There are about 320 million people worldwide whose first language is English. It is about 450 million people's second language, and there are around a billion people who understand it (The Sunday Times Word Power supplement 1993 part 3). However, all these people do not speak an invariant unchanging identical language. English has spread worldwide and with it, more and more variations have been derived. In this essay I will mainly focus on spatial variations of English. I will focus on English as it is used today, although it must be appreciated that the language is changing all the time. The three main areas in which there is variation are, as said by Paul Kerswill in his article "Language Variation and its Social Function" (updated January 2004), phonetic variation, grammatical variation and discourse strategies. These are what I will be concentrating on in this essay. Equality is the other main issue in this essay. As David Crystal says "part of the problem is that the word 'equal' needs to be used very carefully. We do not know how to quantify language"1. I will however, use the following definition that I have concluded from the definitions I have read in research: Varieties are equal if they all have the same amount of success communicating the social and psychological needs of the communicator to the receiver. Nevertheless, this definition is not without its problems, as will be discussed in the essay. The phrase 'Good English' has been used increasingly over the last few decades as new varieties of language have been coined such as 'text-language' and the non-standard spelling, grammar and syntax used in e-mails. "You are reminded of the necessity for good English and orderly presentation in your answers,"2 a sentence appearing on the front of A-level exam papers; "Speaks good English," a sentence frequently used to describe people, especially foreigners. These are just a few examples, and although we know what is meant by the sentences, are we really sure of what 'Good English' is, and would it mean that anything else is 'bad English'? This would mean that varieties of English are not equal and that there is a definite distinction between 'good' and 'bad'. Good English is stereotypically defined as using standard forms of the language (SE) and Received Pronunciation (RP). Received Pronunciation is defined as "The accent associated with upper-class speakers of English". Standard English is defined as "The vocabulary and grammar associated with educated users of the language". It seems from these definitions that the variety of language is defined by its user: 'upper class speakers' and 'educated users', which are often socially seen to go hand in hand. Neither SE nor RP indicate the speaker's regional origin. However, they do seem to suggest social class. They are the most prestigious form of English promoted by education and used in government, law and the media. SE is the most widely understood form of English but is used by only a minority of those who understand it and estimations tell us that only 3% of the population now speak pure RP. Standard English is what prescriptivists say we should all conform to. "Tongues, like Governments, have a natural tendency to degeneration: we have long preserved our constitution, let us make some struggle for our language" (Dr. Samuel Johnson, preface to A Dictionary of the English Language)3 Prescriptivists, like Dr. Johnson, see the need for a known distinction between correct and incorrect forms of English. They would argue for inequality in varieties of English, saying that the prestigious SE and RP are better than non-standard English and regional dialects and accents. Descriptivism on the other hand takes a describing approach to the varieties of English and does not label them correct or incorrect. I shall now look at some of the deviations away from Standard English and Received Pronunciation. I will firstly look at language variation in England (regional variation); then look at World English (national variation); and finally, compare the two. Kerswill identifies three areas of variation: phonetic, grammatical, and discourse strategies. Phonetic variation looks at accents. There is a definite hierarchy of how people evaluate different accents. This tends to flow as suggested in the following diagram (figure 1) Bottom of the list are those accents associated with large industrial cities and the working class. However, research shows (Giles and Trudgill 1970s) that people with regional accents are thought of as more down-to-earth, friendly and humorous than those speaking RP. Non-standards such as the use of the glottal stop (e.g. 'Ga'wick airpor' as opposed to 'Gatwick airport') and the use of W instead of L (e.g. 'hiuw' rather than 'hill') are features of the lower variations in the hierarchy especially found in Estuary English. Grammatical variations also have standard and non-standards. Examples of non-standards are double negatives such as "I never done nothing"; and the use of 'ain't' as in "I ain't done it" as opposed to the standard "I haven't done it" or even used to mean, "I didn't do it". In the regional varieties of English other than standard, there are features such as Altered negatives- the use of never to refer to a single occasion, e.g. 'You gave it to me' 'I never did'Dropping the - ly from an adverb, e.g. 'don't do that so slow'Tag questions used in confrontation, e.g. 'I said I was going, didn't I? "Double negatives are the probably the only variation in grammar which could cause confusion to a standard user listening. If someone says, "I didn't do nothing," it is usually presumed that they mean they didn't do anything. However, the meaning could in fact be they did something rather than doing nothing. Generally the phonological variation will tell us which meaning is being implied by certain intonation and stress on either the 'do' when meaning 'I didn't do anything' or on the 'nothing' when meaning "I did something rather than nothing." So all these grammatical variations are not too difficult to understand if someone uses them even if you don't use them yourself. Variation in Discourse Strategies (as called by Gumperz, 1982) looks at dialects and idiolects and why people say things in a certain way to communicate their point. Variation has occurred but understanding of different dialects is better now than it was when traditional dialects were very regionally pronounced and definite borders between regional dialects existed. This is due to people moving around more. People do not tend to stay in the place in which they grew up. They move either for work or for education or due to relationships. They are therefore not only exposed to the dialect of that area where they grew up. Commuter-lifestyles can also lead to exposure to more than one dialect. Also, Compulsory education has meant that everyone is taught in Standard English, so even if they have regional dialect, they are also educated in the standard. Lastly, the media and technological advances such as the Internet use a variety of dialects especially the e-mail and chat-room language known as Leet. We would be exposed to standard in the newspapers and television news, but also to regional dialects in television programmes such as the many regional soap operas. Vocabulary is the main variant. Slang and colloquialisms are commonly used and although they age, each generation will have a set of slang words that they understand and often use. "No part of 'usage' changes more quickly than verbal currency."4 Regions have different words that are not in the vocabulary of other regions. For example gym-shoes are commonly called 'plimsolls' in the South East (London, Brighton), but are called 'daps' in the West (Bristol, Gloucester). World English is even more varied than the regional variations I have looked at. There isn't really one 'standard English' nationally. There is a Standard English as we know it, a Standard American English (SAE), an Australian SE, a Caribbean SE, one SE for East Asia and one for South, and more throughout the world. Most of the varieties have either British SE or American SE as their basis, but as can be seen in figure 2, there are variations in the three areas looked at earlier from Kerswill's article Variations of English are often used as a Lingua Franca in trading and business. Some of these have elements of other languages in them, but still manage to communicate successfully. English is many people's second language, and is learnt in a basic form at many French, German and many other nationality's schools. Most of what is learnt in foreign schools will be SBE. British Black English has become a creole language. It is a symbol of identity for black youth culture. It is yet another variety of English but is broader than a dialect, and not regional. Creoles were once thought of as corrupt forms of a language, but some have now become accepted and are seen as an important expression of personal and national identity. Therefore, unlike dialects, creoles as language variations are not generally seen as inferior. Attempts to standardise English have been made by campaigns such as the 'Speak Good English Campaign' in Singapore, where many people speak a cross between Chinese dialects and English known as 'Singlish'. The government are encouraging people to speak Standard English. There is an example of this sort of campaign in England also. The Plain English Campaign does not campaign for Standard English, but it calls for one version of English that is understandable to all no matter what their social class, regional origin or background. They say that, "the golden rule is that plain English should be used in any information that ordinary people rely on when they make decisions."5 There are linguistic hierarchies nationally and regionally. However, the terms of equal change according to social factors. For example, SE is seen as more prestigious and formal, whereas some regional dialects such as Welsh and Scottish are seen as more friendly. It depends on the factor that is being researched as to which languages are at the top of the hierarchy. Most people generally know Standard English, being the one that is taught in schools, and most people can use it when called for. However, as long as the dialect they use relates to the situation they are in, it can be understood, and that, to me, is all that matters. It is therefore to do with register and style according to circumstances. Lingua Francas work because both parties understand them. They do not need to be Standard English as long as they are understood, and since both parties have comprised them, both parties should have understanding of it. I feel therefore that the conclusion of this essay should be that there is no question of equality in language itself, more a question of equality in society. As long as there is understanding between the participants, one variety is equal to all other varieties as long as they are understood. Standard English can be used when called for, and as long as it is still taught as a basis, there can be divergence towards this when people of two different dialects conflict. The increase in mobility of people also means that we are more knowledgeable of other dialects, and with knowledge comes acceptance, and therefore 'equality'. 