On the Johnson blog at the Economist, there was a post a few days ago titled, "The language holding Malays, Tamils and Chinese together", on the choice to adopt Standard English (and the author also mentions Mandarin) as the working language of the country.
While I think the article itself doesn't consider the sociolinguistic reality, focusing mainly on the language policy the government had adopted - yes, Standard English has been adopted but if I were to speak 'Standard English' in most situations in Singapore, I'd be considered somewhat of a snob. You know, really tao and all.
What I find ironic is that the people who push for Standard English to be spoken (some of whom have taken to defacing public signs that use 'bad English' - I'll need to find the link to this at some point), as opposed to 'Singlish' are often people whose English I would consider to be substandard. Just look at the first comment on this blog post:
I have no doubt Singaporean has good grasp or command of English, but
its Singlish or Malish (Malaysian) does give a goose bump when speaking loudly in public.
Singlish is a typical pidgin language or bad creolization of many "pasar(market)" loan words from typically Hokkien or Malay. I hope
Singaporean should pick up LKY style of spoken English but not those
of Goh Chok Tong's English.
Discounting the possibility of unintentional typos, the way this person writes reflects a variety of English that I wouldn't consider to be anywhere near 'LKY's style of spoken English'. To expect other 'Singaporean' to pick up LKY style of spoken English is just plain hypocrisy.
And of course, it's simply absurd to suggest that people follow a particular PM / SM / MM's style of speaking. It's usually politicians and royalty who end up adjusting their speech to match that of their supporters / followers, not the other way round.
While I think the article itself doesn't consider the sociolinguistic reality, focusing mainly on the language policy the government had adopted - yes, Standard English has been adopted but if I were to speak 'Standard English' in most situations in Singapore, I'd be considered somewhat of a snob. You know, really tao and all.
What I find ironic is that the people who push for Standard English to be spoken (some of whom have taken to defacing public signs that use 'bad English' - I'll need to find the link to this at some point), as opposed to 'Singlish' are often people whose English I would consider to be substandard. Just look at the first comment on this blog post:
I have no doubt Singaporean has good grasp or command of English, but
its Singlish or Malish (Malaysian) does give a goose bump when speaking loudly in public.
Singlish is a typical pidgin language or bad creolization of many "pasar(market)" loan words from typically Hokkien or Malay. I hope
Singaporean should pick up LKY style of spoken English but not those
of Goh Chok Tong's English.
Discounting the possibility of unintentional typos, the way this person writes reflects a variety of English that I wouldn't consider to be anywhere near 'LKY's style of spoken English'. To expect other 'Singaporean' to pick up LKY style of spoken English is just plain hypocrisy.
And of course, it's simply absurd to suggest that people follow a particular PM / SM / MM's style of speaking. It's usually politicians and royalty who end up adjusting their speech to match that of their supporters / followers, not the other way round.
No comments:
Post a Comment