<div dir="ltr"><br>
<header class="gmail-post-header gmail-cf">
<div class="gmail-featured">
<a href="https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/ST-photo-signs-Tower-Transit.png" title="Give Singlish a break!" rel="prettyPhoto">
<img src="https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/ST-photo-signs-Tower-Transit-702x336.png" class="gmail-attachment-main-slider gmail-size-main-slider gmail-wp-post-image gmail-no-display gmail-appear" alt="Photo of a sign in a Tower Transit bus by Straits Times" title="Give Singlish a break!" height="336" width="702">
</a>
<div class="gmail-caption">Photo of a sign in a Tower Transit bus by Straits Times</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail-heading gmail-cf">
<h1 class="gmail-post-title gmail-item gmail-fn">
Give Singlish a break! </h1>
</div>
<div class="gmail-post-meta gmail-cf">
<span class="gmail-posted-by"><span class="gmail-reviewer"></span> </span><span class="gmail-posted-on">on <span class="gmail-dtreviewed">
<time class="gmail-value-title" datetime="2017-03-16T11:52:19+08:00" title="2017-03-16">March 16, 2017</time>
</span>
</span>
<span class="gmail-cats"><a href="https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/category/opinion/" rel="category tag">Opinion</a></span>
</div>
</header>
<p>by Wan Tsung-Lun</p>
<p>Signs written in Singlish have called attention to social identity of
this language again recently. However, the debate does not have a
significant progression regarding how people stick to argue over whether
Singlish should be a pride to Singaporean people. Frankly speaking, the
government has shifted its attitude towards this so-called ‘dialect’
from the standpoint suppressing its existence. Surprisingly, the public
discourse is going around in circles.</p>
<p>Linguists have agreed Singlish as a language has its importance in
terms of either social reality or academic discussion. It is worthless
to insist on the stigma in which Singlish is just a broken word-by-word
translation from Chinese into English. There is no evidence supporting
this idea. So, just give up spreading the rumour. The concern this
globalized city-state has more with Singlish is whether this would stop
Singapore from receiving good reputation for its openness. I would say
the answer is an obvious ‘not’. They are dealing with the wrong issue.</p>
<p>According to sociolinguistics studies, the negative linguistic
attitude, the researchers have gathered from foreigners, towards
Singlish is not a matter of this language itself. Instead, the issue is
more about the social interaction between the locals and the non-locals.</p>
<p>Priven (2008) points out that whether one grieves the loss of the
language of the other or not is connected to their own interest. This
point is supported by previous studies which have shown how immigrants
and guest workers from different social backgrounds have heterogeneous
attitudes towards Singlish.</p>
<p>For instance, Kang (2012) reports that with more and more Korean
families sending children to Singapore for learning English and
Mandarin, Korean mothers have found that Singlish is being widely used.
On the one hand, based on pragmatism, these mothers view Singlish as a
useful tool, though with some negative characteristics, in this island;
on the other hand, from the perspective of sociolinguistic competence,
their children are required to be able to switch between Singlish and
Standard English because they are positioned as global elites by their
parents.</p>
<p>As a contrast, McKay (2013) points out that the migrant workers who
go to Singapore because of poverty in their homelands tend to
marginalize Singaporeans who can only use Singlish. Their negative
attitude toward Singlish, compared to Filipino or Indian English,
becomes a strategy to challenge their positions of social inferiority in
Singapore society.</p>
<p>Furthermore, De Costa (2010) studies how the standard English
language educational policy is interpreted by a female student, with a
designer-immigrant identity, from China in the classroom. De Costa finds
that throughout the classroom interaction, this student shows a certain
degree of agency in using standard English and not adopting the
Singlish features employed by other students to negotiate her
professional identity.</p>
<p>And, according to my own analysis on a spontaneous discussion in an
online group comprising Taiwanese in Singapore, Taiwanese who condemn
the use of Singlish are actually ‘relocalizing’ their negative
experiences contacting local Singaporeans. Due to a rising exclusionism,
some locals try to use Singlish to differentiate other Asians and
themselves. Sometimes it takes the form of criticizing these foreigners’
English as “incorrect English”, since they already knew these outsiders
are not English native speakers. Taiwanese immigrants, however, see
this action to be unacceptable speaking of the cosmopolitan role of this
state. Therefore, their solution is to make strong arguments against
Singlish.</p>
<p>All the studies above have shown one important thing—Singlish is not
the real issue. As we have known the reason why foreigners seem to not
accept Singlish is out of their own interests, attacking Singlish as a
shameful language will never answer the real question. Even if Singlish
disappears one day, as long as the contrasting relationship between the
locals and non-locals is constructed within the neo-liberalized era
under the government’s policy, the non-locals will always be able to
internalize their ideologies to something else to condemn. This is the
real issue. Singlish is a fake issue. Give this language a break.</p>
<p><strong>References</strong></p>
<ul><li>De Costa, P. I. (2010). Language ideologies and standard English
language policy in Singapore: Responses of a ‘designer
immigrant’student. Language Policy, 9(3), 217-239.</li><li>Kang, Y. (2012). Singlish or Globish: Multiple language ideologies
and global identities among Korean educational migrants in Singapore.
Journal of Sociolinguistics, 16(2), 165-183.</li><li>McKay, S. L. (2013). Globalization, localization and language
attitudes: the case of “foreign workers” in Singapore. Multilingual
Education, 3(3). doi:10.1186/2191-5059-3-3</li><li>Priven, D. (2008). Grievability of first language loss: Towards a
reconceptualisation of European minority language education practices.
International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 11(1),
95-106.</li></ul><br clear="all"><a href="https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2017/03/16/give-singlish-a-break/">https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2017/03/16/give-singlish-a-break/</a><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature">**************************************<br>N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to its members<br>and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner or sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal, and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message. A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)<br><br>For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to <a href="https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/" target="_blank">https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/</a><br>listinfo/lgpolicy-list<br>*******************************************</div>
</div>