This study examines the morphosyntactic constraints on Pashto-English code mixing. The framework for the present research is based on the widely attested code-switching model, the Matrix language Frame Model augmented by 4-M model. The present study supports the asymmetrical structure approach to the Pashto-English bilingual data for the morphosyntactic constraints. In order to investigate four research questions, 25 clips of Pashto speech community have been transcribed and analyzed.
In the core research question for the morphosyntactic constraints, the study is based on MLF model augmented by 4-M model. It has been found that Pashto is the language responsible for the morphosyntactic frame and is the matrix language while English is the embedding language. The second research question for the pattern of code mixing is based on Muysken (2000) typology of code mixing where it has been found that the pattern of insertion is the dominant pattern of code mixing. The third research question shows that in the bilingual compound verb, the light verb construction is highly innovative and an emerging category in the Pashto-English bilingual data. The fourth research question shows that Pashto-English code mixing is used as a device of indigenization of English loanwords in the Pashto language of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
Table of Contents
1. THE STUDY OF CODE MIXING
1.1 Introduction
1.2 The Present Study
1.3 Code Mixing in the Pashto Cpeech Community of KP
1.4 Types of Bilingualism in KP and its Influence on Code Mixing
1.5 Social Setting
1.6 The Pashto Language as Marker of Identity
1.7 Code Mixing VS other Contact Phenomena
1.8 Code mixing and Code Switching
1.9 Code mixing and Borrowing
1.10 Social Factors and Code choice in a Bilingual Speech Community
1.11 Organization of the Dissertation
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Sociolinguistic Dimensions of Code Switching
2.2.1 The Emergence of Code Switching
2.2.2 The Contribution of Fishman’s Model
2.2.3 Situational and Metaphorical Mwitching in Blom and Gumperz (1972)
2.2.4 Situational and Metaphorical Switching
2.2.4.1 Gumperz’s 1982 Conversational Code Switching
2.2.5 Myers-Scotton’s Markedness Model
2.2.6 Conversation Analysis of Code Switching Data
2.2.7 Susan Gal’s (1979) Research on German and Hungarian languages
2.2.8 Code-choice and the Influence of Social Factors
2.2.9 Code Mixing Evidence in Code Switching Research
2.2.10 Empirical Research in Code Mixing: linguistic Form and Socio-cultural Meanings
2.3 Structural Dimensions of Code Mixing
2.3.1 Contribution of Timm (1975) and Pfaff (1979) to the Study of Code Mixing
2.3.2 Poplack’s (1980) Equivalence and Free Morpheme Constraints
2.3.2.1 Counter-evidence from Different languages
2.3.3 The Matrix Language Frame Model (MLFM)
2.3.4 Pieter Muysken’s (2000) Typological Approach to Code mixing
2.3.5 Different Processes of Code Mixing at Intra-sentential level
2.3.5.1 Features of the Three Code Mixing Patterns
2.3.5.2 The Pattern of Insertion
2.3.5.2.1 The pattern of alternation
2.3.5.3 The Pattern of Congruent Lexicalization
2.3.5.4 The Structural Interpretation of the Three Patterns
2.4 The Role of Syntactic Theory in the Analysis of Intrasentential Code Switching
2.4.1 The Government Constraints on Intrasentential Code Switching
2.4.2 The Functional Head Constraints
2.4.3 A Minimalist Approach to Intrasentential Code Switching
2.5 Summary
3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND RESEARCH DESIGN
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Structural Asymmetry in Bilingual Data
3.3 Uniform Structure as Principle
3.4 The Matrix Language Frame Model
3.4.1 The 4-M Model
3.5 Differential Access Hypothesis (DAH)
3.5.1 Conceptually-activated Morphemes: Content Morphemes and Early SMs
3.5.2 Late System Morphemes
3.6 Research Design/strategy
3.7 Research Questions
3.8 Methodology
3.8.1 Selection of the Target Population
3.8.2 Sample 1
3.8.3 A brief Description to the Subjects and the Topic of Discussion
3.8.4 Sample 2: AVT Khyber Recording Clips
3.8.5 Procedure for Data Collection
3.9 Transcription of the CM Data
3.10 Data Coding
3.10.1 Data Coding for Research Question One (1)
3.10.2 Data Coding for Research Question Two (2)
3.10.3 Data Coding for Research Question Three (3)
3.10.4 Data Coding for Research Question Four (4)
3.11 Summary
4. THE SALIENT FEATURES OF PASHTO GRAMMAR
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Word Order in Pashto
4.3 Head-initial and Head-final Distinction between Pashto and the English Language
4.4 Pashto as Head-marking Language
4.5 Grammatical Categories
4.5.1 Nominal
4.5.1.1 Number
4.5.1.2 Gender
4.5.1.3 Case Forms
4.5.1.4 Vocative Case
4.5.2 Definite/Indefinite Nouns
4.5.3 Personal Pronouns
4.5.3.1 Demonstrative Pronouns
4.5.3.2 Possessive Pronouns
4.5.3.3 Possessive Clitics
4.5.3.4 Directive Pronouns
4.5.4 Adjectives
4.5.4.1 Degree of Comparison
4.5.4.2 Adjectives as Nouns
4.5.4.3 Adjectives as source of verbs
4.5.5 Prepositions and Postpositions
4.5.6 The Verb
4.5.6.1 Conjugation in Pashto Verb
4.5.6.2 Nominal Verb
4.6 Verb Classification
4.6.1 Complex Verb
4.6.2 Inchoative verb
4.6.3 Light verb – Inchoative
4.6.4 Transitive Verb
4.6.5 Derived Transitive (Verb)
4.7 Pashto Complex Verb and Aspect Driven Asymmetries
4.7.1 Merger and Clitic Placement
4.7.2 Clitic Placement in Compound Verb
4.8 Clitics in Pashto
4.9 Summary
5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Morphosyntactic Constraints on Pashto-English CM
5.1 Introduction
5.2 English Single Elements in Different Constructions of Pashto
5.2.1 English Bare Nouns
5.2.2 Embedded Elements in Determiner Complex Construction
5.2.3 EL Elements in Determiner Construction
5.2.4 The EL Nouns in the ML Prepositional Phrases
5.2.5 In Possessive Construction (dә)
5.2.6 EL Adjective in ML Construction
5.2.7 EL Adverb in ML Construction
5.2.8 Embedded Element + Light verb
5.3 Embedded Islands in Pashto-English Code Mixing
5.3.1 Bare Embedded NPs Island in ML
5.3.2 Embedded Island in ML PPs
5.3.3 Embedded Island in the Determiner Construction
5.3.4 Embedded Island in the Possessive Construction
5.3.5 EL Island PPs in ML
5.3.6 EL Adjectives in EL Island
5.4 Conclusion
6. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
The pattern of CM in Pashto-English Bilingual data
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Predicting the CM Patterns
6.2.1 The Proposed Diagnostic Features for the Pattern of Insertion
6.3 Patterns of CM for Nouns
6.3.1 Nouns in Bare DP Constructions
6.3.2 Nouns in Determiner Phrase Constructions
6.3.3 Nouns in Prepositional Phrase Constructions
6.3.4 Nouns in the Possessive Constructions (dә)
6.4 EL Adjective in ML Constructions
6.5 EL Adverb in ML Constructions
6.6 Embedded Element + Light verb Constructions
6.7 Embedded Language Islands in Pashto-English Code Mixing
6.8 Conclusion
7. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Pashto-English CM and Light Verbs’ Innovations
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Monolingual Complex Predicates in the Literature
7.3 The Compound Verb Construction in Pashto
7.4 Bilingual Compound Verbs in the Code mixing literature
7.5 Pashto-English Bilingual Compound Verbs
7.5.1 English Verbs with the Light Verb kaw
7.5.2 Example with a Noun
7.5.3 Example with Gerund
7.6 English Verbs with the Intransitive Light Verb ‘keg’
7.6.1 Example with a Noun
7.6.2 Example with a Phrasal Verb
7.7 English Lexical Elements with the Pashto Verb ‘be’
7.7.1 English gerund with the Pashto copula (be)
7.7.2 Example with a Participle
7.7.3 English Lexical Element with a Light Verb ra- zam
7.8 Conclusion
8. PASHTO-ENGLISH CM: A DEVICE OF INDIGENIZATION
8.1 Introduction
8.2 Code Mixing and Borrowing
8.3 Loanwords and Borrowing
8.4 Method
8.4.1 Tools for Data Collection
8.4.2 Procedure for Data Collection
8.5 Discussion on the English Loanwords in the Present data
8.6 The Major Categories
8.7 Conclusion
9. CONCLUSION
9.1 Introduction
9.2 Morphosyntactic Constraints in the Pashto-English Bilingual data
9.3 The Pattern of Insertion in the Pashto-English Bilingual data
9.4 Pashto-English CM and Light Verbs’ Innovations
9.5 Pashto-English CM: A Device of Indigenization
9.6 Concluding Remarks
Research Objectives and Topics
This dissertation investigates the structural and syntactic constraints governing code-mixing between English and the Pashto language within the Yousafzi dialect in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. The study aims to determine how these two distinct and asymmetrical languages combine to produce grammatically well-formed sentences, using the Matrix Language Frame (MLF) model and the 4-M model as a primary theoretical framework to understand the division of labor between the matrix and embedded languages.
- Analysis of morphosyntactic constraints in Pashto-English code-mixing.
- Examination of code-mixing patterns (insertion, alternation, and congruent lexicalization) based on Muysken's typology.
- Investigation into the emergence of new verbal categories through bilingual compound verbs.
- Exploration of code-mixing as a socio-linguistic device for the indigenization of English loanwords.
- Quantitative and qualitative evaluation of empirical data gathered from natural speech in TV talk shows and personal interviews.
Excerpt from the Book
The Study of Code Mixing
The term code mixing refers to, “all cases where lexical items and grammatical features from two languages appear in one sentence” (Muysken, 2000: 1). One of the major issues in the study of code mixing is whether there are syntactic or morphological constraints on code mixing. A number of researchers have proposed different types of constraints on the basis of empirical data from different varieties of code mixing in different languages, e.g. Poplack (1980) on Spanish-English, Sridhar and Sridhar (1980) on Kannada-English, etc. These constraints have been proposed by a number of different researchers, some of which are claimed to be language-universal and applicable to typologically diverse varieties of code mixing, e.g., Matrix Language Frame Model (Myer-Scotton, 1993), Equivalence and Free Morpheme constraints (Poplack, 1980) and the Typological approach to code mixing (Muysken, 2000). In recent years, a considerable attention has been paid to the code mixing research from Chomsky’s Principles and Parameters Theory (1981, 1986). Within the Chomskyans’ perspective, Woolford (1983) has researched English-Spanish data for his Generative Model for code mixing, DiSciullo et al., (1986) have developed the Government Constraint Model for code mixing, Belazi et al., (1994) have come up with the Functional Head Constraint Model of code mixing. MacSwan (1999, 2000), working within the boundary of syntactic theory, has developed Model of Minimalist constraints on code mixing.
Summary of Chapters
CHAPTER 1: This chapter introduces the study of code mixing, defining core concepts, discussing previous theoretical approaches, and outlining the research focus on Pashto-English interactions.
CHAPTER 2: This chapter provides a comprehensive literature review, detailing sociolinguistic and structural dimensions, models of code switching, and previous empirical research.
CHAPTER 3: This chapter establishes the theoretical framework using the Matrix Language Frame (MLF) and 4-M models, and describes the research methodology, including sample selection and data collection.
CHAPTER 4: This chapter outlines the fundamental features of Pashto grammar, focusing on word order, grammatical categories, and clitics, providing the necessary linguistic context for the analysis.
CHAPTER 5: This chapter presents the structural analysis of morphosyntactic constraints on code mixing, utilizing quantitative and qualitative methods to test the theoretical models.
CHAPTER 6: This chapter analyzes patterns of code mixing, specifically focusing on insertion, and evaluates the transcribed data against Muysken's diagnostic features.
CHAPTER 7: This chapter examines the innovation of light verbs in bilingual compound verbs, analyzing how English lexical items are conjugated with Pashto auxiliaries.
CHAPTER 8: This chapter explores the role of code mixing as a device for the indigenization of English loanwords within the Pashto speech community.
CHAPTER 9: This chapter provides the final conclusions, summarizing the findings on morphosyntactic constraints, insertion patterns, and the socio-linguistic impact of the research.
Keywords
Code mixing, Pashto, English, Matrix Language Frame, 4-M Model, morphosyntactic constraints, bilingual compound verbs, indigenization, insertion, syntax, language contact, sociolinguistics, loanwords, language identity, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this dissertation?
The dissertation focuses on the morphosyntactic constraints and structural patterns involved in Pashto-English code mixing, specifically among the Yousafzi dialect speakers in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
What are the core research themes?
The study centers on the interaction between Pashto (as the matrix language) and English (as the embedded language), the patterns of insertion in bilingual speech, the development of bilingual compound verbs, and the role of code mixing in the indigenization of English loanwords.
What is the central research question?
The primary research question asks what specific morphosyntactic constraints exist in Pashto-English code mixing and how these languages work together to produce well-formed bilingual sentences.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The research is descriptive in nature, combining qualitative and quantitative methods to analyze spontaneous conversational data, including transcripts from TV talk shows and interviews.
What does the main body of the work cover?
The main body covers a literature review of code-switching models, an analysis of Pashto grammar features, structural analysis of code-mixing data, the innovation of light verbs, and the process of indigenizing English vocabulary.
How would you describe the key terminology?
Key terms include "code mixing" (intra-sentential language alternation), "Matrix Language" (the language providing the grammatical frame), "Embedded Language" (the language supplying lexical items), and "bilingual compound verbs" (a new syntactic category observed in the study).
How does this study contribute to the Matrix Language Frame (MLF) model?
The study provides empirical validation for the MLF and 4-M models by showing that Pashto consistently provides the morphosyntactic frame, even when English lexical items are inserted.
What is the significance of the "light verb" innovation identified here?
The study identifies the use of bilingual compound verbs as a highly productive and innovative syntactic category, where English bare verbs are conjugated with Pashto light verbs like 'kaw' (to do/make) or 'keg' (to become).
How does this research view the distinction between code-mixing and borrowing?
The research concludes that the distinction is often blurred, suggesting that code-mixing acts as the initial stage in the process of indigenization and lexical borrowing.
- Citation du texte
- Arshad Khan (Auteur), 2014, Morphosyntactic constraints on English-Pashto Code Mixing, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1161339
