ARTICLE

ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN PAKISTAN A POLICY ANALYSIS OF PAST AND PRESENT OF LINGUISTIC CONTACT WITH URDU AND PASHTO

08 Pages : 77-86

http://dx.doi.org/10.31703/gpr.2020(V-II).08      10.31703/gpr.2020(V-II).08      Published : Jun 2020

English Language in Pakistan: A Policy Analysis of Past and Present of Linguistic Contact with Urdu and Pashto

    The paper revisits the diachronic evolution of the belief, practices, and attitudes of Urdu and Pashto speakers towards English and ascertains the drivers and effects of such changes. The changes are explored at two levels, micro and macro. The macro-level perspective concerns the 'use' interface while the microlevel concerns the 'code'. The study hinges on the theory of contact linguistics' approaches such as language shift, hybridization and domain conquest. In the wake of this study, the scholars revisit the value of 'Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scales' (GIDS) in the assessment of language prospects of survival. The study finds that Pashto and Urdu both underwent substantial changes as a result of contact with the English language. The study also proposes revisiting definitions of some popular terms used in the evaluation of language policy and planning as the proposal to use more discrete terms that can be easily understood and applied by the practitioners of the fields, such as the distinction of language attitude and belief

    English Language, Urdu, Pashto, Pakistan, Contact Linguistics, GIDS, Language Policy, Language Planning
    (1) Ayaz Ahmad
    Lecturer, Department of English, Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, KP, Pakistan.
    (2) Liaqat Iqbal
    Assistant Professor, Department of English, Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, KP, Pakistan.
    (3) Irfan Ullah
    Assistant Professor, Department of English, Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, KP, Pakistan.
  • Ahmad, A., Hussan, S., & Malik, M. S. (2018). An overview of English language as a window of economic opportunity in Pakistan. Review of Economic and Development Studies, 4(2), 281-291.
  • Ahmad, A. (2016). Role of English in Afghan language policy planning with its impact on national integration (2001-2010). (Ph.D.), University of Peshawar, Peshawar.
  • Ahmad, A., & Khan, A. (2016a). Provincial autonomy and devolution of language policy in Pakistan: Retrospect and prospect. Dialogue, 12(4), 361-378.
  • Ahmad, A., & Khan, A. (2016b). Integration through language in the Pak-Afghan borderland: The interplay of past legacies, present realities and future scenarios. Central Asia Journal, 79(winter), 33-51.
  • Baumgardner, R. J. (Ed.). (1996). South Asian English: Structure, use, and users. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
  • Blommaert, J.,Recensie, & Wright (ed.) 1995: 'Languages in contact and conflict: contrasting experiences in the Netherlands and Belgium'. Language in Society 26/4 (1997): 606-608.
  • Bloomfield, L. (1984 [1933]). Language (revised by F.C. Hockett ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • Chomsky, N. (1957). Verbal Behavior by B.F. Skinner. Language. 35(1). 26-58
  • Das Gupta, J. (1970). Language conflict and national development: Group politics and national language policy in India. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • De-Saussure, F. ((1959[1915)). Course in general linguistics (W. Baskin, Trans. C. Bally & A. Sechehaye Eds.). Los Angeles: The University of California.
  • Ethnologue. (2018). The Map of Pakistan. Retrieved from https://www.sil.org
  • Ferguson, G. (2006). Language planning and education. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press
  • Fishman, J. A. (2008). Research methods in language and education. In K. A. King & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education (Vol. 10, pp. 3-14). London: Springer.
  • Fishman, J., A. (2006a). Do not leave your language alone: The hidden status agendas within corpus planning in language policy. Mahwah (New Jersey): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  • Fishman, J. A. (2006b). Sociolinguistics: More power(s) to you! on the explicit study of power in sociolinguistic research. In M. Putz, J. A. Fishman & J. Neff-Van Aestselaer (Eds.), 'Along the Routes to Power': Explorations of Empowerment through Language. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Fishman, J. A. (1999a). Sociolinguistics. In J. A. Fishman (Ed.), Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity (pp. 152-163). New York. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Fishman, J. A. (Ed.). (1999b). Handbook of language and ethnic identity. New York. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Fishman, J. A. (1991). Reversing language shift. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
  • Fishman, J. A. (1989). Language and ethnicity in minority sociolinguistic perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
  • Fishman, J. A. (1965). Who speaks what language to whom and when? La Linguistique, 1(3), 67-88.
  • Fishman, J. A., Ferguson, C. A., & Dasgupta, J. (1968). Language problems of developing nations. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Government of Pakistan. (2017). National Education Policy. Islamabad Govt. of Pakistan.
  • Hult, F., M., & Johnson, D. C. (Eds.). (2015). Research Methods in Language Policy and Planning: A Practical Guide. West Sussex, UK: Wiley Blackwell.
  • Khan, Z. J. (2004). Language Policy in Pakistan. In S. Mansoor, S. Meraj& A. Tahir (Eds.), Language Policy Planning & Practice: A Southasianperspective (pp. 23-26). Karachi: Aga Khan University/ Oxford University Press.
  • Labov, W. (2006[1966]). The social stratification of English in New York City. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic Imperialism. London: Oxford University Press.
  • Lewis, M. P., & Simons, G. F. (2010). Assessing Endangerment: Expanding Fishman's GIDS. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique, 55(2), 103-120.
  • Mansoor, S. (Ed.). (2004). Language policy planning & practice: A Southasianperspective. Karachi: Aga Khan University/ Oxford University Press.
  • Mahmood, S. (1895). A History of English Education in India: Its rise development, progress, present condition, and prospects being a narrative of the various phases of Educational policy and measures adopted under the British Rule from its beginning to the present period, (1781-1893). Calcutta: M A O College Aligarh.
  • Malinowski, B. (1944).A scientific theory of culture and other Essays. Chapel Hill, N. Carolina: The University of North Carolina Press.
  • Nelde, P. H. (1987). Language contact means language conflict. In G. MacEoin, A. Ahlquist& D. Ohaodha (Eds.), 3rd International Conference on minority languages. General Papers. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
  • Nekvapil, J., & Sherman, T. (2015). An introduction: Language Management Theory in Language Policy and Planning. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2015(232), 1-12.
  • Rahman, T. (2008). Language Policy and Education in Pakistan. In S. May & N. H.Hornberger(Eds.), Encyclopaedia of Language and Education (2nd ed., Vol. 1). New York: Springer.
  • Rahman, T. (1996) The history of the Urdu-English controversy. Vol. 311. Islamabad: National Language Authority (Government of Pakistan).
  • Rahman, T. (1990). Pakistani English. Retrieved from http://www.tariqrahman.net/content/pakenglish.pdf
  • Rahman, T. (1995). Pashto language and identity formation in Pakistan. Contemporary South Asia, 4(2), 151- 170.
  • Schiffman, H. F. (2012). Language policy and language conflict in Afghanistan and its neighbors: the changing politics of language choice. Leiden; Boston: Brill.
  • Schiffman, H. F. (1999). South and Southeast Asia. In J. A. Fishman (Ed.), Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity (pp. 431-443). New York. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Schiffman, H. F. (1996). Linguistic culture and language policy. New York: Routledge
  • Schumann, J. H. (1978). The Pidgniziation process: A model for second language acquisition. California, CA: Newbury House Publisher.
  • Siddiqui, S. (2013). Language, gender, and power: The politics of representation and hegemony in South Asia. Karachi, Pakistan: Oxford University Press.
  • Simons, G. F., &Fennig, C. D. (Eds.). (2018). Ethnologue: Languages of Pakistan (21st Edition ed.). Dallas, Texas: SIL International.
  • Skinner, B.F. (1948). Verbal Behavior. USA: Harvard University Press.
  • Spolsky, B. (2004). Language Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Voloshinov, V. N. (1973 [1930]). Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. New York London: Seminar Press.
  • Weinreich, U. (1953). Languages in contact: Findings and problems. The Hague: Mouton Publishers.

Cite this article

    APA : Ahmad, A., Iqbal, L., & Ullah, I. (2020). English Language in Pakistan: A Policy Analysis of Past and Present of Linguistic Contact with Urdu and Pashto. Global Political Review, V(II), 77-86. https://doi.org/10.31703/gpr.2020(V-II).08
    CHICAGO : Ahmad, Ayaz, Liaqat Iqbal, and Irfan Ullah. 2020. "English Language in Pakistan: A Policy Analysis of Past and Present of Linguistic Contact with Urdu and Pashto." Global Political Review, V (II): 77-86 doi: 10.31703/gpr.2020(V-II).08
    HARVARD : AHMAD, A., IQBAL, L. & ULLAH, I. 2020. English Language in Pakistan: A Policy Analysis of Past and Present of Linguistic Contact with Urdu and Pashto. Global Political Review, V, 77-86.
    MHRA : Ahmad, Ayaz, Liaqat Iqbal, and Irfan Ullah. 2020. "English Language in Pakistan: A Policy Analysis of Past and Present of Linguistic Contact with Urdu and Pashto." Global Political Review, V: 77-86
    MLA : Ahmad, Ayaz, Liaqat Iqbal, and Irfan Ullah. "English Language in Pakistan: A Policy Analysis of Past and Present of Linguistic Contact with Urdu and Pashto." Global Political Review, V.II (2020): 77-86 Print.
    OXFORD : Ahmad, Ayaz, Iqbal, Liaqat, and Ullah, Irfan (2020), "English Language in Pakistan: A Policy Analysis of Past and Present of Linguistic Contact with Urdu and Pashto", Global Political Review, V (II), 77-86
    TURABIAN : Ahmad, Ayaz, Liaqat Iqbal, and Irfan Ullah. "English Language in Pakistan: A Policy Analysis of Past and Present of Linguistic Contact with Urdu and Pashto." Global Political Review V, no. II (2020): 77-86. https://doi.org/10.31703/gpr.2020(V-II).08