Zoya Proshina The abc and Controversies of World Englishes ббк 81
|
|  Yüklə 2.18 Mb.
|
Fossilized Interlanguage vs Dynamic Lectal ClineКлючевые слова: шкала билингвизма, речевой континуум, лектальный континуум, интеръязык, акролект, мезолект, базилект, промежуточная система, приблизительная система, застывшая система, фоссилизация, изучаемый язык, перенос языкового явления, сверхобобщение, подвариант, креольский язык, пиджин. A non-native speaker’s English is a cline as far as its development and functional use are concerned. It is a cline from a beginner’s level to a proficient one. There is a notion of interlanguage in a psycholinguistic theory of second language acquisition and foreign language learning. The term “interlingual identifications” was first mentioned in Uriel Weinreich (1953: 7) in regard to a language contact situation. It was further assumed by Larry Selinker as “a psychological structure” that “is latent in the brain, activated when one attempts to learn a second language” (Selinker (1974: 196). Interlanguage (IL) is defined as “the type of language produced by second- and foreign-language learners who are in the process of learning a language” (Richards, Platt & Platt 1993: 186). It is a psycholinguistic phenomenon, as “(i)ntelanguage refers to the knowledge of the L2 in the speaker’s mind” (Cook 1999: 190). Selinker considers it to be a separate intermediate linguistic system that is formed in-between the mother tongue and the target language when a learner tries to achieve a native-speaker competence. Since a non-native speaker will never become a native speaker, interlanguage is an approximative system fossilized at a certain stage. Fossilization is “regular reappearance or re-emergence in IL productive performance of linguistic structures which are thought to be eradicated” (Selinker 1974: 198). In other words, it is regular occurrence of permanent errors in a learner’s speech resulting from “imperfect learning” (Kachru Y & Nelson C. 2006: 85). These errors are caused by five different mechanisms:
Interlanguage was developed as a psycholinguistic phenomenon and since this concept does not deal with sociocultural perspective (Kachru Y. 1994: 798), it is not applied to the WE theory. This difference between ‘interlanguage’ and “World Englishes” was emphasized by Alan Davies (1998) who rejected the equation of the terms on the ground that an interlanguage accounts for individual language development and variation and World English “deals with societal varieties” (Davies 1998: 447). Interlanguange is idiosyncratic, not social or typical. “Among the unfortunate consequences of the popularity of interlanguage studies among EFL/ESL teachers (important though Interlanguage may be as a concept in psycholinguistics) have been the unquestioned assumptions that (1) all deviations from an adult norm are deviations from a single NS norm, and (2) all interlanguages, or all individuals and groups, are points on a path toward a single, universal native-speaker norm. Interlanguage theory was originally developed in the context of the psychological conditions of the individual: social conditions and processes were of a minor relevance.” (Strevens 1982: 45) The sociolinguistic context provides a bilingual cline both in terms of proficiency in English and in its functional uses (Kachru B. 1983: 77). This cline is a lectal continuum, which is not necessarily developmental but may be functional. Each variety of English includes sub-varieties that have functional values. These subvarieties making up a continuum are basilect, mesolect, and acrolect. The terms were introduced by Stewart (1965) who described a post-creole continuum. Later, linguists applied these terms to a speech continuum when referring to varying levels of proficiency in a variety of English. The acrolect is a sub-variety whose users are characterized by high level of English proficiency. It is sometimes labeled ‘edulect’ (< education + lect) (Bautista & Gonsalez 2006: 132) as it is the lect of educated users from the Outer and Expanding Circles. It is based on written standards and functions in formal situations. The basilect is the lowest point of the speech continuum. It is the sub-variety of users with low levels of education and is outstandingly marked by language transfer from the vernacular. The mesolect is the sub-variety in between. It is based on the communicative norm of spoken speech and is used by people that have incomplete education or by educated people in informal situations (Platt & Weber 1980: 274). The following diagram shows lectal variations of world Englishes and their fluidity: ACROLECT
MESOLECT
BASILECT Basilect can be considered pidgin English as it meets the following criteria:
Depending on the social context, users of this or that variety can switch from one lectal sub-variety to another. For example, an educated Singaporean can use an acrolect in his/her workplace, a mesolect at home, and a basilect (Singlish) at the market. Questions to discuss: 37. Why is interlanguage a psychological phenomenon rather than sociolinguistic one? 38. What is fossilization? 39. Why is interlanguage fossilized while Kachru’s lectal cline is dynamic? 40. Why is it possible to speak about lects as a social phenomenon? Can they also be considered an individual issue? 41. Observe your classmates speaking, mark their errors and try to analyze mechanisms of their errors. 42. Find English equivalents to the Russian key words stated before the text of the chapter. Discuss the meaning of the terms. |