Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T17:44:32.280Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Structural nativization, typology and complexity: noun phrase structures in British, Kenyan and Singaporean English

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 February 2014

THOMAS BRUNNER
THOMAS BRUNNER*
Affiliation:
Department of English and American Studies, University of Regensburg, 93040 Regensburg, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two much-cited explanations for linguistic innovations in varieties of New Englishes are cross-linguistic influence (see Gut 2011) and simplification (see Schneider 2007: 82). Using these two notions as starting points, the present study seeks to detect effects of structural nativization in noun phrase (NP) modification in two varieties of English whose substrate languages differ strongly from a typological point of view: Singaporean and Kenyan English. The results yielded by the comparison of random samples extracted from the relevant components of the International Corpus of English in the first part of the study show striking correspondences between the preferred NP structures in the varieties at hand and NP structures in the local languages concerned, which, in the light of Mufwene's (2001, 2008) ecological theory of language change, can be interpreted as effects of language contact. The second part of the study shows that the NPs from the three varieties also differ in terms of variables which can be viewed as measures of NP complexity. What is more, the different degrees of complexity found in the samples correspond closely to predictions about the evolutionary status of the varieties at hand made by Schneider's (2007) Dynamic Model.

Type
Research Article
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 23 - 48
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ansaldo, Umberto. 2009a. The Asian typology of English: Theoretical and methodological considerations. English World-Wide: A Journal of Varieties of English 30, 133–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansaldo, Umberto. 2009b. Contact languages: Ecology and evolution in Asia. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bache, Carl. 2000. Essentials of mastering English: A concise grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhiming, Bao. 1998. The sounds of Singapore English. In Foley, Joseph A., Kandiah, Thiru, Zhiming, Bao, Gupta, Anthea F., Alsagoff, Lubna, Lick, Ho Chee, Wee, Lionel, Talib, Ismail S. & Bokhorst-Heng, Wendy (eds.), English in new cultural contexts: Reflections from Singapore, 152–74. Singapore: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zhiming, Bao. 2005. The aspectual system of Singapore English and the systemic substratist explanation. Journal of Linguistics 41, 237–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhiming, Bao & Aye, Khin Khin. 2010. Bazaar Malay topics. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 25, 155–71.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunner, Thomas. Forthcoming. The noun phrase in Kenyan and Singaporean English. PhD dissertation, University of Regensburg.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2006. From usage to grammar: The mind's response to repetition. Language 82, 711–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of Statistics Singapore. 2010. Census of population 2010. www.singstat.gov.sg/pubn/popn/c2010acr.pdf (6 November 2012).Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew. 2011. Noun-modifier order in Africa. In Hieda, Osamu, König, Christa & Nakagawa, Hirosi (eds.), Geographical typology and linguistic areas: With special reference to Africa, 287–311. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garside, Roger & Smith, Nicholas. 1997. A hybrid grammatical tagger: CLAWS 4. In Garside, Roger, Leech, Geoffrey & McEnery, Tony (eds.), Corpus annotation: Linguistic information from computer text corpora, 102–21. London: Longman.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Githiora, Chege. 2008. Kenya: Language and the search for a coherent national identity. In Simpson, Andrew (ed.), Language and national identity in Africa, 235–52. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 2009. Introduction. In Givón, Talmy & Shibatani, Masayoshi (eds.), Syntactic complexity. Diachrony, acquisition, neuro-cognition, evolution, 1–19. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney. 1991. The development of the International Corpus of English. In Aijmer, Karin & Altenberg, Bengt (eds.), English corpus linguistics. Studies in honour of Jan Svartvik, 83–91. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. 2004. HCFA 3.2 – A Program for Hierarchical Configural Frequency Analysis. www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/faculty/stgries/research/overview-research.html#PublicationsEditing (6 November, 2012).Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. 2009. Statistics for linguistics with R: A practical introduction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gut, Ulrike. 2007. First language influence and final consonant clusters in the new Englishes of Singapore and Nigeria. World Englishes 26, 346–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gut, Ulrike. 2011. Studying structural innovations in new English varieties. In Mukherjee, Joybrato & Hundt, Marianne (eds.), Exploring second-language varieties of English and learner Englishes: Bridging a paradigm gap, 101–24. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haan, Pieter de. 1993. Noun phrase structure as an indication of text variety. In Jucker, Andreas H. (ed.), The noun phrase in English: Its structure and variability, 85–106. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin (ed.). 2005. The world atlas of language structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John Alan. 2001. The role of processing principles in explaining language universals. In Haspelmath, Martin, König, Ekkehard, Oesterreicher, Wulf & Raible, Wolfgang (eds.), Language typology and language universals: An iInternational handbook, vol. 20, 360–9. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John Alan. 2009. An efficiency theory of complexity and related phenomena. In Sampson, Geoffrey, Gil, David & Trudgill, Peter (eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable, 252–68. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hudson-Ettle, Diana & Nilsson, Tore. 2002. Orality and noun phrase structure in registers of British and Kenyan English. ICAME Journal 26, 33–61.Google Scholar
Hudson-Ettle, Diana & Schmied, Josef. 1999. Manual to accompany the East African component of the International Corpus of English. Chemnitz: Chemnitz University of Technology.Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. 1992. Social stylistics: Syntactic variation in British newspapers. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kachru, Braj B. 1983. The Indianization of English: The English language in India. Oxford, New York and Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aye, Khin Khin. 2010. Identity and variations in the syntax of Singapore Bazaar Malay noun phrase. International Conference on Minority and Majority: Language, Culture and Identity (ICMM). Malaysian Association of Modern Languages & Centre for Language Studies Universiti Malaysia Sarawak. www.mymla.org/icmm2010papers (6 November 2010).Google Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd & Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2009. World Englishes between simplification and complexification. In Hoffmann, Thomas, Siebers, Lucia & Schneider, Edgar W. (eds.), World Englishes: Problems, properties and prospects, 265–85. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Li, Charles N. & Thompson, Sandra A.. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lim, Lisa. 2004. Sounding Singaporean. In Lisa, Lim & Foley, Joseph A. (eds.), Singapore English: A grammatical description, 19–56. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lim, Lisa. 2007. Mergers and acquisitions: On the ages and origins of Singapore English particles. World Englishes 26, 446–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lim, Lisa. 2010. Peranakan English in Singapore. In Schreier, Daniel, Trudgill, Peter, Schneider, Edgar W. & Williams, Jeffrey P. (eds.), The lesser-known varieties of English: An introduction, 327–47. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lim, Sonny. 1988. Baba Malay: The language of the Straits-born Chinese. Papers in Western Austronesian Linguistics 3, 1–61.Google Scholar
Lu, Xiaofei. 2010. Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 15, 474–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, Stephen & Yip, Virginia. 2011. Cantonese: A comprehensive grammar, 2nd edn. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mesthrie, Rajend. 2012. Deletions, antideletions and complexity theory, with special reference to Black South African and Singaporean Englishes. In Kortmann, Bernd & Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt (eds.), Linguistic complexity: Second language acquisition, indigenization, contact. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Mesthrie, Rajend & Bhatt, Rakesh Mohan 2008. World Englishes: The study of new linguistic varieties. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miestamo, Matti, Sinnemäki, Kaius & Karlsson, Fred. 2008a. Language complexity: Typology, contact, change. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miestamo, Matti, Sinnemäki, Kaius & Karlsson, Fred. 2008b. Introduction. The problem of language complexity. In Miestamo, Matti, Sinnemäki, Kaius & Karlsson, Fred (eds.), Language complexity: Typology, contact, change, viii–xiv. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Jim & Weinert, Regina. 1998. Spontaneous spoken language: Syntax and discourse. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mufwene, Salikoko S. 2001. The ecology of language evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mufwene, Salokoko S. 2008. Language evolution: Contact, competition and change. London: Continuum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, Gerald. 1996. The design of the corpus. In Greenbaum, Sidney (ed.), Comparing English worldwide: The International Corpus of English, 27–35. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortega, Lourdes. 2003. Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics 24, 492–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pakir, Anne Geok-In Sim. 1986. A linguistic investigation of Baba Malay. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
Pakir, Anne Geok-In Sim. 1991. The range and depth of English-knowing bilinguals in Singapore. World Englishes 10, 167–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polomé, Edgar C. Swahili language handbook. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, J.. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team. 2008. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. www.r-project.org (6 November 2012).Google Scholar
Ravid, Dorit & Berman, Ruth. A.. 2010. Developing noun phrase complexity at school age: A text-embedded cross-linguistic analysis. First Language 30, 3–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rescher, Nicholas. 1998. Complexity: A philosophical overview. New Brunswick and London: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
van Rooy, Bertus & Schäfer, Lande. 2003. An evaluation of three POS taggers for the tagging of the Tswana Learner English Corpus. Lancaster University Centre for Computer Corpus Research on Language Technical Papers, 835–44.Google Scholar
Sampson, Geoffrey, Gil, David & Trudgill, Peter. 2009. Language complexity as an evolving variable. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmied, Josef. 2008. East African English (Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania): Phonology. In Mesthrie, Rajend, Kortmann, Bernd & Schneider, Edgar W. (eds.), Varieties of English, vol. 4: Africa, South and Southeast Asia, 150–63. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schneider, Edgar W. 2007. Postcolonial English: Varieties around the world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skandera, Paul. 2003. Drawing a map of Africa. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2009. Typological parameters of intralingual variability: Grammatical analyticity versus syntheticity in varieties of English. Language Variation and Change 21, 319–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Technical report: CLAWS part-of-speech tagger. University Centre for Computer Corpus Research on Language, Lancaster University (UCREL).Google Scholar
Whiteley, Wilfred H. 1974. The classification and distribution of Kenya's African languages. In Whiteley, Wilfred H. (ed.), Language in Kenya, 13–64. Nairobi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar