The implication that I believe could be incurred is that Singlish would thereby be made out to be almost as an inferior variant of the English langugage due to its colloquail nature, which in light of Singapore's increasing globalized nature, might be seen to be less relevant and effective especially when placed next to the standard acrolectal Singaporean English.
Logically it does make sense for us to view the standard acrolectal Singaporean English as being more relevant, but if we (prudishly) start viewing it as being superior to basilectal Singlish, then it could cause the mainstream consciousness to start to shirk away from Singlish, and thereby causing us to regrettably relinquish a unique feature of our culture that serves almost as a common meeting point for people in our society, regardless of class.
When Singlish or any other variety of English is categorised as a basilect, it somewhat creates an unspoken understanding that to speak that variety of language would be the norm in social, informal settings. For instance, in the 'Ruby Pan' video, Ruby's American friends were shocked that Ruby spoke with an American accent instead of a Singaporean one though she was from Singapore. This was because Ruby’s American friends considered Singlish a basilect and thus thought that it would only be normal for a Singaporean to speak Singlish.
Categorising a variety of language as a basilect may also create an opinion that speaking that variety of language would not be the very appropriate in formal situations. As mentioned in the video, Ruby observed that news presenters in Singapore speak in “fake BBC English” and teachers speak with a “stiff upper lip”. This is probably because being categorised as a basilect, many perceive Singlish as informal and thus inappropriate in such contexts, whereas Received Pronunciation is considered to be an acrolect, which gives newscasters and teachers authority over their audiences, and hence viewed as more formal and appropriate in such contexts.
I agree with Roanna and Lionel that categorizing a variety of language as a basilect affects our general perception of the language.
Like what Lionel has mentioned, it is possible that one might, based on the classification of Singlish as a basilect, conclude that Singlish is inferior to acrolectal Singaporean English. A more immediate implication would be the assumptions that will be formed of the person speaking each language. When a language is pegged as a basilect, or a 'lower-class' form of speech in a society, judgements will be made of the people who speak them.
But does speaking Singlish, considered to be 'inferior' to Acrolectal Singaporean English, necessarily make the speaker inferior linguistically, or in any other way?
Definitely no. But by ranking the various forms of speech within a society, one might unknowingly typecast users of that form, making certain judgements as soon as he/ she speaks.
This question & its ensuing comment thread have brought to mind a rather silly incident from my primary school days.
As required by the school, each class had to put up a skit for the Speak Good English Movement & my class adapted the story of three little pigs from the Wolf's point of view. I was one of the narrators as at that time, my young & naive self was perceived by my English teacher to have a satisfactory command of English, at least enough to narrate the story. All went well during our performance on stage until something untoward happened &, according to witnesses, I shouted into the microphone "wahlao!" in response to that which was untoward. (I have absolutely no recollection of that which was untoward but evidently it was shocking enough for my Primary 2 self to have responded in such a manner.) In the end, my class which was supposed to have a good shot of winning the competition, did not advance any further. Apparently, all because of my exclamation. ): (I am so sorry, my dear classmates, if you ever read this.)
I do still make frequent use of "wahlao" & yes that is also how I spell it when I use it in text-based conversation. Basilectal Singaporean English, more affectionately known as Singlish, is already deemed inferior or to be shunned as mentioned by Lionel & reinforced by personal experience (refer to long story above). I fear its eradication in the future as I like how Singlish allows our racial harmony to truly shine as we spin together sentences in multiple languages and dialects. Sometimes, there is simply no other way to better express ourselves.
I agree with Jolyn that by classifying Singlish as a basilect, it reflects badly on the speaker. It leads one to form a very low opinion of the person using Singlish.
Singlish may be informal and may be a mixture of various languages but that does not mean that it is any less important or relevant. The main purpose of language is to allow you to communicate with one another and express yourself. Singlish enables you to do that effectively so surely it is in no way less prestigious than the Acrolectal Singaporean English.
However, I can see why Singlish is referred to as a basilect. Outsiders can't always understand Singlish so it may not be the best for all situations. Also, the way it is spoken sounds less polished compared to the Acrolectal Singaporean English.
Though it is understandable why Singlish is a basilect, at the end of the day, it is what gives Singaporeans their identity, and looking down on Singlish is almost the same as looking down on Singaporeans themselves.
I think the classification of Singlish as a basilect IN ITSELF is basically saying that its an informal, layman form of speech that, if used in highly professional circumstances, would not be appropriate and definitely considered an inferior sort of communication.
to really conclude from there that all speakers of singlish are socially less advanced would be highly oversimplistic however- I think its about being able to code-switch in different situations. if you look at the nature of language being for the sake of communication the effectiveness of said language should be based on its ability to serve as a vehicle for the message at hand, rather than through the accordance of an objective, non-negotiable value to different languages full stop. language is something very dynamic!
therefore er I agree with alagu and think its important to respect every variation of a language through the acknowledgement of its origins rather than labelling them according to how polished they sound (I mean that's totally subjective too right!) and calling one acrolectal and one basilectal.
As said by everyone very rightly above, calling Singlish a basilect definitely degrades it to at least a class below regular grammatically accurate and properly pronounced English, or acrolectal English.
However, I don't think it's wrong to classify it in such a way actually. It -is- widely regarded as the less prestigious version of English used in Singapore, and does connote a certain lack of regard for good pronunciation and grammar, due to the nature of the language. Also it can only be used and understood by Singaporeans, which makes it a very specialised and exclusive variety of English that cannot be used when speaking to foreign people. In these regards, I do think that classifying it as a basilect is justified: it signposts that this isn't a language that follows the rules of internationally spoken English.
Yet, it's sad that people are judged as lesser for speaking this. Even if it's a basilect, it's still a recognised variety of language and should be treated as an equivalent - or even preferred - language variety in informal social situations.
The implication that I believe could be incurred is that Singlish would thereby be made out to be almost as an inferior variant of the English langugage due to its colloquail nature, which in light of Singapore's increasing globalized nature, might be seen to be less relevant and effective especially when placed next to the standard acrolectal Singaporean English.
ReplyDeleteLogically it does make sense for us to view the standard acrolectal Singaporean English as being more relevant, but if we (prudishly) start viewing it as being superior to basilectal Singlish, then it could cause the mainstream consciousness to start to shirk away from Singlish, and thereby causing us to regrettably relinquish a unique feature of our culture that serves almost as a common meeting point for people in our society, regardless of class.
- Lionel (A01B)
When Singlish or any other variety of English is categorised as a basilect, it somewhat creates an unspoken understanding that to speak that variety of language would be the norm in social, informal settings. For instance, in the 'Ruby Pan' video, Ruby's American friends were shocked that Ruby spoke with an American accent instead of a Singaporean one though she was from Singapore. This was because Ruby’s American friends considered Singlish a basilect and thus thought that it would only be normal for a Singaporean to speak Singlish.
ReplyDeleteCategorising a variety of language as a basilect may also create an opinion that speaking that variety of language would not be the very appropriate in formal situations. As mentioned in the video, Ruby observed that news presenters in Singapore speak in “fake BBC English” and teachers speak with a “stiff upper lip”. This is probably because being categorised as a basilect, many perceive Singlish as informal and thus inappropriate in such contexts, whereas Received Pronunciation is considered to be an acrolect, which gives newscasters and teachers authority over their audiences, and hence viewed as more formal and appropriate in such contexts.
Roanna
13S03H
I agree with Roanna and Lionel that categorizing a variety of language as a basilect affects our general perception of the language.
ReplyDeleteLike what Lionel has mentioned, it is possible that one might, based on the classification of Singlish as a basilect, conclude that Singlish is inferior to acrolectal Singaporean English. A more immediate implication would be the assumptions that will be formed of the person speaking each language. When a language is pegged as a basilect, or a 'lower-class' form of speech in a society, judgements will be made of the people who speak them.
But does speaking Singlish, considered to be 'inferior' to Acrolectal Singaporean English, necessarily make the speaker inferior linguistically, or in any other way?
Definitely no. But by ranking the various forms of speech within a society, one might unknowingly typecast users of that form, making certain judgements as soon as he/ she speaks.
Jolyn (:
13A01C
This question & its ensuing comment thread have brought to mind a rather silly incident from my primary school days.
ReplyDeleteAs required by the school, each class had to put up a skit for the Speak Good English Movement & my class adapted the story of three little pigs from the Wolf's point of view. I was one of the narrators as at that time, my young & naive self was perceived by my English teacher to have a satisfactory command of English, at least enough to narrate the story. All went well during our performance on stage until something untoward happened &, according to witnesses, I shouted into the microphone "wahlao!" in response to that which was untoward. (I have absolutely no recollection of that which was untoward but evidently it was shocking enough for my Primary 2 self to have responded in such a manner.)
In the end, my class which was supposed to have a good shot of winning the competition, did not advance any further. Apparently, all because of my exclamation. ): (I am so sorry, my dear classmates, if you ever read this.)
I do still make frequent use of "wahlao" & yes that is also how I spell it when I use it in text-based conversation. Basilectal Singaporean English, more affectionately known as Singlish, is already deemed inferior or to be shunned as mentioned by Lionel & reinforced by personal experience (refer to long story above). I fear its eradication in the future as I like how Singlish allows our racial harmony to truly shine as we spin together sentences in multiple languages and dialects. Sometimes, there is simply no other way to better express ourselves.
- Kimberley
I agree with Jolyn that by classifying Singlish as a basilect, it reflects badly on the speaker. It leads one to form a very low opinion of the person using Singlish.
ReplyDeleteSinglish may be informal and may be a mixture of various languages but that does not mean that it is any less important or relevant. The main purpose of language is to allow you to communicate with one another and express yourself. Singlish enables you to do that effectively so surely it is in no way less prestigious than the Acrolectal Singaporean English.
However, I can see why Singlish is referred to as a basilect. Outsiders can't always understand Singlish so it may not be the best for all situations. Also, the way it is spoken sounds less polished compared to the Acrolectal Singaporean English.
Though it is understandable why Singlish is a basilect, at the end of the day, it is what gives Singaporeans their identity, and looking down on Singlish is almost the same as looking down on Singaporeans themselves.
I think the classification of Singlish as a basilect IN ITSELF is basically saying that its an informal, layman form of speech that, if used in highly professional circumstances, would not be appropriate and definitely considered an inferior sort of communication.
ReplyDeleteto really conclude from there that all speakers of singlish are socially less advanced would be highly oversimplistic however- I think its about being able to code-switch in different situations. if you look at the nature of language being for the sake of communication the effectiveness of said language should be based on its ability to serve as a vehicle for the message at hand, rather than through the accordance of an objective, non-negotiable value to different languages full stop. language is something very dynamic!
therefore er I agree with alagu and think its important to respect every variation of a language through the acknowledgement of its origins rather than labelling them according to how polished they sound (I mean that's totally subjective too right!) and calling one acrolectal and one basilectal.
As said by everyone very rightly above, calling Singlish a basilect definitely degrades it to at least a class below regular grammatically accurate and properly pronounced English, or acrolectal English.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I don't think it's wrong to classify it in such a way actually. It -is- widely regarded as the less prestigious version of English used in Singapore, and does connote a certain lack of regard for good pronunciation and grammar, due to the nature of the language. Also it can only be used and understood by Singaporeans, which makes it a very specialised and exclusive variety of English that cannot be used when speaking to foreign people. In these regards, I do think that classifying it as a basilect is justified: it signposts that this isn't a language that follows the rules of internationally spoken English.
Yet, it's sad that people are judged as lesser for speaking this. Even if it's a basilect, it's still a recognised variety of language and should be treated as an equivalent - or even preferred - language variety in informal social situations.
...so yeah. :D