This chapter investigates the intersection between gender, writing and editing of published written texts and endonormativity in South African English. We focus on three sub-varieties within the South African context: two indigenous strands, Afrikaans English (AfrE) and Black South African English (BSAfE), and the settler strand, White South African English (WSAfE). We use multifactorial methods to analyse the effects of gender amongst a set of linguistic and extra-linguistic variables conditioning the genitive alternation across unedited and edited texts produced by AfrE, BSAfE and WSAfE authors. The results show that gender plays a minor role in conditioning the genitive alternation for both authors and editors, demonstrating that the genitive choices of men and women are conditioned in similar ways. As expected, linguistic factors play the greatest role in conditioning the genitive alternation. Our findings confirm recent investigations into cross-varietal and register differences and show that while the direction of the effect of linguistic factors is the same across sub-varieties and registers, the strength of these factors differs in certain sub-varieties and registers. Our findings also confirm recent findings regarding the genitive alternation in second-language varieties and suggest a possible substrate transfer effect, in especially BSAfE writing. Although editorial intervention introduces subtle shifts in preferences for the two constructions, this intervention mostly reinforces the choices of authors.

This chapter analyses the development of over thirty semantic features of South specialisation and re-analysis of words is provided, even where some English words had no endogenous potential to develop in this way. The historical data suggest that the features had propagated considerably by the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, whereas the contemporary data show that these features are more likely to appear in the spoken register. More generally, this chapter argues that even though speakers of Afrikaans and South African English have not experienced any identity alignment in the traditional sense, they have maintained a kind of racial affinity within the historical South African context, which has facilitated deep-rooted, reciprocal influence. The unmistakable role of Afrikaans as activating agent in the grammaticalisation process of these features is emphasised. The findings show that the features are often more than transfers and loan translations.

This chapter focuses on the relationship between editorial work, endonormativity and convergence in the South African context, presenting a corpus-based quantitative case study of how editing reshapes academic writing by users of the STL (White South African English, or WSAfE) and IDG (Black South African English, or BSAfE) strands in South Africa. An inductive, exploratory quantitative method is used to identify linguistic features that distinguish unedited BSAfE and WSAfE academic writing, and edited BSAfE and WSAfE academic writing, using a corpus of edited texts and their unedited counterparts. Two features are analysed in detail: the use of downtoners and possibility modals. The findings provide support for the endonormativity of BSAfE, with WSAfE more ambiguous. The two strands are largely divergent in their usage of the two individual features. With a few exceptions, editors leave BSAfE usage patterns unaltered but sometimes change WSAfE usage to be closer to British English usage. Editing thus either leaves the stylistic distance between the two varieties unaltered or increases it. These findings support an assessment of (sometimes problematised) endonormativity at the level of the individual strands, but no strong evidence for convergence.