The variety as seen by its speakers

The variety as seen by its speakers
Notwithstanding these considerations, it remains
that speakers are very happy to identify individual
varieties by means of a convenient label, even in
highly multilingual societies. In a small
questionnaire-based survey, administered online
to Chinese Singaporean university students, many
respondents, for instance, were happy to say that
they were fluent in Singlish, English, and any
number of official and non-official varieties.
Non-official varieties of Chinese were often
labelled as‘dialects’ in keeping with the terminology of the nation’s language planners. The ease
with which these are used presupposes a degree
of shared knowledge and of agreement on what
these terms refer to (for example, Mandarin in
Singapore is not the same as Mandarin in Beijing, Shanghai, or Taipei), but at the same time,
they are imprecise in the extreme (the term English
alone does not reveal whether it covers Singlish,
Standard English, something in between, or the
whole continuum). After all, the ostensibly simple
distinction between Singlish and English has proven to be rather more complex than it is usually
thought to be by both planners and speakers
(Platt, 1975; Gupta, 1994; Alsagoff, 2010;
Leimgruber, 2012).
To come back to the possibility of Hokkien–
Singlish/English code-switching, and given the
abundance of Hokkien loanwords in Singlish,
one wonders to what extent Hokkien and Singlish
are distinguished by speakers. When presented
with the sentence in (1), which is entirely in
Hokkien and has the pragmatic status of the prototypical interjection that precedes a fight, respondents were split on what to answer to the
question ‘Is this Singlish?’ There was agreement

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 2:

The Variety as seen by its Speakers
Notwithstanding these considerations, it remains
that Speakers are very Happy to Identify individual
Varieties by means of a convenient Label, even in
highly Multilingual Societies. In a Small
questionnaire-based Survey, administered Online
to Chinese Singaporean University students, many
respondents, for instance, were Happy to Say that
they were FL Uent in Singlish, English, and any
Number of of fi Cial and non-of fi Cial Varieties.
Non-of fi Cial Varieties. of Chinese were often
labeled As'dialects' in keeping with the Terminology of the Nation's language Planners. The Ease
with which these are used presupposes a Degree
of Shared Knowledge and of Agreement on what
these terms Refer to (for example, Mandarin in
Singapore is not the Same as Mandarin in Beijing, Shanghai, or Taipei), but at the Same time,.
they are imprecise in the Extreme (the English term
alone does not Reveal whether it Singlish Covers,
Standard English, Something in between, or the
whole continuum). After all, the ostensibly Simple
Distinction between Singlish and English has proven to be rather more Complex than it is usually
thought to be by both Planners and Speakers
(Platt, 1,975th; Gupta, the 1,994th; Alsagoff, the 2,010th;
Leimgruber, 2012).
To Come. Back to the possibility of Hokkien-
Singlish / English code-switching, and Given the
Abundance of Loanwords in Hokkien Singlish,
one Wonders to what extent Hokkien Singlish and
are distinguished by Speakers. When Presented
with the sentence in (1), which is entirely in
Hokkien and has the pragmatic Status of the prototypical Interjection that precedes a fi GHT, respondents were Split on what to answer to the
question 'Is this Singlish?'. There was agreement

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 3:

The variety as seen by its speakers
Notwithstanding, these considerations it remains
that speakers are very happy to identify. Individual
varieties by means of a, convenient label even in
highly multilingual societies. In a small
questionnaire-based. Survey administered, online
to Chinese Singaporean, university students many
respondents for instance, were happy, to say. That
.They were fl uent in Singlish the English the and any sb number of of fi cial and non-of fi cial varieties. The Non-of fi cial varieties of Chinese EOS Were often
labelled as ‘ dialects friendly in keeping with the terminology of the nation friendly s language planners in can The ease
with which EOS These are used presupposes a degree
of shared knowledge and of agreement on what
these terms refer to (for example Mandarin,, In
.Singapore is not the same as Mandarin in, or Shanghai Beijing, Taipei), but at the same time
they, are imprecise in the. Extreme (the term English
alone does not reveal whether it, covers Singlish
Standard English something between or, in, the
whole. Continuum). After all the ostensibly, simple
distinction between Singlish and English has proven to be rather more complex. Than it is usually
.Thought to be by both planners and speakers
(Platt 1975 Gupta 1994;,,;,;, Alsagoff 2010
Leimgruber 2012).
To come back. To the possibility of Hokkien -
Singlish / English code-switching and given, the
abundance of Hokkien loanwords in Singlish
one,, Wonders to what extent Hokkien and Singlish SB are distinguished by speakers. When presented sb with the sentence in (1) the which EOS Is entirely in
EOSHokkien and has the pragmatic status of the prototypical interjection that precedes a fi ght the respondents were split on what EOS To answer to the
question ‘ Is this Singlish? Friendly There was agreement EOS