STANDARD ENGLISH

New Zealand Listener, Volume 36, Issue 915, 22 February 1957, Page 5

STANDARD ENGLISH

Sir-After reading A. R. D. Fairburn’s article on speech I am comforted in the knowledge that there are New Zealanders who appreciate the fact that Standard English exists, as distinct from affected speech on the one hand or uncultivated speech on the other. One thing, however, which does surprise me is the assumption on the part of many New Zealanders, including Mr. Fairburn (if I have not misunderstood him), that the use of Standard English among the educated people of Britain is an indication of class distinction. Standard English is taught throughout the county schools of Britain as well as private schools. If one visits remote places like the Shetland Isles, where a local dialect is spoken which Scots people would probably not be able to understand, the Shetlander will speak to the stranger in Standard English, because he has learnt it at school. The usual reference to Standard English as southern speech is not strictly true, either, since it is not peculiar to the south. It is more widely spoken in the south by educated people than in the north, but one can meet educated people in Yorkshire or other Northern places who also speak very good Standard English. It is much more true to say that standards of speech in Britain indicate standards of education rather than social position. The New Zealander, or other outsider, visits Britain and discovers that most people in good social positions speak in cultivated accents, whereas most people of the working classes speak in local accents, often ugly accents, and he assumes that class dis-

tinction is the reason for it. The real treason for the differing standards of speech lies in the fact that the children of the upper classes al] receive a good education, whereas the children from poor homes have to fight harder for it. They must pass examinations and intelligence tests to gain entry into good grammar schools. If, however, they are successful, they will receive a jolly good education, including tuition in Standard English, which fits them to enter professions later on. There is therefore opportunity for children from the poorest working class homes to enter the professional classes if they have sufficient ability and ambition to do so. This also indicates another fallacy, that the English class system is a "caste" system, as Mr. Fairburn describes it. Many educated Standard English speaking people in London of my own acquaintance have originated from poor working class homes where Cockney or other county accents were spoken. Obviously it is more difficult for a child from a poor home to improve his speech standards when his own family speak badly or carelessly, but it is not impossible; he hears his teachers and school fellows speaking every day and can follow their example. What chance have our children here in New Zealand to learn Standard English, when my own observation tells me that few New Zealand teachers have learnt it themselves? Most of them, including university lecturers, speak in the same ugly accent as the maiorityv of people in this country

do.

RUBY S.

CLIFT

(Auckland).