The focus of research on Singapore English has traditionally been on its structural features, while the relationship between English and other official languages of the Republic within the individual speaker has attracted much less interest, and comparatively little empirical data exist on the actual linguistic ecology of individual Singaporeans. The present study explores the results of detailed language background questionnaires eliciting the linguistic and sociological background of 300 Singaporean university and polytechnic students. The questionnaires assess not only how many languages a speaker is proficient in, but also when and how they acquired each language, how often and in which contexts speakers make use of which language, as well as their attitudes to different languages. The data depict a fine‐grained picture of language use among Singaporean students that challenges the notion of the typical multilingual Singaporean. On the whole, students exhibit bilingual or trilingual identities and report positive attitudes towards both English and their respective mother tongue. Attitudes towards Singapore Colloquial English (Singlish) are also generally positive, especially among university students, as Singlish evidently continues to serve as an important marker of Singaporean identity.
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has witnessed an unprecedented economic and cultural development since its foundation in 1971. Foreign labor and investment play a central role in this development, yielding a sharp imbalance between the Emirati and the foreign population. A population of no less than 85 per cent of highly transient foreigners strongly impacts the local linguistic landscape, with many languages competing in the public sphere. English occupies a special role in this multilingual texture, as it is used as a foreign language, a second language, and a lingua franca. It occurs in its standardized varieties, but also in several non‐standard forms, as foreign labor is recruited from places formerly under British or American influence. Based on a new questionnaire study of 692 university students, we explore the tension between English and Arabic, the prominence of English, the increasing use of English as a home language, and the emergence of a new variety of English: ‘Gulf English’.
SUMMARY Based on some well-established insights into the historical development of English and on a broad typological survey of the relevant domain, an analysis of the development of reflexive anaphors is provided, which raises and answers a number of new questions. The traditional assumption that reflexive anaphors in English developed as a result of combining personal pronouns with the intensifier self is put on solid foundations by a semantic analysis of intensifiers which makes such a development plausible. We argue that the development of complex reflexives in English is also semantically motivated insofar as it started in the context of “unexpected co-reference”, i.e. in the object position of other-directed predicates. The further propagation of this development is in complete harmony with some well-known typological hierarchies: 3rd person > 1st/2nd person; direct object > indirect object; argument > adjunct. Our analysis, which assigns the central role in the development and renovation of reflexive anaphors to intensifiers, also throws some interesting light on the form, meaning and distribution of anaphors, intensifiers and so-called ‘locally-free reflexives’ in Modern English, as well as on some theoretical controversies. RÉSUMÉ Nous allons tenter une analyse de l’évolution historique des pronoms réfléchis en anglais sur la base de quelques faits historiques connus ainsi que sur celle d’une vaste enquête typologique dans le domaine en question. Dans le cadre de cette analyse des questions d’un genre nouveau seront posées auxquelles nous allons essayer de répondre. L’opinion fréquemment énoncée selon laquelle les pronoms réfléchis se développeraient à partir d’une fusion de pronoms personnels et d’intensificateurs (ae. self) reçoit une base solide par une analyse sémantique des intensificateurs qui rend plausible une telle évolution. Le développement des pronoms réfléchis complexes en anglais est motivé selon nous sémantiquement entre autres par le fait que l’on observe ce phénomène d’abord dans le contexte d’une ‘co-référence inattendue’, c’est-à-dire dans les positions d’objets de ‘außengerichteter Prädikate’. La propagation ultérieure de cette innovation correspond aux prévisions d’hiérarchies typologiques connues: 3e pers. > 1ère/2e pers.; c.o.d. > c.o.i.; actant > circonstant. Notre analyse, qui attribue le rôle principal aux intensificateurs quant au développement et à l’innovation de la réfléxivité, jette une lumière différente sur quelques controverses théoriques ainsi que sur les propriétés des pronoms réfléchis, les intensificateurs et les soi-disant pronoms ‘réfléchis localement libres’ (réfléchis indirect). ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Auf der Grundlage von bekannten historischen Fakten sowie einer breit angelegten typologischen Bestandsaufnahme in dem relevanten Bereich wird eine Analyse der historischen Entwicklung von Reflexivpronomina im Englischen entwickelt, die neue Fragen stellt und beantwortet. Die häufig geäußerte Auffassung, daß sich Reflexiva durch eine Fusion von Personalpronomina und Intensifikatoren (dt. selbst; ae. self) entwickelten, erhält eine solide Fundierung durch eine semantische Analyse von Intensifikatoren, die eine solche Entwicklung plausibel macht. Die Entwicklung von komplexen Reflexiva im Englischen ist unserer Auffassung nach auch insofern semantisch motiviert, als zunächst im Kontext von “unerwarteter Ko-referenz”, d.h. in Objektpositionen von außengerichteten Prädikaten zu beobachten ist. Die weitere Verbreitung dieser Innovation entspricht den Voraussagen von bekannten typologischen Hierarchien: 3. Person > 1./2. Person; direktes Objekt > indirektes Objekt; Argument > Adjunkt. Unsere Analyse, die den Intensifikatoren die zentrale Rolle in der Entwicklung und Erneuerung von Reflexivität zuweist, wirft auch neues Licht auf die Eigenschaften von Reflexipronomina, Intensifikatoren und die sog. ‘lokal freien Reflexiva’ im heutigen Englisch, ebenso wie auf einige theoretische Kontroversen.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.