Of New Englishes and and New Literacies

Fig. 1a and 1b: Concentric and Overlapping Circles (Kachru 1985 & 1997)


Fig. 1c: Overlapping One-way Directional Arrows (Graddol, 1997)


Fig 2a: English Umbrella Tree (Yoneoka, 2001)


Fig. 2a: Revised English Umbrella Model (Wenfang, 2011)

In the Revised English Umbrella Model, Wenfang (2011) exemplifies the reality of New Englishes which account for the “many varieties of English in the Outer Circle and the Expanding Circle (which) have become established varieties spoken by people who regard themselves as native speakers and with native speaker intuition” (Yano, 2001 in Wenfang, 2011, p. 8). This revised model introduces and makes a distinction between ‘genetic English as a Native Language’ and ‘functional English as a Native Language’. The revised model also accommodates the social dialectal constructs of acrolect (standard) and basilect (colloquial) English usage. Although the acrolect is the standard variety used in international communication, the model acknowledges the possibility of features of the basilect filtering into international discourse. This model is both egalitarian and generic and very importantly highlights the interconnected socio-cultural systems (which to my mind encapsulate new literacies) in tune with all aspects of society which might affect language and the linguistic features which characterize each variety of English within the context of globalization.

Having reviewed existing models and paradigms of Englishes and New Englishes, I propose a taxonomy of Englishes as a frame to understanding and categorizing Englishes.

Fig 2: Taxonomy of Englishes
In this taxonomy, I identify the abstract and imagined English in the super-ordinate node identified as ‘GENERIC ENGLISH’ from where the Englishes spread into three parameters: Country, Contact, and Function. Within the Country parameter, there are three descriptive subordinate parameters which account for the historical development in the emergence of Englishes identified along Kachruvian paradigms of Inner, Outer and Expanding Circle countries. It is in Outer and Expanding circle countries that the stabilization of New Englishes are found. Whether in the Inner Circle or Outer and Expanding circles, sub-varieties of English are found and the possibility of new and newer Englishes is not ruled out. In a country like Nigeria for instance, there exists other regional/ethnic variations which can give rise to a strand of Nigerian English which can be recognized as Hausa Nigerian English (HNE), Igbo Nigerian English (INE), Yoruba Nigerian English (YNE) as well as many other sub-strands of Nigerian English. The second core parameter of Contact accounts for the contexts and situations which give rise to New Englishes. These contact situations include Socio-political, Settler-indigene contact, Education, Economic and Technological development and diffusion (pervasive use of the Internet and digital technologies) within and among countries. This is where we locate new literacies which I shall consider in the second part of this lecture. In the Function parameter, we have the various Englishes depending on the country and the type of contact experience. This parameter is used to identify English as a Lingua Franca (ELF), English as a Second Language (ESL), English as a Foreign Language (EFL), English as an Additional or Alternative Language (EAL), English as Lingua Franca (ELF), or any other role which English fulfills in the national life of a particular country. It is however important to note that within the Function parameter, there is no function for English as a Native Language (ENL) or English as a Mother Tongue (EMT) because this is an imaginary function in the taxonomy of Englishes. It is important to note that these parameters are not mutually exclusive. There are overlaps and interconnections as determined by global politics, economics and technologies.
The development of New Englishes like language change happens ubiquitously but in delineable phases. Moag (1992) and Schneider (2003) both identify five stages in that process. Moag identifies: (i) Transportation (ii) Indigenization (iii) Expansion in Use and Function (iv) Institutionalization and (v) Restriction of Use and Function while Schneider identifies the following re-rooting processes (i) Foundation (ii) Exonormative Stabilization (iii) Nativization (iv) Endonormative Stabilization and (v) Differentiation. What is interesting in Schneider’s dynamic model is that the fifth stage which looks like the end point is actually the turning point from which something new springs. That is, the stage of dialect birth. According to Schneider (2003), this stage allows for more internal diversification with more subgroup varieties on the basis of sociolinguistic parameters such as ethnicity, regional background, social status, and so on. These are part of the socio-cultural systems at the global level in the revised English umbrella model. In Schneider’s words, stage 5 “marks the onset of a vigorous phase of new or increased sociolinguistic meaningful internal diversification” (Schneider, 2003, p.254). This means varieties of English co-exist with others, including indigenous languages with “language used to performing identity-marking functions (Schneider, 2003, p.254) as is the case in South Africa as well as the growing phenomenon of the social pressure of English in Nigeria (see Egbe & Ayeni, 2019).
From the foregoing, there is no contestation as to the emergence of New Englishes within the framework of world Englishes. In fact, New Englishes have virtually become native-speaker varieties of English and the possibility of expansion in the future is not in doubt so long as English remains the language of international communication and continues to function as a lingua franca in countries with numerous mutually incomprehensible local languages. However, it is important to stress the fact that new varieties of a language are products of variability. This does not preclude the need to establish norms for the purpose of pedagogy. The key concern should be to identify which and whose norms should be accepted as a target in any given situation. This is where descriptive linguists, applied linguists, and language teachers need to meet to complement one another. In addressing this concern, we need understand that emotions and attitudes, which are extra-linguistic considerations, are unavoidable and understandably so. In taking a stand, it is necessary to note that “Descriptive and theoretical linguists fundamentally believe that ALL (emphasis mine) language uses and varieties are functionally adequate in their respective contexts and internally well structured” (Scheider, 2003, p. 238). There is also the need to make a distinction between public norms and written language on one hand and private and spoken performance on the other which are manifested in overt and covert prestige. In Nigeria for instance, we need to identify what norm or standard of English is expected of a Nigerian child writing a public examination and the standard expected of the same child when having a private conversation with his/her parents and siblings at home. While we cannot gloss over the issue of social class and class consciousness with regard to language choice and usage, it is difficult for any language description to be devoid of ideological trappings. It is such trappings that tend to view British English and other English as a Native Language (ENL) varieties as norm-defining and as a standard for norms of correctness and to negatively view New Englishes as being peripheral and as deviations from the norm. We shall return to these ideological perceptions later in this lecture. But first, let us consider the question of who is a native speaker of English.

3.