Sent by a colleague; comments below.
Changing lingo: Hinglish in, English outLONDON: Hinglish, Chinglish and Spanglish are as English as the language traditionally said to belong to the British Queen, a revolutionary new prescription says, arguing that new arrivals to Britain should not be taught Queen’s English but cultural mixes used by non-native speakers in territories such as India.
The new report issued by Demos, an influential think-tank that claims to represent “everyday democracy”, says “Imperial” English (is) outdated” and believes Britain will lose out despite its initial ownership of the English language unless it “adapts to the global reach of the language”.
In the boldest suggestion yet to incorporate Indianisms such as ‘aloo’, ‘airdash’, ‘eve-teasing’ and ‘pre-pone’ into more than just the rash of market-hungry, standard rash of get-rich-quick dictionary supplements routinely issued over the last few years, Demos argues that language blends such as Hinglish are the way forward.
It says the British government’s recent calls for newcomers to the UK to learn standard English are misplaced and they should be encouraged instead to learn blends such as Hinglish (Hindi/Punjabi/Urdu-English), Chinglish (Chinese-English) and Spanglish (Spanish-English) which is widespread in America, where it is also called Tex-Mex.
The Demos report says the English language is no longer the preserve of the native English-speaking peoples of the world. They, says the report, are “just one of many shareholders’ in a global asset… With non-native English speakers set to top two billion in as little as five years, Britain’s influence, relationships and access to markets across the globe are at risk unless we change our outmoded attitude to language”.
Demos says that Britain’s attitude to English “is better suited to the days of the British Empire than the modern world.” It categorically asserts that “Far from being corruptions of English, new forms of the language such as ‘Chinglish’ (and Hinglish) have values that we must learn to accommodate and relate to”.
Curzon’s comments: Frankly, I think Demos is a group of nitwits who shouldn’t be given the time of day. When you modify a language in ways that alienates you from the majority of those speaking it, you open up a can of worms that is destined to result in disaster.
Consider: if you speak Spanish and English, you can communicate with the people all over the Western Hempisphere save for Brazil and Quebec, plus many other countries and cities in Europe, Africa, Oceania, and Asia. That’s wonderful. But here’s a reality check: If you speak “Spanglish,” then you can only speak with some people in New Mexico and Miami. You get the worst of both worlds of knowing two languages.
(Speaking of which, it’s telling that there’s not even an agreement on how to spell Spanglish/Spenglish. How is a linguistic revolution supposed to spread when the name can’t even be agreed on.)
Second reality check: if you teach south Asian immigrants “Hinglish,” you are relegating them to a life of isolation and infusing them with a cultural identity crisis. And that’s just wrong, no matter how you look at it.
- BROWSE / IN TIMELINE
- « 5 Things
- » Gagging teh Internets
COMMENTS / 10 COMMENTS
snow added these pithy words on 03 May 07 at 6:04 amI agree with you wholeheartedly Curzon. There is nothing wrong with mixing other languages in with English as part of daily vernacular, but a higher standard is needed for academics, government and business. As you say, standardized English allows one to communicate throughout the world and to negotiate meaning wherever one might go. As some English actors have noted, only being able to speak in a regional accent generally limits one’s options in terms of roles available whereas if one can speak in a ‘standard accent’ or a variety of accents, your options for work are greatly increased. The same with a standardized English. Knowing the standards gives you an advantage, which can be supplemented with various vernacular versions.
The same in jazz music. Those who know the ‘standards’ of what it supposedly means to be a jazz player are, for the most part, accorded much more respect than those who do not (with exceptions, of course, even as jazz has changed alot over the decades). In other words, though jazz has changed to the point where the standards could be said to be no longer ‘standard’, it is still strongly recognized by very many players that a player should have a solid foundation in the standards or basics of what it means to be a jazz player.
subadei added these pithy words on 03 May 07 at 11:16 pmI too agree. While Nihonglish served me well in my short time in Japan I can’t imagine establishing an effective living or integrating myself into the culture (heh, especially in Japan) through such means. Demos seems to think the British should apologize for being, er, British.
Michael added these pithy words on 04 May 07 at 4:52 pmNot to mention that Hinglish, Chinglish, Spanglish, etc, speakers wouldn’t be able to communicate with each other. sigh Times like this, I really think some of my fellow liberals need to be slapped upside the head.
Mricbm added these pithy words on 04 May 07 at 8:38 pmEveryone is missing the point.
This Hinglish/Spanglish/Chinglish/Ebonics system is intended to make it impossible for minorities to communicate with the wider public except through the Jesse Jacksons and Anjeem Coudrays of their ethnicity. It is intended to recreate that paradise of identity politics: the ghetto.
Lexington Green added these pithy words on 05 May 07 at 6:39 amWhat MrICBM said. The point is to create ghetto constituencies who have nowhere to go. It is meant to enslave and destroy the prospects of people, to use them as things, as tools for the advantage of purportedly progressive people. It is a vicious attack on the future of these people and they should respond accordingly. But I fear the won’t.
Pete Bradwell added these pithy words on 06 May 07 at 10:56 amHello. I’m Pete, one of the authors of the Demos report. This is a great blog. I just thought it might be useful to respond to some of the comments and commentary on As You Like It. I think I’d probably agree with a lot of what is being said here – primarily because the version of the pamphlet reported on by the majority of the press, and picked up on here, is a pretend pamphlet that happens to make for better tabloid copy than the real one. It is a version I would respond to with similar thoughts as there are here. Its been a bit frustrating – the stories are mainly the result of some pretty lazy journalism. As a result, I don’t normally bother responding to this stuff (I was going to on the Daily Mail website – to their hilarious headline ‘A-Levels in Hinglish?’ – but considered life too short). But this seemed like it might be a place where you’d appreciate some response and discussion.
In the pamphlet we are trying to point out some challenging trends relating to English that are likely to have a big influence on the world around us, and which will change the benefits and opportunities the language has afforded. The main point of the report – which has got lost a little in the press – is that the story of English tells us interesting things about the state of global power. And today, the lingua franca that some call ‘global English’ is offering both potential and problems for those interested in the (equitable) distribution of power, authority and opportunity.
Curzon: I sort of take your point when you say: “when you modify a language in ways that alienates you from the majority of those speaking it, you open up a can of worms that is destined to result in disaster.” But we’re pointing out that, even though numbers are hard to be certain about on this, non-native English speakers outnumber native speakers by around three to one on some estimates. And you’re right – that’s a big challenge. But we can’t pretend that the majority of people speak one kind of English – the forms taken on reflect cultural, political and economic aspirations of those using it. I think we’re arguing that we shouldn’t presume that the teaching of a single kind of English – and I know you aren’t advocating that here – will be enough to reflect those uses and aspirations. The challenges of communication etc you all outline are absolutely still prescient challenges – but we’re just pointing out that English as a lingua franca is different to a single means for communication, and certainly isn’t something that does or should be faithful to British, American or other native versions (again, I know you aren’t suggesting it should be).
Incidentally, evidence would probably suggest that hybrid forms do not necessarily narrow communicative potential because they don’t replace other languages – it’s not necessarily a zero-sum game. That relates to your second point – because it would be more likely to if we did advocate teaching immigrants Hinglish or Singlish. We don’t, anywhere – that is an invention by journalists. An amusing one, I have to admit, for the purposes of their story, but not one taken from our argument. It’s a stupid idea, as you rightfully note.
MrICBM and Lexington Green – I completely agree with you both. But in fairness they aren’t criticisms of the report – As You Like It certainly does not build a framework to help create ghetto constituencies. That would, as you both point out, mean we were falling into some horrid traps around patronising and damaging identity politics.
Maybe we’re still nitwits at Demos – not true, I would suggest! – but Sam and I should be seriously off the hook for most of the stuff written about As You Like It. Apologies that the comment got so long – hopefully it made sense but do forgive any Sunday morning haziness!
You can download the (actual…) report here
You can leave comments on the publication page – be good to hear your thoughts. Cheers.
Pete
Dan tdaxp added these pithy words on 06 May 07 at 6:31 pmChinglish/hinglish/etcglish are best seen as loyalty militias for the English language—useful when in foreign territory, but damaging if their system is imported back to the homeland.
Michael added these pithy words on 07 May 07 at 4:47 pmscratches head Times like this, I remember a quote I recently saw attributed to Napoleon “Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence.”
You don’t have to be playing with your Junior Macchievelli kit to think this is a good idea, you just have to be a blind ideologue looking for a shortcut around the challenges of language education.
Brian added these pithy words on 08 May 07 at 5:05 amThis is nonsense. Speaking as a native Texan with a Hispanic girlfriend and numerous friends bilingual in English and Spanish, Spanglish as a phenomenon is something that is spoken mainly in the home by people who are already bilingual. Teaching it would be a waste of time and would, as already noted by others, hinder the ability of people taught the pidgin to communicate with people in other areas where the language is spoken. Furthermore, you would be isolated, unable for instance to get your news from either Univision or from CNN.
Chief Wiggim added these pithy words on 09 May 07 at 1:34 pmIn 1996, there was an actual proposal by the Oakland (California) school board to teach in Ebonics to black students:
The board’s controversial resolution not only recognized black English as a distinct language but also called for public money for bilingual education.
“Cooler heads prevailed.”http://www.cnn.com/US/9612/30/ebonics/index.html
The district (later) said it would not teach Ebonics in place of standard English, and would not try to classify Ebonics-speaking students as bilingual in order to obtain federal funds.
SPEAK / ADD YOUR COMMENT
Comments are moderated.
