Sociolinguistic background
The range of variation in English in Africa
One of the broadest categorizations of the English used in Africa is suggested by Angogo and Hancock (1980: 71), who distinguish the following types according to speakers:
(a) native English of African-born whites and expatriates;
(b) native English of locally-born Africans;
(c) non-native English spoken fluently as a second language (…);
(d) non-native English spoken imperfectly as a foreign language (…).
The first category, White African English, is relatively insignificant in East Africa today, although the influence of the early British and South African settlers may have been considerable. The other three categories of (Black) African English constitute a continuum of English forms, which ranges from ‘native’ to ‘second-language’ to ‘international’ varieties. It is worth noting, however, that these categories were used to illustrate differences between entire nations, especially in the process of developing (hypothetical) national varieties of English. When it comes to analyzing language forms which are actually used in Africa, intranational and intrapersonal variation, the individual speaker’s sociolinguistic background and the actual speech-act situation must be taken into consideration. At the individual level, the type of English spoken by Africans depends largely (i.e. if we ignore special exposure to English either through personal acquaintances or the modern mass media) on two factors: (a) their education, i.e. the length and degree of formal education in English, and (b) their occupation, i.e. the necessity for and amount of English used in everyday life.
The second category is also less important than in Southern or West Africa, although English may be used as the primary language even in the home in mixed marriages of highly educated partners.
The last category reflects, of course, less the colonial heritage than the role of English as the international language of science and technology, international development and communication today. But “broken” English, “school” English or “bad” English is usually looked down upon as a sign of little education and ridiculed, especially in Kenya, in literature or political campaigns (e.g. in cartoons in the daily newspapers).
Thus the varieties of EAfE show the characteristic features of New Englishes (cf. Platt, Weber and Ho 1984 or Hickey 2004), background, genesis and function. In particular they are not transmitted directly through native-speaker settlers; usage is formed mainly through its use as media of instruction in school and reinforced outside school; and they are used in public functions in the national educational, legal and administration system. Interestingly enough, the term New English is rarely used in East Africa, probably because Standard English even with EAfE pronunciation or as an (hypothetical) independent East African Standard is considered more appropriate.
