Lynn Dee is completing her PhD study on polylanguaging in diverse Chinese families, building on her master’s study on bilingual lexical development in a Singaporean infant. Lynn Dee has gained extensive research experience through her work with the Singapore Centre for Chinese Language, the Institute of Adult Learning, and the National Heritage Board. Her research expertise spans school-based studies on creative writing and learning motivation, as well as baseline research on preschoolers’ oral competence (funded by the Lee Kuan Yew Fund for Bilingualism), the Singaporean Mandarin Database (funded by the Promote Mandarin Council), and adult education. Her research interests primarily focus on the linguistic landscape in Singapore, language use in families from diverse backgrounds, and employ ethnographic methods and analysis from a polylanguaging perspective. 

Polylanguaging in diverse Chinese Singaporean families

Singapore is a multicultural and multilingual country. The four official languages of Singapore are English, Malay, Mandarin Chinese, and Tamil. An “English-knowing” bilingual policy was established in 1953. In recent years, there has been a clear trend towards language shift in Singapore families from mother tongue to English. Besides the official languages, Singlish and Singnese have emerged in Singaporeans’ daily lives.Linguistic studies in Singapore have mostly followed the language separation norm, which cannot fully represent highly diverse real-life language use in Singapore. Hence, this study analysed language use from the perspective of polylanguaging. Speakers who employ whatever linguistic features they need to achieve their communicative aims are practising polylanguaging. The linguistic features can be described along three parameters: linguistic features associated with different languages, linguistic features associated with different registers, and speakers’ positioning. Two research questions were set. First, what is the nature of polylanguaging in the talk of speakers from families of diverse backgrounds? Second, is the choice of linguistic features context-bound? Two Singaporean families (the Hau and the Ngor family), two Malaysian families (the Lim and the Toh family) and two Chinese families (the Chiu and the Zhao family) participated in this study. Each family filled in a language ecology questionnaire and collected spontaneous language data in four different contexts: mealtime, free play or daily routines, Chinese-related context, and English-related context. A total of 12 hours, 11 minutes, 17 seconds of valid video recordings and 12 hours, 25 minutes, 38 seconds of valid audio recordings were transcribed and analysed. All utterances were coded as EO (English Only), MCO (Mandarin Chinese Only), or NEONMCO (Neither English Only Nor Mandarin Chinese Only). Among the Singaporean families, the Haus and the Ngors displayed a greater usage of linguistic features associated with English. The primary register they used was mainly SCE (Singapore Colloquial English). The two Malaysian families, the Lims and the Tohs showed a higher occurrence of linguistic features associated with Mandarin Chinese, particularly in the case of the Tohs. They tended to combine linguistic features from different languages. The registers they used varied between SCM (Singapore Colloquial Mandarin) and SCE. As for the two Chinese families, the Chius and the Zhaos, they predominantly exhibited linguistic features associated with Mandarin Chinese. The main register they used was BSM (Beijing Standard Mandarin), particularly in the case of the Zhaos. All six families engaged in polylanguaging regardless of their linguistic ideology. The major contributions of this study are providing data for theorising polylanguaging, providing a new lens in viewing “a language,” and stimulating the rethinking of language learning and language use. Future studies should recruit more varied families within each cultural background and develop a more comprehensive coding system.