CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE
ENGLISH AS SPOKEN BY
NATIVE URDU SPEAKERS
A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction cf the
requirements for the degree of ~1aster of Arts in
Linguistics
by
Glynn Yvonne Alam
///
June, 1976
The Thesis of Glynn Yvonne Alam is approved:
Paul L. Kirk
Iris Shah, Committee Chairperson
California State University, Northridge
ii
DEDICATION
This study is dedicated to Murshid Alam who pursued informants
in the Chicago area, and to Khursheed Alam who not only helped to
locate informants in the Los Angeles area but allowed his native
knowledge of Urdu to be examined extensively.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION.................................................
ABSTRACT
ID
.........................
,
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
..
•
•
•
•
•
..
•
•
•
•
ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE TEXT.............................
iii
v
v·i i
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . .
1
Chapter I
THE
............................. .
3
Chapter II
DATA COLLECTION ............................ .
8
Written Language Exercises.............
Tape Recordings........................
Perception Tests.......................
Test Samples...........................
8
9
10
ANALYSIS OF THE DATA ....................... .
23
Phonological Features..................
Lexical and Grammatical Features.......
1. Prepositions .......... ~.........
2. Do as a Main Verb and as a
Support Verb....................
3. Nouns ........... ·................
4. Demonstrative Pronouns ..... 4....
23
30
37
40
46
CONCLUSION.................................................
51
BIBLIOGRAPH)' ................................ ~ ~ .. :..............
54
Chapter III
INFORt~ANTS
iv
12
30
ABSTRACT
ENGLISH AS SPOKEN BY
NATIVE URDU SPEAKERS
by
Glynn Yvonne Alam
Master of Arts in Linguistics
June, 1976
This study is an analysis of some of the phonological, grammatical, and lexical features of the English spoken by native Urdu speakers living in the United States.·
The initial data collection involved noting down all nonstandard English usages by native Urdu speakers in informal social s·ituations.
Based on this data, written exercises, perception tests, pro-
nunciation lists, a reading passage, and a common topic for informal
discussion were developed for the second data collection.
Both error
analysis and contrastive ana·lysis were then performed on this data
collected from a number of informants.
Phonologically, the most significant occurrences of errors inelude the use of the Urdu labiodental /w/ in place of the English consonants /v/ and /w/ and in the use of /th/ for /9/, a sound nonv
existant in Urdu.
guages.
Prepositions or postpositions occur in both
lan~
Due to their idiosyncratic features in different languages,
the second language learner is faced with the task of memorizing them.
In the written tests, only a few Urdu natives revealed that they did
not know the SAE usage.
Because Urdu does not use the verb do as a
support verb, the Urdu native often omits it in his English speech.
According to the written test data, the Urdu informants are aware of
SAE usage of do as a main verb as well as a support verb.
The Urdu
informants often deviate in their use of the English definite article.
This is shown to be caused by the fact that such an article does not
exist in Urdu.
They also have difficulty in using the noun partitive,
pair of, again because such a partitive does not occur in Urdu.
Count-noncount nouns present the Urdu informant with problems of SAE
usage since the classification of these nouns is peculiar to each language.
Even though the Urdu informants are aware that an English dem-
onstrative cannot be used in conjunction with a possessive, as the
data shows, they occasionally use such a construction in their English
speech.
The study concludes with the statement that since the Urdu speakers have mastered English global grammar, they are successful communicators in their second language.
vi
ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE TEXT
adj
adjective
agt
agentive
art
article
att
attributive
B
Bihar, India
Bg
Bangladesh
Br
Bangalore, India
By
Bombay, India
CCAT
case category
CM
case marker
cop
copular
CP
Central Province, India
OEM
demonstrative
det
determiner
E
English
gen
genitive
imper
imperative
Inf
informant
K
Karachi, Pakistan
loc
locative
M
mode
N
noun
NC
no change
No.
number
NSAE
Nonstandard American English
vii
ABBREVIATIONS (continued)
obj
objective
p
proposition
Pj
Punjabi
PLU
plurality
pass
possessive
prep
preposition
pres
present
s
sentence
SAE
Standard American English
sent
sentence
u
Urdu
v
Verb
0
Null
viii
INTRODUCTION
It is my intention in this study to analyze certain phonological,
grammatical, and lexical features of the English spoken by native Urdu
speakers living in the United States.
Urdu is an Indo·-European language spoken by
areas of India and Pakistan.
It is this religious aspect that orig-
inally made it distinct from Hindi.
enced by
Persian~
in various
~loslems
Besides being lexically influ-
Urdu adopted the Arabic writing system thus render-
ing it unreadable by Hindi speakers who use the Sanskrit writing system.
Over the years, the two languages have developed some minor
phonological and lexical differences, but,
essentially~
they are the
same language.
In 1947, Britain gave up its 200-year rule over the Indian Subcontinent.
It left its language, English, as a unifying force in an
area where mutually unintelligible languages and dialects abound.
Another legacy is that English has become a prestige language, the
language of government and of the best schools.
Thus, it is not un-
usual for an Indo-Pakistan native to begin English training at a very
early age and to continue such throughout his academic life.
It should be noted that the Urdu speakers used as informants in
this study were first exposed to British English prior to arriving in
the United States.
This is immediately apparent in the pronunciation
of certain sounds and sometimes in syllable accentuation.
However~
these Britishisms are not treated in the scope of this study nor is
British Engiish considered as one of the influences on Urdu English
as spoken in the United States.
In the material presented, Urdu
1
2
appears to be the primary influence on the English spoken by native
Urdu speakers.
I
THE INFORMANTS
The most difficult problem in finding informants for this study
was to locate speakers of Urdu as a first language.
There are a
great number of immigrants from Pakistan and India in the United
States.
Many of them speak several languages fluently, some of them
being natively multilir.gual.
Since it would be difficult to determine
whether one or several of their first languages were the cause of interference in the English they speak, only those who claimed a single
language, Urdu, as their first language were selected as informants.
The initial background questionnaire (shown at the end of this
chapter) was given to eighty-five immigrants from the Indian Subcontinent.
Of the eighty-five, only eighteen met the condition of
speak~
ing Urdu as a first 1anguage anc were willing to participate in the
study.
Of the eighteen, two are recent immigrants who are not fluent
in English and cannot read English well enough to complete a written
exercise.
So, the total number in the study is sixteen.
Table 1 displays some of the more significant aspects of each
informant's social characteristics.
The sixteen informants used for
the analysis range in age from nineteen to forty-one; seven are between nineteen and twenty-eight while nine are between thirty and
forty-one.
The time they have spent in the United States ranges from
less than one year to twelve years; ten in the one-to-four year span,
six in the five-to-t\'Jelve year span.
The greatest difference is the
span between the time English training began and the moment when they
were in a totally English speaking environment.
3
All were under the
4
age of thirteen when they were first exposed to English instruction,
but for only two was it the it· predominant 1anguage a yeat· after the
onset of instruction.
For the remainder of the subjects, it was be-
tween five and thirty-five years before English became the predominant
language in their environment.
The national origin of the informants is varied because of the
religious and political conflicts which have taken place on the Indian
Subcontinent after World War II.
All of the informants are Moslem,
and even though some may have lived in a state where Urdu was not the
dominant language, it was certainly the dominant language within their
Moslem community.
India.
Seven informants are from the state of Bihar in
There, Urdu is the dominant language spoken by Moslems.
Five
informants are from Karachi, Pakistan, where Urdu is dominant, but it
is an Urdu in the process of assimilating many dialects spoken by recent immigrants.
The remaining four informants are from Central
Province, Bombay, and Bangalore in India and from Bangladesh.
Central Province is Urdu the predominant language.
Only in
The people in the
other areas speak languages either distantly related or unrelated to
Urdu.
Although four informants began their English schooling with
native English speakers as models, this had little effect on their
spoken English since this training was traditional with an emphasis
on written translation.
Either because they reside in campus housing or because of intermarriage, seven informants no longer use Urdu in their homes and for
them English is totally dominant.
Nine informants live in the Los
Angeles, California area, and seven live in Chicago, Illinois.
5
All sixteen informants claim to be able to read and write English
as well as they speak it.
understanding of spoken
Five feel somewhat unsure about their
English~
especially Black English.
Only two
expressed some insecurity about speaking English.
It is impossible to determine, without an extremely thorough
analysis of the dialects of Urdu involved, whether these dialect differences have any significant influence on the English of the informants.
Such an investigation is beyond the scope of this study.
It is
assumed only that the informants' first language is Urdu, that they
are bilingual, and that English, the second language, is affected by
the first language.
6
Table 1
Analysis of the Background Questionnaire
Inf
A
B
c
19
23
6
4
19
24
7
8
18
23
24
1
2
3
4
25
5
6
25
26
27
4
12
24
7
8
9
10
5
23
23
D
F
G
19 u
IJ
5 E
u
18 u
u
18 U,P; U,P;
5 E
u
15
E
u
u
22
30
6
26
18
31
5
28
31
I1 31
12
31
13
35
28
26
8
14
15
16
Column
Column
Column
Column
Column
Column
Column
Column
Column
37
39
41
A:
B:
C:
D:
E:
F:
G:
H:
I:
6
6
10
10
8
5
23
21
35
25
32
40
E
u
u
u
20 U_,P;
13
E
22
u
15 u
25
u
32
0
40
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
H
K
E_M
u K
u
!I
!'..
E
K
B
B
K
B
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
Bg
CP
B
Br
B
B
B
I
u
E
E
u
u
u
u
E
IJ
E
._~
E
u
t:'._
u
u
Age at time of data collection
Age at onset of English instruction
Age of arrival in the United States
Age at beginning of dominant use of English
First language of English instructors
Dominant language spoken in childhood area
Dominant language spoken in childhood school
National origin
Language currently spoken in U. S. home
7
BACKGROUND QUESTIONNAIRE
1.
In what area of India or Pakistan did you spend the first six
years of your life? __________________
2.
What language or languages were spoken in your home during the
first six years of your life?
--------------------------
3.
What language was spoken at school when you first attended?
4.
What language was spoken most often in the area where you lived
as a child?
---------------------------------------
5.
At what age did you begin learning English?
6.
At what age did you begin using English more than any other
language? ____________________________________
7.
What was the native language of those who taught you English?
8.
Did you learn English after arriving in the United States? _ __
9.
At what age did you come to the United states?- - - - - - - -
----------------
10.
What is your age now?
11.
What is your sex?- - - - - What language do you usually speak in your home in the United
States?
12.
------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
13.
Do you read and write English as well as you speak it? _ _ __
14.
Do you feel completely sure of yourself when you are speaking
English? ___________________~---------------------
15.
Do you always understand English when spoken
by
Americans? _ __
II
DATA COLLECTION
The Urdu informants were first observed in completely informal
social situations.
It was during these informal settings that non-
standard English usages were noted and from which the components for
study were dr·awn.
nonstandard usage.
The researcher simply \"rote down every instance of
Tape recordings were then made to investigate non-
standard phonological uses as well as to gather further information
on nonstandard lexical and grammatical usage.
It was noted in listening to the informal speech of the informants that there appeared to be vacillation between the voiced labiadental /v/ and the semi-vowel /w/ and various replacements for the
interdental fricatives /9/ and/~/.
These instances occurred within
a five sentence read·ing passage and therefore
~varranted
further study.
It was also noted in this initial data collection, that the
majority of nonstandard English fell into four lexical-grammatical
areas:
3) nouns
1) prepositions
2) do as a main verb and as a support verb
4) demonstrative pronouns in conjunction with possessives.
The second elicitation of data was done through written language
exercises, perception tests, pronunciation lists, a passage to read,
and a topic on \-Jhich the informants could speak freely.
Samples of the tests prepared for the second data collection are
included at the end of this chapter.
Written Language Exercises
Four written exercises were developed to examine the usages noted
8
9
by the researcher.
sitions.
The first exercise deals with the use of prepo-
Twenty-five sentences 1t1ere prepared with one preposition de-
1eted from each sentence.
tions was listed.
Afte't'' each sentence, a choice of prepos i-
The informant had to choose the one he would use
if he were speaking the sentence.
In the second written exercise, twenty sentences making use of
do as a main verb and as a support verb were prepared; nonstandard
sentences were interspersed with standard ones.
The informant was
asked to either change the sentence or write no change based on how he
would say the sentence.
The third exercise also asked that the informant correct the sentence or write no change.
It consisted of fourteen sentences using
nouns in standard and nonstandard English.
The nonstandard usage in-
valved the plural marker on nouns, the definite article with the noun,
and count-noncount nouns.
The final exercise consisted of five nonstandard sentences using
a possessive pronoun with a demonstrative pronoun.
The informant was
asked to simply correct it or write no change.
Before eliciting data from the Urdu informants, nine speakers of
Standard American English were given the written exercises as a basis
for
determin~ng
acceptable standard usage.
Tape Recordings
To elicit data for the phonological study, a list of ninety words
was read aloud by each informant.
/v/, /w/, /9/, and
was followed
by
;8;
The list consisted of words using
in initial, medial, and final positions.
This
a reading passage of five sentences containing the
10
same phonemes in various positions within the words.
Each informant
was then asked to explain the system of arranged marriages amongst
Pakistani and Indian Moslems.
This elicited a sample of informal
speech from each informant, with some overlap of vocabulary given the
uniform topic.
Perception Tests
As Nemser {1971) points out, a nonnative speaker of English may
not only pronounce a phoneme differently from speakers of standard
English, he may also hear it differently.
Nor are what he hears and
what he pronounces always the same, both being different from standard
English.
Nemser's contention is that it is not always possible to
predict where errors will occur in the second language simply on the
basis of contrasting the phonological systems of the two languages.
He suggests that the nonnative speaker will merge the two phonological
systems, anc thus, it is necessary to test the second language speaker's perception as well as his pronunciation.
A four-part perception test was given to each Urdu informant.
Part A consisted of ten nonsense syllables pronounced by the interviewer.
The informant wrote down what he heard using standard English
orthography.
In Part B, the informant was given a sheet containing
the same nonsense syllables, plus (in each case) two phonetically similar syllables, and a zero (¢) choice.
The interviewer pronounced the
syllable, and the informants ch·c1ed what they heard.
For instanceJ
if the nonsense syllable called was /a~/, the informant had a choice
of circling ath, ad,
~1,
or i·
Part C v1as a test where the informant heard an actual Eng1ish
11
word.
The interviewer pronounced a word, context free, and the in-
formant wrote it down.
Par·t 0 used the same English words, but this
time they were written and included two phonetically similar ones,
plus a ¢ choice for the subject to select from.
circled what he thought he heard.
The informant again
12
PRONUNCIATION LIST
vacant
1eather
catholic
wrath
thirty-two
tavern
massive
way
nerve
either
bathing
leeway
television
\'Ja
11 et
bathe
th;~ow
move
towel
wharf
birth
rejuvenate
toward
curve
ruthless
myth
renovation
beware
lover
wax
wing
window
threat
three
vacuum
well
with
sheath
have
dove
truthful
truth
vantage
vegetable
behave
whale
serve
that
theory
lowered
sever
carve
mathematics
thrust
revise
locomotive
mowing
bath
verse
work
revenue
reward
wreath
CO\'tard
thimble
ver:y
arithmetic
math
thermostat
wallm-1
veterinarian
pulverize
birthday
whiz
valid
wool
..
1,)
.
vision
without
coworker
thanks
powerfui
vice
velvet
ward
vacillate
wonderful
vend
waken
veil
windmill
shove
READING PASSAGE
On Wednesday, the thirtieth ofNovember, we sang happy birthday
to Mrs. Valentine.
This was her ninety-seventh birthday!
three short years, we will be celebrating her hundredth.
In just
She says
the secret of her long life is to have a high sense of truth and love
along with a fevt, well-developed vices!
14
PERCEPTION TEST
Directions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Write what you hear.
PART A
15
PERCEPTION TEST
Directions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
ath
PART B
Circle the syllable you hear.
6.
ava
ad
awa
at
aha
¢
gS
ther
7.
vit
der
\vit
ter
hit
¢
gS
utha
8.
koho
uda
kava
uta
kowo
gS
¢
droog
9.
wer
troog
her
throog
ver
¢
¢
thwa
10.
wabe
twa
vabe
dwa
habe
gS
¢
16
PERCEPTION TEST
Directions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
PART C
Write the word you hear.
17
PART D
PERCEPTION TEST
Directions:
1.
bait
Circle the word you hear.
6.
·vary
bathe
2.
3.
4.
5.
wary
bade
hairy
¢
¢
mother
7.
win
mutter
vend
mudder
hen
r/J
r/J
Ruth
8.
coven
rude
cowen
root
cohen
(J
r/J
drew
9.
verse
true
worse
threw
hearse
r/J
r/J
dirty
10.
ways
turdy
vase
thirty
haze
r/J
¢
18
LANGUAGE EXERCISE 1
Circle the word or phrase that you would use in the sentence if
you were speaking the sentence. The sign, ¢, signifies that no word
would be used in the blank.
1.
Pull your chair
2.
The dish is
3.
Let's drop _ _ the Khan's.
4.
What do you know ___ the man?
5.
Come and sit
6.
Let •s go _ _ there when you are free.
7.
We will come to your place _ _ Sunday.
8.
Write your name _ _ the register.
on; in; at; upon
9.
We'll be there
at; on; when; upon
the table.
the table.
me.
at; up to; to; on
at; on; in; upon
in on; into; on; in; by; ¢
about; of; from; ¢
alongside; beside; side
your birthday.
over; over to; ¢
10.
Hang the picture _ _ the \'.'all.
11.
We are going to town _ _ car.
12.
They traveled to Karachi _ _ plane.
13.
The company is operating _ _ the red.
14.
He was arrested _____ a narcotics charge.
15.
That man is _ _ England.
16.
I'm so busy.
on; at; ¢
in; at; with; onto; on; by
in; by; with; on
in; on; by; with
by; on; with; in; ¢
by; with; on; of
of; from; ¢
I'm always _ _ the run.
in; on; with; ¢
17. __ the way, what is your nationality? ¢;in; beside; by; on
18.
He insisted ___ going today.
19.
They played a trick _ _ me.
20.
The body washed
21.
He bought his books _ _ the university.
to; at; by
22.
Drop _ _ tomorrow, and we'll have tea.
bv· up· "'·
J.l' in
23.
I'm sorry.
in; to; on; ¢.
to; of; on; by; ¢; for
the beach.
to; up; on; onto; up on; in
>J
'
I'll make it _ _ to you someday.
'
by; with; on; up;
¢
19
LANGUAGE EXERCISE 1 (continued)
24.
25.
She rested
the shade.
the light of our
under; in; at; by; underneath
findings~
we can draw a conclusion. on;
in ; by; wi th
20
LANGUAGE EXERCISE 2
If you \\lere speaking, would you change the following sentences?
If so, correct them on the line provided. If not, write NO CHANGE on
the line.
1.
What they do?
2.
You do see the ball, don't you?
3.
Do it my way.
4.
I have done the exercises.
5.
He done the best he could.
6.
You know the way to his house?
7.
She no have anything.
8.
She don't have shoes.
9.
He don•t want to go.
10.
I don•t see no basket.
11.
I no 1 ike what you do.
12.
I know what you made them to do. - - - - - - - - - - - - -
13.
Do she have a new dress?
14.
She doing all that she can.
15.
I don•t want do that.
16.
Does he know your name?
17.
We don•t have a chance.
18.
What can do he about it?
19.
I don•t know what do next.
20.
He do his homework after dinner.
1
21
LANGUAGE EXERCISE 3
If you were speaking, would you change the following sentences?
If so, correct them on the line provided. If not, write NO CHANGE on
the line.
1.
This is floor.
2.
Fruit is my favorite snack.
3.
I'm going to the store to buy
a shoe.
4.
I need a new pant to wear with
my jacket.
5.
May I have a bread, please.
6.
We used worm to fish with.
7.
The fisherman ran out of baits.
8.
They can seen moon every night.
9.
She put some plants on the
display case.
10.
Let's go to town today.
11.
City streets are not as safe as
country roads.
12.
Gold is more valuable than the
silver.
13.
The store doesn't have rice
today.
14.
I'm going to get my hairs cut
today.
22
LANGUAGE EXERCISt 4
If you were speaking, would you change thE: follo\'Jing sentences?
If so, correct them on the line provided. If not, write NO CHANGE on
the line.
1.
My this book is better than
that one.
2.
These her toys are dangerous.
3.
She picked up his those clothes.
4.
That pen is nicer than my this.
5.
Your that house is on our way.
III
ANALYSIS OF THE DATA
Two methods of analysis have been used in this study namely
error analysis and contrastive analysis.
The second type of analysis
is based on the model presented by DiPietro (1971) with some minor
changes.
The procedure will be to first show how the languages con-
trast in selected areas of the phonological, grammatical, and syntactic components followed by a discussion of the utterances and written
exerc·ises collected from the informants.
Phonological Features
To sound the English phoneme /v/, a speaker must touch the lower
lip, which is cur1ed inward, with the
up~;er
teeth and vibrate the
Thet'e is also a tendency to close the sides of the
vocal cords.
lower lip.
Thus, the English /v/ is described as a voiced labiodental
fricative.
A similar phoneme in Urdu is made by not quite touching
the lower lip, which remains uncurled, with the upper teeth and vibrating the vocal cords.
the lower lip.
There is no tendency to close the sides of
Such a phoneme is described by Bailey (1962) as a
voiced labiodental semi-vowel.
between English /v/ and /w/.
This description places the Urdu /w/
The following feature matrix shows the
contrast between the two languages:
1abi odenta 1
English /V/
English /w/
Urdu
/w/
bilabial
fricative
semi-vocalic
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
From this contrast, we can predict that the Urdu speaker will not
23
24
distinguish between English /v/ and /w/.
The English listener, on the
other hand, may hear a /v/ because of the Urdu labiodental quality
where a bilabial semi-vovml consonant /w/ is expected.
Where a labio-
dental /v/ is expected, the English speaker perceives the semi-vowel
quality and hears /\'1/.
The English interdental fricatives /9/ and
Urdu.
;5;
do not exist in
However, the voiced and voiceless dental aspirates /th/ and
/dh/ do exist, as do the unaspirated dental stops /t/ and /d/ as well
as aspirated and unaspirated retroflexed /t/, /th/, /d/, and /dh/.
Again, a
featu~e
matrix can show the contrast between the b;o lan-
guages:
stop
English /Q/
Englishh/6/
Urdu /th/
Urdu /d I
Urdu /t!
Urdu /d/
Urdu /tft
Urdu /t I
Urdu /dh
Urdu /d /
fricative
i ntet·denta l
+
+
+
+
dental
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
alveolar aspirate
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
From the matrix, it can be predicted that the Urdu speaker is
likely to substitute /th/ for /9/ and /dh/ for /~/ since the Urdu
dental and aspirated qualities are close to the English interdental
and fricative
quali~ies.
This is, in fact, what the data shows.
Table 2 demonstrates the informants mispronunciations of vwrds
1
with the initial sounds /v/,
/w/~
and /9/.
The left column states the
number of words in the list (shown at the end of chapter II) which
begin with these sounds.
The right column shows the number of times
the sixteen informants mispronounced that particular sound.
Tables 3
25
and 4 show the same information in medial and final positions, this
time including '1..;ords containing ;&; .
Table 2
No. of words
containing the
sound in initial
~ition ·
14
19
7
The sound
No. of times
the sound \\las
mispronounced
/v/
/W/
/9/
47
47
16.3
16.7
42.0
The sound
No. times
mispronounced
% of time
mispronounced
37
% of the time
the sound was
mispronounced
Table 3
10
10
7
2
/v/
13
39
10
1
/w/
/~/
(6!
8.1
24.3
8.9
3.1
Table 4
Final position
11
3
8
1
Note:
The sound
/v/
/w/
I~rI
No. times
mispronounced
% of time
misoronounced
0
0
60
0
0
46.8
0
0
The sixteen informants pronounced each word only once.
Therefore~ each informant pr.,onounced /v/ in initial position fourteen t1mes.
In all cases of the mispronounced /v/ and /w/ words, regardless
of word position, the informants were substituting their /w/ for the
sound.
/th/.
In the case of /9/ words, the mispronunciation occurred as
There wer~ a few occurrences of /d/ for 1&1.
occurred ·in the pronunciations of vlith and bathe.
terminated with either /9/ or
For example, this
In SAE, with may be
t&i. In the case of the informants, the
26
following occurred:
pronounced as /d/
1 occurrence
6.25% of the time
pronounced as /th/
6 occurrences
37.5% of the time
The word bathe has one occurrence of;&; pronounced as /th/, but this
was probably due to a misreading of the word and is disregarded in the
data since the word bath has already been recorded in Table 4.
Table 5 shows what occurred when the informants were reading the
short passage (shown at the end of chapter II).
Again the columns on
the left show the number of words containing a particular sound while
the right columns.show the number of times a mispronunciation occurred
and the percentage of time each occurred.
No attempt was made to
separate the words into those containing the sounds in initial, medial, and final position as these words were not read in isolation.
Table 5
No. of words
containing the
sound
7
The sound
mis2ronounced
mis2ronounded
/V/
14
13
22
12.5
13.1
17.2
9.37
6
8
/w/
4
I .
~~~
6
Only nine informants were available for the perception tests.
In Part A, the following ten nonsense syrlables were pronounced by the
interviewer:
1) a& 2) &ar 3) uQa
8) kowo 9) var
10 veib.
4) Grug
5) 9wa
6) ava
7) wit
The infor·mants were then instructed to use
English orthography to write dm'in these syl i ab 1es.
syllables were used for Part B.
The same nonsense
This time, the informants circled
the written forms that they thought they heard from a list of choices
27
{shown at the end of chapter II).
Table 6 gives the results of the
informants writing what they heard (Part A) and circling what they
heard (Part B).
Table 6
Sound being
tested
Part A
Part B
No. informants
misperceiving
the sound
No. informants
misperceiving
the sound
/~/
1
3
1
2
2
2
3
5
4
5
9
2
I I
/9/
/9/
/9/
/V/
3
1
5
2
0
8
4
/W/
/W/
/V/
/V/
6
The misperceptions on the nonsense syllable tests were not
limited to one kind per sound.
Table 7 shows the orthrographic rep-
resentations the informants used for each sound and the number of
times they were used.
Table 7
/~!
Orthographic
sign
No.
times
written
z
dh
sign No.
/9/
/9/
sign No.
sign No.
i9/
sian No.
----""---·
3
th 7
th 8
th 4
th 6
1
d
2
f
1
p 1
f
3
1
t
1
t
1
----ath
--~~------~--------------~s--·--1-----------------s---l-1
rz
v
1
r
gh
1
.L
1
28
/w/
/V/
s·ign No.
v
7
w
2
/W/
sign No.
w
9
s·ign
No.
1
5
3
'II
v
rfi
/v/
/v/
sign No.
sign No.
v
9
v
3
w
4
\'1
6
A similar result occurred when the informant had to circle a
nonsense syllable he thought he heard.
~ircled
and the
numb~r
of times
th~y
Table 8 shows those syllables
were circled.
Tab1e 8
Syllable
called
---
Syllable No. times
circled cir·cl ed
/a&;
ath
tiler
utha
throog
thwa
ava
wit
kowo____
ver
vabe
/oar/
7uGa/
j9rug/
/Gwa/
lava/
/wit/
jkowo/
/var/
7vei b/
Syllable No.
1
8
7
7
7
ad
der
uta
troog
twa
awa
6
y·P·
• t.
2
4
kovo
wer
wabe
5
8
6
5
4
Svll able No.
__..___
3
1
1
1
2
rfi
1
4
5
In part C of the perception test, the following English words
were pronounced by the
4)
intervie't~er:
1)
bathe 2) mother 3) Ruth
threw 5) thirty 6) wary 7) win 8) coven
9).
verse 10) vase.
Using the same words) Part D {see the end of chapter II) allowed the
informants to circle what they heard from a list of wor·ds.
In Part C,
the informant wrote down the word he thought the interviewer called.
In both parts, a particular sound was being tested.
Table 9 shows
the number of informants, out of nine, \'-lho misperceived the sound in
each part.
29
Table 9
Part
C
-Sound being
tested
Part D
· No. informants
No. informants
mis~erceiving
-~I
I I
mis~erceiving
2
0
2
/9/
/9/
/9/
/w/
/w/
/v/
/vi
/v/
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
5
5
4
3
4
7
7
2
5
6
Table 10 shows the letters written within actual words for each
word the interviewer called.
The table shows only the sound being
tested follovJed by the letters written and the number of times they
were written.
Table 10
Sound being
tested within
an actual word
Letter written
for sound being
tested
No. times
letter was
written
Lette:-written
No. times
/*'
th
th
th
th
th
7
v
2
;-/
/9/
/9/
/9/
/w/
/rl/
/v/
/V/
/V/
"'w'
v
v
v
9
7
9
9
4
2
7
4
f
2
v
wh
w
w
5
7
2
3
'tl
6
Table 11 gives the results of Part D.
5
It sh6ws the actual word
called by the interviewer and the word circled by the informants plus
the number of times the word was circled.
30
iable 11
l~ord
called
bathe
mother
Ruth
threw
thirt,Y
war~
win
coven
verse
vase
Word
No. times
circled circled
bathe
mother
Ruth
threw
thirt,Y
war,Y
win
coven
verse
vase
Word
No. times
circled
---- circled
Word
No. times
circled circled
9
9
9
8
9
4
5
6
..,'J
L
0
1
var,Y
vend
cowen
worse
wa s
5
3
3
4
7
1
The results of the perception tests show that while many of the
informants misperceived both /9/ and
;5;
in the nonsense syllables,
few of them misperceived the same sounds in actual words.
We can con-
clude that /9/ and 1&1 are learned sounds and are only semantically
significant for the Urdu speaker.
When confronted with a nonsense
syllable, some Urdu natives merge the two phonological systems and
perceive the various sounds shown in table 7.
Lexical and Grammatical Features
1.
Prepositions
Both English and Urdu use prepositions (postpositions in Urdu)
to mark case.
Such marking in any language is highly peculiar to the
grammar of a particular language.
Consider, for example, figure 1
which illustrates the same phrase in English, Spanish, French, and
Urdu.
31
Figure 1
s
-y- - -
..
CCA:-_ _ _
~~
CM
DET
,
the,
J
I
el,
1',
fl
N
I
mar.,
hombre,
homme,
admi
I
CM
with,
de,
a,
val a
The man with the black beard
El nombre
d~
la barba negra .... .
L'homme \ la barbe noire ....... .
Kali dari vala admi ....•....... ,
(black) (beard) (in possession of)
(man)
CCAT 1
I
wtu
DET
I
the,
la,
la,
9l
CCAT
I
N
I
beard,
barba,
barbe,
dari
I
s
6
lllttl
the beard is
black, etc.
32
Students learning case markers must rely on memory in order to
use them properly since dictionary translations will not provide the
desired construction.
When the Urdu speaker learns English, he must
also memorize such semantic-grammatical constructions.
As any stu-
dent of a foreign language can attest, this process is difficult and
many prepositions never fully enter into the speech of the second
language speaker.
Figure 2 is a deep to surface
structut~e
realization of the first
sentence in the preposition exercise (shown at the end of chapter
II).
See figure 2 on following page.
Figure 2
s
,-----------------~---------------------r
p
~
,---'-----,
pres
imper V
I
pull,
lana
I
CCAT
CCAT
I[1 of]
I th~
r-L
CM
I91
c~
N
I .---L-.N
you,
tum
up .to, DET
ki lanlb 1
the,
~
1
table,
mez
Pull the chair up to the table.
Kursi mez ki 1anib lao.
(chair} (table) (toward)
(pull)
This tree represents a construction peculiar to Urdu.
locative case by the postposition £i.
towards.
-----
v
Janib is a noun marked for
In most instances this would be translated as
34
Figure 3 is a deep to surface realization of sentence twenty-four
of the same exercise.
It represents a case of a direct translation of
the preposition (postposition in Urdu) between the two languages.
See figure 3 on following page.
Figure 3
s
p
M
I
past
I
-.ad
-ya
v
I
rest,
~rna (do)
c~~
I
(J,
ne
l
CCAT
.~bj]
CM
N
~
¢
I
I
she,
Us
I
aram (rest).
crt:
CCAT
inJ
me
DET
I
the,
~
Sh~
rested in the shade.
ne ~ao me aram kya.
(her) (by) (shade) (in)
Us
(rest)
(did)
N
I
shade,
~ao
From these two tree diagrams, it is apparent that both Urdu and
English use prepositions (postpositions) to mark case.
The main dif-
ference is that Urdu uses ne (by) to mark agentive case in the past
English would use a case marker for the agent only in passive
tense.
constructions.
Although the sentences in the prepositional exercise provide
only a small sampling, the results show that the Urdu informants have
generally learned SAE usage, at least as far as the written language
goes.
According to the tape recordings and informal
they frequently misuse them.
conversations~
The most frequent misuse in the test
was that of the preposition in the idiomatic expression, in the red.
This is likely due to the fact that many of the informants have not
yet learned the phrase and were merely guessing at the preposition.
Table 12 shows the prepositions chosen for each sentence by a
control group of nine Standard American English speakers follovted by
the number of Urdu informants, out of fourteen, who chose other than
SAE usages and the actual prepositions they used.
Table 12
Prep.
Sen- acceptable to
tence 9 SAE speakers
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
up to, to
on
in on, b_y
about
beside
over, ¢
on, ¢
when, at
on
on, onto
b.Y
NSAE prep. No. inf.
chosen by who chose
Urdu inf. NSAE prep.
NSAE No.
prep. in f.
at
1
¢
1
in
1
¢
1
2
1
when
with
1
1
b,l
at
at
in
on
in
b,i:
1
2
3
2
NSAE No.
prep. inf.
lf!i
th
1
37
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2.
on
from
on
by
on
on
up on, onto
at
b in
u '
in, under
in
with
3
of
1
~
to
on
1
2
2
in
1
¢
3
with
1
1
underneath 2
by
2
1
on
1
Do as a Main Verb and as a Support Verb
The following realizational rule shm-Js the contrast of the use
of the verb do between English and Urdu.
English
( + I support
l
+ I main verb
00'------------>-3>-
Urdu
\ - I support
L I main verb
+
The contrast is simple; do is never used as a support verb in Urdu.
Figure 4 illustrates a peculiar problem with the sentence,
I know what you made them do.
See figure 4 on following page.
38
Figure 4
s
M
I
pres.
I
,s,
-~a
hu
I
v
I
know,
Jana
CCJI.T
CM
I
II
I
CCAT
I J9bJ]
@g{l
s
N
I
I
m~'
M
r
past
I
-de,
-ya
v
I
make,
karvana
CCAT
CCAT
,__r._.~D
i fPbJJ
N
S
CM
I .,. .-----~1~--.-,
I
I
you, M
tum
pres
rl,
ne
I
I
do,
II
(with)
(this)
_
I
cr~g£1
ccj1s~U
,-----,
CM
¢,
se
N
they
Un
I know what you made them do.
M~ Yanta hu ke tum ne Un se ye karvaya.
(I) (know) (that) (you) {by) (they)
I
I
v
(
P
(caused)
1
CM
rl
N
something,
ye
39
Urdu has causal verbs that, semantically, have more features than do
English causals.
to do.
For instance, Karna is the regular infinitive meaning
Karvana, on the other hand, means to cause to do.
Urdu uses
this causal where English needs the two verbs, to make and to do.
The Urdu sentence in Figure 4 will translate roughly, I know that you
caused them to do this.
Urdu cannot directly translate the English
sentence because there are no question word
cla~ses
in Urdu.
The
tree in Figure 4 also shews that neither language realizes the infinitive in surface structure.
Therefore, it is difficult to explain
why five of the informants chose to keep the infinitive construction
and write, I know what vou made them to do. According to Burt (1975),
a nonnative speaker of a language may generalize a rule of the second
language to cover many aspects of a particular category.
A possible
explanation for what the Urdu speakers are doing here is that they
have used such a sentence as I want them to do that as a model for
rule generalization.
The informants were given a written exercise (shovm at the end of
chapter II) on do as a main verb and as a support verb.
Table thir-
teen shows those changes made by the nine SAE informants followed by
the number of Urdu informants (out of fourteen) who chose NSAE usage.
Table 13
Sentence
1
2
3
4
5
--6-
Changes made
by SAE inf.
No. Urdu inf.
choosing NSAE
.. do they .. , .. did .. , are .. doing..
4
NC, eliminate do
1
NC
1
NC, change done to fin shed.____________,o;;----.. did .. , has done .. , d H..
0
o
Do..
3
7______~·~·-d~o~e~sn__~t~·~·--·--------------------------------·-2______
40
8
13
14
15
.. doesn't .. ,
•. doesn't..
change no to
change no to
eliminate to
change do to
.. in doing..
.. to do..
16
NC
0
18
.. he do..
.. to do..
.. does .. , .. did .. , will do .. , .. can do..
2
0
1
9
10
11
12
.. doesn't .. any..
2
any, change no to a
don't
0
1
0
5
does
1
1
1
17.-----~N.~:---------------------------------------~l-----
19
20
These figures reveal that the Urdu informants did not deviate to any
significant degree from Standard American English usage in their responses.
3.
Nouns
The informal speech of the Urdu informants revealed a non-
standard usage of nouns in three areas:
articles with nouns, plural-
ization of nouns, and count-noncount nouns.
Figure 5 illustrates the deep to surface structure of the
English and Urdu sentences, They can see the moon.
See figure 5 on following page.
.11
.• ...
Figure 5
s
I
p
pres,
I
can,
sakte he
v
I
see,
dekna
CCAT
Ik§
I
I
CM
I
~
N
I
they,
voh
CCAT
~T
J ~'n
'
I
the,
"
They can see the moon.
Voh ~and dek sakte he.
(they) (moon) (see) (able)
(are)
N
I
~oon,
cand
42
The contrast is a simple one; Urdu does not have a definite
article, and Urdu natives are therefore likely to omit it in spoken
English.
Both Urdu and English have the distinction of count-nouncount
nouns.
But, as in the case of prepositions, the categorization of
such nouns is peculiar to each language.
The tree diagram in figure
6 is an example of opposite usages of count-noncount nouns in the two
languages.
See figure 6 on following page.
43
Figure 6
s
·---------------.
p
~
I
v
past
\
-ed,
-ya
I
. use,
Istamal
K~rna
r-
Oi
I
r,
ne
c~1·~.~! ' ccj(ob~
c;M
DE;T
I
the,
r;
I
I
t/i
N
I
wor·ms,
ki ra
fisherman,
mahigir
The fisherman used v10rms ·::or bait.
Mahigir ne kira tere ki tarha Istamal kya.
{fisherman) (by) (worm) (baits) {in place of) {used)
CCft.T
1 (ati]
CM
i
for,
kiterha
N
I
bait
lere
44
The English noncount noun bait cannot carry a plural marker in this
case, but its translation in Urdu, ~ere, is pluralized.
English
worms is pluralized while Urdu kira is not.
Figure 7 shows the deep to surface realization of the sentence
I need a new pair of pants.
See figure 7 on following page.
45
Figure 7
s
p
M
I
pres.
v
I
need,
!ahna
CCAT(' ::\
. I
CM
I
~
I ,._gt~
I
N
I
I,
mu]he
r~
~·
.n
a,
ek
pants,
patlun
CCAT
CCAT
s
s
i (_atQ
l(at!J
I
~
the pants are new~
pttlun nea he
~
the par.ts are
a pd·ir,
¢
I need a new pair of pnnts.
Mu]he ek nea patlun lahie.
(I) (a) (new) (pant) (need)
46
The contrast between the two languages is in the English use of
the noun partitive pair of.
Urdu has no such construction.
The
word pants in English is never used in the singular, but Urdu patlun
is \'Jithout a plural marker unless it is being counted.
Both lan-
guages make use of the indefinite article.
The next test (shown at the end of chapter II) given to the informants was one of noun usage.
Table 14 shows those changes made by
the nine SAE
by
infcrm~nts
foliowed
the number of Urdu informants
who chose NSAE usages and the usages they actually chose.
Table 14
Sentence
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Changes made
by SAE inf.
the floor
NC
a pair of shoes, some shoes,
buy shoes
some new pants, a new pair
of ants
the bread, some bread
worms
bait
No. Urdu inf.
choosing NSAE
NSAE usage
chosen
NC
1
0
5
NC
8
NC
6
7
8
NC
NC
NC
0
5
the town
--~8~----~t~he~m-o_o_n----------------------~7,-------NC
9
10
11
12
13
14
NC
NC
NC
than s i1 ver
any rice, NC
hair
0
5
1
5
NC
rices
NC
In sentences two, nine, and eleven, the Urdu informants made no
errors on the test.
recorded:
In actuai speech, however, the following were
Fruit are my favorite snack., She put some plant on the
display case., and The citv streets are not as safe as the country_
roads.
4.
Demonstrative Pronouns
Figure 8 is a deep to surface structure derivation of the sen-
47
tence This is better than that one in English and Urdu.
See figure 8 on following page.
48
Figure 8
----"-T
CCAT
(obj]
l
s
I
ADJ
I
better,
athi
b..
be,
hona
than that one is
(Mine) Th;s is better than that one.
Meri ye Us se a~hi he.
(My) (this) (that) (than)
(better) (isj
49
The word mine is placed in parentheses in front of the English surface sentence to indicate that it could have been used in the sentence
in place of this.
~(this).
In Urdu, meri (my) can be used in conjunction with
In both languages it is grammatical to follow thE: demon-
strative with a noun, i.e., this book, meri ve kitab (my this book).
The fo 11 m·ring rule i 11 ustra tes the contrast between the two languages.
English
~
Urdu
t
DEtvr-·-----·-->7'
+ dem I agent
+ dem I dem + noun
- dem I pass + dem {+ noun)
+ dem I agent
+ dem I dem + noun
+ dem I pass + dem
(+noun)
That is, both Urdu and English allow a demonstrative to be used as
an agent.
They both allow a demonstrative to be used in conjunction
with a noun.
However, while Urdu allows a possessive to be used with
a demonstrative, English does not.
On the language exercise involving demonstratives (shown at the
end of chapter II), the informants had to correct five sentences that
used possessives in conjunction with demonstrative pronouns.
The
control group of nine SAE speakers all agreed that each sentence had
to be rewritten by omitting either the possessive or the demonstrative or by using a prepositional phrase, i.e., these toys of hers.
Table fifteen illustrates the number of Urdu informants, out of fourteen, who felt the sentences were correct as they stand.
Table 15
Sentence
-----
No. of Urdu inf. choosing NSAE usage
1
2
2
1
1
1
3
4
50
Table 15 (continued)
Sentence
5
No. of Urdu inf. choosing NSAE usage
3
These figures show that most of the Urdu informants are
a~J.:are
that English does not allow a possessive to be used in conjunction
with a demonstrative.
However, the language contrast shows why the
Urdu speaker w·ili sometimes use his own rules of grammar in English
informal speech.
CONCLUSION
The results of the study show that, as expected, Urdu grammar
rules frequently interfere with the English speech of native Urdu
speakers living in the United States.
Phonologically, the most sig-
nificant occurrences of errors involve the use of the Urdu labiadental semi-vowel /w/ in place of the English consonants /v/ and /w/
and in the use of /th/ for /9/, a sound nonexistant in Urdu.
The use of prepositions or postpositions to mark case occur in
Due to their idiosyncratic features in each lan-
both languages.
guage, however, the second language learner is faced with the task of
memorizing them.
In the written exercises, only a few Urdu natives
revealed that they did not know the SAE prepositional usage although
more informal observation reveals frequent misuse in natural speech.
Because Urdu does not use the verb do as a support verb, the
Urdu native often omits it in his English speech.
According to the
written exercise data, however, the Urdu informants are aware of SAE
usage of do as a main verb as well as a support verb.
The most frequent deviances from SAE occurred in the written
exercise on nouns.
definite article.
an article does
n~t
Urdu informants deviated in their use of the
This was shown to be caused by the fact that such
occur in Urdu.
ficulty in using the noun partitive
partitive does not exist in Urdu.
usag~
The Urdu informants also had dif~r
of, again because such a
The informants did now follow SAE
when confronted with English count-noncount nouns.
Thecate-
gorization of these nouns is peculiar to each language, and it is a
problem for the second language speaker to learn their semantic51
52
grammatical usage.
Contrastive analysis shows that what is a count
noun in one language may be noncount in another, and therefore misuse
is frequent in the second language.
In the testing situation, most Urdu informants were aware that
an English demonstrative cannot be used in conjunction with a possessive even though they are observed to occasionally use such an Urdu
construction in their English speech.
Although the Urdu speaker may make frequent errors in spoken
English, he appears to have little difficulty in communicating his
message.
To explain this, we can use Burt's (1975) ideas of global
and local grammars.
To successfully communicate in a second language,
a nonnative speaker must be competent in the global grammar of that
language.
That is, he must correctly adhere to the overall sentence
organization of the target language.
order.
In English, this includes word
If the Urdu speaker said, Bait out ran of fisherman worms,
his communication effectiveness would certainly be in danger regardless of what he did to the count-noncount nouns.
Local grammar
refers to individual elements within a sentence such as verb inflections, auxiliaries, and noun inflections.
From this study, it appears
that the informants have not mastered English local grammar.
Thus,
we can conclude that since the Urdu speaker has mastered English
global grammar, it is not surprising that he has communicative success.
Since the scope of this study was limited in both number of
informants and areas covered, it must be considered only a beginning.
Ideally, one should be able to follow a second language learner
through the years of his exposure to the second language to see if
53
learning-teaching strategies have caused a particular usage that contrastive analysis cannot predict or explain.
In other words, if the
same set of tests could be given to the same set of informants over
a period of years, beginning with the first exposure to English, we
might see different patterns developing.
It would also be interest-
ing to study the individual informant who deviates from both standard
usage and from the other informants• usage.
Such a study would entail
an in depth look at his psychological makeup, i.e., intelligence,
sociability, as well as his linguistic and educational background.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bailey, T. Grahame.
Ltd., 1962.
Urdu.
London:
The English Universities Press
Bender, Ernest. Urdu Grammar and Reader.
of Pennsylvan·ia Press~61.
Philadelphia:
University
Bills, Garland D., ed. ~outhwest Areal Linguistics. San Diego:
Institute for Cultural Pluralism, San Diego State University,
1974.
Burt, Marina K. 11 Error Analysis in the Adult EFL Classroom ...
TESOL Quarterly 9 (1975): 53-63.
Chomsky, Noam. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax.
M.I.T. Press, 1965.
Cambddge:
DiPietro, Robert .J. LanguRge Structures in Contrast.
Newbury House Pub I., 1971.
The
Rowley, Mass:
Gleason, Henry Allan, Jr . .Kork~ook in Descriptive Linguisti~~·
San Francisco: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1955.
Johansson, Stig. 11 The Uses of Error Analysis and Contrastive
Analysis (II) ... English Languaqe Teachinq ~Journal 29 (1975:
330-336.
Nernser, William. E:~_Experimental Study of Phonological Interf~rence
In the English of Hungarians. Bloomington: Indiana Univ.,
1971.
Ritchie, W.
11
0n the Explanation of Phonic Interference ...
18 {1968):
Weinreich, Uriel.
LL
183··197.
Languag_~s
in Contact.
The Hague:
Mouton, 1968.
Halt and Fasold, Ralph W. The Study of Social Dialects in
American E_!l9lish. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1974.
~lolfr·am,
54