Elsevier

Language Sciences

Volume 32, Issue 6, November 2010, Pages 594-601
Language Sciences

New Englishes and the native speaker debate

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2010.08.002Get rights and content

Abstract

In this paper I examine arguments for and against the concept of the native speaker in linguistics. My focus is mainly on new varieties of English that have stabilized in parts of the former British Empire, with main exemplification from Indian English and its bilingual speakers as well three varieties that have undergone or are undergoing language shift. I examine the ideas of critics who dispute the idea (from different perspectives) that English is merely a second language in India (Kachru, 1983, Singh, 1998). I use their ideas and formulations to ascertain what kinds of evidence are most appropriate to the debate over “nativeness”. I propose that formal linguistic criteria (e.g. those proposed for L1s by Chambers (2003) and for L2s by Kortmann and Szmrecsanyi (2004)) are less relevant than issues pertaining to fluency, control and prestige. In this regard, I chart the continuing rise of Indian English into what I believe is the expanding group of Standard Englishes of the world.

Research highlights

► Structural criteria as evidence for ‘nativeness’ are not totally adequate. ► Language shift provides a better window into the flexible limits of nativeness. ► Elite bilingualism also shows the problematic nature of defining the native speaker as a monolingual person. ► An elite variety of Indian English is perhaps the first “New English” to enter the circle of Standard Englishes of the world, whilst emerging from a fully multilingual context.

Section snippets

Introduction and history

The field of New Englishes or World Englishes is concerned with varieties that arose as second or foreign languages as English spread as a world language. This spread was initiated in the first instance under British expansionism from the 17th century on, with the setting up of plantations in the American South and the Caribbean, worked largely by African slaves, but also by indentured workers of Irish descent (Rickford, 1986). The main linguistic outcome of this era was the demise of local

Singh’s critique of the concept of native speaker

The critique of the concept of the native speaker is not new: the line of enquirers and dissenters include Paikeday, 1985, Davies, 1991, Singh, 1998, etc. The collection in Singh (1998) includes voices for and against the idea that a speaker’s native language is ‘the dialect acquired from the crib  [a]cquired incidentally, stored implicitly, and available for automatic use’ (Paradis, 1998, p. 207). Singh’s position, which is a particularly trenchant one, was restated at a recent conference

The quest for structural criteria

In this Section 1 will raise issues that connect with Singh’s strong claims that ‘there is no feature α such that α occurs in every alleged native variety and in no alleged non-native variety’ and that conversely ‘there is no feature β such that β occurs in every alleged non-native variety and in no alleged native variety’ (let us call these Singh’s formulations, which I am rephrasing slightly here). Singh’s formulations are probably too rigid for human languages, with their essence being in

Evidence from language shift and elite bilingualism

In my original response to Singh’s paper (Mesthrie, 2007) I raised the question whether the manner of introduction of English in the colonies could have influenced its characteristics there. A relevant notion of language here is that of an aggregate of acoustic speech signals, whose defining feature is being continuous (or indiscrete). Everyone, by virtue of being human and interacting in a human community, has the ability to process at least one language holistically, i.e. without segmenting

Conclusion

‘Native speaker’ and ‘mother tongue’ are no longer transparent terms in the sociology of English. Sociolinguists have long known that it is not the mother (or father) whose norms count in language transmission, but the norms of their child’s peer group (especially the norms of those a year or two older). Where a child sounds like her mum (or dad) it is by a co-incidence of the neighbourhood norms with those of the parents. The criterial case is of course when the parents are immigrants to the

References (30)

  • Jacques Arends

    Towards a gradualist model of creolization

  • Richard W. Bailey

    Images of English: A Cultural History of the Language

    (1991)
  • D. Bickerton

    Roots of Language

    (1981)
  • Kingsley Bolton

    English in Asia, Asian Englishes, and the issue of proficiency

    English Today

    (2008)
  • Jack K. Chambers

    Sociolinguistic Theory

    (2003)
  • Da Silva, Aristar, 2007. South African English: A Sociolinguistic Investigation of an Emerging Variety. Unpublished PhD...
  • Alan Davies

    The Native Speaker in Applied Linguistics

    (1991)
  • Markku Filppula

    Irish English: morphology and syntax

  • Anthea Fraser Gupta

    The Step-Tongue: Children’s English in Singapore

    (1994)
  • Ulrike B. Gut

    Nigerian English: phonology

  • Robert A. Hall

    Pidgin and Creole Languages

    (1966)
  • Braj B. Kachru

    The Other Tongue

    (1983)
  • Bernard Kortmann et al.

    Global synopsis: morphological and syntactic variation in English

  • Christian Mair

    Kreolismen und verbales Identitätsmanagement im geschriebenen jamaikanischen Englisch

  • Rajend Mesthrie

    English in Language Shift: The History, Structure and Sociolinguistics of South African Indian English

    (1992)
  • Cited by (22)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text