Abstract

Hybridization has a significant role in creating words that have the flavor of both the knotted languages. It not only results in the formation of single words but also leads to compound word creation. The present study aims to unveil hybridization in compound words. For this purpose, 5 Pashto TV programmes from Khyber News were selected through purposive sampling. In this study, the framework developed by Kachru (1978) and adapted by Rasul (2006) has been employed. The findings show that hybridization in compounding is a frequently occurring phenomenon that usually has different arrangements of words from both languages, i.e., Pashto words coming before the English word or vice versa depending on the nature of compounding; however, mostly the Pashto words were placed before. Out of the 84 examples of hybridized compounds, there were only two adjectives, and the rest were compound nouns.

Key Words

Language contact, hybridization, compound words, language change, code-switching

Introduction

Language variability is the chief concern of sociolinguistics. Language variability can be observed in multilingual settings and different domains of language use. “Domains are defined in terms of institutional contexts or socio-ecological co-occurrences. They attempt to designate the major clusters of interaction situations that occur in particular multilingual settings” (Fishman, 1972, p. 19). Sociolinguistics needs to establish the domains which govern linguistic choices. Schmidt- Rohr, in 1932, as cited by Hoffmann (2014), proposed nine domains of language use. They are family, playground and street, the school, the church, literature, the press, the military, the courts and the government and administration. Fishman, Cooper and Ma (1971) identified five domains; family, friendship, religion, employment and education. Saghal (1991), in her research, has described the use of language in India in three domains of family, friendship and institution. Fishman (1972) is of the view that there is no constant group of domains that can be relevant to all multilingual settings. Hence, they can be defined intuitively, theoretically or empirically. For this research, different domains of language use have been identified where Pashto-English hybridization is investigated in relation to hybridization in compound words.

The study suggests that frequent Pashto-English code-mixing leads to the creation of hybrid forms that further contributes to the desertion of original Pashto equivalents. Such hybrid forms are the by-products of bilingualism and the indicators as well as the vehicles of language change. The use of hybrid forms on Pashto electronic media is a reflection of the societal acceptance of the linguistic change. Moreover, Pashto-English hybridization is a manifestation of the changing attitudes of Pashto speakers towards their ethnic identity. 

Apart from language change, Pashto-English hybridization can result in the evolution of a new language, a process Kachru (1986) terms as the ‘Englishization of Hindi”. This phenomenon can also be termed language convergence. The possibility of the emergence of a new variety of Pashto seems to be more valid as far as Pashto-English contact is concerned. Possible reasons behind the emergence of a new variety of Pashto may be its rich vocabulary, minimum proficiency issues for the speakers and more adaptability in the swiftly changing world.

One can hardly speak or listen to pure Pashto because of Pashto-English contact, and this fusion is quite evident in Pashto electronic media. The present research aims to examine the frequent mixing of English in Pashto, which has resulted in Pashto-English hybridization in compound words.

Literature Review

It is noticed that often the speakers of a code choose another code because they feel that certain words, phrases or clauses of the first code cannot properly explain what they want to convey. Crystal (1987) is of the view that speakers switch from one code to the other because they cannot express themselves properly in that code. An example can be given here from the Pashto-English context of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa: Nan da sabzay rate dair ochat day. In this example, the user has used the English word ‘rate’ instead of the Pashto word ‘narkh’, which may be due to his ignorance of the Pashto word or because of the less frequent use of this word in spoken Pashto. This is because of language contact that results in mixing the codes. Code mixing is a device that is dependent on the role and situation of the speaker. The speaker uses a mixed code whenever he or she feels that items and units from one code rather than the other will provide him with a chance to take part or to create a rapport in a communicative event.

The historical context of culture and society, the usage of various languages by various people and consequently, the language contact between various languages leads to the establishment of a particular behavioural relationship between the speaker and the code mixed language. Commenting on this issue, Sridhar (1978) records the samples of mixing Perso-Arabic and Kannada on the one hand and, on the other hand, he takes the mixing of English and Kannada. He remarks that the interaction among Arabic, Persian and Kannada, as a historical fact, is the main cause of code-mixing in Kannada. During Muslim rule, the Kannada language came under Perso-Arabic influence, particularly in the domain of government and administration. Either the Persian language, with Arabic script, or Hindustani, affected by Arabic and Persian languages, was used for official record-keeping during this era. This example shows that such a situation leads to code switched world, and hybridization occurs at a different level. 

Language hybridization is the synthesis of two languages resulting in fact from code-mixing. According to Maschler (1998), code-mixing or mixed code is the usage of two languages in such a way that “a third, new code emerges, in which elements from the two languages are incorporated into a structurally definable pattern” (p. l25). When two codes interact, through code-mixing, a third code is created, which possesses structural features specific to the newly created code.

Hybridization, as defined by Bakhtin (1981), 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” (p. 304). According to Backus (2000), the recurrent use of ‘intra-sentential code switching’ denotes a “bilingual lect” or what Alvarez-Caccamo refers to as an “alloy” (p. 833). The users of this mixed ‘lect’ are probably unaware of the fact that they are mixing two languages but consider it as a single language. According to Backus (2000), this ‘lect’ includes mixed utterances as well as utterances in both languages along with utterances that belong to a single language. Consequently, this ‘lect’ is used as the language of that particular speech community.

Thirumalai (2004) states that the borders of the two languages are indistinct in the course of hybridization, but the speaker and participants who use this hybridized form deliberately and regularly consider this as a single language. He does not consider this blur of boundaries as abnormal or unnatural. A worth noting dimension of borders’ synthesis in the process of hybridization is that some speakers of hybridized version may keep the involved languages apart, but it is almost impossible for all the speakers of the hybridized variety to separate one language from another.

Research Methodology

Data for the present study were selected from the Pashto channel Khyber News where programmes representing different domains were selected through purposive sampling. The programmes include Naway Sahar, Top Stories, News Hour, Mohim Reportuna, and Sports Mag. There are several reasons for taking data from television. The first reason is that television can provide a huge amount of data for the analysis and find out of the frequency of language hybridization in different lexical categories. Such a huge amount of data was difficult to be collected from daily discussions. The second reason for taking data from television is that it provides data in most of the domains of language use. Sufficient data is available for the analysis of phenomena like code-mixing and language hybridization from formal as well as informal domains of language use. The participants of the talk shows and discussion panels are professionals and technical experts and belong to different domains. Their use of language, particularly on media, influences the use of language in daily life. The last reason for selecting television as a source for data collection is that data from television can be easily recorded and, hence, could be studied in minute detail. Sacks (1984) states that the recorded data “had a single virtue, that I could replay them. I could transcribe them somewhat and study them extendedly- however long it might take.” (p. 26). Hence, recoding provides “researchers with a transportable object that can be studied again and again, and put on display for others” (Have, 2004, p. 42).

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

 

Table 1. Details of the Selected TV Programmes

Programme No.	Name of the Programme	Date the Programme was Telecast	Duration of the Programme (in minutes)	Domains Discussed in the Programme
1	Top Stories	02-03-2016	56	·         Economy ·         Govt. and dministration ·         School and Education
2	Top Stories	16-03-2016	50	·         Govt. and dministration
3	News Hour	17-03-2016	50	·         Govt. and dministration ·         Military
4	News Hour	07-04-2016	51	·         Govt. and dministration ·         Courts ·         Economy
5	Mohim Repotuna	30-03-2016	25	·           Military ·         Courts
6	Mohim Repotuna	06-04-2016	26	·         Govt. and dministration ·         Courts ·         Religion
7	Naway Sahar	18-03-2016	46	·         Religion
8	Naway Sahar	25-03-2016	52	·         Religion
9	Sports Mag	20-03-2016	43	·         Playground and Street
10	Sports Mag	27-03-2016	43	·         Playground and Street

       

The above table shows the name of the programme, its duration, date of telecast and the domains of language use discussed in the programme. Each programme is allotted a particular number by which it is referred to throughout the study. All these programmes have been taken from Khyber News for its wide coverage in the Pashto speech community. Two episodes of each programme have been selected. Most of these programmes are talk shows where the interlocutors are mostly the hosts and the participants. But programmes number 5 and 6 also contain brief reports where the reporters interview the people of different areas across the province. In programme number 6, the reporter interviews a few individuals from Quetta, the capital of Balochistan, where the Pashto community also exists. In some of the programmes, the participants participate in the programme through the telephone line and ask questions or express their views on the topic under discussion. Some segments of programmes number 4, 5 and 6 are purely in Urdu and, hence, were not considered for analysis.

For analysis purpose, the framework developed by Kachru (1978) and adapted by Rasul (2006) has been employed. One important factor for the use of the selected framework is its relevance to the Pakistani context. In this regard, keeping in view the objective of the study, the only Hybridization in Compound Words has been considered from the framework.

 

Analysis: Hybridization in Compound Words

This category deals with hybridization in compound words. For the analysis of the collected data, findings of the selected TV programmes have been presented in tabular form. Pashto-English hybridization in compound words is analyzed in each table individually. This category is concluded with an overall discussion on Pashto-English hybridization in compound words, emphasizing the two dominant patterns followed by hybridized compound words. 

 

Table 2. Compound Word Hybridization Programme 1

Compound Words	Frequency	Compound Words	Frequency
1.    Federal hukoomat 2. Sobai assemblay 3.    Opposition partianey 4.    Aeeni body	4 3 1 1	5.       Ehtisab commission 6.       Ehtisab act 7.       Vice chancelleran 8.       Check postona	6 1 1 1

 

The above table provides eight instances of compound word hybridization. Data collected from Programme 1 shows that compound words can have different forms after they are hybridized. Two dominant patterns can be noticed in the above list of words. The first pattern is a ‘hybrid compound’ where one part of the compound is from one language and another part from a different language. In the above list, words following this pattern are; federal hukoomat, aeeni body, ehtisab commission and ehtisab act. The second pattern that can be noticed in the compound word hybridization is that one element or part of the compound is from one language but the second element or part of the compound is a hybridized form in itself. The compounds which follow the second pattern in the above list are sobai assemblay, opposition partianey, vice chancelleran, and check postona.

 

Table 3. Compound Word Hybridization Programme 2

Compound Words	Frequency	Compound Words	Frequency
1.       Qaumi assemblay 2.       Political partae 3.       Mazhabi partae 4.       Kharija policy 5.       Istehqaq committae 6.       Kharija policianey	1 1 1 12 1 1	7.    Kharija policae 8.    Intelligence idaro 9.    Khawateen bill 10. Mazhabi partianey 11. Khazo bill 12. Mazhabi partiano	2 1 1 3 1 1

 

The above table presents a list of twelve examples of compound word hybridization. It is observed that the compound hybridized forms provided in the above list follow the same two patterns, i.e., a hybrid compound and a compound where one element is from one language, and another element is a hybridized form. Four compound words in the above list follow the first pattern. These words are; khazo bill, intelligence idaro, khawateen bill and kharija policy. There are eight hybridized compound words in the above list which follow the second pattern. These words are; qaumi assembley, kharija policianey, istehqaq committae, mazhabi partae, mazhabi partiano, mazhabi partianey, kharija policae, and political partae. In these compounds, one part is either from Pashto or English whereas the other part is a hybridized form, which hybridizes the whole compound.

Table 4. Compound Word Hybridization Programme 3

Compound Words	Frequency	Compound Words	Frequency
1. Security ahlikar 2. Khusosi committee 3. Security soratihaal 4. Check postona	1 1 2 1	5. Political intizaamia 6. Civil haspathaal 7. Qaami assemblae	2 2 1

 

Seven hybridized compound words have been presented in the above table. All these hybridized forms follow the same two patterns of compound word hybridization discussed in the previous two programmes. ‘Hybrid compounds’ in the above data are; security ahlikar, khusosi committee, security soratihaal, political intizaamia, and civil haspathaal. The second part of the hybrid compound civil haspathaal is the assimilated form of the word ‘hospital’. Although the word ‘hospital’ has a Pashto substitute roghtoon but it is not in common use. Hence haspathaal is considered as a Pashto word for this study. The two hybridized compound words which follow the second pattern are check postona and qaami assemblae. First elements of the abovementioned hybridized compounds are English and Pashto respectively but the second element of these hybridized compounds are hybridized in themselves by the addition of Pashto inflectional suffixes -ona and -ae respectively.

 

Table 5. Compound Word Hybridization Programme 4

Compound Words	Frequency	Compound Words	Frequency
1.                  Offshore companyaney 2.                  Azaad commission 3.                  Maalyati scandal 4.                  Khairaati project 5.                  Security idaaro 6.                  Non custom paid gaadi	2 1 1 1 1 2	7.       Mura’ati package 8.       Ghair registered 9.       Sana’ti zones 10.   Sana’ti units 11.   Ibtida’ee report 12.   Link roadona	1 1 1 1 2 1

 

The table presents a list of twelve instances of compound word hybridization. Data has been collected from the selected Programme 4. The hybridized compound words which follow the patterns of ‘hybrid compound’ are; azaad commission, maalyati scandal, khairaati project, security idaaro, non custom paid gaadi, mura’ati package, ibtida’ee report, sana’ti zones, sana’ti units, and ghair registered. One element of each of these hybridized compounds is from one language whereas the rest of the elements of each of these compound words are from a different language. All these compounds, except ghair registered, are compound nouns. The word ghair registered is a compound adjective. It is the only hybridized adjective that has been observed in this study so far. The other two hybridized compound words of the above table follow the second pattern of compound hybridization. These words are offshore companyaney and link roadona.

 

Table 6. Compound Word Hybridization Programme 5

Compound Words	Frequency	Compound Words	Frequency
1. Rah e raast operation 2. Fauzi operation 3. Policy thag larey 4. Security idaro 5. Hazir service 6. E’teraafi video 7. Khufya agency	1 2 1 1 1 1 1	8.      Security chaarwako 9.      Munazzam system 10.   Red kaafir 11.   Nizam e adal regulation 12.   Civil judgaan 13.   Additional session judgaan 14.   Mohim reportona	1 1 1 6 3 2 1

 

This table provides a list of 14 hybridized compound words used in Programme 5. Out of these 14 words, eleven words follow the first pattern of hybridization of compound words. One part of each of these words is from one language, whereas the second part belongs to a different language. These words are; rah e raast operation, fauzi operation, policy thag larey, security idaro, hazir service, e’teraafi video, khufya agency, security chaarwako, munazzam system, red kaafir, and nizam e adal regulation. All these words, except hazir service are compound nouns. The word hazir service is a compound adjective. It the second hybridized compound adjective which has been observed so far in the study. The other three hybridized compound words in the above table which follow the second pattern of compound word hybridization are; civil judgaan, additional session judgaan, and mohim reportona.

 

Table 7. Compound Word Hybridization Programme 6

Compound Words	Frequency	Compound Words	Frequency
1.      Business communitay 2.      Offshore compnyaney 3.      Offshore compnyano 4.      Huqooq e naswa bill 5.      Fauzi operation	1 1 1 1 1	6.      Opposition daley 7.      Sobai assemblae 8.      Non custom paid gadi 9.      Mohim reportona	1 1 1 1

 

The above table provides nine instances of compound word hybridization. Four of these words follow the first pattern of ‘hybrid compounds’. These words are; opposition daley, non custom paid gadi, huqooq e naswa bill, and fauzi operation. The hybridized compound words which follow the second pattern are; business communitey, mohim reportona, sobai assemblae, offshore compnyaney, and offshore compnyano. The hybridized compounds following the first pattern are composed of elements that belong to two different languages. The hybridized compounds which follow the second pattern of compound word hybridization consist of elements where one element is either Pashto or English, whereas the second element is a hybrid form hybridized by Pashto inflectional suffixes.

No compounding was found in programme 7 and 8. These programmes are selected from the religious domain of language use. The participants of these programmes do not hybridize any English compound word. This may be due to the fact that religion is a domain where the use of English is least preferred, especially in Pakistan.

 

Table 8. Compound Word Hybridization Programme 9

Compound Words	Frequency	Compound Words	Frequency
1.      Qaami team 2.      Khpal crowd 3.      World cupey 4.      Mezbaan team 5.      Rhumbay edition	4 1 1 1 1	6. Narhiwal cup 7. Narhiwal event 8. Narhiwal teamona 9. Dwaim round	1 1 1 1

 

This table presents a list of nine instances of compound word hybridization. Data has been collected from the selected Programme 9. The hybridized compound words which follow the patterns of ‘hybrid compound’ are; qaami team, dwaim round, mezbaan team, rhumbay edition, narhiwal cup, narhiwal event, and khpal crowd. One element of each of these hybridized compounds is from one language, whereas the rest of the elements of each of these compound words are from a different language. All these compounds are compound nouns. The other two hybridized compound words of the above table follow the second pattern of compound hybridization. These words are narhiwal teamona and world cupey. The first parts of these compounds are Pashto and English, respectively, but the second parts of both these compounds are two English words hybridized by Pashto plural suffixes -ona and -ey, respectively.

 

Table 9. Compound Word Hybridization Programme 10

Compound Words	Frequency	Compound Words	Frequency
1.       Ghat event 2.       International satah 3.       International lobgharho 4.       Praday crowd 5.       Mukhalif pressure 6.       Mukhalif ground 7.       Khpal crowd	1 1 1 1 1 1 1	8.    Majmui’ score 9.    Sabiqa champion 10. Naway talent 11. Naway team 12. Tough hareef 13. Young kol	1 1 1 1 1 1

 

Thirteen hybridized compound words have been presented in the above table. All these hybridized compounds follow the first pattern of compound word hybridization. It can be observed that one element of each of these compounds is from one language, but the other element is from a different language and, hence, not an individual element of these compounds is internally hybridized. All the compounds hybridized in the programme are compound nouns.

Data collected for compound hybridization presents a total of 84 instances of hybridized compound words. Out of these 84 examples, only two are compound adjectives. The rest of the examples are compound nouns which are more frequently hybridized by speakers of the selected TV programmes. In fact, compound nouns exceed compound verbs or compound adjectives in English. The main reason is that “Cultural and technical change produces more novel artifacts’ than novel activities or novel properties” (Carstairs-McCarthy, 2002, pp. 61-62).

Two patterns of compound word hybridization have been observed during the data analysis. The first dominant pattern of compound word hybridization is what Sridhar (1992) terms as ‘hyponymous compound’ and what Rasul (2006) calls ‘hybrid compounds’. In this type of compound word hybridization, one part of the compound belongs to one language, whereas the other part belongs to a different language. Few examples of such ‘hybrid compounds’ from the collected data are; aeeni body, kharija policy, security ahlikar, and political intizamia. Items on the left side of the first two examples are Pashto words, whereas items on the right side of the first two examples are English words. On the other hand, items on the left of the third and fourth examples are English words, whereas items on the right of these compounds are Pashto words. Such a pattern of hybridization has been noticed as the most dominant pattern of compound word hybridization in the study.

The second pattern of compound word hybridization observed in this study is that one element of the hybridized compound is either an English or Pashto word, but the second element of the compound is hybridized in itself. Few examples of such hybridized compounds from the collected data are; check postona, link roadona, kkarija policyaney and qaami assemblae. Items on the left side of the first two examples are English words whereas items on the right side of these compounds are English words hybridized by Pashto plural suffix -ona. On the other hand, items on the left of the third and fourth examples are Pashto words, whereas items on the right of these compounds are English words hybridized by Pashto plural suffixes -ey and -ae, respectively. Such a pattern of hybridization has been noticed as the second most dominant pattern of compound word hybridization in the study.

Conclusion

The collected data has been categorized with respect to the domain of language use. With the help of the collected data, it has been interpreted that Pashto-English hybridization takes place both in formal as well as informal domains of language use. Religion is the only domain where English does not influence the use of Pashto. The rest of the domains of language use provide sufficient data which represent almost every aspect of society. 

Furthermore, the researcher has gained insights from this study that if the concerned study had focused on Pashto print media instead of electronic media, the findings of this study would have been different. The reason being the constant use of conscious language in print media restricts the scope of language hybridization. The resultant hybridized language, if any, would have been influenced by intentional inflexions in word forms as compared to electronic media in which hybridization is more frequently observed. Similarly, the conversational nature of language use in electronic media is influenced by the emotional states of the participants. Thus, the medium of language use is highly significant in studies related to language contact, particularly hybridization. In addition to that, within electronic media, different types of language uses are employed. In some of the TV programs, spontaneous use of language is carried out, while in certain other programs, for example, newscasting, planned and deliberate use of language is practiced. Hence the nature of the programme determines the scope of hybridization up to a considerable extent. Thus, spontaneity or naturalness in the use of language is another influential factor that needs to be considered in studies about language hybridization. The medium of language use, as well as the elements of spontaneity and deliberation, play a pivotal role in determining the results of studies related to language hybridization. 

References

• Backus, A. (2000). Code-switching in conversation: Language, interaction and identity. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(6), 831-838.
• Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). Discourse in the novel. In M. Holquist (Ed.). The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays by M. M. Bakhtin (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
• Carstairs-McCarthy, A. (2002). An introduction to English morphology: Words and their structure. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
• Crystal, D. (1987). The Cambridge encyclopedia of language. Cambridge: Cambridge 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.
• Have, P. T. (2004). Understanding qualitative research and ethnomethodology. London: Sage publications.
• Hoffmann, C. (2014). Introduction to bilingualism. London: Routledge.
• 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
• Kachru, B. B. (1986). The alchemy of English: The spread, functions, and models of non-native Englishes. Oxford: Pergamon Institute of English
• Maschler, Y.(1998). Te Transition to a mixed code. In P. Auer (Ed.) Codeswitching in Conversation. London: Routledge. (pp. 101-124).
• Rasul, S. (2006). Language hybridization in Pakistan as a socio-cultural phenomenon: An analysis of code-mixed linguistic patterns (Doctoral dissertation, National University of Modern Languages, Islamabad, Pakistan). Retrieved from http://eprints.hec.gov.pk/1478/
• Sacks, H. (1984). Notes on methodology. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 21-27). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
• Sridhar, S. N. (1978). On the functions of code mixing in Kannada. International Journal of the sociology of language, 1978(16), 109-117.
• Thirumalai, M. S. (2004). Tradition, modernity, and impact of globalization- Whither will Tamil go? Language in India, 4.