“Zanglish” versus “Standard English”

In Zambia, as elsewhere in many parts of Africa, English is a “second language.” It is common in such instances for people to create a local version of English. This often happens, even in a country where English is the dominant first language (such as the United States). So, for example, the Latino community in the USA speaks what is sometimes called “Spanglish,” which is a version of English but has Spanish characteristics and vocabulary. African-Americans often speak what is called “Black English;” it, too, has its own structure and vocabulary. In the end, languages are dynamic and when two different languages exist in the same context, they tend to influence each other.

This raises some interesting questions for a class in “written communication” and there are no easy answers to some of the questions:

1. What do we mean by the term, “standard English”? Whose standard? British? American?

2. What is the relationship between spoken English and written English? Is it permissible for certain aspects of spoken English to find a place in written communication? If so, to what degree?

3. In Zambia, should we consider English to be a “second language” and treat it accordingly, or should we assess students as if this is their first language?

4. When teaching written English to second language learners, to what degree should we remove their local English dialect? Should we allow uniquely created words or grammatical structures?

These questions pose serious challenges for anyone teaching or learning to write English in a context in which English is essentially a second language. This is our situation in Zambia.

The term “Zanglish” refers to the fact that Zambians have created a version of English which is uniquely Zambian. Its characteristics generally come from the features of local Zambian languages, and include both grammatical structure and vocabulary differences. In Zanglish, some word order differs from standard English and often word use differs.

Some examples:

o Zanglish: “Thank you. We appreciate.”
Standard” English: “Thank you. We appreciate it.”
[Note: Zanglish omits the word “it” where it is required by standard English.]

o Zanglish: “I received your email. Am ready to be guided.”
Standard” English: “I received your email. I am ready to be guided by you.”
[Note: Zanglish omits “I” while standard English requires it.]

o Zanglish: “You will find us at Nahumba.”
Standard English: “We will be at Nahumba.”
[Note: Zanglish uses the word “find” in this way because this is way that word functions in local Zambian languages (i.e., the use is from “ulibambile” in Tonga).]

This brings the issue back to the essential question above – How much Zanglish should remain if one is to retain a uniquely Zambian written voice? No perfect answer exists; it is often a matter of judgement. One might also distinguish between different sorts of written communication. Might it be true that a research paper can have a different sort of writing than a newspaper article? Probably.

However, some standard English practices should probably be maintained. For example, it is reasonable to expect words to be spelled in accordance with standard English. One humorous example from a student submission:

Upon receiving the assignment, the student responded to the lecturer: “Thank you for your comments. Only miner corrections are necessary.” “Miner corrections”? Are workers from the Mamba Mines going to make his corrections? The misspelling totally changes the meaning of the reply. The spelling should be “minor” not “miner” in order to have the correct meaning. This instance is not an example of Zanglish but an example of incorrect English.

ZACU values local culture and Afro-centric expression, so we will try to allow (and even encourage) authentic local “voices.” At the same time, we will sometimes insist that student writing meets the highest levels of “standard English.”