Proposal+and+Annotated+Bibliography


 * __Proposal__**

Our primary source is a video that is focused on the colloquial English used in Singapore, commonly referred to as ‘Singlish.’ This video and the concept of Singlish are relevant to the module of ‘language.’ One of the underlying focuses of the video seems to be the importance of Singlish as the medium of communication between different ethnicities in Singapore. This focuses the identity of Singlish - how it was formed and what it is comprised of - to associate it in the context of national identity.

Singapore is a nation of multiracialism and multilingualism. There are currently four official languages in Singapore; English, Mandarin, Tamil and Malay. Most of these languages reflect the different variety of ethnic backgrounds present in Singapore. English, however, does not belong to a particular ethnic group but was instead introduced during the British colonial period. English was taught and used in schools to become a prime tool for economic purposes to develop intra-national and international contact (Foley 1988:2). Furthermore, as English was politically and culturally neutral it was a medium in which each ethnic background could use to cohere a collective identity (Foley 1988:4). While Standard English was used commonly in educational and formal settings, a more colloquial usage of the language was preferred in casual settings as a primary mode of inter-ethnic expression. Thus Singapore Colloquial English (SCE) or ‘Singlish’, as it is better known, rose to prominence.

It is questionable whether Singlish is a post-Creole language because it lacks a pidgin language as its predecessor (Ooi 2001:70). Rather, the association of Singlish as a diglossia of English is preferred as English was the mode of communication within an otherwise unintelligible speech community, and can be said that Singlish is the L language or variety of Standard English (Ooi 2001:73). Comprising of loanwords and syntax structures from the languages of the different cultures in the community, such as Hokkien, Tamil and Malay, Singlish can reflect the cultural context of Singapore, incorporating its diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds and lifestyles. As English is the national means of inter-ethnic communication, it can be said that Singlish is the collective marker of national identity due to its cultural familiarity (Gupta 1994:50).

__**Primary Source**__ [] An episode from the Satirical Singaporean show 'The Noose.'

__**Annotated Bibliography**__

Pg 107 focuses on the absence of some important linguistic elements in sentence structures in various forms of South Asian English including Singapore English. For example, in Singlish some verbs are not obligatory and are omitted however, they are assumed by some reference to it. Thus it is likely that some meaning of words are culturally embedded that they don’t necessarily have to be expressed through speech and dialogue. In this source, the absence is stated as a ‘deletion.’ This deletion of important linguistic elements suggest that some words carry a significant meaning and are shared among the various different cultures within the community thus strengthening Singlish as a cultural lingua franca.
 * Baumgardner, R.J (ed). 1996. South Asian English: Structure, Use and Users. United States of America: University of Illinois Press. **

This is a combination of journal articles pertaining to various aspects of Singapore English as ‘New Englishes’ where English has acquired an important status in the multilingual nation beyond economical and international purposes. There were only three relevant articles on the understanding of English in Singapore. First, Foley’s article (page 1 – 26) was useful in summarising past attempts to describe what constitutes Singapore English. Gupta (page 27-50) highlighted difficulties that arise from standardising Singapore English due to internal stigmatism. Lastly, Tung (page 70-99) sought to define Singapore English as code mixing than code switching in understanding that Malay and Chinese dialects significantly contribute to the altered syntax and lexicon of English in Singapore.
 * Foley, J. 1988. New Englishes: The Case of Singapore. Singapore: Singapore University Press. **

** Gupta, A.F and Kwan-Terry, A. (ed). 1991. 'Acquisition of Diglossia in Singapore English'. Child Language Development in Singapore and Malaysia. Singapore: Singapore University Press. 119-160. ** This essay is essential to our project in that it examines the concept of diglossia (a situation in which two languages – or varieties of the same languages – are used under different conditions within a community, often by the same speakers) and how it applies to Singapore English and the diglossia of SSdE and SCE. In particular, the section devoted to the ‘Criterial Features of Singapore Colloquial English,’ followed by the ‘Criterial Features of Standard Singapore English,’ allows us to identify and evaluate the different features between the two forms of Singapore English.

Pg 47 is the beginning of the topic of ‘SCE in Singapore today’, focusing on the nature of Singlish and its significance. It emphasizes the notion that Singlish is an identity marker as a potential national language. It notes on the acquisition of the different cultural languages in its syntax and lexis and linking its use with the language repertoire of the individual. It also describes the features of Singlish and also demonstrates how to acquire Singapore Colloquial English. Overall the author emphasizes the overall significance of Singlish in its cultural context.
 * Gupta, A.F. 1994. The Step-Tongue: Children’s English in Singapore ** . **England: Multilingual Matters Ltd.**

This source states that there are two forms of English in Singapore; Standard Singapore English and Colloquial Singapore English. The author illustrates the distinction between the two, particularly their phonology, grammar and vocabulary. It is noted that SSE is used in strictly formal situations such as in school environment and government administration while in all other situations CSE is preferably used. Though the vast distinctions between CSE and SSE raises concerns of CSE usage such as possibly impairing the ability to convey SSE, reducing employability, and threatening the nation's competitive edge in the global economy, the author recognizes the importance of CSE and thus Singlish as an expression of Singaporean identity and a tool for expressing national identity.
 * Leimgrube, J. R. E. 2011. ‘Singapore English’. Language and Linguistics Compass, Vol 5, No. 1. 47-62. **

This source in chapters six (pg 79-89) and seven (pg 89-102) primarily focuses on some of the aspects of syntactical structures of Singlish (Singapore Colloquial English). For example, Singlish usually omits tense markings, making no distinction between past tense and present tense. Furthermore it is said that reduplication of words in Singlish is common. For example ‘Where is your boy-boy (boyfriend or son)?’ reduplication of nouns in this case is to emphasize affection and intimacy. These syntactical structures indicate a systematic structure and consistency within Singlish, going against the notion that Singlish is ‘bad’ or ‘broken’ English.
 * Ooi, V.B.Y (ed). 2001. Evolving Identities: The English Language in Singapore and Malaysia. Singapore: Times Academic Press. **

In the series of articles compiled within this text, Rosemary Koo (page 105 – 116) provided the most insight into the basic understanding and definition of Singapore Colloquial English (SCE). Distinguishing elements of SCE was clearly identified and explained (page 108-114) to provide concrete examples to further grasp the linguistic complexity of SCE. An example is that words relating to cultural objects and expressions without comparable English synonyms have automatically invited frequent usage for communication, thus integration of Malay, Chinese and Indian into the spoken English in Singapore.
 * Pakir, A (ed.). 1992. Words in a Cultural Context. Singapore: Unipress. **

This Journal article explains the English speech continuum and cultural background of Singapore English (SE) in which Singapore Colloquial English (SCE) – better known as ‘Singlish’ – is the basilect (page 363 – 366). The historical development of SE is effectively portrayed through a visual diagram on page 267. Born from a complex cultural and language environment, this article attempts to linguistically define SCE. As SCE is neither derived from a pidgin and its status as a first, second or third language in Singapore disqualifies it as a Creole, the writer concluded that this interesting basilect of Singapore English is similar to post –creoles but should be categorised as a Creoloid, a new concept created but only defined briefly in six points by Platt on page 372.
 * Platt, J.T. 1975. The Singapore English Speech Continuum and its Basilect ‘Singlish’ as a ‘Creloid’. Language in Society, Vol. 34, No. 2. 239 – 275. **

This article is a detailed examination of the Singapore English particle of ‘one’ which Wong states is not present in the English language and previous linguistic studies have not properly analysed. Wong states that the examination of language can reveal more to us about a society’s culture – hence the necessity of examining the grammatical details of Singlish. He differentiates ‘Anglo English’ from ‘Singapore English’ and presents an evaluation of the cultural differences between the two as well as the origin of ‘Singapore English’ stemming from a mix of ‘Anglo English’, Chinese languages and Malay as well as a mix of Chinese and Malay values – hence the need to differentiate ‘Anglo English’ which carries Anglo-Saxon cultural values.
 * Wong, J. 2005. “Why You So Singlish One?” A Semantic and Cultural Interpretation of the Singapore English Particle One. Language in Society. Vol. 34. No. 2. 239 - 275. **

The key readings in this dissertation reside in Chapter One, the //Introduction and Review of Literature//, with a particular focus on the sub-section //Review of Literature// (p22-58 in particular) which discusses the idea of Singapore English being a ‘sub-standard variety’ and goes on to analyse the ‘system’ of Singapore English, the use of English in Singapore as well as examine previous studies on Singapore English. The dissertation provides an interesting analysis on the origins of Singapore English, which allows for one to evaluate the contributing factors that have led to the presence of Singapore English in both it’s SCE (Singlish) and SSdE (Standard Singapore English). The dissertation as a whole focuses on Singapore English in writings of Fiction which unfortunately means that the primary focus of the text is on SSdE instead of SCE as most published works will use SSdE instead of Singlish, hence, diminishing the necessity of the dissertation to our project.
 * Wong, L. 1992. A Descriptive Analysis of the Varieties of Singapore English – As Recreated by Singapore Writers of Fiction. Michigan: University Microfilms International. **