Dormouse559 wrote: ↑
02 Jan 2019 16:51
Then I'll return to your assertion about how native speakers of English are defined. You were talking about the whole world. Given the U.S. is part of the whole world, and one of the largest concentrations of native English speakers in the whole world, it stands as a large counterexample to the idea that native speakership of English is determined by race.
Certli mi vou no sei ki nativo spikis is countee bai ras. E certli lis counta neblank USis as nativo spikis, si dat is su nativo lingua. I ha sei ki normali wen lis sei ki la numero de 330 tu 360 milion inglishe nativo spikis as hir: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-speaking_world
, lis refere tu landes as USA, UK, Australia, ma no landes as Kenya o Naijiria. Tais is mencionet in el article oso, ma plu sub, as spikis de "dialecto continumes" af inglish, "ranging from english baseed creole to standard english". In Naijiria multi pople solo spik a sorte creol o pidjin, mas in Est Africa e specialik in Sud Africa in landes as Zambia o Zimbabwe inglish is certli super plus izi tu comprend (auminu tu mi) e plu nire tu standard inglishe dan el inglishe ki some scotis o pople in Nord Ingland spik. So lis ignore no ta landes na statisticas coze lis is neblank, lis fa lu coz in ta landes lis spik no standard inglish o coze lis hav a paralelo nativo lingua, wat is no la caz in multi caz, coze na mega citis pople veni de diferente regiones na land e mus comunica na coloniale lingua, so su kidis spik la coloniale lingua na dom, o su maipai spik un africano lingua ma la kidis mus spik la coloniale lingua co la vizinis. La facto ki lis is neblank is rader a coinsidens, mi supon.
I certainly wouldnt say that native english speakers are counted by race. And certainly they count non-white americans as native speakers, if english is their native language. I was saying that usually when they say the number of 330 to 360 million of english native speakers as here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-speaking_world
, they refer to countries like the USA, UK, Australia, but not countries like Kenya or Nigeria. These are mentioned in the article, too, but further down, as speakers of "dialect continua" of english, "ranging from english based creole to standard english". In Nigeria many people only speak some sort of creole or pidgin, but in East Africa and especially in Southern Africa in countries like Zambia or Zimbabwe or Botswana their english is certainly much easier to understand (at least for me) and nearer to standard english than the english spoken say by some scots or people in Northern England. So they dont ignore these countries in the statistics because they're non-white, they do it because in those countries they dont speak standard english or because they have a parallel native language, which isnt the case in many cases, since in the big cities people come from different regions in the country and have to communicate in the colonial language, so their children speak the colonial language at home, or maybe they hear their african language at home from the parents but have to talk to their neighbors in the colonial language. The fact that they're non-white is rather a coincidence, i guess.