Print

Print


http://www.vsubhash.com/desienglish.asp

There's also a paper dictionary of the language that was published
this month I think.

2006/12/8, [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>:
> li [Carl Mäsak] mi tulis la
>
> > Dana (>), quoting
> > <http://www.eigodaigaku.com/archives/en/000158> .html>:
> > > "11)
> > There is a standard form of the language
> > (compare English in which
> > > there are competing standards)"
> > >
> > > English really only has two major standards, American and
> > British and
> > > the differences are not enough to make the dialects unintelligible.
> >
> > Is this still true, and not simply an ever-increasingly
> > obsolete old truth?
> >
> > Look at
> >
>  <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dialects_of_the_English_language>
>
> > which lists, among others, European English, Chinese English
> > (Chinglish), Hindi English (Hinglish) and Singaporean English
> > (Singlish). I've omitted more from the list than I have included,
> > because I only included those which I often hear about in everyday
> > conversation.
>
> > At which point will these dialects of English be regarded as major
> > standards too, with their own well-defined, self-consistent grammar
> > and vocabulary?
>
> > Unless "major standard" means something vastly different from what I'm
> > imagining here, I think that we have moved past the days when English
> > really only had two major standards.
>
> There are many dialects of English, even within Britain and the U.S. but
> the "standard" forms are those which are taught in schools, used in
> broadcasting, etc.  I don't see any textbooks teaching or advocating
> Hinglish, Chinglish, Jinglish, Singlish therefore they are not
> standardized forms.  Most L2 materials that I've seen teach the
> (non-rhotic, etc.) British forms.
>


-- 
-----
http://wiki.galbijim.com