1. World Englishes Jennifer Jenkins
A resource book for students

2. Implications and issues
B. Development
Implications and issues

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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

22. IVE settings differ from SLA concepts
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

23. 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

24. 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

25. 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