I recently was in Singapore for a business trip. We were working with the Global Medical Affairs team of a Japan-based pharmaceutical company. This was probably my 10th trip to Singapore over the years. It is one of my favorite countries in the world. I love the cleanliness, efficiency, people, and of course, the food. But it had probably been five or six years since I last visited.
One thing that really stood out for me on this visit was that Singaporean English, or at least the English Singaporean people speak to non-Singaporeans seems to be rapidly approaching a kind of "off-shore English." I noticed this from taxi drivers, shop clerks, hotel workers, and businesspeople, alike. In other words, the English that most people spoke to me was very close to what I'd call a "global standard." It was very easy to understand. Of course, since I am a native speaker of English there theoretically should be no problem for me to understand even heavily-accented English. But for non-native speakers, this is likely not true. Without a doubt, the closer the English is to a "standard" variety, the easier it will be for non-native speakers of English to follow. It definitely seemed that the English I heard on this visit to Singapore was much closer to this "global standard."
Now, no one "owns" English. It's not a British possession, not a U.S. American possession, not an Australian possession. But, for better or worse, there is no escaping the fact English is undoubtedly the language of business in today's world. And in order for that standard language to fulfill its role as a lingua franca, it needs to be mutually understandable among the people who use it.
What do I mean when I say "standard"? When it comes to pronunciation, whether we are talking about the phonetic level of how specific consonants and vowels are pronounced or whether we are talking about prosody (intonation, stress, rhythm, temp, pausing, etc.), I strongly believe that there is an acceptable range within which reasonably competent speakers of English (especially non-native speakers of English) can be expected to understand the message. As long as the pronunciation is within this acceptable range, English can function well as a vehicle for communication among people who come from different backgrounds.
As I mentioned, what I observed on this visit to Singapore was that when native Singaporeans were speaking to people from outside Singapore, they almost always used the off-shore, standard pronunciation of English. This English still had a perceptible "Singapore accent," but it was so much easier for me to understand than the English I often heard on previous visits. At the same time, when Singaporeans spoke with other native Singaporeans in English, we could often hear the local Singlish. I could catch most of what they said, but I really had to pay careful attention. Non-native speakers of Engish surely must struggle to understand.
Thus, at some level, many Singaporeans are consciously adjusting the English they use in order to communicate effectively with others. In my opinion, this is a very positive trend. We can and should respect local varieties of English. These local "Englishes" are often an important badge of cultural identity and local pride. A barista at a local coffee shop told me that she definitely speaks Singlish with her friends and coworkers if there are no non-Singaporeans around. As far as I'm concerned, when people from the same background speak with each other, if they choose to speak English, they should be encouraged to use their own local variety.
At the same time, however, I strongly believe that there needs to be some "standard, mutually understandable, off-shore" version of English that can be used as a tool to communicate comfortably in today's diverse, globalizing world. Based on my observations in Singapore last week, it is clear that, as a tendency, many Singaporeans have embraced this idea. And that certainly is a good thing, in my opinion.
Robert 