7/28/2019 English 52

1/3

Since the 1980s, the notion of 'standard'has come to the fore in public debateabout the English language. At nationallevel, in several countries (but especiallyin the UK), the concern has focused onthe devising of an acceptable nationalcurriculum for English in primary andsecondary education.

At international level, the focus hasbeen on the question of which nationalstandards to use in teaching English as aforeign language. In both contexts,however, there is a need for clear understanding about what Standard English (SE)actually is. Disentangling the issues isbest done first at national level, where theissues have been around a long time, andare reasonably well understood. From thedozens of definitions available in theliterature on English, we may extract fiveessential characteristics.Defining Standard English SE is a variety of English - adistinctive combination of

linguistic features with a particularrole to play. Some people call it a'dialect' of English - and so it is,but of a rather special kind, for ithas no local base. There is nothingin the grammar and vocabulary ofa piece of SE to tell us which partof a country it comes from. The linguistic features of SE arechiefly matters of grammar,vocabulary and orthography(spelling and punctuation). It isimportant to note that SE is not amatter of pronunciation: SE isspoken in a wide variety of accents(including, of course, any prestigeaccent a country may have, such asBritish Received Pronunciation).

SE is the variety of English whichcarries most prestige within acountry. 'Prestige' is a socialconcept, whereby some peoplehave high standing in the eyes ofothers, whether this derives fromsocial class, material success,political strength, popular acclaim,or educational background. TheEnglish that these people choose touse will, by this very fact, becomethe standard within their

Is there aWorld Standard

English?David Crystalinvestigates.

community. In the words of oneUS linguist, SE is 'the Englishused by the powerful' (JamesSledd).

The prestige attached to SE isrecognised by adult members ofthe community, and this motivatesthem to recommend SE as adesirable educational target. It isthe variety which is used as thenorm of communication by thecommunity's leading institutions,such as its government, law courts,and media. It is therefore thevariety which is likely to be themost widely disseminated amongthe public. It will, accordingly, bewidely understood - though not byeveryone, and with varying comprehension of some of its features(thus motivating the demands ofthe 'plain English' campaigns). Itmayor may not be liked. Although SE is widely understood,it is not widely produced. Only aminority of people within acountry (e.g. radio newscasters)actually use it when they talk.Most people speak a variety ofregional English, or an admixtureof standard and regional Englishes,and reserve such labels as 'BBCEnglish' or 'the Queen's English'for what they perceive to be a

'pure' SE. Similarly, when theywrite - itself a minority activity the consistent use of SE is requiredonly in certain tasks (such as aletter to a newspaper, but notnecessarily to a close friend).More than anywhere else, SE is tobe found in print.On this basis, we may define the

Standard English of an English-speakingcountry as a minority variety (identifiedchiefly by its vocabulary, grammar, andorthography) which carries most prestigeand is most widely understood.World Standard English?If we read the newspapers or listen to thenewscasters around the English-speakingworld, we will quickly develop theimpression that there is a World StandardEnglish (WSE), acting as a stronglyunifying force among the vast range ofvariation which exists. However, a totallyuniform, regionally neutral, andunarguably prestigious variety does not yetexist worldwide.

Each country where English is afirst language is aware of itslinguistic identity, and is anxiousto preserve it from the influence ofothers. New Zealanders do notwant to be Australians; Canadiansdo not want to be 'Americans' , andAmericanism is perceived as adanger signal by usage guardianseverywhere (except in the USA). All other countries can be groupedinto those which follow AmericanEnglish, those which followBritish English, and those (such asCanada) where there is a mixtureof influences. One of the mostnoticeable features of this dividedusage is spelling. In certaindomains, such as computing andmedicine, US spellings arebecoming increasingly widespread(program, disk, pediatrics), but weare a long way from uniformity.

A great deal of lexical distinctiveness can be observed in thespecialised terms of local politics,business, culture and naturalhistory, and in the 'domestic'columns of national newspapers(such as Want Ads). There is alsoa certain amount of grammaticaldistinctiveness, especially betweenUS and UK English . The notion of a 'standard pronunciation' is useful in the international setting of English as a second orforeign language, but here toothere is more than one teachingmodel - chiefly, British ReceivedPronunciation and US GeneralAmerican.

Would it be more prestigious for areport from an international body to be inBritish or American spelling?

7/28/2019 English 52

2/3

The question of prestige is noteasy to determine, at an international level, because of thedifferent national histories whichcoexist. Would it be moreprestigious for a report from aninternational body to appear inBritish or American spelling?Should it refer to cars orautomobiles? What image do itsauthors wish to convey? Decisionsabout such matters are made ininnumerable contexts every day. Itwill take time before the worldsees a consensus, and only timewill tell whether this consensuswill display the domination of apresent-day variety of English(such as American English),develop a new, composite variety(as in the kind of Englishcommonly heard in the corridorsof power of the EuropeanCommunity, and sometimes called'Euro-English'), or create anentirely fresh variety, based on aset of assumptions about thoseaspects of English which are mostuseful for international purposes(as in the proposal in the early1980s to develop a 'nuclear' kindof English which would includeonly the most communicativefeatures of grammar andvocabulary).It is, accordingly, difficult to know

what to expect, when a language developsa worldwide presence to the extent thatEnglish has. There are no precedents forsuch a geographical spread or for so manyspeakers. Moreover, the speed at which ithas all happened is unprecedented:although the history of world English canbe traced back 400 years, the currentgrowth spurt in the language has a historyof less than 40 years. There has neverbeen such an increase in independentstates (UN membership has more thandoubled since 1960) nor such a growth inworld population (from 2.5 thousandmillion in 1950 to 5.6 thousand million in1994). How will English fare (how wouldany language fare?), faced with suchresponsibilities and having to respond tosuch pressures?The Conflict between Internationalismand IdentityThe examples above suggest that there aretwo chief issues - of internationalism andof identity. The problem is that theseconflict. In the former case, a nation looksout from itself at the world as a whole, andtries to define its needs in relation to thatworld. In the latter case, a nation lookswithin itself at the structure of its societyand the psychology of its people, and triesto define its needs in relation to its senseof national identity. Correspondinglinguistic issues automatically arise .

Internationalism implies intelligibility. If the reason for any nationwishing to promote English is togive it access to what the broaderEnglish-speaking world has tooffer, then it is crucial for itspeople to be able to understand theEnglish of that world, and to beunderstood in their turn. In short,internationalism demands anagreed standard - in grammar,vocabulary, spelling, pronunciation, and conventions of use - andpromotes the notion of a WorldStandard English.

Identity implies individuality. If anation wishes to preserve itsuniqueness or to establish itspresence, and to avoid being ananonymous ingredient in a culturalmelting-pot, then it must search forways of expressing its differencefrom the rest of the world. Flags,uniforms, and other such symbolswill have their place, but nothingwill be so naturally and universallypresent as a national language - or,if there is none, a national varietyof an international language. Inshort, in the context of English,identity demands linguistic distinctiveness - in grammar, vocabulary,spelling, pronunciation, orconventions or language use - andpromotes the notion of a diverseset of Regional StandardEnglishes.The Drive for Intelligibility

The pressure for international intelligibility is very strong, and may by now beunstoppable. International travel, satellitebroadcasting, world press and television,world stock markets, multinational corporations, intergovernmental agencies, andmany other institutions have guaranteed asituation of daily contact for hundreds ofmillions of English speakers who togetherrepresent every major variety. Historicalloyalties (e.g. to Britain) have been largelyreplaced by pragmatic, utilitarianreasoning. If using British English cansell goods and services, then let BritishEnglish be used. If it needs AmericanEnglish, then so be it. And let either orothers by employed as occasion demands.It is not surprising, in such a climate, tofind a core of English grammar,vocabulary and orthography already inwidespread use, at least in print. There is,however, still some way to go before theworld arrives at a level of uniform usagewhich will guarantee international intelligibi~ity at levels comparable to thosefound intranationally. Breakdowns incommunication due to differences inidiom, vocabu lary, or grammar arecommon enough, even between Britishand American English, and differences inregional accent can be devastating.

The Drive for IdentityThe pressure to foster national identity isalso very strong, and the signs are thatdivergence is increasing. The 1990s hasseen no reduction in the number ofconflicts which involve regions trying toestablish their independence, and oneconsequence of successful nationalism isthe early adoption of speech formsmarking a linguistic distance between thenew nation and its colonial antecedents.Two local factors readily foster thisdistancing: It is inevitable, first of all, that

when English is in close contactwith other languages, it will adoptsome of the characteristics of thoselanguages, especially theirvocabulary and prosody. Thelatter, in particular, can be a majorsource of local variety identity, asis heard in the distinctive stresstime rhythm of Indian orCaribbean English, or the risingintonations of Australian and NewZealand English.

Secondly, the fact that English isfound all over the world meansthat it will be used to express anunparalleled range of fauna, flora,and cultural features. EachEnglish-speaking country willaccordingly find itself withthousands of words to express itslocal character. Whether we viewthese words as part of a worldstandard or a regional standard willdepend chiefly on the extent towhich the world at large isinterested in the notions theyexpress. Thus, in South AfricanEnglish apartheid and impala havebecome part of the general Englishvocabulary, whereas dorp ('smalltown or village') and bredie ('typeof stew') have not. The wordsmost resistant to world standardisation will be those which alreadyhave equivalents in StandardBritish or American English, suchas outwith (Scots, 'outside') orgodown (Indian, 'warehouse').There may be a natural balance which

the language will eventually achieve. Anationalistic climate may cause a varietyto move in a particular direction awayfrom its source standard, but may then bepulled back when moderates within thecommunity find it increasingly difficult tounderstand what is being said. Anexample of this actually happening wasreported in 1985 by Alan Maley, at thetime the British Council Representative inSouth India:Mrs Indira Gandhi was prompted to

write to her Ministry of Education not solong ago to complain of falling standardsof English in India, reportedly afterattending an international meeting at

7/28/2019 English 52

3/3

what is standard english?

which she had been unable to understand the contribution of the Indian delegate (speaking inEnglish).

The features of Indian English which gave MrsGandhi a problem are well-recognised. Whetherher reaction was representative and influentialremains to be seen.The future of EnglishThere is no linguistic subject more prone toemotional rhetoric or wild exaggeration that thefuture of the English language. Heights ofoptimism complete with depths of pessimism.Among the optimists we may cite the Germanphilologist Jakob Grimm, who addressed the pointin a lecture published in 1852:"Of all modem languages, not one has acquiredsuch great strengths and vigour as the English ...(it) may be called justly a LANGUAGE OF THEWORLD and seems, like the English nation, to bedestined to reign in future with still more extensivesway over all parts of the globe."

In the late Victorian period, estimates of thenumbers of mother-tongue English speakers livinga century thereafter (i.e. today) often reachedastronomical heights. One writer, in an issue ofThe Phonetic Journal (13 September 1873)calculated (with hopeful precision) that by the year2000 this total would be 1,837,286,153 - anestimate which, with the benefit of hindsight, canbe seen to be in error by a factor of six. Suchtotals were commonplace in the heady atmospherewhich accompanied the climax of British andAmerican colonial expansion.

By contrast, there were the pessimists,predicting that within a century the Englishlanguage would be in fragments. Here we maycite the British philologist Henry Sweet, whowrote in 1877:

" ... by that time (a century hence) England,America, and Australia will be speaking mutuallyunintelligible languages, owing to theirindependent changes of pronunciation."

The same point had been made nearly a centurybefore by Noah Webster, in his Dissertations onthe English Language (1789). Webster though thatsuch a development would be 'necessary andunavoidable', and would result in 'a language inNorth America, as different from the futurelanguage of England, as the modem Dutch, Danishand Swedish are from the German, or from oneanother'. From Webster's pro-American point ofview, of course, this would not have been such abad thing.

Neither Grimm nor Sweet proved to be accurateprophets. English has indeed become a worldlanguage, but it is by no means everywhere and itis by no means always welcome. And English hasindeed developed many spoken varieties, but theseare by no means mutually unintelligible. Perhapsthe only safe generalisation to be made is thatpredictions about the future of English have a habitof being wrong.

Professor David Crystal, author, lecturer,broadcaster on language and linguistics, is also aneditor of reference books. He is author of AnEncyclopedic Dictionary of Language andLanguages and editor of the Cambridge ConciseEncyclopedia. He is a member of the ESU'sEnglish Language Committee .