“Singlish” should not be considered a language. It comprises of many borrowed words from other “proper” languages (Malay), dialects (Hokkien). These words are used because what they represent may not have an equivalent English translation (kiasu?), or are simply preferred to their verbose and inaccurate English counterparts for ease of use and convenience. As it was derived from English, Singlish can be considered a unique proper language, because it has a sound phonology and semantics structure. It has all the makings of a language. But sometimes, for ease of use and convenience, as with how new words were borrowed and used to create a whole new meaning, new grammatical structures have arisen. And by “new”, I mean short, often ignoring the strict rules of grammar in English. These structures only have the key verbs, vocabularies: “sure can one”. (?!) In this aspect, wouldn’t it be more appropriate to label “Singlish” as a pidgin, an imperfect creole? Also, as all other languages have literature to enrich them, does “Singlish” have any? Literature can be considered as a benchmark as to whether a “language” is a true language: only when a language is rich and deep enough can literature be produced. Has there been any literature work in “Singlish”? With all the “lah”, “leh”, “lor” and all the undefinable terms? Should Singlish really be treated with all the respect and love that English or French rightfully deserve?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment