Global English Models, Theories and Studies Flashcards
Kachru’s Circle Model
Braj Kachru’s Circle Model is a sociolinguistic framework that categorizes English into three concentric circles, each representing a different domain of use and proficiency. The model was developed by linguist Braj Kachru to describe the global distribution and functional differentiation of English.
Inner Circle
Description: The Inner Circle refers to native English-speaking countries where English is the primary language. This circle includes countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
Use: In the Inner Circle, English is the mother tongue, and it serves as the official language in various domains, including education, government, media, and everyday communication.
Outer Circle
Description: The Outer Circle comprises countries where English has a significant historical and institutional presence, and it is often used as a second language. These countries may have a legacy of British colonial rule or historical contact with English-speaking communities.
Use: In the Outer Circle, English functions as a second language and is used in education, administration, and as a means of interethnic communication. English may also have official status alongside other languages.
Expanding Circle
Description: The Expanding Circle encompasses countries where English is learned as a foreign language. These countries typically do not have a colonial history with English-speaking nations but recognize the practical importance of English for international communication.
Use: In the Expanding Circle, English is often taught in schools and universities and may be used in specific domains such as business, science, and technology. Proficiency levels vary, and English serves as a global lingua franca in international contexts.
Advantages of Kachru’s Circle Model
- The Circle Model is not only geographical but also reflects sociolinguistic and historical factors.
- Kachru’s framework recognizes the diversity of English use and the varying degrees of proficiency and ownership of the language in different parts of the world.
- It challenges the notion that the Inner Circle varieties are the only legitimate or “correct” forms of English and acknowledges the legitimacy of other English varieties.
The model has been influential in shaping discussions about World Englishes and the globalization of English. It highlights the dynamic and evolving nature of the English language, acknowledging its multiple roles and forms in different sociolinguistic contexts.
Canagarajah criticism of Kachru’s circles
Questioned the validity of Kachru’s circles as migration and modern technology have led to the ‘leaking’ of clearly defined circles.
Schneider’s Stages
Peter Trudgill, a sociolinguist, introduced the concept of “Schneider’s Stages” in his book “New Zealand English: its Origins and Evolution.” In this framework, Trudgill outlines five stages of historical development for the varieties of English that have emerged around the world. While it’s not directly attributed to Schneider, it’s often associated with Trudgill’s work.
stage 1
Foundation
The foundation stage involves the initial settlement of English-speaking populations in new territories. During this stage, colonizers establish contact with indigenous populations and other immigrant groups, leading to the emergence of early varieties of English characterized by linguistic diversity and contact-induced language change.
Stage 2
Exonormative Stabilisation
In the second stage, English speakers strive to maintain linguistic ties with the colonial or metropolitan center. This often involves attempts to emulate the linguistic norms and standards of the colonial power, resulting in the adoption of prestigious or standardized varieties of English.
Stage 3
Nativisation
Nativization marks the third stage, during which local English varieties begin to diverge from the norms of the colonial center. Speakers adapt and modify English to suit local linguistic, cultural, and social contexts, leading to the emergence of distinct regional or national varieties. Nativization involves processes of linguistic innovation, adaptation, and hybridization, as well as the incorporation of elements from other languages and dialects.
Stage 4
Endonormative Stabilisation
Endonormative stabilization occurs in the fourth stage, as local English varieties become more established and standardized within their respective communities. Speakers develop their own linguistic norms and standards, which may diverge from those of the colonial center or other varieties of English. Endonormative stabilization involves the codification and institutionalization of local linguistic features, as well as efforts to promote linguistic pride and identity.
stage 5
Differentiation
The fifth and final stage, differentiation, involves the ongoing diversification and specialization of local English varieties. Speakers may continue to innovate and adapt their language in response to internal and external pressures, leading to the development of subvarieties, dialects, and registers within broader linguistic communities. Differentiation reflects the dynamic and evolving nature of language, as well as the diverse sociocultural and historical contexts in which English is spoken around the world.
Substratum Theory
William Labov
The way that different forms of languages come into contact with English. These create imperfections that is then passed down generationally, in turn, altering language forms.
Substratum theory is a linguistic concept that explains how a language can influence another language that replaces it or coexists with it in a multilingual setting. This influence typically arises from the language of a population that has been displaced or conquered, leading to the adoption of certain features, vocabulary, or structures into the dominant language. This theory highlights how historical language contact situations can shape the evolution of languages over time.
- Substratum theory emphasizes the role of the displaced language in influencing the lexicon and grammar of the dominant language after contact.
- The theory often applies in contexts like colonialism, where indigenous languages have left traces in the colonizers’ languages.
- Examples of substratum influence can be found in various regions, such as Caribbean English Creoles reflecting West African languages.
- Substratum theory helps explain why certain linguistic features persist even after a community shifts to a new dominant language.
- The interplay between substrate and superstrate languages showcases the dynamic nature of language evolution through contact.
Substratum theory explains that when one language displaces another due to factors like colonization or conquest, elements from the displaced language can still persist within the new dominant language. This happens because speakers may retain certain vocabulary, grammatical structures, or pronunciation traits from their original language. Over time, these features become integrated into the dominant language, creating a blend that reflects both linguistic heritages.
Substratum theory is closely linked to the emergence of pidgins and creoles as they often arise in situations involving multiple languages due to contact. When groups with different native languages need to communicate, a simplified form emerges (pidgin), which may later evolve into a more complex language (creole) when it becomes nativized. The original languages involved serve as substrates and contribute vocabulary and grammatical influences to these new languages, illustrating how substratum elements can persist even in entirely new linguistic forms.
Substratum theory provides valuable insights into how historical events such as migration, conquest, and colonization shape languages over time. By examining how displaced languages influence dominant languages, linguists can trace patterns of linguistic change and development that reflect social and cultural shifts. The recognition of substratum influences also highlights the complexity of linguistic identities and reinforces the idea that no language exists in isolation but rather evolves through continuous contact with others.
Superstrate: A superstrate refers to a language that exerts influence on another language, typically due to the dominance of the speakers of the superstrate language over those of the substrate language.
The Wave Model
Johnnes Schmidt
the wave model or wave theory is a model of language change in which a new language feature (innovation) or a new combination of language features spreads from its region of origin, affecting a gradually expanding cluster of dialects. The theory was intended as a substitute for the tree model, which did not seem to be able to explain the existence of some features in some languages. by descent from a proto language.
The wave theory challenges the family tree theory. The wave theory holds that within the original common language before differentiation, there are dialect differences, and the characteristics of these different dialects will spread to all directions like waves, so that different languages have some of the same characteristics; languages after differentiation Nor do they develop in a vacuum, and they also affect each other.
Sharma and Sankaran’s investigation of Punjabi speaking Indians in 2011
Sharma and Sankaran’s aim
- to investigate the english of 3 age groups of Punjabi speaking Indians in West London
Sharma and Sankaran’s sample
- 3 age groups of punjabi speaking indians in west london
- oldest group= first generation immigrants who arrived as adults from 1950s onwards
- second and third groups= children of immigrants
Sharma and Sankaran’s findings
- older gen= seemed to vary forms used considerably, 100% Indian when talking to maid to 100% British when talking to Cockney mechanic
- far less variation in younger gen speakers
explaining sharma and sankaran’s findings
- older gen faced more hostile, anti-immigrant community and therefore under more pressure to integrate linguistically
- younger gen in more mixed neighbourhoods but with British Asians in a majority, less need to switch between speech styles to the same extent
