I do not think so. Perhaps a few in Colombo 7 like to think so.

http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2010/06/20/mon05.asp

However, I agree with Pearl that Sri Lankan English usage should be documented. Michael Meyler has done something commendable by compiling ‘A dictionary of Sri Lankan English’. The best thing he does in it is comparing local usage with British (and sometimes American) usage. (I would have preferred it if he had made comparisons with both British and American usage all the time since American English also plays a dominant role in the global sphere today.)

I personally have added two sections (i.e. ‘Comparison of some Sri Lankan usage patterns with international usage’ and ‘Detailed description of pronunciation differences’) to the Wikipedia page on Sri Lankan English (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Lankan_English), adapting what I had already written in my blog on English (http://ingirisi.blogspot.com/).

The views Humanist has expressed definitely strike a chord with me. Rather than decide in a condescending manner what type of English the ‘ordinary’ people should learn, we had better make them aware of the choices they have and let them decide for themselves. This is what I’ve been trying to do with my blog too.

As Humanist rightly points out, more opportunities are available today with all these media around, unlike in our time. Growing up in the countryside in the 70s, I even had trouble listening to the English Service of the SLBC sometimes. When TV made its entry into the country, we had to set up an antenna at the top of a coconut tree to receice ITN! Today all this (and more) is available pretty much throughout the country.

The argument behind proposing Sri Lankan English for the ‘masses’ seems to be the misconception that ‘those’ people probably are incapable of learning anything else. The truth of the matter is that lots of bright rural people didn’t learn it in the past because they were given the impression that it was the in thing not to learn the oppressor’s tongue (and that came at a time opportunities were really opening up with the Central Schools and all that).

Another thing we have to remember is that Sri Lankan English is not somthing spoken by the majority of Sri Lankans today (that is, considering the whole country, not just Colombo and Kandy). Unlike in India, most Sri Lankans don’t speak any English at all – unless of course Singlish is counted as a form of Sri Lankan English too. This is a point Michael Meyler himself has made, talking about standard and non-standard Sri Lankan English. Since these Sri Lankans have to learn it anyway now, I think they themselves can make the choice as to what sort of English they want to settle for. (I run a poll about this on my blog. Although only 90 people have responded so far, 64% of them say they want to go for an internationaally accepted variety.)

I think it is not good to be patronising and make choices for people. It is better to make people understand the differences between various kinds of English (at least British, American and Sri Lankan) and give them the choice of what they want to learn to speak. It is no longer so hard for young people to learn English as in my generation for example, because they are exposed to TV and can easily pick up the more “global” forms of English, if they are encouraged to do so at a very young age.

Michael Mahler’s argument in this blog is that Sri Lankan English should not be relegated to the back shelves in the library. It exists and it communicates with larger population and not just the English purists.

The Japanese remain a super-power without speaking English in their relations with the international community.

English is but one language and the days of the British Empire are long gone.

We, as Sri Lankans, should be proud of how we communicate whether through our own version of British English, or a mixture of vernacular and English. Even the British are evolving when it comes to terminology.

It would be to our merit if as Mahler advocates Sri Lankan English and that our usage becomes incorporated into the OED which is updated every year.

I can remember an Englishman who commented on my English during my younger days telling me one day that I spoke English like reading a book ! He added that Englishmen do not speak grammatical English and that it is confined only to plays and speeches from the stage. In the circumstances we should not discourage Sri Lankan for the way they speak English. Of course that does not mean they should be discouraged from learning good English.

You are absolutely right in that the primary purpose of language is to communicate. If someone can make himself (or herself) understood, that person has definitely acquired the basic competence in using that language.

But then there are higher levels of competence. Whether we like it or not, society judges us by the way we use language. And this is especially so when it comes to English, which is widely considered a mark of social class. My contention is not that we should discriminate against those who speak sub-standard English, but that we shouldn’t discourage others who might otherwise have a chance to acquire what is generally considered Standard English.

A whole generation of Sri Lankans were misled by those who told them that they didn’t need to learn English at all. Let’s not make the mistake of telling today’s younger generation that they don’t need to learn anything but Sri Lankan English. Why not let them learn both varieties – Sri Lankan and international – if they can do so? In case a certain section of society fails to go beyond what is Sri Lankan even then, we’ll still treat them with respect and try to help them make the best of what they’ve got (though I’m not sure that everybody would actually do so).

Agreed.

I agree with you 100% that the poor English of those who haven’t got the chance to learn it well should never be laughed at, though some Sri Lankans with good (Snooty?) English do exactly that. However, what today’s youngsters need, in my view, is the chance and encouragement to learn better English than their parents did. That way they won’t need our pity in the future as their parents do today.

I don’t think we should purposely downgrade our own English when talking to those who are not so good at it. It’s a good thing to avoid complicated language (which is probably commendable in any context) but I believe those who have a good command of English should rather set an example for the others to follow. Sri Lanka today would do well to have a few local role models that the language learners could emulate. (Our generation had some like Ravi John and Richard de Zoysa but I don’t think their influence reached very far, as English was being neglected even more in those days.)

You have done something great by teaching English to all those people while you were here. That, I think, is the way to go.

I am not a language purist. I freely use such common Sri Lankan patterns in informal situations here and enjoy using them too. Though they would be understood quite well in the international arena as well, we know they are not part of what is considered educated English usage in international circles. That’s why all of us here tend to use ‘Standard (Snooty?)’ English even at forums like this. (There is only one comment here that uses Sri Lankan English patterns – that is, the second one – and it is obviously written in jest.)

Others might find it amusing to hear what they consider sub-standard English but the speaker wouldn’t gain any plus points for his or her language competency with it. (That may be all right if all you want to do is work as a waiter for them, but I feel that future Sri Lankans should set themselves higher goals than that.)

I readily agree that the primary purpose of learning a language is to be able to communicate. So I also encourage those Sri Lankans who are learning English to start practising whatever they have learned without any fears about possible mistakes. But I just can’t agree that we tell them to limit themselves to our Sri Lankan ways. Why not let them learn both varieties like we did – or even multiple varieties if they are so inclined – and have the best of both worlds.

You are absolutely right. When I comment it is only my opinion. I do understand that those of us who have had the privilege of learning English with all its correctness should strive to educate others paricularly who went to govt. schools without English teachers (I know many from the Sri Lankan diaspora who told me they never had English as a subject in schools!).

Before I became a journalist I must have given tuition to at least 75 students from Grade 1 to A/L and many have entered universities and Law College thanks to learning English.

Nevertheless my point is that I enjoy Annesley, Bertie and Rodrigo on Youtube which I watch very often because they make me laugh. Also, I do not deride and offend those who cannot speak proper English because here in the West if you spoke with a French accent you are considered quaint and sweet.

So why should we not accept it is difficult for some to pronounce or speak properly and that we also speak in a way they understand. By the way, my mother who only studied until Grade 8 could read newspapers and write cannot comfortably speak English. How we children and my father used to laugh at her.

I understand your nostalgia for things Sri Lankan. As I have mentioned before, I myself use accepted forms of Sri Lankan English (like using ‘no?’ instead of tag questions) without any hesitation when interacting with our own people (and that means everyday as I live here). But I wouldn’t dream of saying things like ‘iskool’ even in such situations. And when it comes to occasions that are more formal – or with the participation of foreigners – I invariably switch to the internationally accepted forms as best I can. That’s the way most educated Sri Lankans with a good knowledge of English go about it here (though their level of competence in these matters may vary) and that’s exactly what all of us are doing right here at this forum.

So we’ve got to realize that we have no moral right to tell the average Sri Lankan (who unfortunately is rather weak in English) that they need not learn international standards and it’s enough for them to learn it ‘Our Way’, while we ourselves happily make use of ‘proper’ English whenever we feel it’s appropriate. Why don’t we encourage others to learn both these ways themselves (OK, if they hate the old colonizer, let them learn American English) and have the ability and freedom to choose between the two according to the context just like we do?

It’s going to rain, isn’t it?
It’s going to rain, no?

I want to have a cup of tea.
I want to have a tea.

By using the second question/statement in each of these pairs, would the user close his entry into the world?? I cant understand your point.

Sri Lankan English would not replace standard British English. But we have to recognise that we are living in a global village and what is most important is that we communicate.

My niece’s generation interpret ‘wicked’ as brilliant and not something evil.

Sri lankans have their own quirks and they are quite delicious particularly when those of us who have migrated for whatever reasons yearn for everything Sri Lankan.

Carl Muller, a diehard Burgher, is an inspiration to all of us who long for the days we could not be arsed with syntax and those rigid grammar instilled into us by the off-shoots of our colonial British teachers.

I relish Sri Lankan English like I do pol sambol and I am not unanimous in this.
I desire freedom of expression without hang-ups.

In Mr. D. B. Nihalsingha’s article yesterday about one aspect of the IIFA event (http://transcurrents.com/tc/2010/06/sinhala_film_industry_given_sh.html), he mentions a possible “fear” among the organizers “that Sri Lankan film people could not speak English worth their salt and thus be no match for the fluent English of the Bollywoodians”. Do we want our people to be kept on the sidelines because of their poor English in the next generation too, which is most probably what would happen if they learned only Sri Lankan English?