The following is the first few parts of the Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights deemed relevant to the Singaporean government policy on Singlish. Unfortunately, I don't have enough energy to debunk completely the Singaporean government policy on Singlish as far as the UDLR will take it. If I remember correctly, the UDLR is a UN document, as well as international law. If you support Bush's foreign policy, however, your arguements are unfortunately void as he promotes international crimes. (war crimes among others, in Guantanamo Bay, it is against international law to hold foreign prisoners indefinately without officially declaring them prisoners of war.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> article III. 1. This Declaration considers the following to be inalienable personal rights which may be exercised in any situation: the right to the use of one's own language both in private and in public; --Singlish is no longer allowed on public television or in movies. It is no longer the choice of any of those taking part in the production, distrobution, sales, or displaying of a film whether it is allowed to be shown or not. If the film is in Singlish, the government will not allow it to be shown in theatres, such is the case with "Talking Cock" (Talking Nonsense), 2002. the right to maintain and develop one's own culture; --The Singaporean government is outwardly against the use of Singlish. Singlish is banned from the airwaves, from movies, CDs, audiotapes, and more. Although it can easily be asserted, both thru vocabulary and typological features, that Singlish is a separate language from English rather than a "dialect", the government of Singapore says that "Proper English" should be used instead of Singlish. If you were denied your right to watch movies in English, but were told "if you want to watch a movie, you must watch a movie in a language other than English," how would you feel? There is no doubt that films EXIST in Singlish, but they are not allowed to be viewed in public theatres BECAUSE THEY ARE IN SINGLISH. 2. This Declaration considers that the collective rights of language groups, may include the following, in addition to the rights attributed to the members of language groups in the foregoing paragraph, and in accordance with the conditions laid down in article 2.2: the right for their own language and culture to be taught; --But is this not denied? It would not be permissible to hold a class in the Singlish language at a public school, whether the course was funded by the government or not. It is simply not permissible by the Singaporean government to encourage or promote the use of Singlish by children. the right of access to cultural services; --This is not allowed either. Singaporeans are not guaranteed the right to any services in Singlish. It is regarded by the government as merely a local patois, yet those who speak Singlish and not English are quite alienated by these services if they do not speak Chinese (Mandarin, the government has also made a case against non-Mandarin sinitic languages), Malay, or Tamil. As of yet, many services are not even guaranteed in all of these languages and, in some cases, in any of them. the right to an equitable presence of their language and culture in the communications media; --But as said previously, this is no longer allowed. All presence of the Singlish language in the communications media have been banned. Singlish is not permissible to be transmitted to the general populous in newspapers, on the airwaves, or in public theatres. the right to receive attention in their own language from government bodies and in socioeconomic relations. --This right is most certainly denied, as the Singaporean government claims that English material and attention is sufficient for speakers of Singlish. There are currently peoples who speak Singlish, but not Chinese (Mandarin, or some any dialect for that matter), Malay, Tamil, or English. These persons cannot understand English. The Singaporean government acknowledges this by giving government-funded English classes to Singlish speakers. If they weren't different languages, why would Singlish speakers need to learn English? article V. This Declaration is based on the principle that the rights of all language communities are equal and independent of their legal status as official, regional or minority languages. Terms such as regional or minority languages are not used in this Declaration because, though in certain cases the recognition of regional or minority languages can facilitate the exercise of certain rights, these and other modifiers are frequently used to restrict the rights of language communities. --This is blatantly denied by the government of Singapore. Not only do they deny the rights of Singlish monolinguals (as well as Singlish polylinguals, and Singlish polylinguals in unrecognised sinitic languages), but the rights of speakers of non-Mandarin sinitic languages are denied as well. article VII. 1. All languages are the expression of a collective identity and of a distinct way of perceiving and describing reality and must therefore be able to enjoy the conditions required for their development in all functions. --This right is denied as well. The Singaporean government argues that Singlish is not distinct from English, but one can see from a maximum of 15 sentences, probably much less, that they are really quite different languages. 2. All languages are collectively constituted and are made available within a community for individual use as tools of cohesion, identification, communication and creative expression. --This is true of Singlish. The Singaporean government does not blatantly deny the right of Singlish speakers to use their language for communication in informal situations, but use is limited beyond informal situations. article VIII. 1. All language communities have the right to organize and manage their own resources so as to ensure the use of their language in all functions within society. --This is denied by the Singaporean government. Singlish is not recognised as separate from English, although it is plain to see. 2. All language communities are entitled to have at their disposal whatever means are necessary to ensure the transmission and continuity of their language. --This is denied to Singlish as well. Even when it has been allowed by copyright owners of a film in Singlish, as well as by a theatre owner, to display the film, the government will not allow it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have only just begun to list the fallacies in the Singaporean policy on Singlish.
GB-GIL Trans-global ... I voted 'I couldn't care less'. The thing that bothers me is that you consider this to be an attack on 'Basic Rights'. Why do you feel as you do? Take care, and welcome to Sciforums.
Re: GB-GIL Trans-global ... Basic rights of the LANGUAGE. This is an attack on the basic rights of the LANGUAGE. It isn't nearly an attack on the basic rights of the people. Actually, it sort of is. And this is /not/ my first post at Sciforums. You've responded to previous posts of mine Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! However, your "couldn't care less" attitude is what makes you an average American. And don't give me crap because I /am/ a US American, although quite unwillingly I must admit.
Having lived and worked there for two years, I'd imagine your average singaporean has a little more to worry about than this... They're used to rather odd laws being passed by their governments over the last 35 years or so in an attempt to make Singapore a western nation. And it is rather stupid... imagine trying to ban the Australian colloqialisms because they're not "proper english"... we'd laugh in their faces. Singaporeans, on the other hand, might not... any criticism of the goverment tends to result in ruinous lawsuits. I did notice your orignal post was edited though.. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
