Wednesday 14 May 2014

The Strange, Divergent World of Assamese #1

So, to start off the blog, the first language I've picked is Assamese. A language that isn't usually spoken much outside the North East, Assamese is natively spoken by around  15 million people, in the Indian state of Assam. It is an Eastern Indo-Aryan language, deriving from the historical Magadhi Prakrit that modern Bengali, Oriya and other Eastern Indo-Aryan languages descend from. It also forms the base of Nagamese creole, since Naga tribes speak mutually unintelligible dialects, and required a common language, a lingua franca. It's also spoken as a second language by many tribes in Assam, who form around 12 % of the population of Assam.

Now, rather than talk about the language in depth, I'd like to focus on what I feel are the most interesting features of Assamese, things that set it totally apart from the standard forms of other Indo Aryan languages.

(To clarify, the examples used will be of standard Assamese, and the examples of other languages will be of their respective standard forms.)

Assamese, and Bengali, are unlike Hindi written Devanagari when it comes to orthography. Hindi has a very phonemic orthography, which means that there is a high correspondence with what is written and what is pronounced. There are a few exceptions of course, but for the most part it's phonemic. Assamese's spelling conventions, especially for larger, technical words, are based off the Sanskrit spelling, however the pronunciation varies greatly from the 'Indic' or Sanskritic standard pronunciations. I'll get back to that later.

However, a note: Since Assamese isn't written phonemically, it's a bit ambiguous which is the 'correct' pronunciation in daily speech, to non native speakers. What I mean is that, like in Hindi or Urdu, there is a formal, prestige pronunciation which might be the ideal in certain usages and contexts. Keep this in mind for the rest of the examples in this post.

The first feature, in which it shares with Bengali, is the loss of vowel length. There is no long or short vowel distinction in Assamese (or Bengali), but it is represented in the writing/orthography because the writing is based on the Sanskritic system and orthography. In contrast, Hindi, Marathi, Punjabi etc still have phonemic vowel length. Also, the short or inherent a sound would be pronounced with a round 'o' sound that I will represent with ô. This would mean that names represented in transliteration reflecting the Sanskritic pronunciation like Kārtik, Ānand, Pūjā, Nīlam, would actually be pronounced as Kartik, Anônd, Puja, Nilôm in Assamese and Bengali.

Now to specifically focus on features of Assamese.

A specific feature Assamese unique to the language, that I find especially interesting, something very out of place by the standard (mainstream Indo Aryan and Dravidian) Indian languages, is the loss of distinction between dental and retroflex plosive consonants. The dentals are त,थ,द,ध,न, vs retroflex consonants, ट ,ठ ,ड ,ढ , ण in Devanagari. In Assamese, the counterparts for the two sets would be pronounced the same - as their dental versions. So, a hypothetical, made up word word that could be transliterated from its Sanskritic orthography as Ṭūḍhāda, would actually be pronounced Tudhadô in Assamese. Assuming the word existed, of course, but the phonological changes in the example still are valid.

Moving along to more consonants. To illustrate all of them at once, here's the sequence of standard Indic sounds (the ka kha ga gha sequence we were taught in school) compared to its Assamese version, using Assamese pronunciation.

ka kha ga gha ṅa / kô khô gô ghô ṅô
ca cha ja jha ña / sô shô zô zhô jô
ṭa ṭha ḍa ḍha ṇa / tô thô dô dhô nô
ta tha da dha na / tô thô dô dhô nô
pa pha ba bha ma / pô phô bô bhô mô
ya ra la va / zô rô lô wô-bô
śa ṣa sa ha / xô xô xô hô


The one on the left holds good for Hindi, Sanskrit, and even Dravidian languages like Kannada, Telugu and Malayalam. Since it's the Sanskrit form, and all Indic scripts are derived from the Sanskrit form (even the Dravidian ones), it remains the standard. The one on the right, the native Assamese pronunciations, are highly divergent! For example, going by this chart, it would seem that cāī, or tea, would be pronounced sai in Assamese. And apparently, it is the case. Names in Sanskrit like Śaṅkar, Saṅgītā, Cāndinī, Śāradā, Jananī would be natively pronounced Xôṅkôr, Xôṅgita, Sandini, Xarôda, Zônôni going by this.

What exactly is this x sound? It sounds like a forceful h sound, from the back of the throat - like the ch in loch, or the stereotypical kh in Arabic (which is present in Urdu, too - khud, khwāb) or even the ch in German. It can even be a normal h in some positions of the letter. And oddly enough for Indic, they replace the usual 's/sh' sounds.

I can't think of any other Indic language with this feature, or even any divergence from the 's/sh' standard that those sounds represent in Sanskrit - at most you have the 'rural', 'uneducated' replacement of 'sh' with 's', but that's hardly divergence, rather a simplification of the existing sound. Hell, even 'Assam' is natively pronounced Ôxôm and the language and people, Ôxômiya. For those of us used to the Sanskritic pronunciations this can be very throwing off and strange.

C being pronounced as s makes for words like xôs, which would be sac in Hindi (truth), axa, which would be āśā (Hope) in Sanskrit/standard Indic, and dôx is ten, similar to das in Hindi. Using names as examples again, Jīvan, Jhārkhaṇḍ ,Cetan, Chavi would be Zivôn, Zharkhônd, Setôn, Shôbi. (Notice the lack of retroflex sounds in Zharkhônd!)

However, shifts of c, ch, j, jh are not actually rare - They also occur in MarathiKonkani, and Nepali, which have a combined native speaking population of around 102 million people (loosely). The shift of 's/sh', however, is still pretty rare - AFAIK Assamese is the only language with it.

As a recap, here are more examples. Assamese on the left, and standard Indic equivalents on the right, and the meanings on the right.

Xôbhô - Sabha              (Assembly)
Bhaxa -Bhāṣā               (Language) 
Xat - Sāt                       (Hindi, 7)
Xôbdô - Śabda, Śabd    (Word)
Purux - Puruṣ               (Male person)
Dex - Deś                      (Country)
Xombar - Somvār         (Monday)




To be continued in future parts...

Tools used :

http://www.virtualvinodh.com/aksharamukha

Sources :

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/messeas/handouts/nagamese/nagamese.htm

http://www.assam.org/node/2335

http://www.iitg.ernet.in/rcilts/pdf/assamese.pdf

http://sealang.net/sala/archives/pdf8/moral1997north.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org

http://www.omniglot.com/

Wednesday 7 May 2014

A Note on Transliteration.

What is transliteration?

From Wiki : Transliteration can form an essential part of transcription which converts text from one writing system into another.

In India, we use several systems for transliterations, however, most of the commonly used ones are horribly inefficient. The officially and most commonly used one is Hunterian transliteration, which has huge flaws in distinguishing between many sounds.

The dental and retroflex consonants are not distinguished, neither is vowel length. For South Asian languages, these are crucial to the word's pronunciation and meaning. For example, Bharat (the name) and Bharat (India) are written the same in this system. So is dal/daal (lentils) and dal/daal (to put, Hindi). You have big shifts in meaning. There are lots of other examples, if you look for them.

Why is correct transliteration for Indian languages important?

From the preface of Sheldon Pollock's Literary Cultures in History : Reconstructions from South Asia,

"South Asian writers have always been remarkably attentive to the correct use of language, showing as profound a concern for grammatical exactitude as for any other feature of literary composition. Ancient Sanskrit stories tell of beings coming to grief because of a mispronounced word: the son of the divine Tvaṣṭr̥ , for example, famously become a victim instead of a victor of the god Indra because his father misplaced the accent when announcing his name at birth. Later poets would ridicule their rivals for failure to discriminate between long and short vowels, as in Tenāli Rāmaliñgaḍu’s parody of Allasani Peddanna, recounted by V. Narayana Rao in this book."

"The guide to pronunciation aims to make as clear as possible to the nonspecialist reader the practical significance of these sometimes extremely subtle distinctions—whose importance to the literary traditions derives in part precisely from their subtlety."

While texting, it's not really important to be accurate. You can tell from context almost always. Informal contexts allow for great freedom because the point is to communicate rather than to be accurate.

However, while talking about concepts or ideas or even things that are India specific, talking about places, and in official or academic contexts to remove disambiguity, and most importantly - while transcribing languages, toponymy or texts from native languages -  it's very important that words are transliterated right, to provide the specific pronunciation and nature of the word.

On a slight detour : Chinese has a concept of tone, where every syllable carries a certain intonation that gives it a distinct meaning. For example, ma can mean mother, horse, hemp, or scold depending on its tone. Chinese has its own official system of transcribing the sounds of its characters, called Pinyin. This system conveys the tonal information with diacritic marks. Without pinyin, or indeed any standard system for romanizing Chinese that includes provisions to show tones, it's impossible to learn for someone not familiar with the language. Nali can mean here, or where, based on the tone alone. De can have three possible meanings without the tone being specified. In fact, so important are tones in Chinese that they are said to be as important as the vowels in Chinese. And if the vowels themselves are written (they obviously have to be), then the tones do as well - and they are.

How is this relevant you ask? Well, just as tones have a significant role in determining the meaning of a word, vowel length, aspiration, and voiced/unvoiced, dental/retroflex contrasts also play a very significant role in Indo Aryan and Dravidian languages. (Spread over and official in : India, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Maldives).

But in spite of their great importance they are ignored in transliteration for all practical and even official purposes.

There are systems to address this inadequacy. They include:
In this blog, I'll be using the last scheme unless stated. However, for place names, already Anglicized nouns and writers' names, English spelling will be used.

Tuesday 29 April 2014

Introduction!

Hello. This is my new blog, for talking about Indian languages. I've kept it aside from my personal blog because I'd be able to give more focus and go more in depth this way. Apart from stuff on Indian languages, I'll be posting some stuff on languages in general, but the focus will mostly be on Indian ones, seeing as I'm exposed to so many constantly and am exploring them now.

Also, here I'll be taking Indian English as a purely Indian language. It's pretty distinct from other Englishes at this point, and now even has a growing media and culture of its own, with music, books, movie dialogues and what not. This Indian English I speak of counts 'babu' English, the broken Englishes of working class people, the various regional accents and slang, and the various sociolects - however I'll be focusing especially on urban middle class English spoken as a lingua franca by Indians from a predominantly white collar background, and the variations of it spoken in Chennai (Where I live).

Indian English, to me, is something that hasn't been explored much, which is almost an insult to it considering its relevance and large number of users.

Hope you enjoy reading. Please leave a comment if you have any points to add or anything to say.
Cheers.