Hybridisation and Lexical Variation: An In-depth Analysis of The Ministry of Utmost Happiness
Abstract
Abstract Views: 0
Hybridization and lexical variation are phenomena that are prevalent in many cultural domains, which as a process define the instances of hybridity in language and culture. The current study aims to investigate the variation English language in Arundhati Roy’s, The Ministry of Utmost Happiness to study the incorporation of code mixing between L1 (Hindi-Urdu) and L2 (English). This research also investigates how code-mixing results in lexical variation and hybridization in the context of South Asian languages. The findings of this research revealed that) the writer borrowed words, phrases, and sentences from both Hindi and Urdu languages to construct a specific form of hybrid identity. She frequently uses metaphorical language as an organism to convey its social and cultural backgrounds, indicating a linguistic hybridity submerged within a cultural context. Additionally, the findings also indicated that most of the borrowings stem from various sources, such as religion, cuisines, clothing, poetry, caste systems, and untranslatable expressions. Roy in particular resists translation of expressions, such as ‘Razai (Quilt), Masjid (Mosque), Baba (Father), and Inqilaab (Revolution) to create nuances of meaning embedded in the South Asian cultural context. Thus, the findings also revealed that the hybrid use of language by South Asian writers is in actual an attempt to reject the normative hegemony of Standard English and promote Hindi-English and Pakistani-English as an idea of celebrating hybrid identity.
Downloads
References
Aggarwal, N. K. (1982). English in South Asia: A bibliographical survey of resources. Indian Documentation Service.
Alaiyadi, B. (2021). Language transfer and its impact on Arabic-speaking EFL learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 10(1), 186–193.
Aravamudan, S. (2006). Duru English: South Asian religion in a cosmopolitan language. Princeton University Press.
Asghar, J. (2014). Postcolonial South Asian literature and the quest for identity. NUML Journal of Critical Inquiry, 12(2), 57.
Ashcroft, B., Griffiths, G., & Tiffin, H. (2003). The empire writes back (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Baumgardner, R. J. (1993). The English language in Pakistan. Oxford University Press.
Bhabha, H. K. (2012). The location of culture. Taylor & Francis.
Bolton, K. (2003). Chinese Englishes: A sociolinguistic survey. Cambridge University Press.
Canagarajah, A. S. (2013). Translingual practice: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. Routledge.
Counihan, C. M. (2018). The anthropology of food and body: Gender, meaning, and power. Routledge.
Gautam, M. R. (2001). The musical heritage of India (2nd ed.). Munshiram Manoharlal.
Gerhardt, C. (2013). Culture and food. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 4–8.
Kachru, B. (1987). The bilingual’s creativity: Discoursal and stylistic strategies in contact literature. In L. Smith (Ed.), Discourse across cultures: Strategies in world Englishes (pp. 125–140). Prentice Hall.
Kachru, B. (2006). Asian Englishes: Beyond the canon. Hong Kong University Press.
Kachru, B. B. (1976). The other tongue: English across cultures. University of Illinois Press.
Kachru, B. B. (1983). Models of new Englishes. In J. Cobarrubias & J. A. Fishman (Eds.), Progress in language planning: International perspective (pp. 145–170). Mouton Publishers.
Kachru, B. B. (1985). The bilinguals' creativity. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 6, 20–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500003032
Kachru, B. B. (1986). The Hindu view of language and linguistics. Journal of Pragmatics, 10(1), 67–86.
Kachru, B. B. (1990). World Englishes and applied linguistics. World Englishes, 9(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1990. tb00683.x
Kachru, B. B. (1997). Cultural meaning and language use. Oxford University Press.
Kachru, B. B. (2006). World Englishes and culture wars. In B. B. Kachru, Y Kachru, & C. L. Nelson (Eds.), The handbook of world Englishes (pp. 446–471). https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470757598
Kachru, Y. (2011). World Englishes: Contexts and relevance for language education. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 155–172). Routledge.
Khan, H. I. (2012). The evolution of Pakistani English as legitimate variety of English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 1(5), 90–99.
Kirkpatrick, A. (2007). World Englishes hardback with audio CD: Implications for international communication and English language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Mahboob, A. (2009). English as an Islamic language: A case study of Pakistani English. World Englishes, 28(2), 175–189. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2009.01583.x
McArthur, T. (2001). World English and world Englishes: Trends, tensions, varieties, and standards. Language Teaching, 34(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800016062
Moag, R. F. (1992). The life cycle of non-native Englishes: A case study. In B. B. Kachru (Ed.), The other tongue: English across cultures (pp. 233–252). University of Illinois Press.
Muthiah, N. (2009). Indigenizing fictionalized English: The case of South Asian writing in English. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 8(3-4), 239–255.
Myers-Scotton, C. (1993). Social motivations for codeswitching: Evidence from Africa. Oxford University Press.
Nelson, C. L. (1982). Intelligibility and non-native varieties of English. In B. B. Kachru (Ed.), The other tongue: English across cultures (pp. 58–71). University of Illinois Press.
Nilep, C. (2006). "Code switching" in sociocultural linguistics. Colorado Research in Linguistics, 19, 1¬–22. https://doi.org/10.25810/hnq4-jv62
Parafita Couto, M. C., & Gullberg, M. (2019). Code-switching within the noun phrase: Evidence from three corpora. International Journal of Bilingualism, 23(2), 695–714. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006917729543
Pennycook, A. (2006). Global Englishes and transcultural flows. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203088807
Quinto, E. J. M., & Santos, J. C. (2016). Abrogation and appropriation in selected pre-war Philippine short stories in English. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 16(1), 157–168.
Rahman, A. M., & Rahman, A. R. M. M. (2021). Linguistic hybridization in a television talk show: A sociolinguistic analysis. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(2), 767–782.
Rao, R. (1938). Kanthapura. William Heinemann Ltd.
Roy, A. (2017). The ministry of utmost happiness. Penguin Random House.
Sarfraz, M. (2021). Lexical variations in Pakistani English: A case study of the novel Twilight in Delhi. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 4(6), 252–260. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2021.4.6.30
Schneider, E. W. (2007). Postcolonial English: Varieties around the world. Cambridge University Press.
Schneider, E. W. (2016). English in the contact zones: Hybridity and the emergence of new varieties. World Englishes, 35(2), 191–204.
Sheeraz, M. (2013). Indigenization of English: An exploration. Journal of ELT and Applied Linguistics (JELTAL), 1(1), 1–12.
Stockwell, P. (2002). Sociolinguistics: A resource book for students. Psychology Press.
Talib, I. S. (2002). The language of postcolonial literatures: An introduction. Psychology Press.
Trudgill, P. (2002). Standard English: What it isn’t. In T. Bex & R. J. Watts (Eds.), Standard English (pp. 129–140). Routledge.
Trudgill, P. (2003). A glossary of sociolinguistics. Oxford University Press.
Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2021). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Tabula Rasa, (38), 61–111. https://doi.org/10.25058/20112742.n38.04
Weinreich, U. (2011). Languages in contact: Findings and problems. Mouton Publishers.
Weinreich, U., Labov, W., & Herzog, M. (1968). Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In W. P. Lehmann & Y. Malkiel (Eds.), Directions for historical linguistics: A symposium (pp. 95–188). University of Texas Press.
Wong, Y. K., & Hassan, R. (2013). Indian English poetry: New perspectives. McFarland.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal.
