The Impact of Standard Spoken Tamil in Singapore Tamil Classrooms

The Impact of Standard Spoken Tamil in Singapore
Tamil Classrooms
Seetha Lakshmi
Nanyang Technological University
Singapore
Abstract
This paper examines recent changes in the teaching of Tamil in Sin-
gapore to students from Tamil language homes. Tamil is a diglossic
language, with a formal or H variety that is used mainly in writing and
is learned in schools and a spoken or L variety that is used in infor-
mal conversations and is learned naturally through exposure. Stan-
dard Spoken Tamil (SST) is the variety used by educated Tamils re-
gardless of their caste or region in Tamil Nadu. Following the review
of the Tamil language curriculum and pedagogy in 2006 by the Minis-
try of Education, Singapore (MOE), a Standardised variety of Spoken
Tamil (SST) has become a key feature of Tamil language syllabus
since 2008. This paper is based on a qualitative analysis of 18 primary
school Tamil lessons and interviews with the participating teachers to
understand: (a) the impact of introducing SST in Tamil classrooms;
(b) the reactions of the teachers; and (c) those of the students to the
lessons and techniques.
Keywords: Tamil language, Standard Spoken Tamil, Literary Tamil (LT), Writ-
ten Tamil (WT), Tamil language classrooms, Singapore
Introduction
Language maintenance presents several long-term problems for mi-

nority communities, one of which is language shift. The shift to the
host country’s educational language can be as rapid as within two to
three years. But community leaders encourage the new migrants to
maintain their home languages as their heritage languages and for
their ethnolinguistic identities (Mihyon, 2008; Wiley, 2001). In Sin-
gapore, with a population comprising Chinese, Malays, Indians and
112 Lakshmi
Eurasians, the language of instruction in schools and universities is

English. At the same time, students have to study their mother ton-
gue language (Mandarin, Malay or Tamil) through the formal educa-
tional system from the primary grades to Junior College. Children are
expected to begin their formal schooling with a base in their home
language.
However, the situation is complicated by the fact that some degree of

language shift has already taken place in the communities in Singa-
pore. Saravanan (2001) studied the network patterns of bilingual
Chinese, Malay and Tamil children and found a shift in language use
patterns from the community language to English. In general, the
community language is preferred when interacting with the grandpar-
ent’s generation, whereas English is used to speak with other children
of the same age group. Mohamed Aidil Subhan (2007) reports on the
declining linguistic proficiency of Malays as English is taking on the
role of a lingua franca within the Malay community; he found that
younger Malays were unable to use the standard variety of language.
As earlier mentioned, students in Singapore study two languages,

English and one of these languages - Mandarin, Malay or Tamil. Bi-
lingualism has been a feature of the Singapore school system since
the 1960s (Tan Jason, 2002). “English has been touted as the lan-
guage that will best provide access to science and technology. At the
same time, the study of one of the three other languages -- Mandarin,
Malay or Tamil -- was promoted as a means of preserving what were
termed “traditional values” and of preventing deculturalization amid
rapid societal modernization” (Tan Jason, 2002).
In Singapore, the three mother tongue languages (MTLs) are offered

in schools as second languages. The Minister for Information and the
Arts and Second Minister for trade and Industry stated that “[t]o
transmit Chinese culture and the Chinese language effectively to suc-
cessive generations of Chinese Singaporeans, we need a Chinese in-
tellectual and cultural elite” (Yeo, 1998). On Malay, Masagos Zulkifli
(2009) said that it is not the teachers’ responsibility alone but “a col-
lective responsibility – involving parents, schools, Institutes of High-
er learning, community organisations and the media”. In the Tamil
The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 113
community, the Ministers and social leaders wish to produce more

cultural elites to make the language a living language in Singapore.
The Tamil Language Curriculum and Pedagogical Review Committee
(MOE, 2005) portrays its ideal future Tamil Singaporean with bilin-
gual and bicultural abilities to have Tamil as the heartbeat of the
community.
Teaching the MTLs in Singapore is a challenging task as more and

more students come from English-speaking homes. The Educational
Minister Dr Ng Eng Hen (2009) said that,
“Since the 1980s, more of our Prima-

ry 1 students are coming from house-
holds where English is the dominant
home language... Only 1 in 10 of Pri-
mary 1 Chinese students in 1982
(quarter century, age 33 today) came
from homes that used English — the
figure today is nearly 6 in 10. For In-
dians it has moved from 3 in 10 to 6
in 10; Malays — 0.5 in 10 to 3.5 in 10.
A seismic shift in language environ-
ment has occurred within one genera-
tion. Those above 40 years of age to-
day would have grown up in homes
that spoke their MTL, either predo-
minantly or partly, either with parents,
grandparents or siblings”.
In this multicultural and multilingual situation, teaching has to ad-

dress the different needs of the different communities. Each com-
munity is unique as it forms a different proportion of the population.
The same techniques and strategies cannot be used to teach Manda-
rin, Malay, and Tamil because of the differences in the communities’
language attitudes, language use in their personal and professional
domains, opportunities for the use of the language within and outside
homes, economic and cultural values of the language: and the com-
munity’s economic development and confidence.
114 Lakshmi
As a minority community in Singapore, the Tamils and Tamil lan-

guage use have their own issues. This paper first describes some of
these issues. It then examines the use of spoken Tamil in Singapore,
its impact on the Tamil language syllabus and the responses of stu-
dents and teachers to Standard Spoken Tamil (SST).
Varieties of Tamil
Tamil is characterized by diglossia (Britto, 1986; Ferguson, 1972).
According to Ferguson (1972), there are two main varieties of Tamil -
- the formal or H variety is used mainly in writing, and the second is
the spoken or L variety that is used in ordinary everyday conversa-
tions.
Within spoken Tamil, Schiffman (1998) has identified a variety

termed Standard Spoken Tamil (SST) that is used by educated Tamil
speakers to communicate in formal and informal situations. When a
group of Tamil people from different dialect backgrounds meet, they
use SST. It is a non-Brahmin variety that is not particular to a region
and is understood by Tamils from all dialects. Schiffman (1998) de-
scribed it as a spoken koine with a standardised grammar, syntax, and
pronunciation. Annamalai (in Seetha, et al (2006) and Agasthialingom
(2008)) adds that this is the variety that symbolises the community’s
upward movement and developmental mobility of socio-economic
status. SST is used between individuals in work settings as well as
Tamil movies and dramas and is now being used in Singapore televi-
sion dramas.
In contrast, Written Tamil (WT) is used in formal situations and in

writing. It requires formal training as it involves a more complex me-
thod of expression. Needless to say, the Tamil variety used in writing
and for school examinations is not necessarily most suitable for use
in daily interaction as it is more akin to a second language than a
mother tongue. Annamalai (2011) says that there is a distinction be-
tween the written language and writing the spoken language.
In Tamil Nadu, a few major varieties of Tamil language are used. WT

is the variety generally used in Tamil newspapers, which can be un-
derstood by a person who is able to read Tamil. The Literary level

Written Tamil (LT) is the Tamil used in ancient poems. It is a variety
easily understood by educated Tamil. Spoken Tamil is the variety
used by people to interact in informal situations in the home, school
and religious domains. Within Spoken Tamil, there are many dialectal
varieties based on community sub-groups (e.g. Chettiar, Nadar,
Brahmin, Mudaliar, etc.) and geographical districts (e.g. Tanjore,
Trinelveli, Madurai, Arcot, and Chennai). Although these dialectical
varieties of Spoken Tamil are considered a low variety much like the
colloquial variety, a high variety of Spoken Tamil, the standardised
Spoken Tamil has emerged in recent centuries.
In Singapore, SST has long been in use, and it has gained such wide-
spread acceptance that it is assumed to be the native speaker’s spoken
language. Unfortunately, this is not the form adopted in the class-
room where emphasis is on the more literary form. Hence, students
from English-speaking homes are unable to use the spoken form in
their own community as the only variety they know is the WT variety.
If Tamil were to be a living language in Singapore, it has to be used
actively and spontaneously by young Tamil students. To bridge the
divide between the community and the classroom, teachers need to
be willing to bring samples of SST into the classroom by identifying
suitable recordings and encouraging their students to listen to and
discuss such material.
Standard Spoken Tamil as a Model for Language Usage

SST is the variety used at homes and in informal interactions. No
formal or special training is needed to learn the SST. Speaking in SST
is easier than speaking in WT. SST connects the family, home,
school, and community. At the same time, to acquire WT, a person
has to go through formal training as it is used in formal situations and
formal writing. In Singapore schools, written examinations in Tamil
require the formal WT.
A very small percentage of Tamils in Singapore use colloquial Tamil

(CT) terms in the midst of their SST; for example they say cootta nalla
kottikko, which literally means to throw the rice well, whereas the SST
116 Lakshmi
term for kottikkoo is caappiTu which means eat. In classrooms too,

certain students mix the colloquial terms with their SST.
In Singapore, the SST variety is used at home, in the community,

media and business domains. In 1995, Tamil radio and television sta-
tions switched from WT to SST in their informal programmes. Per-
haps the most pressing reason to promote a switch to SST is that
many students of the language complain that it is difficult for them to
speak in Tamil. This, in turn, is because they were not exposed to the
variety used in the classroom from their childhood (Saravanan, 1993).
The first exposure of a Tamil child to WT is in the classroom. It is
undoubtedly important that children be encouraged and supported to
use their mother tongue language. If a Tamil family lives in a non-
Tamil community, it becomes even more important to expose the
child to the mother tongue language so that s/he can build a strong
foundation in that language and be able to use it with confidence in
his/her later life.
A child’s early exposure to Tamil would result in early acquisition of

his/her mother tongue language. A child who is exposed to his/her
mother tongue language will be able to enjoy his/her mother tongue
language lessons. For Indian Singaporean children, late acquisition of
Tamil in the school will make it difficult for them to learn the lan-
guage with ease and to move to WT later. Before 2005, students were
exposed to WT in their Tamil language classes and there were no op-
portunities to use SST. This created an awkward situation wherein
students speak in formal WT in informal settings.
The MOE Singapore (2005:14) which strongly encourages the use of

SST gives the following examples to differentiate between SST and
WT, a formal variety used in Spoken form:
a. I want money
enakku paNam veeNTum (WT)

enakku paNam veeNum (SST)
b. He is very good
avar mikavum nallavar (WT)

avaru romba nallavaru (SST)
c. Did you sell your house?
niinkaL unkaL viittai viRRuvittiirkaLaa? (WT)

niinka unka vittai vittuttingaLaa? (SST)
In the above examples, there is no structural difference between the

two varieties. But in b., the adjective mikavum in WT is romba in
SST. It is also possible that more than one SST term exists for the
same WT term. In c., the verb ‘sell’ in WT (unkaL) and in SST (un-
ka) have different spellings.
Example 1: Mother is going to the shop

In Singapore, there are a number of Tamil varieties used by the
community. The Literary level of Written Tamil variety (LT) is ar-
chaic Tamil used in formal situations. Some Tamil educators use this
variety because they believe in using a pure and high variety of Tamil.
Written Tamil (WT) is also a formal Tamil variety which is used in
newspapers (Saravanan, 1993). This is not a difficult variety and can
be understood without consulting a dictionary. The Standard Spoken
Tamil variety (SST) is used by educated Tamils and it gives respect to
the speakers in informal situations (Schiffman, 1998; Saravanan,
1993). The other varieties are used by certain community or age
groups in the Singapore community. However, we see a high use of
the SST variety starting in the late 1990s. In the simple example be-
low, ‘Mother is going to the shop’, these varieties of Tamil are illus-
trated. In all varieties (nos. 1 to 7), the Tamil word for mother and
shop are the same. However, the phrase ‘is going to’ is celkiRaar in
LT (no. 1), pookiRaar in WT (no. 2) and poorRaanka in SST (no. 3). In
colloquial Tamil variety (CT), a non-standard spoken Tamil, the
phrase ‘to the shop’ is shortened to kaTikki (no. 4). In no. 5,
pooRaa is used instead. The word comes from a non-standard spoken
Tamil used by a certain group of newly immigrated Tamil expatriates.
In no. 6, pooRaani is another non-standard spoken Tamil that is used
118 Lakshmi
by students in their teens. Lastly, a non-standard spoken Tamil vari-

ety used by primary school pupils in their informal speech is pre-
sented in no. 7. The phrase going Raani shows the influence of English
(going) in their speech.
Mother is going to the shop

1. அம்மா கைடக்குச் ெசல்கிறார் (LT)
amma kaTaikkuc celkiRaar (LT)
2. அம்மா கைடக்குப் ேபாகிறார் (WT)
amma kaTaikkuppookiRaar (WT)
3. அம்மா கைடக்குப் ேபாறாங்க (SST)
amma kaTaikku pooRaanka (SST)
4. அம்மா கடிக்கிப் ேபாவுது (CT)
amma kaTikki poovutu (CT)
5. அம்மா கைடக்குப் ேபாறா (a dialect used by newly immi-
grated Tamil expatriates)
amma kaTaikkuppooRaa
6. அம்மா கைடக்கு ேபாறானி (a non-standard spoken Tamil
used by teenage students)
amma kaTaikku pooRaani
7. அம்மா கைடக்கு goingறானி (a Taminglish variety used by
primary school pupils)
amma kaTaiikpooRaani
Mazhinan (1996:31), chairman of Tamil Education Review Commit-

tee, SINDA, defined SST and the need for a critical awareness of it in
Tamil Education in Singapore:
“From scholars to the man in the

street, Tamils speak to each other in
what is known as spoken Tamil. This
is the natural or face-to-face commu-
nication. Written Tamil or literary
Tamil is used mostly in writings but
also in formal communication such as
public speaking and broadcasting. The

difference between spoken Tamil and
written Tamil is so much greater than
the difference, for example, between
colloquial English and formal English,
that comparisons between the two
languages become meaningless. This
extreme diglossia is unique to Tamil
among the four official languages in
Singapore and therefore creates a
unique problem for the Tamil educa-
tion system”.
Nadaraja (in Seetha et al., 2006), a linguistic consultant for the Tamil
syllabus at MOE, enumerated some observations and recommenda-
tions on the use of SST/Street Tamil/Youth Tamil/Movie Tamil.
First, he noted that WT was used as the language for textbooks after
Primary one. So, he recommended the use of SST in textbooks as
well as in classroom presentations. Second, he observed that Tamil
teachers were using the regional dialect. He instead advised them to
use the non-caste related dialect that is used by mass media (radio,
movies, etc.) as it is considered SST and thus, it does not contradict
his first recommendation. Third, he stressed that there is no such
thing as street language and youth language; they are considered as
home and regional dialects. Further, for comparison, he cited the
problem on regional and social dialects in Tamil Nadu and stated
that, “That is the reason why we always say that let us use only writ-
ten Tamil for reading and writing and spoken Tamil only for listening
in the classroom” (Nadaraja in Seetha et al., 2006).
In Singapore, the Spoken Tamil has been standardised by the com-

munity and now among Singapore Tamils this variety is an accepted
norm in informal situations. This SST is a symbol of a developed lin-
guistic variety and a social marker of the community’s language ecol-
ogy. As Schiffman (2010) stated, this variety is an emergent variety
which is used in the mass media and spoken by educated speakers in
the Tamil community in Tamil Nadu and Singapore.
120 Lakshmi
Spoken Tamil includes all spoken varieties of Tamil language includ-

ing the varieties based on geographical districts, social groups (castes)
and age groups of students. For standard spoken Tamil, there is a
standardised variety. This standardised variety could be a dialectal
variety but standardised by the educators’ community. In Singapore,
it is the Tanjore variety as in earlier times, a significant number of
Tanjore people came to live in Singapore. If there is no SST, within
Spoken Tamil there is no high and low level difference. If a person
speaks colloquial Tamil (CT) or a standard variety, both are consi-
dered as spoken Tamil. But in reality, CT is not accepted. SST gives
respect to the listener and speaker. As Annamalai stated (in Seetha et
al., 2006), this variety shows the upward movement of the communi-
ty and one’s status. Hence, a person who generally uses CT, must also
try to use SST as it gives prestige and shows solidarity with the com-
munity.
As an insider in Singapore Tamil classrooms, I overheard the follow-

ing in trainee teachers’ talk in their teaching practicum. In Example
2, the teacher trainees used CT because they did not know the differ-
ence between the low (stigmatised) and high varieties. SST is a non-
stigmatised variety. Hence, teachers’ understanding of Spoken Tamil
and SST are important to develop students as confident speakers of
Tamil.
Example 2: Colloquial Tamil

1. Go to McDonald’s and pour well
ெமக்ேடானல்ட்ஸ்ல ேபாய் நல்லா
ெகாட்டிக்ேகாங்க (CT)
McDonald’sla pooi nalla kottikkoonka (CT)
2. We won’t eat anything in the night

ராைவக்கி நாம ஒன்னும் தின்னமாட்ேடாம் (CT)
raavaikki naama tinnamaattoom (CT)
rattirikku naanka onnum caapiTamaattoom (SST)
In no. 1, Example 2, kottikoonka is the colloquial term for the phrase

‘eat well’. In SST, it is caapiTunka. For no. 2, the SST for the collo-
quial words raavaikki and tinnamaattoom are raatthirikku (in the night)
and caapiTamaattom (we won’t eat), respectively.
The Tamil Community in Singapore

Even though Tamil is considered a MTL in schools, majority of Ta-
mil children aged five years and above do not communicate in this
language. Statistics show a decreasing trend in homes speaking Tamil:
52.2% in the 1980s, 43.7%, in the 1990s and 42.9% in 2000. This is
partly due to the influence of English, which is being used widely, but
also because with both parents working, the use of Tamil at home
decreases and Tamil is only used in the classroom. According to the
latest survey, 38% of Tamil students speak English in their homes
and 26% speak Tamil occasionally. Nearly 33% of Tamil students
speak English and Tamil frequently while 30% of students speak
Tamil at home and 23% of them said that they speak Tamil mostly
with occasional English at home. Here, 82% of Tamil students use
both languages in different proportions. Only 7% use Tamil at home
and 12% use English as their main conversational language. We could
say that only 38% of Tamil language students speak English at home
and nearly 62% use Tamil at home. This may be seen as a positive
signal but this is a small increase when compared to previous surveys
on young students. 1
Among parents, there is growing concern that children spend more

time on mother tongue language work (20%) and reading books
(33%). They would prefer their children to spend more time on other
subjects. In certain schools, for the primary classes to be selected as a
good class, MTL is not counted in the selection and ranking criteria.
Students who are in primary 6 and secondary 4 classes have a strong
perception that learning the MTL subject is important (95% and
87%), enjoy Tamil lessons (94% and 87%) and like to learn the sub-
ject (95% and 87%), respectively.
Tamil students have few opportunities to use the language outside

home and school. They have to buy special software for Tamil if
they want to use the language in computers and mobile phones.
1
http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/files/2011/mtl-review-report-2010.pdf).
122 Lakshmi
Without ready and free access to Tamil language in computing and

mobile technology, they have no choice but use English. In addition,
there are fewer chances for Tamil students to see advertisements or
other printed materials in Tamil. This is reflected in a report pub-
lished by MOE in 2010 that states that the percentage of Indian stu-
dents whose first home language is English has increased from 49%
in 1991 to 59% in 2010 (MOE, 2010). In another survey involving
1,600 Indian primary and secondary school students, K Ramiah
found that six out of ten students prefer speaking in English and
more than 40% admitted that they would not study Tamil if it were
not compulsory. One student was quoted as saying, “it drives me
crazy just to look at a comprehension passage” and another said, “my
parents tell me that if I learn Tamil, I will only get a job as a coolie”
(The Straits Times, 2000).
Despite the full support from the government to promote the use of
the Tamil language, the community continuously raises questions
such as Tamil cooru pooTuma? (Will Tamil provide food to you?) and
Tamil paTittaal veLinaaTu pookamuTiyumaa? (Will you go overseas with
Tamil education alone?). A significant number of Tamil community
members are doubtful about reaping any benefits from using the
Tamil language at homes. This is further compounded by the fact
that Tamil is not taught in an interesting way in schools (Shegar and
Ridzuan, 2005; MOE, 2005).
Reviews of the Mother Tongue Language (MTL) Curriculum

Despite Tamil teachers’ strong beliefs in espousing literary level Writ-
ten Tamil rather than using the informal variety in school settings,
there have been complaints that the Tamil taught in school is archaic
and not graded by difficulty level. In his study of primary school
textbooks and syllabus, Schiffman (1998) found the vocabulary diffi-
cult and stressed that SST has to be the foundation of textbooks in
Singapore. He portrayed this state as being “tongue-tied” and raised
questions about a language policy for Tamil as there was no spoken
Tamil in the Tamil classrooms before 2005 (Schiffman, 1998). He
suggested that corpus planning of Tamil is necessary to develop func-
tional use of the language. Spoken Tamil should be standardized be-
cause as Nadaraja says, “Singapore has its own dialect and it is more
appropriate to use that in the teaching materials” (Seetha et al., 2006).
In 1996, the Singapore Indian Development Association (SINDA)

conducted a review and called for an understanding and adoption of
Standard Spoken variety in Tamil classrooms (Mahizhnan, 1996).
SINDA also recommended addressing the clear differences and dis-
tinctions between the Tamil education syllabuses for the Secondary
school streams, namely, Express, Normal and Normal Technical
streams, and stressed the need for a word list in textbooks. The
MOE-engaged Forbes Research (1999) mother tongue language re-
view committee found that students had difficulties in comprehen-
sion and composition and did not have much fun or interest in learn-
ing Tamil. The committee recommended suitable standards with the
shift in the students’ home background (MOE, 2002). Certain fea-
tures of the Tamil language syllabus, such as proverbs unsuitable for
the local context, were removed. In 2004-2005, the Centre for Re-
search in Pedagogy and Practice, National Institute of Education
(NIE) conducted a curriculum review and recommended, among
other things, using an accessible language i.e., SST, linking the text-
book content with assessment, undertaking textbook reform, and
using multimedia and IT.
In 2005, another review was carried out and a Forbes survey was
conducted with its stakeholders (MOE, 2005). The findings remained
the same. Students found open-ended comprehension very difficult
and learning Tamil was not fun or ‘cool’. Here, the objective was to
nurture and sustain in all children an interest in learning the mother
tongue languages to their highest level, and in using the language well
after they leave school. One of the review’s key recommendations
was the use of Spoken Tamil in the Tamil classes to have confident
and effective bilingual Indian Singaporeans. The committee strongly
felt that use of SST in day-to-day life and outside classroom was the
key to make Tamil a living language in Singapore. The new syllabus
was implemented in 2008 for primary schools and in 2010 for sec-
ondary schools; the textbook materials were produced in phases. In
2010, an MTL review was carried out again. A key finding was that
the measures implemented in 2008 were effective and efforts would
124 Lakshmi
be made to build on the strengths of the measures already in place.

Information and communication technology (ICT) would be used
more as young students are already ‘digital natives’. Further, the MTL
curriculum needs to be tailored to the students’ home background to
develop students “as proficient users who can communicate effec-
tively using the language in real-life contexts and apply it in inter-
personal communication, listening and reading for comprehension,
and presenting in spoken and written forms” (MOE, 2011). The re-
vised curriculum was implemented at the end of 2010. Table 1
presents an overview of all the above-mentioned reviews, recom-
mendations and results. Since the recommendations from the reviews
conducted by NIE and MOE (MOE, 2005; 2010), SST has become
an important aspect of Tamil teaching in Singapore.
Table 1
The key issues and recommendations of the reviews
Year Issues and recommendations
1996 Need awareness on SST and second language pedagogy
1999 Tamil lessons are difficult for students and the change of
home language background
2004 Textbook reform, use of accessible language and link texts
with assessment and use of IT
2005 Shift in home language background and difficulty for stu-
dents to learn and write exams
2010 Use of IT and strengthening of the implementation of SST
Researchers have provided feedback that spoken language should be

emphasized in classrooms. A number of research studies (Annamalai
2011; Asher, 1982; Ferguson, 1972; Mahizhnan, 1996; Mani & Gopi-
nathan, 1983; Ministry of Education, 2005; Ramiah, 1991, 2002; Sa-
ravanan, 1989, 1998; Saravanan, Lakshmi, & Caleon, 2007; Schiff-
man, 1995, 1998, 2002, 2008) have been carried out to identify,
define and develop spoken Tamil and the SST variety in educational
and media domains. Following committee recommendations, the re-
vised curriculum and textbooks for selected primary classes were in-
troduced in 2008 in Singapore. Further, the project reports were pre-
sented at the MOE Review committee. The nationwide awareness for
Standarised variety of spoken Tamil in education allows the commu-
nity to complement these efforts. Greater emphasis was recommend-

ed to be placed on developing students’ listening and speaking skills
especially in the lower primary years. Students need oral skills so that
they can use Tamil confidently in daily situations (MOE, 2005: 35).
The revised curriculum should ensure a strong grounding in spoken
Tamil so that students develop a lifelong facility in the language
through being able to comfortably switch between Standard Spoken
and formal Tamil in different contexts (MOE, 2005: 36). Although
spoken Tamil is currently used in many classrooms”, teachers still
encourage their students to speak formal Tamil in a number of class-
rooms. Don Snow (1996:16) argues that learners need to amass suffi-
cient vocabulary in reading text and listening to speech in order to
develop a solid foundation in that culture. After the curriculum re-
view report at the NIE (Seetha et al., 2006), SST has an important
place in Tamil teacher training.
Teachers’ understanding of spoken and written Tamil is critical, for

which training is required. NIE started pre- and in-service courses;
the majority of in-service teachers have gone through the new
courses and pre-service teachers have studied the importance and use
of SST in the classroom. Still, teachers need further guidance on how
to assess SST in examinations. For this, they need an understanding
of sociolinguistics and bilingualism theories that will help them un-
derstand student difficulties in language learning. Teachers in the
MOE-sponsored M Ed programme are aware of these theories. A
significant number of Tamil teachers have studied in English-medium
schools but still use the mother tongue at home. However, with li-
mited input to their language, greater expertise is needed especially
since a sizeable proportion of students in the Tamil classes are expa-
triate children.
During formal interviews and informal discussions with the Tamil

teachers conducted for this study, some teachers said that although
changes have been implemented, the school management expects
them to give good academic results. One of the changes that has
been implemented is the use of Standard Spoken Tamil (SST) in
classrooms. In addition, the students, particularly Primary 6 students,
are expected to know Written Tamil (WT) for major government ex-
126 Lakshmi
aminations such as the PSLE (Primary Six Leaving Examination).

The implemented changes have positive results as stated elsewhere in
the paper but at the same time, teachers are required to teach WT to
students for examinations and they are also expected to cover every-
thing in the syllabus. This implies that teachers need to focus on pre-
paring students for examinations and complete the syllabus and text-
book lessons. Hence, they need more training on how to utilize the
early primary classes to develop listening, speaking and reading and
the upper primary classes to teach writing in order to prepare stu-
dents for national examinations. A similar pattern of skills develop-
ment and exam preparation can be followed in secondary school.
Compared to previous years, there is now significant progress in the

use of Tamil. The Strait Times (February 20, 2000) reported that the
Umar Pulavar Tamil centre was to be created as a national resource
centre and mount it as a teaching centre to embrace the setting up of
Tamil language elites who may become future leaders in Singapore.
For the past few years, the Tamil Language Council and Tamil com-
munity organizations have celebrated yearly the Tamil Language Fes-
tival. Various programmes such as debates for students from primary
school through Junior College build a foundation in the language and
culture. There is interest in the community to use Tamil in the 24-
hour radio programme Oli 96.8 where young comperes who are mostly
bilingually educated can get a feel for the language. Vasanthan TV
has been given extended hours and a separate channel. There is now
wide viewership for locally produced Tamil dramas such as veettai,
collamalee, nijankaL and vaijayanti. The popular programmes which
used to be featured in Vasantham TV received recognition for their
wide viewership. Recordings of these programmes are available at the
xin.msn.com website.
The Use of SST in Singapore

Mahizhnan (1996:31) argued that the review committee would like to
urge MOE to set up a special committee to study the viability of in-
troducing and using SST widely within the school system. In Singa-
pore, SST has long been in use, and it has gained such widespread
acceptance that it is assumed to be the native speaker’s spoken lan-
guage. Unfortunately, this is not the form adopted in the classroom
where the literary form is emphasized. Hence, students from English-

speaking homes were unable to use the spoken form at the commu-
nity and the only variety they knew is the written form, which is Writ-
ten Tamil. In Singapore, if Tamil is to be a living language it has to be
used actively and spontaneously by young Tamil students (Seetha et
al., 2006; Shegar and Ridzuan, 2005). To bridge the divide between
the community and the classroom, teachers need to use SST in the
classroom by using suitable recordings and encouraging their stu-
dents to listen to and discuss such material.
In speaking or oratorical competitions organized by various Tamil

associations, students are good at speaking fast or using rhyme.
However, in a debate, even students in higher classes struggle to
speak in the impromptu round where they have to answer questions
posed by the judge. Here, we find that native speakers or Singaporean
students whose parents are from India are effectively bilingual in
both the spoken and written varieties of Tamil, whereas Singaporean
students who study Tamil as a second language have difficulty
switching between the two varieties (Vaish, 2007; Shegar and Rid-
zuan, 2005). This year, the government and the Tamil Language
Council are organizing a month-long Tamil language festival.
Until 1995, audio media used WT, but now SST is used more widely
in the media (Saravanan, 1993). Schiffman (1988) also noted that
Tamil movies have adopted SST. As such, Tamil teachers especially
those who are teaching early primary school classes, need to expose
students to the spoken variety as this is the variety they are likely to
encounter outside school. After being exposed to Standard Spoken
Tamil, students can then better learn literary Tamil which still holds
significance as a more formal variety for use in assessment and
evaluation.
It is envisaged that the use of SST in the classroom will have several
beneficial outcomes. First, if the language variety used at home is
similar to the one used in schools, students are less likely to have dif-
ficulty mastering the language. Second, the switch to SST will in-
crease student motivation to communicate in Tamil and reduce the
stress associated with learning Tamil. Third, the use of SST in school
128 Lakshmi
will heighten the impact of efforts by the popular media, such as Oli
96.8 FM (Tamil radio) and Vasantham Channel (Tamil Television
channel), to reach out to Tamilians of all age groups in their mother
tongue, which will in turn increase the salience of Tamil as a living
language in Singapore.
SST can work as the link between the home and school language to
help students improve their Tamil. Thinnappan (in Seetha, et al. 2006)
and Rajendran (in Seetha et al., 2006) stated that SST should be en-
couraged, but research is needed (Annamalai in Seetha, et al, (2006)).
Teaching SST in schools will increase students' awareness of their
ethnicity, language, and identity in Singapore. In bridging their ex-
periences at home, in the community, and at school, students will
learn to appreciate their culture. This is in fact a key objective of the
current Tamil curriculum in Singapore schools. Most importantly, the
propagation of the spoken form of the language will slow down the
level of language loss that continues to be observed in Singapore,
where Tamil is a required second language for students of South In-
dian backgrounds (Seetha et al., 2006).
The Study
From 2005, both the Tamil education community and the Tamil
community became aware of major changes in Tamil education and
the use of Standard Spoken Tamil. Hence teachers started using
Standard Spoken Tamil from 2006. Their syllabus was re-designed
and the textbooks implemented in 2008 (MOE, 2008). The three re-
search questions addressed during the project were:
1. What is the impact of the SST which has been implemented
in the school curriculum?
2. What are the responses of the teachers who teach this variety
of Tamil?
3. What do the students, who are the future Tamil-speaking
Singaporeans, think about the lessons and the techniques that
are used by the teachers who teach Standard Spoken Tamil?
Data Collection
The data analysed for the present study come from audio and video
recordings of eighteen lessons from Primary one to five Tamil class-
rooms and interviews with the stakeholders, i.e. teachers and students
under two research projects, “An Examination of the use of Standard
Spoken Tamil in the school and media domains in Singapore in order
to establish SST as an additional resource for the teaching and learn-
ing of Tamil” (CRP 10/06 SL) and “Curriculum Implementation in
Early Primary Schooling in Singapore (CIEPSS)” (OER47/08MS).
Eight lessons from Primary three to Primary five classes from eight
schools comprise the data taken from the first project. These lessons
which are nearly seven hours in length were recorded from 2008 to
2010. Data from the second project come from another eight
schools and consist of five hours of five Primary one Tamil lessons
and five Primary two Tamil lessons that are five hours and 10 mi-
nutes long. The lessons were recorded between March and Novem-
ber 2009. All 14 excerpts used in this paper were extracted from the
aforementioned data sets. The team of research assistants who had
transcribed the lessons includes a native speaker. They all have ex-
tensive experience in Tamil language research and were trained by the
principal investigators of both projects. The transcriptions were
coded using a scheme developed by the author based on Spoken Ta-
mil grammar (Schiffman, 1979, 1999). In addition to the video and
audio recordings of the lessons, the author interviewed the teachers
who conducted the lessons. As part of the first project, she also
talked with primary school students on their Tamil language classes
through formal and informal interviews during her learning work-
shops and school visits. She also observed student-to-student inte-
ractions before and after their Tamil language classes.
Language Varieties used in Tamil Classrooms

This section examines the language forms used by teachers and stu-
dents in Tamil classrooms.
Based on the observations of lessons done for the present study, sen-
ior Tamil teachers in Singapore tend to use more WT while younger
teachers use spoken formal Tamil with code switching. Due to their
limited content knowledge and unaware of how to use their passive
130 Lakshmi
cultural knowledge, younger novice teachers tend to follow their les-

son scripts strictly and in doing so, they fail to invite their students to
be active participants in class. When speaking Tamil, teachers occa-
sionally include words from WT in order to avoid using their English
equivalents. When this is not possible, teachers mix English with
SST.
During group activities, students tend to speak in English even

though some are proficient in SSL when the teacher is not around.
In the presence of a teacher though, the students use SST. When
writing answers or compositions, students are willing to raise ques-
tions and request translations for English terms or request a WT
equivalent for the SST terms.
Based on this corpus’s frequency profile, the following five words are
most frequently used by students in their classroom conversations
with their peers and teachers: வந்து-vantu (came); இருக்கு- irukku
(have); நான்-naan (I); அந்த-anta (that); ஒரு-oru (one) and
ஆசிரியர்-aaciriyar (teacher). These words are also among the
500,000 SSL words in the corpus data bank transcriptions from the
first project (Lakshmi and Saravanan, 2009).
Many students have their first experiences with Tamil in the class-
room and they are exposed to WT before any kind of spoken Tamil.
This is usually the case for students from English-speaking homes as
illustrated in Example 3 below. In Example 3, the students used the
verbs, uNNaamal (without eating), alikkaama (without giving), kaanp-
pikkiraTu (it shows) and the nouns mannanai (the king), and payanum
(use) in WT instead of the SST terms caapiTaamal (without eating),
kuTukkaama (without giving), kaatturatu (it shows), and the nouns
raajaavai (the king), prayojanamum (use), laabamum (profit).
Example 3: WT and SST mix

1. I will give my food
என்ேனாட உணைவ தருேவன்
ennooTa uNavai taruveen
2. He gave it to him without eating. He will always promote good

values, that’s why they give
அவர் உண்ணாமல் அவர்ட்ட ெகாடுத்துட்டு
அவர் எப்ேபாதும் நல்ல பண்புகைள வளர்ப்பார்னு
அவர்ட்ட ெகாடுக்குறாங்க
avar uNNaamal avarkitta koTuttu avar eppotum nalla paNpu-
kalai valarppaarnu avarkitta koTukkuRaanka
3. It did not benefit

பயனும் அளிக்காமப் ேபாயிட்டு
payanum aLikkaama poyittu
4. I think it is showing the king. Aang.

மன்னைன காண்பிக்கிறது என்று
நிைனக்கிேறன். ஆங்.
mannanai kaanppikkiratu enru ninaikkireen. Aang.
Primary School Lesson Excerpts

In the early primary classes, the students show an interest in speaking.
Students from English-speaking homes use English and Written Ta-
mil. The teachers also use English, either when they are unsure about
the Tamil translation or to help students understand.
132 Lakshmi
Excerpt 1
The language variety used by the teacher (WT or SST) influences
which variety students use to continue the turn. This can be seen in
the excerpt below. When the teacher uses SST, students tend to re-
spond in SST. But when the teacher uses WT, students feel pressured
to respond in WT.
1. ஆசிரியர் வணக்கம் நாம் இப்ெபாழுது Generally

the
ஒரு முக்கியமான ஒரு teacher
ெசய்திையப் பற்றிப் ேபச uses WT
விரும்புகிேறாம். நீங்கள்
அேநகமாக அந்த இயற்ைக
பற்றிக் ேகள்விப்
பட்டிருப்பீர்கள். இயற்ைக
நமக்கு நல்லைதயும்
ெசய்கிறது; அேத
சமயத்தில் நமக்கு பல
தீங்குகைளயும்
விைளவிக்கிறது. அது
தீங்கு என்று
ெசால்லமுடியாது, அது
இயற்ைகயின் நிகழ்ச்சி.
இப்படி ஒரு நிகழ்ச்சி ேபான
வருடம் உலகத்தில்
நடந்தது. யாருக்காவது
ெதரியுமா? என்ன நிகழ்ச்சி
என்று?
aasiriyar vaNakkam naam ippoRudu oru muk-
kiyamaana oru ceidiyaip paRRippeeca
virumpukiRoom. niingkal aneekamaaka

anta iyaRkai paRRik keeLvip pattirup-
piirkaL. iyarkai namakku nallataiyum
ceykiRatu. adee samayattil namakku pala
tiingukaLaiyum viLaivikkiratu. adu tiin-
gu eNru solla muTiyaaTu. adu iyarkaiyin
nikaRcci. ippaTi oru nikaRcci poona va-
ruTam ulakattil naTantatu. yaaruk-
kaavatu teriyumaa? enna nikaRcci enRu?
Teacher Greetings. Now we would like to
talk about some important news.
You would have probably heard
about nature. Nature does good to
us; at the same time, it causes a lot
of harm. We cannot come to the
conclusion that it was a bad incident,
but rather it was an act of nature.
An incident like this happened last
year in the world. Does anyone
know? What is the incident?
2. மாணவர் அதுதான் சுனாமி. Teacher

uses WT
only
maaNavar atutaan cunaami.
Student That was tsunami
3. ஆசிரியர் ம்…. சுனாமி. இந்த சுனாமி Teacher

continues
என்று ெசால்லப்படுகின்ற with WT
ஒரு இயற்ைகப் ேபரிடர்
ேபான வருடம் நடந்தது.
எங்ேக நடந்தது, எங்ேக
ஆரம்பித்தது என்று
யாருக்காவது ெதரியுமா?
134 Lakshmi
aasiriyar m. . cunaami. inda cunaami enRu colla-

paTukinRa oru iyaRkaippeeriTar poona
varudam naTantatu. engee naTantatu,
engee aarampittatu enRu yaarukkaavadu
teriyumaa?
Teacher Mm... Tsunami. A natural disaster
known as a tsunami occurred last
year. Does anyone know where it
happened? Where it started?
4. மாணவர்: இந்ேதாேனசியாவில். WT
maaNavar Indonesiavil.
Student: In Indonesia
5. ஆசிரியர்: இந்ேதாேனசியாவிேல WT only
ஆரம்பித்ததாக
ெசால்கிறீர்கள். சரி
அங்கிருந்து அந்த சுனாமி
என்ற ஒரு.. இயற்ைகப்
ேபரிடர் ஏற்பட்டுப் பல
பகுதிகைளப் பாதித்தது.
அது யாருக்காவது
ெதரியுமா எந்ெதந்த
பகுதிகைளப் பாதித்தது
என்று?
aasiriyar Indonesiavilee aarampittataaka colki-
Riirkal. cari ankiruntu anta cunaami
enRa oru... iyaRkaip peeriTar eerpattup
pala pakutikalaip paatittatu. atu yaa-
rukkaavatu teriyumaa ententa pakutika-
laip paatittatu enRu?
Teacher: You say that it started from Indone-
sia. Okay. From there, the natural

disaster called the tsunami occurred
and affected many areas. Does any-
one know what areas it affected?
6. மாணவர்: ஸ்ரீலங்கா. Country’s

name is in
WT. It is
same in
the SST
too.
maaNavar: Sri Lanka
Student: (Sri Lanka)
Excerpt 2
At the same time, sometimes the students’ language also influences
that of the teacher. In Excerpt 2, the teacher repeats the students’
answer, ‘form fill up’ pannoom (we filled up the forms) and uses a
few more English terms.
1. ஆசிரியர்: ேபான வாரம் என்ன Teacher

uses mostly
ெசஞ்சிங்கனு ஞாபகம் SST
இருக்க?
aaciriyar: poona vaaram enna cenchinkanu
gnaapakam irukka?
Teacher: Do you remember what you
did last week?
2. மாணவர்கள்: form fill up பன்ேனாம் Students

used SST
with code
maaNavarkaL: Form fill up pannoom mixing in
English
Students: We filled up the form
136 Lakshmi
3. ஆசிரியர்: ஆமா form up Teacher

fill
follows stu-
பன்ன ீங்ங. ஆமா form dents’ reply
பத்தி ேபசுேனா இல்ல? and used
SST and
Very stressful you know?..
code mixing
சில மாணவர்கள் சரி in English
ெசால்லிட்டங்க ஆனா
ைகெயழுத்துப்
ேபாடல.
aaciriyar: aamaa form fill up panniinka.
aamaa form patti peecunoo illa?
very stressful you know?. .cila
maaNavarkaL cari collittaanga
aanaa kaiyeRuttu pooTala
Teacher: Yes, you did fill out the form.
Yes, we spoke about the form,
right? You know, it was very
stressful. Some students said
ok, but have not signed it.
There are currently about 700 Tamil teachers working in Singapore schools
(Nalluraj, 2012; MOE, 2012). After the closure of the only Tamil High
School in 1982 (Ramiah, 1998), the teachers who are enlisted into Tamil teach-
ing received bilingual education. About 150 teachers who are native speakers
recruited from India to work here as Tamil teachers are mostly assigned in Sec-
ondary schools and Junior Colleges. Those who were born and brought up in Sin-
gapore and studied Tamil as a second language are relatively young and enthusias-
tic about upgrading their academic qualifications. During the interview, many of
these young teachers generally want to teach in SST and engage their students by
equipping them with aural and oral skills. Being in this position, they greatly
motivate students from English-speaking homes who struggle to speak Tamil via
SST. One of them told that, “speaking in Standard Spoken Tamil is easy and
not stressful. Students are also happy to listen and answer without fear!” This
also surfaced in one of the focus group discussions in another study in which the
author was also involved (2006). Hence in the early primary classes, we witness
the use of SST as an encouraging situation.
Excerpt 3
In Excerpt 3, the student asks a question using SST. When teachers
encourage the use of SST, students are less afraid to ask questions.
1. மாணவர் என்னா ஆசிரியர், இன்னிக்கு Fluent use

of SST
என்ன ெசால்லித்தரப்
ேபாறீங்க?
maaNavar enna aaciriyar, innikku enna collitara
pooRiinka?
Student Teacher, today what is the name of the lesson

that you are going to teach?
Excerpt 4
At the same time, they are very confident in talking to the teacher and initiating
the conversation. This is apparent in Excerpt 4.
1. மாணவர்: நீங்கதான் ஆசிரியராச்ேச, Fluent use

of SST
நீங்க சரியாத்தான்
ெசால்வங்க
ீ !
maaNavar: niinkataan aaciriyaraaccee, niinga
cariyaataan colvinka!
Student: You are a teacher, so you will tell the
correct things!
Excerpt 5: Teacher is the role model

Generally in class, the Tamil teacher is speaking in SST. The teacher
is the role model for the students. Sometimes students have difficul-
ties, as they do not know the exact Tamil word for an English term.
As they think in English and study most of their subjects in English,
they use the English term in the midst of their Tamil speech. Espe-
cially Tamil students have difficulties in finding Tamil terms for a
number of verbs in the Tamil classes. Copy is one such verb. In Ex-
cerpt 5, students use the word copy while talking about Amir. Here, if
the teacher can understand the students’ situation and frequently use
138 Lakshmi
the Tamil term for copy in subsequent lessons, then the Tamil term
becomes familiar to students and subsequently they will use it in their
speech.
1. மாணவர்: அமீ ர் காப்பிப்பண்ணுரா! One Eng-

lish word
and one
maaNavar: Amir copy paNNuRaa
SST word
Student: Amir is copying
2. ஆசிரியர்: இல்ல. . . அவரு Mostly
SST
ெசாந்தமாதா எழுதுறாரு.
பாத்துக்ேகாங்க அவர்
எப்படி எழுதுறாருன்னு
கவனிங்க. . .
எழுதிட்டீங்களா? சரி
aaciriyar: Illa . . . avaru contamaataa eRutuRaaru.

paattukkoongka. avar eppaTi eRutuRaa-
runnu kavaningka. eRutittiingkaLaa?
cari.
Teacher: No. He is writing on his own. See,

observe him how he is writing.
Have you written? Ok.
At times, teachers too use English terms. Here we could ask whether
Tamil teachers should use English words in the class. Although the
answer is no, in a multilingual, globalised country, current teachers
who have gone through English-medium education have limited con-
tent knowledge in Tamil and Tamil vocabulary and thus do not know
the exact Tamil term for some English words.
Excerpt 6
In Excerpt 6, the teacher used words like ‘group’ and ‘correct’ in the
midst of their Tamil speech. Sometimes these words also register well
in their minds and they use them in their lessons. For these teachers,
the content-oriented degree programme in Tamil is very useful in
equipping them with the Tamil language.
1. ஆசிரியர்: ஆ. .ரம்பம். Teaching voca-

.
bulary. Except
ஆரம்பம் சரி that word, teach-
ஒன்று! சரி இங்க er uses SST
இருந்து
aaciriyar: aa. . rambam. aarambam.
cari, onRu! cari. inka iruntu.
Teacher: aa. . rambam.(starting).
aarambam(starting). Ok.
onru(one). From here. .
2. மாணவர்கள்: ஆ. . . லயம் Teaching voca-
bulary
maaNavarkaL: aa. . layam
Students: aa. . . layam (Temple).

3. ஆசிரியர்: ஆ. . லயம் Teaching
. the
following two
இரண்டு. . இந்த nouns: aa. ...
குரூப்புல இருந்து! layam (Temple).
Irandu (two)...
நிஷாந்;
aaciriyar: aa. . layam. iraNTu. Inta Teacher uses
group-la iruntu! Nishanth Group-la (the
group) instead of
KuRuvula
Teacher Temple. . . Two . . . From
this group. Nishanth.
4. ஆசிரியர்: ஆ. . ப்பம் ஆ. . . Teacher is teach-
140 Lakshmi
ப்பம் ஆ. . ப்பம் ing vocabulary

by repeating
கரக்ட் சரி மூன்று same word.
இங்க இருந்து!
aaciriyar: aa. . ppam. Aa. . .ppam. Mostly teacher
aa…ppam. Correct. cari. uses SST and
moonRu. Inga irundu! one English
word
Teacher Indian pancake. .. Indian aa...ppam (Indian

pancake. . Indian pan pan cake made
cake. . Correct. Three . by rice); muunRu
From here. (three).
Excerpt 7
In Excerpt 7, the teacher mostly uses SST and otherwise she uses
written Tamil terms that are mainly nouns. For example, taaL (paper),
aintee ainntu (only five), onRu (one), iranTu (two), naanku( four), kuru
talaivarkaL (team leaders). Here, they do not use Standard Spoken
Tamil to tell the numbers. It might be their orientation in school and
they continue with that trend without changing to Spoken Spoken
Tamil. Here the teacher needs to be conscious of what he or she is
saying in class, as they are role models for their students. At the same
time, in Singapore teachers also use the term potti for the spoken Ta-
mil term petti, which means box. In the past, people from India came
with a box (trunk) and the whole community called it potti instead of
petti. For paper, they do not use kaayitam as used in Tamil Nadu, but
the WT word taaL. In Tamil, in some places in Singapore, however,
the WT word is used in SST. For example, book is called pustakam in
India. But in Singapore, the WT word, puttakam is used in SST. Cur-
rently, second language educated Tamil youths use the WT words for
SST.
1. ஆசிரியர்: ………ேகள்விெயல்லா Generally

teacher
இல்ல. . . எனக்கு uses SST
அந்தக் குழு except the
terms, ku-
தைலவர்கள் எல்லாம் Ru talai-
வாங்க. குழு varkaL
(team
தைலவர்கள் மட்டும் leaders).
இங்க வாங்க! இைத For the
English
புடி! நிஷந் இருங்க word,
வேர! ேமகான்! இருங்க ‘pencil’, it
is the
வேர! ேமகான்! இருங்க common
வேர! ேமகான்! இப்ப term in
Tamil, too.
உங்க குழு
தைலவர்கள்
ஒங்ககிட்ட ஒரு தாள்
ெகாடுக்கறாங்க.
கைடச்சதா? ேபன்சில்
எடுத்தாச்சா?..
aaciriyar: …………keelviyella illa.
….enakku antak kuRu talaivar-
kaL ellaam vaanka. kuru talaivar-
kaL mattum ingka vaangka! Itai
puTi! Nisanth, irungka vareen!
Mekaan! Irungka vareen! Meekaan
irunka vareen! Meekaan! Ippa ung-
ka kuRu talaivarkaL ongkakitta
oru taaL koTukkiraangka. ka-
Taiccataa? Pencil eTutaaccaa?
Teacher No question. For me the group
leaders only come here. Hold
this. Nishanth, wait, I will
142 Lakshmi
come. Meekaan, wait I will

come. Meekaan, wait I will
come. Now your groupleaders
are giving a paper to you. Have
you received it? Have you tak-
en your pencil?
2. மாணவர்கள்: ஆமா. . .
maaNavarkaL: Aamaa
Students: Yes
3. ஆசிரியர்: ெபயர் எழுதியாச்சா?

சரி. . எழுதறதுக்கு
ஐந்ேத ஐந்து
கணக்குத்தா. .ஒன்று. . .
இரண்டு. . . மூன்று. . .
நான்கு. . ேததி வந்து
பலைகயில இருக்கு.
பாத்தாச்சா?
aaciriyar: peyar eRutiyaaccaa? cari. . . eRuta-
Ratukku aintee aintu kaNakkut-
taa . . onRu… iraNTu . . . muu-
nRu. . . naanku. . . teeti vantu
palakaiyila irukku. paataaccaa?
Teacher Have your written your name?
Ok. You need to write only
five sums. One, two three,
four. .. The date is on the
board. Have you seen it?
Excerpt 8: Use of both varieties in the class

Here the teacher uses the word one which in spoken Tamil as onnu. It
shows that the teacher is able to use both varieties in the class. Also,
she is speaking interestingly to the students. She said, “I haven’t put
appam” which means she hasn’t cooked appam. But the lesson is on
aappam which has a long vowel at the start of the word. But the stu-
dent used the word with the short vowel in front. With her answer,
the student will be able to correct his mistake in pronouncing the
word correctly.
ஆசிரியர்: aaci- ேமகன்! அப்பம் Teacher is

stressing on
riyar: ேபாடைலய நா. . . . ன் long vowel
Teacher:
Mekaan! appam pooTalaya naa. . . for the word,
n appam. appam
Mekaan! I am not cooking ap- is WT and
pam! aappam is SST
மாணவர்கள்: ஆப்பம்!;
maaNavarkaL: aappam
Students: Indian Pancake
Excerpt 9
Here in Excerpt 9, the teacher use the English word to evaluate
whether the students have understood her question. So the teacher
used aaN (male) means boy or girl? The students answered boy. The
excerpt shows that the teacher’s language is the model for the stu-
dents. In this excerpt, the teacher uses WT and the students follow
his style and answering in WT.
1. ஆசிரியர்: ஆண். aaN is word which means

‘male’. Teacher is teaching
ஆண். words starts with vowel,
aaciriyar:
Teacher: ஆண். . aa.
Here she repeats the
னா? Boy girl? word ‘aaN’ and asks the
aaN aaN aaN. students whether the
.naa? Boy, girl? meaning is boy or girl?
144 Lakshmi
Male male
male. .means
Boy or girl?
2. மாணவர்கள்: Boy Students answer, ‘boy’.
Boy
maaNavarkaL:
Boy
Students:
3. ஆசிரியர்: Boy. சரி! Teacher says it is correct.
aaciriyar: Boy. cari
Teacher: Boy. Correct.
Excerpt 10
Tamil teachers are the gate keepers of the language and role models
for the students to use that language. Teachers too understand their
challenges in using SST in class. They sometimes, try to use the literal
translation for the English words in their lessons. If they use it every
day and make it as a regular word for the students to use, then they
will remember it. In Excerpt 10, the teacher used, paLLippai for
school bag (paLLi= school, pai=bag).
1. ஆசிரியர்: சரி உக்காருங்க.

aaciriyar: cari ukkaarunka SST has
Teacher: ok. Sit down been used
2. ஆசிரியர்: சரி எல்லாரும் பள்ளிப் SST has

been used.
ைபைய தைரல Also, literal
வச்சாச்சா? ஓேக. இங்க translation
of
கவனிக்கணும்.
aaciriyar: Cari. Ellaarum pallippaiyai taraila English
vaccaaccaa? Ok. inka kavanikka- term in
Num. Tamil has
been used.
Teacher: Ok. Have you placed your
school bag on the floor? OK.
See here.
Excerpt 11
When students use English words, the teachers ask the class for the
Tamil word or meaning. Through this, the teacher encourages the
class to learn, understand, and use the corresponding Tamil words
for English terms. Here, it is encouraging that students know the
Tamil words for the English words.
1 மாணவி: என் birthday வர Student use

SST and Eng-
மாதிரி இருக்கு lish word
maaNavi:
en birthday vara maatiri iruk- ‘birthday’.
Female student:
ku
It looks like my birthday is
coming
2 ஆசிரிைய: உன்ேனாட birthday Teacher uses
. SST and re-
வர மாதிரி இருக்கா? peats student’s
ஆஹ். . . birthday term, ‘birth-
day’ in Eng-
என்ன lish.
ெசால்லுவாங்க.
aaciriyai: unnooTa birthday vara maatiri At the same
irukkaa? Aah. . birthday time, she asks
enna colvaanka the Tamil
term for
‘birthday’
Teacher: Your birthday is coming?

AAH. How do you say
birthday?
3 மாணவர்கள்: பிறந்த நாள். . Students give
Tamil transla-
maaNavarkaL: பிறந்தநாள். tion for
Students:
piRantanaaL. . piRantanaaL ‘birthday’
Birthday birthday
4 ஆசிரிைய பிறந்தநாள் வரா Teacher
generally uses
146 Lakshmi
மாதிரி இருக்கு SST

உனக்கு. சரி
ஸ்ேவதா
aaciriyai: piRantanaaL varaa maatiri
irukku unakku cari Sweetha
Teacher: It looks like a birthday is
coming to you. Correct,
Sweetha.
Excerpt 12
Teacher’s encouragement and advice is helpful to students to speak
Tamil during the group activity. Here the teacher told them to speak
Tamil during the group activity.
1. ஆசிரியர் நீங்க வந்து ஆஹ். . Generally

the
இல்ல. அந்த teacher is
ேபர்கைளயும், அந்த using
SST
படங்கைளயும் வந்து
ஒட்டப் ேபாறீங்க.
சரியா?...............................
ஒரு எழுத்த இந்த
மாதிரி ஒட்ட
ேவண்டும். சரியா? எந்த
குழு சரியா ெசய்றாங்க?
முதல்ல ெசஞ்சி
முடிக்கிறீங்க.
அப்படின்னு நா
பார்க்கப் ேபாேறன்.
ஆனா ெராம்ப
முக்கியமா நீங்க என்ன

ெமாழில ேபசணும்.
aaciriyar: niinga vantu Aah illa. anta
peerkaLaiyum, anta
paTankalLaiyum vantu
ottappooriinka. cariyaa? . . . . . . . .
.oru eRutta inta maatiri otta
veenTum., cariyaa? enta kuRu
cariyaa ceiRaanka? mutalla cenci
muTikkiRaanka. appaTinnu naa
paarkkapooReen. Aana rompa
mukkiyamaa niinga enna moRila
peecaNum.
Teacher: You are all going to paste the
names and pictures. Ok. You
have to paste one letter like
this. First you do it. Then I will
see how you are going to com-
plete the task. But, very impor-
tant, you have to talk in which
language?
2. மாணவர்கள்: தமிழ்
maaNavarkaL: tamiR
Students: Tamil
3. ஆசிரியர்: தமிழ்ல ேபசணும்.
அப்புறம் சண்ட
ேபாடக்கூடாது.
பாரக்கலாம்.
aaciriyar: tamiRla peecaNum. appuRam
canTai pooTakkuuTatu.
paarkkaalaam.
Teacher: Speak in Tamil. Then, don’t
fight. Let’s see.
148 Lakshmi
Excerpt 13
Excerpt 13 demonstrates Tamil students who are able to speak in
SST to the Tamil teacher. The students answered well in Tamil.
1. மாணவர்: நரி வந்து ஒரு மிருகம். Teacher

and stu-
maaNavar: அத வட்ல
ீ வளக்க dents speak
student:
முடியாது. in SST
nari vantu oru mirukam. ata viitla
vaLakka muTiyaatu.
Fox is an animal. We could not rear
it at home.
2. ஆசிரியர்: ஏன் அத வட்ல

ீ வளக்க
முடியாது? நரியும்
aaciriyar:
Teacher: அழகாதாேன இருக்கு?
een ata viitla vaLakka muTiyaatu?
nariyum aRakaataanee irukku?
Why couldn’t we rear it at home? It
also looks pretty.
3. மாணவர்: நரி அழகா இல்ேல

maaNavar: Nari aRakaa illee
Student: Fox is not pretty
4. ஆசிரியர் அழகா இல்ைலயா?
aaciriyar: aRakaa illaiyaa?
Teacher: Not pretty?
5. மாணவர்: ஆனா நரி அழகாேவ

இருக்கு ஆனா அழகா
இல்ல. ஏன்னா நரி வந்து
கருப்பு நிறத்துல இருக்கு.
maaNavar:
எனக்கு கருப்பு நிறம்
புடிக்காது.
Student:
aanaa nari aRakaave irukku.
aanaa aRakaa illa. eennaa nari
vantu karuppu nittula irukku.
enakku karuppu niram puTikkaatu.
But fox is pretty. But not pretty.
Because fox is black. I don’t like
black.
6. ஆசிரியர்: கருப்புற நிறத்துல
இர்க்றதால உனக்கு
aaciriyar: பிடிக்காதா? சரி முக்கியமா
ஏன் நரிய வட்ல
ீ வளக்க
Teacher:
முடியாது.
karuppu nirattula irkkRataala unakku
piTikkaataa? cari. mukkiyamaa een
nariya viitla vaLakka muTiyaatu
You do not like it because it is in
black. Ok, why we could not rear
the fox at home?
7. மாணவர்: கடிக்கும். அதுக்கு வந்து
maaNavar: ெராம்ப கூரான பல்லு
Student:
kaTikkum. atukku vantu romba
kuuraana pallu
it will bite. it has very sharp teeth.
8. ஆசிரியர்: கூரான பல்லு, சரி
aaciriyar: kuuraana pallu. cari.
Teacher: Sharp teeth. Ok.
9. மாணவர் ெராம்ப பயமா இருக்கும்
maaNavar romba payamaa irukkum
Student: Very scary
150 Lakshmi
Excerpt 14
When asked about the students’ Standard Spoken language in Tamil
class, Primary school teachers told that generally they have to teach
SST to some students who are from English-speaking homes.
Among them, some have studied Tamil in kindergarten and they have
known WT. Students from Tamil speaking homes are able to speak
in Tamil language. Excerpt 14 shows that teachers are the role mod-
els for their students. If they start speaking in SST, students will fol-
low them and for those who need, teacher can provide help.
இப்ேபா பிள்ைளங்க நல்லா தமிழ்

ஆசிரியர்1:
ேபசுறாங்க. வட்டுல
ீ அப்பா அம்மா
ேபசுனா இன்னும் நல்லாயிருக்கும்.
இப்ேபா இருக்கற பாடபுத்தகமும்
நடவடிக்ைகங்களும் ஒதவியா
aaciriyar 1: இருக்கு
ippoo piLLainka nalla tamiR peecRraanka. viittula appaa,

ammaa peecunaa innum nallyirukkum. ippoo irukkaRa
Teacher 1: paaTaputtakamu naTavaTikkainkaLu otaviyaa irukku
Now children are speaking Tamil well. If father,

mother speak Tamil at home, it will be more good.
Current text books and activities also helpful.
ஆசிரியர்2: நாமளும் மாணவர்கேளாட நல்லா

ஆர்வமா ேபசுனா பிள்ைளகளும்
சந்ேதாசமா ேபசுவாங்க வகுப்பைற
நல்லாருக்கும். தமிழ்ல ேபச
aaciriyar 2: முடியாதவங்களுக்கு ஆங்கிலத்துல

ெசால்லித் தமிழ்ல ேகப்ேபன்
naamaLum maaNavarkaLooTa nallaa aarvamaa pee-

cunaa piLLaikaLum canttoocama peecuvaanka. va-
Teacher 2: kuppaaRai nallayirukkum. tamiRla peeca muTiyaata-
vankaLukku aankilattula collittamiRla keeppeen
If we talk to the students with interest, they too
speak happily. Class is also fun. For students who
cannot speak in English, I will teach in English and
later ask them to tell it in Tamil.
The teacher also needs to use differentiated instructional approach to

teach SST to different groups of students. However, during group
activities, the native speakers who are expatriate Tamil students pro-
vided assistance to the other students to learn and understand SST.
With the movie clips, local Singaporean Tamil dramas, and television
programmes, teachers can infuse interest in listening and speaking
SST among students.
Generally, we find that both the teacher and the students use SST.
Both groups are doing well and enjoying the language in the class.
However, the teacher is the role model for the students’ language use.
English words are there when the class or teacher is not sure about
the correct Tamil word. The students are confident in answering the
teacher and expressing their opinions and are able to self-correct
their pronunciation or vocabulary. The teacher regularly clarifies her
comments and students’ answers so that students understand the les-
son. This is a positive trend in the Tamil class as the teacher moti-
vates students and enables them to speak freely (Pohan, 2003; Zeich-
ner, 1993) while meeting the objectives of the lesson.
After the 2005 Tamil language curriculum and pedagogy review

committee’s report, SST play an important role in the Tamil class-
room. From 2008 onwards, the new syllabus, textbooks, and teacher
training provided scaffolding to SST in Tamil classrooms. Communi-
ty organizations and media played additional roles to encourage and
educate the community to use Tamil at home and public domains
when they meet another Tamil. Through this, there is a greater
awareness and strong impact in the students Tamil language use in
152 Lakshmi
Tamil classrooms. However, there still are some doubts and confu-
sion among teachers, parents and students.
Several other observations that emerge during the study:

 When students do not know a Tamil word, they tend to use the
English term.
 Expatriate students are resourceful in carrying on sustained con-
versations in SST.
 Teachers are generally keen on using SST during oral discussions,
but at times they use English or WT. Teachers who have recently
completed pre-service and in-service training consciously use SST
in their class with fewer WT and English terms.
 Among secondary school teachers, SST is used in nearly 80% of
all classroom interactions, while 20% of the discourse is con-
ducted in WT. The lessons are mostly focused on examinations
with heavy content and archaic language. In one primary school
Tamil class, the teacher used a large number of WT terms be-
cause the students had been most exposed to that variety.
 WT terms are most often used when teachers repeat their stu-
dents’ answers.
 When teachers use ICT, interesting stories and task-based activi-
ties, students are happy to speak in SST variety.
 Scaffolding and use of prior knowledge encourages students to
speak in SST.
 Teachers use code mixing when they would like to facilitate dis-
cussion with the students without disturbing the flow of the les-
son. Students use code mixing when they do not know the cor-
rect Tamil word for the particular English noun or verb.
 Some teachers incorporated colloquial terms in their discourse.
The author interviewed some of the students for this study. When
she asked them about the use of SST in the Tamil class, the students
said that they were happy to use it and they hoped to do well in their
written examinations which are generally given in WT. The first co-
hort that had gone through the new syllabus and curriculum materials
sat for their Primary School Leaving Examination in 2010. The re-
sults of their MTL Examination have shown the impact of SST use
in the classrooms. After the release of the results, the teachers were
interviewed by the author. They said that they were happy with the
results. At the lower primary classes, it is obvious that students are
happy to use SST in class especially when there is good rapport and
understanding between teachers and students. However, the students
wish to use the Internet, iPad, iBook and Web 2.0 instead of paper-
based materials for their lessons. In addition, they would like to have
the lessons using age-related themes such as rap singers, movie ac-
tors, young leaders, meaningful Tamil cultural practices, traditional
celebrations, Tamil youngsters from Tamil diaspora communities and
their ideal people from various domains instead of ancient kings, se-
rious science and culture-based lessons. For lower primary students,
they prefer more stories, songs, animated movies and prior know-
ledge based lessons.
Conclusion and Recommendations

After the in-depth emphasis for SST adoption in teacher training and
the implementation of the Review Committee Report (MOE 2005),
there has been a development and positive impact on the use of SST
in Tamil classrooms. With the constant use of both SST and WT,
students will be able to understand the differences between the two
varieties and develop their skills in both varieties. For that, it is im-
perative to use SST in the written form instead of WT. When it
comes to stories and speech bubbles, textbooks need to have a dif-
ferent script for SST and it will add value in the learning of Tamil. In
the Tamil class, the dialogic teaching (Alexander, 2010) and constant
engagement with the content has to be developed for students to de-
velop higher-order skills and vocabulary. For that, authentic task-
based teaching and learning is essential. Introducing authentic activi-
ties and authentic assessment (Gopinathan, 2000) will help students
to learn about their ethnicity, culture and language. If teachers use
authentic task-based teaching and encourage task-based learning, the
use of SST will increase as there are no opportunities for Tamil stu-
dents to use their SST in the multilingual community. Also, as Senior
Minister of State, Ministry of Trade and Industry and Ministry of
Education Mr Iswaran (2010) mentioned, many students come from
English-speaking homes. They have opportunities to use SST in their
classroom only. In that classroom too, it is inevitable to provide sup-
154 Lakshmi
port to the students’ vocabulary to build their confidence in using

Tamil. Hence, teachers need to provide ample input and supportive
opportunities to their students. The Tamil syllabus also needs to be
changed to include pictures, discussions, and culture that encourage
the use of listening and oral skills.
Tamil in Singapore needs to develop a niche for itself. The ecology

of Tamil language teaching and learning in the past 20 years shows
that the educational community in Singapore is changing towards the
teaching of a second language. Yet some students are having difficul-
ty in speaking in SST because of English speaking home background.
Here it is time to profile them based on their home language and
provide them more help to find fun in speaking SST. With the con-
tinued support from the government, constant effort from the teach-
ers, and encouragement to the students, we can assure that Tamil
language will be a living language in Singapore. Through this, Singa-
pore can develop itself as a hub for second language teaching and
learning for Tamil and provide its experience and expertise to the
Tamil diaspora in the United States, Europe, Australia and New
Zealand.
Acknowledgments
I would like to express my sincere thanks to Prof Renu Gupta for her
guidance, advice and continuous encouragement in reorganising the
paper despite her busy academic research schedule. Special thanks
also go to Prof Vanithamani Saravanan for her continuous support
and guidance. My sincere thanks to the anonymous reviewers for
their advice and comments for the improvement of this paper. Lastly,
I would like to express my gratitude to the Centre for Research in
Pedagogy and Practice and the Office of Educational Research, Na-
tional Institute of Education, Singapore for the research funding
through research grants CRP 10/06 SL and OER 47/08 MS.
References
Agasthialingom, S., (2008, April). Standard Spoken Tamil. Personal

communication.
Alexander, R. (2010). Speaking but not listening? Accountable talk in
an unaccountable
context. Literacy, 43, 103-111.
Annamalai E. (2006). In L. Seetha, V. Vaish, S. Gopinathan, & V.
Saravanan (2006). A critical review of the Tamil language syllabus
and recommendations for syllabus revision- Research Project Report.
Singapore: National Institute of Education, Centre for Re-
search in Pedagogy and Practice.
Annamalai, E. (2009). Spoken Tamil. In L. Seetha & V. Saravanan.
(Eds.), Standard Spoken Tamil and Pedagogy (pp. ix-xiv). Singa-
pore, Singapore: Pasumpon Publications.
Annamalai, E. (2011). Social Dimensions of Modern Tamil. India: Cre-A.
Britto, F. (1986). Diglossia. A study of the theory with application to Tamil.
Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
Asher, R. E. (1982). Tamil. Lingua Descriptive Series. Amsterdam: North
Holland Publishing Co.
Pohan, C.A. (2003). Creating caring and democratic communities in
our classrooms and schools. Childhood Education, 79, 369-393.
Zeichner, K. M. (1993). Educating Teachers for Cultural Diversity
(NCRTL Special Report). MI: National Center for Research on
Teacher Learning.
http://education.msu.edu/NCRTL/PDFs/NCRTL/SpecialReports/
sr293.pdf
Snow, D. (1996). More Than a Native Speaker: An Introduction for Volun-

teers Teaching English Abroad Rev. Ed., (p. 16). Alexandria, VA:
TESOL.
Emmitt, M., Pollock, J., & Komesaroff, L. (2003). Language and learn-
ing: An introduction for teaching. Australia: Oxford Press.
Ferguson, C. A. (1972). Diglossia. Language in education: A source book
(pp. 38-45). London: Routledge & Kagan Paul.
Goh, Y. S. (2007). English Language Use in Chinese Language Teaching as a
Second Language: Making the Most of the Learner’s Linguistic Re-
source. In V. Vaish, S. Gopinathan, & Y. Liu (Eds.), Language,
156 Lakshmi
Capital, Culture: Critical Studies of Language and Education in Sin-

gapore (pp. 119-132). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers,
Gopinathan, S. (2000, November). Challenges for Mother Tongue Teaching
and Learning in the New Millennium. Plenary address presented
at the seminar Let Us Make Learning and Teaching Tamil an
Interesting Experience in Singapore, Singapore.
Gopinathan, S., & Saravanan, V. ( 2003). Education and Identity Is-
sues in the Internet Age: The Case of the Indians in Singa-
pore. In M. Charney, & B. S. A. Yeoh, & C. K. Tong (Eds.),
Asian Migrants and Immigration: The Tensions of Education in Immi-
grant Societies and Among Migrant Groups (pp. 32-51). Amster-
dam: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Iswaran, S. (2010, June). Speech. Presented at the Inauguration of the
9th Tamil Internet Conference, Coimbatore. Retrieved from
http://www.news.gov.sg/public/sgpc/en/media_releases/a
gencies/moe/speech/S-20100624-1.
Mahizhnan, A. (1996). Report of the Tamil Education Review Committee,
Singapore: SINDA.
Masagos Zulkifli. (2009). Speech. Presented at the UniSIM. Retrieved
from
http://www1.sim.edu.sg/sim/pub/gen/sim_pub_gen_conte
nt.cfm?mnuid=323&id =3782.
Mihyon, J. (2008). Korean Heritage Language Maintenance and Lan-
guage Ideology.
Heritage Language Journal, 6(2). 54-71.
Ministry of Education. (2002). Speech by Minister on Schools 2011. Re-
trieved from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/speeches/2002/sp21052002
b_print.htm
Ministry of Education. (2004). Chinese Language Curriculum and Pedagogy
Review Committee Report (CLCPRC Report), Singapore.
Ministry of Education. (2005). Tamil Language Curriculum and Pedagogy
Review Committee Report (TLCPRC Report), Singapore.
Ministry of Education. (2005).Malay Language Curriculum and Pedagogy
Review Committee Report (MLCPRC Report), Singapore.
Ministry of Education. (2008). 2008 Syllabus Tamil Language Primary.
Curriculum Planning and Development Division, Singapore.
Ministry of Education. (2009). Teachers — The Heart of Quality Educa-

tion. Press Release. Singapore: Ministry of Education. Re-
trieved from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/2009/09/teachers-
the-heart-of-quality.php.
Ministry of Education. (2011). Nurturing Active Learners and Proficient
Users. 2010 Mother Tongue Languages Review Committee
Report. Singapore: Ministry of Education. Retrieved from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/files/2011/mtl-review-report-
2010.pdf.
Ministry of Education. (2012). School Information Service. Retrieved
from http://app.sis.moe.gov.sg/schinfo/SIS_index.asp.
Mohamed Aidil Subhan bin Mohamed Sulor (2007). Planning for
Malay Language In Education: Lessons of History & Present
Ecology.
In Y. B. Liu, V. Vaish, & S. Gopinathan, (Eds.), Language, Capital and
Culture: Critical Studies of Language in Education in Singapore. (pp.
157-174).Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Nadaraja P. N. (2006). In L. Seetha, V. Vaish, S. Gopinathan, & V.
Saravanan (2006). A critical review of the Tamil language syllabus
and recommendations for syllabus revision- Research Project Report.
Nalluraj, S. (2012, January). Personal communication. Singapore.
Ng, E.H. (2009, December). Speech. Presented at the 12th Appoint-
ment Ceremony for Principals, Singapore. Retrieved from:
http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/speeches/2009/12/29/spee
ch-by-dr-ng-eng-hen-at-the-35.php.
Rajendran, N. S.(2006) In L. Seetha, V. Vaish, S. Gopinathan, & V.
Saravanan. A critical review of the Tamil language syllabus and rec-
ommendations for syllabus revision- Research Project Report. Singa-
pore: National Institute of Education, Centre for Research in
Pedagogy and Practice.
Ramiah, K. (1991).The pattern of Tamil language use among primary
school pupils in Singapore. Singapore Journal of Education, 11(2),
45–53.
Ramiah, K. (1998). A Study of the Errors made by students in Tamil Lan-
guage. Singapore.
158 Lakshmi
Ramiah,K. & Seetha,L. (Eds.) (2002). Teaching and Learning of Tamil

Language through Mass Media. Singapore: Tamil Art Printers.
Saravanan, V. (1993). Language and Social Identity Amongst Tamil-
English Bilinguals in Singapore. Language, Culture and Curricu-
lum. 6(3). 275-290.
Saravanan, V. (1989). Variation in Singapore Tamil English. (Unpub-
lished doctoral dissertation). Monash University, Australia.
Saravanan, V. (1998). Language Maintenance and Language Shift in
the Tamil-English Community. In Language, Society and Educa-
tion in Singapore: Issues and Trends, 2nd ed. Times Academic
Press.
Saravanan, V. (2001). The significance of bilingual Chinese, Malay
and Tamil children’s English network patterns on community
language use patterns. Early Child Development and Care, 166,
81–91.
Saravanan, V., Lakshmi, S. & Caleon, I. (2007). Attitudes towards
literary Tamil and standard spoken Tamil in Singapore. Inter-
national Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(1), 58–
79.
Schiffman, H. F. (1998). Standardization and Restandardization: the
case of Spoken Tamil. Language in Society, 27(3), 359-385.
Schiffman. H. F. (1979). A Grammar of Spoken Tamil (pp. i-viii, 1-104).
Madras: Christian Literature Society.
Schiffman. H. F. (1995). Language shift in the Tamil communities of
Malaysia and Singapore: The paradox of Egalitarian language
policy. In G. Bills (Ed.), Language loss and public policy, Southwest
Journal of Linguistics, 14(1-2).
Schiffman, H. F. (1998). Standardization or restandardization: The
case for “Standard” Spoken Tamil. Language in Society, 27,
359–385.
Schiffman, H. F. (1999). A Reference Grammar of Spoken Tamil. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schiffman, H, F. (2002). Tongue-tied in Singapore: A language policy
for Tamil? Journal of Language, Identity and Education, 2(2), 105–
125.
Schiffman, H, F. (2008). Tamil language policy in Singapore: The role
of implementation. Language, capital, culture: Critical studies of
language in education in Singapore (pp. 209–226). Rotterdam:

Sense Publishers.
Schiffman, H. F. (Ed.) 2010. An English Dictionary of the Tamil
Verb. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.
Seetha, L., Vaish, V., Gopinathan, S., & Saravanan, V. (2006). A criti-
cal review of the Tamil language syllabus and recommendations for sylla-
bus revision- Research Project Report. Singapore: National Institute
of Education, Centre for Research in Pedagogy and Practice.
Seetha, L., Saravanan, V. (2009). Standard Spoken Tamil and Pedagogy.
Singapore: Pasumpon Publications.
Shegar, C., & Ridzuan A. R. (2005). Tamil Language Instruction in Singa-
pore: A Preliminary Report of findings of classroom pedagogical practice-
Research Project Report. Singapore: Centre for Research in Peda-
gogy and Practice, National Institute of Education.
Tamil teaching to undergo revamp. (February 20, 2000). The Strait
Times, p. 28.
When it is cool to say ‘Vanakkam’. (November 25, 2000). The Straits
Times, p. H14.
Thinnappan, S. P. (2006). In L. Seetha, V. Vaish, S. Gopinathan, &
V. Saravanan (2006). A critical review of the Tamil language sylla-
bus and recommendations for syllabus revision- Research Project Report.
Tan, J. (2002). Education in the Early 21st Century: Challenges and Dilem-
mas. In D. da Cunha (Ed.), Singapore in the New Millennium:
Challenges Facing the City-State (pp. 154-186). Singapore: Insti-
tute of Southeast Asian Studies.
Vaish, V. (2007). Bilingualism without Diglossia: The Indian Com-
munity in Singapore. International Journal of Bilingual Education
and Bilingualism, 10(2), 171-187.
Wiley, T. G., (2001). On defining heritage languages and their speak-
ers. In J. K. Peyton, D. A. Ranard, & S. McGinnis (Eds.), Her-
itage languages in America: Preserving a national resource (pp. 29-36).
Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta
Systems.
Yeo, G. (1998, September). Speech (Delivered in Mandarin). Pre-
sented at The 1998 Speak Mandarin Campaign Launch, Sin-
gapore. Retrieved from
160 Lakshmi
http://www.mandarin.org.sg/index.php?option=com_conte
nt&view=article&id=108%3Aminister-george-yeo-
1998&catid=54%3Aofficial-speeches-1984-
2005&Itemid=63&lang=en.

The Impact of Standard Spoken Tamil in Singapore Tamil Classrooms

Uploaded by

The Impact of Standard Spoken Tamil in Singapore Tamil Classrooms

Uploaded by

The Impact of Standard Spoken Tamil in Singapore

Language maintenance presents several long-term problems for mi-

Eurasians, the language of instruction in schools and universities is

However, the situation is complicated by the fact that some degree of

As earlier mentioned, students in Singapore study two languages,

In Singapore, the three mother tongue languages (MTLs) are offered

community, the Ministers and social leaders wish to produce more

Teaching the MTLs in Singapore is a challenging task as more and

“Since the 1980s, more of our Prima-

In this multicultural and multilingual situation, teaching has to ad-

As a minority community in Singapore, the Tamils and Tamil lan-

Within spoken Tamil, Schiffman (1998) has identified a variety

In contrast, Written Tamil (WT) is used in formal situations and in

In Tamil Nadu, a few major varieties of Tamil language are used. WT

derstood by a person who is able to read Tamil. The Literary level

Standard Spoken Tamil as a Model for Language Usage

A very small percentage of Tamils in Singapore use colloquial Tamil

term for kottikkoo is caappiTu which means eat. In classrooms too,

In Singapore, the SST variety is used at home, in the community,

A child’s early exposure to Tamil would result in early acquisition of

The MOE Singapore (2005:14) which strongly encourages the use of

enakku paNam veeNTum (WT)

avar mikavum nallavar (WT)

c. Did you sell your house?

niinkaL unkaL viittai viRRuvittiirkaLaa? (WT)

In the above examples, there is no structural difference between the

Example 1: Mother is going to the shop

by students in their teens. Lastly, a non-standard spoken Tamil vari-

Mother is going to the shop

Mazhinan (1996:31), chairman of Tamil Education Review Commit-

“From scholars to the man in the

public speaking and broadcasting. The

In Singapore, the Spoken Tamil has been standardised by the com-

Spoken Tamil includes all spoken varieties of Tamil language includ-

As an insider in Singapore Tamil classrooms, I overheard the follow-

Example 2: Colloquial Tamil

2. We won’t eat anything in the night

In no. 1, Example 2, kottikoonka is the colloquial term for the phrase

The Tamil Community in Singapore

Among parents, there is growing concern that children spend more

Tamil students have few opportunities to use the language outside

Without ready and free access to Tamil language in computing and

Reviews of the Mother Tongue Language (MTL) Curriculum

In 1996, the Singapore Indian Development Association (SINDA)

be made to build on the strengths of the measures already in place.

Researchers have provided feedback that spoken language should be

nity to complement these efforts. Greater emphasis was recommend-

Teachers’ understanding of spoken and written Tamil is critical, for

During formal interviews and informal discussions with the Tamil

aminations such as the PSLE (Primary Six Leaving Examination).

Compared to previous years, there is now significant progress in the

The Use of SST in Singapore

where the literary form is emphasized. Hence, students from English-

In speaking or oratorical competitions organized by various Tamil

Language Varieties used in Tamil Classrooms

cultural knowledge, younger novice teachers tend to follow their les-

During group activities, students tend to speak in English even

Example 3: WT and SST mix

2. He gave it to him without eating. He will always promote good

3. It did not benefit

4. I think it is showing the king. Aang.

Primary School Lesson Excerpts

1. ஆசிரியர் வணக்கம் நாம் இப்ெபாழுது Generally

virumpukiRoom. niingkal aneekamaaka

2. மாணவர் அதுதான் சுனாமி. Teacher

3. ஆசிரியர் ம்…. சுனாமி. இந்த சுனாமி Teacher

aasiriyar m. . cunaami. inda cunaami enRu colla-

5. ஆசிரியர்: இந்ேதாேனசியாவிேல WT only

sia. Okay. From there, the natural

6. மாணவர்: ஸ்ரீலங்கா. Country’s

1. ஆசிரியர்: ேபான வாரம் என்ன Teacher

2. மாணவர்கள்: form fill up பன்ேனாம் Students

3. ஆசிரியர்: ஆமா form up Teacher

1. மாணவர் என்னா ஆசிரியர், இன்னிக்கு Fluent use

Student Teacher, today what is the name of the lesson

1. மாணவர்: நீங்கதான் ஆசிரியராச்ேச, Fluent use