Article Sidebar

Download
pdf
Statistic
Read Counter : 264 Download : 202

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

This paper provides the basic information of the phonological networks and social identity about the heritage languages. The phonological networks convey the classification of the sound systems, while the social identity declares the difference among the native speakers of the heritage languages. The problem is investigated that how a particular speech segment created the variation among the speakers of the different languages in the speech communities. The objective of this paper is to determine the unique segments of the heritage languages and how these segments clear the social identity of the speakers in a particular speech community. The researcher collected the sample of primary and secondary data from the gadgets and the speakers of the heritage languages. The sample of data goes to the social characteristics of ages between twenty and forty of the respondents both male and female. The data are collected through observation, interview and the available literature of the heritage languages. For the collection of primary data, the high quality of the tape recorder is used and put approach to the mouth of the respondents for the recording at the time of interview. After the data collection, it is analysed base on the aspects of phonetics and phonology to find out the social identity of the respondents. In the result, it is found out that one particular speech segment represented the social identity of the speakers. In the framework of conclusion, it is represented that Urdu has different types of the speech segments covered all the processes of production, transmission, and perception.

Keywords

heritage language phonological networks social identity speech community

Article Details

How to Cite
Raza, M. H. (2021). The Structure of Phonological Networks and Social Identity of Heritage Languages. JL3T (Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Language Teaching), 6(2), 89-101. https://doi.org/10.32505/jl3t.v6i2.1981

References

  1. Arbesman, S., Strogatz, S. H. & Vitevitch, M. S. (2009). The Structure of Phonological Networks across Multiple Languages. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, pp. 01-05.
  2. Hayman, L.M. (1970). How Concrete is Phonology?. Language 46, pp. 58-76.
  3. Hayman, L.M. (1975). Phonology: Theory and Analysis. New York: Holt Rinehart Winston.
  4. Katamba, F. (1989). An Introduction to Phonology. New York: Longman.
  5. Liberman, A. & Prince, A. (1977). On Stress and Linguistics Rhythm. Linguistic Inquiry 8, pp. 249-336.
  6. McCarthy, J. (1979). Formal Problems in Semitic Phonology and Morphology. MIT Doctoral Dissertation. (Available from Indiana University Linguistic Club, Bloomington).
  7. McCarthy, J. (1981). A Prosodic Theory of Nonconcatenative Morphology. Linguistic Inquiry 12, pp. 373-418.
  8. McCarthy, J. (1982). Prosodic Templates. In van der Hulst and Smith (Eds.). (1982a).
  9. McCarthy, J. (1986). OCP Effects: Gemination and Anti-gemination. Linguistic Inquiry 17, 207-63.
  10. Prince, A. (1983). Relating to the Grid. Linguistic Inquiry 2, pp. 19-100.
  11. Polinsky, M. (1997). American Russian: Language Loss Meets Language Acquisition. In Formal Approach to Slavic Linguistics, Brown, W. et al. (Ed.), pp. 370-407. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.
  12. Polinsky, M. (2000). The Composite Linguistic Profile of Speakers of Russian in the US. In the Learning and Teaching of Slavic Languages and Cultures. Kagan, O. & Rifkin, B. (Eds.). pp. 437-65. Bloomington, IN: Slavica.
  13. Polinsky, M. (2006). Incomplete Acquisition: American Russian. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 14, pp. 161-219.
  14. Polinsky, M. (2008a). Gender Under Incomplete Acquisition: Heritage Speaker’s Knowledge of Noun Categorization. Heritage Language Journal 06 (01).
  15. Polinsky, M. (2008b). Heritage Language Narratives. In Heritage Language Education: A New Field Emerging, Brinton, D. et al. (Ed.). pp. 149-64. New York: Routledge.
  16. Rothman, J. (2007a). Heritage Speaker Competence Differences, Language Change, and Input Type: Inflected Infinitives in Heritage Brazilian Portuguese. International Journal of Bilingualism 11, pp. 359-89.
  17. Rothman, J. (2007b). Pragmatic Solutions for Syntactic Problems: Understanding Some L2 Syntactic Errors in Terms of Pragmatic Deficits. In Baauw, S., Dirjkoningen, F. & M. Pinto (Eds.). Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory, pp. 299-320. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  18. Rothman, J. (2009). Understanding the Nature and Outcomes of Early Bilingualism: Romance Languages as Heritage Languages. International Journal of Bilingualism 13 (02), pp. 155-63.
  19. Sanz, C. & Torres, D. (2018). The Prior Language Experience of Heritage Bilinguals. In Malovrh, P. A. & Benati, A. G. (Eds.). The Handbook of Advanced Proficiency in Second Language Acquisition, pp. 179-98. Hoboken, N. J.: John Wiley & Sons.
  20. Valdes, G. (2000). The Teaching of Heritage Languages: An Introduction for Slavic Teaching Professionals. In the Learning and Teaching of Slavic Languages and Cultures, Kagan, O. & Rifkin, B. (Eds.). pp. 375-404. Bloomington, IN: Slavica.
  21. Valdes, G., Gonzalez, S.V., Garcia, D.L. & Patricio, M. (2008). Heritage Languages and Ideologies of Language: Unexamined Challenges. In Heritage Language Education: A New Field Emerging, Brinton, D. et al. (Ed.). pp. 107-30. New York: Routledge.