Tuesday December 4, 2012
Proud of Manglish?
By ANDREW SIA
Manglish mania: Malaysian English is certainly not deemed ‘incorrect’ in the sitcom Kopitiam. Rather, it’s celebrated! Some of the old and new cast here are (from left): Bernie Chan, Douglas Lim, Mano Maniam, Joanna Bessey and Chew Kin Wah. Ashamed of speaking Malaysian English? Here are the intellectual justifications for it.
IS Malaysian English somehow “sub-standard”? There have been many readers’ comments after Mind Our English (MOE) ran the article “Just don’t call it Manglish!” last Tuesday.
The writer, linguist Dr Alistair King who pens the Right for Business column in MOE, notes that there is nothing “bad” with “REAL Malaysian English” gems such as: “What for you run so fast-fast one?”.
While this phrase is, admittedly, not standard grammar, he advocates a kind of linguistic pride in our own brand of English, at least when it comes to the spoken variety.
After all, other countries already have their own recognised home-grown varieties of the language such as “Standard Indian English” and “Standard Jamaican English”.
King underlines that even British English has an assortment of spoken tongues. Which one is “standard”?
Even when it comes to pronunciation, almost nobody, except the monarch herself, speaks the “Queen’s English”.
In socio-linguistics, he outlines that a language can have many “levels” namely: Acrolect (high language), Mesolect (middle language) and Basilect (low language).
The spectrum from Acrolect to Basilect can be described as language which is “slightly Malaysian” to “very Malaysian”, with Mesolect somewhere in between.
Acrolect has proper grammar and can be understood globally, even if we speak with a Malaysian accent (without pathetic imitations of American slang – y’hear).
As for Basilect, it’s captured in the immortal phrase “How come cow can?”, which King praises as having an alliterative “economy of words” while being utterly “communicative”!
“Basilect is wonderful in its colour and precision,” he points out, adding that it has simplified grammar, so that the syntax of Basilect has more in common with Cantonese, Hokkien or Malay than with native-speaker English.
Even people who can speak grammatically correct Acrolect English may choose to speak Basilect “as a mark of intimacy or common identity” says King.
Here, one is reminded of how Oxford-educated Tony Blair, the former British Prime Minister, embraced the glottal stop when talking about football to make himself sound less posh and more man-in-the-street!
King’s conclusion is that there’s no such thing as “good” and “bad” spoken English, just what is “appropriate” or otherwise.
Basilect and Mesolect variations of Malaysian English have their place and the usefulness, though professional advancement would require a mastery of Acrolect as well.
That summarises last week’s article. Now, here’s what the readers have to say:
Dear Dr King,
Congratulations on a superb article on Malaysian English. It was an excellent analysis of the three levels/types of local English.
I thank you for educating me on three new terms viz, Acrolect, Mesolect, and Basilect. Although I have a degree in Linguistics and Economics from the University of Malaya, I have never come across these three terms before. Ever since then, I have always been interested in the subject matter of Linguistics. Like you, I abhor the fake American accents spoken by our radio presenters and DJ’s. It’s so sad that they think it’s trendy.
I do believe you’ve got it spot on with this article. I find it refreshing that you, a native English speaker, are fascinated by, and can see the brilliance of “How come cow can”.
I speak Acrolect as well as Basilect and switch between them when speaking to friends and colleagues.We think nothing of it, although we fully realise that it’s not “well spoken” English.
These sentence constructions are adapted from Chinese and Malay. Another version of that phrase would be “Why cow can, deer cannot?”
Hope to read more of your articles soon.
LW
Many thanks for the interesting article by Dr Alistair King.
There is so much to be said in favour of using Manglish and any other ‘glish if this helps students to express themselves in understanding and being understood.
Since this method was first used over ten years ago in Southampton University in England, it has proven to be a most useful tool in promoting easy conversation between people from all corners of the world.
If we allow students to communicate uninterrupted (rather than being continually corrected about their grammar), we have a far greater flow of uninhibited communication.
Of course, I agree with Dr King that correct grammar is needed when writing official documents or employment applications. However, in informal conversation, being relaxed is so very important.
I have been using this informal (teaching) method for the past ten years in Malaysia in a voluntary capacity, with young students from Japan and Mongolia.
David King
I absolutely agree with what you wrote. I have always believed that there is nothing wrong with Manglish and disagreed with those who said otherwise. Our Manglish is what makes us unique!
However, written English must always be proper. I often cringe when I read (poorly written) emails and letters from professional organizations.
For parents who are worried about their children’s English, they shouldn’t. From what I remember of my childhood, I read loads and loads of story books (Enid Blyton, Hardy Boys etc,). From there, I somehow knew the difference between a grammatically correct or wrong sentence; even though I could not explain why.
To me, a sentence is gramatically correct because it ‘sounds’ right. So my advise to parents is make sure your kids read lots of books. I would like to take this opportunity to say that I always enjoy reading your articles.
Iris
I’m Jason, a 16-year-old boy living in KL. Just wanna say thank you for that article of yours. I personally think it’s utterly true that “proper” language is not about right or wrong, but more about whether it’s appropriate or inappropriate.
Jason C
Source:
RSS
