Article Sidebar

Download
pdf
Statistic
Read Counter : 148 Download : 115

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

When a new object or activity or idea enters in a culture, the word or words which express it may be borrowed. The most basic function of a loanword is communicating the new object or idea. A culture may elect to use its own resources (as ‘horsepower’ for a steam locomotive engine) for the new item Hoffer, (2002). The present research aims at examining the English borrowed words into Urdu language. It begins with Introduction to the borrowing in general and English with reference to Urdu in particular. It also discusses various forms of borrowing. English language has been in contact with Urdu during the British colonization in India. This has resulted into borrowing so many lexicons into Urdu which must be studied linguistically. It is argued that borrowing has enhanced the communicative range of Urdu lexicons. This is the qualitative study in its nature. Loanwords have been categorized in different domains. Then, the historical background of Urdu and English language interaction until now, and the processes, reasons that are involved in the borrowing of loanwords in Urdu from English language has been discussed.

Keywords

Borrowing Cultural Borrwing Loanwords Loan Translation Loan Shift Loan Blend

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Ahmad, Z., & Khan, I. (2024). English Loanwords in Urdu Language: A Study of Borrowing. JL3T (Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Language Teaching), 10(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.32505/jl3t.v10i1.6020

References

  1. Ahmad, M. A., Eckert, C., & Teredesai, A. (2018). Interpretable machine learning in healthcare. Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Bioinformatics, Computational Biology, and Health Informatics, 559–560.
  2. Appel, & Muysken. (1987). Effects of bilingualism on personality, cognitive and educational developments: A historical perspective.
  3. Bloomfield. (1933). Language Borrowing. The Routledge Language and Cultural Theory Reader.
  4. Haugen, E. (1950). The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language, 26(2), 210–231.
  5. Hockett, C. F. (1958). A course in modern linguistics. ERIC.
  6. Hockett, C. F. (1958). Sound Change in Multilingual Language. Language and Teaching, 41(2), 185–204.
  7. Hoffer, B. L. (2002). Language borrowing and language diffusion: An overview. Intercultural Communication Studies, 11(4), 1–37.
  8. Jake, J. L., Myers-Scotton, C., & Gross, S. (2002). Making a minimalist approach to codeswitching work: Adding the Matrix Language. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5(1), 69–91.
  9. Koerner, E. F. K. (2013). Ferdinand de Saussure: Origin and development of his linguistic thought in western studies of language (Vol. 7). Springer-Verlag.
  10. Moravcsik, E. A. (1978). On the distribution of ergative and accusative patterns. Lingua, 45(3–4), 233–279.
  11. Mose, E. (2021). Phonological Processes in Ekegusii Borrowing: A Constraint-based Approach. JL3T (Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Language Teaching), 7(2), 83–100.
  12. Muysken, P. (2000). Semantic transparency in lowland Ecuadorian Quechua morphosyntax.
  13. Myers-Scotton, C. (1993). Common and uncommon ground: Social and structural factors in codeswitching. Language in Society, 22(4), 475–503.
  14. Myers-Scotton, C. (2002). Contact linguistics: Bilingual encounters and grammatical outcomes. OUP Oxford.
  15. Myers-Scotton, C. (2006). Natural codeswitching knocks on the laboratory door. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9(2), 203–212.
  16. Raza, M. H. (2020). An OT Account of Phonotactic and Coda Neutralization of English Loans in Pilibhit Hindi-Urdu. JL3T (Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Language Teaching), 6(1), 12–30.
  17. Suhery, D., Raza, M. H., Purba, H. S. R., & Khairunnisah. (2009). An Optimality Theory Account of English Loanwords In Pilibhit Hindi-Urdu (Uttar Pradesh) India. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, 8(5c), 758–765. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijeat.e1108.0585c19.
  18. Saussure, F. de. (1959). Course in General Linguistics (1915). W., Philosophical Library, 12.
  19. Sharma, S. K., & Spitz, J. (1980). Hillock formation, hole growth and agglomeration in thin silver films. Thin Solid Films, 65(3), 339–350.
  20. Thomason, S. G., & Kaufman, T. (1988). Language contact. Edinburgh University Press Edinburgh.
  21. Thomason, S. G., & Kaufman, T. (2023). Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Univ of California Press.
  22. Weinreich, U. (1953). The Russification of Soviet minority languages. Probs. Communism, 2, 46.
  23. Whitney, W. D. (1881). On mixture in language. Transactions of the American Philological Association (1869-1896), 12, 5–26.