WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM BAD ENGLISH PRESENTATION FOR ENGLISH TODAY, - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM “BAD ENGLISH” PRESENTATION FOR ENGLISH TODAY, NEAT SEMINAR ELIZABETH PETERSON

DESCRIPTIVE SOCIOLINGUIST … ? • descriptive (socio) linguist h"ps://livingtongues.wordpress.com/category/k-­‑david-­‑harrison-­‑3/ ¡ h"p://tyjna.com/wp-­‑content/uploads/2011/12/ mean_teacher_800w_600h.jpg ¡

DESCRIPTIVE IDEOLOGIES 1) all (spoken) languages change over time 2) all spoken languages are equal in linguistic terms 3) grammaticality and communicative effectiveness are distinct and independent issues (vis Chomsky’s proficiency vs performance and de Saussure’s langue vs parole ) 4) written language and spoken language are historically, structurally, and functionally different creatures 5) variation is intrinsic to all spoken languages at every level (Lippi-Green 2012)

STANDARD LANGUAGE IDEOLOGIES

IMPLICATION: speakers are not equipped to care for their own language; whatever it is that they have learned before they enter school and subsequently learn “the right way” does not count.

RELATIONSHIP OF WRITTEN LANGUAGE TO SLI dissemination of written language standardization codification prescriptivism, SLI h"p://s3-­‑eu-­‑west-­‑1.amazonaws.com/lookandlearn-­‑ preview/B/B001/B001405.jpg ¡ 19/09/15 ¡ 6 ¡ "Bad English"

Lippi-Green (2012:61): “The myth of standard language persists because it is carefully tended and propagated, with huge, almost universal success, so that language, the most fundamental of human socialization tools, becomes a commodity. This is the core of an ideology of standardization which empowers certain individuals and institutions to make these decisions and impose them on others.”

h"p://wikitravel.org/upload/shared/thumb/b/bd/ World_map_percentage_english_speakers_by_country.svg/634px-­‑ World_map_percentage_english_speakers_by_country.svg.png ¡

The ¡three ¡circles ¡model ¡of ¡English ¡in ¡the ¡world, ¡ based ¡on ¡Kachru ¡1986 ¡

GLOBAL CULTURE / YOUTH CULTURE Bottom-up learning: 1) individual learning of English; influence is from “the bottom up” 2) different style of English than historically, influenced by AmEng but also by AAVE 3) learning the grammar is not seen as important; the learners are not prescriptive 4) English is used for lingua franca purposes (Melchers & Shaw 2003: 183) 10 ¡ Global and Regional Variation

SEPARATED BY A COMMON LANGUAGE?

INDIAN ENG MORPHOLOGY • reduplication: small small favor • countability of non-counts: furnitures, luggages • addition of prepositions/particles: Everyone is dismissing off my proposal. • use of progressive in stative verbs: I am knowing the answer. • lack of articles (by some users) (Sailaja 2009)

IE SYNTACTIC FEATURES • yes/no questions Hasn’t the president left for Nairobi? UK, US: Yes, he has left for Nairobi / No, he hasn’t left for Nairobi. Indian: Yes, he hasn’t left for Nairobi / No, he has left for Nairobi. (Bhatia 2004; see also Sailaja 2009)

Indian English Dictionary Helping Business People to Communicate with India Business people from many countries often get confused by the English spoken in India. This includes Americans, Canadians, people from the U.K. (“Britishers” as Indians call them) and even some Indians living overseas. As expert cross-cultural business consultants for Western businesses dealing with India, we have created the ultimate online dictionary and glossary of "Indish" or Indian English. This section on our website will help you understand the words in Indian English. We also have a separate page explaining unique Indian Abbreviations. To understand the sentences, paragraphs and underlying motivations of Indian business people, you need to retain our professional services. h"p://www.amri".com/india-­‑english-­‑dicPonary/ ¡ Search Search meaning for: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 0-9 C.A. cabaret Cabin Calling card Cantonment Cantt capitation fees Capsicum Car Lifter Car Park Caravanserai Carom Cash Memo Casteism casual leave Catberry cello tape Cent Percent Central government Cess Chaat Chaddar Chaddies Chai Chaikhana Chaiwallah Chaiyya Chak De Chal Chalaan Challan Challo! Chalo Chalta hai Chamak challo Chamak chalo Chamari Chamcha Chammak Chammak challo Chammak chulo Chanakya Chappals Chaprasi chargesheet Charpoy Chatni Chaturanga Chawl Cheap checkpost Chemist Chennai Cheque cheri Chief Secretary Chingariya Chiranjeevi chit Choli Chor Chori Chowk Chowkidar Christian name chuddies Chuddies Chulha Chunni Churidar Chutney Ciggy Cinema Cinema Hall clean chit Cloney Co-brother Co-sister Coal Coir Cold drink Collector Colony Come again

WASTED RESOURCES? — Special forms of semantics, grammatical features, spelling, etc. “[AA youth] obviously value language knowledge and are willing to learn the orthographic, grammatical, lexical and phonological rules of both AAE and GE. And these rules become the grist of their power discourse. Yet, educators routinely consider AA youths’ powerful knowledge of language to be in conflict with formal learning and education goals. This is a tragedy not only for youth whose identity is often attacked through language, but for society at large, who treat black youths’ identification with their community as a national problem” (Morgan 2002: 131).

• “While the notion of Blinglish points us back at one level to the idea of a homogenizing spread of language and culture, as kids around the world imitate African American speech forms, it is also worth considering that if it is indeed disenfranchised African Americans who are spearheading the global dominance of North American language and culture … then we are looking at forms of expression of resistance to dominant white culture becoming a dominant global cultural norm” (Pennycook 2007: 3).

THE LOGIC OF “BAD ENGLISH” AAE English yourself yourself hisself himself herself herself ourselves ourselves yourselves yourselves theirselves themselves

LOGICAL? Finnish Swedish English AAE (and others) (minä) puhun jag pratar I talk I talk (sinä) puhut du pratar you talk you talk (hän) puhuu han/hon pratar he/she talks he/she talk (te) puhutte ni pratar you talk you talk (he) puhuvat de pratar they talk they talk

LOGICAL? Swedish English AAE (and others) jag var I was I was du var you were you was han/hon var he/she was he/she was ni var you were you was de var they were they was

UNIVERSALS CHECKLIST AAE ELF L1 pidgins Eng 1. -ing à -in X X ? X 2. CC simplification X X X X 3. final obstruent X ? X X devoicing 4. leveling of X X X X irregular verbs 5. default singulars X X X X in verbs 6. multiple negation X X X X 7. copula absence X ? X X

A CHANGE IN ATTITUDES = BETTER EQUALITY Baugh 2007: Linguists have a moral duty to make their findings public • Resulting in such changes in policy, for example, as in Ann Arbor, Michigan • “[linguists … ] embody an ethos of human equality among all people, and therein lies the direct and indirect relevance to the global quest for racial justice … ” (Baugh 2007: 344). compare to Milroy 2001: • “ … linguists do indeed have an ideological agenda – to alter public opinions on language use. They are not at this point disinterested scientists, and the public is correct to perceive this” (J. Milroy 2001: 538).

WHAT ABOUT TRANSLATORS, TEACHERS AND EDITORS? • “Good English” is socially constructed and reinforced; it reflects social biases • not supported from a linguistic point of view • it is commonly believed that “Good English” can’t be entrusted to the common people; it requires some sort of social expertise, reflecting mainstream, hegemonic values • the idea of Standard Language is something relatively new in English, coming from written standards and mass media

Baugh, ¡John. ¡2007. ¡LinguisPc ¡ContribuPons ¡to ¡the ¡Advancement ¡of ¡Racial ¡JusPce ¡Within ¡ and ¡Beyond ¡the ¡African ¡Diaspora. ¡ Language ¡and ¡Linguis+cs ¡Compass ¡1 ¡(4): ¡331-­‑349. ¡ ¡ Kachru, ¡Braj. ¡1986. ¡ The ¡alchemy ¡of ¡English: ¡The ¡spread, ¡func+on, ¡and ¡models ¡in ¡non-­‑ ¡ na+ve ¡English. ¡ Oxford: ¡Oxford ¡University ¡Press/Illini ¡Press. ¡ Lippi-­‑Green, ¡Rosina. ¡2012. ¡ English ¡with ¡an ¡Accent. ¡ Routledge. ¡ �Melchers, ¡Gunnel ¡and ¡Philip ¡Shaw. ¡2003. ¡ World ¡Englishes: ¡An ¡Introduc+on. ¡Arnold. ¡ Milroy, ¡James. ¡2001 . ¡ Language ¡ideologies ¡and ¡the ¡consequences ¡of ¡standardizaPon. ¡ Journal ¡of ¡Sociolinguis+cs ¡ 5 ¡(4): ¡530-­‑555. ¡ ¡ Morgan, ¡Marcyliena. ¡2002. ¡ Language, ¡Discourse ¡and ¡Power ¡in ¡African ¡American ¡Culture. ¡ Cambridge ¡University ¡Press. ¡ ¡ Pennycook, ¡Alistair. ¡2007. ¡ Global ¡Englishes ¡and ¡Transcultural ¡Flows . ¡Routledge . ¡ Sailaja, ¡Pingali. ¡2009. ¡ Indian ¡English. ¡ Edinburgh ¡University ¡Press. ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡

THANK YOU Questions or comments? elizabeth.peterson@helsinki.fi