Apart from their use as a means of communication, linguistic hybrids such as Tex-Mex perform an important social identifying function. In one study of a group of business people having lunch, the solidarity between two members of the group showed itself by the way they slipped the occasional Spanish word or phrase into their English when they addressed each other – something they never did when they talked to the other members, who came from outside the area. The same kind of thing happens when a group of English speakers with different dialect backgrounds come together (see p. 88). People unconsciously vary their speech as they go through the day, depending on whom they are addressing, the formality of the occasion, and so on. There is a strong tendency for people to express their identity by emphasizing features of their accent or dialect which convey where they are from – especially when it’s a question of ‘taking sides’ in a conversation.
But regional identity is only one factor. Also important are the other facets of a person’s background, which may find expression in linguistic form, such as age, occupation and, in particular, sex. Probably the most important change which has happened to English since 1970 has to do with the attitude society has adopted towards the practices and consequences of sexism. There is now an awareness, which was lacking a generation ago, of the way in which language identifies social attitudes towards men and women. The criticisms have been mainly directed at the biases that constitute a male-orientated view of the world, which have led to unfair sexual discrimination and the low status of women in society. All of the main European languages have been affected, but English more than most, because of the impact of early American feminism.
Both grammar and vocabulary have been affected. In vocabulary, attention has been focused on the replacement of ‘male’ words by neutral words – chairman, for example, becoming chair or chairperson, salesman becoming sales assistant. In certain cases, the use of sexually neutral language has become a legal requirement (such as in job descriptions). There is continuing debate between extremists and moderates as to how far such revisions should go – whether they should affect traditional idioms such as man in the street and stone-age man, or apply to parts of words where the male meaning of man is no longer dominant, such as manhandle and woman. The vocabulary of marital status has also been affected – notably in the introduction of Ms as a neutral alternative to Miss or Mrs.
In grammar, the focus has been on the lack of a sex-neutral third person singular pronoun in English, which becomes a problem when it is used after sex-neutral nouns (such as student) or after indefinite pronouns (such as someone). The difficulty can be seen in such sentences as the following, where the blanks would traditionally be filled by the pronouns he or his:
If anyone wants to see me, — should come at 4 o’clock.
A student should see — tutor at the beginning of term.
To avoid the he bias, various alternatives have been suggested. He or she is sometimes used (or, in writing, forms such as (s) he), but this is often stylistically awkward. In informal speech, they is widespread after words like anyone, but this usage attracts criticism from those who feel that a plural word should not be made to agree with a singular one. A common strategy is to recast the sentence structure to avoid the problem (People wanting to see me should…), or to turn the singular noun into a plural (Students should see their tutors…). And there have been many proposals for brand-new pronouns to be added to the word-stock of English (such as co, mon, heesh, hesh, hir, na, per and po), but none of these have achieved any real currency.
The linguistic effect of these changes in social attitudes has been far more noticeable in writing than in speech – and in certain kinds of writing, in particular. One study compared the frequency with which such forms as he and man were used in American English between 1971 and 1979: the frequency fell from around twelve per 5,000 words to around four per 5,000 words during that period. Women’s magazines showed the steepest decline, followed by science magazines, with newspapers further behind, and congressional records least of all. The trend has continued, and become more pervasive. Publishing companies now usually issue guidelines recommending that authors should avoid sexist language, as do several national bodies, such as the American Library Association. It will take much longer before we can say whether the changes are having any real impact on the spoken language, with its greater spontaneity. If I inadvertently introduce a sexist pronoun in the draft of this book, I (or a sub-editor) will doubtless spot it and replace it. But there are no such controls available in the rush of conversational speech. How long it takes for spoken language to respond to fresh social pressures so that a new usage becomes automatic throughout a community, no one knows.
New regional Englishes
In recent decades, increasing attention has been drawn to the emergence of new varieties of English around the world, spoken by people for whom English is a second language (see p. 2). In India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Singapore, Malaysia, the countries of West and East Africa, and many other areas which retain links with the era of British colonialism, the English language is used officially or semi-officially as a means of communication. Large numbers of people are involved; and, as a consequence, there is an inevitable tendency to develop new local norms of usage that in the course of time become taken up by educated speakers and thus form new local standards – the same process as affected the development of new mother-tongue varieties of English (see Chapter 13). English is adopted then immediately adapted. The emergence of these second-language varieties, and the uneasy relationship which sometimes exists between them and the standard British or American varieties, is a major feature of the current world English-language situation.
The English of the subcontinent of India – sometimes called South Asian English – provides the clearest example of the way these developments have affected the language (for numbers of speakers, see p. 5). There are many varieties of English spoken within the region, ranging from pidgin English to a standard English that is very close to British, including the use of Received Pronunciation. Some of these varieties have developed over along period of time, deriving from the period of colonial rule (from the end of the eighteenth century until 1947). As a result, there are hundreds of distinctive lexical items; some derive from local Indian languages, some are new combinations of English words, or British English words which have been given new senses. Especially when the subject matter is specialized – for instance, in relation to religion, agriculture, politics – a newspaper account can appear unintelligible to outside eyes (see p. 278).
In several of these varieties, there are marked differences in pronunciation, due mainly to the different rhythm of the Indian languages native to the area: the syllables in Indian English are typically spoken with equal weight (‘rat-tat-tat’), and do not fall into the kind of strong and weak (‘tum-te-tum’) patterns found in British English. Certain sounds, such as the ‘retroflex’ t and d, pronounced with the tip of the tongue curled back, are a highly distinctive feature of Indian English.
In grammar, there are several points of difference, but few have been studied in detail. They include:
The use of the ‘progressive’ form of such verbs as have, know, think, or understand: I am understanding it now, He is knowing the answer.
The use of repeated forms (mainly in Sri Lanka): Who and who left early? They went running running.
Collective nouns are often made plural: litters (waste paper), fruits (fruit), aircrafts.
Unfamiliar compound nouns appear: chalk-piece, key-bunch, schoolgoer.
Prepositions are sometimes used in different ways: pay attention on, accompany with, combat against.
‘Familiar’ English words and phrases from India
bandana, brahmin, bungalow, calico, cheroot, chintz, chutney, coolie, curry, guru, juggernaut, jungle, jute, pundit, purdah, rajah, sahib, tiffin, verandah
brother-anointing ceremony, caste-mark, cow-worship, cousin-sister, nose-screw (ornament for a woman
’s nose), waist-thread (ritual thread tied round the waist)
And some less familiar words and phrases
ayah (nurse), bandh (labour strike), crore (10 million), demit (resign), dhobi (washerman), durzi (tailor), godown (warehouse), goondah (hooligan), jawan (soldier), kukri (curved knife), lakh (a hundred thousand), lathi (baton), ryot (farmer), stir (demonstration), stepney (spare wheel), swadeshi (indigenous)
backward class (deprived groups), Himalayan blunder (grave mistake), military hotel (non-vegetarian hotel), pin-drop silence (dead silence), swadeshi hotel (native restaurant)
Extracts from Indian newspapers (compiled by Braj Kachru) show the potential distinctiveness (and corresponding unintelligibility to outsiders) of standard Indian English:
Dharmavati was chosen for Ragam, Tanam and Pallavi. Singing with an abandon, MS set off the distinct character of the mode and followed with methodically improvised Pallavi. The swaraprastara was full of tightly knit figures.
Urad and moong fell sharply in the grain market here today on stockists offerings. Rice, jowar and arhar also followed suit, but barley forged ahead.
In Karachi Quran khawani and fateha was held at the Cifton residence…
Wanted well-settled bridegroom for a Kerala fair, graduate Baradwaja gotram, Astasastram girl… Subsect no bar. Send horoscope and details.
The word order of certain constructions can vary: Eggs are there (for British There are eggs), Who you have come to see? (Who have you come to see?)
Tense usage may alter: I am here since this morning.
Isn’t it? is often used at the end of a sentence in an invariable way (like n’est-ce pas in French): You’re going now, isn’t it?
Because of the length of the British presence in India, and the countries’ vast populations, South Asian English has developed to a more distinctive level than is found in most other countries where English is used as a second language. But this may be only a temporary situation. Any country which relies on English as its primary medium of communication sooner or later will find itself developing its own norms of pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary. And at that point, a critical question of identity is posed, which must be answered at various levels – in particular, by government officials in charge of educational programmes, and by writers wishing to express their identity, and the identity of their country, in a literary way. Which variety should they use? In the case of teaching, should they choose the internationally recognized standard English as a model for teachers to follow in class, or should they recommend the use of the regional standard, which is the one the children will hear and see around them? In the case of literary expression, should authors opt for standard English, which will guarantee them a readership throughout the world, or should they write in their regional standard, which will give them a more authentic and personal ‘voice’? Or should they stay with their mother tongue, and not write in English at all?
These questions are fiercely and emotionally debated in all parts of the world where new varieties of second-language English are emerging. There is a great deal of stylistic experiment, and several distinct genres have developed. The problem is greatest for poets, novelists, and dramatists in the newly independent nations, where there is often considerable antagonism towards English, seen as a symbol of colonial oppression. The dilemma is acute. Should they use the ‘enemy’s’ language, with all the alien awkwardness that comes with the use of a second language for literary expression, in order to achieve an international audience? Or should they use their mother tongue, for which they have an immediate sensitivity, but which will place severe constraints on their potential readership? The solution, many writers maintain, is to concentrate on developing the English of their own region, making it into a language which belongs to them, and with which they can identify. ‘Our method of expression’, wrote the Indian author Raja Rao, ‘has to be a dialect which will some day prove to be as distinctive and colorful as the Irish or the American… The tempo of Indian life must be infused into our English expression.’ And the call for new Englishes, personal, evocative, and dynamic, has been echoed by second-language writers around the world, in South-east Asia, East and West Africa, and by first-language writers in Jamaica, South Africa, and New Zealand.
The Indian poet Kamala Das adopts a pragmatic view of the language situation. For her, the language used is unimportant; what counts is ‘the thought contained in the words’.
... I am Indian, very brown, born in
Malabar, I speak three languages, write in
Two, dream in one. Don’t write in English, they said,
English is not your mother-tongue. Why not leave
Me alone, critics, friends, visiting cousins,
Every one of you? Why not let me speak in
Any language I like? The language I speak
Becomes mine, its distortions, its queernesses
All mine, mine alone. It is half English, half
Indian, funny perhaps, but it is honest.
It is as human as I am human, don’t
You see? It voices my joys, my longings, my
Hopes, and it is useful to me as cawing
Is to crows or roaring to the lions…
The Old Playhouse and Other Poems (1973)
World Standard English
Meanwhile, as English-speaking communities and individuals strive to make the language different, to reflect their own backgrounds and experiences, there is a strong, persistent pull in the opposite direction. The demand for a language medium which is universally intelligible is widely felt, and frequently voiced. At present, English is the only language in a position to adopt the role of the world’s first language. Chinese has many more mother-tongue speakers, but is currently too isolated (and its main writing system too unfamiliar) to attract much external interest. French, the world language of the eighteenth century, is an important lingua franca in many countries, but does not have the regional or occupational spread of English. Spanish is important in South and Central America, and increasingly so in the United States, but has little further spread outside Spain. No language other than English carries universal appeal. And auxiliary languages, such as Esperanto, have to date made very slow progress in persuading world authorities to pay attention to their claims. The situation could change. Language is so intimately connected with power that any significant change in the world’s political, military, or economic ‘balance’ could have immediate linguistic consequences. But there is little sign of such change.
At present, due primarily to the economic superiority of the United States, there is no competitor for English as a world language. And therefore a great deal of attention is being paid to devising standards of language use which will transcend regional differences and guarantee intelligibility when people from different English-speaking parts of the world communicate with each other. There has been a veritable information explosion, as researchers and popularizers draw attention to the differences between dialects and styles of English, and attempt to explain them. In the last twenty years, we have seen a remarkable growth in reference works, including the publication of more general and specialized dictionaries, grammars, and manuals of style than have ever appeared before. Information networks, terminology banks, computer-assisted translation, speech synthesis and recognition by machine, the Internet and other computationally controlled systems all bring people together, and presuppose shared norms of usage in order to be successful. Many projects aimed at standardizing usage and eliminating differences have been the result, in such fields as science, finance, industry, medicine, government, transport, and advertising.
Two specific examples will illustrate the application of this point. English is the official language of air traffic control, but it is widely recognized that this fact alone does not solve all communication problems. There have been several accidents in which an inadequate command of English by air crew has been cited as a causative factor. Reactions to this problem have been various. There are re
ports that some flights now talk to ground control in languages other than English – to the discomfiture of other aircraft in the vicinity. There have been proposals to replace English by Esperanto, though there is no evidence that the problems of communication are due to those irregularities of English structure which artificial languages avoid. Most promising is the ongoing research into the factors which hinder intelligibility in the air. Some of the difficulty must be due to the considerable levels of noise and interference which are present in ground-to-air transmission, which will affect foreign-language learners more than native speakers. And it is likely that improvements could be made to the actual patterns of Airspeak, which pilots are recommended to use.
Improvements of this kind have already taken place in the form of English used as the international medium of communication at sea. Here, too, it is essential that the language should follow clear rules, to reduce the possibilities of ambiguity and confusion when sending or receiving messages. Bridge officers come from a variety of language backgrounds. Shipping routes often alter, and new problems of traffic flow are always present. Larger and faster ships present greater navigational hazards.
In 1980 a British project was set up to produce Essential English for International Maritime Use – known as Seaspeak. The project extended the coverage of the Standard Maritime Navigational Vocabulary already in existence, and allowed the communication of longer messages than was previously possible. The guidelines relate mainly to communication by VHF radio, and include procedures for initiating, maintaining and terminating conversations, as well as a recommended grammar, vocabulary, and structure for messages on a wide range of topics. But the language is still much more restricted than everyday English.
The English Language: A Guided Tour of the Language Page 28
