Navigating Language Choice in the Workplace: Professional Employees' Attitudes Towards Singlish in a Multinational Company in Malaysia

This qualitative study explored the attitudes of five professional employees towards the use of Singlish in the Malaysian branch of a multinational company, with particular attention to how its perceived appropriateness varied across workplace relationships and levels of formality. Semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted with five multilingual employees who had experience with Singlish in workplace communication. The interview data were analysed using an inductive thematic approach with language ideology subsequently applied as an interpretive lens. The findings revealed that participants’ attitudes towards Singlish were context-dependent rather than uniformly positive or negative. Singlish was associated with comfort and approachability, particularly among familiar interlocutors, while Standard English was more closely associated with professionalism. In formal workplace settings, some participants considered Singlish acceptable for maintaining rapport, whereas others expressed reservations about its use, particularly in client-facing interactions. Participants also identified common Singlish features, including sentence-final particles such as lah, leh, lor, meh, and ah. Overall, the perceived appropriateness of Singlish was influenced by factors such as the interlocutor, degree of familiarity, workplace hierarchy, and level of formality. The study contributes to the understanding of Singlish beyond its primary Singaporean context by highlighting how the five participants associated language choice with interpersonal rapport and expectations of professionalism in a Malaysian multinational workplace.

Singlish; workplace communication; language attitudes; multilingual workplace; language choice

1. Abu Bakar, N. L. A., & Hashim, F. (2024). Accent dynamics in the Malaysian workplace: Perceptions and implications. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 30(4), 379–392. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2024-3004-25 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Alsagoff, L. (2007). Singlish: Negotiating culture, capital and identity. In V. Vaish, S. Gopinathan, & Y. Liu (Eds.), Language, capital, culture: Critical studies and education in Singapore (pp. 25–46). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789087901240 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Alsagoff, L. (2010). Hybridity in ways of speaking: The glocalization of English in Singapore. In L. Lim, A. Pakir, & L. Wee (Eds.), English in Singapore: Modernity and management (pp. 109–130). Hong Kong University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bhar, S. K., Abdullah, S., & Chua, Y. E. (2022). Language use in the plantation industry: Insights from a multinational company in Malaysia. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Communication, Language, Education and Social Sciences (CLESS 2022) (pp. 287–301). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-494069-61-9_27 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bolton, K. (2012). World Englishes and Asian Englishes: A survey of the field. In A. Kirkpatrick & R. Sussex (Eds.), English as an international language in Asia: Implications for language education (pp. 13–26). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4578-0_2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Brannen, M. Y., Piekkari, R., & Tietze, S. (2014). The multifaceted role of language in international business: Unpacking the forms, functions and features of a critical challenge to MNC theory and performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(5), 495–507. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2014.24 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Cavallaro, F., Ng, B. C., & Seilhamer, M. F. (2014). Singapore Colloquial English: Issues of prestige and identity. World Englishes, 33(3), 378–397. https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12096 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Chiu, E. F.-Y., & Lin, J.-A. (2024). An attitude changing investigation into English accents with explicit instruction on Global Englishes. Journal of Educational Practice and Research, 37(3), 79–124. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Goh, R. B. H. (2016). The anatomy of Singlish: Globalisation, multiculturalism and the construction of the ‘local’ in Singapore. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 37(8), 748–758. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2015.1133628 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Gupta, A. F. (1989). Singapore Colloquial English and Standard English. Singapore Journal of Education, 10(2), 33–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188798908547659 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Idris, A. A. M., & Ismail, I. N. (2023). Request modifications by Malay speakers of English in the workplace: A contrastive pragmatic analysis. Studies in English Language and Education, 10(2), 981–999. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v10i2.26464 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Irvine, J. T., & Gal, S. (2000). Language ideology and linguistic differentiation. In P. V. Kroskrity (Ed.), Regimes of language: Ideologies, polities, and identities (pp. 35–84). School of American Research Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Karhunen, P., Kankaanranta, A., & Räisänen, T. (2023). Towards a richer understanding of language and identity in the MNC: Constructing cosmopolitan identities through “English”. Management International Review, 63, 507–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-023-00504-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Lan, C. Z., Diskin-Holdaway, C., & Maxwell, O. (2025). “I’m sad that we’re forced to speak impeccable English”: A survey on language ideologies among Singaporeans. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 45(4), 553–578. https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2025.2510450 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Lee, E. S. Y., & Ahn, H. (2021). Overseas Singaporean attitudes towards Singlish. Asian Englishes, 23(3), 264–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/13488678.2020.1795783 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Leow, Y. E. A., Chau, M. H., & Kheovichai, B. (2025). Exploring identity for social justice: Insights from multilingual speakers of English in Malaysia and Singapore. Languages, 10(5), Article 87. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages10050087 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Nair-Venugopal, S. (2003). Malaysian English, normativity and workplace interactions. World Englishes, 22(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00269 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Ningsih, N. S., & Rahman, F. (2023). Exploring the unique morphological and syntactic features of Singlish (Singapore English). Journal of English in Academic and Professional Communication, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.25047/jeapco.v9i2.3933 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Norizam, N. (2014). A comparison of Manglish and Singlish lexis in blogs [Master’s thesis, University of Malaya]. UM Research Repository. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Tan, D. A. L., Lee, B. C., Kasuma, S. A. A., & Ganapathy, M. (2018). Like that lah: Malaysian undergraduates’ attitudes towards localised English. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 18(2), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2018-1802-06 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Zaidi, A., & Arrumsia, C. (2026). Improving workplace communication through pragmatic competence: English skills training for Indonesian foreign domestic workers at Newman SRE Singapore. Journal of Community Empowerment and Technology (Commet), 2(1), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.52523/commet.v2i1.24 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Evaluating the Impacts of Mind Mapping Strategy on Developing EFL Students’ Critical Reading Skills
• Significance of Reading Instructions for Language Improvement in Children with Down Syndrome
• Prenasalised Consonants in Liangmai
• Metadiscourse Matters: Definitions, Models, and Advantages for ESL/ EFL Writing
• Blank Minds and Stuck Voices: Understanding and Addressing Cognitive Anxiety in High-Stakes ESL Speaking Tests