In Singapore Colloquial English (aka “Singlish”) there is a linguistic construction I like to call the “is one” construction. Basically this is an “is”, followed by a statement, followed by “one”, typically used to assert the agency of the subject of the statement. E.g., one might say,

“Is he say one, (not me)!”
To mean, “It is he who said it, (not me)!”

Or “Is the cat eat one, (not the dog)!”
To mean, “It is the cat that ate it, (not the dog)!”

#linguistics #Singlish #bilingualism, 1/7

The “is” can be left out entirely, in which case what is being asserted is the statement in its entirety. For example,

“Discuss before one! (Don’t remember meh?)”
Meaning, “This has been discussed before! (Don’t you remember?)”

The operative word is “one”, which is what signifies this asserting or emphasising modality.

#linguistics #Singlish #bilingualism, 2/7

The origins of this construction is not a mystery. One can observe an almost identical construction in Mandarin Chinese:

“是他说的,(不是我!)”
[be] [3rd person singular] [say] [的], [negation][be][1st person singular]
Meaning, “It is he who said it, (not me)!”

What I want to know is, how did “one” in English come to take on the function of 的 in Mandarin Chinese?

#linguistics #Singlish #bilingualism, 3/7

的 is used in other constructions, such as those signifying belonging,

“她的猫。”
[3rd person singular][的][cat]
”Her cat”

As well as relative clauses, where it functions similar to the relative pronouns “that” or “which” in English:

“他煮的汤很好喝。”
[3rd person singular][cook][的][soup][very][good][eat]
“The soups that he cooks are very good to eat.”

#linguistics #Singlish #bilingualism, 4/7

I want to state the question this way: What semantic (or pragmatic?) properties do “one” and “的” share that prompted early Chinese speakers of English in Singapore to extend the assertive meaning of the latter to the former?

I might be misapplying some terminology. I haven’t been a linguistics major in almost a decade.

#linguistics #Singlish #bilingualism, 5/7

(There is an argument that the “one” in the Singlish construction is not actually “one” but the sound “wan”. I don’t like this argument because it takes us nowhere. Of all the possible sounds English-Mandarin bilingual speakers can produce, why “wan” specifically? It bears no phonetic resemblance to 的, nor to any other pragmatic particle in Mandarin I can think of…

#linguistics #Singlish #bilingualism, 6/7

Anecdotally, I have also observed “one” indeed spelt “one” while employed in this construction, suggesting that this equivalence is real in the minds of at least some speakers.)

#linguistics #Singlish #bilingualism, 7/7

@wzhkevin
Is it functioning approximately like の in Japanese (or "n[o] desu"?)

Borrowing "one" from English, I think maybe it might be borrowing from the usage like "it's not this one, it's that one", "It's the one that..."?

@petealexharris Hmmm. I don’t know enough about Japanese to say. You might be onto something with “it’s not this one, it’s that one,” though. 🧐
@petealexharris Hmmm. I’m looking “のです” up, and at least superficially it does sound similar. Are you think this is a structure that might have entered Japanese from Chinese as well?
@wzhkevin Who knows. I don't know anything about early Japanese and I know almost nothing about modern Japanese 😀
@wzhkevin @petealexharris Japanese の is equivalent to Chinese 的. On Chinese social media the character の is often used instead of 的, because it looks cooler.
@petealexharris @manvanaarde That’s interesting. I didn’t know this. And do you think most people are aware it’s a character borrowed from Japanese? Is there any tension at all because it’s Japanese?
@wzhkevin @petealexharris
Yes, Chinese people know this is a Japanese character. And no, I have seen no tension because of that. In fact, many younger Chinese people are in love with Japanese (and Korean) pop culture.
@petealexharris @manvanaarde Ah. I seem to recall there was some criticism of this by nationalists: Japan because of the war, Korea something about K-Pop having some kind of “effeminising” influence, and both because they are western allies. But I don’t know how prevalent these criticisms really are or the degree to which they are taken seriously.
@wzhkevin @petealexharris Sure, but that's mostly politics. And unless it affects them personally, or sentiments are being whipped up, the vast majority of people do not care about that.

@manvanaarde @wzhkevin
I didn't know hiragana の was being borrowed in Mandarin, but yeah it is one of the more aesthetically pleasing ones so why not. English should borrow it too.

I had read it was being used in a Taiwanese language because Chinese characters don't have a good alternative for a particle with similar use.
https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=8922

Language Log » No character for the most frequent morpheme in Taiwanese

@petealexharris @wzhkevin As the top comment there shows, there *are* Chinese characters that fit. The people just think the Japanese ones look cool. And I get it—Chinese characters are very angular.
@manvanaarde @petealexharris To be fair I think の is particularly pleasing to look at. And a few other kana are cute too. や looks like a giraffe to me, and ひ is like a cheeky smile, which is appropriate since it is pronounced sort of like “heeee”
@manvanaarde @wzhkevin
Maybe, but in the Taiwanese case it's being used to write a different language and the corresponding Chinese character used in Mandarin has a different reading, so it might be slightly different scenario.
@wzhkevin
Maybe they may be phrasing it according to the grammar of other language groups in Singapore?

@wzhkevin This is similar to how people use “only" in Indian colloquial English. Your examples would translate to:

He only said it.
The cat only ate it.

I suspect this come from the influence of Indic languages that have similar sentence structures.