Cover not available
Part of
Dynamics of Linguistic Diversity
Edited by Hagen Peukert and Ingrid Gogolin
[Hamburg Studies on Linguistic Diversity 6] 2017
► pp. 163–191

Overarching consonant alternations

A case study of an unbalanced trilingual situation Bundeli – Hindi – English

| University of Hamburg
This pilot research project addresses the interlanguage transfer of phonetic-phonemic phenomena in a trilingual situation: Bundeli-Hindi (L1-L2, not standard – standard) bidialectism extended by L3 English. The audio data analysis focuses on semantically and grammatically empty cross-phonemic consonant alternations that are not conditioned by phonotactics. Their transfer points to a specific transfer type, involving systemic relations. I introduce an alternation rate index as a tool to assess the dependence of cross-phonemic interlanguage alternations on linguistic and sociolinguistic parameters. The results of the analysis indicate that cross-phonemic alternations are unilaterally transferred from Bundeli to Hindi and English and that the alternation rate is inversely related to the socio-educational level and language proficiency as well as to the level of language standardisation.
Keywords: Bundeli, Hindi, English, transfer, consonant alternations, alternation rate, language standardisation level
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Interrelations between Bundeli, Hindi and Indian English
    • Interrelation between Bundeli and Hindi
    • Bundeli – Hindi cross-phonemic alternations
    • Phonological adaptation of English
    • Accommodation of Standard English (RP) consonants in Hindi, Bundeli and Indian English
  • Data analysis and methodology
    • Audio data
      • Data collection
      • Types of school
      • Data collection procedure
      • Selection of data for analysis
      • Subjects
      • Data on the subjects’ language use
    • Audio data processing
    • Alternation rate
  • Discussion of the results
    • Summary of the data analysis
      • Alternations in the data elicited from KP
      • Alternations in the data elicited from DM
      • Alternations in the data elicited from CK
    • Linguistic perspective
    • Sociolinguistic perspective
    • Limitations of the analysis
  • Conclusions
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 24 May 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hsld.6.09ora
References (57)
References
Agnihotri, R.K. 1991. Sound patterns of Indian English: A sociolinguistic perspective. In English in India: Issues and Problems, R.S. Gupta & K. Kapoor (eds), 175–188. Delhi: Academic Foundation.Google Scholar
Arsenault, P. 2015. Retroflex consonant harmony: An areal feature in South Asia. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 2(1): 1–28. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Auer, P. 1997. Co-occurrence restrictions between linguistic variables: A case for social dialectology, phonological theory and variation studies. In Variation, Change and Phonological Theory [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 146], F.L. Hinskens, R. van Hout & W.L. Wetzels (eds), 69–100. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bansal, R.K. 1978. The phonology of Indian English. In Indian Writings in English, R. Mohan (ed.), 101–113. Madras: Orient Longman.Google Scholar
Bright, W. 1990. Language Variation in South Asia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Britain, D. 2004. Dialect and accent. In Sociolinguistics: An International Handbook of the Science of Language and Society, 2nd edn, U. Ammon (ed.), 267–273. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bundel News, 18 May 2014. <[URL]> (18 May 2014).
Cenoz, J. 2001. The effect of linguistic distance, L2 status and age on cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition. In Cross-linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition [Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 31], J. Cenoz, B. Hufeisen & U. Jessner (eds), 8–20. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Census of India. 2001. <[URL]> (13 December 2015).
. 2011. <[URL]> (13 December 2015).
Cohn, B. 1996. Colonialism and its Forms of Knowledge: The British in India. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Collinge, N.E. (ed.). 1985. An Encyclopaedia of Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Desai, S.B., Dubey, A., Joshi, B., Sen, M., Shariff, A. & Vanneman, R.D. 2010. Human Development in India: Challenges for a Society in Transition. Oxford: OUP, <[URL]> (25 January 2017).
Doordarshan: A Brief History Doordarshan Kendra: Bhopal, <[URL]> (22 May 2014).
Duarte, J. 2015. Cross-linguistic transfer of academimc language in multilingual adolescents. In Transfer Effects in Multilingual Language Development [Hamburg Studies on Linguistic Diversity 4], H. Peukert (ed.), 221–247. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Dube, A. 1996. Bundelī kā vyākaraṇik anuśīlan / A Grammatical Study of Bundeli. Naī Dillī: Sārthak prakāśan.Google Scholar
Dvivedī, K.B. 2002. Bundelī śabdkoś/A Bundeli Dictionary. Ilāhābād: Satyendra Prakāśan.Google Scholar
Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 17th edn. 2014. <[URL]> (20 June 2014).
Ferguson, C.A. 1973. Diglossia. In Language and Social Context: Selected Readings, P.P. Giglioli (ed.), 232–251. Harmondsworth: Penguin Education.Google Scholar
Fishmann, J. 1967. Bilingualism with and without Diglossia; Diglossia with and without Bilingualism. Journal of Social Issues XXIII(2): 29–38, <[URL]> (30 May 2014).
Gargesh, R. 2008. Indian English: Phonology. In Varieties of English, 4: Africa, South and Southeast Asia, R. Mesthrie (ed.), 231–243. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Grierson, G.A. 1916. Linguistic Survey of India, Vol. IX, pt. I – Specimens of Western Hindi and Panjabi. Calcutta: Office of the Superintendent of Government Printing.Google Scholar
Gut, U. 2009. Cross-linguistic influence in L3 phonological acquisition. International Journal of Multilingualism 7 (1). Special Issue: L3 Phonology: 19–38. doi/full/:DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hammarberg, B. 2001. Roles of L1 and L2 in L3 production and acquisition. In Cross-linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition [Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 31], J. Cenoz, B. Hufeisen & U. Jessner (eds), 21–41. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Haṃs, K. 1976. Bundelī aur uske kṣetrīy rūp: Ek bhāṣā-vaigyānik adhyayan. (Bundeli and its Regional Varieties: A Linguistic Analysis). Prayāg: Hindī sāhitya sammelan (Sāgar viśvavidyālay dvārā sahayojit).Google Scholar
Hock, H.H. 2015. The Northwest of South Asia and beyond: The issue of Indo-Aryan retroflexion yet again. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 2(1): 11–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hock, H.H. & Joseph, B.D. 2009. Language History, Language Change, and Language Relationship: An Introduction to Historical and Comparative Linguistics [Trends in Linguistics], 2nd rev. edn. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jaiswal, M.P. 1962. A Linguistic Study of Bundeli (A Dialect of Madhyadēśa). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
James, A.R. 1983. Dialekt, Fremdsprache und phonischer Transfer. Eine kontrastive Analyse Schwäbisch-Englisch. In Dialektphonologie and Fremdsprachenerwerb / Dialect Phonology and Foreign Language Acquisition [Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik 199], A. James & B. Kettemann (eds), 48–62. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Jessner, U. 2006. Linguisic Awareness in Multilinguals: English as a Third Language. Edinburgh: EUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kalmar, T.M. 2008. Illegal Alphabets and Adult Biliteracy: Latino Migrants Crossing the Linguistic Border. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Keating, P., Linker, W. & Huffman, M. 1983. Patterns in allophone distribution for voiced and voiceless stops. Journal of Phonetics 11: 277–290. <[URL]> (1 August 2014).
Knops, U. 1988. Attitudes towards regional variation in Dutch pronunciation. In Language Attitudes in the Dutch Language [Topics in Sociolinguistics 5], R. van Hout & U. Knops (eds), 105–120. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kurzon, D. 2008. Indian languages: Hidden English in texts and society. In Globally Speaking: Motives for Adopting English Vocabulary in Other Languages, J. Rosenhouse & R. Kowner (eds). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Labov, W. 1972. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Ladd, R. 2014. Simultaneous Structure in Phonology. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Llama, R., Cardoso, W. & Collins, L. 2009. The influence of language distance and language status on the acquisition of L3 phonology. International Journal of Multilingualism 7(1). Special Issue: L3 Phonology: 39–57. . DOI logo.Google Scholar
Masica, C.P. 1991. The Indo-Aryan Languages. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Mitchener, W.G. & Nowak, M.A. 2004. Chaos and Language. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B 271: 701–704.Google Scholar
Moag, R.F. 1986. Diglossia versus bidialectalism: Hindi in Fiji and in Eastern Uttar Pradesh. In South Asian Languages: Structure, Convergence and Diglossia [MLBD Series in Linguistics, Vol. III], B. Krishnamurti, C.P. Masica & A.K. Sinha (eds), 350–370. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Google Scholar
Nemser, W. 1983. Preface. In Dialektphonologie and Fremdsprachenerwerb / Dialect Phonology and Foreign Language Acquisition [Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik 199], A. James & B. Kettemann (eds), 9–10. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Niedsielski, N. 2006. Vernacular. In Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Vol. 13, K. Brown (ed.), 114–115. Oxford: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nihalani, P., Tongue, R.K. & Hosali, P. 2004. Indian and British English: A Handbook of Usage and Pronunciation. Delhi: OUP.Google Scholar
Ohala, M. 1983. Aspects of Hindi Phonology [MLBD Series in Linguisics 2]. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Google Scholar
Pandey, P. 2014. Sounds and their Paterns in Indic Languages. New Delhi: CUP.Google Scholar
Peukert, H. 2015. Transfer effects in multilingual language development. In Transfer Effects in Multilingual Language Development [Hamburg Studies on Linguistic Diversity 4], H. Peukert (ed.), 1–17. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pollock, S. 2006. The Language of the Gods in the World of Men: Sanskrit, Culture, and Power in Premodern India. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Puṣpā, M. 1999. Cāk. Naī Dillī: Rājkamal Prakāśan.Google Scholar
Śarmā, R.N. 2001. Bundelī bhāṣā sāhitya kā itihās. Tulnātmak adhyayan. (A History of Literature in the Bundeli Language. A Comparative Study). Jhāṃsī: Sushīlā Śarmā.Google Scholar
Saxena 2006. Introduction. In Lesser-Known Languages of South Asia: Status and Policies, Case Studies and Applications of Information Technology, A. Saxena & L. Borin (eds), 1–28. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schiffman, H. 1999. Classical and Extended Diglossia. 21 January 1999. <[URL]> (15 July 2014).
Schilling-Estes, N. 2004. Investigating stylistic variation. In The Handbook of Language Variation and Change, J.K. Chambers (ed.). Malden MA: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Subhash. 2013. Three language education formula in multilingual India: Problems and prospects. International Journal of Educational Research 1(4): 150–158, <[URL]> (20 May 2014).
Syllabus, Vol. 1: Elementary Level. 2006. National Council of Educational Research and Training. New Delhi: Publication Department, 58–67. <[URL]> (20 May 2014).
Tagliamonte, S.A. 2012. Variationist Sociolinguistics: Change, Observation, Interpretation. Malden MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Thomas, E.R. 2007. Sociophonetics. In Sociolinguistic Variation: Theories, Methods, and Applications, R. Bayley & C. Lucas (eds), 215–236. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vaish, V. 2008. Biliteracy and Globalization: English Language Education in India. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar