With the increase in the number of English users worldwide, global Englishes will fragment into a multitude of unintelligible varieties. This is more likely to happen if there are no internationally agreed standards. In this article, we will examine the roles of English varieties and how they came about. We will also explore on the extent of which Singapore English will diverge and converge in the future ahead and its shift towards pluricentricity.
English as lingua franca (ELF) is used in cross cultural communication in both the outer and expanding circles. Due to speakers of various cultures existing together, their distinct cultural identities will naturally contribute to variations in the English spoken. In this context, a growing number of ELF English speakers will naturally result in more varieties of English. Some examples of these varieties are creole Englishes, pidgin Englishes, regional dialects and immigrant Englishes. These varieties of English have a unique history, status, form and function attached to them. All varieties emerge from different circumstances. They come about when there is language contact with another existing language in the language user’s environment. Over time, it is expected that the local varieties of English will become more fragmented or divergent. There are already examples of English all over the world, evolving to a different variety.
For example, in America there are Southern accents, Maine accent and Californian accent. Despite being regional dialects, they were also formed due to cross cultural contact just as other English varieties. The Southern accent, for example, emerged from Northern British immigrants influenced by the creole language of the slaves. However, there are also less subtle varieties that have gone through more changes. For example, the Hawaiian English is a pidgin English which was formed out of language contact with languages such as Hawaiian, Cantonese and Portuguese. Like most pidgin and creole languages, Hawaiian pidgin is a transactional language formed by groups of speakers with no mutual language.
Before the English language dominated Hawaii, the grammar and vocabulary of pidgin language comprised of the local language Hawaiian and other languages such as Cantonese, Tagalog and Portuguese. Many Chinese, Filipino and Portuguese immigrants arrived in Hawaii to work in sugar plantations and thus came the need of a mutual language of communication. However, by the 19th century, English in Hawaii was the lingua franca which influenced the Hawaiian pidgin. The Hawaiian pidgin which was initially spoken evolved due to the strong influence of American English. It went through a period of stabilisation before becoming a Creole English variety with native speakers. The Hawaiian Creole language now has more features of American English than when it first developed.
This is an example on how the English language evolves over time, showing that languages are not a product but a social process. However, unlike in the past, most users of English are no longer native speakers. Many are bilingual speakers of English from the expanding and outer circles of the Kachru model. Previously, basilect languages such as Asian and African English varieties were disenfranchised in favour of Inner Circle English. This was due to the dominance of speakers of English as a native language (ENL). However, currently there are more non-native speakers of English than ENL speakers. Unlike ENL countries, countries with non-native speakers who use ELF have a different communicative context. Their communication strategies involve code-switching and accommodation which requires them to be innovative and develop their own norms. Therefore, the dominance of ELF speakers gives them the power to employ endormative standards to serve their countries’ internal functions.
Consequently, this leads to divergence on a local level to accommodate to the local language users. These bilingual speakers impose their syntax, grammar and vocabulary of their native language onto English. Though this makes for easier intranational communication, it widens the unintelligibility gap. The biggest divergence would be the phonological difference. Sounds which may be more difficult for the speakers to articulate are simplified and conflated. Some common examples of this are words such as ‘thin’ and ‘tin’ and ‘then’ and ‘den’. Also, consonant clusters are simplified and the contrast between long and short vowels narrows.
Examples of this can be easily seen in speakers of Singaporean English such as students. To give an example, a Singaporean student may say “Graduate mothers are given more privileges”. Phonetically, it will similar to ‘GradooAte mAders are geeven more preevelages’. A fellow Singaporean student can understand what the speaker means. However, an American will not be able to make out what is being said although it is still in English. The placement, rhythm and intonation are also markedly different. As demonstrated above, there are emphasis placed on specific clusters and vowels which comes across as monotonous. However, this does not make the local variety of English ‘wrong’.
Each of these regions have its own standard variety of English that is not a deficit version of the standard British or American English. Rather than classifying non-native varieties as basilect, Kachru adopts the difference model stating, “Such varieties are varieties of English in their own right rather than stages on the way to more native-like English.” Whereas the deficit model classifies English varieties to be unacceptable and full of errors, the difference model sees the variations as rightful innovations that serves the country’s needs. Hence, it is important to adopt a pluricentric approach. Pluricentricity allows for not just a single but several global centres made up by native and non-native speakers. It also conserves the culture of the speaker without forcing them to follow a single standard. If pluricentricity is not adopted, English may be disfavoured for another international language with lesser linguistic difficulties and more cultural flexibility.
However, fragmentation only happens to a certain extent. To be understood and effectively communicate on a global level, there still needs to be a mutual intelligibility.[g6] As a result, speakers worldwide would speak World Standard Spoken English (WSSE) to achieve this mutual intelligibility. On one hand, there is a divergence in phonology, grammar and syntax. On the other hand, it is likely that the vocabulary of the English varieties will eventually converge to bring speakers together such that they are understood. The sociolinguist Trudgill predicts that the vocabulary of WSSE will become increasingly Americanised[g7] . This is a phenomenon that is already starting to take place. This can be contributed to the pervasive nature of American English.
The media is heavily dominated by American English through which a wide variety of global audiences are exposed to American vocabulary. A substantial part of this audience is made up of non-native speakers of English across the world. The frequent exposure to the American vocabulary heavily influences many of these speakers from the outer and expanding circle by. Some examples of specifically American words which are now commonly used include ‘can’, ‘train station’, ‘briefcase’, ‘sweater’ as opposed to ‘tin’, ‘railway station’, ‘luggage’ and ‘jumper’. Gradually, on a global level, the lexis or vocabulary of English will become more homogenised.
In summary, though the immigrants of Singapore in the first diaspora were essentially in a monolingual situation, this changed so that they could communicate with each other. Singapore English took shape and over the years, is no longer seen as inferior. Though the grammatical structure will continue to shift in the Singapore education system, we will see Singaporean students using a more Americanised vocabulary in the future.
