I really do agree that code-switching is the key here; First of all, Singlish honestly does sound uncouth. It doesn't sound elegant or refined, but that's not the point here.
It's a mixture of languages that only locals would understand, so it can be labeled as a 'culture' or defining feature.
'We shouldn't be ashamed of who we are- This is our identity and the unique way in which we speak. Therefore, we must embrace it.'
I guess you do make sense there, that a mixture of languages is identity and a defining feature. It 'bridges' us but that too limits the understanding of Singlish to just between locals. Take this out of a Singaporean context, and all of a sudden you get the consequences of not using 'standard and correct' English. In professional settings, foreigners would not be able to understand you. They'd cap a label upon you for not being able to use a mother-taught language properly, and for justifying it as a 'culture' and newly-formed language. It's the same logic as any other non-English speaking individual who learns English: A person from France would use common-place French words that are globally renowned when talking to people, but that's because most people know what 'merci' is. However, only Singaporeans know what the local cuss words are, and the different connotations associated with the differing tones. Take that understanding driven into us through the context of having lived here all our lives away, and people misunderstand us or, worse of all, fail to understand.
It becomes a 'language barrier', if you'll call it that.
Besides, the point of learning one language is to master it and be able to converse through it. By taking what a language originally is and converting it to our own 'version' of it is, from one perspective, a lazy way of saying 'we speak it badly, therefore we translate it into what only we can understand.' If that case, does it not make Singlish a dialect? Only people who have learned it and grew up speaking it in a certain context can understand it.
And this has nothing to do with the Singaporean accent either- it's about the usage of the English language itself.
Point is, we seem to have changed the usage of many dialects (in the past before Singapore became this developed) to one, country-specific dialect. Instead of making us a country that is 'bilingual' and skilled in both Mandarin and English, we seem only to have switched from speaking many differing dialects to one dialect.
Where then is the change in all of Singapore's history is what I'm saying.
Thus, if English is recognized for inter-racial communication for being the most common language worldwide, we have failed to fulfill the function of making it the main language here, by changing it to Singlish.
From another perspective, you could say that since English was formally a 'created' language as is with anything else, it is a conservative view to hold onto, that Singlish can't be recognized as an official language. However, this goes back to the entire concept of 'practicality', that is the fact that English is supposedly for easy communication between people of different ethnicities and mother languages.
Furthermore, if we take United States as an example- a country that has many immigrants alike to Singapore- could you argue the same point that incorporating different dialects and languages into a broad category of a 'defining feature' helps create a culture that is the US? In the first place, such a thing does not exist in the US. Perhaps it could be seen as societal segregation and a lack of interracial harmony that is believed to exist in Singapore, but my opinion is that it actually doesn't: English is the main language there and they will use it properly and correctly.
Maybe this makes it a rigid way of looking at things, but wouldn't you agree that not everything can be 'flexible'? Rules have to be; certain other stuffs- not really.
This video says that we 'can' speak standard English, but choose not to. Entertainers such as the interviewed one here chooses to speak Singlish because he believes it unites and defines us.
Honestly, there is nothing wrong with that, and I don't think that entertainers should stop at all. This has nothing to do with national pride. After all, would you really stand up to the point that one language alone showcases a country's individuality and uniqueness? There's so much more to pride and identity than that, don't you think?
There is nothing to be ashamed of in speaking Singlish. If we choose to think of it as culture, then so be it.
The only thing left to do is to code-switch: both for communicating clearly with people who don't know Singlish, and for the 'bridging' factor that is the widely-accepted view here.
But I agree that it shouldn't be made an official language; it defies the function of English in the first place, and it doesn't really encompass the Singaporean identity.
.
But then again, maybe it does show our identity..
(The thing is that my stand changes regularly ><)
A dialect is basically a language, so my flow of thought is flawed. It's more of the idea behind it that I'm trying to convey, I suppose.
If it's something only Singaporeans do, then it has the same value of 'kiasuism'. What makes it an uncomfortable thing to accept is the fact that we seem to willingly embrace whatever new things we're able to churn out, and add it to the ever-growing list of what makes a Singaporean Singaporean.
It almost makes it a capping of labels onto anything and everything, and explaining the justification behind it all as the vague concept of 'individuality'. (I need more synonyms)
That can be viewed both ways: Excuses, or unique features.
Which is it, exactly?
No comments:
Post a Comment