Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

World Englishes Jennifer Jenkins

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "World Englishes Jennifer Jenkins"— Presentation transcript:

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

Download ppt "World Englishes Jennifer Jenkins"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google