Preamble The Vice-Chancellor, Principal Officers, Members of the Council and Senate of the Obafemi Awolowo University, In the

name of God, Father Almighty, I pay homage1 and give honour to all of whom it is due. My father, who laid the early foundation of my education but is now resting peacefully in the heavenly abode of God; My mother and co-mother sitting here with us on this occasion; My wife, Taiwo Ibidunni Akanke, for your beauty and the love in your heart; My children, all, for abundant living and joy; My relations, in-laws, friends, colleagues and students, for your support; Everybody present here, for your goodwill and good wishes; I welcome you all. I have deliberately delayed mentioning the names of two persons dear to me, my mentors, Prof. Adebisi Afolayan and Emeritus Professor Ayo Bamgbose. It was through the former that I got invited to English language scholarship in the Department of English as Graduate Assistant in 1982 and initiated to academic scholarship as an M.A. English as a Second Language (ESL) holder and Assistant Lecturer in 1984. And it was through the latter that I became mature as an academician when I obtained the PhD degree in Linguistics under his supervision at the University of Ibadan in 1991. Thank you very much for your tutelage. 1. Introduction Today, I stand before you all to share with you the benefits of my scholarship as a Professor of English Language and Applied Linguistics. The discipline of Applied Linguistics is concerned with the relation of knowledge about language to decision making in the real world (Cook 2003). It sets out to investigate problems in the world in which language is implicated - political, economic, educational, technological, social, interactional and linguistic, among others. In Nigeria and many African nations today, the role of language is undervalued (cf. Afolayan 1994, Thomas 1995). Language ought to be given due prominence in policy formulation and implementation. In education, it is not just another subject in the curriculum; it is also the medium of instruction across the curriculum. Outside the curriculum, it is a medium of communication in all aspects of life (Thomas ibid, Ilesanmi 2004). Language is an important vehicle of education and development. What this means is that in discussing the English language today, we are not only going to investigate the issues and problems about the language alone, but we are relating the discussion to other languages and the sociopolitical problems of Nigeria. Issues and problems about the English language are among the problems of Nigeria as a nation and are intertwined with issues and problems of all languages in the nation2. An Applied linguistic approach to English studies would thus not study English in isolation but relate it to the context of other languages and the myriads of national problems.

Fig.1: Map showing some principal linguistic groups of Nigeria

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigeria. Accessed on May 11, 2010)

Nigeria as the Context of Study Nigeria (pronounced /nadri/), officially the Federal Republic of Nigeria, is a federal constitutional republic comprising thirty-six states and its Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. The country is located in West Africa and shares land borders with the Republic of Benin in the west, Chad and Cameroon in the east, and Niger in the north. Its coast in the south lies on the Gulf of Guinea on the Atlantic Ocean. The three largest and most influential ethnic groups in Nigeria are the Hausa, Igbo and Yoruba. In terms of religion, Nigeria is roughly split half and half between Muslims and Christians with a very small minority who overtly practice traditional religions. The people of Nigeria have an extensive history. Archaeological evidence shows that human habitation of the area dates back to at least 9000 BC. The area around the Benue and Cross River is thought to be the original homeland of the Bantu migrants who spread across most of central and southern Africa in waves between the 1st millennium BC and the 2nd millennium. The name Nigeria was taken from the Niger

River running through the country. This name was coined by Flora Shaw, the future wife of Baron Lugard, a British colonial administrator, in the late 19th century. Nigeria is the most populous country in Africa, the eighth most populous country in the world, and the most populous country in the world in which the majority of the population is black. It is listed among the next eleven economies, and is a member of the Commonwealth of Nations. The economy of Nigeria is one of the fastest growing in the world, with the International Monetary Fund projecting a growth of 9% in 2008 and 8.3% in 2009. It is the third largest economy in Africa, and is a regional power that is also the hegemony in West Africa. 2. Nigeria as a Non-host English as Second Language (ESL) Community ESL is a technical term that describes the existence of the English language in a context in terms of historical, politico-geographical, psychological and societal factors which determine and influence its usage and uses. It is not an inferior variety of English to any variety of English; rather, it has mutual co-existence with other varieties of English, which will be mentioned in due course. A host environment of ESL is a community of native speakers of English, e.g. the USA and Britain, where some non-native speakers of the language learn and use it as a second language. A non-host ESL environment is that in which English exists and is learnt and used in a community of non-native speakers of the language such as India, Kenya, Nigeria and Singapore. In the former, it is speakers that are non-native, while in the latter, it is the language that is non-native to an environment. A distinction is thus being made here between learning English in a non-host ESL community, such as Nigeria, and learning it in a host ESL community, such as Britain, the USA, Canada or Australia, where a non-native speaker of English may reside either as a home citizen or an immigrant. A Nigerian learner of English who emigrates to a native English speaking community has thus moved from a non-host ESL community to a host community. The terms usage and use are parallel to Saussures (1959) distinction between langue and parole. Usage here refers to the conventional form or norm of a language, dialect or register. It denotes the system of rules and regulations agreed upon by a group or community of speakers in respect of a language, dialect or register. Thus, English language usage in Nigeria refers here, in general terms, to the characteristics of Nigerian English as a dialect of English; and individual usage would refer to the idiolect, or personal orientation of an individual to the group norm. In contrast, English language use would mean the utilisation of language for specific purposes in particular situations. Language usage is derived from its individual uses in diverse social contexts, while the uses realise the usage forms of registers, genres or dialects of language. Language misuse is the incorrect or inappropriate utilisation of language in a particular or general social context. 3. English Language Studies in Nigeria 3.1 Varieties of English in the World Quirk, et al. (1972) describes the English language as a common core or nucleus which is realised in different forms of the language, i.e. varieties that we actually hear or read. He later distinguishes six kinds of varieties according to region, education, social status, medium, attitude and interference. He further claims that the core varieties are the native English (EMT) dialect, while the second (ESL) and foreign 3

(EFL) dialects are considered as dependent interference varieties because they are influenced by features from the speakers mother tongues. However, he observes that some of the latter two varieties have characteristics that are of such long standing that they may be thought stable and adequate enough to be institutionalised and regarded as varieties in their own right. Other classifications include those of Gregory (1967) and Halliday (1978) who propose a system of dialectal and diatypic varieties, which respectively describe varieties according to users (dialects) and varieties according to use (registers). Freitas and Adkins (1981) lump ESL and EFL together as ESOL (English for speakers of other languages) because they consider the separation of the varieties unnecessary and confusing. Kachru (1982) and Afolayan (1987, 1995) argue that each of EMT, ESL and EFL is a recognizable variety on its own, conceived on a lingua-cultural basis in terms of the social history, status and functions which it serves in certain spheres of life in its community. Kachru (1985, 1997) further explains the three varieties in three concentric and, later, overlapping circles. They correspond to the inner, outer and extending (or expanding) circles and are also described respectively as norm producing, norm developing and norm dependent varieties. Later, some scholars express dissatisfaction with certain aspects of the models of circles, which, for example, Yoneoka (2001) criticises as placing some varieties on an inferior footing to native speakers varieties. He (Yoneoka 2001) presents an alternative model, the English Umbrella model, in which different parts of the umbrella identify and characterise different varieties. The model, he claims, will enable newer Englishes to be viewed on an egalitarian footing with more established varieties of English (ibid. p.6). Thus, over time, dialects of English have been described from numerous perspectives all over the world, but those relevant for this presentation are based on geographical (e.g. British English (BrE), American English (AmE) and Nigerian English (NigE); social (educated/ non-educated, standard and non-standard/local); and sociolinguistic criteria (EMT, ESL and EFL).

Fig. 2: Kachrus concentric and overlapping circles of English (from Kachru 1997: 213)

Fig. 3: The English Umbrella (Yoneoka 2001:6)

(4) the fabric covering=background sociocultural systems (5) the top=an idealised standard English

(2) the tips=English varieties

(3) the spokes=communications network

(1) the handle=core easy English

3.2 English in Nigeria According to Graddol (1997), there are 63 countries in which there are substantial populations of second language speakers of English. Nigeria tops the list with an estimated 43 million L2 speakers3. This leading position which Nigeria occupies makes it central to the study of World Englishes and incumbent on scholars to be conscious of the need to study the status, forms and functions of the language, particularly in the context of Nigerias national development objective and of global economic, cultural and technological advances (Akere 2009). English is the major official language of the country. Apart from administration and education, English is the dominant language of the mass media, business transactions, politics, advertising, the courts, science and technology and so on. It serves intra-ethnic, inter-ethnic and international functions in the nation. The language co-exists with more than 500 indigenous languages4 which serve as mother-tongue of speakers of diverse ethnic groups, and also some foreign languages such as French, Arabic and German, which are studied in schools. In its non-native contexts, English has peculiar forms of usage which occur in the different uses of the language in social and individual contexts in Nigeria and such forms have engaged the attention of language scholars around the world for some time now. 4. Research on English Usage in Nigeria 4.1 Perspectives Awonusi (1994) presents a linear view of the development of English in Nigeria in three stages. The first stage (1400-1842) includes the beginning of Portuguese influence which metamorphosed into pidgin and the now extinct Negro Portuguese, the emergence of English-based pidgin and later the assimilation of some English culture in the coastal states (Calabar region) of Nigeria. The second stage (1843-1914) witnessed the active role of various missionary institutions in the planting of schools and churches in the Eastern and Western coasts of Nigeria. The noticeable 6

feature of this period is the predominance of English and de-emphasis of the Nigerian mother tongues as the medium of instruction in schools. In the third stage, (1915present) the dominance of English is maintained in spite of all efforts to boost the status of Nigerias mother tongues. The later part of this period is, however witnessing a decline in the standard of English use when compared to the second stage. Schneider (2007) proposes a dynamic model which explains the growth of new varieties of English. In his presentation, postcolonial Englishes arise out of the interactions of two strands in communicative interactions, that of the settlers (STL) and that of the indigenes (IDG) and its growth passes through five stages or phases: the foundation, exonormative stabilisation, nativisation, endonormative stabilisation and differentiation. NigE is at present between stages 2 and 3, that is, the exonormative stabilisation and the nativisation stage. The implication of this is that the growth of the variety has, not unexpectedly, been stunted, when compared to Singaporean English, another second language variety, that is in stage 4 (cf. Mukherjee and Gries 2009). Jowitt (2008:18) attributes this phenomenon to the fact that after Stage 2, the role of a permanent group of English speaking residents of British origin in contributing to the evolution of the NigE variety has been negligible, if not non-existent. But, of course, other reasons abound such as the divergent views and opinions of scholars and lapses in language policy formulation and implementation. Akere (2009) identifies four phases of research on English usage in Nigeria as contrastive and error analyses; variety differentiation in NigE; nativisation, codification and elaboration; and re-inventing. This classification by Akere suits our goal of describing English in the wider context of bilingualism, multilingualism and national development. We shall, therefore, take the phases one at a time. 4.2 Contrastive and Error Analysis The focus of the first phase (See Banjo 1995, Akere 2009) is on the description of errors and the influence of mother tongue on English at various levels of language: phonological, syntactic and lexical (cf. Tomori 1967, Afolayan 1968, Banjo 1969 and Adesanoye 1973). The frameworks utilised are mostly those of contrastive and error analyses. The procedure is either a contrast of elicited data in BrE and NigE and identification of deviations from the British norm as errors that must be avoided or minimised or identification of errors from spoken or written data in English by Nigerian users. A lot of description of features has been undertaken by scholars in this respect (cf. Ayoola 1988, Adesanoye 1994, 2004 and Fakoya 2004) and even up till this moment (Alo and Mesthrie 2008, Gut 2008). These are illustrated in Appendix 1 of this paper, based on relevant categories in the literature. But before we shift our attention from this page, let us whet our appetite with this made-up excerpt by Kujore (1995:372-373)5: The ceremony was colourful; it was a party in commemoration of the first year anniversary of the Chiefs death. The Chief was a powerful politician, with a large followership in his lifetime. There was plenty to eat and drink, and guests were seated in groups relations, family friends, professionals, retirees and so on. Old friends were happy to meet themselves, and chatted pleasantly about the occasion as they dined and wined. The head of the village was there; as guests arrived, they went across to him on the high table, prostrated before him and greeted him. 7

I had just started eating when I saw Kunle (poor man. Hes out of job) come in, in company of his senior sister. He, too, saw me and came straight to me. As he sat beside me and tried to explain why he had come a little bit late, I put down my fork and knife and requested for hot drinks for both of us, but he would prefer soft. He said he had had to go and condole a friend who had lost his junior brother the brother died in a ghastly motor accident. Even then, he would have to leave immediately and join us at the party later because he had to attend a meeting which will hold between 3 to 4pm. Meanwhile, I congratulated him for his brilliant performance on the stage in Zulus play recently, and also advised him to completely hands off the matter of Tundes grandmothers estate. No problem, I would. Thank you, I will like to go now. See you later. As soon as Kunle left, his sister moved her chair nearer and pleaded with me to forgive her friend: Youve got to make it up with Simi now at all cost. She has shown beyond all doubts that she is sincere. Meanwhile, some key issues have been raised by scholars about the error analysis procedure. One of them, for example, is what should constitute the valid and reliable sources of data for analysis of errors; for instance, would errors have similar quality and frequency of occurrence in spoken v. written, formal v. informal (colloquial) English and educated v. non-educated English? It is obvious that one would mostly likely encounter more errors in impromptu spoken than in prepared spoken English, in the local market English than in the classroom English, in a speech delivered by a person as a guest at a social ceremony and the same person as a guest lecturer at a university symposium, in spoken English in a lecture room than a written research paper, in primary school English than in tertiary English. For example, Jowitt (1991) and Alo and Mesthrie (2008) distinguish between the errors that occur at lower levels of usage (Varieties 1 and 2 of NigE) and those that persist to a higher level (Variety 3). A second issue that has been addressed pertains to the parameters that would be utilised to distinguish between errors/deviants and non-errors/variants. If we look at the illustrations in the appendix, one would observe that pragmatic and creative features (variants) are more tolerable than linguistic features, for mainly socio-cultural reasons. Among linguistic features, listeners are less tolerable with most morphosyntactic features (errors) than lexico-semantic and phonological/ orthographic features (variants and errors). In phonology, lapses pertaining to sound segments and syllables are, for certain physiological and psychological reasons, frowned upon more than lapses at the stress and tonal levels; and, in orthography, writing is, as a matter of reality, induced mainly by the computer and media technology, that AmE spellings are considered as alternatives to BrE. The third and the last issue to consider here is about the percentage of errors that would occur in the performance of a speaker to determine his/her competence or incompetence in English by the Nigerian standard. It is of course recognised that the tolerable level of many listeners of English is very low, as quite a lot of people would seem to stalk a speaker for errors and pounce on him or her at the slightest opportunity. This becomes even more surprising when the listeners themselves are sometimes not more competent than the speaker. If, for example, a non-native speaker of English commits one or two errors or lapses in a 15-minute speech or a writer commits such in a 20-paged article, does that make the speaker/writer incompetent? Of course, it is 8

agreed that judgements, sometimes, may be based on certain circumstances, such as the level of education and the situation of usage. 4.3 Variety Differentiation of English Usage in Nigeria The second phase in NigE studies marks a shift from the perception of it as deviant or interference English by scholars to its recognition as a substantive variety or set of varieties whose features can be characterised. Varieties of NigE have thus been categorised and described in different ways by scholars (Ubahakwe 1979, Jibril 1982, Afolayan 1987, Bamgbose, et al. 1995, Akindele and Adegbite1999, Udofot 2003): - the geographical perspective, in regional terms as northern and southern English varieties, and in ethnic terms as Hausa English, Edo English, Ibibio English, Igbo English,Yoruba English, among others; - the social perspective as standard: sophisticated/educated v. non-standard: local/ interference; or lectal: acrolectal, mesolectal and basilectal; - psycho-sociolinguistic as English as a Second language (ESL), against English as Mother Tongue (EMT) and English as Foreign Language (EFL); and - registeral, as technical/scientific, non-scientific or literary; formal v. informal; official v. personal; spoken v. written; interactional, etc. Scholars then embark on the characterisation of NigE at various levels of usage phonological, lexico-syntactic, semantic and pragma-sociolinguistic especially as they mark different varieties of English spoken and written in Nigeria (Ubahakwe 1979, Odumuh 1987, Bamgbose et al. 1995) 4.4 Nativisation (also Indigenisation or Domestication) of English in Nigeria The third phase becomes inevitable when drawing the line between errors and non-errors in language usage becomes very difficult and there are areas of controversy, especially on culturally related items that differentiate the native and non-native varieties. Bamgbose (1995) observes that the nativisation of NigE consists of three aspects: linguistic, pragmatic and creative. Linguistic nativisation includes substitution of Nigerian language vowels and consonants for English ones, replacement of stress by tone, pluralisation of some non-count nouns, the use of culture-specific vocabulary items, back formation, semantic shift, different verb-preposition combinations and some L1-induced structures. Pragmatic nativisation involves modifying the rules of language use in native situations under pressure from the cultural practices of the Nigerian environment. Creative nativisation manifests in either coining expressions to reflect the Nigerian experience or world view or translating an authentic Nigerian native idiom into English in such a way as to reflect the mood of the situation or character. Although the three aspects have been investigated in the literature, the linguistic aspect has been focused more than the others. Three major issues are debated in respect of the nativisation process. It deserves that we pay attention to these issues, which are germane to the current state of the language in the country. 4.4.1 Is There Standard Nigerian English or Not? Jowitt (2008) describes the diversity of positions in terms of left, right and centre in respect of the attitude of scholars to tolerance of learners errors. The left, 9

towing the line of Kachru (1982) is represented by all those (cf. Adetugbo 1979a and b and Odumuh 1987) who would generally assert that a standard NigE exists and has a right to exist, that it is used by educated people, that it has begun to find expression in creative writing and that it can be an expression of national identity. The right, towing the line of Prator (1968), maintains the position that the distinctive usage identified in NigE cannot be regarded as standard, because the standard form of a language is one that is generally both accepted and used by the educated section of the community; the lack of standard is evident in the numerous errors observed in the usage and the lack of institutionalisation, in the absence of any dictionary embodying its usage (cf. Salami 1968, Adesanoye 1973). The centre position, which appears to be the consensus among scholars of NigE in recent times, is that a standard form exists in the ontological sense in the usage of educated Nigerians, though the features are yet to be codified (Grieve 1966, Banjo 1971, Bamgbose 1982, Jibril 1986, Adegbija 2004). 4.4.2 The Model for English Language Teaching (ELT) This debate centres on whether an indigenous model, NigE or external (or foreign) model such as BrE should be the target for ELT in schools. Many scholars (cf. Udofot 2003) would, for nationalistic and realistic reasons, concur with the endonormative model suggested by Banjo (1971) as a follow up to Brosnahans (1958) earlier classification. In Banjos four-variety typology of English language usage in Nigeria6, Variety III , the variety of the educated elite, suggested by him, is associated with university education in recent times and has been supported by many scholars in Nigeria (cf. Odumuh 1984, Adeniran 1979 and Banjo 1996). He (Banjo 1971) describes it as a variety that is close to Standard British English in syntax and semantics, similar in phonology, but different in phonetic features as well as with regard to certain lexical peculiarities. Although some scholars have observed the lack of uniformity in competence and performance among educated Nigerians, there is ample evidence to show that a combination of education, exposure to considerable data and considerable experience of usage correlates with competence in English (Jowitt 2008, Adegbite and Gut 2010). However, despite this seeming agreement among scholars, it is rather disheartening that, forty years after Banjos suggestion, the BrE still serves as the main reference point in school examinations in the country because of the lack of codification and, consequently, lack of uniform resource materials on the indigenous model. 4.4.3 Pro-RP and Anti-RP Model of Spoken English for ELT The third debate in the third phase, parallel to the debates above, is that between pro-British Received Pronunciation (RP) (Atoye 1987, Amayo 1988) and anti-RP (Eka 1985, Adetugbo 1987, Dairo 1988) scholars on the model of spoken English to be used for teaching English in schools. The pro-RP group cites the availability of descriptive materials in the form of textbooks and a tolerable degree of international intelligibility as reasons for their suggestion. In contrast, the contra-group argues that there is lack of personnel to teach the model in Nigeria. They also comment on its lack of social prestige (Gut 2008); that is, its non-desirability and nonacceptability among Nigerians, especially when used by Nigerians or other non-native speakers. Ioratim-Uba (1995), writing on the attitude of Nigerian undergraduates towards RP, says (pp.69-70): Whereas a need is felt for RP as a tool for educational and communicative effectiveness, the undergraduates in our sample would not employ it just because they want to be like white men... its persistence might for sometime 10

remain a classroom phenomenon, and to some extent a tool in the hands of other users such as radio and TV broadcasters. Besides, there is the fact that RP itself is outdated, even in Britain where people are shifting to other models in common use. For example, Awonusi (2004) examines the fairly recent vicissitudes of the RP accent of English and reflects on its relevance as a standard accent/model for spoken English teaching and learning in nonnative speaker English speaking communities like Nigeria. He observes some challenges that result in its changing status as historical factors, threats from hitherto traditional UK rural dialects and globalisation factors (such as the influence of AmE). With the observation that RP is fairly dated (almost Jonesian) and that many of its phonetic features are recessive but not appealing to current young RP speakers, Awonusi (ibid., 189) asks whether we should still continue to insist that young people all over the world continue to use an accent of fading-out ninety-year olds, when, in reality, they will be dealing with much younger people in business, education, communication and industry. His suggestion is to develop local standards and simply regard RP as a codified version; this functional approach will lead us to recognise nonRP Standard English accents which will still belong to the community of World English for as long as intelligibility is not seriously impaired. 4. 5 Codification of Nigerian English The tasks of codification and elaboration are the ones in current contention among scholars of NigE. The requirement here is the description of a structure or behavioural norm in reference books such as dictionaries, grammars or usage guides or their inclusion in the specified target of language instruction in schools. Bamgbose (1998) suggests five measurements of the degree of standardisation of linguistic innovations (under which he subsumes linguistic structures such as lexical items, syntactic structures or the pronunciation of words as well as pragmatic and social aspects of language use): - demographic: number of speakers who use a particular linguistic innovation, - authoritative: type of speakers who use a particular linguistic innovation, - geographical: regional spread of the innovation, - codification: description of the innovation as a norm, and -acceptability. Of these, Bamgbose (1998: 4) claims, codification and acceptability are the most important, but he considers acceptability the ultimate test of admission of an innovation. The supporting criterion for acceptability is intelligibility, which, in turn, is based on appropriateness and grammaticality (Afolayan 1977, Adejare 1995). Bamgbose (1998: 5) predicts that pragmatic innovations will be standardised before structural ones as there is a greater tolerance for them. With regard to standardising the linguistic features, the condition of acceptability mentioned above must be met. Standard NigE, that is, the acrolectal variety of NigE, should be made up of features of Standard BrE and AmE (as representations of International/World Englishes) and some popular features of Nigerianism. By popular here, we refer to those Nigerianisms that have a high frequency of usage among Nigerians as a test of their wide acceptability. It would appear that so much time has been spent preparing the ground in terms of defining terms and concepts than carrying out the real task of lexicography 11

and grammatical description. The works of a few scholars, however, need to be pointed out as charting a course on the issue, even though these have been descriptive rather than prescriptive, sometimes characterising errors in their collections7. First is the notable work of Kujore (1985) which presents a long list of expressions in English usage in all the areas of language (phonology, grammar and lexis). Another presentation of a glossary of forms in NigE covers an extensive section of Jowitts (1991) publication. The latter work bears similarity with the former, but it goes further by providing information about the context of use. Also worthy of mention is Igboanusis (2002) compilation of distinctive NigE expressions, which Jowitt (2008) considers as perhaps the longest inventory so far, but still tentative because the judgements are provisional. The above efforts undoubtedly represent a step in the right direction, but the search for a comprehensive dictionary still continues. Jowitt (2008:29) himself recognises the limitations of the previous efforts when he asserts that: The task of differentiating variants from errors of deciding which usage should be lifted out of the category of (merely) popular expressions and exalted to the status of Standard, and so prescribed expressions is thus an interesting one. It is invidious for an individual, however, even if that individual is a Professor of English, to start making solo pronouncements. The task is one of delicacy and needs to be carried out by a team of experts, not by an individual. It is thus proper at this point to recognise the insightful project on NigE corpus that is being undertaken by a group of scholars coordinated by Prof. Ulrike Gut at the University of Augsburg in Germany. The ICE (International Corpus of English) Nigeria project aims to collect a 1-million word corpus of spoken and written data of English usage by educated Nigerians and it contains text categories and annotations specified by the ICE project International (Wunder, et al. 2010). The written part of the corpus, consisting about 400,000 words, is already completed and work is in progress on the spoken part. The corpus could undoubtedly be utilised to facilitate the codification of NigE. For example, the application of the instrument to research enhances combined quantitative and qualitative corpus searches of features in a study by Adegbite and Gut (2010). Apart from being a rich source of representative data, it provides an objective basis for comparing features and describing the frequency of their occurrences. The codification of a widely accepted and used form of NigE, in essence, needs to rely on facts about how wide-spread the usage of particular forms is among the users of the variety. 4.6 Elaboration and Re-inventing of Nigerian English The elaboration of English, as Akere (2009:9) observes, involves a painstaking listing of all domains in which English functions in official and non-official capacities and then going on to identify and describe the usage structures that are attested in each domain in their standard NigE variety. Also part of the elaboration process is the publication and wider dissemination of codified materials to learners and users through teaching, broadcast, advocacy and enlightenment. With respect to the phase of reinventing English, it is expected that scholars would interrogate, assess and re-package English to meet the current requirements of modernity, development and globalisation. In order to confront linguistic homogenisation and Englishisation of the world in the course of globalisation, some scholars have suggested the need to re-examine the status and functions of English vis--vis the existing languages in the community. The re12

examining process follows two main courses. In the first course, scholars attempt to create an awareness of the positive and negative influence of English on some indigenous languages, in order to safeguard the latter against the cannibalistic incursion of the former (Bamgbose 1982, Banjo 1986, Ekundayo 1987, Ufomata 1991, Isola 1992, Essien 1995, Adegbite and Akinwale 2008). In the second course, scholars attempt to review existing language provisions, which tend to valorise the English language and overlook the indigenous languages, arguing that both should complement each other in the task of nation-building (Adegbite 2004a and 2008a, Afolayan 1994, Bamgbose 2006, Emenanjo 1998, Essien 2003, Jibril 2007, Lawal 2009, Schafer and Egbokhare 1999). The remaining sections below extend the discussion on the elaboration and re-inventing of English further. 5. The Uses of English in Nigeria 5.1 Micro-uses The uses of English in various domains of communication in Nigeria have been described by scholars in recent times via different approaches: linguistic, literary, stylistic, textual, pragmatic, discoursal and conversational. Some of the areas covered, particularly in the Department of English, Obafemi Awolowo University, include casual and family interactions and discourses in the classroom, computer mediation (internet, e-mail, text messaging, etc.), education and literacy, gender, law, literature, mass media (electronic and print), popular media (film and entertainment), medicine, politics, religion, translating and interpreting. This speaker has made his own contributions to some of these areas by applying different approaches (systemic linguistic, text linguistics, linguistic stylistics, critical linguistics, content-text analysis, discourse analysis and pragmatics) to the analysis of texts from different areas of human communication in English and Yoruba: translation/interpreting, biblical passages and legal, literary and medical discourse. I have also engaged in both descriptive and empirical studies on language learning, literacy and education, and language policy and planning. It might be appropriate to mention some salient observations and comments made in a few of the works stated above. For example, in my earliest research on translation/interpreting (Adegbite 1987, 1988 and 2000a), I observed that simultaneous interpreting of Yoruba Christian Sermons from Yoruba into English was a collaborative bilingual process that raised linguistic, technical and interpersonal challenges for practitioners. The first major challenge was the interpreters duty to translate from a native language (L1) into English, which was usually his or her second language (L2), though it was far much easier to translate from ones L2 into the L1. The interpreter, therefore, required adequate communicative competence in the L2 for efficiency and effectiveness. Another challenge was the choices of options from translation techniques: literal or free, equivalent form or message, focus on source or target text, translation of cultural items and all that. That thus called for adequate training in order to acquire the professional skills required for the job, in addition to experience. Lastly, a cordial relationship between the source language speaker and the interpreter was crucial for an effective output. The interpreter had to be familiar with the communication habit of the source speaker, the pronunciation, vocabulary, length of sentences and other idiosyncrasies. A lot of encounters thus took place behind the scenes to ensure a successful performance. Later on, I carried out both stylistic and empirical studies on the interpretation of a passage, St John 1: 1-14, selected from two versions of the Bible, the King James 13

Version (KJV) and The Living Bible (TLB) versions. In the stylistic study (Adegbite 1991a), I investigated the different ways in which the passage was written in the two versions, using the systemic linguistic framework. The findings revealed that the TLB text was paraphrastic and simpler than the other text. The stylistic procedures used to achieve this included the orthographic style of paragraphing; the use of dashes and parentheses to mark parenthetical statements that helped to eliminate ambiguity or vagueness; the use of simple and avoidance of multiple and complex sentences; and the simplicity, clarity and currency of usage of the expressions, for example, the light shinethand comprehended it not in the KJV (verse 5) is expressed as the light that shinescan never extinguish it (TLB, verse 5). In the other study (Adegbite 1998), the reactions of selected university students and lecturers to the two texts were elicited via a questionnaire. The findings confirmed the researchers interpretation in the previous work, regarding the distinction between aesthetics and comprehensibility. In addition, the older respondents, the lecturers, preferred the KJV because of its aesthetic qualities, projected through the rhythm and other poetic devices. They claimed that the passage had a mystical quality appropriate for the religious/Biblical register. In contrast, the younger respondents preferred the TLB passage because it was clearer and less ambiguous and, thus, more easily comprehended. The study showed the different factors that readers could bring to textual interpretation, which authors/writers should be aware of. Another field of my research is that of the legal register, in which I (Adegbite 1996) investigated some interpretation problems in selected court cases in Nigeria using three prominent court cases as examples. It was observed that the cause of interpretation disputes in law courts is the indeterminacy of meaning of formulated laws. Although judges aimed at the literal meaning of provisions of statutes, they sometimes found it difficult to arrive at this meaning in adjudication. The problems identified could be attributed to conflict in the application of principles of law, conflict between the logical and conventional meanings of expressions, non-contextual decoding of expressions, ambiguity in the meaning of provisions in legal documents and intentional or deliberate misinterpretation of expressions in some instances to suit specific purposes. While, in my opinion, one could wish that framers of law provisions and statutes tighten those language ends that tend to allow ambiguity of expressions in legal documents, it might be difficult to check practitioners who would deliberately or inadvertently misinterpret documents even when such are clearly written. We may wish that interpretation problems be eradicated or minimised in law and make several suggestions in this regard, but it would seem that interpretation disputes form the basis of the legal profession and the practitioners thrive on the phenomenon. My research on medical discourse is a cross-linguistic one. The primary study of some features of language use in Yoruba traditional medicine (YTM) was the product of my PhD research in linguistics (Adegbite 1991b) and it later provided the basis of comparison with a later collaborative work in English. The features of the YTM study were described at the levels of situation, use, functions, message and form using a combination of frameworks from ethnography of communication, discourse and conversation analysis, text linguistics and systemic functional linguistics. The features of situation showed YTM texts as products of speech events which involved human and non-human objects and indicated participant beliefs, actions, relations and revealed human behaviour. The texts, whose primary mode is conversational, revealed 14

especially that participants in YTM interactions believe in magical medicine, rituals and in the power of the spoken word. The major uses performed by the texts were diagnosis, optional divination and medication and these derived from the participants intuitive reactions to the functions and messages of the texts. The functions provided mainly the informative and directive bases for the message content which expressed the identification of a health problem and quest for its remedy. The structure of the texts revealed interactions in which herbalists and clients take turns in diagnostic and prescriptive transactions to make various initiation-response moves constituted mainly by elicit-reply and direct-accept acts. In some texts, however, the herbalists turns may further extend into monological transactions of divination, incantations and supplication, depending on the performance situations. Lastly, the forms of the texts showed that the preponderance of reference and lexical cohesion features as well as clauses with the unmarked theme enhanced simplicity and easier comprehension of messages of the texts. They also showed that the material process and positive polarity were prominent because the texts expressed a lot of physical activities carried out towards achieving a positive goal. They further indicated that the declarative mood marked the primary function of giving information in the transactions. The collaborative study by Adegbite and Odebunmi (2006) investigated discourse tact in Doctor-Patient interactions in English in selected hospitals in Southwestern Nigeria. The mutual contextual beliefs (MCBs) of participants, linguistic patterns and other pragmatic features were analysed from the perspective of the pragmatics of discourse. The findings indicated the predominance of doctor-initiated spoken exchanges in which doctors elicit and confirm information and give directives to patients, while the patients give information and attempt to respond appropriately to the doctors moves. It was also observed that conversational maxims8, except that of quantity, were flouted and politeness maxims of tact, generosity, agreement and sympathy were exploited in order to enhance successful diagnosis in the interaction. Below, a brief description of the grammar of sentences in a typical doctor-patient interaction is presented from the perspective of Hallidays (1985) systemic functional grammar (the grammatical terminologies are italicised). The interaction opens with an interrogative clause of the relational identifying type (are, is) in which the doctor expresses a value (how? where?) of a token (your health). The client replies via a declarative clause of the relational attributive type (am, have/has been) in which an attribute (not well, pregnant, sick) is ascribed to a carrier (I, he, she). Alternatively, the reply is expressed in a declarative clause with the relational possessive process (have/has (got), am/is having) in which a possessor (I, he, she) possesses possessed items of illness (fever, malaria, cough, headache, diarrhoea). Similar process and participant features to the one above realise further diagnostic investigations in the interaction. Occasionally, however, there may be other clauses expressing either (i) a mental process of the reaction/affection type (feel [s]) in which a senser (I, he, she) is affected by a phenomenon or condition (hot, dizzy, like Im having malaria); or (ii) material (or physical) process of the action type (eat, sleep, work or cant eat/sleep/work) in which participants are both the affected and goal in middle clauses. In all of these expressions, circumstantial details of either inner or outer types may realise the time 15

duration (3months, for a long time); location (on my neck, in my mouth) and manner (persistently, seriously, properly, slowly) of an illness. Towards the end of the interaction, the doctor recommends treatment via declarative clauses of the modalised (shall give/send/prescribe/do) or non-modalised (have taken/written /sent) type in which the material action process above (send, give, do) is performed by the doctor as an agent/actor (I, We) on the client as beneficiary/recipient and objects of medicine as goal (samples, drugs, etc). In the analysis of literary texts, not only did I use linguistic theories to demonstrate my interpretation of the texts, I also related the interpretations to some topical issues of the day and I shall specifically mention briefly my opinion on three of them: gender (Adegbite and Kehinde 2003), diplomatic communication (Adegbite 2005a) and conflict mediation (Adegbite 2007). Adegbite and Kehinde (2003) utilised the perspective of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to describe features of feminism in some of Flora Nwapas novels, focusing on Efuru (1966) and Women Are Different (1981). The discourse features analysed were interaction, transaction, exchanges, moves, acts, turntaking, contributions and the narrative techniques observed were the third person omniscient narrator, collective heroinism, documentation/historicisation and presence/absence/silence of characters. The features above illustrated the phenomena of control, dominance as well as sex and social roles in the texts. Recognising the double agenda of feminism mentioned by Humm (1995:4) as the task of critique (attacking gender stereotypes) and the task of construction, the researchers asked whether in performing the first task, a feminist needed to deconstruct male chauvinistic stereotypes only to replace it with female ones or in performing the second task, s/he needed to aim at creating the superior female and subordinate male instead of creating a male-female relationship imbued with self and mutual respect between the sexes. The researchers frowned at Nwapas utilisation of the destructive-male model which substitutes female silence with male silence in her works. They observed that Nwapa denigrates almost all the male characters and emphasises the frailties of men and opined that Afro-centric feminism has to be embracing, not isolationist; otherwise, the consent of the male sex cannot be assumed. In the conclusion, Adegbite and Kehinde (ibid.) recognised the contribution of Flora Nwapa towards the expression of womens voices in her novels, but observed her failure to reconcile African consciousness with feminist aspirations. To some feminists, the notion of African feminism almost seems a contradiction and it is in a bid to remove this contradiction that the African stance bears the tag of womanism (Hudson-Weems 1993 and Kolawole1996), bearing in mind that it is i. not sex-isolating but accommodating; ii. not only for self-realisation, but also for family/group/social development; iii. not sexually subordinating but sexually parallel; and iv. self-respecting and group attracting Adegbite (2006) utilised both the systemic functional linguistics (SFL) and functional sentence perspective (FSP) models to demonstrate a stylistic analysis of an extract of conflict mediation speech from Chinua Achebes (1958) Things Fall Apart. In the opinion of stylisticians, an objective description of a literary text can help learners not only to create awareness about the internal patterns of language in the text 16

but also to give their own personal responses to the text. The extract analysed represented the speech of an Igbo communal mediator in the Achebes novel. The fictional mediation context was that of an estranged relationship between a husband, on the one hand, and his wife and her relations, on the other hand. The analysis gave us some insights into the content of mediation and the linguistic characteristics of the text. The transitivity options reveal that mediation primarily expresses relations among participants by identifying and making references to authorities, social values, obligations and social duties. Sometimes, human beings are either involved or committed to performing actions in the present or future. Constant appeal is also made to the cognitive and visual attention of disputants and the mediator ascertains their cooperation in the mediation process. The options of mood indicate the characteristic traits of mediators to counsel mainly via assertions and a few instructions. Conflict resolution is thus perceived as social obligations/duties which interactants must perform in conformity with conventional regulations. Lastly, the options of theme indicate the orientation of the mediator to the direct conversational nature of mediation speeches. References are made to disputants, mediators and third parties in the communication. The emphasis on the mediators personality and power and potency of social control in the themes and rhemes is indicative of conflict resolution by coercion and appeal to authority rather than by complex argument and persuasion, as may be observed in some other sociocultural or cross-cultural contexts. My study on diplomatic communication (Adegbite 2005a) is an interface of linguistic and literary studies in which principles deriving from linguistic and literary pragmatics were utilised to analyse the features that enhanced successful communication and those that led to communication breakdown in Ola Rotimis Ovonramwen Nogbaisi (OVON), using relevant extracts of dialogue from the play for illustration. The concepts pertaining to literary interpretation utilised were voice and characterisation and those of linguistic pragmatics were those relevant to analysing dialogue in interactive discourse, viz, the cooperative principle and conversational maxims, the politeness and face principles and relevant categories of conversation analysis such as turns, contributions, interruptions, interaction, transaction, exchange, move and act. Central to both facets of pragmatic analysis mentioned above is the category of context, which is concerned with the conditions governing either speaker-listener or author-reader collaboration and the dialectics of text (fiction and dialogue) and society. The findings revealed that conversational maxims were both flouted and violated in the interactions that took place in the text. In view of the formality of the discourse, characterised by the business-like nature of the topic of transaction and the social distance between participants in terms of position, familiarity and race, participants spoke indirectly and cautiously. They said less or more than they should say (quantity), concealed information from each other/one another (quality), did not go straight to the point (relevance) and were hesitant, loquacious and sometimes rude (manner). It was observed further in the study that a combination of factors enhanced successful diplomatic communication in the play and these included (i) the observance of politeness maxims, expressed through deference, calm counseling, assurance, indirect instead of direct accusation, presentation of gifts, extending a hand of fellowship, expression of prayers and exchanges of pleasantries; (ii) utilisation of negative on-record with redress and off-record face strategies; and (iii) concessions of participants to each other in confrontational transaction. In contrast, the communication that broke down was characterised by (i) breaches of politeness 17

maxims such as those of modesty, tact and agreement; (ii) expressing bald on-record face threats without any redress; and (iii) failure of participants to make concessions. Finally, the interpretation of the extracts from the text analysed revealed the following as the major sources of conflict in the play: a. King Ovonramwen breached the societal measures put in place to control royal availability for face encounters. He talked too much in public and engaged himself so much in self praise. He distanced himself from his chiefs who should advise him because he doubted their loyalty. His people perceived him as a wicked king. His obsession with power was constantly threatened by the fear of rebellion within his kingdom and domination by the Whitemen. b. The Whitemen considered the business of trade negotiation without respecting the cultural values of their host community. The invocation of the Queen via verbal and non-verbal means was perceived as an imposition of the Queens authority over the Benin Empire. The excesses of the British soldiers who visited Benin on a selfappointed date that was inconvenient for their host further indicated their insensitivity to the independence of the Benin people. c. The interaction between the Benin security officers and the British military officers broke down because they did not employ sufficient tactics of diplomacy in their communication. The participants on both sides flouted and violated conversational maxims, breached politeness principles and shunned concessions to each other when they disagreed. Of course, military and security officials are reputed more for physical force than language power to resolve issues. The question is: could civilians have handled the negotiation of the problematic encounter between Okavbiogbe and Phillips in OVON (pp. 28-30) better than they did? On language learning, literacy and education, my research activities spanned all levels, investigating various issues of form, content and methodology: nursery (Adegbite and Obilade 2002), primary (Adegbite 1993, 2000b, 2005b), secondary (Adegbite and Arua 1998, Adegbite 2000c and 2005c), tertiary (Adegbite 1995 and 2005d) and community literacy (2000d and 2003b). The principles and concepts applied to the studies are those relevant to the bilingual/multilingual African situation such as bilingualism/ multilingualism in language teaching, learning and use, primacy of the mother tongue, English as a Second Language, Communicative Competence and English for Specific Purposes. Meanwhile, my professional activities have not been restricted to research alone. I have also been involved in mentoring scholars and doing practical work relevant to my field. I have successfully supervised nine postgraduate students with research thesis: 3 PhDs, 1 M.Phil. and 5 M.As. Four other students are making progress in their research work at the three levels above. Regarding practical activities, I have been engaged in textbook writing at all levels of education in the country. For example, I am a co-author of some textbooks (see Okedara, et al. 2003, Adegbite, et al. 2008a) that are utilised in the classroom nationwide by primary and secondary school pupils. Also, texts which I authored (Adegbite 2009), co-authored (Akindele and Adegbite 1999, reprinted 2005) and co-edited (Adegbite and Onukaogu 1994, Adegbite and Olajide 2008b, 2009a and 2009b) are being used by tertiary students in the areas of psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics and language in education. I have organised, coordinated, facilitated and participated in literacy workshops and activities locally, nationally and internationally. Currently, some scholars and I are involved in the compilation of a comprehensive English-Yoruba bilingual dictionary project 18

coordinated by Prof. Kola Owolabi of the University of Ibadan. From the layout and the progress made so far, the work shows great promise to be a masterpiece when completed. The list goes on to Gods glory. Permit me not to bore you with these details any longer, because we still have one or two more grounds to cover. 5. 2 Macro-uses At the macro-level, the use of English may be viewed in terms of the status of the language vis--vis other languages from the perspective of language policy and planning as well as language attitudes of Nigerian citizens. I shall discuss these issues from three standpoints: (a) language provisions in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999) and the National Policy on Education (NPE 1977, revised 1981, 1998 and 2004)); (b) the national language question; and (iii) language and social citizenship. 5.2.1 Language Provisions in Nigeria There is no comprehensive language policy document for Nigeria, but there are provisions formulated haphazardly in the Constitution and NPE which scholars always refer to for the explanation of language status and use in the socio-political context. Below, I present the provisions in both documents and some of these would be discussed later in the study. I have italicised the areas of those policies that would be commented on later. 1. The business of the National Assembly shall be conducted in English and in Hausa, Ibo (sic) and Yoruba when adequate arrangements have been made therefor. (Constitution 1999, Paragraph 55) 2. The business of a House of Assembly shall be conducted in English, but the House may in addition to English conduct the business in one or more other languages that the house may by resolution approve. (Constitution 1999, Para. 97) 3. Government appreciates the importance of language as a means of promoting social interaction and national cohesion; and preserving cultures. Thus every child shall learn the language of the immediate environment. Furthermore in the interest of national unity, it is expedient that every child shall be required to learn one of the three Nigerian languages, Hausa, Igbo, and Yoruba. (NPE, 2004, Para. 10a) 4. For smooth interaction with our neighbours, it is desirable for every Nigerian to speak French. Accordingly French shall be the second official language in Nigeria and it shall be compulsory in Primary and Junior Secondary schools but Non-vocational elective at the Senior Secondary School. (NPE 2004, Para. 10b) 5. Government: shall ensure that the medium of instruction is principally the mother tongue or the language of the immediate community (Early Childhood/ Preprimary Education, NPE 2004, Para. 14c) 6. The medium of instruction in the primary school shall be the language of the environment for the first three years. During this period, English shall be taught as a subject. From the fourth year, English shall progressively be used as a medium of instruction and the language of immediate environment and French shall be taught as subjects. (Primary Education, NPE 2004, Para.19e and f)

19

7. Junior Secondary School (NPE 2004, Para. 24a) Core Subjects (Languages): English, French and language of immediate environment. (The language of the immediate environment shall be taught as L1 where it has orthography or literature. Where it does not have, it shall be taught with emphasis on oracy as L2.) Elective (Language): Arabic 8. Senior Secondary School (NPE 2004, Para 25c) Core Subjects (Languages): English language, a major Nigerian language Electives (Languages): Literature in English, Arabic, any Nigerian language that has orthography and literature It is apparent that English occupies a primary place in the provisions above in relation with the indigenous languages; even in Provision 3 where it is not overtly stated, the primary role is assumed all the same. Note also the preference given to the three major languages of Hausa, Igbo and Yoruba. These roles need to be interrogated as I shall attempt to do later in this study. 5.2.2 The National Language Question The national language debate has been quite enduring (see especially Bamgbose 1990, Emenanjo 1990), though, sadly, there has been nothing much to show for it. Without any doubt, to possess a national language is a confirmation of the political sovereignty of a nation, since language is the extant symbol of identity of an individual or society. A national language has the added advantage of further enhancing wider communication, both vertically and horizontally, among the people because a minimum of 75% will have access to it. This would consequently have a positive effect on democracy and national development, since it would be easier to effectively mobilise the generality of the citizenry towards participation in developmental tasks under good leadership. Existing proposals can be categorised into two terms, the unilingual and multilingual approaches. The unilingual approach covers various suggestions of one language as national among which are English; Pidgin English; an artificial language such as Guosa, formed from an amalgamation of elements of, especially, the major languages of Hausa, Igbo and Yoruba; a major language selected from one of the three earlier mentioned; a minor indigenous language from the centre of Nigeria such as Igala; and an external pan-African language such as Swahili. In contrast, the multilingual approach features the suggestion of the three major languages alone or their selection as national languages while English retains its current official status. Although well argued, it has been difficult to adopt any of the suggestions above. Bamgbose (1990:75) asserts that Of the possible candidates for selection as a unilingual model, some can be dismissed out of hand. In this group, I include pidgin, artificial language, any pan-African languages and any minority languages. It is clear now, as a matter of reality, that the major languages are not favoured either, whether separately or jointly, for various reasons9. The best that they can achieve status-wise is to remain as regional languages, while the other indigenous languages serve as state, local government or community languages. Where then do we go from there? A logical step would be to confirm the higher role of English at the national level while delimiting its functions at sub-national levels. In this regard, a 20

nativised Standard NigE could be adopted as the primary official language at the national level, while the indigenous languages are considered secondary at this level. Then, there would be role reversal at the sub-national levels where the indigenous languages would play primary roles while English plays a secondary role. Adegbite (2004a) suggests a framework for roles assignment in which the indigenous languages, on the one hand, and NigE, on the other hand, complement each other to perform personal and official roles. According to him, five levels of geopolitical significance can be identified in democratic Nigeria for official language usage. These are (a) The International Community; (b) The National Level; (c) The Sub-national Level (Regions, Zones, and States); (d) The Local Government Areas; and (e) the Local Government wards. At each level of a-e, English currently plays a formal role as the primary official language; whereas, it ought to serve primarily at only two, Levels a and b and, occasionally, in the multilingual minority areas of Level c, while it performs a secondary official function in the monolingual areas under Level c (monolingual states, zone or regions) and at Levelsd and e (cf. Adegbite 2004b). An illustration of the suggestion made above is presented in Table 1 below. Table 1: Official functions of languages at politico-geographical levels in Nigeria Functions (Inter-) National Zonal/State Local/Ward Primary MB SE SS Secondary NW NE SW Indigenous Primary NW NE SW Languages Secondary MB SE SS Zones: MB (Middle Belt), NE (North East), NW (North West), SE (South East) and SW (South West) An explanation of the presentation above is that NigE, would be used primarily for international communication and in national (inter-ethnic) communication at the National Assembly, National Executive Council, Federal High Court and all federal institutions, while the indigenous languages in respective areas are used primarily at the intra-ethnic level such as in the States Houses of Assembly and other states institutions. Indeed, the consideration of English usage at all for official communication at the ward and local government levels is rational on the grounds that the messages of such communication may sometimes be intended to extend beyond those areas. The NigE mentioned above, indigenised and domesticated to wear a Nigerian colour, would be different from Colonial English, when codified. It is the codified standard form that would be used for official inter-ethnic and international communication, while the colloquial and non-standard forms, including pidgin, could be used for intra-ethnic communication alongside the indigenous languages (cf. Attah 1987, Jowitt 1991, 1995). 5.2.3 Language and Social Citizenship in Nigeria The decisions about what roles to assign to languages or dialects of languages at individual and societal levels, which languages to choose for communication in personal and official communication and why particular languages are preferred to others in communication situations are to a great extent determined or influenced by such factors as language attitude, language mastery, human behavior and the psycho21 Languages NigE

social conditions prevailing in a society at a particular time. It is proper to examine how these factors affect the status and uses of English and indigenous languages in Nigeria so that we can have a clear understanding of the individual capacities and social responsibilities of citizens in addressing the challenges of languages vis--vis national development. In Nigeria, the attitudes of speakers to languages have been identified as a major factor militating against the utilisation of languages for sustainable individual and social development (Adegbija 1994; Bamgbose 2001, Oyetade 2001, Adegbite 2003a) and scholars have attributed the attitudes to colonialism, eliticism, mobility and job prospects, level of language development and lack of knowledge of the workings of language. In particular, the elite-masses distinction has been a major factor in the consideration of language attitude, choice, usage and use by Nigerians. For example, the Nigerian elite have been blamed for the inferior status of the indigenous languages compared with English (Oyesakin 1992). Since it is the elite that dominate policy making in Nigeria, their interest has always been equated with public interest. Consequently, the dominance of English over the indigenous languages in Nigeria and the attendant positive attitude towards the language can be attributed to elitist interests. Ordinarily, the masses could not have had a negative attitude towards their respective native languages if they had not been misled or misdirected by the elite who dictate the pace and whom they look up to for direction. In the next few paragraphs, I shall present my opinion, based on the views of scholars and my own social experience, about the social-linguistic characteristics of the elite and the masses of Nigeria so that we can perceive their past, present and future capacities for responsible social-action towards developing Nigerian English and other languages for the consequent development of the Nigerian nation. For convenience, the presentation is illustrated in Table 2 in Appendix 2 of this paper. Scholars have earlier perceived the African elite as a united group, referred to variously as the bourgeoisie or national middle class and distinguished from the metropolitan capitalists in Europe (Rodney 1972:36). The elite are characterised as having an almost incurable desire for the permanent identification with Western elders from whom they have learnt their lessons. According to Ngugi (2009: 42), the elite class prefers the European linguistic screen that keeps their worlds apart from the people. In developed societies, writers, keepers of memories and carriers of national discourse use the languages of their communities; but the postcolonial elite prefer to express communal memories in foreign languages, which mean sharing those communal memories with the foreign owners of the languages or among themselves as foreign language-speaking elite. The result is an intra-class conversation of elite that, cocooned from the people by the language of its choice and practice, conceives of itself as constituting the nation by itself. In the present day Nigeria, different faces of elitism10 can be identified. Over the fifty year period of independence, a ruling elite have gradually emerged in the polity from the previous national middle class parallel and in constant touch with Western capitalists. The 0.5% ruling elite entrusted with the governance of the nation at the national, state and local government levels have progressively acquired political power and stupendous wealth at the expense of the nation in order to maintain and sustain contact with their cohorts abroad. Conscious of class preservation, detached from the local community and exploitative, they use language as an instrument of power and exploitation (cf. Fanon 1967: 133,152). They themselves are bilingual in 22

varying degrees in English and respective indigenous ethnic languages, depending on their levels of education; but they encourage the sustenance of English for official business and, sometimes, personal interests disguised as official, making endless visits overseas for conferences, social activities and medical treatment and stashing away money in foreign accounts. Their children live abroad and receive education there at great expense to the nation. Having English as their mother tongue and little or no knowledge of an indigenous language, the children become culturally alienated and estranged from the Nigerian community. Yet, courtesy of their parents means and resources, these emigrated children who have for many years been shielded from national problems and aspirations are, unfortunately, sometimes foisted on the nation to hold leadership positions through improper and rigged elections. The second elitist group of major significance is the educated or middle class elite. The more numerically prominent members of this group are the careerists or professionals, about 15% population, in various fields - senior teachers, academicians, educationists, journalists and media practitioners, lawyers, accountants, doctors, writers, publishers, film makers, senior civil servants and senior officers of security and law enforcers, corporate managers and businessmen. Members are more often collaborators and imitators of the ruling elite and just as self-centred, intra-class in perspective and conscious of self-serving awards. Fanon (1967:120) says: The university and merchant classes which make up the most enlightened section of the new state are in fact characterised by the smallness of their number and their being concentrated in the capital, and the type of activities in which they are engaged: business, agriculture and the liberal professions...The national bourgeoisie is not engaged in production, nor in invention, nor building, nor labour The career elite demonstrate the attitude of ambivalence and contradiction, feeling proud to identify with the native languages which serve as a powerful symbol of ethnicity while at the same time taking maximum advantage of all the benefits that proficiency in English confers. Parents forbid their children from speaking the native language at home, even when the fathers and mothers speak the language to each other. They overzealously prevent their children from playing with peers in the neighbourhood, except those who can speak to them in English. They send the children to schools abroad and high fee paying elitist private schools locally. In the local private schools, low priority is accorded indigenous languages at school in a straight for English programme. Apart from the fact that fewer periods are allocated to the languages in the school curriculum, if they occur as subjects at all, school regulations forbid children from speaking them, even when the teachers do so. Thus, children who do not speak indigenous languages at home or in school lack any interest in it and fail to master the language to any significant degree. The less prominent members of the educated elite are the intellectuals who are very few indeed (2%). They cut across all the professions mentioned above for career officers. Intellectuals are not only well educated in bookish terms, but they are also involved practically in social activities that involve reasoning, sensitisation and participation. In other words, intellectuals are socially responsible citizens who do not only theorise and pontificate on social issues, but advocate, lobby and take practical steps to solve social problems (Bamgbose 2006, Adegbite 2008b)11. The intellectual 23

elite are nationalists and patriots. They seek for, research and promote original and creative ideas and inventions that can help to advance progress and sustain the sovereignty and development of the nation. Intellectual academics and scholars are coordinate bilinguals12 and have consistently advocated the complementarity of the learning, mastery and utilisation of indigenous languages and English for national development and the numerous benefits attached to such language measures. They suggest bilingualism and bilingual education as a basis for sustainable national development. In this regard, they utilise their native language primarily for communication at home and in social gatherings, while at the same time provide a conducive environment for achieving literacy in the native language and English. Their children attend quality but not too expensive private and government schools in which bilingualism is encouraged or at least, tolerated; thus, the children are able to achieve competence and literacy in both native language and English. A sub-elite group of individuals, mostly of the older generation, can also be identified. This group of people, about 2.5% in population, are wealthy and have the financial capacity to achieve economic goals, but their limited formal education constrain their socio-political power from matching that of the ruling or educated elite. The sub-elite group members are competent in the spoken form of their native language but may not be literate in the language; they also lack knowledge of either spoken or written English. In order to boost their social position, they encourage their wards or children to attend school in order to be literate in English. The kind of school which their children attend depends on their level of association in society or extent of enlightenment. Thus, the children achieve bilingualism in varying degrees in both their native language and English, from limited to coordinate bilinguals. Coming to the masses, which scholars (Fanon 1967, Rodney 1972, Ngugi 1981) have referred to cover the proletariat and peasants, the masses form the largest group of individuals (80%) in the nation. The proletariat or working class people (20%) have not received as much formal education as the elite class has. With the feeling of deprivation of formal education, accompanied by low wages at work, the working class is always in constant struggle with the elite for better wages and conditions of service. Members are incipient and subordinate bilinguals who are competent in their native language but lack competence in English. However, whatever the limitations of parents in the proletariat group, they compensate for in their desire to ensure that their children and wards are educated and speak English. They emulate their elite colleagues by speaking English to their children at home, not minding the quality of the language emanating from their own deficiency. They also send their wards to fee-paying primary schools where the medium of instruction is English, even though the schools they can afford lack the quality of teachers and facilities to enhance its proper learning and usage. For children who do not speak their native language at home before going to school, they become limited bilinguals, failing to master any language to any significant degree. Constituting 60% of the citizens population, the peasants are the largest group of people in the country in terms of social class. However, they are a marginalised group in view of their lack of formal education and knowledge of English. Communication wise, they have been excluded from the affairs of the nation, despite the large potentials of the knowledge and capacity they possess for national development. Ngugi (1981: 23) asserts that the peasant keep alive the national heritage and see no contradiction between speaking their own mother tongue and belonging to a 24

larger national or continental geography. The children of peasants who go to school (many do not) have achieved mastery of oracy skills in their native language before going to school, but they fail to acquire education and literacy in both the language and English in the public schools they attend due to poor learning conditions. 6. The Misuse(s) of English in Nigeria 6.1 Misuses at the Micro-level I go back to the comment of Prof. David Cook, mentioned earlier in this study, (see Notes 2) that the pattern of language use in the country is mainly responsible for the low level of development in the key areas of national life. The hitherto uncoordinated overbearing status of English above indigenous languages has done incalculable damage to the individual and collective psyche of Nigerian citizens, unwittingly. Reports of poor performance of students in education, qualitavely and quantitatively, continue to jar our ears from time to time. Students perform poorly in examinations in all subjects, including languages (Akere 1995, UBE 2003, Bamgbose 2006 and Jibril 2007). Majority of users, while not literate in their mother tongues, do not also speak or write English well, even at the tertiary level (cf. Adesanoye 1994, 2004). There is constant evidence of impoliteness in communicative interactions in English among people as many speak bookish English even in informal situations. Through the overuse of English, majority of the Nigerian populace is excluded from information and active participation in the different facets of social life (Oyelaran 1988, Bamgbose 2006). There is communication restriction due to the shortage of information facilities, on the one hand, and the existence of deliberately formulated information restriction laws. Knowledge and information circulated in English get to 20% of the Nigerian population and the interpretation and translation of such into the indigenous languages is haphazardly done, courtesy a few mass media that are conscious of the essence of indigenous language development. A major restriction is that not all users of English are even competent in the language and it is common knowledge that research findings, academic discussions and most government policies written in English circulate among and are understood by only 10% of the Nigerian population, who are competent in the language. Not only is this trend unhelpful to democracy, it is also a hindrance to human development. Further evidence of communication failure can be observed in the aversion to interactions by some political leaders, manifested either through avoidance of impromptu dialogue in English with news reporters and the public and the making of unilateral declarations and issuance of threats and abuses in form of harsh words and words of coercion (cf. Adegbite 2008c). It is not just enough to castigate human beings for their low performance levels, nor is it even wise enough to blame the failure on the lack of adequate qualified and skilled human resources, inadequate funding, poor facilities, equipment and infrastructure. These resources are secondary to the main cause of the problems, language misuse. Take it or leave it, without getting the language right, there is a very limited chance of survival in the globalised economy. Essien (2003, 2006) observes that it is quite clear that nationhood, economic, legal, socio-cultural and linguistic developments were integrated in developed western and Asian nations and are where they are - far above the new Black African nations whose developments take no cognisance of the enormous potential of language.

25

Thus, in addition to the need for government authorised long-term sustained efforts, a combined effort of individuals and groups to promote, develop and utilise the language resources of the nation appropriately, through micro- and macro-policies, planning and action measures, is a sine qua non of qualitative and quantitative education, positive socio-cultural dynamism, creative technology, vibrant economy, social justice, medical innovations and political sovereignty. It is sometimes very surprising when a group of human beings recognise language as a basic requirement of their social existence and yet fail to exploit its creative potential for societal growth. Instead, we face other things and continue to chase the shadows. 6.2 Misuse at the Macro-level 6.2.1 Examining the Language Provisions It has already been stated that the overuse of English and underuse of indigenous languages have been the sources of our collective language failure and the consequent national kwashiorkor. One reason for the language problem is the lack of a comprehensive language policy, while some of the few language provisions that abound are either not well formulated or not implemented. Let us at this juncture look at the provisions stated a short while ago and comment on them. Of the eight provisions, five (1, 2, 3, 4, and 8) are not in tune with the reality of the situation on ground and may require reformulation to be feasible. Two (5 and 7) are okay as they are but are not being implemented for one reason or the other. The remaining provision (6) may suffice if well implemented, but some scholars would prefer an alternative to it. In my comments on the provisions below, I shall identify the flaws in the provisions and attempt to suggest reformulations or solicit implementation as may be necessary. Provision 1. No preference should be given to any language(s) by mentioning them overtly (cf. Adegbite 2008a), which is the main complaint by the ethnic minority groups (cf. Egbokhare 2004). Besides, all languages are to be treated as equal, as a right of the speakers13. Secondly, the expression when adequate arrangements have been made therefor, has been described by scholars as an escape clause that covers up inaction (cf. Bamgbose 1994). Reformulation: The business of The National Assembly shall be conducted in English and Nigerian indigenous languages, when desirable. Provision 2. The indigenous language(s) is/are considered primary at the state level and should be mentioned before English. Reformulation: The business of a House of Assembly shall be conducted in the language(s) of the immediate environment in each State, as the House may by resolution approve, and in English. Provision 3. The preference for any language(s) should not be explicitly stated. The child or community should have the freedom to choose from any of the languages he/she may desire. Reformulation: Government appreciates the importance of language as a means of promoting social interaction and national cohesion; and preserving cultures. Thus every child shall learn the language of the immediate environment. Furthermore, in the interest of national unity, it is expedient that every child shall be required to learn another Nigerian 26

language apart from his/her own native language. Provision 4. The provision is ambitious and unrealistic, having been hastily drafted by the military government of Nigeria at that time to spite Britain during a temporary period of strained political relationship between them. What is the essence of a second official language when the existing official language, English, is daunting enough to cope with? Bamgbose (2001) wonders how feasible it is to introduce French in the primary school curriculum, since every primary school teacher teaches all subjects and very few of them can teach the subject. Learning a foreign language such as French should be an optional and not a compulsory task. Reformulation: For smooth interaction with our neighbours, it is desirable for Nigerians to speak French. Accordingly, students shall be encouraged to learn French as a subject in the curriculum, starting from the Junior Secondary School. Provision 5. This provision is well formulated and is in conformity with international standards. But scholars have reported its non-implementation. Ohiri-Aniche (2001) reports that most of the nursery schools in Nigeria, which are privately owned, use English as a medium of instruction and some of them do not even have the mother tongue or language of the immediate environment as a subject on the school time table. Some proprietors/proprietresses and head teachers, of course, are aware that the provision is valid and reasonable (Adegbite and Obilade 2002), but what can they do? Instead, they give the usual escapist excuse: That is what the parents want, and s/he who pays the piper dictates the tune. Can one really blame them for succumbing to the parents pressure, under the false notion of the earlier English, the better? Many parents who speak English to their children at home lack mastery of the language themselves and do not realise what damage they cause their children who may have to unlearn in future some of the wrong things they have been taught as children. The education administrators who are to enlighten the parents and also monitor the schools to ensure that they comply with the provision are themselves compromised and the perpetuation of ignorance continues. Meanwhile, the status of nursery education in public schools is arbitrary and unplanned. Provision 6. The main problem with this information is that the implementation is haphazardly done as it lacks the political will and commitment of the government. The provision is also well formulated, to some extent, and it would suffice in the meantime, in view of indigenous languages that do not yet have the script, human and material resources to cope beyond the lower level as mediums of instruction. Otherwise, scholars have commented that the fourth year period of change-over from language of immediate environment to English is too early for effectiveness (Fafunwa, et al. 1989, Afolayan 2001, Obanya 2002)14. They suggest that the native language should be used as a medium of instruction throughout the six years of primary school or even up till the end of basic education, after the third year of junior secondary school, while at the same time taught alongside English as a subject. Note also the observation made earlier about the non-feasibility of teaching French at this level of education. Provision 7. This provision is okay as it is, provided that it is well-implemented. Provision 8. The problem with this provision is that literature in English is listed as an 27

elective at the Senior Secondary School level; whereas, it should be a compulsory subject, in order to develop positive reading habits among all students, not a select few (Adegbite 2005b). Notwithstanding the comments and reformulations of provisions above, it is quite apparent that a general framework that expresses the national philosophy, principle(s) and/or ideology(ies) is lacking, to which all the provisions above can be related. Adegbite (2008a:15) suggests a policy framework at the macro-level of societal (national) bilingualism, represented symbolically thus: NL + SL + (OL), where NL refers to Native Languages; SL refers to Second Language (English); OL refers to other languages which may be another indigenous language, Pidgin English or foreign languages such as French, Arabic, German and Latin; and the brackets indicate optionality. The principles underlying the policy are three, viz, (i) the primacy of the mother tongue, (ii) the secondary role of English or English as a Second Language and (iii) bilingualism-biculturalism (Adegbite 2004c). It can also be seen that the specification above supports polyglottism, but a status distinction is made between NL and SL as obligatory languages and OL as optional languages. 6.2.2 Misconceptions about Language Learning and Use Language scholars have identified three facets or aspects of attitude as the cognitive, affective and the behavioural or active (Agheyisi and Fishman 1970, Baker 2001). These aspects apply to the lackadaisical or negative attitude paid to language development in Nigeria. For example, the affective aspect can explain the positive attitude which speakers may have towards English and, to some extent, their own native languages and the negative attitude that they may have towards the languages of other people. The behavioural or active aspect can explain the reasons why some people take practical steps towards developing languages, why some others are apathetic about the languages and why, yet, some prevent the development in other to perpetuate exclusion. The cognitive aspect can explain the knowledge, beliefs, ideologies and values that speakers may have about themselves, others, their environment and languages that may predispose them to feel or behave in a particular way. Certain misconceptions about language learning and use by some individuals may have been responsible for their attitude towards languages. Obemeata (2002) presents some of such misconceptions as follows: (i) Children have no advantage in being taught in the mother tongue. The mother tongue interferes negatively with the learning and usage of the English language. (ii) Mother tongue learning is not relevant to the global economy. (iii)Mother tongue cannot express technical concepts of mathematics, science and technology. (iv) The language projects of NERDC in developing indigenous languages may, after all, be a colossal waste of resources. In their attempt to argue for the primary role of English in Nigeria, Igboanusi and Lothar (2005:18) claim that Nigerians are not genuinely complaining about the role and functions of English in Nigeria. Those who try to fault the dominance of English in Nigeria do so for academic purposes. To buttress their position, they (ibid. p.19) cite Luckos (2003) assertion that

28

 demanding that all these languages be developed to a point where they can serve as fully-fledged languages in all domains of life and as a medium of instruction in the education system seems to be a fundamentalist thinking because this may be unrealistic and even unhelpful. These nations have much more pressing needs than development of all languages, such as providing people with food, development of infrastructure and health systems, etc. governments therefore have to concentrate (often limited) material resources on main objectives. Later, in the same book, (p.22), the authors have this to say: Education in English does not mean a rejection or forsaking of our culture. After all English permits the projection of ones culture in the language. There is also nothing wrong in cultural hybridisation, which the use of English may encourage. While there is no disagreement between the authors position and mine on the realities of bilingualism/ multilingualism and hybridisation, our main point of disagreement is that of primacy between the native languages and English. No one is disputing the fact that English should play primary roles nationally and internationally. Instead, what we are saying is that its role can be de-emphasised at the intra-national level, where it would play a secondary role. We are also saying that with the political will, indigenous languages can also play secondary roles at the national level. Lastly, on the issue of misconceptions, I shall refer to the claim of some legislators of the Lagos State House of Assembly during a debate on language medium of communication in the House (The Guardian, 10 December, 1999) that The mother tongue is not appropriate for the conduct of the business of the House of Assembly. It is capable of demeaning and reducing the intellectual capacity of legislators. It is, however, gratifying that the same House, for better reasons of common sense, has now passed the bill for the occasional use of Yoruba to conduct her affairs, like some other Houses in the Southwestern and Northern states (Owolabi 2006). 6.2.3 The Need for Enlightenment Contrary to the misconceptions expressed above, there are some useful facts about language that should be made available to all citizens of Nigeria who are interested in language development. First, the vital role of the native languages, which are respectively the mother tongues of users, cannot be overemphasised as they provide the bases for their positive personal image, original individuality and creativity, retention and maintenance of native identity. The mother tongue is the most useful language to a bilingual child in the formative stage of his/her life. According to Fafunwa (1982), it is natural to him/her like mothers milk. A human being without competence in his/her mother tongue is deprived and de-humanised. In Nigerias cultural parlance, only a bad mother will refuse to give her child breast milk while only an awkward child will rate another language higher than his/her own. To be denied the opportunity to acquire education or communicate in ones mother tongue is a violation of ones linguistic rights (Tollefson 2004). To allow such a denial is to destroy the life of the individual psycho-socially and also sentence the language to death. According to Skuttnabb-Kangas (2004), no language deserves to die because the cost of language death in terms of knowledge and cultural loss to an enlightened community is enormous. Essien (2003) says that the source of power of 29

developed nations lies in their ability to develop their numerous languages from very few sources and utilise the languages for gainful purposes. While academics in developed nations of the world encourage participation in the globalisation process via native and non-native languages, contesting Englishisation seriously (Phillipson and Skutnabb-Kangas 1999, Skutnabb-Kangas 2004), most academics in undeveloped Anglophone nations, apart from a few active linguists, respond to globalisation by either being apathetic or encouraging the loss of their native languages and promoting Englishisation. Furthermore, research in bilingualism and second language teaching has shown that pupils perform better in both mother tongue (L1) and English (L2) in primary school leaving examinations, when instruction is carried out in the mother tongue and both the mother tongue and English are taught as subjects (Afolayan 2001, Ouane 2005, Jibril 2007). The results of several experiments carried out around the world (cf. Cummins 1981, Royer and Carlo 1991, August et al. 2000 and 2006) have confirmed that the acquisition of competence in a mother tongue facilitates the proper learning of a second language if mother tongue and second language skills are introduced in a sequential order in which skills learnt earlier facilitate the acquisition of later skills (cf. Adegbite 1993, 2000b). For example, the oral skills of listening and speaking of L1 and L2 influence positively the learning of literacy skills of reading and writing in both L1 and L2; also the mastery of reading and writing L1 later influences reading and writing in L2. What Adegbite (1993, 2000b) suggests, in line with the approach of sequential bilingualism utilised by the scholars mentioned above (Kessler 1984), is that in early education at the nursery and early primary level, while the L1 is used as the medium of instruction, both the L1 and English will be taught as subjects. In the languages taught, both the oracy and literacy skills of L1 will be emphasised but only the oracy skills of L2 will be focused on. By the time the children get to the later part of primary school, they will be fully literate in the L1 and will also have had considerable mastery of oracy and some mastery of reading in L2. When you now focus on the literacy skills of L2 at this level, the children will bring all their previous learning experience to bear on these later skills and thus enable efficient and effective learning. Also, when there is a switch from L1 to L2, either at this stage (Primary 4) or a later stage (JSS1), the children already have the linguistic, cultural and cognitive bases to cope with their subjects. Otherwise, the straight use of a second or foreign language to teach children who are not yet competent in their mother tongues or second language, as is currently in practice, most often results in limited bilingualism or semi-lingualism and also in rote learning (Baker 2001, Dada 2006), especially when there is lack of adequate exposure to the second language (Bamgbose 1985). According to Andrew Thomas (1995:383), former Assistant Director, British Council, in charge of English and education in West Africa, the teaching of English should be carried out within a truly bilingual system, integrating the teaching of English with the teaching of indigenous languages. English must be able to co-exist with the indigenous languages, both in the curriculum and in the world outside education. Another repercussion of the straight for English programme is that the children would at best have acquired Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS), but not Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP), when we believe that they have successfully learnt English. Cummins (1984) distinguishes between BICS and CALP (cf. also Baker 2001) in second language learning. According to him, 30

the terms describe two different types of language abilities found in children. BICS refers to context-bound, face-to-face communication, like the language first learned by toddlers and preschoolers, which is used in everyday social interaction. In contrast, CALP (Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency) refers to the highly abstract, decontextualised communication that takes place in the classroom, especially in the later elementary grades. CALP involves the language of learning, which enables children to problem-solve, hypothesise, imagine, reason and project into situations with which they have no personal experience. It is a prerequisite for learning to read and write and for overall academic success. Children who begin acquiring a second language at the time they begin school generally take one to two years to acquire BICS and five to seven years to acquire CALP. The implications of the BICS and CALP concepts are that the childs second language or language of the classroom needs to be sufficiently well developed for her or him to be able to meet the cognitive demands of the academic setting. This does not mean that the childs L1 should be abandoned, however. In fact, the theory assumes that a minimum threshold of competence in L1 is required in order for a child to benefit from instruction in L2. All activities such as speaking, listening, reading or writing in both L1 and L2 facilitate the development of the whole cognitive system. However, if children are made to operate in L2 when L1 is not adequately developed, then the entire language system will be compromised and academic learning and performance will suffer. 6.2.4 Summary of Argument I have argued in this lecture that English is a second language in Nigeria and thus ought to complement rather than dominate the native indigenous languages. In doing this, English would function primarily as a language of inter-ethnic and international communication and secondarily in intra-national and intra-ethnic communication. The indigenous languages can play secondary roles at the national level and play primary roles at the ethnic and intra-ethnic levels. Next, I have argued that the indigenisation of English is inevitable, to enable it express experiences of Nigerians; hence, the suggestion that Standard NigE be codified as a model that will co-exist with other colloquial and non-standard forms to be used appropriately with the indigenous languages for efficient and effective communication in specific situations. I see bilingualism/ multilingualism as an asset, not a liability. But I support additive bilingualism instead subtractive bilingualism (Lambert 1975), because the former promotes the development of the two languages and encourages the users flexibility in them, while the latter demotes the first language in the process of acquiring the second and results in the loss of native cultural identity (Gutierrez, et al. 2002 and SkutnabbKangas 2004). Then, I suggest that languages be presented sequentially to learners in schools, to enable mother tongue and second language skills learnt earlier to facilitate those learnt later. In a nutshell, the point I am making is not to discontinue with English. Instead, it is simply about additive bilingualism and the restitution of positive individual self-image and social responsibility; the preservation of native personal identity, even in the acquisition of multiple identities; the acquisition of language and cognitive competence and creativity; and lastly, learning languages through appropriate sequencing and order of skills, not putting the cart before the horse. 7. Implications and Recommendations Nigeria requires well-coordinated macro- and micro-language planning measures (cf. Emenanjo 1990, Ricento 2006, Omoniyi 2007, Adegbite 2008a) for sustainable national development, in view of the importance of language in nationbuilding. While macro-planning takes place at the national level, in the form of 31

formulating appropriate policies and demonstrating positive political will to support the implementation, micro-planning takes place at the individual, group and subnational levels to promote, use and develop languages. Some examples of microplanning activities mentioned by Adegbite (2008a) are the Ife Six-year Primary Project (SYPP), already cited; the Zaria Primary Education Improvement Project (PEIP) (Omojuwa 1980) and the Port Harcourt Rivers Readers Project (Williamson 1980). Others include the identification of varieties, nativisation and codification efforts on NigE (Ubahakwe 1979, Bamgbose et al. 1995, Awonusi and Babalola 2004 and Adegbite and Olajide 2009); the Use of English, including the Communication Skills Project (COMSKIP), programme in tertiary institutions (Afolayan 1986); modernisation efforts on indigenous languages such as the production of (i) a glossary of technical terminologies in science and mathematics for primary schools in eight languages, (ii) a metalanguage in three languages on linguistics, literature and methodology, (iii) translations of the 1999 Constitution into three languages, (iv) a quadrilingual glossary of legislative terms (QGLT) in three languages, and (v) a Yoruba Dictionary of Engineering Physics (cf. Owolabi 2006). Effective language planning would require the attention of all stakeholders in the society to formulate, implement, develop and nurture an enduring additive sequential societal bilingual policy in which both English and indigenous languages are utilised complementarily as national, regional, state and local languages for personal, official and in particular, educational purposes. The stakeholders in the Nigerian society have minimum specific roles, though not restricted to these, to play in the language development process. The government at the national level should - formulate, legislate and provide the enabling environment for the implementation of a bilingual policy for the nation; - sponsor the codification and elaboration of Standard NigE to reflect the identity of the nation and proclaim it as national language. - encourage the translation and interpreting of documents and texts across languages for public consumption. It is also the duty of the governments at the state and local government levels to encourage, finance and support the languages in their respective domains. It is the duty of the intellectual and career elite to engage in planning measures such as corpus planning - development of language structure through devising and standardising of orthographies and writing grammars and dictionaries by language scholars; status planning assigning vital roles to languages by politicians and all citizens; acquisition planning by learners, teachers and education administrators; advocacy planning politicking by all citizens, especially by cultural groups and legislators; and elaboration planning enlightenment and popularisation of languages by scholars, media practitioners, writers, publishers and film artistes and directors. Individuals, groups (especially cultural), corporations and organisations may promote a bilingual policy in several ways such as using the mother tongue and English for communication at home; sponsoring learners to study languages at school; specifying both native and English languages as requirements for admission and employment; and using them in writing advertisements, signposts and billboards (cf. Ugorji 2005). 32

Mr Vice-Chancellor sir, may I use this opportunity to appeal to academic colleagues in Obafemi Awolowo University to make efforts to balance the abstract researches which they conduct for the benefit of the elite and overseas sponsors with practical application that is of relevance to the generality of the Nigerian society. In this regard, collaborative efforts to translate some of those useful but hidden research findings in the archives into books, booklets and pamphlets could be well utilized if presented in consumable form to proletariat technical persons, craftsmen and women and intelligent peasants that may need them. The Institute of Cultural Studies of this university can be further strengthened with materials and equipment to promote collaborative activities between the sciences and humanities. In this regard, the university would, in addition to its academic pedigree, further justify the For Learning and Culture sobriquet and make a giant leap towards social relevance. 8. Conclusion The benefits of multiple (multi-) languages, multi-literacies and integrated language and social development are unlimited in multilingual-multiethnic nations for the survival of individuals and societies in the globalised economy. I have had the opportunity at one point or the other to raise some of the issues discussed above at conferences and academic forums. It is absurd to aim at mono-competence in English in a second language environment, instead of communicative bilingual competence. Many English language teachers have low tolerance for the promotion of indigenous languages in schools, perhaps for the fear of losing their jobs or for the belief that a straight for English or only English programme will lead us to the El Dorado. When teachers of English fail to support, what do we expect from teachers who teach other subjects in English, some of whom will even declare bare-facedly in this 21st C. that you cannot use Yoruba to teach physics or chemistry, as if those subjects originally existed in English in the first instance? On the contrary, linguists show a better understanding of the issues. They are more tolerant and, indeed, strive to promote multi-languages, multi-literacies and integrated language and social (lingua-cultural) development. As a scholar of English language and applied linguistics, I straddle the two fields and understand the bases of the differences in attitudes. My submission on these observations is that languages exist for human beings, not just to be learnt, spoken and written for the sake of it, but to be utilised for the development of individuals and societies. Thank you very much for listening.

33

Notes 1. In Yorubaland, homage is a cultural canon, just as acknowledgement is in scholarship. Ilesanmi (2004: 95) says that it has to be meticulously followed if the artist would not court the opposition of the custodians of the cultural oratural heritage. I see no reason why such an appropriate canon should not extend to academic scholarship, at least, in Yorubaland. I should use this opportunity to acknowledge the scholarship provided by the DAAD German Academic Exchange Service for a research stay in Germany. The conducive atmosphere provided by the university, as well as personal and academic support by my hostess, Professor Ulrike B. Gut, has contributed a lot to the quality of this paper. 2. Prof. David Cook, a British Professor of English literature at the University of Ilorin, at a colloquium in 1990 remarks that one reason why Africa has been slow to become leaders of science and technological development is the pattern of language use which encourages rote learning like parrots. Concepts in mathematics and science had been taught in a language which the teachers themselves did not understand. 3. Scholars have estimated the population of English speakers in the world as follows: ENL: over 337 million; ESL: 235 350 million; EFL: 100 1000million; Conservative estimate, native or native: 670million; Reasonable competence: 1,800 million; A middle of the road estimate: 1,200-1,500 million, a quarter of the worlds population. (Crystal 1997, Graddol 1997 and Jowitt 2008) 4. Grimes and Grimes (2000) put the number at 505. Wikipedia puts it as 521. This number includes 510 living languages, two second languages without native speakers and 9 extinct languages. Ethnologue says there are 527 languages, of which 514 are living languages, 2 are second languages without mother-tongue speakers and 11 have no known speakers. 5. The italics are by the author cited and the reference should be consulted for the solution to the exercise. 6. According to Banjo (1995:209), Variety I exhibits the greatest density of mothertongue transfers, while Variety four exhibits the least. Of the other two varieties, Variety II exhibits more transfers than Variety III but, because Variety III, unlike Variety IV, is a home-grown variety, it is identified as the most appropriate endonormative model. The suggestion comes after Brosnahan earlier suggestion of four levels: Level 1 (Pidgin): no formal education; Level 2: only primary education completed; Level 3: only secondary education completed; and Level 4: university education completed. But parallel to Banjos classification are the sociolectal varieties: basilect, mesolect and acrolect. These represent a continuum from the non-standard to the standard form. While Broken English is regarded as a part of the basilectal variety, the case with Pidgin English is less clear-cut (Bamgbose 1995). Some scholars (Elugbe and Omamor (1991) argue that Pidgin English is not a variety of English but a variety of pidgin language in general. 7. In this regard, scholars would need to distinguish between a descriptive focus on NigE, which permits data from different varieties to be described objectively, irrespective of the sources or quality, and a prescriptive focus, which discriminates between data and marks out a qualitative one for description. The codification of 34

Standard NigE is undoubtedly a prescriptive grammar that must be based on data from the acrolectal variety. When the form is fully described, the co-existence with the other varieties becomes streamlined and users can select forms according to the communication situation based on their communicative competence (Adejare 1995) 8. According to Grice (1975), the maxims that speakers normally obey in conversations are quantity, quality, relevance and manner. This view has been criticised by scholars and an alternative suggestion is the politeness principle, conceived in terms of politeness and face maxims. 9. Scholars have explained the reasons for the non-implementation of policies in Nigeria diverse but complementary ways. For example, Bamgbose (2001) identifies the constraints as failure to accord priority to language policy, negative attitude to all indigenous languages, absence of well coordinated implementation strategies, administrative or political instability leading to frequent changes of policy makers and policies, failure to use language experts and lack of political will. Owolabi (2004) identifies possible threats in terms of (i) downright opposition to the policies from three quarters, viz. speakers of main and small group languages whose native languages are not overtly recognised, elite who have the native language prejudice syndrome (NLPS) and those who would like to oppose the policies because they are not part of the teams that produce them; and (ii) official reluctance to implement the policies. Most important of all is the negative disposition of Nigerians from the ethnic minor and minority groups who believe that some of the provisions favour the three major Nigerian languages and neglect others. 10. It is sometimes possible that the distinction is made between the middle class and the ruling class, the fact still remains that, to the low class, they constitute different facets of elitism and the positional relationship between both groups is fluid. 11. The following assertion by Gramsci (1971: 352) is apt on social responsibility: In this sense, the real philosopher is, and cannot be other than, the politician, the man (sic) who modifies the environment, understanding by environment the ensemble of relations, which each of us enters to take part in. if ones individuality means to acquire consciousness of them and to modify ones own personality means to modify the ensemble of these relations. 12. Bilingual speakers of an indigenous language and English exist with varying degrees of competence in the two languages. Coordinate bilinguals have good mastery of the two languages. Subordinate and incipient bilinguals have good mastery of one of the two languages, usually the L1, and understand the second language partially, with the former being slightly higher on the bilingual competence ladder. Limited bilinguals or semi-bilinguals lack competence in both languages. 13. Three phases of LPP research have been observed by Ricento (2000) and Chibita (2006). The first phase (from the viewpoint of language as problem) was to seek linguistic homogeneity out of diversity, for furthering the goals of modernisation and Westernisation. The second phase (from the viewpoint of language as a resource) shifted from the more technical aspects of language to the social, political and economic effects of language contact and from languages, their structures and their roles in society to the status and relations of linguistic communities. The current third 35

phase (from the viewpoint of language as human right) presents language as a tool for the empowerment of individuals and societies (cf. Adegbite 2008c). 14. In the Ife Six Year Primary Project (SYPP) that was carried out in the early 1970s, the experimental group was taught all the subjects in the six-year primary school curriculum, except English, in Yoruba, while English was taught as a subject. The results showed that the experimental classes demonstrated better competence in English than the control group and performed much better in practically all the other subjects in the curriculum, including science and mathematics (Afolayan 2001). Despite the tremendous success of the programme, political instability and lack of political will prevented its replication and implementation nationally.

36

REFERENCES Authors Publications Adegbite, A. B. (1987) Assessing the quality of translation into English as a Second Language. Journal of English Studies IV, 59-73. Adegbite, Wale (1988) Problems of message equivalence in simultaneous translation from Yoruba into English. Ife Studies in English Language Vol. 2, No. 1, 15-28. ______ . (1991a) A comparative stylistics study of message projection in two versions of a Biblical text. GEGE: Ogun Studies in English Vol. 1, 127-143. ______ . (1991b) Some features of language use in Yoruba traditional medicine. PhD Thesis, University of Ibadan. ______ . (1993) Towards an efficient bilingual programme for teaching language skills in Nigerian primary schools. Literacy and Reading in Nigeria Vol. 6, 337-351. ______ . (1994) Teaching English prosodic features to Nigerian secondary school pupils. Ife Journal of Theory and Research in Education Vol.4 Nos 1and 2, 82-94. ______ . (1995) The use of English programme in Nigerian tertiary institutions: A consideration of the course content. Nigerian Journal of Educational Research Vol.1, No1, 99-105. ______ . (1996) English and legal argument: Some interpretation problems in selected court cases in Nigeria. Abuja Journal of the Humanities. Vol. 1, No 2, 90-101. ______ . (1998) Some factors affecting interpretants reactions to English texts in Nigeria. Ilorin Journal of Language and Literature 3, 26-35. ______ . (2000a) Some features and problems of simultaneous interpretation of Christian sermons in Yoruba and English. Ilorin Journal of Language and Literature 4, 1-16. ______ . (2000b) Sequential bilingualism and the teaching of language skills to early primary school pupils in Nigeria Glottodidactica XXVIII, 5-18. ______ . (2000c) Teaching reading comprehension in English through vocabulary. TESL Reporter Vol. 33 (1), 23-31. ______ . (2002) The promotion of reading habits in Yoruba and English through the Media: A case study of some media activities in southwestern Nigeria. Literacy and Reading in Nigeria Vol.9, No 2, 88-94. ______ . (2003a) Enlightenment and attitudes of the Nigerian elite on the roles of languages in Nigeria. Language in Culture and Curriculum 16:2, 185-196. (Hard copy: New Language Bearings in Africa: A Fresh Quest, edited by Margaret Muthwii and Angelina N. Kioko, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 89-100. ______ . (2003b) The Karatu workshops on literacy and development in Nigeria. In Arua, A. E. (Ed.) Reading for All in Africa: Building Communities Where Literacy Thrives. Newark, DE: International Reading Association, 109-12. ______ . (2004a) Towards a delimitation of the status and functions of English in Nigeria. In Owolabi, K. and Dasylva, A. O. (Eds) Forms and Functions of English and Indigenous Languages in Nigeria: A Festschrift in Honour of Ayo Banjo. Ibadan: Group Publishers. ______ . (2004b) Language, culture and local government administration in Nigeria In Aransi, I.O. (Ed.) Local Government and Culture in Nigeria. Chapel Hill, NC. Chapel Hill Press Inc., pp. 206-212. ______ . (2004c) Bilingualism, biculturalism and the utilization of African languages for the development of African nations. In Oyeleye, L. (Ed.) Language and Discourse in Society. Ibadan: Hope Publications, 13-31. 37

______ . (2005a) Pragmatic tactics in diplomatic communication in Ola Rotimis Ovonramwen Nogbaisi. Journal of Pragmatics 37, 1457-1480. ______ . (2005b) A contentbased approach towards learning English and other subjects in Nigerian Primary Schools. Special Calel Vol. 3 No. 2 (Special issue of the Journal of the International Conference on African Literature and the English Language, University of Calabar, Calabar, Nigeria), 87-105. ______ . (2005c) Curriculum development and English studies in Nigerian secondary schools. In Dada, A., Abimbade, A. and Kolawole, O. O. (Eds) Issues in Language, Communication and Education. A Book of Reading in Honour of Prof. C.A. Okedara. Ibadan: Counstellation Books, pp.110-124. ______ . (2005d) Perspectives of meaning interpretation in English. In Olateju, M. and Oyeleye, L. (Eds) Perspectives on Language and Literature. Ile-Ife: Obafemi Awolowo University, pp. 53-72. ______ . (2006) A stylistic analysis of conflict mediation discourse in a literary text. Ife Studies in English Language Vol. 6,1: 139-168. ______ . (2008a) Macro-language policy and planning and lack of proficiency in language learning and use by Nigerian students. Journal of the Forum on Public Policy.www.forumonpublicpolicy.com/archivespring08/Adegbite/pdf ______. (2008b) The responsibility of academics towards promoting Nigerian languages for sustainable national development. Paper presented at the 22nd Conference of the Linguistic Association of Nigeria (CLAN), held at the University of Maiduguri, Maiduguri, from November 9-13, 2008. ______ . (2008c) Achieving democratic progress through effective planning and utilization of languages in Nigeria. Paper presented at the Faculty of Arts International Conference on Democracy in Africa, August 12-15. ______ . (2009) The Psycholinguistics of English Language in Nigeria: An Introduction. Ibadan: Kraft Books ______. and Onukaogu, C.E. (1994) (Eds.) Language in Education in Nigeria: Some Critical Perspectives. Ile-Ife: Centre for Language in Education and Development (CELED), pp. i-xiii, 1-303. ______ . and Arua, A. E. (1998) A study of secondary school students' proficiency in English in Oyo and Osun States. Journal of Educational Improvement, Vol. 1, 44-54. ______ . and Obilade, O. O. (2002) Problems of teaching reading skills in English to nursery school pupils in Southwestern Nigeria. Africa Reads (A Publication of the International Development in Africa Committee) No 2, 9-13. ______ . and Kehinde, A. (2003) Discourse features of feminism in some of Flora Nwapas novels Estudos Portugueses e Africanos EPA No 42, 5-21. ______ . and Adejuwon, A. O. (2005) Problems of perception of rhythm in English poetry by Nigerian undergraduate students. Journal of the Nigeria English Studies Association. Vol. 11 No 1, 77-86. ______ . and Odebunmi, Akin (2006) Discourse tactic in doctor-patients interactions in English: An analysis of diagnosis in medical communication in Nigeria. Nordic Journal of African Studies, Vol. 15 (4), 499-519. ______ . Odebunmi, Akin, Sadiq, Tajudeen and Akobundu, Ngozi (2008a) Lantern Comprehensive English for Junior Secondary Schools I-III. Lagos: Literamed Publications. ______ . and Akinwale, Layi (2008a) The Limitations of Yoruba-English in Bilingual Undergraduates Students in the Expression of Greetings. In Ndimele, O. M. Udoh, I. I. and Anyawu, O. (Eds) Critical Issues in the Study of Linguistics, 38

Languages and Literatures in Nigeria. A Festschrift for C.M. B. Brann. Port Harcourt: Grand Orbit Communications Ltd and Emhai Press, pp.195-184. ______ . Wale and Olajide, Billy (Eds) (2008b) English and the Challenges of Literacy in the 20th C. Proceedings,of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Nigeria English Studies Association (NESA). Lagos: Olivetree Ventures and NESA, 213 pages. ______ . and Olajide, Billy (Eds) (2009a) Re-inventing the English Language in the Context of Globalization and Decolonization. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the Nigeria English Studies Association (NESA). Lagos: Olivetree Ventures and N ESA. ______ . and Olajide Billy (Eds) (2009b) English in the Nigerian Environment: Emerging patterns and new challenges. Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the Nigeria English Studies Association (NESA). Lagos: Olivetree Ventures and N ESA. _______ . and Gut, U. B. (2010) Variation in English Language Usage in Nigeria across Two Generations. Mimeo, Department of English, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria Akindele, Femi and Adegbite, Wale (1999, Re-printed 2005) The Sociology and Politics of English in Nigeria: An Introduction. Ile-Ife: Obafemi Awolowo University Press, i-vi, 1-181 pages. Okedara, C. A., Awonuga, C. O., Adegbite, A. B. and Ezeokoli, Francis (2003a)Lantern Comprehensive English for Primary Schools, Books 1 6 (including Teachers Guide and Activity Books 1-6. Lagos: Literamed Publications. B. Others Achebe, C. (1958) Things Fall Apart. London: Heinemann Adegbija, E. (1989) Lexico-semantic variation in Nigerian English. World Englishes 8:2, 165-177. _______ . (1994) Language Attitudes in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Sociolinguistic Overview. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. ______ . (2004) The domestication of English in Nigeria. In Awonusi, S. And Babalola, E. (Eds) In The Domestication of English in Nigeria In A Festschrift in honour of Abiodun Adetugbo. Lagos: University of Lagos Press, pp.20-44. Adejare, O. (1995) Communicative Competence in English as a Second Language. In Bamgbose, A., Banjo, A. and Thomas, A. (Eds.), pp. 153-177. Adeniran, A. (1979) Nigerian elite English as a model of Nigerian English. In Ubahakwe, E. (Ed.), pp. 227-241. Adesanoye, F. (1973) A Study of the Varieties of Written English in Nigeria. PhD Thesis, University of Ibadan _______ . (1994) Tertiary English in Nigeria In Asein, S. O. and Adesanoye, F. A. (Eds) Language and Polity: Essays on Language and Society in Nigeria. Ibadan: Sam Bookman, pp. 132-147. _______ . (2004) The English language in Nigeria: The case of a vanishing model In Owolabi, K. and Dasylva, A. (Ed.), pp. 507-22. Adetugbo, A. (1979a) Appropriateness and Nigerian English. In Ubahakwe, E. (Ed.), pp. 227-241. ______ . (1979b) Nigerian English and communicative competence. In Ubahakwe, E. (Ed.), pp. 167-183 39

_______ . (1987) Nigeria English phonology: Is there any standard? Lagos Review of English Studies Vol. IX, 64-84. Afolayan, A. (1968) The linguistic problem of Yoruba learners and users of English. PhD Thesis, University of London, London. ______. (1977) Acceptability of English as a second language in Nigeria. In Greenbaum, S. (Ed.) Acceptability in Language. The Hague: Mouton, pp.1325. ______ . (1986) The English language and development-oriented education higher education in Nigeria. In Freeman, R. And Jibril, M. (Eds) English language Studies in Nigerian Higher Education. London: British Council, pp. _______ . (1987) English as a second language: A variety or myth? Journal of English as a Second Language1, 4-16. ______ . (1994) Valedictory lecture: Language as a neglected factor of development in Africa In Adegbite, W. and Onukaogu, C. E. (Eds), pp. 250-288. _______ . (1995) Ineffectiveness in the presentation of English in Nigeria: Sources and Remedies. In Bamgbose, A., Banjo, A. and Thomas, A. (Eds), pp. 113-129. ______ . (2001) The alienated role of the mother tongue in literacy education for sustainable national development: The Western Nigeria Yoruba example. In Manaka, S. (Ed.) Proceedings of the First Pan-African Reading for All Conference, Pretoria: International Reading Association, pp. 70-88. Akere, F. (1995) Languages in the curriculum: An assessment of the role of English and other languages in the education delivery process in Nigeria.In Bamgbose, A., Banjo, A. and Thomas, A. (Eds), pp. 178-99. ______ . (2009) The English language in Nigeria: The sociolinguistic dynamics of decolonization and globalization. Keynote address. In Adegbite, W. and Olajide, B.(Eds) (2009a) op.cit., pp.1-15. Alo, M. A. and Mesthrie,R. (2008) Nigerian English: Morphology and syntax. In Mesthrie, R. (Eds) Varieties of English 4, Africa, South and Southeast Asia, Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp.323-339. Amayo, A. (1980) Tone in Nigerian English. Papers from the Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society 16, 1-9. ______ . (1988) The case for RP as the appropriate model for teaching English pronunciation. Ife Studies in English Language 2:1, 71-74. Atoye, R. O. (1987) The case for RP as the appropriate model for teaching English pronunciation. Ife Studies in English Language 1, 1&2, 63-70. Attah, M.O. (1987) The national language problem in Nigeria. Canadian Journal of African Studies 21, No 3: 393-401. August, D., Carlo, M., and Calderon, M. (2000) Transfer of Skills from Spanish into English. Report from Practitioners, Parents and Policymakers Retrieved from http://www.Cal.org/pub/articles/skillstransfer.pdf Accessed on 30th April 2003. August, D., & Shanahan, T. (2006) Developing literacy in second-language learners. Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum. Awonusi, V. O. (1994) The Americanization of Nigerian English. World Englishes 13:1, 75-82. ______, S. (2004) RP and the sociolinguistic realities of non-native English accents. In Owolabi, K. and DaSylva, A. (Eds), pp.179-192. _______ . and Babalola (Eds) (2004) The Domestication of English in Nigeria. A Festschrift in honour of Abiodun Adetugbo. Lagos: University of Lagos Press, 40

pp.20- 44. Ayoola, K. A. (1988) Towards the standardization of Educated Nigerian English. Ife Studies in English Language 2:1, 61-70. Baker, C. (2001) Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Bamgbose, A. (1971) The English language in Nigeria. In Spencer, J. (Ed.) The English Language in West Africa. London: Longman, 35-48. _______ . (1992)[1982] Standard Nigerian English: Issues of identification. In Kachru, B. The Other Tongue: English across Cultures. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, pp. 99-111. ________ . (1982) Languages in contact: Yoruba and English in Nigeria. Education and Development 2:1, 329-341. ______ . (1985) Barriers to effective education in West African languages. In Williamson, K. (Ed.) West African Languages in Education. Wien: Beitrage Zur Afrikanistik, Band 27, 22-38. ________ . (1990) Language and the national question in Nigeria. African Notes Vol. 14, Nos 1 and 2: 70-80. ________ . (1994) Fifteen years of the national language policy in education: How far has language fared? In Adegbite, W. and Onukaogu, C.E. (1994) (Eds) op. cit., pp. 1-10. ________ . (1995) English in the Nigerian Environment. In Bamgbose, A., Banjo, A. and Thomas, A. (Eds), op. cit., pp. 2-26. ______ . (1998) Torn between the norms: innovations in World Englishes. World Englishes 17:1-14. ______ . (2001) Language policy in Nigeria: Challenges, opportunities and constraints. Keynote Address presented at the Nigerian Millenium Sociolinguistics Conference, University of Lagos, Lagos, August 16-18. ______ . (2004) Negotiating English through Yoruba: Implications for Standard Nigerian English. In Owolabi and Dasylva (Eds), pp. 612-630. ______ . (2006) Linguistics and social responsibility: The challenges for the Nigerian linguist Keynote Address Delivered at the 20th Annual Conference of the Linguistic Association of Nigeria at the Nigerian Educational Research and Development Council, Abuja, Nigeria, November 13-17. ______ . Banjo, A. and Thomas, A. (Ed.) (1995) New Englishes: A West African Perspective. Ibadan: Mosuro/ Trenton, NJ and Asmara: African World Press. Banjo, A. (1969) A contrastive analysis of aspects of the syntactic and lexical rules of English and Yoruba. PhD Thesis, University of Ibadan, Ibadan. _____ . (1971) Towards a definition of Standard spoken Nigerian English. Actes du 8e Congre de Societe Linguistique de lafrique Occidentale, dUniversite dAbidjan, 165-75. _____ . (1986) The influence of English on the Yoruba language. In Viereck, W. And Bald, W. D. (Eds) English in Contact with Other Languages. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado. _____ . (1995) On codifying Nigerian English: Research so far. In Bamgbose, A. Banjo, A. and Thomas, A. (Eds), pp. 203-231. _____ . (1996) An Overview of the English Language in Nigeria. Ibadan: Ibadan University Press. Brosnahan, L.F. (1958) English in Southern Nigeria. English Studies39, 97-110. Chibita, M. (2006) Our tongues count: A Ugandan perspective on indigenous language, local content and democracy. In Salawu, A. (Ed.) Indigenous 41

Language Media in Africa. Lagos: Centre for Black and African Arts and Civilization (CBAAC), pp. 238-270. Cook, G. (2003) Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford university Press. Crystal, D. (1997) English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cummins, J. 1981. Bilingualism and Minority Language Children. Ontario: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. ______ . Wanted: A theoretical framework for relating language proficiency to academic achievement among bilingual students. In C. Rivera (ed.), Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Dada, S. A. (2006) Language contact and language conflict: The case of YorubaEnglish Bilinguals In Ndimele, O., Ikekeonwu, C. and Mbah, B. M. (Eds) Language and Economic Reforms in Nigeria. Port Harcourt: M & J Grand Orbit Communications Ltd and Emhai, pp. 68-85. Dairo, L. (1988) Teaching English pronunciation in Nigerian schools: The choice of a model. Ife Studies in English Language 2:2, 102-110. Egbokhare, F. (2004) Language and politics in Nigeria. In Owolabi, K. and Dasylva, A. (Eds), pp. 507-22. Eka, D. (1985) A phonological study of Standard Nigerian English. PhD Thesis, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria. Ekundayo, S. A. (1987) English in suppressive interference. Ife Studies in English Language 1:1&2, 5-14 Emenanjo, E. N. (1990) In the tradition of the majors: Lessons in language engineering for the minority languages In Emenanjo, E. N. (Ed.) Multilingualism, Minority Languages and Language Planning in Nigeria. Agbor: Central Books Limited in Collaboration with The Linguistic Association of Nigeria, pp. 88-98. ______ . (1998) Towards a pragmatic language policy for Nigeria: Hindsight as foresight in the education domain. Mimeo. Aba: National Institute for Nigerian Languages. Essien, O. (1995) The English language and code-mixing: A case study of the phenomenon in Ibibio. In Bamgbose, A. Banjo, A. and Thomas, A. (Ed.), 26983. ______ . (2003) National development, language and language policy in Nigeria. In Essien, O and Okon, M. (Eds) Topical Issues in Sociolinguistics: The Nigerian Perspective. Aba: National Institute for Nigerian Languages, pp. 21-42. ______ . (2006) Language and the Nigerian reforms agenda. In Ndimele O., Ikekeonwu, C. and Mbah, B. M. (Eds) Language and Economic Reforms in Nigeria. Port Harcourt: M & J Grand Orbit Communications Ltd. and Emhai, pp. 1-14. Fafunwa, A. B. (1982) An integrated primary school curriculum in Nigeria: A six year project. In Afolayan, A. (Ed.) Yoruba Language and Literature. Ile-Ife and Ibadan: University of Ife Press and University Press Limited, pp. 291-299. ______ . Macauley, J. I. and Sokoya, J. A. F. (1989) Education in Mother Tongue. Ibadan: University Press Ltd. Fakoya, A. A. (2004) A mediolect called Nigerian English. In Owolabi, K. And Dasylva, A. (Eds), pp. 223-238. Fanon, F. (1967) The Wretched of the Earth. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin. Federal Republic of Nigeria. 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Lagos, Nigeria: Federal Government Press. 42

Federal Republic of Nigeria (2004) National Policy on Education (Revised). Lagos: Federal Government Press. Freitas, J. F. And Adkins, P. V. S. (1981) English for, not English as. English Language Teaching XXXV: 3, 216-219. Graddol, D. (1997) The Future of English. London. The British Council. Gramsci, A. (1971) Selections from the Prison Notebook, Edited and translated by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith. London: Lawrence and Wishart. Gregory, M. (1967) Aspects of varieties differentiation. Journal of Linguistics 3, 2: 177-198. Grice, H.P. (1975) Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. and Morgan, J. L. (Eds) Syntax and Semantics, Vol.3: Speech acts. New York: Academic Press, pp. 45-58. Grieve, D. G. (1966) English Language Examining. Lagos: West African Examinations Council. Grimes, B. and Grimes, J. (2000) Ethnologue, Languages of the World. Vol. 1. Dallas: SIL International. Gut, U. B. (2008) Nigerian English phonology. In Mesthrie, R. (Ed.) Varieties of English. Africa, South and Southeast Asia, 323-339. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Gutierrez, K. D., Asato, J., Pacheco, M. Moll, M. C., Olson, K., Horng, E. L.,Ruiz, R., Garcia, E. and McCarty, T. L. (2002) Conversations: Sounding American: The consequences of new reforms on English language learners. Reading Research Quarterly 37:3, 328-343. Halliday, M.A.K. (1978) Language as a social semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold. ______ . (1985) An Introduction to Systemic Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold. Hudson-Weems, C. (1993) Africana Womanism: Reclaiming Ourselves. Troy, MI: Bedford. Humm, M. (1995) Practising Feminist Criticism: An Introduction. London: Prentice Hall/ Harvester Wheatsheaf Hudson-Weems, C. (1993) Africana Womanism: Reclaiming Ourselves. Troy, MI: Bedford. Igboanusi, H. (2002) A Dictionary of Nigerian English Usage. Ibadan: Enicrownfit Ilesanmi, T. M. (2004) Yoruba Orature and Literature: A Cultural Analysis. Ile-Ife: Obafemi Awolowo University Press. Ioratim-Uba, G. A. (1995) Attitudes towards Received Pronunciation (RP) among Nigerian undergraduates. ITL Review of Applied Linguistics 109 (110), 36-74. Isola, A. (1992) The African writers tongue, in Research in African Literature, 24(1), 7-26. Jibril, M. (1982) Phonological variation in Nigerian English. PhD Thesis, University of Lancaster. _____ . (1986) Sociolinguistic variation in Nigerian English. English Worldwide 7, 47-75. _____ . (2007) New directions in African linguistics. In Akinrinade, S., Fasina, D. and Ogungbile, D. O. and Famakinwa, J.O. (Eds) Rethinking the Humanities in Africa. Ile-Ife, Nigeria: Faculty of Arts, Obafemi Awolowo University, pp. 281-290. Jowitt, D. (1991) Nigerian English Usage: An Introduction. Lagos:Longman. _____ . (2008) Varieties of English: The World and Nigeria. Inaugural Lecture delivered at the University of Jos on Friday, 28 March. 43

Kachru, B.B. (Ed.) 1982. The Other Tongue: English across Cultures. Illinois: University of Illinois Press. ______ . (1985) Standards, codification and linguistic realism: the English language in the outer circle. In Quirk, R. and Widdowson, H. (Eds) English in the World: Teaching and learning of Languages and Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ______ . (1997) World Englishes and English-using Communities. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics: Multilingualism 17, 66-87. Kessler, C. (1984) Language acquisition in bilingual children. In Miller, N. (Ed.) Bilingualism and Language Disability: Assessment and Remediation. College Hill Press, Inc. Kolawole, M.E.M. (1996) Womanism and African Consciousness. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press Kujore, O. (1985) English Usage: Some Notable Nigerian Variations. Ibadan: Evans. _____ . (1995) Whose English? In Bamgbose, A. Banjo, A. and Thomas, A. (Eds), pp. 367-380. Lawal, A. (2009) Globalization and the repercussions of Englishization in Nigerian education. In Adegbite, W. and Olajide, B. (Eds), pp.1-15. Lewis, M. P. (Ed.) The Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 16th Edition. Dallas, TX: SIL International. Lucko, P. (2003) Is English a killer language? In Lucko, P. Peter, L. and Wolf, H. (Eds) Studies in African Varieties of English. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 151-165. Mukherjee, J. and Gries, S. T. (2009) Collostructional nativisation in New Englishes. English World-Wide 30:1, 27-51. Ngugi wa Thiongo (1981) Decolonising the Mind:The Politics of Language in African Literature. Nairobi, Kampala, Dar es Salaam: East African Educational Publishers. ______ . (2009) Re-membering Africa. Nairobi, Kampala, Dar es Salaam: East African Educational Publishers. Nwapa, F. (1966) Efuru. Ibadan: Heinemann. _____ . (1981)Women Are Different. Trenton, NJ:Tana Press. Obanya, P. (2002) Revitalizing Education in Africa. Ibadan: Stirling Horden. Ohiri-Aniche, C. (2001) Language endangerment among a majority group: The case of Igbo. Paper presented at the Nigerian Millenium Sociolinguistics Conference, University of Lagos, Lagos, August 16-18. Odumuh, A. E. (1984) Educated Nigerian English as a model of Standard Nigerian English. World Language English 3, 231-235. ______ . (1987) Nigerian English. Zaria: Ahmadu Bello University Press. Omojuwa, R. A. (1980) Primary Education and the Problem of Medium Transition. Zaria: Institute of Education, Ahmadu Bello University. Omoniyi, T. (2007) Alternative contexts of language policy and planning in SubSaharan Africa TESOL Quarterly 41:3, 533-549. Ouane, A. (2005) Learning but in which language? ADEA Newsletter Vol. 17, No 2, 1-2. Owolabi, K. (2004) On the translation of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria into selected languages. In Owolabi, K. and Dasylva, A. (Eds), pp. 523-37. ______ . and Dasylva, A. (Eds) (2004) Forms and Functions of English and Indigenous Languages in Nigeria. Ibadan: Group Publishers. 44

_______ . (2006) Nigerias native language modernization in specialised domains for national development: A linguistic approach An Inaugural Lecture delivered at the University of Ibadan, Nigeria on Thursday 29th June. Oyelaran, O. O. (1988) Language, marginalization and national development in Nigeria. Ife Studies in English Language 2:1, 1-14. Oyesakin, A. (1992) Who is afraid of mother tongue? Paper Presented at the seminar in honour of Prof. Ayo Bamgbose, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, January 9-11. Oyetade, S. O. (2001) Attitude to foreign languages and indigenous language use in Nigeria. In Igboanusi, H. (Ed.) Language Attitude and Language Conflict in West Africa, Ibadan: Enicrownfit, pp. 14-29. Prator, C. (1968) The British Heresy in TESL. In Fishman, J. Ferguson, C. A. and Das Gupta, J. (Eds) Language Problems of Developing Nations. New York: Wiley. Phillipson, R. and Skuttnabb-Kangas, T. (1999) Englishization: One dimension of globalization. In Graddol, D. And Meinhof, U. (Ed.) English in a Changing World. AILA Review 13: 19-36. Oxford: The English Book Centre. Quirk, R. and Greenbaum, S. (1972) A University Grammar of English. London: English Language Book Society and Longman. Ricento, T. (2000) Ideology, Politics and Language Policies: Focus on English. Amsterdam:John Benjamins. Rodney, W. (1972) How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. London: Bogle-Louverture Publishers and Dar es Salaam: Tanzania Publishing House. Royer, J. M. and Carlo, M. S. (1991) Transfer of Comprehension Skills from Native to Second Language Journal of Reading 34:6,450-455. Salami, A. (1968) Defining a Standard Nigerian English. Journal of the Nigeria English Studies Association 2:2, 99-106. Saussure, F. De. (1959) Cours de Linguistique Generale (English Translation by Wade Baskin) Course in General Linguistics. New York: Philosophical Library. Schafer, R. P. And Egbokhare, F. O. (1999) English and the pace of endangerment in Nigeria. World Englishes 18: 381-91. Schneider, E. W. (2007) Postcolonial English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Skuttnabb-Kangas, T. (2004) Do not cut my tongue, let me live and die with my language. A comment on English and other languages in relation to linguistic human rights. Journal of Language, Identity and Education Vol. 3, No. 2, 127-133. The Guardian 10 December, 1999. Thomas, A. (1995) Summary In Bamgbose, A., Banjo, A.and Thomas, A. (Eds), op. cit., pp. 381-384. Tollefson, J. W. 2004. Theory and action in language policy and planning Journal of Language, Identity and Education 3:2, 150-54. Tomori, S. H. O. (1967) A study in the syntactic structures of the written English of British English and Nigerian grammar school pupils. PhD Thesis, University of London. Ubahakwe, E. (Ed.) Varieties and Functions of English in Nigeria. Ibadan: African Universities Press Universal Basic Education, UBE DIGEST Newsletter of Basic Education in Nigeria, Vol. 4.Abuja: UBE, 2003.

45

Udofot, I. (2003) Stress and rhythm in the Nigerian accent of English. English World Wide 24 (2): 201-220. Ufomata, T. I. (1991) Englishization of Yoruba Phonology. World Englishes 10:1, 3351. Ugorji, C. U. C. (2005) The Igbo language: Endangerment and empowerment In Ndimele O. (Ed.) Trends in the Study of Languages and Linguistics in Nigeria. Port Harcourt: M & J Grand Orbit Communications Ltd. and Emhai, pp.161170. Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Nigeria. Williamson, K. (1980) Small Languages in Primary Education: The Rivers Readers Project as a Case History. In Bamgbose, A. (Ed.) Language in Education in Nigeria, Vols I and II. Lagos: National Language Centre/Federal Ministry of Education. Wunder, E., Voormann, H. & Gut, U. (2010) The ICE Nigeria corpus project: Creating an open, rich and accurate corpus. ICAME Journal 34, 78-88. Yoneoka, J. S. (2001) The English umbrella: Model of a multicultural language system. Asian English Studies 7, 2: 69-83
http://kumagaku.ac.jp/teacher/.../26.umbrellaweformatfinal2.doc Accessed May 12, 2010

46

APPENDIX 1: FEATURES OF NIGERIANISM LEVELS: Linguistic, Pragmatic and Creative A. LINGUISTIC: Phonology, orthographic (spelling) syntax and lexico-semantics 1. PHONOLOGY a. Substitution of consonant sounds /f/ for /v/ as in /ferI/ for /verI/ (very); /f/ for /p/ as in /fu/ for /pu/ (poor); /t/ for // as in /tIn/ for /In/ (thin); /d/ for / // as in /dIs/ for /Is/ (this); /s/ for /z/ as in /su:/ for /zu:/ (zoo); // for /t / as in /e / for /t e/ (chair) b. Substitution of vowel sounds /I/ for /i:/ as in /sIt/ for /si:t/ (seat); /e/ for /eI/ as in /let/ for /leIt/; /e/ for / / as in */hevn/ for /hvn/ (heaven); // for /e/ as in */ldI/ for /leIdI/ (lady); // for // as in */kt/ for /kt/ (cut); // for // as in */kt/ for /k:t/ (court); /u/ for /u:/ as in (pool); // for // as in */pu/ for /pu/ (poor) or (future); // or / / for / / as in /kI/ or /kI/ for /kI/ (care) or /baut/ (about) c. Syllable: Vowel insertion in consonant clusters *bured instead of bread , *filask instead flask*milik instead of milk, litu instead of little, *sitirikt instead of strickt d. Stress placement (i) *maRY instead of Mary, *MOBILE instead of Mobile CARPENTER instead of CARpenter, *RECOGNISE(-TION) instead of REcognise(-tion) (ii) *CLASSIFY instead of CLAssify, *MAGNIFY instead of Magnify (and ify words); (iii) *SOCIALISE/SOCIALISM instead of SOcialise/ Socialism, *VANDALISE (-ISM) instead of VANdalise(-ism), MOBILISE instead of MObilise (and other ise/ words); (iv) *CONGRATULATIONS instead of conGRAtuLAtions, *PRONOUNCIATION instead of ProNUNciAtion e. Tonal Assimilation: Rising pitch in LOW-RISING sequences H H L H / H L L H HH HLL / H L HLL students affairs / students affairs senior lecturer /senior lecturer f. Rhythm: Syllable-timed (even pitches) v. Stress-timed (uneven pitches) (i) L H H L H H L L M L M L L The lecture is holding at the Oduduwa Hall NigE (Yoruba speaker) (ii) L H L L H L L L H L L L L The lecture is holding at the Oduduwa Hall (Note that the utterance ends on a low pitch (Falling Tune) as a statement.) 2. SPELLING (see the italicised only) *Yes the too areas is invisble becaus resion is that the distant is diferent in evry kilometas, they are intercros becos the two ares one is not par away in top of 47

another. (two, invisible because, reason, different, every, kilometer, intercross, areas, far 3. MORPHO-SYNTAX a. The Nominal Group (i) Articles Omission *Government is making serious effort to solve the problem. (The, a) Lagos State government has just purchased some buses. River Niger can be used effectively for transportation in Nigeria. Superfluous usage *Everybody is entitled to a freedom of expression. (Article not needed) Usage of the ordinator one in place of the indefinite article a/an *I saw one big animal coming towards us. (a/an) (ii) Plural marking of nouns *The student can be told to read their books regularly. English is the language of instructions at all levels of education. (instruction) Other words that are marked for plural in error include furniture, success, treatment, equipment and machinery. (iii) Case ?We are stronger than them in all respect. (they/ they are) ?She knows the subject much more than me. (I/ I do) (iv) Genitive / Possessive *Salvation is God desire for all human beings. (Gods) *The swimming pools water was too cold for me. (pool water/ water in the pool) (v) Gender *The mother told his children that he suffered a lot for them. (her, she) *Every man in life has his destiny to face. (human, his or her) (vi) Pronoun (they used for singular referent) *That woman there, they are calling you. (she) *They have stolen my money. (Someone has stolen my money. / My money has been stolen. *They have jailed him. (He has been jailed.) (vii) Reflexive pronoun for reciprocal activity *The brother and sister are fond of fighting themselves. (each other) *Please, let us show love to ourselves in this class. (one another) (viii) Relative Pronouns *Who are you talking to? (Whom) *She asked me whos book is this? (She asked me whose book it was.) b. The Verbal Group (i) Concord

48

*The findings of the study shows that all the children are malnourished. (show) *Every day, the boy leave home early for school. (leaves) (ii) Tense and Aspect *Many people called me and threaten to beat me up. (threatened) *Her father was not ready to assists her. (assist) *I hope and pray every day that she can believes me. (believe) *The parents attitude must have influence her behavior. (influenced) *Students have not being around on campus for some time now. (been) *It took a long before a winner was emerged. ( winner emerged) (iii) Modality *I will like very much to attend your wedding. (would) *Please sir, help me to sign my form. / *I want to register. (Please sir, could you sign my form? / May I register please?) (iv) Stative v. Non-stative (Dynamic) Verbal Expressions *It is just recently that I am liking yam. (like/ beginning to like) *We are trusting God to perform a miracle on her. (We trust) c. Other Function Words (i) Prepositions *During campaigns, they go about soliciting for votes (solicit votes) *They did not allow him search the room. (allow him to) *He was uncomfortable, but he endured, since he would soon get down from the bus. (get off) * I have just requested for money from home. (requested money) *Have you served the people on the high table? (at) *Congratulations for your success. (on) (ii) Conjunctions *Although nobody voted for him, but he was elected. (Choose although or but) Politics can be beneficial to mankind (sic). On the other hand, politicians can use it to destroy people. (On the one hand is missing) * In case if he does not come, I will go there myself. (Choose in case or if) d. Clause and Sentence Level (i) Questions *How did he lost the election? (lose) *Does she understands you? (understand) (ii) Topicalisation *The female, they perform better than male students. *People, you can not judge them by what they say. (delete either of the italicised expressions) *The brain, the lower animals, they have it too. e. Tag Questions *They are not coming, do they? (are they?) *I got the answer correctly, isnt it? (didnt I?)

49

f. Repetition and tautologisation *Through research, findings from studies have shown that (research and studies are tautological) *The origin of ESP can be traced back to (traced to) *first year anniversary (first anniversary) 4. LEXICO-SEMANTIC a. Lexico-semantic Transfer (i) Loan words: Native names of persons, titles, places, ethnic groups, religion and festivals, meals and objects (These are considered normal, unless there is an adequate equivalent word for an item in a circumstance.) (ii) Acronyms: WAZOBIA, UME, WAEC, FRSC, PHCN, ASUU, NASU, ND, MON, etc. (Acceptability depends on wide usage) (iii) Loan expressions and codeswitching: o; jare; fa; walahi, Tufia kwa; turenci; A dupe ma. Na wetin, etc. (These are sometimes stigmatised in educated usage.) b. Lexico-semantic Extension: Kinship terms: family, father, mother, my children, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, etc. c. Lexico-semantic Shift: senior/junior brother or sister (elder), chief (as a title), madam (a wealthy woman), amount (money), cult/cultism (gang), ghastly (fatal), machine (motorbike/motorcycle), deliver a baby (be delivered of), take in (become pregnant), *to take away light (power failure), hot (strong) drink, etc. c. Neologism and Nonce Formation (i) Neologism: timber and caliber, healthiness, relinked, segmentalised, retirees, followership, etc. (ii) Nonce Formation: *straight forward jacked (straightjacket), *bores down to (boils down to), *live in a selfcontain (noun) instead of self-contained flat, *two-storey building (a storey- building) B. PRAGMATIC 1. Prayers, greetings, proverbs, social (ceremonial) expressions, etc. 2. Some social expressions: wake keeping (wake) Hip! Hip Hip! (3 times in NigE but 2 times in BrE or AmE) C. CREATIVE Coinages: been-to, bride price, go-slow, mammy water, long leg, cash madam, to be someones eye, to meet at home, 419, etc.

50