+0
I'm intrigued. On another forum, Mr P mentioned of the term "standard spoken English". He hasn't yet given a clear definition of what he means by that term, but he has excluded the use of "if I have/get chance..." over "if I have/get the/a chance..." from his view of what is standard spoken English.

I wonder, what do you all think the term "standard spoken English" means and would you, as Mr P did, exclude the above? And these, would you exclude from spoken standard English's borders?

-Things going well, are they?
-He won't be late I don't think.
-She about six foot tall.
-wanna/gonna
-Jamie, he's got a new hat.
-He's got a new hat, Jamie.
-There's a hairy thing on the green stuff.
-Dave coffee?
-He got killed.
-I was worried I was going to lose it and I did almost.
-You know which one I mean probably.
-A friend of mine, his uncle had the taxi firm when we had the wedding.
-Do you know erm you know where the erm go over to er go over erm where the fire station is not the one that white white...
1 2 3 4
Comments  (Page 3) 
Is it just the way I read it, or is there really little interest in world English/es on this part of the forum?

Please consider this passage and tell me what you think:

The aspirations and efforts for standardization and globalization of a specific variety of English –British or American – during the colonial and post-colonial periods have largely remained a mirage. What we witness is that monolithic labels as modifiers of the English language have only marginal pragmatic, linguistic and functional validity, for example, the label ‘international lingua franca”. The use of such terms indicates continued efforts to sustain and propagate this mythology of a lingua franca, for example, by the ELT profession, multinational corporations and international publishers of pedagogical materials. The motivations for sustaining this mythology are not merely economic, but ideological too, as has been extensively discussed in literature. In this ell-coordinated and motivated drive, multiple agencies of various governments are also involved.

Asian Englishes: Beyond the Canon. By Braj B. Kachru.

-------

Please, be truthful, Are you involved in supporting and propogating such mythologies? If so, why? Is it for ideological or political reasons? Maybe for personal economic reasons? Feelings of power and superiority you assume belong to your variant of English? what is it that pushes you to support such myths, if you do?
< MrP's standard seems to be a common variety, even if maybe he doesn't want to define it precisely.>

Far from precisely, I'd say.

But what's your definition?

Firstly, I'd say there no one standard definition and no one standard, if any at all - linguistically speaking. That's why I was puzzled by Mr P's label "standard spoken British English". He seems to feel there is only one standard of such a form, but until he enlightens us with a deeper definition...

If I were to try to define "standard or standardising spoken English", I'd have to be sure that such a thing/things exists. As I'm not sure it/they does/do exist... . And, as always, I find far too many people who can define what isn't standard, but fail when it comes to defining what is standard. Worse still, many such people have beliefs about what it is that makes up the written standard form and such beliefs often lead them to overlook a wide variety of speaking styles in the spoken language. Mr P's insistence that "have chance to" is not standard spoken British English, is, IMO, an example of such a tendency.

I think that many native-speakers decide on impulse which spoken forms they think are or are not standard. I'm not sure that Mr P's tendency to do the same is wholly scientific, wholly linguistics- based. I've witnessed that native impulse and intuition, even when coming from so called educated speakers, is not alway useful and is sometimes useless.

My dineros worth.
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
AnonymousIs it just the way I read it, or is there really little interest in world English/es on this part of the forum?
Probably... but I like them! I like to learn about most varieties...
Anonymousthe label ‘international lingua franca”. The use of such terms indicates continued efforts to sustain and propagate this mythology of a lingua franca,
Huh? English is already a lingua franca, isn't it? We come from every corner of the world, and yet we can understand each other here on EF (ok, LOL, not really always, but...). Isn't that amazing? Now I hope you are not going to ask me what I mean by lingua franca and what variety of English it should be... it's obviously expected to consist of several dialects based on two groups of major dialects, mainstream American English and mainstream British English (my definition of "mainstream" is "used in the media": CNN, New York Times, BBC, The Simpsons, assorted movies, etc.). Of course learners speak a kind of English affected by their own first language, but the "model" they try to copy is that mainstream English...
AnonymousPlease, be truthful, Are you involved in supporting and propogating such mythologies? If so, why? Is it for ideological or political reasons? Maybe for personal economic reasons? Feelings of power and superiority you assume belong to your variant of English? what is it that pushes you to support such myths, if you do?
I support English as a lingua franca, because a lingua franca is vital nowadays, in a world where international communication has become extremely important. English is already the most learned language in the world, and it's the de-facto lingua franca. Most information can be found in English, or has been translated into English.
I don't support only one variety, but I hope there'll always be at least one variety that can easily be understood by most people in the world, and so there will be at least one variety as lingua franca.
AnonymousAnd, as always, I find far too many people who can define what isn't standard, but fail when it comes to defining what is standard. Worse still, many such people have beliefs about what it is that makes up the written standard form and such beliefs often lead them to overlook a wide variety of speaking styles in the spoken language.
LOL, yeah, that's interesting. It seems non-standard forms are often used in informal speech, so I guess talking informally is non-standard. Emotion: big smile
Of course learners speak a kind of English affected by their own first language, but the "model" they try to copy is that mainstream English...

I disagree. Mainstream media plays less of a role than it did a few years ago. Fragmentation and localisation has come about through satellite broadcasting, and television is not as able to play an important role in maintaining a global standard as it once could. The centralised networks are fast disappearing. Users of Hinglish, for example, are certainly not trying to copy so called mainstream English. In fact, maybe a "destandardisation" of English is happening.

The English you speak of, the one you see happening on this forum, is an example of only one of the main functions of English in the world, i.e. English as a vehicle for international communication. The other main function of English is hardly represented here at all, i.e. English as a basis for forming cultural identities.
Well, that's true. I think I should have said that mainstream English is the "model" teachers try to teach them. Then learners' native languages affect their English in several ways, and we sure are going toward fragmentation. One day maybe we'll have thousands of different dialects like Chinese-English, Russian-English... but as I said, I hope there'll always be some varieties that are easily understood by most people in the world... or we will all have to turn on the subtitles every time we watch a movie, even though it's in English, LOL.
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
<Well, that's true. I think I should have said that mainstream English is the "model" teachers try to teach them.>

But maybe not for long. If ELT publishers get wind of other variants apart from BrEng and AmEng on the rise, they'll cash in on that move, for sure.

<Then learners' native languages affect their English in several ways, and we sure are going toward fragmentation. One day maybe we'll have thousands of different dialects like Chinese-English, Russian-English... but as I said, I hope there'll always be some varieties that are easily understood by most people in the world... >

I wouldn't worry to much about total fragmentation:

'Smith (1992) carried out an experiment using speakers of nine "national varieties" of English - China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Taiwan, the UK and the USA - in order to discover whether "the spread of English is creating greater problems of understanding across the spread of cultures" (Smith, 1992). He concluded that there was no evidence of a breakdown in the functioning of English as an international lingua franca, but that, "interestingly, native speakers (from Britain and the US) were not found to be the most easily understood, nor were they, as subjects, found to be the most able to understand the different varieties of English" (Smith, 1992).'

From: Analysing English in a Global Context: A Reader By Anne Burns, Caroline Coffin.
As a practical matter, it's not a definition that determines what standard spoken English is. It is English that does not offend the ears of educated native English speakers. A parallel is tasteful dress.
Anonymous... but that, "interestingly, native speakers (from Britain and the US) were not found to be the most easily understood, nor were they, as subjects, found to be the most able to understand the different varieties of English" (Smith, 1992).'
Maybe because native speakers tend to talk fast, compared to users of English as a second language? That might be one reason...
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
That may well be true, Koyeen, but what about this part?

<<<nor were they (the British and Americans), as subjects, found to be the most able to understand the different varieties of English" (Smith, 1992).'>>>
Show more