Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T11:41:57.362Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Non-Native Varieties of English: Nativization, Norms, and Implications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Peter H. Lowenberg
Peter H. Lowenberg
Affiliation:
Georgetown University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Institutionalized “non-native” varieties of English have developed in countries such as Nigeria and India, where English is widely used as a second, often official, language in a broad range of intranational domains. These varieties are characterized by “nativization” (Kachru, 1981a): systematic changes in their formal features at all linguistic levels, which result from the use of English in new sociocultural settings, in contact with other languages, and in the absence of native speakers of English. This paper demonstrates how non-native varieties are distinct from interlanguages or approximative systems of “established” (Platt & Weber, 1980) varieties of English (e.g., British or American). Crucial differences are illustrated in strategies common to both nativization and second language acquisition—generalization of rules in the established varieties of English and transfer of linguistic features from other languages—in terms of linguistic contexts in which they apply and motivations underlying their application. A survey of positive attitudes toward non-native varieties among their users indicates that certain nativized features are becoming new norms for English usage in many countries. These strategies of and attitudes toward nativization are shown to have important implications for the teaching of English as a second language and for linguistic theory.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , February 1986 , pp. 1 - 18
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Andersen, R. 1979. Expanding Schumann's pidginization hypothesis. Language Learning 29; 105–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, R. 1980. Creolization as the acquisition of a second language as a first language. In A. Valdman & A. Highfield (eds.), pp. 273–95.Google Scholar
Andersen, R. 1981. Two perspectives on pidginization as second language acquisition. In Andersen, R. (ed.), New dimensions in second language acquisition research, pp. 165–95. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Bailey, R. & Görlach, M. (eds.). 1982. English as a world language. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Bamgbose, A. 1982. Standard Nigerian English: Issues of identification. In B. Kachru (ed.), pp. 99–111.Google Scholar
Bansal, R. 1969. The intelligibility of Indian English. Hyderabad: Central Institute of English.Google Scholar
Bokamba, E. 1982. The Africanization of English. In B. Kachru (ed.). pp. 77–98.Google Scholar
Bourhis, R. 1982. Language policies and language attitudes: Le monde de la Francophonie. In Ryan, E. & Giles, H. (eds.). Attitudes toward language Variation, pp. 34–62. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. 1968. Contrastive analysis and interference theory. In Alatis, J. (ed.). Contrastive linguistics and its pedagogical implications. Report of the Nineteenth Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies, pp. 113–22. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Chishimba, M. 1980. Some bilingual and bicultural aspects of African creative writing. Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Chishimba, M. 1982. African varieties of English: Text in context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Conrad, A. & Fishman, J.. 1977. English as a world language: The evidence. In Fishman, J., Cooper, R., & Conrad, A. (eds.). The spread of English, pp. 3–76. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Giles, H. 1979. Ethnicity markers in speech. In Scherer, K. & Giles, H. (eds.). Social markers in speech, pp. 251–89. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gold, D. 1981. An introduction to English in Israel. Language Problems and Language Planning 5; 11–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez, A. 1983. When does an error become a feature of Philippine English? In Noss (ed.), 150–72.Google Scholar
Hancock, I. & Angogo, R.. 1982. English in East Africa. In Bailey & Görlach (eds.), pp. 306–23.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. 1971. The ecology of language. The Linguistic Reporter, Supplement 25; 19–26. Reprinted in Dil, A. (ed.), 1972, The ecology of language, pp. 325–39. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hill, G. 1982. English in Brunei: Second language or foreign language? World Language English 1; 240–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ikara, B. 1981. Some linguistic and sociocultural variables in a Nigerian variety of English. Paper presented at 16th Regional Seminar, SEAMEO Regional Language Centre, Singapore.Google Scholar
Jain, M. 1974. Error analysis: Source, cause, and significance. In J. Richards (ed.), pp. 189–215.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. 1976. Models of English for the third world: White man's linguistic burden or language pragmatics? TESOL Quarterly 10; 221–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kachru, B. 1981a. The pragmatics of non-native varieties of English. In L. Smith (ed.), pp. 15–39.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. 1981b ‘Socially realistic linguistics’: The Firthian tradition. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 31; 65–89.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. 1982a. Meaning in deviation. In B. Kachru (ed.), pp. 325–50.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. 1982b. Models for non-native Englishes. In B. Kachru (ed.), pp. 31–57.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. 1982c. South Asian English. In Bailey & Görlach (eds.), pp. 353–83.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. 1982d. The bilingual's linguistic repertoire. In Hartford, B., Valdman, A., & Foster, C. (eds.), Issues in international bilingual education: The role of the vernacular, pp. 25–52. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. (ed.). 1982e. The other tongue: English across cultures. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. 1983. The Indianization of English. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. 1984a. Regional norms for English. In Savignon, S. & Berns, M. (eds.), Initiatives in communicative language teaching, pp. 55–78. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. 1984b. World Englishes and the teaching of English to non-native speakers: Contexts, attitudes, and concerns. TESOL Newsletter 18; 25–26.Google Scholar
Kachru, Y. (1985). Discourse analysis, non-native Englishes, and second language acquisition research. World Englishes: Journal of English as an International and Intranational Language 4; 223–32.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. & Terrell, T.. 1983. The natural approach. Hayward, CA: The Alemany Press.Google Scholar
Llamzon, T. 1969. Standard Philipino English. Manila: Ateneo University Press.Google Scholar
Llamzon, T. 1983. Essential features of new varieties of English. In R. Noss (ed.), pp. 92–109.Google Scholar
Mehrotra, R. 1982. Indian English: A sociolinguistic profile. In J. Pride (ed.), pp. 150–73.Google Scholar
Nelson, C. 1982. Intelligibility: The case of non-native varieties of English. In B. Kachru (ed.), pp. 58–73.Google Scholar
Nemser, W. 1971. Approximative systems of foreign language learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics 9:115–23. Reprinted in J. Richards (ed.), 1974, pp. 55–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noss, R. (ed.), 1983. Varieties of English in Southeast Asia. RELC Anthology Series, 11. Singapore: Regional Language Centre.Google Scholar
Platt, J. & Weber, H.. 1980. English in Singapore and Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Platt, J. & Ho, M.. 1984. The new Englishes. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Povey, J. 1977. The role of English in Africa. English Teaching Forum 15(3); 27–29.Google Scholar
Pride, J. 1982a. Communicative needs in the learning and use of English. In Anderson, J. (ed.), Language form and linguistic variation: Papers dedicated to Angus McIntosh, pp. 321–77. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pride, J. (ed.). 1982b. New Englishes. Rowley, MA.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J.. 1972. A grammar of contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Richards, J. 1971. A non-contrastive approach to error analysis. English Language Teaching 25; 204–219. Reprinted in J. Richards (ed.), 1974, pp. 172–88.Google Scholar
Richards, J. (ed.). 1974. Error analysis: Perspectives on second language acquisition. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Richards, J. 1979. Rhetorical and communicative styles in the new varieties of English. Language Learning 29; 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, J. 1982. Singapore English: Rhetorical and communicative styles. In B. Kachru (ed.), pp. 154–67.Google Scholar
Sankoff, C. 1980. Variation, pidgins, and creoles. In A. Valdman & A. Highfield (eds.), pp. 139–64.Google Scholar
Selinker, L. 1972. Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics 10:209–31. Reprinted in J. Richards (ed.), 1974, pp. 31–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serpell, R. 1982. Learning to say it better: A challenge for Zambian education. In J. Pride (ed.), pp. 100–18.Google Scholar
Sey, K. 1973. Ghanaian English: An exploratory survey. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Shaw, W. 1981. Asian student attitudes toward English. In L. Smith (ed.), pp. 108–22.Google Scholar
Smith, L. (ed.). 1981. English for cross-cultural communication. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
Smith, L. & Rafiqzad, K.. 1979. English for cross-cultural communication: The question of intelligibility. TESOL Quarterly 13; 371–80.Google Scholar
Stevens, W. 1984. In South Asia, the Queen's English adds a new twist to planet's babel. The New York Times, 03 19:6.Google Scholar
Strevens, P. 1980. Teaching English as an international language. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Strevens, P. 1982. World English and the world's English – or, whose language is it anyway? Journal of the Royal Society of the Arts (06), pp. 418–31.Google Scholar
Subrahmanian, K. 1977. Penchant for the florid. English Teaching Forum 15(3); 23–24.Google Scholar
Tay, M. 1982. The uses, users, and features of English in Singapore. In J. Pride (ed.), pp. 51–70.Google Scholar
Tay, M. & Gupta, A.. 1983. Towards a description of Standard Singapore English. In R. Noss (ed.), pp. 173–89.Google Scholar
Tiffin, B. 1974. The intelligibility of Nigerian English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of London.Google Scholar
Todd, L. 1982. The English language in West Africa. In R. Bailey & M. Görlach (eds.), pp. 281–305.Google Scholar
Todd, L. 1984. Modern Englishes: Pidgins and Creoles. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tongue, R. 1979. The English of Singapore and Malaysia, 2nd edition. Singapore: Eastern Universities Press.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. 1974. Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. & Hannah, J.. 1982. International English: A guide to varieties of Standard English. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Valdman, A. & Highfield, A. (eds.). 1980. Theoretical orientations in creole studies. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Verma, S. 1982. Swadeshi English: Form and Function. In J. Pride (ed.), pp. 174–87.Google Scholar
Weinstein, B. 1980. Language planning in Francophone Africa. Language Problems and Language Planning 4; 55–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, I. 1981. English in Malaysia. In L. Smith (ed.), pp. 94–107.Google Scholar
Wong, I. 1982. Native-speaker English for the Third World today? In J. Pride (ed.), pp. 261–86.Google Scholar
Wong, I. 1983. Simplification features in the structure of colloquial Malaysian English. In R. Noss (ed.), pp. 125–49.Google Scholar