Nigerian English: A Morpholectal Classification

Adeleke A. Fakoya, PhD

Department of English
Lagos State University
Lagos, Nigeria

E-mail: adelekefakoya@yahoo.com

Abstract
The international acceptability of the dialect called Nigerian English seriously hinges not
only on its intelligibility at the written and grammatical levels but also on its conformity
to standard morphological practices. This paper examines the dialect against the
backdrop of Crystal’s (2000) observations and suggestions, and submits that, for
Nigerian English to enjoy higher global recognition, the numerous morphological flaws
presented here must be addressed and redressed. Working within the methodological
ambit of conversation analysis, with data drawn from real-life fragments of English-in-
context, the paper proposes a morpholectal classification of varieties exhibiting features
akin to the ones presented in the discussion. The description admits, however, that as far
as domestic communication is concerned, Nigerian English satisfies nearly 80% of its
speakers’ needs, but submits that to stimulate (as well as enjoy) viable international
rapport, Nigerians need to adhere to morphological meanings accessible to speakers of
other varieties, especially standard British English and/or standard American English –
in the light of which two varieties the ‘morpholectal’ aberrations highlighted in the paper
are discussed.

1.0 Introduction

Man: Well, if I were you, I wouldn’t marry that lady.

Friend: Ah, sorry about that. I’m so sure she’s the one for me.
Man: My friend, you will undo yourself by marrying that kind of
lady, I tell you.
(Fakoya 2006)

Over the years, linguists have classified varieties of language in accordance with terms
such as paralect, acrolect, mesolect, and basilect – that is, in view of how close to the
ideal or native-speaker variety available to the speakers of the dialect being examined.
While these terms may give a general view of the variety under scrutiny, they may gloss
certain features that could also be used in [further] classifying the dialects. Thus, in this
paper, we look at the morphological aberrations obtainable in the dialect called Nigerian
English and propose that a further characterization might be necessary to account for the

©2006 Adeleke A. Fakoya, PhD

facts about some dialects of English that exhibit certain morphological oddities when
compared with a yardstick variety, e.g., standard British or standard American English.
This kind of characterization, called morpholectal classification here, need not be
regarded as a stigmatizing label but as a descriptive term for any variety of language –
any language at all – whose morphological ‘sensibilities’ are somewhat offensive to the
generally acceptable idiom of the parent dialect.

The discussion contained in this paper accepts that languages influence one another as
demonstrated in the ‘incursion’ that [colonized] indigenous languages made on the
English e.g., in some American states, Australia, New Zealand – and particularly Nigeria
– but totally refuses to pander to the suggestion that all such ‘incursions’ should become a
part of the language thus affected. Thus, while words such as raccoon (North America),
juggernaut (South East Asia), boomerang (Australia) and voodoo (West Africa) are all
now assimilated into the English language, this paper takes the stand that it might take
another world for certain expressions discussed in it to have any ‘trans-Nigerian’
tolerability.

The paper concludes by indicating that the raison d’être for adopting a language is not
solely that the individual can communicate with his or her compatriots but particularly so
that he can have access to – and be accessed by – the world outside his local linguistic
unit. As will be demonstrated in the discussion, the morpholectal features identified with
Nigerian English easily point to a facile readiness to adopt logical reasoning to the
detriment of established internalized rules which are continually and unconsciously
exhibited by native speakers, regardless of contextual requirements like mode and tenor.

The data used in this paper was surreptitiously collected while listening in on numerous
conversations among Nigerian speakers of English, between January and March 2006.

2.0 Nigerian English at a glance

The English spoken in Nigeria shares the syntactic patterns of the standard British
variety, and a lot of the lexical details of general American English. However, anyone
truly concerned about the status of English spoken in Nigeria would be struck by the

2
oddity and confusion in some of the aspects of the variety, especially if they care to pay
attention to some of its defining features. We may summarize the particulars of this
variety of English in the three illustrations of usage presented below.

2.1 Some phonological features of Nigerian English

What with the paucity of corresponding segmental vowel and consonantal phonemes
between many Nigerian languages and English, Nigerian English is adjudged to have its
own distinctive ‘representation’, especially when seen in the light of Received
Pronunciation. Of the twelve monophthongs of English, most Nigerian speakers have no
problem producing /i, e, a,N and u/ as found in words such as, respectively: tree, met,
cart, shore, and pool. This inadequacy is noticed in the rendition of one or two
diphthongs as well, e.g., /?T/ and /D?/ where Nigerians simply substitute the nearest
sounds in their own native language inventory: [o] and [ia] respectively, as in go and
share. By and large, to redeem this ‘phonemic’ deficiency in their performance in
English, most Nigerians resort to a number of socially acquired and communicatively
acceptable phonological observances, briefly discussed here.

2.1.1 Substitution
Since some of the sounds of English are absent from most native Nigerian languages,
members just replace them with the nearest equivalents in their own language, much for
ease of communicative efficiency rather than compliance with any established standard
dialect. Now, this does not mean that they would not strive to make themselves better
accessed by speakers of other dialects of English – especially speakers of British or
American English – but, at least among fellow Nigerians, no one is finicky about RP
during communication. As such, it is normal for the following certain sounds to be
realised as follows, much against standard expectations:

Noise - /nNis/ (sound substituted: /z/)

Vision - /viRNn/ (sounds substituted: /Y/ and /?/
Cassette - /keHset/ (sound substituted /?/. However, /eH/ here, as in gate, is
pronounced as a monophthong, not as a diphthong.
Hover - /hova/ (sounds substituted: /P/ and /?/.

3
2.1.2 Adaptation
With several phonemes of English missing from the Nigerian English sound inventory,
Nigerian speakers of English tend to adapt the available ones to the new domain of use.
For example, the schwa /?/ is not found in any Nigerian language, and so members
‘improvise’ by substituting it with various sounds – depending on the morpho-phonemic
environment. Sounds that are very often used in place of the schwa include /eH/ as in
about; /a/ as in teacher; and /N/ as in doctor. Also, the central vowel /U/ may have /N/ and
/u/ in environments like comfort and cum respectively.

2.1.2 Insertion
Because of the syllable-timed structure of Nigerian English, it is often uncomfortable for
many Nigerians using English to pronounce certain words as in the standard dialects.
Examples are augment and expatiate, during the production of which Nigerians would
insert [u] and [n] respectively – and thereby realise the words as augument and
expantiate. As should be noted, this feature of interspersing consonant clusters with
vowel sounds (and vice versa) is found in all Nigerian languages; so, generally, when
performing in a language like English, the tendency is to carry the feature over. However,
it is not clear what may be accountable for a word like covenant, which is rendered by
most Nigerians as convenant.

2.1.4 Syllable-timing
Perhaps the most remarkable feature of Nigerian English is its syllable-timed structure.
With consonant clusters nearly impossible in many Nigerian languages, speakers are very
much at home with marking the flow of conversational English according to the number
of syllables in a word (and, consequently, in a phrase or sentence) to the utter disregard of
the stress-timed pattern of the language. Thus, a word like irreparable comes out not as
/H!rep?rebl/ (that is, with the stress on the second syllable only) but as /!iri!piareHbl/ - with
all the syllables of the word having equal emphasis. In fast speech, the feature is no less
visible and so Nigerian speakers of English may be seen to not display any awareness of
the effect of the mode of communication on the sounds of a language. Thus, halfpenny,
extraordinary and compounds such as dining hall, swimming pool, and bread knife have

4
no ‘fast-speech’ distinctions in Nigerian English. In other words, each of these
expressions is pronounced with all the syllables receiving uniform stress.

2.1.5 Surface realisations

The average Nigerian comes across English in the classroom where the communicative
practice of the language is overrun by the rules of formal grammar. In such situations,
members learn to stick to creating spelling guides on account of the ‘graphic picture’ of
the words they are presented with, leading to pronunciations like /!hig!ledi !pig!ledi/ for
/!hHgldH pHgldH/ [that is, higgledy-piggledy]; /dYaidYantik/ for /dYaigantik/ [that is,
gigantic] and /meHn!teHnans/ for /meHnt?n?ns/ [that is, maintenance].

2.2 Some Morpho-Syntactic Features

2.2.1 Standard Double Dutch

Not many Nigerian speakers of English know the difference between certain lexical items
in British and American English. Such speakers think that the difference between the
following pairs of words is simply stylistic: corn/maize, flat/apartment, nappy/diaper,
taxi/cab, mad/crazy, ill/sick, film/movie, cooker/stove, lorry/truck, holiday/vacation, etc.
Look at the following pieces of language, for instance:

1. I can’t eat groundnuts; I prefer peanuts. (Idea: Groundnuts are sold by the
roadside but peanuts are sold in the shops.)
2. The manager is leaving his flat for a bigger apartment. (Idea: Apartments are
bigger than flats.)
3. Let’s travel in a cab; the police are less likely to suspect us than if we travel
in a taxi. (Idea: The difference between a cab and a taxi is colour.)

2.2.2 Wrong bearing

What with the invasive slothfulness associated with establishing the facts about the usage
of the language, it is not unusual that speakers of Nigerian English sometimes rely on
artisans and their ilk for appropriate lexical performance. For instance, many do not see
the aberration in words like overfloating, ribit, and boris. These three expressions refer
respectively to: the malfunction observed when the carburettor floods (that is, flooding);
the action of riveting something; and bearings.

5
2.2.3 Semantic contortions
The meaning associated with numerous English words shows a rather rebellious
disposition to the lexico-semantic order existing in the language. For instance, some
words mean the opposite [O] in native usage, while in other cases, the meaning is either
erratically enlarged [E] or mischievously reduced [R]. The three expressions below
illustrate these three odd facts:
Word NigEng Meaning Standard BrEng Meaning
Dupe [noun] the con man the victim of a scam [O]
Customer buyer or seller buyer [E]
Beverage only cocoa-based drinks any drink (but water) [R]

From the short discussion here, one would see that Nigerian English has its own defining
characteristics which are mostly a reflection of its roots in the native tongues of its
speakers. It is reassuring to know, however, that with very serious attention to detail,
teachers of the language in Nigeria can eliminate most of the phonological aberrations –
although the constituent cultures of the dialect will have permanent vestiges.

In sum, it may look as if Nigerian English is all about wrong usage or aberrant structures.
That is very far from the truth. One of the most interesting facts about this dialect is its
close affinity to standard British English. With very strong adherence to the requirements
of formal, pedagogic and standard usage, Nigerians’ use of English may be described as
‘excessively correct’, a fact constantly attested by the tenor observed even in very relaxed
fields of usage.

3.0 A Morpholectal Description of Nigerian English

Following the numerous deviant processes of word-formation and usage of English,
therefore, this paper attempts to establish a morpholectal classification of the dialect
called Nigerian English. From the data, the following broad classifications anchor the
description:

-ed words

lectal –allies

lost possessives

antomorphs

6
3.1 -Ed words
The iconic pattern of the past and past perfect forms of the English verb seems to be
carried too far by Nigerian speakers of English. In the language, it is common to add –d
or –ed to a verb to derive its past and past perfect forms, as seen in such words as arrive,
advise, wave; and search, wish, and shift. However, the limit of such a rule leaps its
boundaries in Nigerian English and speakers can therefore generate other words
especially in conversational discourse:
Fragment A
Agnes: 1. Lola, when next will I be able to see you?
2. By the way, can you call at my office tomorrow?
Lola: 3. Well,
4. yes, if I’m chanced.

Fragment B
Man: 1. One of my sisters needs to get out of town next week.
Friend: 2. Where’s she going?
Man: 3. Oh, Lagos.
4. She has an interview at one of the banks.
5. Can you give her a ride?
Friend: 6. Well, if I’m opportuned;
7. you know, my car is still at the mechanic’s.

Fragment C
Grace: 1. What’s the problem with your neighbour and her husband?
2. They’ve been making such a noise all day.
Felicia: 3. I hear he pregnanted the housemaid.

The –ed words (chanced, opportuned, and pregnanted – for able to, have the opportunity
and impregnated respectively) are employed by most Nigerian speakers of English with
the same ‘lexical conviction’ of native users of the language. The morphological process
adopted in the creation of these words follows from that for numerous verbs in English.
Curiously, these forms are so freely used that almost no one – except teachers grounded
in the standard forms of the language – attempt to offer the correct or appropriate words
from time to time.

However, concerning a word like indiscipline, some unusual factor – rather than the lack
of academic guidance – is responsible for the facile affixation of the –ed morpheme to
generate the adjectival form, indisciplined, discoursally employed with the same semantic
relevance associated with its standard variant, undisciplined:

7
 Newscaster: The University of Lagos has announced the
dismissal of about twenty-five students for
being unruly, indisciplined, and carrying out
acts injurious to the welfare of the majority of
their counterparts in the various departments
of the university.

3.2 Lectal allies

Generally, the morphological process observed in the formation of adverbs of manner and
time is the addition of the –ly morpheme to most adjectives, e.g. poor ~ poorly, wise ~
wisely, and sound ~ soundly, a ‘rule’ that accounts for Nigerians’ approval of the
plausibility of forms like instalmentally and severally. Sadly, while the former word does
not exist in Standard English, the other – even though exists – has a standard meaning,
but Crystal (2000:3) somehow justifies situations leading to such expressions, especially
in non-native speaker contexts:
First, some words will change their meaning. Words from the variety of
English introduced (e.g. British English) will be applied to new settings
and take on different senses. A word won’t quite fit, but rather than
invent a new one, people keep the old one and change its meaning to fit
the new context.

Thus, the following usage aberrations are quite ‘normal’ – and expected – in a
second language situation like Nigeria:
Fragment D
Lecturer 1: 1. I hear the authorities have agreed to pay our
salary arrears after all.
Lecturer 2: 2. Oh, that’s good news.
3. Will they pay everything at once?
Lecturer 1: 4. No; they want to pay it instalmentally.

Fragment E
Manager: 1. Did you get to see the new staff at the hotel?
Deputy: 2. No such luck, sir.
Manager: 3. Didn’t I tell you to do so no matter what?
Deputy: 4. Well, sir, I went there severally but just couldn’t.
5. I think the orientation officer deliberately kept them out
circulation, as it were.

The deployment of instalmentally and severally in conversational snatches like fragments

D and E is so normal in Nigerian English that the two expressions have become
assimilated into the general sociolect. Also, whereas many (traditional) grammarians
would frown at instalmentally (and expect, instead, in instalments), the Nigerian

8
neologism is born by the formation process traceable to the affixation of –al to instalment
to derive the adjective instalmental, and the addition of –ly to such an adjective to create
the manner adverb instalmentally. It is the same process that is adopted in the creation of
severally, although in this case, the justification is rather more to be found in the succour
provided in Crystal’s affirmation above. The existence of severally readily makes
possible the use of the word as meaning ‘several times’ – quite contrary to its standard
meaning of separately (as opposed to jointly), the sense that is not available to most
Nigerians using the word and which is only properly employed mostly by lawyers,
especially in the phrase jointly and severally to refer to people – rather than number of
times, as seen above.

3.3 Lost possessives

The possessive marker –s is usually inadvertently dropped in many words requiring such
a morpheme for their complete meaning. However, any native speaker of English hearing
such expressions as used by Nigerians would immediately understand the speaker’s
meaning, testifying that the morphologically aberrant structures might not impair
discourse meaning at all times. For instance, in the following fragments, no user of the
language would be at a loss concerning the intended meaning of the utterances
highlighted:
Fragment F
Mother: 1. When last did you see your father-in-law?
Daughter: 2. I haven’t seen him for donkey years.
3. You know, he lives about eighty-five kilometres away
from us.
Mother: 4. Oh.

Fragment G
Boss: 1. We won’t take that road this morning.
Driver: 2. Why not, sir?
Boss: 3. The radio report says traffic there is moving at
a snail speed.
Driver: 4. Right, sir.

Fragment H
Prof: 1. Tomorrow, you’ll take me to the zoo to see what they’ve
got there.
Student: 2. I’m sorry but I don’t know this town that much.
Prof: 3. But I was told you knew the in and out of the area.
Student: 4. I’m flattered.

9
 Fragment J
Traveller: 1. Excuse me, how far is the police station from here?
Man: 2. Er, just a stone throw from that red building.

Those four fragments illustrate the use of a few English idiomatic phrases whose forms
are muddled up by Nigerians, although the resulting ‘muddles’ do not quite obfuscate
meaning, given the context of their usage. However, it is worth pointing out that the loss
of the ‘possessive’ marker (’s) somewhat takes away from the conversational efficiency
of the expressions especially when seen in the light of standard usage. For instance, at a
snail speed (NigEng) is at a snail’s pace in standard British English, while the other
expressions should be used as would be found grammatically appropriate: donkey’s
years, ins and outs and a stone’s throw. Well, the expression in and out appears to be
used in Nigerian English in accordance with Crystal’s notion of users’ conferment of
adaptability and flexibility on certain lexical items.

Thus, although ins and outs is a valid phrase in English, Nigerians consider in and out to
have dual applicability to situations not minding what meaning is required (whether it is
the details and aspects of an activity or going regularly and often to a place, as in: He’s
been here for years – he should know the ins and outs of the job by now and She’s been in
and out of hospital all year). It may be stated here, however, that not many Nigerians are
aware of the existence of the ‘plural’ idiom and that the phenomenon of ‘lost possessives’
is evident in numerous lexical items categorized as pluralia tantum – nouns usually used
in the plural, e.g. billiards, spectacles, draughts, binoculars, headquarters, trousers,
barracks, rickets, surroundings, scales, pliers, pants, shoes – but which lose the –s
ending in most Nigerian English conversational discourse.

3.4 Antomorphs
Typically, English words can be negated by affixing certain elements (e.g. de-, mis-, un-,
dis-, etc. to some lexical items, as seen in denature, misunderstand, unforgettable, and
discontinue. Such affixation ought to be regarded as a guide, but in most Nigerian
linguistic interaction, it is regarded as a rule, leading to the formation of numerous
expressions – referred to in this paper as antomorphs (e.g. disvirgin, deshine, and the
strange, dialectal senses of undo and decamp) – which might be considered
ungrammatical to the well-educated:

10
 Fragment K
Lady: 1. These days, everyone talks about safe sex.
2. No one cares about chastity any longer.
3. It’s such a crazy world.
4. What d’you think?
Friend: 5. For me, the question is coming too late.
6. I was disvirgined several years ago.

Fragment L
Jide: 1. I want to report Bola to you.
Kola: 2. What happened?
Jide: 3. She’s saying such bad things about me everywhere.
4. I think she just wants to deshine me among my friends.

Fragment M
Man: 1. Well, if I were you, I wouldn’t marry that lady.
Friend: 2. Ah, sorry about that. I’m so sure she’s the one for me.
Man: 3. My friend, you will undo yourself by marrying that kind
of lady, I tell you.

Fragment N
Husband: 1. My party is unable to meet some of its financial
obligations.
Wife: 2. What d’you mean, in plain language?
Husband: 3. I may have to decamp to a richer party;
4. after all, politics is all about personal gain.
Wife: 5. That’s my husband!

As the four fragments show, the use of disvirgin, deshine, undo, and decamp
demonstrates an un-English process of negation. While one would like to agree further
with Crystal’s explanation, it is not wide of the mark to say that Nigerians’ application of
logic somehow also accounts for these lexical items. For example, disvirgin may be said
to be modelled on words like discourage, discomfort, disfigure, etc. while deshine takes
after entries like denature, demoralize, and deemphasize.

As Crystal’s remarks would suggest, since undo exists in the language, it is only a matter
of lexical adaptability for the word to serve in instances of usage other than it is
semantically expected. Thus, in addition to its general meaning (of to release knots,
buttons, etc. and to cancel the effect of something), undo in Nigerian English is mostly
used (as in Fragment M) to refer to a person’s ruin or failure, in exactly the same sense
of undoing: My friend, marrying that kind of lady will be your undoing, I tell you.

11
Decamp is used principally in the [wrong] sense of leaving one political party for another
– as seen in Fragment N – although another meaning of it is that of being sent out of (the
training) camp, as in the case of a football player or an athlete by the coach. In nearly all
Nigerian usage of the word, the original meaning of going away suddenly and secretly (as
in, They suddenly decided to decamp from their Lagos home to a cottage in their village)
is almost totally lost, making members think that defect/defector/defection are too strong
to express the transfer of one’s loyalty from one political party to another, and advocating
decamp/decampee/decampment instead.

3.5 Sundry morphological aberrations

In addition to the cases reported in the foregoing paragraphs, Nigerian English is replete
with various instances of skewed lexicalisation of items and faulty generation of certain
words understood in the dialect but unattested in both standard American English and
standard British English. The four fragments below quite highlight this point:
Fragment O
Journalist: 1. One needs to report cases of politicians’ mischief with a
little caution.
2. For instance, the number of politicians involved in senseless
cross-carpeting is growing so fast
3. and I think the trend needs to be studied in detail.

Fragment P
Neighbour: 1. My sister, you need to be more alive to your son’s
behaviour.
2. In my opinion, he’s becoming too strong-headed.
3. You need to be a little more firm with him.

Fragment Q
Student: 1. Sorry, ma, this issue of recapitalisation,
2. how won’t it affect the masses in the long run?
3. I mean…
Lecturer: 4. Well,
5. there are certain fiscal policies that the government
needs to put in place to protect the ordinary citizens
from fraudulent banks.
6. Well, let me expantiate it a little…

Fragment R
Citizen: 1. The President needs to show more restraint when he
talks about the people of this country.
2. Look at the way he was talking about the nation’s GDP the
other day,
3. how he was just tongue-lashing everybody as if-

12
 4. as if we’re all rogues.

In fragments O to R, the highlighted aberrant lexical items further attest the

‘morpholectal’ oddities in Nigerian English. In O and P, for example, the morphological
switch of items clearly reports that the word-formation process observed in the use of
cross-carpeting and strong-head(ed) is somewhat skewed. If we appeal to standard usage,
carpet-crossing (that is, defecting to another political party) and headstrong (meaning,
wilful, obstinate, etc.) should replace the earlier items.

As for expantiate, most speakers of the dialect regard this word as a derivation of expand.
While this may be so, the correct form still needs to be properly mastered by the speakers
of Nigerian English. In fact, this false logic of ‘X conceived as the root of Y’ belies the
very nature of much standard usage, as an unbridled application of such logic could
eventually mar the speaker’s communicative and grammatical competence. However,
tongue-lashing (generally regarded as meaning telling somebody off in Nigerian English)
is the product of speakers’ socially constructed linguistic strategy of lashing out at other
people, an unbecoming act generally associated with the speaker’s tongue.

In the two fragments below, the ‘plausibility’ encoded in the lexical items in question
reveals further that Nigerian English is a morphologically odd variety of the language. In
the first fragment, upliftment is presumptuously a derivation of uplift following, quite
erroneously, the formation of such words as development, enlistment, encroachment, etc.
– words whose roots allow the affixation of the derivational morpheme, –ment.
Fragment S
Pastor: 1. As things look in the country today,
2. we need to pray more often.
3. We need to pray for spiritual upliftment.
4. Now, open your mouths and pray…

As pointed out already in various sections of this paper, the blind recourse to logic leads to the
unnecessary derivation of upliftment. Again, consider this conversational snatch:

Fragment T
Commissioner: 1. The government has approved some money for this
year’s pilgrimage to the Holy Land.
2. The Moslem faithfuls are expected to arrive at the
airport at four o’clock tomorrow.

13
As with upliftment above, faithfuls is thought to be the plural form of faithful, what with
the standard acknowledgment of similar derivations, e.g. hopeful ~ hopefuls.

4.0 Conclusion
The facts presented in the sections above may not be peculiar to Nigerian English as it is
possible for other non-native dialects to exhibit similar morphological peculiarities.
However, the discussion is an indication that this variety of English needs some
grammatical as well as semantic overhaul for it to receive recognition in other regions of
the English-speaking community. The point here is not that the dialect has failed in its
functions of expression, communication and interaction among its users, but that with so
many morphological flaws, Nigerian English might not be an appropriate tool to advance
the interests of its users beyond their locality. This means, in effect, that, to perform more
effectively in the language, Nigerians need to conform to morphological processes
acceptable to the entire English-speaking community. For the purposes of this paper, this
suggestion is a direct recommendation of the morphological processes that characterize
Standard English.

The implications of this morpholectal description of Nigerian English can be summarized

as follows:
a) With such unsystematic morphological processes as are demonstrated
in the data, Nigerian English definitely needs a lot of overhaul for it
to be properly aligned to the standard varieties. Of course, this
observation is not in spite of the fact that English has become a global
language, reflecting, as would be expected, numerous conversational,
cultural, and sociolinguist mannerisms of its speakers wherever these
may be found – especially in groups as communities, regions or
nations.

b) Given the trend for speakers of the language irrespective of their

regional habitations to interact with others beyond their own limited
world, it behoves the speakers of every dialect of the language to
align their deployment of the language with standard practices. In
other words, while regional or geographical dialects may be allowed,
speakers of the language need not be too far from the crux of the
language – in morphology, syntax and meaning.

c) For the purposes of education and for rapid advances in science,

technology and information, speakers of Nigerian English in

14
 particular need to adhere to standard practices in their use of the
language. It is counterproductive if a word does not exist in the
standard forms of the language and we teach such forms to our
students all in the name of globalisation, a term that essentially
suggests uniformity rather than deformity – even in language matters.

Given the morphological eccentricities of the Nigerian English dialect – which may be
attested in other non-native varieties of English – this paper has brought to light the need
to reclassify dialects [of English] on account of the aberrations they exhibit. For instance,
there may be other dialects of English whose oddness is displayed in the large numbers of
native terminology for alien cultural features or varieties exhibiting syntactic peculiarities
not permitted in the standard varieties. Describing these various dialects vis-à-vis their
peculiarities just might make available new strategies for appreciating dialect geography.

In addition, numerous works on globalisation and language variation may suggest that as
a dialect of English, and as a culturally modified tongue, Nigerian English as well as
numerous other non-native dialects should be seen as autonomous, especially insofar as it
meets the needs of its numerous users; this view is rather mythical, because Nigerian
English is not ‘an island’, and as long as it is a variety of a language, it is only necessary
for its speakers to seek audience and recognition beyond their immediate socio-cultural
territory.

5.0 Bibliography
Aarts, J., Inge de Mönnink and Herman Wekker (1997) (eds.) Studies in English
language and teaching: in honour of Flor Aarts. Amsterdam/Atlanta: Rodopi.
Bamgbose, Ayo, Ayo Banjo and Andrew Thomas (1995) (eds.) New Englishes: A West
African Perspective. Ibadan, Nigeria: Mosuro.
Banjo, Ayo (1996) 'The Sociolinguistics of English in Nigeria and the ICE project'. In:
Greenbaum (ed.) 1996, 239-248.
Bauer, Laurie and Janet Holmes (1996) 'Getting a flap! /t/ in New Zealand English',
World Englishes 15, 115-124.
Bolt, Philip (1994) 'The International Corpus of English project - the Hong Kong
experience'. In: Fries, Tottie and Schneider (eds.), 15-24.
Calzolari, N. and C. Guo (1994) Proceedings of the Post-COLING94 International
Workshop on Directions of Lexical Research, August 15-17, 1994. Beijing:
Tsinghua University.
Cheshire, J. (1999). "Sociolinguistics and English around the world" in English around
the World: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. J. Cheshire (Ed.) Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1-11.

15
Collins, Peter C. (1996) 'Get-passives in English', World Englishes 15, 43-56.
Crystal, D. (2000). “Emerging Englishes”. In English Teaching Professional, 14: 3-6.
Fries, Udo, Gunnel Tottie and Peter Schneider (1994), Creating and Using English
Language Corpora. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Granger, Sylviane (1993) 'International Corpus of Learner English'. In: Aarts, de Haan
and Oostdijk (eds.), 57-71.
Granger, Sylviane and Stephanie Tyson (1996) 'Connector usage in the English essay
writing of native and non-native EFL speakers of English', World Englishes 15,
17-27.
Greenbaum, Sidney (1988) 'A proposal for an international computerized corpus of
English', World Englishes 7, 315.
Greenbaum, Sidney (1990) 'The International Corpus of English', ICAME Journal 14,
106-108.
Greenbaum, Sidney (1996) 'Introducing ICE'. In: Greenbaum (ed.), 3-12.
Greenbaum, Sidney (1996) The Oxford English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Honey, J. (1989). Does accent matter? London: Faber & Faber
Quirk, R. & G. Stein (1990). "The Spread of English" in English in Use. Essex:
Longman, 54-65.
Strevens, P. (1992). "English as an International Language: Directions in the 1990s" in
The Other Tongue: English across Cultures. B. B. Kachru (Ed.) University of
Illinois, 27-47.

16