ABSTRACT
Language and identity have been influencing the people of the Indian society. The prime focus is those people living in Mumbai. In the current era people have undergone a cultural shift from their native language and has moved on to a completely different origin. (Hofstede,1997;Vaswani,2009). However, it is very depressing to learn that these individuals have accepted the tarnished version of this language (Rao, 2007). This shows that these people have forgotten the importance of language and its existence within the world of intercultural communication (Vaswani, 2009; Gopalakrishnan, 2006). This paper will establish how people’s identity and culture have degraded through the introduction of “Bambaiya Hindi”- a dialect used since the 1960’s (Vaswani, 2009). It will critically research two different aspects of intercultural communication through it. The first section of this treatise addresses how language has affected culture. This exposition will be referring to the concept of “languaculture” (Agar,1994; Roberts, 1998) and “interconnection of language and culture” (Bassnett,1998; Barnes, 2006). The discussion then moves on to understand what is “identity” from a “sociocultural linguistic” (Bucholtz & Hall, 2005; Duranti, 2001) approach and how language has affected identity. In this context this paper will discuss how prestige is associated with the use of language. Problems occurring in this area will also be discussed and where appropriate, solutions to such problems will be indicated. This will be addressed by referring to the arguments of various authors[1] and a wide range of literature.
CONTEXTUAL
Bambaiya Hindi” or “Mumbaiyya Hindi” or “Bhindi” is based on a Khariboli dialect with its base at Hindi (Gupta, Lessons in Bhindi / Bhinglish (Bombay Dialect), 2008) . It encompasses words and pronunciations from Urdu, Gujarati, Marathi and English (Jena, 2006; Anon, 2009). This dialect was usually spoken by street peddlers, criminals and people emerging from the lower Indian class (Chatterji,1999;Faithi,2007;Gupta,2008). Now, it is universally spoken in and around the city of Mumbai, especially by teenagers and college students. Through the case study, “Bambaiya Hindi has eroded the identity of language” (Vaswani, 2009), one may be able to infer the excessive presence of slang Hindi dialect in Bollywood movies. Indian individuals have thoroughly been influenced by films, especially those based on the underworld and this dialect has separated them from their origins (Hafeez,2005; Jena,2006). This dialect has certain positive variations. For instance, Bambaiya Hindi was truly captured in Khwaja Ahmed Abbas’ film – Sheher Aur Sapna (The City and Dreams),1960. However, when people conversing in a particular language die, the language also dies with them (Holmes, 2001). As the 1960 genre of movies stopped being made, it signalled the death of the use this dialect. On the contrary, films like Rangeela (The Colourful) (Varma,1995) and Satya (The Truth) (Varma,1998) started to erroneously use this language (Vaswani, 2009). As a result, people are now being subjected to the distorted version of the originally used dialect. Now, with the rapid transition in time, this dialect has gained popularity and is commonly spoken among Mumbaikars[2] (Rao, 2007) Michael Agar (1994) and James Lantolf (2001) suggest that communication in the present scenario requires an introduction of culture. This link between culture and language might seem to be an area of interest for different genres of authors, especially when we reflect ourselves 30 years into the world of linguistics, anthropology and social psychology. However, what has been quite a difficult task is to provide a link between language and the creation of identity with context to intercultural communication (Bucholtz & Hall,2005). Celia Roberts finds language and culture as a broad meeting of the minds with relation to social reality. (Roberts, 1998) VS Gopalakrishnan, a blogger feels that due to the excessive use of this slang dialect (Bambaiya Hindi), people including him are losing their culture of self respect (Gopalakrishnan, 2006). For instance, in Hindi literature, the word “jao”(go) is often used to address the teenagers or among friends, whereas “jayiye” or “jayenge” shows sense of respect towards elders or senior members. However, with the entry of the deformed Bambaiya language, people use the term “chal na!” (jargon dialect of the word “go”). Language is crucial in the context of “pidgin”[i] limits communication as it establishes a more strong base for intercultural comprehension. Now, this paper will analyse how language and culture can be interconnected through two discourse concepts: a ‘discourse – centred approach to culture’ and a ‘discourse – centered cultural knowledge. Greg Urban supports the first concept. He argues that since we are unable to make an assumption that culture is shared, we must therefore try studying the question empirically[3] (Urban, 1991). Gumperz defines, ‘discourse – centred cultural knowledge’ as an area of study where cultural presuppositions and discourse conventions help produce conversational interpretations.” (Gumprez, 1996; Stucky,2009).
Hence, they cannot be ignored, instead they need to be recognized for their identity: ideological formations (Gumprez, 1996). V.N. Volosinov[4] notes the comprehension of language must be based on social activity and in the social context. In his opinion, social activity must be given more emphasis since it is a critical medium in the process of development (Volosinov, 1973). Contrary to Volosinov argument, Raymond Williams notes the absence of a reined ‘language’ and ‘society’ but the presence of an active ‘social language’ leads one to think whether language is a ‘reflection’ or ‘expression’ of ‘material reality’? (Williams, 1977). “Language has become increasingly politicised and implicated social struggles” (Brian, et al., 2008). The point of argument has shifted the identity of language from a neutral instrument for representation and communication to a politically and culturally bounded medium controlled by groups. Ernst Pulgram believes that, a person’s “identity” lies in his speech which is quite different from his intellect or way of utterance. “Bambaiya Hindi” is a pidgin language as well because it is not a “standard language” but a “vernacular language”[5] (Holmes J. , 2001., pp 74-76). Furthermore, an individual expresses more distinctly through his speech and the opposite person can simply judge him on the basis of how he talks. (Pulgram, 1954,in Street,1993) This brings us to the discussion of what is “identity” and how is identity and language interconnected. In addition, this paper will discuss the analysis of identity as produced in linguistic interaction. This paper has an open – minded perspective on identity. Identity is the “social positioning of self and other” (Bucholtz & Hall, 2005). John Schumann suggests that one of the factors for the above issue is a ‘language shock’ (Schumann, 1976). “Sociocultural linguistics” is the study of a vast interdisciplinary area that includes the ‘intersection of language and the workings of culture and society’ (Bucholtz & Hall, 2005). Mary Bucholtz and Kira Hall brings across this lingusitc approach to identity. In their opinion this approach is based on five major principles. Identity seen as the product rather than the source of linguistic practices. Identities include demographic attributes at the macro – level.
Identities may be “linguistically indexed” (Bucholtz & Hall,2005) through linguistic structures and systems. There is the creation of identity with context to the relationship between the self and the other. Identity may be partly an outcome of interactional negotiation or construct others perceptions and representations or a source for ‘ideological processes and structures’. (Bucholtz & Hall,2005). Although, Bucholtz and Hall’s model of these five principles are academically useful in comprehending the concept of identity, this thesis will focus at only those principles that are implicative to the case study. Conversely, this paper will argue why certain principles may not be applicable to this issue. The emergence principle’ forms the prime principle to this appraoch. It poses the notion that identity can be best seen as an emergent product instead of a pre-existing source of linguistic and other semiotic practices . Therefore one might examine it as a social and cultural phenomenon. (Bucholtz & Hall,2005). Since, “Bambaiya Hindi” has evolved from the mixture of different Indian languages and broken English. It does not have a social or cultural base to it. Although, most of the Mumbaikars may argue that their identities lie within this language(Gupta, 2008; Chatterji, 1999; Vaswani, 2009) this paper critically supports the notion that an identity is formed through a standard language (Downes, 1998., pp 35-37) and since this dialect is formed from a vernacular language, this principle is not applicable. Contemporary researchers opt for such an approach in the intial research process. It is assumed to be an effortless approach where one can recognize one’s identity as emergent in circumstances where the use of the speaker’s language is inconsistent with the social attributes they were originally assigned with. (Barret, 1999; Besnier, 2004). ‘The ‘positionality principle’ is the second principle that may be noted within quantitative social sciences. It associates social behaviour with macro identities such as age, gender and social class (Bucholtz & Hall, 2005). There is a vast difference of representation of social identities between an upper class Indian speaker and a Mumbaikar. For instance, when an upper class Indian will use the standard interrogative terms like – who, what, why, when, where, how, how many and what; it will sound more appealing and decent. Whereas when a Mumbaikar will use the same terms it will sound coarser, indecent and will lack social class.
Yet, it can be argued that due to this distortion, Mumbaikars have created for themselves a separate niche from the normal Hindi speakers (Anon, 2007). (Appendix 1.1) Researches on sociocultural linguistics distinguish that identities with broader social structures have been features of variationist sociolinguistics[6] (Labov,1966) and the sociology of language (Fishman, 1971). Ethnographers researching on linguistics, survey language users to be conversant with localized identity levels when compared to analytical levels of sociology. They perceive the former to provide an enhanced empirical account of linguistic practice”(Bucholtz & Hall,2005). The two principles discussed above present the ontological status of identity. The essay will now discuss about the third principle which shows the way in which identity is formed. This is known as ‘indexicality’ (Bucholtz & Hall, 2005). The focus of this principle is to show the use of linguistic forms for the construction of identity positions. It gives rise to semiotic relationships between linguistic forms and social meanings (Ochs, 1992; Silverstein, 1985). Furthermore, indexicality can be explained as a sign, or representation of a structure (eg: sentential voice, emphatic stress, diminutive affix) employed from one situation to another and is associated with particular situational dimensions such that when the structure is utilized, the form summons those situational dimensions.
Considering, Elinor Ochs’ notion on indexicality, we can note that the indexical relation between a particular linguistic property and a social identity is not direct in nature (Ochs E.,2008). He suggests that linguistic properties help to create an index identity which can be linked to ‘interactional stances[7](Ochs E.,1992). Major languages in India tend to function as contact languages within or beyond its home territory. It must be noted that, India’s core linguistic arena lies within the scope of bilingualism, which supersedes immigrant bilingualism. This stands to be one of the prime reasons for speakers emerging from diverse speech communities preferring to maintain individual ethnic (home) language. Bambaiya Hindi also constitutes of such a variant dialect that has still been retained by its users. John Gumperz and R. Wilson noted, that in spite of convergent changes in the Bambaiya Hindi dialect, the languages that were in contact continued to be discrete. He also mentioned that ethnic separateness of home life had been a priceless medium in retaining the language, since there was “little reason to expect multilingualism to disappear” (Kuteva, 1999). Prestige is a slippery concept (Holmes, 2001., 2nd ed). This concept is categorized into two categories; “overt” and “covert prestige” (Holmes, 2001., 2nd ed). ‘Overt prestige’ is patently obvious since it is used in a community possessing a standard variety of educational and occupational status. This standard variety of status exceedingly reflect the associations of individual speeches, which is most commonly accepted to be the ‘best’ way of communicating in the community (Holmes, 2001., 2nd ed). Contrastly, covert prestige is regarded as peculiar term and involves two contradictory ideas. Vernacular languages or non standard speech varieties are the areas where the term ‘covert prestige’ has been extensively applied. This paper poses the question as how a dialect can be given recognition if it is not culturally and publically accepted (Holmes, 2001., 2nd ed). ‘Bambaiya Hindi’ is a dialect based on the vernacular language, Khariboli with its base being Hindi and a conglomeration of languages like Gujarati, Marathi and English. Hence it may not be recognized as an ‘overt’ prestige. Contrastly, since it is a vernacular language and has the traditional flavour of having ‘contradictory ideas’ it may be recognized as a ‘covert’ prestige. Dr. A.R. Faithi[8] notes that althougth Bambaiya Hindi may be abhorrent to conservatives, yet it can be debated that it has a rhythm and consiceness of its own (Faithi, 2007). Moreover, the media has been playing a major role in promoting this dialect by expressing it through films, television and music. Although this dialect is extensively affluent in and around Delhi streets but there is still lies a large proportion of Indians who are yet to make it to the forefront of Delhi wallahs repertoire (Faithi, 2007). The culture of a place is dogged from its people, religion, language, cuisine and festivals. Mumbai’s cultural heritage is a blend of the old and the new generation. People living in Mumbai seek to follow the trendy and hip-hop lifestyle, which is another reason why they prefer speaking in this dialect (Anon, 2009).
Hence, they cannot be ignored, instead they need to be recognized for their identity: ideological formations (Gumprez, 1996). V.N. Volosinov[4] notes the comprehension of language must be based on social activity and in the social context. In his opinion, social activity must be given more emphasis since it is a critical medium in the process of development (Volosinov, 1973). Contrary to Volosinov argument, Raymond Williams notes the absence of a reined ‘language’ and ‘society’ but the presence of an active ‘social language’ leads one to think whether language is a ‘reflection’ or ‘expression’ of ‘material reality’? (Williams, 1977). “Language has become increasingly politicised and implicated social struggles” (Brian, et al., 2008). The point of argument has shifted the identity of language from a neutral instrument for representation and communication to a politically and culturally bounded medium controlled by groups. Ernst Pulgram believes that, a person’s “identity” lies in his speech which is quite different from his intellect or way of utterance. “Bambaiya Hindi” is a pidgin language as well because it is not a “standard language” but a “vernacular language”[5] (Holmes J. , 2001., pp 74-76). Furthermore, an individual expresses more distinctly through his speech and the opposite person can simply judge him on the basis of how he talks. (Pulgram, 1954,in Street,1993) This brings us to the discussion of what is “identity” and how is identity and language interconnected. In addition, this paper will discuss the analysis of identity as produced in linguistic interaction. This paper has an open – minded perspective on identity. Identity is the “social positioning of self and other” (Bucholtz & Hall, 2005). John Schumann suggests that one of the factors for the above issue is a ‘language shock’ (Schumann, 1976). “Sociocultural linguistics” is the study of a vast interdisciplinary area that includes the ‘intersection of language and the workings of culture and society’ (Bucholtz & Hall, 2005). Mary Bucholtz and Kira Hall brings across this lingusitc approach to identity. In their opinion this approach is based on five major principles. Identity seen as the product rather than the source of linguistic practices. Identities include demographic attributes at the macro – level.
Identities may be “linguistically indexed” (Bucholtz & Hall,2005) through linguistic structures and systems. There is the creation of identity with context to the relationship between the self and the other. Identity may be partly an outcome of interactional negotiation or construct others perceptions and representations or a source for ‘ideological processes and structures’. (Bucholtz & Hall,2005). Although, Bucholtz and Hall’s model of these five principles are academically useful in comprehending the concept of identity, this thesis will focus at only those principles that are implicative to the case study. Conversely, this paper will argue why certain principles may not be applicable to this issue. The emergence principle’ forms the prime principle to this appraoch. It poses the notion that identity can be best seen as an emergent product instead of a pre-existing source of linguistic and other semiotic practices . Therefore one might examine it as a social and cultural phenomenon. (Bucholtz & Hall,2005). Since, “Bambaiya Hindi” has evolved from the mixture of different Indian languages and broken English. It does not have a social or cultural base to it. Although, most of the Mumbaikars may argue that their identities lie within this language(Gupta, 2008; Chatterji, 1999; Vaswani, 2009) this paper critically supports the notion that an identity is formed through a standard language (Downes, 1998., pp 35-37) and since this dialect is formed from a vernacular language, this principle is not applicable. Contemporary researchers opt for such an approach in the intial research process. It is assumed to be an effortless approach where one can recognize one’s identity as emergent in circumstances where the use of the speaker’s language is inconsistent with the social attributes they were originally assigned with. (Barret, 1999; Besnier, 2004). ‘The ‘positionality principle’ is the second principle that may be noted within quantitative social sciences. It associates social behaviour with macro identities such as age, gender and social class (Bucholtz & Hall, 2005). There is a vast difference of representation of social identities between an upper class Indian speaker and a Mumbaikar. For instance, when an upper class Indian will use the standard interrogative terms like – who, what, why, when, where, how, how many and what; it will sound more appealing and decent. Whereas when a Mumbaikar will use the same terms it will sound coarser, indecent and will lack social class.
Yet, it can be argued that due to this distortion, Mumbaikars have created for themselves a separate niche from the normal Hindi speakers (Anon, 2007). (Appendix 1.1) Researches on sociocultural linguistics distinguish that identities with broader social structures have been features of variationist sociolinguistics[6] (Labov,1966) and the sociology of language (Fishman, 1971). Ethnographers researching on linguistics, survey language users to be conversant with localized identity levels when compared to analytical levels of sociology. They perceive the former to provide an enhanced empirical account of linguistic practice”(Bucholtz & Hall,2005). The two principles discussed above present the ontological status of identity. The essay will now discuss about the third principle which shows the way in which identity is formed. This is known as ‘indexicality’ (Bucholtz & Hall, 2005). The focus of this principle is to show the use of linguistic forms for the construction of identity positions. It gives rise to semiotic relationships between linguistic forms and social meanings (Ochs, 1992; Silverstein, 1985). Furthermore, indexicality can be explained as a sign, or representation of a structure (eg: sentential voice, emphatic stress, diminutive affix) employed from one situation to another and is associated with particular situational dimensions such that when the structure is utilized, the form summons those situational dimensions.
Considering, Elinor Ochs’ notion on indexicality, we can note that the indexical relation between a particular linguistic property and a social identity is not direct in nature (Ochs E.,2008). He suggests that linguistic properties help to create an index identity which can be linked to ‘interactional stances[7](Ochs E.,1992). Major languages in India tend to function as contact languages within or beyond its home territory. It must be noted that, India’s core linguistic arena lies within the scope of bilingualism, which supersedes immigrant bilingualism. This stands to be one of the prime reasons for speakers emerging from diverse speech communities preferring to maintain individual ethnic (home) language. Bambaiya Hindi also constitutes of such a variant dialect that has still been retained by its users. John Gumperz and R. Wilson noted, that in spite of convergent changes in the Bambaiya Hindi dialect, the languages that were in contact continued to be discrete. He also mentioned that ethnic separateness of home life had been a priceless medium in retaining the language, since there was “little reason to expect multilingualism to disappear” (Kuteva, 1999). Prestige is a slippery concept (Holmes, 2001., 2nd ed). This concept is categorized into two categories; “overt” and “covert prestige” (Holmes, 2001., 2nd ed). ‘Overt prestige’ is patently obvious since it is used in a community possessing a standard variety of educational and occupational status. This standard variety of status exceedingly reflect the associations of individual speeches, which is most commonly accepted to be the ‘best’ way of communicating in the community (Holmes, 2001., 2nd ed). Contrastly, covert prestige is regarded as peculiar term and involves two contradictory ideas. Vernacular languages or non standard speech varieties are the areas where the term ‘covert prestige’ has been extensively applied. This paper poses the question as how a dialect can be given recognition if it is not culturally and publically accepted (Holmes, 2001., 2nd ed). ‘Bambaiya Hindi’ is a dialect based on the vernacular language, Khariboli with its base being Hindi and a conglomeration of languages like Gujarati, Marathi and English. Hence it may not be recognized as an ‘overt’ prestige. Contrastly, since it is a vernacular language and has the traditional flavour of having ‘contradictory ideas’ it may be recognized as a ‘covert’ prestige. Dr. A.R. Faithi[8] notes that althougth Bambaiya Hindi may be abhorrent to conservatives, yet it can be debated that it has a rhythm and consiceness of its own (Faithi, 2007). Moreover, the media has been playing a major role in promoting this dialect by expressing it through films, television and music. Although this dialect is extensively affluent in and around Delhi streets but there is still lies a large proportion of Indians who are yet to make it to the forefront of Delhi wallahs repertoire (Faithi, 2007). The culture of a place is dogged from its people, religion, language, cuisine and festivals. Mumbai’s cultural heritage is a blend of the old and the new generation. People living in Mumbai seek to follow the trendy and hip-hop lifestyle, which is another reason why they prefer speaking in this dialect (Anon, 2009).
CONCLUSION
Discussing language from a discourse based approach, the core of the problem is that language is fundamentally ambiguous (Scollon ; Scollon 2001). Different research traditions within sociocultural linguistics have particular strengths in analyzing the varied dimensions of identity outlined in this article. According to Stephen Levinson it is not possible to grasp complete control of the meanings of the things we say and write ( Levinson,1988). In other words, language is a joint construction created by the participants in communication. Scollon argues on a discourse level that individuals may find an unambiguous meaning in language. Furthering the argument he suggests that people may try being specific about the subject in which the literature are used and in this process if we may find sufficient information that can be made explicit, probably then there are chances of the language not being ambiguous at this level. He again suggests that this approach may or may not work. Hence language would retain in its state of ambiguity at this level. Deborah Tannen argues Scollon's point by suggesting that the emphasis exerted on a variety of topics in the discourse is the real reason of ambiguity. However the point made is that ambiguity would remain in all sorts of language whenever used, therefore, we should try create strategies for the development of language instead of preventing it. [1] Celia Roberts (1998) ; Michael Agar(1994); Brian V Street (1993), Mary Bucholtz (2005); Kira Hall (2005), Susan Bassnett (1998) [2] People who reside in Mumbai are termed as “Mumbaikars” [3] This concept is founded on a single proposition stating that culture is localized in concrete, publicly accessible signs with majority of them being instances of discourse. [4] V.N. Volosinov (1973) is a Russian Marxist analyst of language. [5] Vernacular is a term referred to a language that has not been standardized and does not have an official status. Whereas the term “standard” is referred to a language that can be written and has undergone some degree of regularisation or codification. It is usually followed by a community. (Holmes J. , 2001 (2nd ed)) [6] Although, ‘variationist sociolinguistics’ refers to the use of language within different speakers, however other analysts have provided a contemporary outlook (Bucholtz M. , 1999; Eckert, 2000) In their opinion, the comprehension of the way language is used, seems to be like a collection or range of linguistic forms which has a relation to personas or identities. (Bell, 1984) [7] Interactional stances include act of force and scope of ambiguity. These can be linked to social attributes (e.g. male/female.) [8] Dr. A.R. Fatihi is a Professor of Li a Professor of Linguistics at the Aligarh Muslim University, India [i] Pidgin language (origin in Engl. word `business'?) is nobody's native language; may arise when two speakers of different languages with no common language try to have a makeshift conversation. Because of colonialism, slavery etc. the prestige of Pidgin languages is very low. Many pidgins are `contact vernaculars', may only exist for one speech event.
No comments:
Post a Comment