Abstract

Domains divide language according to the particular context of its use. Concerning different contexts of research, the domain varies. The purpose of the present research is to explore the sociolinguistic significance of Pashto-English hybridization in the language domains. To explore the area, TV programmes from a Pashto channel Khyber News were selected through purposive sampling. As two episodes from each programme were selected, thus a total of ten programmes were taken for analysis that makes about 10 hours of recording. For data analysis, Kachru’s (1978) framework was used. The findings show that according to different domains of language use, the frequency of hybridized words varied. In the domain of Government and Administration and School and Education, mostly words were hybridized, followed by the domain of Economy, Playground and Street, Military and Courts. The findings reveal that domains have sociolinguistic significance that determines the extent to which language is hybridized.

Key Words

language Domain, Sociolinguistic Significance, Pashto-English Hybridization

Introduction

Hybridization, whether at word level or phrases and sentence level, got significance as it has social as well as morphological significance. It is the reason for bringing innovations not only at the semantic level but also at morphological and syntactic levels. It is defined as the mixing of two languages. When two languages come in contact, naturally, it leads to hybridization. As a result, codes are exchanged and mixed together, forming a language chunk that has the characteristics of both the knotted languages interlinking both the social and linguistic features. The purpose of the present study is to explore the sociolinguistic features of Pashto-English hybridization at the lexical level. For this purpose, electronic media has been used as a source of data and TV programmes belonging to different language domains from the Pashto channel Khyber News are investigated. The domain is the context where interaction takes place (Fishman, 1972), and the number of the domain according to different sociolinguists ranges from three to nine or even more depending on the multilingual setting (Hoffmann, 2014; Fishman, cooper and Ma, 1971; Saghal 1991). 

Hybridization has a social significance because the use of hybridization in a particular domain shows the extent to which that particular type of language is accepted. If we take Pashto TV programmes, the presence of hybridized forms shows that the media is using such forms as these are accepted by society. Furthermore, these forms also reflect the way the speakers conceive their language and give space to other languages. The use of hybrid lexical items is caused by bilingual or multilingual

settings that promote it. Hybridization of lexical items can be because of the lack of a particular item in the native language or as an indicator of affiliation to the target group. It shows that hybridization got social and linguistic significance exploring, which is the aim of the present study.


Statement of the Problem
One can hardly speak or listen to pure Pashto because of Pashto-English contact, and this fusion is quite evident in Pashto electronic media. This situation leads to many questions as to why so frequently pure Pashto is disappearing, what the features of such hybridized words are, what sociolinguistic significance Pashto-English hybridization has. The present research aims to examine the frequent mixing of English in Pashto, which has resulted in Pashto-English hybridization and the role hybridization has in various language domains. 

Literature Review

Different codes are used in communication either to show solidarity, affiliation with a certain group, or distance from another social group. Code, according to Wardhaugh (2010), is the dialect or language used by people on any occasion. The use of codes in such a situation leads to code-switching that causes hybridization.  Hybridization, thus, is the mixing or synthesis of two languages in a manner that the third code is created that has the features of both the languages (Maschler, 1998). This amalgamation is not only linguistic one but, what Bakhtin (1981, p. 833) says it is “an utterance that belongs, by its grammatical and compositional markers to a single speaker, but that actually contains, mixed within it two utterances, two speech manners, two styles, two 'languages’, two semantic and axiological belief systems.”  The two languages are separate, but the speakers don’t consider so as they mixed the boundaries by routine and naturally (Thirumalai, 2004). In this way, language changes unnoticeably, regarding which Milroy (Milroy, 1992, p.1) says that “Indeed, change seems to be inherent in the nature of language: there is no such thing as a perfectly stable human language.” Languages change, and these changes occur because of different reasons that promote the mixing of codes. This provides an arena where creativity takes place and language use, structure and meaning change. 

It means that bilingualism is a mandatory situation for hybridization. Bilingualism is a normal phenomenon all over the world. A person who has native-like proficiency in two languages is generally defined as a bilingual, though the differences amongst the linguists exist as such. The term ‘bilingualism’ or ‘multilingualism’ has always been a topic of disputation among linguists. The term ‘bilingualism’ can generally be applied to a wider range of situations. According to Bloomfield (1933), a bilingual is a person who has “native-like control of two languages” (p. 56). For Haugen (1966), a bilingual produces “complete and meaningful utterances in other languages” (p. 6). At the other extreme, Macnamara (1969), as cited by René Appel and Pieter Muysken (1987), “proposed that somebody should be called bilingual if he has some second-language skills in one of the four modalities (speaking, listening, writing, reading), in addition to his first-language skills” (pp. 2-3). According to Emeneau (1980), a bilingual is an individual “who learns more or less well another language than his mother tongue for various types of communication that on the whole are shared by few in his linguistic community” (p. 38). There can be another situation “in which many members of a linguistic community, being in continuous contact with many members of another linguistic community, learnt more or less well the language of that other community” (Emeneau, 1980, p. 38). Bilingualism is a natural phenomenon. Labov (1972) is of the opinion that it is natural for a second language learner to acquire a second language whenever his first language comes into direct contact with a second language. He further says that the second language is learnt in a more formal situation. To understand the general approach towards bilingualism, it can be categorized into two kinds. The first category of bilingualism is a type of group process which happens slowly and in a natural way, commonly in societies and countries with frequent immigrations. The second category is noticeable in the individual environment. Bilingualism in Pakistan, with English as a second language, is mostly learned and comes under the heading of the second category. Bilingualism, according to Filipovic (1986), as quoted by Macek (1991), can be grouped into two types, i.e., direct and indirect bilingualism. Both direct and indirect bilingualism have an impact on language use, and both contribute to hybridization. Macek further says that as the world is continuously changing, therefore the boundaries in bilingual and monolingual situations often remains blurred. However, one thing cannot be denied that bilingualism is natural whose merits and demerits cannot be ignored.  In this globalized world, such phenomena like code-switching, hybridization and their effects on language cannot be neglected. And that is why exploring such phenomena has great significance.  

Taking the context of Pakistan, which is a multilingual country with many languages spoken both at national and local levels, researchers have explored the different language contact. For example, Kasuer explored Urdu-English code-switching where data was gathered from FM radio programmes. Similarly, Rasul (2006) also explored code-switching in Urdu-English contact, where she worked on hybridization at lexical and phrase level.  In the same way, Jabeen (2018) explored code-switching and hybridization in media and daily life conversation. Ahmad and Ali (2014) explored literary work and studied the impact of Urduised English on English Pakistani fiction.  

On the local languages, little work has been carried out. Pashto, the local language, has been explored by Khan (2010) and Khan and Muysken (2014).  Khan explored the social factors like social status, style, topic, prestige and identity of the interlocutors that cause the use of hybridized language. He focused on how this social variable leads to the use of language especially considering Pashto-English contact. On the other hand, Khan and Muysken (2014) focused more on the linguistic aspects. In addition, Ahmad (2018) took a more holistic exploration where he took Pashto TV programmes and investigated hybridization in simple and compound word and also had a discussion on the role of suffixation in hybridization. Similarly, Gul (2017) also worked on Pashto-English hybridization. She collected data from TV programmes and also used observational methodology in exploring the area. Her focus remained on the linguistic dimensions where she researched the frequency of various categories, e.g., verbs and nouns. 

Unlike other disciplines such as sociology, ethnolinguistics and psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics takes society and language as well-connected structures and not as an arbitrary group of independent items. Sociolinguistics, according to Coupland and Jaworski (1997), is “the study of language in its social contexts and the study of social life through linguistics” (p. 1). Sociolinguistics shows the logical relationship between variations in linguistic structures and social variables. Although it has remained a point of controversy whether society makes a language or language modifies the behaviour pattern of a society but the complementary relationship between language and society cannot be denied. There are social factors like class, ethnicity and gender which affect the linguistic choices of a speaker. Hence, its contribution is immense as far as the work on the relationship between society and language is concerned. Sociolinguistics determines that language change is systematic and not arbitrary, and reasons behind language change can be found and linked with the respective changes through proper investigations. As society and language work as interdependent structures, a variation in one part or item not only affects or changes other parts or items within the same structure but also extra-structural variations occur because of the interdependency of these two structures, i.e. language and society. Therefore, keeping in view the importance of language and society, the current study explores the sociolinguistic significance of Pashto-English hybridization. 

Methodology

The present research explores the sociolinguistic features of Pashto-English hybridization. For this purpose, through purposive sampling, five Pashto programs from a renowned Pashto channel Khyber News were selected. The data was sorted into different domains, i.e., government and administration, school and education, economy, military, courts, and playground and street.  The programmes include News Hour, Top Stories, Naway Sahar, ports Mag and News Hour. It is important to mention that two episodes from each programme were taken that make a total duration of about 10 hours. For analysis purpose, Kachru’s (1978) model was chosen based on which data was analyzed quantitatively and words related to different domains were thus considered.

The programmes which are selected for the collection of data for this study are shown in the following table:

 

 

Table 1.

Programme No.	Name of the Programme	Duration of the Programme (in minutes)	Domains Discussed in the Programme
1	Top Stories	56	·         Economy ·         Govt. and Administration ·         School and Education
2	Top Stories	50	·         Govt. and Administration
3	News Hour	50	·         Govt. and Administration ·         Military
4	News Hour	51	·         Govt. and Administration ·         Courts ·         Economy
5	Mohim Repotuna	25	·         Military ·         Courts
6	Mohim Repotuna	26	·         Govt. and Administration ·         Courts ·         Religion
7	Naway Sahar	46	·         Religion
8	Naway Sahar	52	·         Religion
9	Sports Mag	43	·         Playground and Street
10	Sports Mag	43	·         Playground and Street

Analysis

The present research explores the sociolinguistic features of Pashto-English hybridization. For this purpose, through purposive sampling, five Pashto programs from a renowned Pashto channel Khyber News were selected. The data was sorted into different domains, i.e., government and administration, school and education, economy, military, courts, and playground and street.  The programmes include News Hour, Top Stories, Naway Sahar, ports Mag and News Hour. It is important to mention that two episodes from each programme were taken that make a total duration of about 10 hours. For analysis purpose, Kachru’s (1978) model was chosen based on which data was analyzed quantitatively and words related to different domains were thus considered.

The programmes which are selected for the collection of data for this study are shown in the following table:

 

 

Table 1.

Programme No.	Name of the Programme	Duration of the Programme (in minutes)	Domains Discussed in the Programme
1	Top Stories	56	·         Economy ·         Govt. and Administration ·         School and Education
2	Top Stories	50	·         Govt. and Administration
3	News Hour	50	·         Govt. and Administration ·         Military
4	News Hour	51	·         Govt. and Administration ·         Courts ·         Economy
5	Mohim Repotuna	25	·         Military ·         Courts
6	Mohim Repotuna	26	·         Govt. and Administration ·         Courts ·         Religion
7	Naway Sahar	46	·         Religion
8	Naway Sahar	52	·         Religion
9	Sports Mag	43	·         Playground and Street
10	Sports Mag	43	·         Playground and Street

Conclusion

Pashto-English hybridization has been analyzed and discussed from a sociolinguistic perspective. The data shows that hybridization occurs in all of the important domains, including formal and informal domains. Religion is the only domain where hybridization has not been used. The rest of the six domains of language use provide sufficient data which represent almost every aspect of society. Usually, suffixation help construct hybridized words. The study shows that media language is updated with the current trends and forms of language and truly reflects different domains of language use. It is further concluded that media were often educated class of society is invited in such programmes, there is a need of studying the different facets of society directly so that the true picture of language use in common public may be investigated. The increasing number of Pashto-English hybrid forms is a threat to language. However, Pashto-English convergence seems to be the most likely possibility of the mixing rather than a shift to English. A new variety of Pashto may emerge, which will be richer in vocabulary, highly adaptable and having the least proficiency issues for the speakers.

Pashto-English hybridization in print media is another possible area for further research. Print media is an interesting field for Pashto-English hybridization because the choice of words is more conscious in print media as compared to electronic media. Moreover, as a noun phrase and verb phrase provide enormous scope for language hybridization; therefore, Pashto-English hybridization at phrase level is a potential gap for further research as well. For understanding the phenomenon completely, more in-depth studies can add to the existing knowledge on hybridization in the context of Pashto-English contact.

References

• Ahmad, N. (2018). Pashto-English hybridization: A lexical analysis of Pashto electronic media. (Unpublished MPhil dissertation). Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, Pakistan.
• Ahmad, S. & Ali, S. (2014). Impact of Urduised English on Pakistani English Fiction. Journal of Research (Humanities), 61-75.
• Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language. New York: H. Holt.
• Coupland, N., & Jaworski, A. (1997). Sociolinguistics: A reader and coursebook. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Emeneau, M. B. (1980). Language and linguistic area: Essays. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Fishman, J. A. (1972). The sociology of language, yesterday, today, tomorrow. In R. Cole (Ed.), Current issues in linguistic theory (pp. 51-75). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press
• Gul, A. (2017). Hybridization at lexical level: An analysis of Pashto spoken discourse(Unpublished BS Thesis). Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, Pakistan.
• Haugen, E. (1966). Dialect, language, nation. American anthropologist, 68(4), 922-935. doi: 10.1525/aa.1966.68.4.02a00040
• Hoffmann, C. (2014). Introduction to bilingualism. London: Routledge
• Jabeen, S. (2018). Code-mixing, code switching and borrowing in Urdu and Pakistani English language in media and daily life conversations. International Journal of Advanced Research, 6(11), 805-811.
• Kachru, B.B. (1978). Towards structuring code mixing: An Indian Perspective. International Journal of Sociology of Language, 1978(16). doi: 10.1515/ijsl.1978.16.27
• Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
• Thirumalai, M. S. (2004). Tradition, modernity, and impact of globalization- Whither will Tamil go? Language in India, 4.
• Macek, D. (1991). Between language contact and language development. In V. Ivir & D. Kalogjera (Eds.), Languages in contact and contrast: Essays in contact linguistics (pp. 281-288). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter
• Maschler, Y. (1998). On the transition from code switching to a mixed code. In P. Auer (Ed.), Code-switching in conversation: Language, interaction and identity. London: Routledge.
• Milroy, J. (1992). Linguistic variation and change: On the historical sociolinguistics of English. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
• Rasul, S. (2006). Language hybridization in Pakistan as a socio-cultural phenomenon: An analysis of codemixed linguistic patterns (Doctoral dissertation, National University of Modern Languages, Islamabad, Pakistan)
• Wardhaugh, R. (2010). An introduction to sociolinguistics (6th ed.). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.