EL1102 Studying English in Context

Lecture No. 13 (Part 2)

Organisation

A. Quick revision – topics of lectures

B. Main themes (threads, preoccupations) of the lecture

C. Practical session: bringing things together through discussion of issues

D. Exam format and advice on answering questions.

PART A

L1a: Variation in English

(L1a = Lecture 1, Part 1; L1b = Lecture 1, Part 2)

· Diversity in the English language (and some people talk of the English languages!)

· Variety related to context

· Social variation: social roles, sex, age, ethnic group, educational background, contextual setting

· Temporal variation: long- and short-term changes

· Regional variation: regional accents and dialects; pidgins and creoles; intranational regional varieties and international regional varieties

· Personal variation: a person’s unique style or trademark (eg Shakespeare’s style; Catherine Lim’s style)

L1b to L3 examine the variation based on different linguistic levels

· orthography or graphology: this was not a level we explored in detail (see Graddol Ch. 2 if you’re interested)

· phonology: pronunciation, accents, rhythm, intonation, rhoticity, etc. (L1b)

· lexis (vocabulary): lexical choice and combination; core v periphery (L2); related to word origins (Anglo-Saxon, French, Latin (L8b)

· grammar (syntax, morphology): double negatives, pronouns, tenses, word order, inflexions, hypotaxis, etc. (L3)

· Semantics (meaning)

· Discourse (organisation)

· So what?

· Description on its own is tedious and uninteresting.

· Description leading on to interpretation is more interesting and useful.

· The answers to ‘why has this text this kind of language?’ is often not straightforward sometimes contentious) and open-ended, often requiring non-linguistic considerations

Reasons for language change

L4 attempted to summarise some possible reasons for language change (in answer to the ‘so what’ questions.

· Centripetal and centrifugal forces (convergence v divergence)

· Language contact

· Regularisation

· Reflecting or responding to new realities or perspectives (Whorfism)

· Language engineering or planning

L5-7a: Social variation

· We concentrated on the variation in different social spheres:

· functional variation (rather than variation based on age, gender, educational background, etc.)

· We contrasted informal conversation (common speech) and academic writing

· Different ‘desiderata’ led to linguistic differences

L7b-9: Historical variation

The main periods: OE, ME, MnE (PDE)

· Internal history (grammar, lexis, etc.)

· External history (Anglo-Saxon invasion, Viking settlement, Norman conquest, Reformation and Renaissance, nationalism, colonialism and settlement)

L10-12a: Geographical variation

· English is spread

· Intranational v international geographical variation

· Case studies: North America and S-E Asia (Singapore)

· World English / Global English

L12b: A reprise: Good v Bad English

· Attempts to present the ‘larger picture’: the macro view

· L12b: Good English and political correctness (how does this fit into variation?)

PART B

Main themes

1. Language serves the function of its speech community

· academic writing

· informal conversation

· Old English

· Post-Conquest Britain

· Renaissance and standardisation

· American English

· New Englishes

2. Language is a living entity that evolves

· English in 1100 à English in 1400

· Pre-scientific English à Scientific English

· English as a ‘parochial’ small-time language → English as a world language

· British English brought by the British settlers in America around 1600 → American English 2000

· British English brought by Raffles 1819 à English in Singapore 2000

3. Language harbours a hegemonic potential, and this occasionally leads to contestation

· Favours the trained; labels their language as ‘correct’ – maintains the haves

· Flummoxes the untrained; labels their language as ‘incorrect’ – keeps out the have nots

· Standardisation (lexicography, printing)

· Academic English

· The choice of the American Standard based on the yeomanry

· High-prestige v low-prestige variation (rhoticity in New York, -in’ v –ing in Norwich, glottal stops in the UK in general)

4. Language is closely enmeshed in our activities today.

· The negotiation of meaning is something that we need to be engaged in, otherwise we risk being co-opted into something we might not have bargained for!

· Resistant readings are useful

· We cannot escape the need for language in our dealings in all our modern professions: compare

o Teaching, law, the civil service, government, business etc.

o Farming, fishing, rubber tapping, tea plucking

PART C

Bringing things together.

In this last lecture, I want to see if we can bring together various elements of the module, and I want to do it by dealing with statements that we might quite often hear from people in the street. You might be interested to know that one of them was raised by a doctor to me while he was administering a local anaesthetic on me and stitching up a wound! Not quite the best time to carry out this kind of conversation!

I will show the statements to you first, then you need to decide:

(a) which parts of the modules had points or examples that are relevant to the statement;

(b) what you stand on the issue is;

1. Meanings of words should not be allowed to change or vary

‘How will anybody know what anything means if words keep changing?’

‘I can’t find this word in my dictionary!’

‘Singapore is such a small country! If we make isolated changes nobody will understand us!’

‘English was at its apex fifty years go. It’s been all the way downhill since!’

‘We knew all the rules when we were at school. Schoolchildren are not taught anything these days!’

2. Some languages (or dialects) have no grammar

‘Pidgins just string together words!’

‘There are no rules for Singlish!’

3. Some languages (or dialects) are just not good enough

‘You can’t talk meaningfully using Hokkien/Singlish’

4. Tribal people speak a primitive language

5. In Singapore, we take ‘short cuts’ with English

6. In conversation, we take ‘short cuts’ with English

7. Singlish and Hokkien are ugly; Standard English and Mandarin are beautiful

PART D

Examination format

Two-hour paper

Answer three questions: Question 1, Question 2 and one other question

Question 1 carries 40 marks; other questions carry 30 marks. Please divide up your time accordingly.

· Question 1 is compulsory: responses to short statements (some internal choice available)

· Question 2 is compulsory: the analysis of a short text with rewriting

· Questions 3 to 5 are essay questions; choose one. Expect to compare different sections of the syllabus.

Reminder!

Remember: Some past-year papers are available from the EL1102 Web site.

Remember: The format has changed!

Remember: For this semester, write your answers in the exam booklets.

What are we looking for?

1. Content

(a) Students should be able to provide some information about the English language in various contexts: rhoticity, colloquial language, the Norman conquest, language contact, etc.)

(b) But note: this is an introductory module, and you will not always need to know all the details.

2. Students who will be skilful in dealing with texts.

(a) You need to be able to relate the labels you know to text (we often talk about students acquiring a ‘metalanguage’). You need to know how to apply these labels appropriately.

(b) You need to be able to describe texts accurately.

(d) You need to be able to relate what you see in the texts to the wider context (who is saying what to whom, when, where and for what purpose?)

3. Students who have thought about the material, and worked out their own position.

(a) If you can ‘extrapolate’ from the materials in each topic, this will be viewed very favourably, eg the Norman situation is comparable to the colonial situation in Singapore, yet different.

(b) Your own position need not match the lecturer’s position. If you, for example, feel that the hegemonic potential of global English should be played down rather than played up, provide your reasons, with examples.

Common questions

How much of the syllabus must I study for the exam?

· Some familiarity with the whole syllabus assumed

· Detailed knowledge of specific topics

Are abbreviations and symbols allowed?

· Standard abbreviations like eg, ie, pm, ASEAN, OE, ME, MnE can be used.

· Other shorthand methods are best avoided, eg Δ = change, = the, = with, lg = language, lang = language, diff^ce = difference, Fr. = French

· If you want to use a phrase or term often, you can introduce an abbreviation or symbol but explain it the first time, eg SgE = Singaporean English

Question 1

· You will have had some practice in your tutorials.

· Note that you will be expected to go beyond just agreeing or disagreeing with the statements.

· Statements can be answered by just referring to material in the syllabus. No problems with original or new examples though (provided they are relevant).

EXAMPLE:

Examine any five of the eight statements below and write down your reactions to the statements (ie whether you agree or disagree, strongly or weakly) and provide reasons for your reactions. If appropriate, illustrate your answer with examples or elaborate on the statements. Please a paragraph of about 70 words for each statement.

(a) ‘Standard English is “proper English” because it is the best kind of English.’

(b) ‘English has always been spoken in Britain.’

(d) ‘Nominalisation helps to package information in academic writing.’

(e) ‘Colloquial Singaporean English breaks the rules of English.’

(f) ‘Language contact can lead to the enrichment of the vocabulary.’

(g) ‘Politically-correct language is motivated from a concern for the disadvantaged groups of society.’

(h) ‘Americans speak a version of English completely different from the British.’

Advice on Question 1

· Time yourself: don’t spend too much time.

· You can use an answer book to scribble rough notes on.

· Don’t waste time counting the no. of words: if you have between 5 and 10 lines, you’re about right.

· Students don’t always handle choice well. Read through all the statements, and choose the five you feel most confident discussing, or perhaps feel strongly about.

· There will be statements that are ‘dead obvious’ right or wrong. There are those that are ‘generally’ or ‘mainly’ right or wrong. There are those that are ‘partially’ right or wrong. And there are those that are presumably debatable – you are still encouraged to take a stance.

· Whichever one it is, you need to account for your reaction – this means argue for, or provide support for, your view.

· Concrete examples are always preferable to aerie-faerie generalisations.

· Sometimes terms used need unpacking or explaining or defining.

Example (d)

‘Nominalisation helps to package information in academic writing.’

· A ‘dead obvious’ example?

· In the lecture notes, we have the statement: ‘Nominalisation packages all information around the head noun derived from the verb and makes a single entity which is OBJECT-LIKE’. (We don’t expect you recall this verbatim, of course.)

How do we go about responding to this?

· Provide the response (eg ‘The statement is correct’).

· Some definition of ‘nominalisation’ seems necessary.

· An example will be helpful.

· Don’t forget the last phrase: ‘in academic writing’. Respond to this: why more so in academic writing?

Possible final answer?

The statement is clearly true. Nominalisation involves turning words into nouns; eg a verb like arouse can be nominalised to arousal. Without nominalisation, we might have had to say ‘Euthanasia arouses strong feelings’; but with nominalisation, everything can be packed into a phrase and then commented on, eg ‘The arousal of strong feelings has been exploited by politicians’. This is especially useful in academic writing because academic writing emphasises logical relationships, and the relationships are made clear through nominalisation. (79 words)

We said the statement was ‘dead obvious’. Is another kind of answer possible, which would also attract top marks?

· Perhaps someone might quarrel with ‘helps package’, and want to point out the nominalisation is not always helpful. You might say: The statement is generally true. Nominalisation involves turning words into nouns, eg a verb like ‘arouse’ can be nominalised to ‘arousal’. Instead of saying ‘Euthanasia arouses strong feelings; politicians exploit this’, we might say ‘The arousal of strong feelings has been exploited by politicians’. The original first clause is packaged as a noun phrase which we now take for granted. It makes it more difficult to take issue with it, so that in this sense it is not ‘helpful’. (79 words)

Example (b)

‘English has always been spoken in Britain.’

This seems to be another ‘dead obvious’ one. Of course it is not true.

Many will have cottoned on to the fact that the use of maximisers (absolutely, completely [in section (h)], always), and conversely minimisers (never, in the slightest, at all), call for a closer look at the statement.

Crucial to provide supporting points:

· English is a transported language (Anglo-Saxons invaded the Isles in AD 449 onwards).

· Appears to have been a language shift in Britain (original inhabitants spoke Celtic languages).

Example (f)

‘Language contact can lead to the enrichment of the vocabulary.’

This appears less clear-cut.

Key terms that need some discussion: ‘language contact’ and ‘enrichment’.

One or two examples required for discussion to support your view, eg

· French + English (in Medieval Britain, or even today)

· Greek and Latin + English (in Renaissance Britain)

· Italian, French and German + English (in 18th-century USA)

· Hokkien and Malay + English (in Singapore)

Question 2

· A short passage of text.

· Analysis.

· Rewriting.

Example

This is an extract a tabloid newspaper report. Newspapers obviously belong to the public domain, but sometimes resort to using more conversational language which is usually associated with the private domain. Examine the text carefully before attempting (a), (b) and (c) below.

DOG RIP A MAN’S NOSE OFF

HORROR ATTACK!

By Martin Stote

(1) COPS shot two savage pit bull terriers yesterday after they gored a man’s face to shreds.

(2) The escaped devil-dogs tore into shift worker Frank Tempest, 54, as he walked home at dawn.

(3) Shocked witnesses said the hell hounds RIPPED OFF his nose, MAULED his ear and TORE skin off his face.

(4) The dogs ambushed father-of-four Frank, then dragged him screaming along the road as he struggled to fight them off.

(5) Police sealed off the street and warned terrified neighbours to stay indoors as the marauding dogs savaged a cat to death.

(6) Then six police marksmen with automatic rifles blasted the dogs, believed to be a bitch and her pup, with a hail of bullets.

(7) One pit bull was shot dead, but the other wounded and trailed for an hour before being killed.

(8) Both had escaped from a house close to despatch loader Frank’s home in Monk’s Road Lincoln.

(9) Police refused to name the owner last night and said he would NOT face prosecution.

(a) Imagine you had witnessed the attack on Frank Tempest, and was required to submit a formal written report to the police. Rewrite paragraphs (1) to (4) to illustrate the style you would have used.

(b) How is the newspaper report conversational, in contrast to your report in (a)? Make specific reference to structures or lexical items.

Advice on Question 2

The question is divided into parts (a), (b) and (c) but don’t see them as distinct entities. In this example, the rewriting exercise is so that you have a text in a different style (social variant), that you can draw attention to when you analyse the text.

Normal length: about 3 pages.

Read:

(a) the question very carefully: don’t answer what you haven’t been asked (many students made this mistake)

(b) the text carefully and try to understand what it says or what it is trying to convey. (Here, the contrast between the now and then.)

In the rewriting exercise, try to make it as realistic as possible – you can invent details if you think they are necessary – eg I, Mary Thompson, was having an early breakfast in my dining room which overlooks the road. Suddenly there was a loud commotion. A man in a dark blue raincoat was screaming. [and so on]

The analysis should be well focused – please read the instructions very carefully.

The question focuses on the conversational nature of the tabloid news report. It is this you need to focus on.

You may list out very quick the features that are typical of informal conversational talk – eg

· involvement (rather than detachment),

· subjectivity (rather than objectivity),

· parataxis (rather than hypotaxis),

· short noun phrases,

· lack of nominalisation or passivisation,

· overlap of turns,

· core lexis,

· etc.

Then you should very clearly give examples from the text (the original, as well as your rewritten version). So:

· for lexis, you might contrast cops (core?) to the police

· You can use some examples to show involvement rather than detachment (ripped …off, mauled, etc).

· You might want to point to the use of capitals (RIPPED, MAULED, TORE, NOT) and the use of bold style, which seems to imitate the way stress can be assigned in informal speech.

· You can also show how the text is not completely conversational – there are no overlaps in the turn, it is too tidy, not enough ellipsis, etc.

· You can say that there is hypotaxis in the text (see paragraphs (1) and (2), for example). You might say this is because it is still a written report which quite a bit of planning time available, unlike in an off-the-cuff conversation.

Essay questions

Example from S1 97/98: ‘We seem to be moving … towards a social and linguistic situation in which nobody says or writes or probably knows anything more than an approximation of what he or she means.’ (Kingsley Amis, British novelist)

Amis seems to be bemoaning the way the English language has been changing in recent years. What are some of the reasons for change? Do you agree with Amis that linguistic change leads to imprecision?

Advice on essay questions

Please note that we are looking for more than a GP essay:

· However, we expect that the position taken can be left to the individual, like a GP essay.

· Don’t just launch into the essay. (Many see ‘language changing’ and immediately give the reasons for language change – that they’d mugged up on.)

· Normal length: about 3 pages or a little more (medium-sized handwriting, using every line).

· Try to answer the question. Try to work out your position. (Examiners generally reward personalised answers.) – You’ve got to see that the question also asks if change leads to imprecision. Throw in some examples of change.

· Sometimes, there are different ways of approaching the question. Some of the terms used might also be interpreted in different ways. In general, it is helpful to state explicitly and clearly how you interpret the terms and how you will approach your essay.

· It is also in general to organise your essay somewhat. This is especially important when you are attempting an argumentative essay.

· The question allows you to use different examples: eg loss of inflexions (did this lead to imprecision?); Malay and Hokkien loan-words in SgE (did this lead to imprecision?); rhoticity in New York (did this lead to imprecision?)

· Look at the relationship between the quotation and the actual question.

· Plan and organise your answer, providing many examples.

Be in Suntec City, Exhibition Hall 401 on Monday, 16/4/01, 9.00 to 11.00 am for your exam.

And finally …

Thank you and all the best!

Back to Part 1 of the Lecture

Back to the EL1102 Lecture Schedule