This paper focuses on the use of preverbal so in present-day English. While its use as an intensifier (meaning ‘so much’ or ‘very much’) has been attested already in Early Modern English (OED online, s.v. so, adv. and conj., sense 15), it has only recently acquired emphatic meaning (‘truly’ or ‘definitely’, see OED online, s.v. so, adv. and conj., 2005 Draft Additions). Compare:

1. (1) I do so love weddings. They're such joy. (SOAP YR 2005)

2. (2) I'm so ditching school to babysit. (SOAP AMC 2007)

This paper examines the contribution of Horae Subsecivae to Joseph Wright's (1855–1930) English Dialect Dictionary (1896–1905) (EDD). Horae Subsecivae (‘spare hours’) is an obscure manuscript glossary that was possibly compiled by Robert Wight of Wotton-under-Edge in c.1777–78, and is now preserved amongst Wright's papers at the Bodleian Library as Bodl. MS Eng. lang. d. 66. Even though it has received little scholarly attention, Horae Subsecivae has a substantial dialect element, with a large number of words cited from Devonshire, Dorset, Cornwall, Gloucestershire, Somerset, Wiltshire and Worcestershire. The manuscript went largely unnoticed by 18th- and 19th-century collections, and remains virtually unknown today perhaps owing to its extensive use of Latin, but it drew the attention of Joseph Wright, who employed it frequently to represent some western dialects. Drawing on the electronic version of the EDD (EDD Online; Markus, 2019a), the paper is situated within forensic dictionary analysis (Coleman & Ogilvie, 2009), which ‘uses evidence-based methodologies to interrogate the dictionaries themselves about decision-making processes involved in their compilation’ (1). In this framework, I combine archival material with quantitative and qualitative approaches to the data retrieved from EDD Online in order to ascertain the proportion of words that are cited from the manuscript, and to assess the treatment they are given. Attention is paid to their function in the context of the dictionary, labels, the western dialects about which the manuscript provides more extensive information, as well as the entries in which it is cited as the only source for words, ascriptions and senses. This paper highlights the outstanding contribution of Horae Subsecivae to the EDD, while stressing that it notably improves our knowledge of lexical variation in the dialects of the South West and the lower West Midlands. They can only benefit from further inspection as they ‘are neither as easily found nor as well researched as those of the north’ (Melchers, 2010: 82).

Nigerian English (NigE) is a second language (L2) variety of English which has been domesticated, acculturated, and indigenised (Taiwo, 2009: 7; Jowitt, 2019: 26), due to its co-existence with about five hundred indigenous Nigerian languages (see Eberhard, Simons & Fennig, 2019). It is the language of education, governance, law, the media, and formal financial transactions in Nigeria. Based on Schneider's (2003: 271) Dynamic Model of the evolution of the New Englishes, NigE can be located at the late stage of nativisation, while recent studies show that it is on the verge of entering endonormative stabilisation (Gut, 2012: 3; Unuabonah & Gut, 2018: 210). Although NigE is an L2, there is a growing number of young people who speak it as a first language (L1; see Jowitt, 2019: 16; Onabamiro & Oladipupo, 2019). NigE includes sub-varieties which are classified based on different factors such as region/ethnicity, and educational attainment (Banjo, 1971; Jibril, 1986; Udofot, 2003). Although Udofot (2003: 204) suggests that the sub-variety used by Nigerians who have been educated in tertiary institutions should be taken as the standard variety, Jowitt (1991: 47) opines ‘that the usage of every Nigerian user is a mixture of Standard forms’ and non-standard forms. The data used in this paper are a mix of both standard and non-standard forms.

Morocco is a multilingual country where the official languages, as indicated in the constitution of 2011, are standard Arabic and Tamazight, while French is the nation's second language, pervading sectors of business, administration, diplomacy and higher education. English and Spanish are used as foreign languages in many contexts for different purposes and tasks (Ennaji, 2009). Unlike French and Spanish, whose presence in the Moroccan linguistic situation is due to colonial policy in the 20th century, English does not ‘have a colonial legacy in Morocco’ (Buckner, 2011: 213). With ‘strong demand for a lingua franca’ brought about by the media, economic incentives and globalization, the presence of English has consequently been furthered in Morocco ‘as a global language’ (Zouhir, 2013: 275).

English is an official language in Uganda and is said to be in its nativization phase when placed within Schneider's (2007) model of the trajectorial development of Englishes (Isingoma & Meierkord, 2019). In the present study, we delineate the general features of the Ugandan accent of English (i.e. those that cut across regional or ethnic boundaries) as well as features that evince variability among Ugandans due to regional or ethnic background. The first description of the phonological features of the variety of English spoken in Uganda is included in Fisher's (2000) seminal paper on this L2 (second language) variety of English. Another description of these features is found in Nassenstein (2016). Both Fisher (2000) and Nassenstein (2016) provide a short section, outlining the features which are similar to the general features of L2 Englishes, notably the restructuring of the phonemic system, e.g. /a/ replacing /ɜ:, ɑ:, ʌ, ə/ and the free variation of [l] and [r], although the latter occurs regionally (see similar findings on L2 varieties of English in Bailey & Görlach [eds.] 1984; Platt, Weber & Ho, 1984; Schmied, 1991; Simo-Bobda, 2000; Atechi, 2004; Schneider et al. [eds.], 2004; Tsilimos, 2018; among others). Additionally, Simo-Bobda (2001) and Schmied (2004) describe more or less the same features but in a more detailed way under the label ‘East African English’ (Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania). Schmied (2004) posits three reasons that underlie the features in question: substrate influence, simplification and spelling pronunciation. To these studies, we add a more focused study on one particular aspect of the Ugandan accent(s) of English, namely by Meierkord (2016), who looks at diphthongs and how they are realized by speakers of different L1s. Her findings demonstrate variability but also convergence in the idiomorphic pronunciation of diphthongs by Ugandans.

Naming is a linguistic universal. Every known human society distinguishes and individuates its members by their names. In the context of Africa and beyond, names are not just ordinary labels for the identification of their bearers; they mirror the culture, tradition and worldview of the people. Essien (1986: 5) argues that ‘naming is not an arbitrary affair, it is at once a mental, an emotional, a linguistic and a cultural matter’. It is widely believed that names and naming can influence the personality development and behaviour of their bearers. This claim justifies Camden's (1984: 43) admonition that ‘names should be chosen with good and gracious significations to inspire the bearer to good action’. This implies that people are assumed to live according to the message contained in their names. Significantly, names also embed deep cultural insights that reflect their bearers’ social lives, philosophy, religion, emotions and worldview. African names, for instance, are important cultural and symbolic resources that reflect the peculiarities of the African people, and capture their beliefs, values, identity and personality.

Language policies generally seek to establish, regulate, and conform linguistic practices – whether explicit or implicit – that occur within an ‘authorized’ domain. While there are multiple levels (societal, institutional, and interpersonal) at which such policies are enacted (Hornberger & Johnson, 2007), academic institutions are often significant policy arbiters as they serve as crucial switchboards (Blommaert, 2010; De Costa, 2010) that connect policies at the societal and interpersonal levels. In particular, English medium of instruction (EMI) policies that mandate English as the primary means of academic content delivery have played a pivotal role in enabling universities in countries such as Bangladesh (Rahman & Mehar Singh, 2019), China (e.g., Hu, 2009; Song, 2019; Zhang, 2018), Saudi Arabia (Barnawi, 2018; Phan & Barnawi, 2015), and Vietnam (Phan, 2018) to establish themselves on the world stage and engage with the global community. Even though several scholars (e.g., Coleman, 2006; Jenkins, 2019a; Knight, 2013, 2016; Macaro et al., 2018) have investigated EMI policies across different contexts, the following central question concerning these policies still persists: in what ways has the implementation of EMI policies transformed the higher education sector, and subsequently affected primary social actors, such as students, teachers, and administrators embedded within these shifting contexts? These concerns, we posit, are amplified by the transnational movements of people and institutions (Duff, 2015) and the ever-increasing speed and agility with which TESOL as a field has to respond to the shifting tides of globalization (Barnawi, 2020). Given this conspicuous gap in an ever-evolving English language policy landscape, we set out to critically review previous works that have examined the implementation of EMI policies within a transnational higher education (TNHE) context. TNHE is characterized by the transformation of higher education across the globe (Knight, 2013; Kosmützky & Putty, 2016) as Western-based universities export models – driven by a neoliberal agenda to maximize financial profit – through the establishment of overseas branch campuses. In reviewing works that examine TNHE, we aim to stimulate dialogue on this contemporary phenomenon.

Given today's general bias towards euphemisms (cf. Arif, 2015), the topic of this paper may seem embarrassing and ill-chosen. However, it makes sense to find out to what extent the spoken language of dialects in former centuries correlated with one of the dark sides of everyday reality. In Britain up to the second half of the 19th century, traditional dialect was the common linguistic medium of the large majority of people (the lower and middle classes), just before the norm of ‘King's English’ and, in linguistics, of système, started playing a dominant role. We may assume that the English dialects of the Late Modern English (LModE) period (1700–1900) were a correlative of people's everyday life.

In the introduction to the book he co-edited, Social Justice through Multilingual Education, Mohanty (2009: 3) mentions how, while conducting research in a remote underdeveloped area of the Indian state of Orissa, he came across a schoolboy who asked him about the purpose of his research. The schoolboy told him that indigenous tribal people in ‘this part of the world’ were the subject of too much research, but ‘nothing has changed, nothing will’ (ibid.). Mohanty (ibid.) notes that the encounter had a lasting impact on his thinking and academic work. This is reflected in the ideas underpinning the above-named book that focuses on the question of designing education in a manner that brings social justice to learners. One of its central points concerns the role of English in the Indian education system. It focuses especially on the debate of whether an English-medium education for speakers of minority languages further endangers their language. There are two seemingly intransigent approaches to the role of English in the Indian education system that shape the instrumentality vs. identity debate in language policy research. The instrumentality approach promotes English as a means of socioeconomic mobility for disadvantaged communities (Vaish, 2005; Weber, 2014). The identity approach argues that English-medium instruction leads to cultural alienation of schoolchildren and proposes mother-tongue-based multilingual education as the alternative (Skutnabb–Kangas et al., 2009; Mohanty, 2010). In this paper, I take a closer look at this debate by examining its four key aspects, namely the ‘decolonising’ role of English, language hierarchies, the linguistic double divide, and the problem of defining the term mother tongue. On the basis of this investigation, I describe the challenges this debate poses for policymakers, and explain why the instrumentality approach is a better way of addressing these challenges.

English, in the course of its progressive evolution and global spread, has had contacts with different languages (Hogg & Denison, 2006) which have led to the emergence of native and non-native varieties spoken in different countries of the world. This, in part, has resulted in variable pronunciations of English lexical items, such as anti- pronounced as /ænti/ or /æntaɪ/ at the segmental level and adult as /'ædʌlt/ or /ə'dʌlt/ at the suprasegmental level of stress (Hogg & Denison, 2006). In addition to this, phonological free variation in English has been motivated by phonetic processes, phonological changes and sociolinguistic factors, among others (Shitara, 1993; Mompean, 2010).

Although English is one of the two official languages in Cameroon, it is seldom used out of official circles where indigenous languages, French, and Pidgin English reign supreme (Jikong & Koenig, 1983). This has made the language a matter of concern for teachers, learners, and researchers. An aspect of the language which has so far been little investigated, but which is significant to English proficiency, is question tags. In fact, question tags contribute tremendously to the flow of language. They are ‘a very conspicuous phenomenon of spoken language’ (Tottie & Hoffman, 2006: 284). These short questions (tags), tagged onto a main statement (the anchor) play an important role in spoken English. While the question tag is taught from Sixième to Terminale (Grade 8 to Grade 13, i.e. the first to last years of secondary education in the Francophone subsystem of education), and from primary to secondary school in the Anglophone subsystem of education in Cameroon, researchers are still to question its teaching against the backdrop of its actual use in a country where the nativisation process of English is generally agreed upon (Schneider, 2009). Also, given that the canonical ‘type of tag question with reversed or constant polarity, (. . .) is typical of English’ (Tottie & Hoffman, 2006: 283), its teaching (textbooks focus solely on question tags with reversed or constant polarity) in a non-native setting like Cameroon is likely to foretell a conscious or unconscious desire to keep a certain standard of English. If one concurs with Schneider (2009) that Cameroon is on Phase Three of the Dynamic model (at least in the Anglophone part of the country) – that is, Nativisation where ‘structural nativization has made substantial progress’ (p. 298) – then keeping a native-like standard on school programmes (Ministry of Secondary Education, 2014), textbooks (see for illustration the English textbook Forbin et al., 2019), and official examinations would be likely to indicate some contradictions as per the apparent desire to cut the umbilical cord with the former colonial power.

Terms of endearment enjoy great popularity in all languages to express feelings such as affection and tenderness. The present paper concentrates on the use of these types of words in English. The Historical Thesaurus of the Oxford English Dictionary (henceforth the HTOED) serves as a valuable tool to identify the plethora of terms of endearment which became established in English over the centuries.

Nigerian English (NigE) is a second language (L2) variety of English that has been domesticated, acculturated and indigenised within the Nigerian socio-cultural and linguistic contexts (Adegbija, 2004). Based on Schneider's (2007) Dynamic Model of the Development of New Englishes, scholars have shown that NigE is currently at the late stage of nativisation (stage 3) and is on the verge of entering the stage of endornormative stabilisation (stage 4) (see Gut, 2012; Collins, 2020). Nativisation, which typically begins with the declaration of independence, is a very active and important stage in which there are large-scale linguistic changes, especially during a time when English is usually the only official language (see Schneider, 2007). Although previous studies have investigated the historical development of English in Nigeria (see Taiwo, 2009), there are limited studies on the particular linguistic features that have changed over time, especially from the time Nigeria gained independence. It is very likely that the rapid increase in the number of universities and other educational institutions managed by Nigerians from independence, as opposed to previous management by Britons, would have affected the variety of English spoken in Nigeria and culminated in the development of NigE today.

In 2015, England saw the introduction of a new GCSE English Language, as part of changes to the National Curriculum (NC). At the time, concerns about and protests against the proposed new GCSE English Literature were widely reported (Kennedy, 2014; Tickle, 2013), while the proposed new GCSE English Language attracted less popular attention and criticism. However, GCSE Results Day on the 22nd of August 2019 saw criticism about English Language taking centre stage (Andrews, 2019; Leedham, 2019). The main concerns are that:

1. 1. the exams for GCSE English Language are too difficult for a significant number of students, without any real alternative English qualification on offer;

2. 2. students aged 16–19 who fail to achieve at least a Grade 4 (pass) are required to re-take their GCSE English Language;

3. 3. the repetitive, narrow focus of the GCSE English Language course itself means that significantly fewer students are taking up English Language at A level (Leedham, 2019; Whittaker, 2019).

To understand the role of a global language in different societies, one needs to distinguish between imperial or colonial and post-imperial or post-colonial societies. As a rule, imperial societies strongly resist any kind of linguistic globalization which they consider to be an imminent threat to their language and culture. Post-imperial societies, such as Azerbaijan, tend to have a more open attitude to the realities of a global language since they feel more secure in their cultural identities. Therefore, the spread of global English creates an excellent opportunity for building multilingualism and plurilingualism in post-imperial societies.

Across the world, in many places in which English is not widely spoken, English text often appears on posters, storefronts, billboards, street signs, warning signs, menus, and many other forms of publicly visible written texts. English is often featured alongside one or more additional languages. These signs are typically seen as unremarkable by passersby looking to buy goods, for information regarding prohibited activity, or even just for a comfortable coffee shop. An increasingly robust scholarly literature has examined these signs since the publication of Landry and Bourhis' (1997) foundational study which popularized the term linguistic landscape. Linguistic landscape scholarship now includes large-scale quantitative examinations of publicly visible signs in cities such as Tokyo (Backhaus, 2007), smaller-scale examinations of the written language within individual workplaces in a single building (Hanauer, 2010), studies on mobile linguistic landscapes such as shopping bags (Alomoush, 2019) and many other studies conducted in widely varying locations with widely varying foci (McKiernan, 2019; Yuan, 2019).