The Debate Over Standard English - Essay Example

The debate over ‘Standard English’ As a way of enabling the writing of standardised language grammars and drilling the correct use of various grammatical structures, the existence of a ‘Standard English’ has become indispensible in the battle to rationalise what is, in reality, a vastly variable concept. Students have to be taught something, and so Standard English has become a way of attempting to overcome the differences which are, in reality, an inevitable part of language use. This standardisation presents two linguistic problems. The first is that there is no one form of English which has officially been taken as standard. The second is that, even were such an agreement to exist, any form of English is constantly subject to changes in usage by the people who use it. This essay will, therefore, explore these issues in order to establish the issues which exist around ‘correct’ language usage and whether, therefore, an standard English can really be said to exist. However, this debate also moves beyond linguistics and into a political and social debate once the reality of the classroom is discussed. This essay will also, therefore, explore whether the imposition of a standard English is in fact detrimental to learners. It is first necessary to explore and challenge current issues present in the definition of Standard English. Trask (2007, p.290) puts forward some useful key points which he considers fundamental in the definition of Standard English. The first is that ‘Standard English itself is not quite uniform: for example there are detectable differences between standard American and standard British English’. These differences, although they do not inhibit understanding between speakers, are clear evidence of the fallacy of a standard English. Indeed, it is necessary to speak not of ‘English’ but rather of Englishes. The use of this plural in a number of critical works on the subject is already clear evidence that standard English is an unsuitable term. Gilsdorf is more emphatic in underlining the differences in standard English than Trask. Trask plays down this difference, while Gilsdorf (DATE p. 367) states that ‘English, of course, is multiple Englishes. We are familiar with the U.S.’s regional dialects and to some degree with British English, Australian English, and Irish English, and perhaps a few others. Differences can be considerable’. To say that standard English is ‘not quite uniform’, therefore, is somewhat of an understatement. Standard English, it could be said, does not really exist in the first place. The second is that ‘Standard English is not immutable; it changes from generation to generation.’ This is an essential point which must be considered when attempting to understand what standardisation of the language means. Standardisation is in fact a simple fallacy, since language, being a living and natural process, is in a constant state of change. This is why bi-lingual children who do not have regular contact with mother-tongue speakers of their own change in one of their languages do not speak like their peers who do have such a contact. Many items of vocabulary come in and out of fashion but more fundamental changes in grammatical usage also gradually take place. Definitions and rules must therefore be constantly reassessed to keep up with these changes, and decisions made about whether certain languages usages will be accepted into the standard or sidelined and rejected as ‘incorrect’ or ‘dialectical’ usage. Gilsdorf (?DATE???) discusses this very issue of change with specific reference to business English. She states that ‘many who teach business communication observe gradual changes in Business English’. This type of English is a particularly useful example because it’s intrinsic formality means that it demonstrates changes only once they have become common place in general English. It is, therefore, a useful yard stick against which to measure shifts. Gilsdorf (DETAILS?!) focuses on the US situation and explains that ‘new factors are converging to influence Standard English: U.S. wrk environments are becoming more richly intercultural, newcomers to the United States are increasing their fluency in English, and international business is using English increasingly as a global language of business.’ These factors all influence general English in a similar way. Gilsdorf also discusses the specific issue of changing language use between generations. She notes that ‘business persons, like many others, tend to take a purists attitude when they perceive language errors. They are usually not pleased to notice ways in which the English of their younger employees and new hires differs from their own.’ The generation gap is also the focus of Underhill’s paper. He looks at the use of a specific participle – like – in the speech of young British speakers. Research of this nature demonstrates not only the tendency towards a variation of language use between generations, but also the speed in which such variations come and go among the young in particular. Underhill (DETAILS p. 234) remarks that ‘in trying to collect data, I noticed that I don’t hear like used as much as I used to; it used to come up frequently in class...but like may even now be becoming archaic.’ Impermanent changes such as these The third is that ‘standard spoken English is not always identical to standard written English.’ DEVELOP The accent of Standard English must also be discussed. Trask (2007, p. 290) argues that ‘no particular Standard English is based exclusively on a grammatical basis, without taking into account regional difference in inflection’. However, in countries with significant differences in pronunciation, such as the UK where the accent of a native in Newcastle is vastly different to that of a native of Cardiff or Somerset, there is a tendency to standardise the pronunciation. Regionalism is regarded as not useful to standardisation. Indeed, Trask (2007, p.290) goes on to note that ‘in particular countries there are some accents regarded as more appropriate than others’. Bell (YEAR??, p. 31) supports this view commenting that ‘’BBC English’ is the best known example of what the phonetician means by ‘received pronunciation’. In the United States, the standard language is commonly exemplified by ‘Network English’...the New Zealand situation...also sees news English treated as standard.’ It is broadcasting, therefore, which is the most effective tool of standardisation of pronunciation. An accent which does not expose the regional origin of its speaker is regarded as preferable. What do these issues surrounding standard English mean for language acquisition in the classroom? As Trask (2007, p.291 -2) underlines, there is much debate over whether this standard English should be used in schools or not. He states that ‘one group sees a command of standard English as an enormous benefit and the right of every pupil; the other sees standard English as the elitist possession of a privileged class, and interprets attempts at teaching standard English...as hostile attempts at oppressing working-class speakers.’ This is, therefore, more of a political and social debate than a linguistic one. Standardisation has the detrimental effect of causing a class division between those who speak it and those who speak dialects. It also risks the extinction of these dialects once standardisation becomes commonplace. It is, therefore, important to consider variation within the classroom. There is certainly a need to avoid an imposition of one language form on users of the same language who, however, do not recognise themselves in that language use. The current curriculum, at least in the UK, relies on a study of the ‘classics’ of English literature in order diffuse a brand of standardisation which revolves around a fixed point and a largely closed literary canon. As Bex & Watts (1999, p. 279) comment ‘the answer does not lie in some simple-headed recourse to the practice of the ‘best author’ or the ‘admired literature’ of the past...nor does the answer reside in ‘rules’ for speech and writing laid down by either the ‘educated’ or any official or unofficial body held to be able to guarantee...’correctness’’. A child who attends school and is taught in standard English, but in their daily life outside the classroom speaks a dialect, is much more likely to underachieve precisely because he is less able to adapt to the language of the classroom than his standard English speaking peers. It is, therefore, a serious debate which suggests that a greater variety must be present within the classroom. Yiakoumetti discusses the debate as to whether or not to include dialect in the language of the classroom. In the English classroom this issue can present itself most notably in African-American communities but is present, even if the difference are less marked, in many other English speaking communities where regional dialects exist. Yiakoumetti (2007, p.52) focuses on the central issue of the debate, which is that dialects are often considered ‘stigmatized and not seen as ordered, systematic languages, but rather as degenerate varieties of the particular standards to which they are lexically related.’ The advent of a standardised language, therefore, leaves dialects as somehow inferior versions of the standard, rather than as equally valid forms of the same language. This is an extremely negative impact, and one which can see the disappearance of dialects completely as a result of the shame which speakers associate with them. There is a tendency to standardise English across in second language acquisition so that local language usages are discouraged in preference for a common language basis. This is particularly notable in second language acquisition, where a standard English teaching has become common practice, usually dividing itself into a choice between standard U.S. English and standard U.K English. This is due to a continuing belief that learners will need to be able to communicate with native speakers, rather than other speakers of English as a second language. On this matter Jenkins makes some interesting comments. She regards English language acquisition as being more usefully pointed on English as a lingua franca rather than as a communication tools for interaction with native speakers. She argues (2006, p. 138) that ‘both the nativized Englishes of the outer circle and the lingua franca Englishes of the expanding circle are learnt and used in communication contexts where NSs are not the target interlocutors, and therefore where they do not have the right to regard themselves as the reference point against which correctness is judged’. However, a standard English can also work to overcome issues created when speakers of more than one dialect find themselves in the same classroom. In a classroom which presents two or more alternative dialects, standard English can be expedient tool in establishing a common language which does not prioritise or stigmatise any particular dialect. In this role, the use of standard English can be regarded as in fact transcending boundaries which might otherwise remain between speakers of different dialects. Further, the dialect can be happily introduced into the classroom together with the standard language with very positive results. Tawake (2003) offers an interesting study of the way in which Pacific islanders combined standard English models with untranslatable words from their own dialect to provide a fascinating and above all acceptable version of their own language. Similar works by Maori writers from New Zealand offers similar hybrids which recognise the standard English structure while inserting dialectical vocabulary. These works have sparked much debate about how they can be inserted into the canon of literary works acceptable in the language classroom. Here the debate moves beyond a class division, and becomes based on breaking the ethnocentric canon of ‘English’ literature which focuses overwhelmingly on British and north American works. Bibliography Bell, Allen (?) ‘Broadcast News as a Standard Language’ DETAILS??? Bex, Tony & Watts, Richard J., (1999) Standard English: The Widening Debate. Oxford: Routledge Coupland, Nikolas, (2002) ‘Sociolinguistic prevarication about ‘standard English’, Journal of Sociolinguistics Vol. 4, No. 4 pp. 622-634 Gilsdorf, Jeanette (?) ‘Standard Englishes and World Englishes: Living with a Polymorph Business Language’ Jenkins, Jennifer (2006) ‘Points of view and blind spots: ELF and SLA’, International Journal of Applied Linguistics Vol. 16, No. 2 pp. 138-162 Tawake, Sandra (2003) ‘Bilinguals’ creativity: Patricia Grace and Maori cultural context’, World Englishes Vol. 22, No. 1 pp. 45-54 Trask, Robert Lawrence (2007) Key Concepts in Language and Linguistics. Oxford: Routledge Underhill, Robert (DETAILS) ‘Like is, like, focus’, Regional Language Studies pp. 234-246 Yiakoumetti, Androula (March 2007) ‘Choice of classroom language in bidialectal communities: to include or exclude the dialect?’ Cambridge Journal of Education Vol. 37, No. 1 pp.51-66 Read More