Diversity in languages is a cornerstone of Singaporean identity; it plays an integral role in shaping our multicultural social fabric. Against this backdrop, this LPIM study attempts to document Singapore’s linguistic landscape and provide empirical data on on-going changes in the scene. It compares and analyses data from the Institute of Policy Studies’ Survey on Language, Race and Religion across two iterations in 2013 and 2018, and tracks linguistic trends across a span of five years.
This publication focuses on Singapore’s four official languages, Singlish, and other commonly used languages. It begins by investigating the language proficiency of Singaporeans; presenting general trends and more in-depth findings by age and race cohort. In addition to official language proficiencies, bilingualism, heritage languages, and Singlish proficiencies are also examined.
Next, the study peruses respondents’ language use across a variety of settings: socially with friends, domestic household settings including parent-children and grandparent-children scenarios, and workplace conversations. Respondents’ views on the appropriateness of speaking Singlish across different settings are also analysed in relation to varying demographics such as education levels.
The relationship between language and identity, language capital, and discrimination on the basis of language use are subsequently the focus of the study. These include the languages individuals identify with the most, and their views on Singlish as a marker of Singaporean identity. Linguistic capital – how the use of one language may be more advantageous than another across socio-economic contexts – is also discussed, alongside perceptions of discrimination across various settings with language use.
To round off the substantive findings, the study queries the views of respondents vis-à-vis various language policies, such as communication in public spaces, avoiding socio-linguistic exclusion, recognising and preserving heritage languages, as well as other government intervention prerogatives. LPIM concludes with a summary of key findings and their implications on future policy-making.
Read the report here.
Media Coverage