CHARACTER PRESENTATION AND INTERACTION:

STYLES OF MINORITY DISCOURSE IN THE

MALAYSIAN ENGLISH NOVEL

by Malachi Edwin Vethamani

Thesis submitted to the University of Nottingham

for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, September 1996

19
 Chapter Two

Malaysian English in the Context of

Non-Native Varieties of English

2.1 Introduction 21

2.2 English as a Universal Language 21

2.3 Functions of English in New Contexts 22

2.3.1 English as an Intranational Language 22

2.3.2 English as an International Language 23

2.4 The Worldwide English-Speaking Community 23

2.4.1 Status of the English Language 24

2.4.1.1 English as a Foreign Language 25

2.4.1.2 English as a Second Language 25

2.5 Emergence of New Englishes 26

2.5.1 Categories of English-Speaking Communities 27

2.5.2 Emergence of Non-Native Englishes 29

2.5.3 The Status of Non-Native Englishes 29

2.5.4 Attitudes Towards Non-Native Englishes 30

2.5.4.1 Attitudes Towards Indigenization of the English Language 30

2.5.4.2 Attitudes Towards the Choice of Standard Models for

Non-Native Englishes 35

20
2.6 Development of Non-native Varieties of English in Three

Different Non-Native Contexts 37

2.6.1 India 38

2.6.2 The West Indies 41

2.6.3 Africa 43

2.7 Malaysian English As a Non-native Variety of English 46

2.7.1 Background 46

2.7.2 Description of Malaysian English 46

2.7.3 Development of Malaysian English 51

2.7.3.1 The Advent of English in Malaysia 52

2.7.3.2 Indigenization of English in Malaysia 53

2.7.3.3 Expansion in the Use and Function of English

in Malaysia 54

2.7.3.4 The Institutionalization of Malaysian English 58

2.7.3.4.1 Malaysian English and the Malaysian Educational System 58

2.7.3.4.2 Creative Writing in Malaysian English 61

2.7.3.4.3 Malaysian English and the Media in Malaysia 64

2.7.3.5 Restriction in the Use of English in Malaysia 65

2.7.3.6 Re-establishing English in Malaysia 68

2.8 Conclusion 70

21
 CHAPTER TWO

MALAYSIAN ENGLISH IN THE CONTEXT OF

NON-NATIVE VARIETIES OF ENGLISH

2.1 Introduction

Malaysian English is a relatively recent phenomenon. It is part of a global

proliferation of new varieties of English in the twentieth century which witnessed

the rise of the English language as a universal language (Kachru 1986: 127) and as

an international language (Brumfit 1982: 1; Smith 1983: 1; McArthur 1987: 324;

Strevens 1992: 27-47). The English language is no longer identified with a country

or a single race (Asmah Haji Omar 1992: 61; Smith 1983: 2). Neither is it

considered the possession of its native speakers alone (Brumfit 1982: 3). The

development of English as a universal language was largely the consequence of

British colonialism, which brought much of Africa, the West Indies and Asia under

its dominance in the nineteenth century, and the rise of America as a colonial power

in the twentieth century (Brumfit 1982: 1; Phillipson 1992: 23).

2.2 English as a Universal Language

The English language has achieved the position of being called a universal

language on the basis of the number of users of the language, in its various forms

and functions (Kachru 1986). Kachru defines a universal language as one which is

22
used by a large portion of the human population for easy communication between

peoples of diverse cultural and language backgrounds (1986: 127). English fulfils

this prerequisite as it was estimated that there were about 700 million speakers in

the 1980s (McArthur 1987: 324) and later, Strevens estimated that there were

about 1.5 billion English users (1992: 28).

The emergence of new native and non-native varieties of English has been

the result of its global development. And today, English is a language which

probably has more non-native speakers than native speakers (Trudgill and Hannah

1994: 121). New native varieties evolved in white settler nations like America,

Australia, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa while new non-native varieties

of English sprouted in parts of Asia and Africa.

2.3 Functions of English in New Contexts

The function of English in the new contexts where it has emerged can be

broadly categorised in two major roles: as an intranational or link language, and as

an international language.

2.3.1 English as an Intranational Language

As an intranational language, English has become the lingua franca of

many nations where it was not originally indigenous, as in the case of most

post-colonial nations (Smith 1983: 14). In this instance, English is a language other

than the mother tongue of its users and it is used as a language of communication or

23
as a link language between people of different races, tribes and language groups

within a country, as in the case of India, Malaysia, Singapore, and many nations in

Africa (Kachru 1986: 110; Schmied 1991: 27). It will be the concern of this thesis

to examine the intranational situation in Malaysia.

2.3.2 English as an International Language

As an international language, English is the most widespread medium of

worldwide communication (Brumfit 1982: 1). It is the principal language of

international politics, commerce, technology and aid as well as the language of

science and technology (Smith 1983: 7). As English is an international language, it

is not bound to any one culture, and priority is given to communication. There is

also no need for non-native users of English to sound like the native speaker, but

simply to use language which is appropriate, acceptable and intelligible (Smith

1983: 8).

2.4 The Worldwide English-Speaking Community

The users of the English language can be broadly divided into two major

categories: native and non-native speakers. The notion of native speaker is closely

linked with the term mother tongue. Rampton (1990: 98) states that the concepts of

mother tongue and native speaker raise certain problems as these concepts

spuriously emphasize the biological at the expense of the social and also mix up

language as an instrument of communication with language as a symbol of social

24
identification. Rampton questions the assumptions which often link language

ability to nationality.

Strevens notion of primary language (1992: 36) resembles Ramptons

notion of expertise (1990: 98). Strevens supports the view that the first language

learned from infancy functions in a way which is different from that of any

language which is learned subsequently. The first language is the primary language

through which the individual generally functions. In view of this, there is a need to

view any language used by an individual on the basis of its role in his language

repertoire either as a primary or secondary language. On the basis of this argument,

Strevens definition of native speakers as those for whom English is a primary

language and non-native speakers as those for whom English is a secondary

language (Strevens 1992: 36) is considered acceptable for the purpose of this

study.

2.4.1 Status of the English Language

The status of the English language in communities where it is used as the

primary or native language is not questioned, but in communities where English is

a secondary language, its status is either that of a second or of a foreign language

(Marckwardt 1963: 25; Strevens 1992: 36; Trudgill and Hannah 1994: 121).

Marckwardt's (1963) definitions of second and foreign language still hold currency.

25
2.4.1.1 English as a Foreign Language

Marckwardt (1963: 25) states that English as a foreign language is:

taught as a school subject or on an adult-level solely for the purpose of

giving the student a foreign-language competence which he may use in one
of several ways - to read literature, to read technical works, to listen to the
radio, to understand dialogue in the movies, to use the language for
communication possibly with transient English or Americans.

Users of English as a foreign language, according to Marckwardts definition,

would learn English for specific purposes. English is then used only in those

specific domains for which it had been learned (Kachru 1985: 211).

2.4.1.2 English as a Second Language

Marckwardt (1963: 25) adds that English is used as a second language

where it

becomes a language of instruction in the schools, as in the Philippines, or a

lingua franca between speakers of widely diverse languages, as in India.

Trudgill and Hannah's definition of a second language is close to

Marckwardt's, though they add that the language is used as an official language

(Trudgill and Hannah 1994: 121). This, however, is not always the case in many

countries where English is still widely used. Although Strevens does not state that

the second language must be an official language, he implies such a role, stating

that the second language has a special standing in the community, as it is accepted

26
in the courts of law, for purposes of administration, is a medium of instruction and

in the mass media (Strevens 1992: 36). Strevens' definition seems the most accurate

as English is at times not explicitly accorded the status of an official language.

The language may however have such a role and function in the community, as in

the case of many African countries (Schmied 1991: 23).

The status of the English language and how it is used between and among

the speakers of different ethnic background in the particular context of Malaysia as

portrayed in the fiction of Lloyd Fernando and K.S.Maniam will be considered at

length in Chapter Five.

2.5 Emergence of New Englishes

The worldwide spread of the English language is traced by Kachru (1992:

230). First, it began in Scotland, Wales and Ireland. With this expansion, English

ceased to be the language of England alone. The language then spread to other parts

of the world, namely, America, Australia, New Zealand and Canada as the result of

the movement of English-speaking populations. This resulted in the emergence of

native speakers of English outside the British Isles. The third phase of the spread of

English was associated with Englands colonial expansion to areas where there

were no speakers of English. This marked the spread of English to Asia, Africa

and the West Indies. The indigenous people in these new contexts initially learned

the language for purposes of employment in the colonial administration and also to

survive in the emerging new societies (Strevens 1992: 30-32).

27
2.5.1 Categories of English-Speaking Communities

New English-speaking communities have been categorized into different

groups; the categories, however, should be seen as points on a continuum of the

English language. Thumboo (1985: 54-55), Kachru (1986: 128), Schmied (1991:

34-43) and Crystal (1995: 107) have categorized the worldwide English-speaking

community into three groups.

The first group comprises those for whom English is a native language or

mother tongue: the British, Irish, Americans, Australians, New Zealanders,

English-speaking Canadians and South Africans. The second group comprises those

who use English as a second language (ESL), a language which they learn after

they have acquired their mother tongue. Among those who fall into this category

are English language speakers from the Indian subcontinent, Africa, the Philippines,

Malaysia and Singapore.

The third category comprises users of English as a foreign language, a

language used for international communication and also for specific purposes, such

as, science and technology. It is usually not used for purposes of internal

communication, that is, intranational purposes.

The West Indies poses a problem with regard to the categories posited by

Thumboo (1985) as he does not place them in any of the above categories but states

that they have greater similarities with the countries in the second category in the

English language continuum as they are culturally, socially and economically closer

28
to them. However, Ramchand, himself a West Indian, views English as a first or

native language for the West Indians (1970: 78) . He perceives the linguistic

situation in the former West Indian colonies being on a continuum between

Standard English and Creole English and does not view these as separate languages.

He states that for most modern West Indian writers there is no problem of choice

between English and another language, as English is their native language (1970:

82). Ramchand perceives English as the primary language of the West Indians and,

in the light of Strevens' definition of native speakers (see page 23), they can, thus,

be considered native speakers of the English language.

The varieties of the English language which developed in the second

category have been variously classified by sociolinguists. Kachru (1977) advocates

the term non-native varieties, new Englishes and Third World Englishes;

Strevens (1982; 1992) refers to them as Localized Forms of English; and Platt,

Weber and Ho (1984) describe them as New Englishes. These terms invariably

mean the same: these new varieties of English are distinct new non-native varieties

of the English language.

I will only discuss the issues related to the emergence of non-native

Englishes as they concern the development of Malaysian English. As the issues and

contexts related to development of new native varieties of English are dissimilar to

those of the non-native varieties, the present work will not be concerned with the

new native varieties.

29
2.5.2 Emergence of Non-Native Englishes

Non-native Englishes generally emerged and developed through one of two

routes. One was through the colonial education system where English was used as a

medium of instruction or taught as a subject in educational institutions, as in the

case of India, Malaysia and some African nations. The learning of English is

motivated by the desire to be integrated into a speech community which enjoys high

prestige, as is the case in ESL communities.

The other route was the result of its development from a creole form, as in

the case of the West Indies. In either case, as the English language was being used

in new contexts, the language was subjected to change and these new non-native

varieties developed their own distinctiveness. Today, besides the Standard British

English variety and other newer native varieties of the English language, there are

non-native varieties of the English language: for example, Indian English, Nigerian

English, and Malaysian English.

2.5.3 The Status of Non-Native Englishes

The position of English in new nations is not always clear. English has

been explicitly accorded the status of an official language in nations like India

(Mehrotra 1989: 421), the Philippines (Lim 1993: 12) and Singapore (Lim 1993:

12). However, in the case of African nations, the position of the English language is

less explicit. English has been adopted as the sole official language in the case of

nations like Nigeria, Ghana, Zambia, Uganda and Zimbabwe and as a co-official

30
language in nations like Kenya, Tanzania, Namibia, South Africa and Cameroon

(Schmied 1991: 26). In all these nations, English continues to be used for both

intranational and international communication.

2.5.4 Attitudes Towards Non-Native Englishes

As non-native varieties of English develop, two linguistic issues in ESL

situations have become points of controversy. The issues are related to

indigenization or nativization of the English language in the new contexts where it

is used, and the choice of a standard model in these new speech communities.

2.5.4.1 Attitudes Towards Indigenization of the English Language

The English language which has emerged in the different nations is not

homogeneous. This is the result of the process of indigenization or nativization of

the English language. It is a process by which changes and innovations are made to

the English language by its new users in the new contexts to accommodate the

demands made on the language in its new roles and functions (Kachru 1986: 21-22;

Trudgill and Hannah 1994: 122).

The notion of indigenization or nativization is mainly related to situations

where English is used as a second language, where a distinct variety evolves as a

result of its high currency value as a link language for both intranational and

international communication. In nations where English is used as a foreign

language, predominantly for international communication, there is no local

31
nativization and the users are taught to use native speaker norms (Gorlach and

Schroder 1985: 227).

Indigenization or nativization has traditionally been viewed with

ambivalence by native speakers. Linguistic chauvinism, which opposed the

development of non-native varieties, is represented by the stand taken by Practor

(1968: 459) who posits:

... the heretical tenet I feel I must take exception to is the idea that it is
best, in a country where English is not natively spoken but is widely used
as the medium of instruction, to set up the local variety of English as the
ultimate model to be imitated by those learning the language.

Such a view has been considered unacceptable by both native and

non-native linguists (Kachru 1986: 102; Smith 1983: 8). Smith also reiterates that

language and culture may be inextricably tied together but no one language is

inextricably tied to any one culture, and no one needs to become more like native

speakers in order to use English well (1983: 10). Kachru recognizes that as the

uses of English increase in any speech community, nativization is an inevitable

process (Kachru 1986: 123).

The work by Trudgill and Hannah on international English reflects the shift

in the attitudes towards indigenization. In 1982, Trudgill and Hannah make no

mention of English being indigenized, which they do in the 1994 edition of the

same work. In 1982, they attributed nativized forms to interference from local

languages (Trudgill and Hannah 1982: 100) and perceived them as departures

32
from the native speaker norms which can be accepted only provided they are

intelligible to native speakers of English:

as long as the deviations from EngEng (English as spoken in England, my

parenthesis) in, for example, an African's or Indian's English are not great,
then there is no reason to object to that variety being used in native
English-speaking areas. Obviously, within Africa or India themselves, the
margin for tolerance of deviation can be even wider ...
however, that deviation from native English varieties should not become
too great; otherwise, wider communication through English might be
impaired.

(Trudgill and Hannah 1982: 100)

In 1994, however, their attitude towards indigenization shows a remarkable

change. Trudgill and Hannah (1994: 122), referring to development of new

non-native varieties in nations like Malaysia, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, the Maldives,

Nepal and Nauru, now state:

In many of these areas, English has become or is becoming indigenized.

This means that these second language varieties of English, as a result of
widespread and frequent use, have acquired or are acquiring relatively
consistent, fixed local norms of usage which are adhered to by all
speakers. These varieties of English may differ, often considerably, from
the English of native speakers elsewhere in the world, mainly as a result of
influence from local languages. Thus native speakers of English may
sometimes have some difficulty in understanding these non-native
varieties. This is something of a problem, but it is not clear what should be
done about it.

(Trudgill and Hannah 1994: 122)

The tone has become less prescriptive and the phenomenon of new

non-native varieties is no longer seen only from the native speaker perspective. This

is signalled with the absence of words like deviation, interference and

33
tolerance. These words have been replaced with less contentious words like

local norms and influence. The authors conclude that the lack of intelligibility

between speakers of the different varieties of English could cause problems but

they fail to offer any solutions (Trudgill and Hannah 1994: 122).

The two contrasting attitudes towards new non-native varieties are reflected

in the transformed attitudes towards the innovative linguistic features in the new

non-native varieties as these features have been seen as deficiency not as

difference (Kachru 1986: 21). Closely associated with this notion is that of

mistake and deviation in relation to linguistic innovations in the new varieties

of the English language.

Kachru (1982, republished 1992) makes the distinction between mistake

and deviation at the linguistic and contextual levels. This distinction is made in

relation to a norm, a standard variety of English. This standard variety could either

be a native variety or a non-native variety. The decision on what is considered the

standard variety or norm has to be taken by each community. In relation to this,

Kachru (1992: 62) states that a mistake

may be unacceptable to a native speaker since it does not belong to the

linguistic norm of the English language; it cannot be justified with
reference to the sociocultural context of a non-native variety; and it is not
the result of the productive processes used in an institutionalized non-
native variety of English.

In contrast, a deviation, Kachru (1992: 62) states, has the following traits:

it is different from the norm in the sense that it is the result of the new
"un-English" linguistic and cultural setting in which the English language
is used; it is the result of a productive process which marks the typical

34
 variety-specific features; and it is systemic within a variety, and not
idiosyncratic. There is an explanation for each deviation within the context
of situation.

The productive process refers to the appropriation or nativization of the

English language in its new roles and functions in the new contexts where it is now

used. Trudgill and Hannah (1994) in their guide to varieties of Standard English

provide ample examples of this phenomenon in a number of non-native varieties of

English, which include Indian English and Singaporean English.

Non-native writers in English who have emerged in the new varieties of

English unequivocally stress the need for nativization of English for their own

creative purposes. Among the first to make this stand was Indian writer Raja Rao

(1943: viii), who states:

We cannot write like the English. We should not. We cannot write only
as Indians. We have grown to look at the world around as part of us. Our
method of expression therefore has to be a dialect which will some day
prove to be as distinctive and colourful as the Irish and the American.
Time alone will justify it.

Chinua Achebe (1965: 29) expresses a similar view about the African writer

in English:

The price a world language must be prepared to pay is submission to many

different kinds of use. The African writer should aim to use English in a
way that brings out his message best without altering the language to the
extent that its value as a medium of international exchange will be lost. He
should aim at fashioning it out of an English which is at once universal
and able to carry out his peculiar experience.

35
 It is clear that there is a need to view the new varieties of English with

reference to the countries in which they are used. Each variety represents a distinct

speech community in which the variety performs certain functions and is

appropriate in its role in the socio-cultural context in which it operates (Kachru

1986: 111-112). Malaysia is the country in question in the present study.

2.5.4.2 Attitudes Towards the Choice of Standard Model for Non-Native

Englishes

The choice of a standard model in ESL nations arises as each new variety

emerges. The concept of a native monomodel is no longer considered acceptable as

it presupposes the varieties of English to be homogeneous which is not the case.

The concept of a polymodel for non-native varieties of English is more appropriate

as the varieties of Standard English that emerge would be in the context of local

norms of usage.

The latter concept, based on pragmatism and functional realism,

presupposes variability in acquisition, function and context of situation in each

variety (Kachru 1992: 66). The development of Indian English presents a good

example. English is acquired as a second language and is consequently subjected to

influence from the first language which results in the transference of linguistic

features from the first language into the second language. The language is also

subjected to further influence, in the context in which it is acquired: regional, ethnic

and occupational contexts. Therefore, there are sub-varieties of Indian English - for

36
example, Tamil English (regional), Anglo-Indian English (ethnic) and Kitchen

English (occupational).

In view of the polymodel concept, a standard model based on its

appropriateness, acceptance and intelligibility in the context where it functions

should be considered. The notions of appropriateness and acceptance vary

according to the contexts in which the non-native variety is used. The notion of an

educated variety as a standard model is usually acceptable in most contexts but

this however does not imply an obvious approximation towards speaking in

Received Pronunciation (RP). Speaking in RP could be construed as being affected,

pedantic and even distasteful (Llamzon 1969: 15; Bamgbose 1971: 41; Sey 1973:

8).

Intelligibility has to be taken into consideration in terms of the context in

which the language is used; the non-native speaker may have to develop various

repertoires depending whether he is speaking at an international level or in a local

multilingual situation. This is closely related to Quirk's notion of a local dialect and

a wider speech-form (1968: 91). The local dialect would be used generally for

intranational communication, with those who share the dialect, whereas the wider

speech-form would be used for international communication, between those who do

not share the local dialect.

Although attitudinally the colonizer's standard variety, the exo-normative

(external) model may initially be the preferred norm, as new varieties of English

become institutionalized, an endo-normative (local) model would emerge as the

acceptable model (Kachru 1992). The following phases mark the development of

37
these models. The first stage is the non-recognition of the local variety (Kachru

1992: 56). This stage is an imitative stage when the users of the language identify

with the colonizers. The second stage emerges with the extensive diffusion of

bilingualism in English (Kachru 1992: 56) through the process of nativization. The

local model would still be low on the attitudinal scale though the localized variety

may be used widely for different functions. The third stage begins when the local

variety is slowly accepted as the norm and the difference between linguistic norm

and linguistic behaviour is reduced. This leads to the final stage of recognition

which in attitudinal terms is seen through the identification with the variety by its

users (Kachru 1992: 57).

2.6 Development of Non-Native Varieties of English in Three Different Non-

Native Contexts

The continued development of new varieties of English has been determined

by a number of factors, largely political in nature. The language planning policies of

newly independent nations have determined the status of English in these new

states, either as an official language or second language, and this has had strong

implications on both the status and development of non-native linguistic variety

and writing in English in these countries. In the remaining part of this section, I

shall outline the development of non-native varieties of English in India, the West

Indies and Africa. As the main interest of this study is related to the development of

writing in English in Malaysia, the development of Malaysian English will be

discussed in depth in the next section.

38
2.6.1 India

The advent of English into the Indian sub-continent, especially India, and

the subsequent Indian possession of the language, is succinctly presented in

following statement by Kachru (1983: 18):

The fact is that the British went to South Asia with the English language
and, in due course, the natives took over the language and the Englishmen
took over the land ... The raj crumbled and became a part of history; but
the English language has been 'South Indianized' and has become part of
the culture of that vast area.

The Indians indeed took possession of the English language as there was a

concerted effort by Indians for the introduction of English into India, especially in

Bengal. Indian leaders like Raja Rammohun Roy preferred English to Indian

languages for academic, scientific and other international purposes (Kachru 1983:

21). They were opposed by a group which considered the spread of English a threat

to local languages and religion (Kachru 1983: 23). However, with the passing of

Macaulay's Minute in 1835, English became a compulsory language in the

education system. Chaudhuri (1976) rejects the view that English was imposed on

the Indians by their colonial masters. He claims that the British officials even

positively disliked good English in their Indian subordinates (1976: 90). He

explicitly states that it was the Indians who had to force the British to introduce

English into India (1976: 94).

As English spread in the subcontinent, it emerged as a prestige language,

especially when it was made the official language and the language of academia in

39
the early part of the twentieth century. By the 1920s, bilingualism in English had

spread to all levels of Indian society, and into the interior parts of the country

(Kachru 1983: 23). Despite the rise of anti-English sentiments with the rise of

nationalist movements, the spread of English was not checked as, perhaps

surprisingly, the linguistic medium of the nationalist movement was English.

The English language continues to be a link language for intranational and

international communication in the Indian subcontinent. India is the only nation in

the Indian subcontinent where English is an associate official language, with Hindi

and fourteen other languages (Kachru 1985: 207). In India also, English continues

to be taught as a second language at almost all levels of education (Kachru 1983:

66; Trudgill and Hannah 1994: 127).

Kachru (1983) developed a competence scale, the cline of bilingualism

(1983: 129-130), to match the wide range of competence of speakers of English

across the Indian subcontinent. The competence of the users is ranked from almost

monolingualism at one end, through varying degrees of bilingualism, to absolute

ambilingualism at the other end; these correspond to three measuring points, i.e.

the zero point, the central point, and the ambilingual point (Kachru 1983: 25).

The educated variety of South Asian English used by the bilinguals would be

around the central point of the scale, and towards the zero point of the scale would

be speakers with very limited knowledge of the language who cannot use the

language for many communicative purposes. Some of these restricted varieties have

been labelled according to the occupation of the speakers: for example, Butler

40
English and Kitchen English, as the speakers are only able to function in the

language within one particular domain (Kachru 1983: 24-26).

With the spread of English in the Indian subcontinent, a South Indian

variety of English began to emerge; this is a standard variety of South Asian

English (SAE) which has been labelled as the educated form of SAE. This standard

variety has its regional sub-varieties in Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Nepal and Sri

Lanka (Kachru 1983: 24).

Kachru (1986: 37-38) provides three factors which have contributed to the

distinct South-Asianness of South Asian English (SAE). First, the language is a

second language to the majority of its users and transference from the mother

tongue is a feature of their language. Second, as English is an acquired language,

the South-Asianness reflects the model of English the users were exposed to.

Finally, English is taught as a written language in the curriculum, with the added

complication that pronunciation is frequently based on spelling; the South

Indianness in the spoken language is reflected through the use of exclusively Indian

models.

While retaining its characteristics as a variety of SAE, Indian English has

evolved into a non-native variety with its distinct features or Indian idiom. This

Indianness of English has typical Indian formations and they have been termed

Indianisms (Kachru 1983: 130). Indianisms are perceived as deviations or

innovations in the English language as part of the indigenization process in India or

the Indianization of English. Indianisms feature in the grammar, collocations and

41
lexis of Indian English and this is largely the result of transference from the first

languages, the native South Asian languages (Kachru 1986: 39-42).

2.6.2 The West Indies

The English language in the West Indies developed from a creole form

which had originally been a pidgin. In the initial stage, till the seventeenth century,

African dialects predominated with only a mixture of broken English being used

in the West Indies (Ramchand 1970: 83-84). To meet the needs of administration,

the white settlers had to invent a species of essential English and this became part

of the African slaves verbal repertoire. The use of English grew with increased

contact between the whites and the slaves. A creole form of English developed,

though there was no formal teaching of the English language; from this stage, the

frequency of Africanisms in Creole English began to lessen. However, it was still

considered the language of black creoles and uneducated white creoles (Ramchand

1970: 83-84).

The effects of the introduction of widespread education in the later part of

the nineteenth century on the English language was felt only in the twentieth

century when a standard variety evolved. This was the result of the process of

decreolization, a process which involved the creole languages undergoing differing

amounts of complication and purification (Trudgill and Hannah 1994: 113;

D'Costa 1994: 810). The process of complication reintroduced certain

irregularities from English, and counteracted the simplification that had occurred

42
during pidginization. Purification removed certain of the elements from other

languages that had resulted from the mixing that took place during pidginization

(Trudgill and Hannah 1994: 113).

West Indian Standard English approximates Standard British but has certain

distinctive features in phonology. A creole continuum of the English language has

now developed with Standard English at one end and Creole English at the other;

the West Indian Standard is closer to Standard English and the dialects nearer to

Creole English (Ramchand 1970: 95; D'Costa 1994: 809). The intermediate

varieties in the sociolectal continuum are broadly divided into the acrolectal level,

the top variety, the mesolectal level, the intermediate variety, and the basilectal

variety, the most creole-type variety (Trudgill and Hannah 1994: 114).

D'Costa (1994: 808) effectively encapsulates the present-day linguistic

situation in the West Indies:

In Caribbean countries a range of usages - known as a creole continuum -

links the standardized English of educated speakers to the true creole
speech of the working class. Both groups use partially overlapping
language forms and understand one another generally ....

She adds that there are differences between Creole English and Standard

English in terms of syntax, semantics, vocabulary and pronunciation. D'Costa

perceives this both as a resource and handicap to the Caribbean speakers as it

allows code-switching between the levels of the continuum, though the creole

forms might be alien to speakers from different areas (D'Costa 1994: 809).

43
2.6.3 Africa

English in Africa first developed through its use in trade. It developed into

an African English pidgin and was the lingua franca between the British sailors and

traders and the local traders. It has developed into West African Pidgin English

which is still used today. Trudgill and Hannah describe West African Pidgin

English as a language which is mixed - there are elements in pronunciation,

grammar and vocabulary which are related to indigenous African languages; it is

simplified and regularized - there are fewer grammatical irregularities than in

English (Hannah and Trudgill 1994: 110).

English was introduced much later into the African nations through the

school system by the work of missionaries (Schmied 1991: 16). As the African

nations formally became British colonies in the 1880s, English became the

language of administration, legislation and education. Africans discovered the

advantages of learning the language for economic advancement (Schmied 1991:

14).

As in the case of India, English through education became the language of

liberation and was adopted as it provided the medium for criticizing and attacking

their rulers in international contexts. Even with independence, in most African

nations English continued to be viewed as necessary for modernization. Also, often

for reasons of national unity, it was sometimes used as an official language, as the

choice of any one indigenous language could cause disequilibrium in ethnic

relations (Bamgbose, 1971: 36). Phillipson (1992: 29) adds that in such cases,

English is promoted as a supra-ethnic language of national integration. As

44
English is tribally neutral it is also accepted as a link language for intranational

communication. Its role in international communication is still accepted.

The English that emerged in Africa can be broadly categorized into two

major varieties, West African English and East African English, which can be

further categorized into smaller national sub-varieties like Nigerian English,

Ghanaian English and Kenyan English. As in the case of the non-native varieties in

the Indian subcontinent, the non-native varieties of English in Africa have also been

affected by mother tongue interference, which has led to much transfer of linguistic

features from the mother tongue to the second language (Schmied 1991: 37).

Besides influence from the mother tongue, Schmied (1991: 53) indicates that there

is also interference from the other African languages used in the area and influences

from other models of native speaker English throughout the continent.

Schmied employs the same lectal range continuum as Platt, Weber and Ho

(1984) and Kachru (1986) to categorize the linguistic levels of the non-native

speakers of English in Africa. Such a continuum has also been used to categorize

speakers of Malaysian English (this will be discussed in detail in the following

section). The three lectal categories are the acrolect, the mesolect and the basilect.

The lectal continuum contrasts the range of the language which most approximates

to Standard English with that which is the most deviant. It is also closely linked to

the number of years of English education. The acrolect speakers would have had a

cumulative length of English education of fourteen years, the mesolect speakers

between eight to fourteen years and the basilect speakers between seven to ten

years (Schmied 1991:48).

45
 The acrolect range, though the highest level of English, will still differ from

Standard English and will not imitate Received Pronunciation. It is very much the

standard or educated variety and is used largely by professionals and senior civil

servants, university lecturers, medical doctors and business managers. The mesolect

variety is used by junior civil servants and those who could be categorized as

semi-professionals. The basilect variety is usually used by shop assistants, taxi

drivers, clerks and nurses.

Exemplification of these phenomena will be confined to Malaysian

English.

2.7 Malaysian English As A Non-Native Variety of English

2.7.1 Background

Malaysian English is one of eighty languages spoken in Malaysia (Asmah

Haji Omar 1992: 1). Unlike the situations in nations discussed earlier, in Malaysia

English no longer plays the role of an official language. English had played the role

of official language with the Malay language until ten years after the Malayan

Independence of 1957 (Asmah Haji Omar 1992: 91). Today, the Malay language is

the sole official language (The Federal Constitution of Malaysia 1957, Article 152).

The only status accorded to English is in the national education policy, which refers

to English as "the second most important language" (Asmah Haji Omar 1992: 84).

46
This status had been accorded to it even before independence by the 1956

Committee on Education (Kementerian Pelajaran Persekutuan Tanah Melayu

1956). English is still important both as a lingua franca and as an international

language in the country (Benson 1990: 19). Its presence in the linguistic scene in

Malaysia has been in a state of flux. Pennycook states: the fortunes of English in

Malaysia have waxed and waned and waxed again, and it never seems far from the

centre of debate (1994: 217).

2.7.2 Description of Malaysian English

Malaysian English has been variously described and categorized (Tongue

1979; Platt, Weber and Ho 1984; Lowenberg 1984; Baskaran 1987; Benson 1990).

Tongue (1979: 16) categorized English in Singapore and Malaysia (ESM) into two

dialects: formal and informal. He perceives English in Malaysia and Singapore not

as new non-native varieties of English, but as dialects which have deviated from

British English (Tongue 1979: 16). Tongue states that there is little nativization in

the formal dialect and that the informal variety is a highly nativized sub-standard

dialect; the notion of sub-standard is seen in relation to the British English

standard. Tongue appears not to recognize that these innovations had evolved as

the result of the new cultural and linguistic contexts in which English was being

used. He therefore found the colloquial English usage of Singaporeans and

Malaysians unacceptable and wrong (Lowenberg 1984: 21).

47
 Much of Tongue's study is a presentation of examples of linguistic features

of what he describes as dialects. His description of Malaysian and Singaporean

English as two dialects is restrictive as both Malaysian English and Singaporean

English have developed as languages which can be described on a social scale (Platt

and Weber 1980: 107; Baskaran 1987: 53), encompassing more than his two

categories.

Benson (1990) also attempted to describe Malaysian English using a

formality continuum. He introduced the label Anglo-Malay to describe what he

considered formal Malaysian English. The term has not received wide acceptance

or usage as it does not reflect the nature of Malaysian English as a sociolect. Not

only is his label imposed from a native speaker perspective, with the foregrounding

on Anglo, it also fails to reflect the multiracial code-mixing which is present in

this formal variety (Baskaran 1987: 53). Benson does indicate that there are more

borrowings from the Malay language than from Chinese and Tamil.

Benson posits that language policies in Malaysia have been responsible for

the different types of Malaysian English that have evolved since colonial days. His

view that there are three types of Malaysian English can be accepted on the basis of

language shifts as the result of language policies in Malaysia: the change of the

status of English as an official language to that of a second language, and the

change in the medium of instruction from English to Malay.

His first type of English in Malaysia, Anglo-Malay, is described as a

formal variety used by older English speakers (1990: 21) and is said to be found

in newspapers and other publications in English. This variety is claimed to have

48
evolved from a non-standard colonial expatriate English variety, a variety which

had been adapted to the local context, used by expatriates and the small group of

locals who had acquired English from the colonial education system. This variety

was not a pidgin, unlike that which developed in West Africa. Benson adds that the

distinctive features of Anglo-Malay were mainly lexical and that Standard British

English was the norm. He cites the following extract from a local newspaper which

he claims exhibits some features of Anglo-Malay:

As the bas sekolah approached the kerb directly in front of the Seng Heong
coffeeshop in Jalan Ipoh at 7.10 am, a group of primary schoolchildren
queued to get aboard. Five months ago, the same children would wait near
the flats behind the shophouses ...

(The Star, 19.9. 1987, quoted in Benson 1990: 22)

Benson explains that the loan word bas sekolah from Malay and local

words coffeeshop and shophouse would have been as familiar to the colonial

expatriates as they are to Malaysians. Benson's explanation is acceptable though his

label Anglo-Malay may be contested.

The second type of Malaysian English is said to have emerged from the

English medium schools and is described as a colloquial variety which incorporates

various localized features of pronunciation, syntax and lexis. Benson indicates that

this variety is widely used by educated speakers, however, at the informal end of a

stylistic range which also incorporates the formal variety based on Anglo-Malay

(Benson 1990: 22). He also describes it as broken English or a patois.

49
 The third type of Malaysian English is said to have developed from the

Malay-medium school systems. The norms are said to have been set by the English

medium educated teachers. As the result of the Malay language becoming the

medium of instruction, the English speech of the younger generation shows a great

deal of influence from the Malay language, according to Benson.

Benson's description of Malaysian English as a highly colloquial variety

(Benson 1990: 22) is an inaccurate one. He does not indicate the corpus for his

study which has led him to draw this conclusion. The examples he cites are largely

drawn from newspaper publications and recordings of spoken language from

secondary sources. It is my contention that, had he examined a wider range of

Malaysian English, his conclusions would have been different and would have

more accurately reflected the English speaking communities in Malaysia.

Three further examples may suffice to illustrate the lectal range even in a

day-to- day context. Below are three news items from the New Straits Times (3 Jan.

1996). The first is a letter to the editor:

I took Malaysian Airlines flight MH 783 from Bangkok on Dec 18

last year and landed at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport in Subang
at bay 20 which was away from the main terminal building around the
cargo area.
After about 15 minutes, the passengers were allowed to disembark.
It was raining heavily and this was when the disappointment began.
The passengers were required to walk down the stairs in the rain
without any cover or umbrella to get to the bus heading for the main
terminal ....
I regretted that MAS has not considered either the safety or
comfort of its passengers. The business suit I was wearing was soaked. I
couldnt help but fully agree with a man who sneered rather softly but
appropriately malulah especially among the many foreign visitors on that
flight.

50
 The following extracts are from a news report.

Penang, Tues. - Consumer rights and access to safe food will be the
theme adopted by over 200 consumer organisations globally when they
celebrate World Consumer Rights Day this year.
Consumers International Regional for Asia and the Pacific food
officer Tim Pringle said today that World Consumer Rights Day - on
March 15 - would address the fundamental issues of food security,
especially in the developing world.
...
World Consumers Rights Day was first observed in 1983.
It is an annual event aimed at highlighting a selected consumer
demand from eight basic consumer rights - including the right to live a
healthy and sustainable environment - outlined in the United Nations
Guidelines for Consumer Protection.

And finally, the following extracts are from the Editorial.

Call it a happy coincidence that the annual meeting of Road

Transport Department (RTD) State directors straddles the traditional
season for introspective assessment, resolution-making and the setting of
goals for the new year.
In its case, several measures to be enforced by the department from
this month are directed to wards enhancing discipline and efficiency
among road-users and operators of private or commercial vehicles.
With effect from Jan 1, it has decreed that motorcycles will have to
be fitted with a rear-view window, while commercial vehicles must
display their roadworthiness certificate....
It is unfortunate that road-users are more convinced by the stick
rather than the carrot, when it comes to the error of their ways. That being
their choice, the RTDs next resolution may have to reflect the reality of
the times.

51
2.7.3 Development of Malaysian English

A number of studies on the development of new varieties of English have

been carried out by various sociolinguists including Moag (1982), Strevens (1982),

Kachru (1983; 1986), Platt, Weber and Ho (1984). For the purpose of my

discussion on the emergence of Malaysian English as a distinct non-native variety

of English, I shall incorporate the life-cycle model of non-native Englishes

developed by Moag (1982), with discussion of the studies by Platt and Weber

(1980) and Baskaran (1987) on Malaysian English.

Moag's life-cycle model of non-native Englishes (1982: 270-290,

republished in 1992) is based on Halls model, life cycle of Pidgin Languages

(Hall 1962, quoted in Moag 1982: 270), which, though useful, falls short of

describing the dynamic changes in the development of Malaysian English. Moag

states that there are four processes which are significant constituents of this life

cycle. These are: transportation, indigenization, expansion in use and function, and

institutionalization. He adds that there may be a fifth process known as restriction

of use and function, which may not apply to all cases. I am of the view that

in the case of Malaysian English, there is not only the fifth process, but also a

sixth, the re-establishing of English process (Asmah Haji Omar 1992: 67).

52
2.7.3.1 The Advent of English in Malaysia

The introduction of the English language into a new environment is

described as the process of transportation. Moag states that English was often

introduced through colonial administration. In the case of Malaysia, the English

language arrived on Malaysian shores initially through the commercial interests of

the British East India Company in the early nineteenth century. This was then

quickly followed by Britains imperialistic ambitions to stake its claims in the

Malay Peninsula against its other European competitors, mainly the Dutch. The

English language was first used for commercial communication and later

incorporated for colonial administrative purposes (Wong 1981: 94; Lowenberg

1991: 364).

The Malay language was already established as the language of the local

Court and all administration at the time of the arrival of the British. A lower variety

of the Malay language was used for everyday communication by the rest of the

population. This caused the British to be cautious about the propagation of English

in Malaysia. The initial need for English speaking employees in businesses and in

the government was met by English-educated Indians from the subcontinent.

However, as the demand grew greater, local schools were established and the

natives (the Malays) and other immigrant races (mainly Chinese and Indians) in

Malaya were encouraged to learn the English language. Asmah Haji Omar (1992)

describes this effort on the part of the British as gentle coercion which

53
culminated in the establishment of an elite school for the sons of Malay Sultans,

nobles and chiefs in the 1920s (1992: 83).

2.7.3.2 Indigenization of English in Malaysia

The process of indigenization occurs in two phases. In the first phase, a

number of local words are drawn into the English language by English speaking

newcomers for items in the local context which have no equivalents in the English

language. This phenomenon of borrowing can be easily identified in the Malaysian

context, as many words - for example, kampong, sarong, and kris - have been

borrowed from Bahasa Malaysia (the Malay language) and are now used by other

English speakers.

Moag adds that, during this phase, the borrowings remain very much at the

lexical level, both from the local languages into English and vice versa. This

restricted borrowing at the lexical level is largely because the local learners are

subjected to native speaker models of English and only specific local items are

allowed into the English language.

The second phase of the indigenization process occurs in two ways. To

begin with, English is used as a lingua franca, a link language for people from

different language backgrounds to work together in the colonial system. In the case

of Malaysia, by the late 1940s, the English language was accepted as another lingua

franca equal to the Malay language, the national language (Maniam 1977: 28).

Moag states that at this stage more native features are incorporated into English as

54
the locals bring familiar items and conventions in their own languages and cultures

into play in the new situation (Moag 1982: 273). He also states that the English

language becomes the preferred medium for discussing topics which are alien or

which are associated with culture. The English language, however, is still very

much a foreign language at this stage.

2.7.3.3 Expansion in the Use and Function of English in Malaysia

The process of expansion in use and function of English refers to the

spread of English into new domains, or to an increase in the degree of its usage if it

had already been in use (Moag 1982: 274). The domains that were affected were

largely education, the media, and government services. This process also marks the

change in the status of the language from that of a foreign language to that of a

second language. English becomes the medium of communication.

The English that developed in Malaysia was not through creole, as it was in

the case of West Africa, the Caribbean and New Guinea. Malaysian English

developed through the school system (Platt and Weber 1980: 22; Platt 1982: 384).

Platt and Weber (1980) state that the use of English developed through the English

medium education system. They add that with greater opportunities for education,

a speech continuum developed, from the basilect, a sub-variety spoken by those

with little or no education, through mesolect to the acrolect, a sub-variety spoken by

those with high level of education (Platt and Weber 1980: 22).

55
 Initially, English was taught only to the children of Malay royalty but soon

more schools were built. These schools were geared towards providing their pupils

with a working knowledge of the English language for utilitarian purposes. Maniam

(1977: 14) says that the language kept pace with and was dependent on the

economic and professional requirements of the country.

The English schools were at first not well received by the Malays as they

were considered foreign. Consequently, from the 1880s, a system of vernacular

schools was established through which instruction in English was carried out

together with the local vernaculars, Malay, Mandarin and Tamil. Until 1900, the

English language was taught through the medium of the vernacular languages. This

method was later abandoned and the Direct Method of teaching English was

implemented (Chelliah quoted in Maniam 1977: 20).

With the increase in school enrolments and the shortage of expatriate

teachers, non-native teachers, largely from India, were recruited to teach the

language. However, they too were not able to meet the needs of the country. The

training of local teachers was instituted and local teacher training colleges were

established (Platt, Weber and Ho 1984: 2-4).

With the extended use of English in administration and commerce, those

educated in English came to be associated with a higher earning capability. The

English language came to enjoy a favourable position in the Malaysian education

system and it was seen as a means of entitlement to further education. It became the

medium of instruction when the first Malayan university was set up in Singapore in

1949. The use of English in the media was in the form of English newspapers, an

56
English radio station and, later, programmes in English on the local television

networks. Although English was considered to have achieved equal status with

Bahasa Malaysia as a lingua franca by the 1940s, regulations pertaining to language

and education policies defined its position as the second most important language

in 1956 (Asmah Haji Omar 1992: 84).

The increase in the use of English, largely in its function as a link language,

resulted in the further development of a distinct Malaysian variety of English. The

contact between English and other languages in Malaysia, especially Bahasa

Malaysia, resulted in lexical borrowings, code-mixing and code-switching. Lexical

borrowing is significant in the formal and acrolectal range in the Malaysian English

variety continuum, whereas code-mixing and code-switching feature more in the

informal or colloquial and basilect range (Platt, Weber and Ho 1984; Baskaran

1987). Lowenberg (1991: 367) states that these phenomena reflect not a decline in

English usage, but the adaptation of the norms of English to the political, economic,

and sociocultural contexts of contemporary Malaysia.

Baskaran (1987) also observed the lectal range among Malaysian English

speakers. She indicates that the lectal continuum ranges from the educated form

(used in official speech and writing), through the informal (though not uneducated)

speech variety, and finally on to the uneducated substandard variety. She is of the

view that the acrolect or educated form will evolve to represent the Standard form

in Malaysian English.

The three lectal ranges can manifest themselves in a single speaker

(Baskaran 1987: 5; Platt and Weber 1980: 109-113). An acrolect speaker could

57
switch his lect, because of a change in interlocutor and location and also as a result

of change in interlocutors' role relationships. As such, an acrolectal speaker would

have the ability to move down the lectal scale and speak on a mesolectal or

basilectal level depending on the interlocutors and situation. The lect switch is a

unidirectional downward switch and consequently, the mesolect speaker would also

be able to switch to basilect but the basilect speaker would not be able to use either

the mesolect or acrolect forms.

The informal or colloquial variety often manifests itself in less formal

domains like the office cafeteria and school playground. This phenomenon of

basilectal level non-native English is often depicted in creative works by major

Malaysian writers in English, like K.S. Maniam, Lee Kok Liang and Lloyd

Fernando. Moag also mentions that this phenomenon has been "well reported for

West Africa, India, Singapore and Malaysia, and the Philippines" (1982: 276), as is

stated also in the studies of Platt and Weber (1980) and Baskaran (1987).

2.7.3.4 The Institutionalization of Malaysian English

Malaysian English next underwent the process of institutionalization.

Moag describes institutionalization as a gradual process and states that it is not

easy to pinpoint precisely when it begins. The process of institutionalization of the

non-native varieties of English is influenced by the localization of teachers, the

role of the media, role of vernacular language, government language policies and

role of creative writers (Moag 1982: 277-281).

58
 As indicated by Kachru (1992: 55) and Lowenberg (1984: 36), Malaysian

English by the 1970s could be considered an institutionalized variety for the

following reasons: first, there was extended range of uses of Malaysian English in

the sociolinguistic context in Malaysia; second, there was also an extended register

and style range in the language; third, Malaysian English had undergone the process

of nativization or indigenization and a body of creative writing in nativized English

was developing.

2.7.3.4.1 Malaysian English and the Malaysian Education System

The education system in Malaysia, dictated by the government's language

policies, has played an important role in the institutionalization of Malaysian

English. The Report of the Education Planning Committee 1956 ensured the

continued teaching of the English language in Malaysia (Asmah Haji Omar 1992:

84), and the teaching of English is still seen as an integral part of the Malaysian

education system. It is taught as a compulsory second language right up to

university level. Students have to enrol for the subject, though attaining a pass

grade may not be mandatory at certain levels and in some institutions.

Education in English-medium schools was seen as a means of climbing the

socio-economic ladder of success in the colonial and post-colonial period. English

education was initially seen as the exclusive preserve of royalty and the rich.

However, with the setting up of more schools by missionaries, English education

59
became accessible to more Malaysians, mostly to those in urban areas (Platt and

Weber 1980: 18-20).

To meet the demand for more English language teachers, local teacher

training colleges were established and this resulted in Malaysians teaching the

English language. This had a strong effect on the language that was taught. These

English language teachers attempted to teach according to the Standard British

model; however, their attempts at imitating an exo-normative model were relatively

unsuccessful. As indicated by Platt, Weber and Ho (1984: 4), although these

teachers attempted to use the formal English of the textbooks, their English differed

considerably from that of the native speakers who had been their teachers.

When the medium of instruction in the education system was changed from

English to Bahasa Malaysia in 1971 (Edwin 1993: 44), there was a drastic reduction

in the amount of time the students were exposed to the English language. This was

because English was now taught only as a single subject (Asiah Abu Samah 1984:

194). This change in the medium of instruction to Bahasa Malaysia at all levels of

education, from the primary school level through secondary school to tertiary level,

has been attributed to the development of the kind of Malaysian English which has

been described as Malaysian English Type II by Platt and Weber (1980: 168).

Although the literacy level in English among Malaysians between the years

1970 and 1980 remained at 30 per cent, the standard of English is said

subsequently to have dropped significantly (Asmah Haji Omar 1992: 10). This

situation can be related to Platt and Weber's (1980) categorizing Malaysian English

into two types according to the type of education the speakers had undergone.

60
 The English-medium educated are described as speakers of Malaysian

English Type I (MEI), an interlanguage which approximates to the language of

native speakers. The English which has emerged from the Malay-medium schools

is called Malaysian English Type II (MEII), a non-native variety which is indeed a

second language variety (Platt and Weber 1980: 168).

It is pernicious to state that MEI is a better variety, as it is closer to the

British exo-normative model. Platt and Weber (1980: 168) state clearly that their

categories are not meant to make any value judgment between the two types of

Malaysian English. As to the choice of an official standard, Malaysians had to

determine their own standard based on an endo-normative model. Both Platt and

Weber (1980: 169) and Benson (1990: 22) suggest that, though the official standard

may seem to be Standard British English, the unofficial standard may well be

Malaysian English Type I. Wong (1981) states that Malaysians have come to

realize that no longer is it necessary or desirable to aim at a foreign standard of

English for themselves (Wong 1981: 94). Baskaran recognizes this and is accurate

in her categorization of the acrolect range of Malaysian English as the official

standard for English in Malaysia (1987: 53).

The role of the education system in the institutionalization of Malaysian

English is clear: it has been responsible for the development of the two types of

Malaysian English. For many who now learn English through the Malay medium

education system, English could well be a second language, though for most it

would be very much a foreign language (Wong 1981: 104). There are, however,

still many urban Malaysians, largely Eurasians, Indians and Chinese, who had an

61
English-medium education and for whom the English language became their first

language (Asmah Haji Omar 1992: 63, 83). They are a very small fraction of the

population, but it is highly significant that it was from this group that the first

generation of creative writers in English emerged in Malaysia.

2.7.3.4.2 Creative Writing in Malaysian English

Moag stressed the importance of the development of a local literary tradition

in the non-native variety of English in the process of institutionalizing the language.

He reiterated that local literary activity becomes institutionalized when it becomes

regenerative (Moag 1982: 281). This is achieved through the incorporation into the

English curriculum in the education system of writings in English by local writers

which act as models for the next generation of writers.

Creative writing in English in Malaysia is very much a developing tradition

and has not achieved comparable heights to African, Indian and Caribbean writing

in terms of achievement and recognition. There is, however, a body of literary

works which are significant contributions to the Malaysian literary tradition in

English. Most of the first generation writers of the 1950s - for example,

Muhammad Haji Salleh, Lloyd Fernando, Omar Mohd. Nor, Lee Kok Liang, Wong

Phui Nam, Shirley Lim, K.S. Maniam and Hilary Tham - had local English-medium

secondary school education. Most of these writers continued their education in the

University of Malaya in Singapore, and their undergraduate creative writings were

published in the literary journals of the university, called The Cauldron and later

62
The New Cauldron. The early writings of these undergraduates at the time reflected

their attempts to appropriate the English language in its new context. Some of the

literary intellectuals attempted to create a hybrid language, Engmalchin, as a vehicle

for their literary expression; the attempt, however, failed (The New Cauldron, 1955:

4). This phenomenon will be discussed in detail in Chapter Three.

Local universities have recently started to incorporate literary works by

Malaysians as texts for courses in both undergraduate and postgraduate courses.

Also, for the first time, in 1992, the Ministry of Education included a Malaysian

poet, Muhammad Haji Salleh, in the secondary school Literature in English

curriculum for the Form Five school examination, the Malaysian equivalent of the

British GCSE (Edwin 1992: 26). This interest in writings in English by Malaysian

writers has resulted not only in the institutionalization of Malaysian literary works

in English but has worked towards the development of Malaysian English. It has

also served as a motivating factor in encouraging a new generation of Malaysian

writers in English.

English as a medium for creative writing is re-emerging on a significant

scale. Historically, creative writing in English has had very little support in

Malaysia. Writing in English is considered sectional literature and not part of

national literature. The government, however, has not suppressed or discriminated

against such activity. In fact, it has provided a free environment for interested

agencies to support creative writing in English (this will be discussed further in

Chapter Three).

63
 Of late, many private companies, largely banks, oil companies, fast food

chains and the local press, have supported creative writing in English. They have

been involved both in publishing local writers' works and also sponsoring creative

writing competitions. The New Straits Times Press, multinational oil companies

like Shell and ESSO, and the international fast food chain McDonalds, have

co-sponsored poetry, drama and short story writing competitions for Malaysians.

There has also been a new interest in theatre in English. A number of local

drama companies have been set up; among these are Five Arts Centre, Pentas, and

Kamikasih (Jit 1994: 387). Although most of these are amateur or, at best, semi-

professional companies, they have injected much enthusiasm into the local

English-speaking theatre. More plays are being written in English and staged by

Malaysians. Malaysian dancer and playwright Ramli Ibrahim's play In The Name of

Love (1993) and K.S. Maniam's Sensuous Horizons (1994) have also been

published by a London-based publisher, Skoob Books Publishing Ltd.

2.7.3.4.3 Malaysian English and the Media in Malaysia

English continues to hold a prominent role in the various sectors of the

media (Pennycook 1994: 213). This too has helped to institutionalize Malaysian

English. There are two major national newspapers in English, The Star and The

New Straits Times. There is a third, The Malay Mail, an afternoon paper which

serves much of Peninsular Malaysia. There are a few English newspapers which

serve Sabah and Sarawak (Asmah Haji Omar 1992: 95). The national newspapers

64
in English have very large circulations, the third largest circulation after Chinese

and Malay (Pennycook 1994: 213).

English language television programmes in Malaysia are largely of

American and British origin. They are featured in all three of the national and two

regional television networks in Malaysia. Two of these networks, Radio Television

Malaysia I (RTM I) and Radio Television Malaysia II (RTM II), are run by the

government. RTM I tends to have programmes mostly in Bahasa Malaysia while

RTM II has a mixture of English, Chinese and Tamil programmes. The third

national television network, TV3, is a privately owned company which is run very

much on the lines of RTM II. The two regional networks, MertoVision and Cable

TV are privately owned. All the privately owned networks operate under strict

government control. Despite the large viewership for English programmes, very

few English language programmes have been produced locally. There is still only

one English radio station in Malaysia and it is run by the government. It caters

largely to popular music fans and also serves as an instrument of the government

for the transmission of news and propaganda.

Cinemas in Malaysia draw large audiences. Movies in English are very

popular and, as in the case of television, these movies are foreign; a local Malaysian

English movie has yet to be produced.

Despite losing its official status, the dominance of English in the different

sectors of the mass media is still clear. English language television programmes and

movies are still strong competition for local programmes in the Malay language.

65
National English medium newspapers continue to have wide circulation. The

English language continues to enjoy a favourable climate in these sectors.

2.7.3.5 Restriction in the Use Of English in Malaysia

The fifth stage in the life cycle of non-native varieties, restriction of the use

and function of English, does not apply in all cases (Moag 1982: 270), but in the

case of Malaysia, it is a relevant stage. This is the stage in which English is

relegated to a secondary position, displaced by a local language which takes

predominance as the official language of newly independent nations, which thus

takes control in most (if not all) domains where English had once been used.

In Malaysia, English lost its privileged position as the dominant language

which it had enjoyed till 1956. Though it has not lost its currency today as a

language for communication and knowledge, the language policies of the

Malaysian government place it as a second language in the country.

The Federal Constitution of 1957 gave provision for the official use of the

English language in the Malaysian legal system even after independence, but all

other aspects of official government work were to be conducted in Malay.

However, there were other professions like medicine and dentistry, engineering,

business and finance which continued to use English, largely because of the

shortage of relevant literature written in Malay and because the professionals in

these fields were not competent to function in Malay (Asmah Haji Omar 1992:

112).

66
 Moag (1982: 282) cited Malaysia as one of the nations in which the

government's language planning policies promoted the national language at the

expense of English. This, he stated, would result in English eventually being a

foreign language used by a small elite group. Moag's prediction about the fate of

Malaysian English was quite accurate as the education system played a major role

for some years in restricting the learning and using of the English language within

the country.

Le Page (1962) did not foresee how the government's language policies

would restrict the usage of English and shift its function towards becoming a

foreign language, although it had been given the status of a second language. Le

Page (1962: 145) ironically predicted:

... the total population of the English-medium schools has increased more
than four-fold, more rapidly than that of any other medium .... It seems
possible therefore that by the time any really effective changes can be
made, English will be too strongly entrenched for the change (from
English to Malay) to be possible. If my forecasts are correct, therefore,
English will then begin to emerge as one of the indigenous languages of
Malaya instead of one of the foreign languages being learned in Malaya.

The English language has continued to be a compulsory subject in

Malaysian primary and secondary school education. In 1967, the English language

ceased to be an official language of Malaysia. The medium of instruction in the

local universities was also changed to Bahasa Malaysia. English is still taught as a

second language in all Malaysian universities.

The change in the status of the English language resulted in a change in the

attitude of Malaysians towards the language. Gaudart (1987: 34) states that the

67
acquisition of the English language to most Malaysians is seen as a necessary evil.

This attitude spills over to the children in school, making it more difficult for them

to have any intrinsic desire to acquire English. Platt (1982: 389) states that, in

1967, enrolment in English-medium schools fell to 69.1 percent when, at its height

in 1962, it had reached 90 percent. During the same period, enrolment in

Malay-medium schools rose from 4.1 percent in 1962 to 30.9 percent in 1967.

Despite the decline in the percentage of English-medium school enrolments,

and the relegation of the English language to a second language status, Malaysians

are still encouraged to study and be proficient in the English language. It is not

viewed as the language of the colonizer, but rather as a language for knowledge and

international communication. There is however, no denying that, although English

is still accorded the status of a second language, its role has shifted to that of a

foreign language for most young Malaysians (Todd and Hancock 1986: 280).

English is still used for intranational communication in the large urban centres in

Malaysia, although it cannot be denied that in most rural areas it remains a foreign

language (Benson 1990: 19). Rural people find little or no reason for

communication in English, as most of their transactions are carried out in the Malay

language or in other vernaculars.

68
2.7.3.6 Re-establishing of English in Malaysia

Moag's concept of life cycle implies both a beginning and an end to the

process, implying the possibility of language death for the new non-native variety

of English. Moag (1982) states that there has not been any case of the language

death of any new non-native variety of English, but he does speculate that it may

be in the cards for Malaysia (1982: 263). It may have seemed so in 1982, but

Malaysian English has moved away from that fatal direction; ironically, this is the

result of new government language policies (Pennycook 1994: 16).

Asmah Haji Omar (1992: 67), one of Malaysia's leading linguists, uses the

term re-establishing English to describe the re-emergence of English in

Malaysia. She sees the return of English not as having come a full circle because

it has not been accorded the status it had enjoyed during the colonial period and

early post-independence period. She is of the view that the re-emergence of

enthusiasm for the English language is in line with the role of the language in the

development of the country. The English language which had been associated with

colonial rule became unfashionable following independence, but has re-emerged as

a language for international communication and knowledge. With the firm

establishment of Bahasa Malaysia as the national language, English is no longer

seen as a threat to national unity (Pennycook 1994: 217).

The re-emergence of English in present-day Malaysia is largely because of

the concern of the nation's leaders and educationalists for what they considered a

69
decline in the standard of proficiency in the English language among secondary

school students and especially university graduates (Todd and Hancock 1986: 280).

This alarmed the government and attempts were made to rectify the situation. The

government's concern did not remain purely political rhetoric. It is currently in the

mid-1990s implementing various programmes at all levels in the education system,

including changes in teacher training programmes, to stem the rot which had begun

when the number of hours students were exposed to English was dramatically

reduced after the principal medium of instruction was changed from English to

Bahasa Malaysia in 1971. This meant that English was taught as a single subject

and students were exposed to the language only during English lessons (Asiah Abu

Samah 1984: 193-194).

English is now used again in domains in which it had once been taboo.

Government Ministers even give speeches in English. In December 1993, the

Malaysian Prime Minister, Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, announced that scientific and

technological subjects could be taught in English. This move was opposed by the

Congress of Malay Intellectuals who sent a memorandum to the Prime Minister

expressing their dissatisfaction. The Prime Minister responded by stating that the

move stays, but stressed that it would not be at the expense of Bahasa Malaysia

and that the position of Bahasa Malaysia as outlined in the National Education

Policy would remain (Ramayah and Menon: 1994). This move can be seen as

significant in reinstating English as one of the media of instruction at the tertiary

level.

70
2.8 Conclusion

There is a definite resurgence in interest in the English language in

Malaysia. More Malaysians have become appreciative of the value of being at least

bilingual, in Bahasa Malaysia and English. However, many Malaysians feel the

need to identify with Malaysian English and appreciate that it is a distinct

non-native variety which is equal in standing with other varieties of the English

language.

The development of Malaysian English has been dictated by roles and

functions that have been set for it during the colonial period and also by

contemporary Malaysian society. The special status accorded to English in the field

of education represents the government's concern to ensure that Malaysians are

proficient in the language, to exploit it as a means of acquiring knowledge,

especially in the fields of science and technology.

The English language is also seen as the language for international

communication, especially as Malaysia continues to play a larger role in the

regional and world political and economic arenas. The role of English at the

national level is a very limited one. Its role as a link language between the various

races in Malaysia has been greatly diminished with increased literacy in the national

language, Bahasa Malaysia, at all levels of the population. English is mainly used

by a minority group of professionals in the urban centres (Benson 1990: 21).

The development of Malaysian English has been largely determined by

political and economic forces. Its evolution from a foreign language into a second

71
language was the result of government policies, first on the part of the colonial

powers and later the Malaysian government. It was the Malaysian government's

language policies which were responsible for the restriction of its use, but now it

has given Malaysian English new scope for development by allowing it to be used

in domains where it was once forbidden (Pennycook 1994: 217). The presence of

the English language in the education system and its use as a creative medium

should ensure its continued development.

72