Investigating the Idea of a Standard Language

1. Introduction
It has been a common knowledge that to communicate, to convey
a message, to interact with the community, or just to be a part of it,
people operate language, either spoken or written language, as an
important tool to achieve these activities. Although the language used
is the same, but subvarieties of language turns it different in terms of
sound or even spelling. This one thing can also become a barrier in
communication which against the purpose of language itself. Therefore,
the idea of uniformity (standard language) should be exhibited although
the ideal of absolute uniformity is never achieved in practice (Milroy,
2000). Van Herk (2012) explained that the standard of language is the
variety of language that has been through a process of codification, for
instance the language learned and taught at school, used in formal
document, often heard from the media, and others that has power or
authority to set the language become standard. Cheshire and Stein
(1997) argue that spoken and written language are inevitably
interrelated to each other. They further explain that the written
standard improves or develops the spoken varieties which at later on
sociolinguist called that varieties as dialect. Normal people (Van Herk
(2012) called them to represent non-linguist) and linguist have different
perception about how they understand the idea of standard language.
Normal people understand the idea of standard language prescriptively
which focuses solely on the rules of correctness or how the language
should be used. In contrast, linguist see the standard language from
descriptive perspective that is how language is actually used without
judging it whether it is right or wrong (Milroy, 2000; Van Herk, 2012).
These distinctive attitudes are explained by Silverstein (1973) as
language ideology. He argued that people have their own attitude
regarding dialects and the notion of correctness and incorrectness when
using the language.
To set up one variety as the standard language, government can
apply language policy which can make one single variety dominant over
others and eventually standardized. A step by step of how one variety
can be standard language is explained by Milroy (2000). He argued that
the notion of correctness, the importance of authority, the relevance of
prestige, and the idea of legitimacy play an important role of making
one language standardized. Another opinion is from Haugen (1966) who
explained four main processes of language to become standardized.
The matrix he developed is as follows:
Society

Form
Selection

Langua
ge

Codificatio
n

Function
Acceptanc
e
Elaboration

These processes tell us that selection and codification concern about

form and selection and acceptance refer to the society. Whereas

acceptance and elaboration relate to function, codification and
elaboration refer to language (Haugen, 1966). First of all is the process
of selection (selecting one language variety), next is codification (codify
the selected language variety through books, dictionary, formal
documents, etc.). The third process is elaboration which focus on
expanding the use of language in some important areas such as
schools, offices, etc. Then the final process is acceptance. In this step,
the language is spread and widely used as the standard language by
the community, especially the local.
In this research, the idea of standard language is investigated
through a survey conducted collectively by students. The research takes
place in Australia, to be specifically in ANU. The rationale of this study is
to evaluate speakers attitude towards a set of features exhibiting
variation particularly in the pronoun system of English. In a brief
observation, some of the features elicited strong and negative
evaluations. The features are sociolinguistics stereotype which appear
to be above the level of awareness in the community and some others
are below which therefore seem to slip under the sociolinguistic radar.
There are four variants that are investigated in this study. They are as
follows:
a) Plural youse
b) Singular they/their
c) myself as an object pronoun, and
d) the use of I for me in object coordinate constructions.
2. Research question
This research will not use a specific hypothesis to start and to
test, but rather start with the broad research question: Do speaker of
English agree on the forms of standard (written and spoken) English?
3. Method
The data of this research were collected through interview which
involved the students of language and society class 2016 as
interviewer. Each of the students interviewed four informants of either
all of them are native speakers of English, or non-native speakers of
English, or from a combination of both. The recruitment also considered
gender as one of the criteria. Each of the students collected at least one
male and one female. Other consideration was age groups. The
students collected at least two of the following age groups: a) a group
of people of up to 17 years of age, b) a group of people between 18 and
30 years of age, c) a group of people between 31 and 65 years of age,
and d) a group of people of 66 years of age and older. The last but not
the least was occupation and place of origin. The informants came from
a number of different occupations such as students, lawyer, librarian,
etc. and also from various places. In the interview session, the
informants were asked to evaluate two different tasks: spoken task and
written task. The procedure was that the informants were given two
task sheets: spoken task sheet and written task sheet. In the sheets,

there are three options: correct, incorrect, and I dont know, plus
column comment for their reasons why they give such judgement. The
first task is the spoken task. The informants listened to a series of ten
recorded-sentences that were spoken by various people. Based on that
recording they gave their judgements based on the idea of standard
language. In the next task, the informants evaluated ten written
sentences in the written task in accordance with the rules of standard
English.
4. Findings
Overall, there are 265 respondents of this research where 70% of
them (186 people) are native speakers of English and only 30% (79
people) are non-native. In terms of gender, the number of participants
are found no significant different. There are 135 males (51%) and 130
females (49%). Regarding age groups, the dominant participants are in
the age between 18 and 30 years with 145 people (55%). The second
large age group of the researchs participants is the age of 31-65 with
81 people (31%). Then, the age group of up to 17 years old and the age
of 66 and older have only 9.5% (27 people) and 4.5% (12 people)
consecutively of the participants, (see Table 1).
The plural youse both occurred in the sentence 2 of the spoken
task and in the sentence 5 of the written task. Regarding the use of
youse in the spoken task and its relation to the idea of standard
language, the finding shows that 64% of native speakers and 15% of
non-native speakers did not include youse as the standard language.
Most of these people argued that youse is an issue. Some others said
that it is a slang word and not grammatically correct. Only one fifth of
the total respondents associated youse as the standard language. Some
of these people realized that youse is a plural form of the word you,
some others said it is in oxford dictionary so that the use of youse in the
sentence is fine. The data also shows that two participants or (1%) have
no idea about the word due to unclear voice of the speaker, (see Table
2.1). Similarly, the number of participants (both native and non-native)
who shared opinion of incorrectness of the word youse in the written
task is 238 people or 89% of the total respondents. It is 10% higher
than the spoken task. The respondents who agreed that youse is the
standard language are 16 people: 9 natives and 7 non-natives. The
number is three times smaller compare to the spoken task, (see Table
2.2). Therefore, it can be concluded that both in the spoken and written
task the use of youse as the standard English is found dominantly
incorrect.
In the survey, the singular they/their occurred in the sentence 3
and 5 of the spoken task, and in the sentence 2 and 10 in the written
task. In the finding, the average number shows that more than 50%
native English speakers of the total respondents, either in the spoken or
in the written task, accept the singular they/their as the standard
English. In the non-native group, there are around 20% of the total
respondents felt comfortable with the use of singular they/their as the
standard English. On the other hand, there only around 30% of the total

respondents who contemplated singular they/their as non-standard

English. Some of them commented that singular pronoun should be
followed by singular too, and the use of their/they in the sentence is
completely wrong, (informant ID 219, 240, 251, 263). Overall, it is up to
87% of the total respondents, both native and non-native English
speakers considered singular they/their as acceptable and is considered
as the standard English. (see Table 3).
The next finding is about the use of myself as an object pronoun.
In the spoken task, myself as an object pronoun occurred in the
sentence 7 and 10, while in the written task, it occurred in the sentence
1 and 4. The number of respondents in spoken task who agreed that
myself can be used as an object pronoun are more than 50%, it is
exactly between 151-178 people. While in the written task the figure
showed is lower than in the spoken task, but the dominant respondents
still answered correct, which is 49%-56%, and the rest is incorrect
between 41-45%, and 3-6% I dont know. All in all, the finding shows
that there are 130-178 respondents (up to 68% of the total
respondents), both native and non-native speakers, and either in
spoken or written task, agreed that myself can be used as an object
pronoun. (see Table 4).
The last finding but not the least is about the use of I for me in
object coordinate constructions. The occurrence of the word can be
seen in the sentence 1 and 6 of the spoken task and sentence 3 and 8
in the written task. In the spoken task, the finding shows that the
majority of the respondents answered correct that is 42%-63% (112-163
people), whereas only 22%-33% answered incorrect, and the rest
answered I dont know. (see Table 5.1 and 5.2). Likewise, in the spoken
task, the majority of people answered correct which is up to 170 people
(64%) and the rest answered incorrect (34%-46%) and I dont know
(around 2%). (see Table 5.3 and 5.4). To sum up, the dominant answer,
both native and non-native, and either in the spoken or in the written
tasks, agreed that the use of I in this particular case (I replaces me as
object) is acceptable and is considered as standard English.
From all four variants that we have yielded above, we can finally
conclude that over 265 respondents, plural youse is the only variant
that is considered dominantly as non-standard language. In contrast,
the other three variants (singular they, myself as an object pronoun,
and the use of I for me) are quite acceptable and considered as the
standard English.
Variants
FIndings
plural youse
singular they
myself as an object pronoun
I for me in object coordinate
construction

non-standard English
standard English
standard English
standard English

5. Discussion
The survey above portrayed different attitudes of the respondents
towards the spoken and written language. The findings conclude that

albeit the idea of standard language is inherently correct (Van Herk,

2012), the peoples attitude concerning the spoken and written
language task is prescriptive.
First of all is the variant youse. Since the singular thou has been
abandoned (not popularly used) the community need to differentiate
between you as a singular pronoun and you as a plural pronoun and
therefore youse is used and it is recognized spoken by the lowly status
of Irish English in Australia (Butler, 2014). However, in this study, albeit
youse is still being used by some people, and few of respondents stated
that it is slang word, accent, Australian dialect, however, most of the
respondents argued that youse is not a standard English. Few of them
commented it is not even a word because they have never heard it
before. Shockingly, youse can be found written in some dictionaries
such as oxford dictionary and The English Dialect Dictionary. The latter
dictionary even explains that the word youse is items from Iris English.
The dictionary even further commented that the word has travelled to
both American and Australian versions of English. From this
explanation, it tells us that the word youse has been well codified in
which it is one of the processes of making language become standard
(Haugen, 1966). However, youse is still rejected as the standard
language due to (might be) its infrequent emergence either in spoken
or in written language. As the word being less used, and the high
number of people who reject it as the standard language, it will highly
possible to disappear.
Secondly, the variant singular they. According to (Guo, 2016) in
The Washington Post, the new prominence of the word gives simplicity
to refer people who do not want to be addressed as he or she.
Furthermore, in the post, a linguist Ben Zimmer talk about the
emerging ideas about gender identity. The linguist argued that the
acceptance of the singular they is the symbol that mainstream cultures
has accepted transgender in the society. Regarding the findings of the
study, the dominant respondents who agree that singular they is a
standard language, do not give comments. From the findings, we can
sum up that the singular they is unmarked since most of the respondent
did not get noticed about it. Only some of these people stated that
although the use of they in the sentence is grammatically incorrect,
however, they argued that the use of singular they is to show gender
neutrality. To sum up, Van Herk (2012) mentioned there are ten kinds
of people who can be involved to maintain the language: government,
non-government, churches, dictionary-makers, pundits, writers,
educators, publishers, independent political, and individual, therefore,
since one of the writers on the well-known media also has given his
argument about the singular they, it can highly become the standard of
English.
Third of all, the variant myself as an object pronoun. The majority
of the respondents (138 out of 147 in the written task sentence 1) who
answered correct did not give any comments of why they give correct
option. In contrast, only 19 respondents who did not comment why the
sentence incorrect while the others were questioning whether the

correct one is me or I. As the second variant, the use of myself as object

pronoun is also unmarked since the number of people who choose
correct but did not give comment is high. Therefore, according on the
idea of legitimacy by Milroy (2000) and acceptance by Haugen (1966),
the use of myself as an object pronoun can be considered as standard
language.
Finally, the last variant is the use of I for me. In this variant, the
same case happened with the third variant. Almost all respondents who
answer correct did not give any comments to support the reason of
their judgement. Only two of these respondents said that even if it does
not seem right, but might be correct and understandable. These two
opinion is more descriptive rather than prescriptive. However, we
cannot make a general judgement only according to these two opinions.
The idea of acceptance by Haugen (1966) fits with the phenomenon
happened on this particular variant. The society tend to just accept the
variants according to their own ideology, what they always hear and
use every day.
6. Conclusion
All in all, the report of this study only yield some general data
about the evaluation of the speakers related to standard language
according to their judgement and attitudes. Thus, further research need
to be carried out in order to explore each variable specifically. The
recruitment of the participants should also be reconsidered since the
data that we collected did not have pattern in terms of length of stay in
Australia. Moreover, the issue of youse could be a future research since
the word has been codified but the notion of acceptance is not
accomplished. Another good thing to look at is whether the result of the
survey remains the same if we conducted the survey the other way
(written task comes first and then spoken task). As Cheshire and Stein
(1997) argued that written form develop the spoken one, however,
since the spoken task comes first, it seems the spoken task influenced
the written task. In the findings, we cannot really generalize which
influences which due to lack of comments given by respondents
7. References
Cheshire, J., & Stein, D. (1997). The syntax of spoken language. Taming
the Vernacular: from dialect to written standard language, 1-12.
Haugen, E. (1966). Dialect, language, nation. American anthropologist,
68(4), 922-935.
Milroy, J. (2000). Historical description and the ideology of the standard
language. The development of Standard English 13001800, 1128.
Van Herk, G. (2012). What is sociolinguistics (Vol. 6): John Wiley & Sons.

Silverstein, M. (1973). Language Structure and Ideologies. In the

Elements: a parasession on Linguistics Units and Levels, Chicago
Linguistic Society, Chicago, p. 193
https://www.theguardian.com/books/australia-cultureblog/2014/aug/12/australias-national-dictionary-editor-on-theheat-about-youse [accessed on: September 28th, 2016]
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/08/donaldtrump-may-win-this-years-word-of-the-year/ [accessed on:
September 28th, 2016]

8. Appendices
Table 1
Row Labels
native
18-30
31-65
66 and older
up to 17
non-native
18-30
31-65
66 and older
up to 17
Grand Total

Count of speaker status

186 (70%)
95 (36%)
57 (22%)
11 (4%)
23 (8%)
79 (30%)
50 (19%)
24 (9%)
1 (0.5%)
4 (1.5%)
265 (100%)

Table 2.1. The use of plural youse in the spoken task (S2)
nonGrand Total
Options
native
native
37
correct
16 (6%)
(14%)
53 (20%)
I don't
know
2 (1%)
2 (1%)
40
incorrect
170 (64%)
(15%)
210 (79%)
Grand
79
Total
186 (70%)
(30%)
265 (100%)
Table 2.2. The use of plural youse in the written task (S2)
nonGrand
Options
native
native
Total
9
(3.5%)
7
(3%)
16
(6.5%)
correct
1 (0.5%)
10 (4%) 11 (4.5%)
I don't know
62
176 (66%)
238 (89%)
incorrect
(23%)
79
265
186 (70%)
Grand Total
(30%)
(100%)

Table 3.1. The use of singular they/their in the spoken task (S3)
Count of
Column
speaker status
Labels
Row Labels
Native
non-native
Grand Total
138 (52%)
41 (15.5%)
179 (67.5%)
correct
4 (1.5%)
4 (1.5%)
8 (3%)
I don't know
44 (16.5%)
34 (13%)
78 (29.5%)
incorrect
Grand Total
186 (70%)
79 (30%)
265 (100%)
Table 3.2. The use of singular they/their in the spoken task (S5)

Count of
speaker status
Row Labels
correct
I don't know
incorrect
Grand Total

Column
Labels
native
169 (64%)
1 (0.25%)
16 (6%)
186 (70%)

nonnative
62
(23.5%)
2 (0.75%)
15 (5.5%)
79 (30%)

Grand Total
231 (87.5%)
3 (1%)
31 (11.5%)
265 (100%)

Table 3.3. The use of singular they/their in the written task (W2)
Count of
Column
speaker status
Labels
I don't
correct
incorrect Grand Total
Row Labels
know
33
148 (56%)
5 (2%)
186 (70.5%)
native
(12.5%)
32 (12%)
7 (2.5%) 40 (15%) 79 (29.5%)
non-native
12
73
265
180 (68%)
Grand Total
(4.5%)
(27.5%)
(100%)
Table 3.4. The use of singular they/their in the written task (W10)
Count of
Column
speaker status
Labels
I don't
incorre
Row Labels
correct
know
ct
Grand Total
33
native
147 (55%)
6 (2%)
(12%)
186 (70%)
32
non-native
44 (17%)
3 (1%)
(12%)
79 (30%)
65
265
Grand Total
191 (72%)
9 (3%)
(24%)
(100%)

Table 4.1. The use of myself as an object in the spoken task (S7)
Count of
Column Labels
speaker status
I don't
Incorre
Correct
Grand Total
Row Labels
know
ct
52
126 (48%)
8 (3%)
186 (70%)
Native
(20%)
23
52 (20%)
4 (2%)
79 (30%)
Non-native
(9%)
75
265
178 (68%)
12 (5%)
Grand Total
(29%)
(100%)
Table 4.2. The use of myself as an object in the spoken task (S10)
Count of
Column
speaker status
Labels
I don't
Incorre
Row Labels
Correct
know
ct
Grand Total
60
Native
113 (43%)
13 (5%)
(23%)
186 (70%)
24
Non-native
38 (14%)
17 (6%)
(9%)
79 (30%)
30
84
265
Grand Total
151 (57%)
(11%)
(32%)
(100%)
Table 4.3. The use of myself as an object in the written task (W1)
Count of
Column
speaker status
Labels
I don't
Incorrec
Grand
Correct
Row Labels
know
t
Total
62
119 (45%)
5 (2%)
186 (70%)
Native
(23%)
48
28 (11%)
3 (1%)
79 (30%)
Non-native
(18%)
110
265
147 (56%)
8 (3%)
Grand Total
(41%)
(100%)
Table 4.4. The use of myself as an object in the written task (W4)
Count of
Column Labels
speaker status
I don't
Grand
Correct
Incorrect
Row Labels
know
Total
186
94 (35%)
13 (5%) 79 (30%)
Native
(70%)
36 (14%)
3 (1%)
40 (15%) 79 (30%)
Non-native
119
265
130 (49%)
16 (6%)
Grand Total
(45%)
(100%)

Table 5.1. The use of I for me in the spoken task (S1)

Count of
Column
speaker status
Labels
I don't
Incorre
Row Labels
Correct
know
ct
46
Native
96 (36%)
44 (17%) (17%)
11
Non-native
16 (6%)
52 (96%)
(4%)
96
57
Grand Total
112 (42%)
(36%)
(22%)
Table 5.2. The use of I for me in the spoken task (S6)
Count of
speaker status Column Labels
I don't
Incorre
Row Labels
Correct
know
ct
60
Native
124 (47%)
2 (1%)
(23%)
27
Non-native
44 (17%)
8 (3%)
(10%)
87
Grand Total
168 (63%)
10 (4%) (33%)
Table 5.3. The use of I for me in the written task (W3)
Count of
Column
speaker status
Labels
I don't
Incorre
Correct
Row Labels
know
ct
63
119 (45%)
4 (2%)
Native
(24%)
27
51 (19%)
1 (0%)
Non-native
(10%)
90
170 (64%)
5 (2%)
Grand Total
(34%)
Table 5.4. The use of I for me in the written task (W8)
Count of
speaker
Column Labels
status
I don't
Correct
Incorrect
Row Labels
know
79
105 (40%)
2 (1%)
Native
(30%)
43
34 (13%)
2 (1%)
Non-native
(16%)
122
139 (52%)
4 (2%)
Grand Total
(46%)

Grand
Total
186
(70%)
79 (30%)
265
(100%)

Grand
Total
186
(70%)
79 (30%)
265
(100%)

Grand
Total
186 (70%)
79 (30%)
265
(100%)

Grand
Total
186 (70%)
79 (30%)
265
(100%)