and flora; now
regarded as quintessentially Australian



Words with different meanings
Different slang words and phrases
Many abbreviations, clippings
B5
Differences in grammar
USEng and EngEng (Trudgill and Hannah 2002)
 Verbs: morphology, auxiliaries
 Nouns: noun endings, using verbs as nouns
 Adjectives and adverbs
 Prepositions
B5
Standard English and dialects



Lexical and grammatical differences trivial?
Dialects mostly different in pronunciation
Grammatical structures in British dialects
–
–
–
–

Verb phrase
Adverbs
Negation
Pronouns
Attitudes towards standard and non-standard
varieties
B5
B6: Native and non-native speakers of
English
Arguments against using the terms ‘native speaker’
and ‘non-native speaker’:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Implies that monolingualism is norm (although
multilingualism is widespread)
Multlingual repertoires: L1/L2/L3 increasingly blurry
Implies that order of acquisition determines proficiency
Anglo speaker seen as reference point
Implies a unidirectional power relationship
Encourages simplistic view of what an error is
Negative perception of/among ‘NNSs’
Image of ideal NS
B6
The NS as target for language learning:
resulting questions





Who is the NS of a standard language?
Speaking English – not related to cultural identity?
Regional accents accepted in NSs, regarded as poor
acquisition in NNSs?
Having to sound ‘more British than the British’?
EFL vs. ELF – an important distinction?
B6
Alternatives to the NS/NNS distinction
Rampton 1990:
 ‘experts’  expertise
– Advantages:
does not require identification, learned rather than
fixed or innate, relative, partial, can be challenged
– Disadvantages:
‘non-expert’  value judgement
B6
Alternatives to the NS/NNS distinction
Jenkins 1996, 2000:
 Monolingual English Speaker (MES)
 Bilingual English Speaker (BES)
 Non-Bilingual English Speaker (NBES)
Advantages:
–
–
MES less favourable than BES  monolingualism is not
the preferable target
Removes L1/L2 distinction
Disadvantages:
Problematic distinction between BES and NBES
B6
B7: En route to new Standard Englishes
Codification of Asian Englishes

Importance of codification
–

Acceptance, prestige, classroom model
Obstacles in codification – SLA perspective:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Indigenised varieties of English (IVEs) regarded as
‘interlanguages’
Goal of SLA = native-like competence
NS input sufficient for acquisition
SLA process without reference to L2 functions
Role of L1  interference
Motivation for acquisition ‘integrative’, i.e. admiration of
NS, desire to become member of culture
B7
IVE settings differ from SLA concepts

IVE settings:
–
–
–
–
–
Target: no longer NS, but other NNSs
Input is IVE (not NS)
Multilingual settings, diglossic situation
English does not serve all functions, other local languages
present
Motivation for learning: instrumental not integrative
B7
The SLA paradigm

SLA: ‘Interlanguage’ (Selinker 1972)
–
Unstable learner language or
Fossilised learner language

IVEs = fossilised interlanguage (IL) competences
–

Criticized e.g. by Y. Kachru and Canagarajah
B7
B8: Possible future scenarios:
English Language Complex (ELC)
Mesthrie and Bhatt (2008)
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Metropolitan standards
Colonial standards
Regional and social dialects
Pidgin Englishes and Creole Englishes
English as a second language (ESL)
English as a foreign language (EFL)
Immigrant Englishes
Language-shift Englishes
Jargon Englishes
Hybrid Englishes
B8
Convergence or divergence?

Crystal (1997, 2002):
–
–

Increased diversification, but
World Standard Spoken English (WSSE)
Trudgill (1998):
–
–
–
–
Increasing convergence in lexis (American influence)
Unclear situation in grammar
Diversification in phonology
Mainly refers to Inner Circle Englishes
B8