This chapter sets out to cover two related topics. First, it surveys a Singapore English research tradition that dates from the mid-1970s to the present, which includes not only the description of distinctive features at various levels of language, but also the engagement with the ideological dimensions of Singapore English and ‘Singlish’. Second, the chapter also reports on the authors’ own empirical quantitative and qualitative (social network) research on the language practices of young people in Singapore, where the use of English co-occurs with various types of language mixing among the three dominant ethnic groups, the Singaporean Chinese, Singaporean Malays, and Singaporean Indians. The findings of our research indicate that the vernaculars (in Labovian terms) for many young Singaporeans are forms of speech that include complex patterns of code-mixing and code-switching, despite the fact that such forms of language mixing have previously been largely ignored in the Singapore research literature.

This edited volume explores key areas of interests in Singapore math and science education including issues on teacher education, pedagogy, curriculum, assessment, teaching practices, applied learning, ecology of learning, talent grooming, culture of science and math, vocational education and STEM. It presents to policymakers and educators a clear picture of the education scene in Singapore and insights into the role of math and science education in helping the country excel beyond international studies such as PISA, the pedagogical and curricula advancements in math and science learning, and the research and practices that give Singaporean students the competitive edge in facing the uncertain and challenging landscape of the future.

Singapore’s location at the narrowest point between the Indian Ocean and the Western Pacific means that it must have been influenced over the millennia not just by Malay or Malayic, but also by languages belonging to more distantly related Austronesian sub-groups. Following a brief history of the Austronesian language family, the chapter identifies some of the particular languages from the Malayo-Polynesian branch that might have been spoken in Singapore and nearby parts of Malaysia and Indonesia in earlier times. Other than Malay, these have left surprisingly little trace. This is followed by an outline history of Malay itself, emphasising the dialectal non-‘standard’ complexities that have arisen from its dual role over the past two millennia as simultaneously a regional first-language and a more widely diffused trade-linked second-language. Discussion then turns to the Austronesian languages known to have been spoken in Singapore as a result of migration in the past two centuries. The local history of these languages (both Malayic and non-Malayic) is outlined, with attention to the processes by which they have recently ceased to be spoken, even within families. Selected biographical examples show that their disappearance is primarily due to pressure from Malay and (latterly) English, despite some recent revivalist efforts.

This chapter focuses on Spoken Tamil, the vernacular or Low variety in diglossic Tamil, and reveals variation within Spoken Tamil that has thus far been unexplored in scholarship on the language in Singapore. Furthermore, it conceptually emphasises the link between language, migration and identity construction, wherein differences in spoken varieties of Tamil can be explored through the lens of the different waves of immigration to Singapore. Drawing data from a sociolinguistic survey taken by 109 respondents, the chapter builds on the awareness and attitudes of respondents from the two immigration waves identified, the New Wave, and Old Wave, towards the spoken varieties of Singaporean Tamil, Indian Tamil and Literary Tamil. The results from the survey show that there are speakers of all the varieties listed above, solidifying their existence in Singapore’s Tamil linguistic landscape. The New and Old Wave respondents’ attitudes towards these varieties also show that they favour one spoken variety viewing it as ‘purer’ than the other. Awareness and attitudes towards these different spoken varieties thus begin to render visibility to a new kind of identity politics within the Tamil community that allude to hierarchies in spoken varieties of the vernacular rendering language a significant divider in the distinction between the ‘old’ and ‘new’ diaspora.

This chapter presents a chronological study of the changing status of Malayalam in Singapore across three different periods over the last century, identified on the basis of significant migration trends: (1)1900–1960s, a period predominantly oriented toward language maintenance; (2) 1970–1990s, a period of language shift; and (3) 2000-the present, a period of revitalization. It examines how these processes of language maintenance, language shift and language revitalization during each of these periods are linked to two key factors that have impacted the status of Malayalam in Singapore: changes in the degree of its ethnolinguistic vitality brought about by demographic changes, on the one hand, and Singapore’s language-in-education policy, on the other. In doing this, it utilizes an autobiographic narrative approach to analyse interviews conducted with representatives of the Malayalee community as corroborative evidence of language shift and language maintenance of Malayalam language in Singapore over the century.

Though Mandarin Chinese is one of the four official languages in Singapore, it was the home language for only 0.1% of the population in 1957 when it was made an official language. At that time, the majority of the Chinese in Singapore spoke a vernacular, such as Hokkien, at home. Things have changed dramatically over the years. The 2015 census shows that Mandarin has risen to become one of the most commonly used languages in Singapore, alongside English. The rise of Mandarin Chinese has been at the expense of many Chinese vernaculars that once were the mother tongues of Chinese Singaporeans. Though Mandarin Chinese is strongly promoted to be the lingua franca among the Chinese population and is taught in schools, it has been overshadowed by the rising tide of English dominance. This competition is discussed in the context of the impact of the ‘Speak Mandarin Campaign’ on the course and trajectory of language use in Singapore. This chapter tracks the ascent of Mandarin Chinese to the present day and examines the current role and status of Mandarin Chinese vis-à-vis other Chinese vernaculars and English in Singapore.

The Singapore government has publicly expressed that there should be no ‘sacred cows’ in its policies. Any assumption, however apparently commonsensical, is up for grabs and its relevance and value can always be questioned. However, when it comes to the case of official languages, a much more conservative mindset still prevails. I first describe Singapore’s language policy, the rationale for recognizing four official languages, before explaining why this is now a status quo in need of reconsideration. I show how official languages have been chosen to reflect both ethnic and more pragmatic concerns. The rationale is that the set of official languages has to be inclusive because it must take into consideration the country’s ethnic diversity; yet it also has to ensure that all Singaporeans are economically competitive. But as I show in this contribution, there are also exclusionary problems that arise.

This chapter highlights the case of Singapore’s under-researched Indian community for whose languages the government has made an exceptional accommodation in its second language policy. Officially defined as ‘Indian’, the South Asians in Singapore are represented by Tamil in the language policy. However, the educational and socio-economic challenges of the multilingual community have consistently required the provision of allowances in language planning. Unlike the Chinese and the Malay communities, students of Indian heritage have the unique option of selecting among the three official and five Non-Tamil Indian Languages as the ‘plus one’ language subject in education. Offering a sociolinguistic profile of the Indian community, this chapter highlights (a) the historical rationale for the choice of Tamil as the representative Indian language; (b) challenges to and policy departure from the foundational principles of ‘one community, one language’; and (c) discusses the implications of such concessions, for the promotion of the unofficial Indian languages in education. Following a discussion of archival sources, community school enrolment figures, and survey data, the chapter concludes with an exploration of the challenges of language management for Singapore’s Indian community and minority languages globally.

This chapter examines the complicated engagement of Filipinos in Singapore with inequalities of multilingualism. It aims to show that Filipinos’ linguistic marginality or Otheredness is multilayered in nature. Through an analysis of discourses and ideologies underlying and embedded in actual language use in the linguistic landscape of Lucky Plaza in Singapore, the chapter demonstrates how Filipinos are invisibilized due to the dominance of state-defined multilingualism, mobilized as servants of globalization, and differentiated internally along class configurations.