ISSN 1226-8682

대한영어영문학회 전자저널

대한영어영문학회 전자저널

대한영어영문학회

47권 4호 (2021년 11월)

Against the Usage-based Approach to Substratum Transfer: Singapore English one

김종혁

Pages : 189-230

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.21559/aellk.2021.47.4.009

PDF보기

리스트

Abstract

Kim, Chonghyuck. “Against the Usage-based Approach to Substratum Transfer: Singapore English one.” Studies in English Language & Literature 47.4 (2021): 189-230. The pronominal one displays peculiar properties in Singapore English. Unlike one in Standard English which is mainly used as a pronominal, it has two additional productive functions; it is used to nominalize a phrase or emphasize (a part of) a sentence. In contact linguistics, these peculiar properties of Singapore English one are viewed as a consequence that results from a process known as substratum transfer, where the superstratum language, English, acquires non-English-like properties from the substratum languages spoken in the local environment, mainly Chinese languages in Singapore. In the literature, the standard assumption about substratum transfer, at least since Lefebvre (1998), is that it emerges through a merger of the lexicons of the superstratum and substratum languages, a lexicalist conception of substratum transfer which has its theoretical root in the generative grammar. Bao (2009) argues, however, that this standard generative conception of substratum transfer fails to account for Singapore English one, and proposes instead to adopt a usage-based approach to substratum transfer. Within this usage-based approach, substratum transfer has nothing to do with lexicons but with constructions. In a recent paper, Kim (2021) defends the lexicalist hypothesis by showing that all the major problems that Bao attributes to the lexicalist hypothesis are only apparent and not problematic. While Kim succeeds in defending the lexicalist hypothesis, he fails to show that it is superior to the usage-based approach. In this article, I compare Kim’s analysis with Bao’s point by point with the aim to show that Kim’s lexicalist hypothesis is superior. I argue that even the usage patterns of one, which have been used to support the usage-based approach, in fact turn out be a strong support for the lexicalist approach. (Jeonbuk National University)

Keywords

# Singapore English one # Chinese de # copula deletion # substratum transfer # contact linguistics

References

  • Alsagoff, Lubna & Chee Lick Ho. “The relative clause in colloquial Singapore English.” World Englishes 17.2 (1998): 127-138. Print.
  • Bao, Zhiming. “The origins of empty categories in Singapore English.” Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 16.2 (2001): 275-319. Print.
  • Bao, Zhiming. “The aspectual system of Singapore English and the systematic substratist explanation.” Journal of Linguistics 41.2 (2005): 237-267. Print.
  • Bao, Zhiming. “One in Singapore English.” Studies in Language 33.2 (2009): 338-365. Print.
  • Bao, Zhiming. “A usage-based approach to substratum transfer: The case of four unproductive features in Singapore English.” Language 86.4 (2010): 792-820. Print.
  • Brown, Adam. Singapore English in a nutshell: An alphabetic description of its features. Singapore: Federal Publications. 1999. Print.
  • Bybee, Joan. “Regular morphology and the lexicon.” Language and Cognitive Processes 10 (1995): 424-455. Print.
  • Bybee, Joan. Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Print.
  • Cheng, Lisa. “Deconstructing the shi…de construction.” The Linguistic Review 25.3/4 (2008): 235-266.
  • Chomsky, Noam. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris, 1981. Print.
  • Chomsky, Noam. Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New York: Praeger, 1986. Print.
  • Chomsky, Noam. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995. Print.
  • Croft, William. Explaining language change: An evolutionary approach. London: Longmans, 2000. Print.
  • Croft, William. Typology and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Print.
  • Dryer, Matthew S. “The Greenbergian word order correlations.” Language 68.1 (1992): 81-131. Print.
  • Gupta, Anthea Fraser. “Contact features of Singapore Colloquial English.” Sociolinguistics today: International perspective. Eds. Kingsley Bolton & Helen Kwok. London: Routledge, 1992a. 324-345. Print.
  • Gupta, Anthea Fraser. “The pragmatic particles of Singapore Colloquial English.” Journal of Pragmatics 18.1 (1992b): 31-37. Print.
  • Gupta, Anthea Fraser. The step-tongue: Children’s English in Singapore. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 1994. Print.
  • Hawkins, John A. “A parsing theory of word order universals.” Linguistic Inquiry 21.2 (1990): 223-261. Print.
  • Ho, Mian-Lian and John T. Platt. Dynamics of a Contact Continuum: Singapore English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993. Print.
  • Johnson, Keith. “Speech perception without speech normalization.” Talker variability in speech processing. Eds. Keith Johnson & John W. Mullennix. San Diego CA: Academic Press, 1996. 145-165. Print.
  • Kang, Vincent L. K. Colloquial Singapore English: The ‘one’ construction. Singapore: National University of Singapore honours thesis. 1999. Print.
  • Kim, Chonghyuck & Wee, Lionel. “Resolving the paradox of Singapore English hor.” English World-Wide 30.3 (2009): 241-261. Print.
  • Kim, Chonghyuck. “The role of copula deletion on the emergence of a new grammatical feature.” Studies in English Language & Literature 38.4 (2012): 223-254. Print.
  • Kim, Chonghyuck. “From Chinese de to Singapore English one.” Studies in English Language & Literature 47.2 (2021): 187-204. Print.
  • Kitagawa, Chisato and Claudia N. G. Ross. “Prenominal modification in Chinese and Japanese.” Linguistic Analysis 9.1 (1982): 19-53. Print.
  • Kwan-Terry, Anna. “The meaning and the source of ‘la’ and the ‘what’ particles of Singapore English.” RELC Journal 9.1 (1978): 22-36. Print.
  • Lefebvre, Claire. Creole genesis and the acquisition of grammar: The case of Haitian Creole. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Print.
  • Leimgruber, Jakob R. E. “Singapore English’” Language and Linguistics Compass 5.1 (2011): 47-62. Print.
  • Li, Charles N. & Thompson, Sandra A. Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. London: University of California Press, 1981. Print.
  • Lim, Cindy M. H. The syntax of the ‘one’ construction in Colloquial Singapore English. Singapore: National University of Singapore honours thesis, 2000. Print.
  • Lim, Lisa. Singapore English: A grammatical description. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2004. Print.
  • Lim, Nancy L. S. Scope Phenomena in Colloquial Singapore English: A study of some particles. Singapore: National University of Singapore honours thesis, 1999. Print.
  • Platt, John & Weber, Heidi. English in Singapore and Malaysia: Status, features, functions. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1980. Print.
  • Platt, John T. & Ho, Mian-Lian. “Discourse particles in Singaporean English: Substratum influences and universals.” World Englishes 8.2 (1989): 215-221. Print.
  • Prince, Ellen F. “A Comparison of Wh-clefts and it-clefts in Discourse.” Language 54.4 (1978): 883-906. Print.
  • Tay, Mary W. J. “The uses, users and features of English in Singapore.” New Englishes. Ed. John B. Pride. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. 1982. 51-70. Print.
  • Wee, Lionel. “Lor in colloquial Singapore English.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (2002): 711-725. Print.