Comprehensibility of Language in different contexts

There are hundreds of languages in the world and with the advent of globalisation, people who are from different nationalities and speak different languages can be found all across the world. Chinese live in America, Indians live in Britain, Americans live in Japan etc.

Different languages have different sentence structures and grammar. Different cultures and contexts will also see the people in that situation interpreting a simple sentence differences.

For example, someone may comment, "The children saw the man with a binoculars." In a first world country, people would tend to interpret this in 2 ways- that the children used the binoculars to view a man, or the children saw a man holding a binoculars.

However, in a third world country, like Africa, the sentence "The children saw the man with a binoculars." would be interpreted by most people as the latter meaning, that the children saw a man holding binoculars. This is because in the situation of Africa, the majority of its inhabitants are living in poverty and would not have enough money to afford binoculars.

Should Singlish be discouraged in Singapore?

I believe that Singlish should not be discouraged in Singapore. Unfortunately, the Singapore Government seems to be against having Singlish in Singapore and have set off to conquer it through introducing campaigns like the "Speak Good English" campaign.

Firstly, we have to ask ourselves, what is the definition of language? The Singapore Government claims that Singlish is not a language, thus it should be eradicated to make way for the 'proper' original English to blossom in Singapore. However, who is to say that Singlish cannot be considered as a proper language?

If we use the 4 main features of language: Phonology, Semantics, Grammar and Pragmatics, Singlish can indeed function as a variant of English thus being an official language. In fact, there is even a wikipedia page on English, thus proving that the language can actually be documented, unlike the babbling of babies.

The average Singaporean would definitely understand the basic Singlish used in our everyday context. As such, we should use Singlish while talking to one another but switch to proper English when communicating with foreigners. This reflects on Singapore as we are a melting pot of different cultures, thus it is no surprise that our language is varied as well! It also helps to build a sense of belonging by having a language unique to Singapore.

Will Newspeak work in curbing unwanted views?

No, i do not believe that enforcing a new language among the people will work in curbing unwanted views. The main premise of my argument is that language does not affect thought, rather thought affects language. Thus, changing language will not lead to a change in a person's mindset and thoughts.

Newspeak refers to the "language of the new world", where there is a lack of synonyms and language is direct. The government can actually manipulate Newspeak such that certain words that were previously in the English Dictionary are removed. For example, the government may want to remove the word "revolution" from the dictionary in the hopes that the people would not know what a revolution was and leave the government with power. However, I feel that this is not feasible.

I believe that there is a language of the mind that is unique to each person. Just as the brain transmits signals to the human body to determine its actions, this language of the mind determines how a person acts. If the person's language of the mind decides to have views that are considered "unwanted" by a group or the government, then the person will reflect those unwanted views.

Newspeak is merely grazing the surface of language. It only affects the language that we use in our inter-personal communications and not the mind language that influences our internal thought. Changing the playing field where people interact with each other will definitely not lead to the removal of a person's views.

While a loss in verbal language would indeed result in the loss of ability to express something, the raw emotions would not be lost. In fact, if needed, the people would come up with their secret code- a secret language if you will- to communicate their ideas. Newspeak is and will not be the only mode of communication.

As Newspeak cannot influence the people's thoughts, it cannot leave any significant impact on a person's thinking. Thus, Newspeak will not work in curbing unwanted views.