Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of World Englishes
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of World Englishes
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Maps
- Tables
- Notes on Contributors
- 1 World Englishes: An Introduction
- Part I The Making of Englishes
- Part II World Englishes Old and New
- Part III Linguistics and World Englishes
- Part IV Current Challenges
- 25 Norms and Standards in World Englishes
- 26 Identity and Indexicality in the Study of World Englishes
- 27 The Politics of World Englishes
- 28 World Englishes in the Media
- 29 World Englishes and Transnationalism
- Index
- References
25 - Norms and Standards in World Englishes
from Part IV - Current Challenges
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 December 2019
By
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of World Englishes
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of World Englishes
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Maps
- Tables
- Notes on Contributors
- 1 World Englishes: An Introduction
- Part I The Making of Englishes
- Part II World Englishes Old and New
- Part III Linguistics and World Englishes
- Part IV Current Challenges
- 25 Norms and Standards in World Englishes
- 26 Identity and Indexicality in the Study of World Englishes
- 27 The Politics of World Englishes
- 28 World Englishes in the Media
- 29 World Englishes and Transnationalism
- Index
- References
Summary
The chapter discusses the notions of norms and standards in conceptualizing the evolutionary status of World Englishes. While “standard language” is the product of its functional and formal development in Haugen’s (1972) model, in Schneider’s (2007) model it is the status attained by a regional variety that has become endonormative. From the sociolinguistic perspective, the standard may be seen by its users either inclusively, as a uniting medium for the speech community, or exclusively, as an elevated reference style of English associated with correctness and an ideology of the standard. The norms of a variety can be induced from corpus data, showing how it has differentiated itself from the source variety. Two case studies illustrate the interplay between standards and norms. In both, there is grammatical evidence of the norms shifting away from their exonormative standards yet discomfort expressed in some quarters about the popular regional forms (Singlish, Taglish). Corpus evidence suggests that metalinguistic awareness of tension between Singlish and “good English” is stronger in Singapore than the equivalents in the Philippines, correlating with their evolutionary status.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of World Englishes , pp. 587 - 608Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Ansaldo, Umberto. 2004. The evolution of Singapore English: Finding the matrix. In Lim, Lisa, ed. Singapore English: A Grammatical Description. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 129–52.Google Scholar
Bautista, , Maria (Ma.), Lourdes S. and Bolton, Kingsley. 2008. Philippine English: Linguistic and Literary Perspectives. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
Bautista, , Maria (Ma.), Lourdes S. 2001. Attitudes of selected Luzon university students and faculty towards Philippine English. In Maria, (Ma.) Tayao, Lourdes G. et al., eds. Rosario E Maminta in Focus: Selected Writings in Applied Linguistics. Quezon City: Philippine Association for Language Teaching, 236–73.Google Scholar
Bautista, , Maria (Ma.), Lourdes S. 2004 Taglish-English code-switching as a mode of discourse. Asia Pacific Education Review 5(2): 226–233. doi:10.1007/BF03024960Google Scholar
Bernaisch, Tobias and Koch, Christopher. 2016. Attitudes towards Englishes in India. World Englishes 35(1): 118–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Finegan, Edward and Atkinson, Dawn. 1994. ARCHER and its challenges. In Fries, Udo, Tottie, Gunnel and Schneider, Peter, eds. Creating and Using English Language Corpora. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 255–272.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biewer, Carolin. 2015. South Pacific Englishes: A Sociolinguistic and Morphosyntactic Profile of Fiji English, Samoan English and Cook Islands English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borlongan, Ariane. 2009. A survey on language use, attitudes and identity in relation to Philippine English among young generation Filipinos. Philippine ESL Journal 3: 74–107.Google Scholar
Bowerman, Sean. 2012. Standard South African English. In Hickey, Raymond, ed. Standards of English. Codified Varieties Around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 198–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chand, Vineeta. 2014. Review of Hickey Standards of English: Codified Varieties around the World (2012). Journal of Sociolinguistics 18(5): 708–719.Google Scholar
Collins, Peter. 2009. Modals and quasimodals in World Englishes. World Englishes 28: 281–292.Google Scholar
Collins, Peter. 2015. Recent diachronic change in the progressive in Philippine English. In Collins, Peter, ed. Grammatical Change in English World-Wide. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 271–296.Google Scholar
Devonish, Hubert and Ewart, A.C. Thomas, . 2012. Standards of English in the Caribbean. In Hickey, Raymond, ed. Standards of English. Codified Varieties Around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 179–197.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A. 1972. Diglossia. In Giglioli, Pier Paolo, ed. Language and Social Context: Selected Readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 232–251.Google Scholar
Garner, Bryan. 2009. Garner’s Modern American Usage (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gill, Martin. 2017. “Goodbye, Sweet England”: Language, nation and normativity in popular British news media. In Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid and Percy, Carol, eds. Prescription and Tradition in Language: Establishing Standards across Space and Time. Berlin: de Gruyter, 255–272.Google Scholar
Gjurkova, Aleksandra. 2017. Prescription and language management in Macedonia. In Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid and Percy, Carol, eds. Prescription and Tradition in Language: Establishing Standards across Space and Time. Berlin: de Gruyter, 318–330.Google Scholar
Gonzalez, Andrew. 1983. When does an error become a distinctive feature of Philippine English? In Noss, Richard B., ed. Varieties of English in Southeast Asia. Singapore: Singapore University Press, 150–172.Google Scholar
Gupta, Anthea Fraser. 2010. Singapore Standard English revisited. In Lim, Lisa, Pakir, Anne and Wee, Lionel, eds. English in Singapore: Unity and Utility. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 57–89.Google Scholar
Gut, Ulrike. 2012. Standards of English in West Africa. In Hickey, Raymond, ed. Standards of English. Codified Varieties Around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 213–229.Google Scholar
Guy, Gregory and Hinskens, Frans. 2016. Introduction to special issue. Linguistic coherence: Systems, repertoires and speech communities. Lingua 172(3): 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haugen, Einar. 1972. Dialect, language, nation. In Pride, J.B. and Holmes, Janet, eds. Sociolinguistics: Selected Readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 97–111.Google Scholar
Hickey, Raymond, ed. 2012. Areal Features of the Anglophone World. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Honey, John. 1997. Language and Power: The Story of Standard English and Its Enemies. London: Faber & Faber.Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne, Zipp, Lena and Huber, André. 2015. Attitudes towards varieties of English in Fiji. A shift to endonormativity? World Englishes 34(4): 688–707.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, Andy. 2012. English in ASEAN: Implications for regional multilingualism. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 33(4): 331–344.Google Scholar
Kretzschmar, William and Meyer, Charles. 2012. The idea of Standard American English. In Hickey, Raymond, ed. Standards of English. Codified Varieties Around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 139–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J. 2004. A Dictionary of Singlish and Singapore English. www.Singlishdictionary.comGoogle Scholar
Lim, Lisa. 2012. Standards of English in South-East Asia. In Hickey, Raymond, ed. Standards of English. Codified Varieties Around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 274–293.Google Scholar
Lim, Lisa, ed. 2004 Singapore English: A Grammatical Description. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lising, Loy, Peters, Pam and Smith, Adam. 2016. Language use and language attitudes in multilingual habitats. Paper presented at the Australian Linguistic Society Conference, December 2016.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 2006. Twentieth Century English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 2013. The world system of Englishes: Accounting for the transnational importance of mobile and mediated vernaculars. English World-Wide 34(3): 253–278.Google Scholar
Mauranen, Anna. 2012. Exploring ELF: Academic English Shaped by Non-native Speakers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McArthur, Tom. 2001. Review: World English and world Englishes: Trends, tensions, varieties, and standards. Language Teaching 34(1): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milroy, James and Milroy, Lesley. 1985. Authority in Language: Investigating Prescription and Language Standardization. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Alexander G. and Delbridge, Arthur. 1966. The Speech of Australian Adolescents. Angus and Robertson.Google Scholar
Övergaard, Gert. 1995. The Mandative Subjunctive in American and British English in the 20th Century. Uppsala: Almquist and Wiksell.Google Scholar
Pakir, Anne. 1993. The English Language in Singapore: Standards and Norms. Singapore Association for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Pefianco Martin, Isabel. 2014a. Philippine English revisited. World Englishes 33(1): 50–59.Google Scholar
Pefianco Martin, Isabel. 2014b. Philippine English: Beyond nativization? In Buschfeld, Sarah, Hoffmann, Thomas, Huber, Magnus and Kautzsch, Alexander, eds. The Evolution of Englishes: The Dynamic Model and Beyond. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 70–85.Google Scholar
Peters, Pam. 2009. The mandative subjunctive in spoken English. In Peters, Pam, Collins, Peter and Smith, Adam, eds. Comparative Studies of Australian and New Zealand English. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, Pam. 2012. Varieties of English: Standard British English. In Bergs, Alexander and Brinton, Laurel, eds. HSK English Historical Linguistics HSK 34.2. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1879–1899.Google Scholar
Peters, Pam. 2014. Differentiation in Australian English. In Buschfeld, Sarah, Hoffmann, Thomas, Huber, Magnus and Kautzsch, Alexander, eds. The Evolution of Englishes: The Dynamic Model and Beyond. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 107–125.Google Scholar
Peters, Pam. 2018. The lexicography of usage. In Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid, ed. English Usage Guides: History, Advice, Attitudes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 31–50.Google Scholar
Peters, Pam and Young, Wendy. 1997. English grammar and the lexicography of usage. Journal of English Linguistics 25(4): 315–331.Google Scholar
Platt, John T. and Weber, Heidi. 1980. English in Singapore and Malaysia – Status, Features, Functions. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Preston, Dennis. 1996. Where the worst English is spoken. In Schneider, Edgar W., ed. Focus on the USA. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 279–360.Google Scholar
Schneider, Edgar W. 2007. Post-Colonial English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schreier, Daniel. 2012. Varieties resistant to standardization. In Hickey, Raymond, ed. Standards of English: Codified Varieties Around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 354–368.Google Scholar
Siemund, Peter, Schulz, Monkia and Schweinberger, Martin. 2014. Studying the linguistic ecology of Singapore: A comparison of college and university students. World Englishes 33(3): 340–362.Google Scholar
Smakman, Dirk. 2012. The definition of the standard language: A survey of seven countries. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 218: 25–58.Google Scholar
Tan, Peter K. W. and Tan, Daniel K. H.. 2008. Attitudes towards non-standard English in Singapore. World Englishes 27(3–4): 465–479.Google Scholar
Tan, Siew Imm. 2016. Charting the endonormative stabilization of Singapore English. In Leitner, Gerhard, Hashim, Azirah and Wolf, Hans-Georg, eds. Communicating with Asia: The Future of English as a Global Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 69–84.Google Scholar
Thompson, Roger M. 2003 Filipino English and Taglish: Language Switching from Multiple Perspectives. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Wales, Katie. 2006. Northern English: A Social and Cultural History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wee, Lionel. 2011. Metadiscursive convergence in the Singlish debate. Language and Communication 31: 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, Xinyue and Collins, Peter. 2012. The present perfect in world Englishes. World Englishes 31(3): 386–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar