Blog 3: Singlish in Singapore – Boon or Bane?

There has been ongoing debate whether the trademark Singaporean slang – “Singlish” is good or bad for Singaporeans. Here are my views on this pertinent issue.

Nearly every Singaporean is guilty of peppering his sentences with local jargon like “lah” and “lor”, which have essentially become part of their vocabulary, whether at the coffee shop or in the classroom. Some students are so accustomed to using Singlish, or broken English, that they subconsciously use them in their English essays, much to the disgust of their English teachers. Well, is Singlish a boon or bane?

Some Singaporeans argue that Singlish, despite being grammatically wrong, is indeed good for the country, for it gives Singapore a sense of identity, something that is “uniquely Singapore”. Local comedies such as the Phua Chu Kang series all have characters that use the slang.

Furthermore, speaking Singlish to many Singaporeans is the most comfortable way of communication. As Mr Gaurav Keerthi, president of the local Debating Association, puts it, Singlish “can express a lot of feelings colloquially which may not have the same impact or meaning as English.” One must admit that this is very true; we are all used to using Singlish, a “language” that every Singaporean can understand and relate to.

Since Singlish seems to benefit us so much, then why is there such a heated debate whether it should be used? Well, the problem with Singlish is that it is highly grammatically incorrect. “Sian lah, got do English blog yet?” is one such example where Singlish inculcates poor grammar in students. Sentence structure borrowed from Mandarin and the additions of “lah” or “leh” is what makes Singlish so unique, but also makes it so controversial among teachers and leaders.

Can Singlish be detrimental to students? Yes, it most certainly can. Using Singlish may get so deeply rooted in their brains that they can easily forget and use them in their oral assessments and exams. This may affect them when they grow up too; what type of impression would they give if they use Singlish in their resumes? Communication with people from other countries will be difficult too. I do not think Singlish will be very intelligible to non-Singaporeans. The use of broken language will only give them a poor impression of our nation.

Therefore, I feel that despite Singlish being part of our unique culture, it is rather impractical and detrimental when it comes to communication and relations with foreigners from other lands. It has the potential of making a negative impact on the schooling population, for it will adversely affect the standard of English, both spoken and written.

After all, it was Singlish that sparked the Speak Good English Movement, aimed to improve the English standards in Singapore, to help Singaporeans speak Standard English with correct grammar and pronunciation (the exact opposite of what Singlish is), to enable Singaporeans to be able to relate better abroad with other English-speaking humans.

However, does that mean we should ban Singlish and forget it altogether? Despite its drawbacks, we should also not forget how it benefits us, as mentioned earlier. I think that expressing our feelings colloquially using Singlish is not a sin; but overdoing it to the extent of using Singlish in reports and essays is.

Think about it: would not Singapore become duller if Singlish were banned? Singlish is essential in injecting local humour and flavour to this sunny little island.

To conclude, I feel that Singlish can be both a boon and a bane—depending on how one uses it. Using it excessively will compromise the standards of English in Singapore – making it more of a bane. However, as long as we Singaporeans use it minimally and under control, we can all enjoy it, at the same time not experiencing its negative side-effects on Standard English.

Here’s the article to refer to (on Newslink – the links don’t work all the time, but you can try: http://newslink.asiaone.com/user/OrderArticleRequest.action?order=&_sourcePage=%2FWEB-INF%2Fjsp%2Fuser%2Fsearch_type_result.jsp&month=08&year=2008&date=20&docLanguage=en&documentId=nica_ST_2008_9719854 ):
Don't codeswitch to Singlish, please
Section: Home
Publication: The Straits Times 20/08/2008
Page: B3
No. of words: 367
IT MAY seem like good manners to turn on the Singlish when communicating with a countryman who can speak only the patois, but think again.You are doing him a disservice, not a favour, because his language skills will never improve, said the chairman of the Speak Good English movement (SGEM), Mr Goh Eck Kheng.When speakers of standard English codeswitch to a non-standard form, poor speakers will think there is no need to increase their proficiency.Codeswitching is actually condescending, akin to talking down to someone, Mr Goh added.He hopes to cultivate speaking good English as the norm. "Immersing Singaporeans who cannot speak English well in this environment will give them the incentive to speak good English all the time. It's like sending them to London or New York where generally there's a good English-speaking environment."There are three groups being targeted: Singaporeans who can speak standard English, those who cannot but want to, and those who speak bad English but see no need to improve.The movement wants those in the first group to be role models, and will help the second group by providing more resources. As for the third, it hopes to change their mindsets through its public awareness campaign and with the help of standard speakers.Ex-national debater Jonathan Pflug felt role models would not work – not because the idea is bad, but because Singaporeans will not bother when it comes to simple actions like ordering hawker food. "When you interact with people in daily life, those interactions are just functional. I don't think people think of them as educational opportunities," he said.Another reason could be the homely familiarity of Singlish."It's comfortable, and you can express a lot of things colloquially which may not have the same impact or meaning as English," said Mr Gaurav Keerthi, president of the local chapter of the Debating Association.English schoolteacher Anne Lua felt speaking Singlish to speakers of bad English is not condescending, but a case of "building rapport". She said: "If I speak in proper English to hawkers, they may think I'm showing off or better than them. That may affect service and people's self-esteem."

Term 2 Blog: "Democracy creates stability in a society"

“Democracy creates stability in a society.”

Many countries around the world adopt democracy as their political ideology, with varying degrees of success. As such, democracy is a double edged sword, with its fair share of advantages and disadvantages.

What is meant by “democracy”? It is defined as a system of government in which everyone in the country has the right to vote and make decisions for the nation. A democratic nation allows its inhabitants freedom of speech – a democratic government does not censor the media and its people’s expression of ideas. A democracy will grant its people political power through methods such as voting and referendums.

To simplify things, a stable society shall be defined as one that is socially stable. A socially stable country is one that seldom has conflicts and riots, and is peaceful. Social stability leads to economic growth; foreign investors would prefer to put their money in a peaceful, safe country.

Now, does a “democracy” create a stable country? Let us first examine it using the first defining characteristic of democracy: freedom of speech. This is a means of showing respect to its citizens and their human rights, thus, it seems to do the country good.

Freedom of expression is important to achieving social stability in a country. Who would not want to express his views on the country and government? By letting citizens voice their concerns and novel ideas, the government will understand its citizens and have a wider range of viewpoints on how to govern the country. This will help the country achieve stability and keep its citizens satisfied and unrest at bay. On the contrary, the lack of freedom of expression would frustrate its citizens and create instability, as illustrated in the recent Tibetan riots.

Democracy can aid in creating social stability because it grants each citizen equal political power through voting and referendums. No doubt every citizen would like to have a say in the electing of their government. Thus, letting the people have equal right to make decisions for their country is certainly a fair method that can keep them happy. Conflicts between the government and its people will be minimised this way, because voting helps both government and citizens to settle on a decision made by both sides. In a way, both government and citizens are working together to help build a better nation. Therefore, democracy can help achieve social stability because it respects human rights and gives each and every citizen a fair opportunity to choose his government. Since the government is voted in by its people, chances are that it is the most capable group of people to rule the country, thus further helping the country to progress and achieve stability.

An example will be democratic Singapore. The government allows its citizens to vote for their desired parties during General Elections, showing that it acknowledges the rights of its people. As such, conflicts between the government and the people are minimised and social stability in this peaceful country is evident. This is unlike some communist nations where its people have no political rights, resulting in many uprisings and much unhappiness among the population.

However, democracy does not guarantee stability in a country. Take Taiwan for example. This country has been democratic since the lifting of martial law. However, the various political parties and their supporters have been at odds all these years. The country has absolute freedom of speech, but the freedom has also led to chaos and confusion among the population. This is because the right to freedom of speech has been abused by certain sections of its people, resulting in many conflicts and a stagnation in its economy. Thus, while freedom of speech appears to be fair to the people, it also can have a negative effect on the country, because differing ideas of its citizens can spark a conflict, leading to instability.

Granting voting rights to every citizen does not ensure stability. The people must use their voting rights responsibly and wisely. Sometimes, an undeserving party gets elected, often with bad consequences for the nation. For example, Bhutan has recently become a democracy, and its people voted for the first time. They had to be taught how to vote. Hopefully, they had elected the right government. Therefore, we can see that voting rights does not guarantee stability if the population is not well-informed and they may make the wrong decision. A decision made by the majority may not be the right one.

In conclusion, I feel the most important factor that can affects stability in a democracy is the citizens’ use of the rights that the democracy entrusts them with. In both criteria (freedom of speech and voting rights), if the people exercise these rights responsibly and wisely, the country will benefit and progress. If not, the result could be instability. Therefore, social stability in a democracy largely depends on its citizens; they decide how they want their nation to turn out.

After all, a democracy is one that gives power to its ordinary citizens. Thus, everyone plays a part in deciding the fate of their homeland.

Bad Language and Youngsters (Term 1 Blog: Teenage and social issues)

In this article, a 17-year-old teen is punished by her school for using vulgarities to complain about school administrators on her blog. In response to this, her lawyer argued that she should not have been reprimanded, claiming that schools should not regulate “off-campus speech” such as blogs.

Vulgarities have found their way into nearly every youngster’s vocabulary nowadays. If you pay attention to the conversation of some stranger schoolmates, chances are you will find their sentences peppered with profanities. Vulgarities that teenagers use come in a wide variety of forms – four-letter words and even Hokkien expletives are two common examples. Furthermore, teenagers use them everywhere – in everyday exchanges, when playing football, during MSN conversations…

One reason why I think youngsters are fond of using such crude lingo is to let go of the anger and stress within them. But aren’t there many other ways to do so (for example punching your pillow)? Whatever the case is, I feel that swearing still can never be justified.

Another reason why teenagers curse and swear freely is probably because they think it is cool to do so. I beg to differ. Not only is it a sin to swear (swearing only shows how filthy you are within), it can also land you in deep trouble. Remember the Member of Parliament who muttered expletives during the Parliament sitting? The consequences were severe and embarrassing. The 17-year-old teenager mentioned in this article is yet another fitting example of the undesirable results of using such dirty words.

Speaking of that teenager, one can conclude that blogs are another platform for us youngsters to complain about life. And with that comes the filthy language. It is not uncommon to find authors who express their feelings through vulgarities. These irresponsible bloggers seem to totally forget that their blog is posted for everyone to read. To further substantiate this point, here is an excerpt from the instructions on how to write this English Blog that you are reading now:

“Note that your blog is posted in the public domain and that you are accountable for everything you write. Recall cases of bloggers who have not been responsible and thus suffer a public backlash.”

I thus disagree with the schoolgirl’s lawyer, for the teenager is fully responsible for what she posts on her blog.

Blogs are not the only online resource for finding expletives. Take a closer look at your MSN contact list, for example. I found at least four contacts with unwholesome language embedded in their display names. Other examples include popular social networking websites such as “Friendster” and “Facebook”. In short, foul language is rampant among youngsters. They do not care if other strangers read it. It is no wonder then that so many are getting into trouble in this way.

How, then, could this be prevented? There is probably only one answer: self-control. It is entirely up to ourselves to decide whether we want to swear or not. And if you do not swear, do not start, for habits are difficult to break. It was probably this bad habit that landed the blogger (and MP) into trouble; you do not want to be the next victim, do you?

Watch your tongue!

(500 words)

The article can be accessed here: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/03/05/america/Student-Speech.php

P.S. Sorry about the paragraphing; it is supposed to have a "2-finger spacing" at the
start of each paragraph but I could not get it to do so.