Australian Review of Applied Linguistics - Volume 36, Issue 3, 2013

There are now significant numbers of children who speak a language other than English when they enter the formal school system in Australia. Many of these children come from a language background that is entirely different from the school language. Many Indigenous children, however, come from creole-speaking backgrounds where their home language may share features with the school language whilst remaining substantially different in other ways. What often makes this situation more challenging is the tendency to view creole, rather than as a different language, as a kind of deficient version of the standard language. Children entering the school system with a creole thus often encounter considerable difficulties. In addition, teachers who are not trained in teaching creole-speaking children may not recognise these difficulties. This paper explores some of these issues in the Australian context with reference to home languages such as Kriol and Torres Strait Creole (TSC) as well as minority dialects such as Australian Aboriginal English (AAE), and discusses possible resolutions.

The language ecologies of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in Queensland are characterised by widespread language shift to contact language varieties, yet they remain largely invisible in discourses involving Indigenous languages and education. This invisibility – its various causes and its many implications – are explored through a discussion of two creoles which developed in Queensland: Yumplatok (formerly Torres Strait Creole) and Yarrie Lingo. Although both are English-lexified and originate in Queensland, they represent different histories and different trajectories of awareness and recognition. The Yumplatok discussion emphasises issues arising from speakers’ own attitudes, including Sellwood’s own lived experiences. The Yarrie Lingo discussion highlights issues arising from its creole–lexifier relationship with (Standard Australian) English. Finally, this paper examines a recently published government language report, highlighting the ways that Indigenous creoles are marginalised: this marginalisation exacerbates their invisibility in mainstream discourse.

Aboriginal English has been documented in widely separated parts of Australia and, despite some stylistic and regional variation, is remarkably consistent across the continent, and provides a vehicle for the common expression of Aboriginal identity. There is, however, some indeterminacy in the way in which the term is used in much academic and public discourse. There are diverse assumptions as to its relation to pidgin, creole and interlanguage varieties, as well as to Australian English.

In an attempt to provide some clarification, this paper compares Aboriginal English with the main varieties with which it bears some relationship, either historically (as in the case of the English of Southeast England and Ireland) or geographically (as in the case of Australian English and Australian pidgins and creoles). It does this by employing the morphosyntactic database of the World Atlas of Varieties of English (Kortmann & Lunkenheimer, 2012).

The electronic database on morphosyntactic variation in varieties of spoken English (eWAVE) isolates 235 variable features and enables their relative prevalence to be compared across varieties. A comparison of Aboriginal English with six relevant varieties on this database leads to the view that it retains significant influence from the English varieties of Southeast England and of Ireland, in many ways not shared with Australian English and that it has a great deal more feature overlap with Australian creoles than with Australian English, though a significant percentage of its features is shared only with other English varieties rather than creoles. The findings support the view that Aboriginal English is an English variety of post-creole origin, though not a creole, and that it is not directly related to Australian English. In the light of these findings, it is argued that Aboriginal English speakers will be disadvantaged in an education system which assumes that they are speakers of Australian English.

In the light of these findings, it is argued that Aboriginal English speakers will be disadvantaged in an education system whichassumes that they are speakers of Australian English.

Texts in Aboriginal English (AE) and creole varieties have been created by Indigenous and non-Indigenous writers for a range of purposes. In this paper, we focus on materials created in and for five educational contexts, and investigate the orthographic or spelling systems developed in each setting. Choices about orthography are guided by linguistic and non-linguistic considerations. They are sensitive to matters of prestige and identity, and new orthographic conventions are subject to comparison with ‘correct’, ‘standard’ spellings. We explore the processes, motivations and rationale that drive choices for the orthographic conventions and the diverse outcomes in the five settings.

Within the Australian education system, Aboriginal students’ use of non-standard English features is often viewed simplistically as evidence of non-attainment of literacy and oral-English milestones. One reason for this is the widespread use of assessment tools which fail to differentiate between native- English speakers and students who are learning English as a second language. In these assessments, non-standard English features are framed as ‘mistakes’ and low scores taken as evidence of ‘poor’ performance. This paper will contrast a mistake-oriented analysis with one that incorporates knowledge of the students’ first language. It will clearly show that when consideration is given to the first language, a more nuanced picture of English proficiency emerges: one that is attuned to the specific second language learning pathway and thus far better placed to inform both assessment and classroom instruction.i

Speech pathology assessment within cross-cultural contexts, where the assessor and client differ in their cultural backgrounds, can create many challenges for assessment usage and implementation. With Australia being home to people from many cultures, this isa particular challenge for speech pathologists working in this country. This paper outlines the development of an assessment specifically for Aboriginal children living in a discrete region of the Kimberley in Western Australia. This assessment was developed in collaboration with local language experts as well as speech pathologists experienced in the area of assessment with Indigenous children. Nearly all parts of the assessment were administered by a local co-worker in the children’s first language, Kimberley or Fitzroy Valley Kriol. The paper outlines the specific components of the assessment as well as the approaches taken to ensure fair and accurate assessment of children’s communication skills. It highlights the benefits of collaborating with local co-workers and provides those working with Indigenous children in Australia with practical activities to consider.

This paper focuses on the role of language and some issues associated with identifying appropriate language of instruction for three foundational Maths ideas in the Early Years of schooling. These are considered in relation to the project: Strong Literacy and Numeracy in Communities – Numeracy Component. This had two broad goals, firstly to work with paraprofessional Indigenous teachers to determine an effective language of instruction for specific foundational numeracy concepts and secondly, to create a resource to enable this to be shared. Only two of the project sites are considered here. Both are in Yolŋui communities in northeast Arnhem Land, where English is not widely used for interaction. We focus on the use of first language, Djambarrpuyŋu, for the children’s concept development. The English language that can be used is determined by what is possible for early second language learners. We will share some samples of the Djambarrpuyŋu identified for teaching early number ideas. We will describe the process by which suitable expressions for the key ideas in Djambarrpuyŋu were identified and some issues that arose regarding the use of language for comparing numbers. The project showed how ‘Maths’ lessons are a time both for concept development and for language development.