Talk:Pakistani English

Come on

This is just stupid. I'm Pakistani and I've noticed almost no difference between the standard English of my country and that of India. It's the same dammnit. It's just English. I love my country too and I don't like it when westerners mix us up all the time with India, but sometimes this attempt to completely differentiate India and Pakistan by Pakistanis is getting too out of hand. What are we going to have next, different articles on Pakistani and Indian Punjabis? I mean look at the history described in this article, being on the fringes? Lahore was one of the many mainstream urban centers of the old colonial India, back then. Peshawar was an important frontier town kept within colonial jurisdiction. Karachi was an important seaport ranking with Bombay and Calcutta. Quetta was an essential military post. Hardly fringe regions if you ask me. Punjab was very clearly an integral part of the empire. So was NWFP. Sindh was actually part of Bombay Presidency. It's possible to accept that we have some things in common without calling us the same, ok? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.255.203.224 (talk) 05:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I have lived in Pakistan and Britian and also come across many people from India, I find pakistani English in major cities to be more heavily influenced by contemporary British english, especially in terms of the accent. In India however (Bombay English being a prime example, they seem to have their 'own english' in terms of accents and terminology, this is possibly due to english having developed as a common language in India much before pakistan. I think it's fair to keep both articles separate. Khokhar (talk) 20:00, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Apparently, the scholars are not hearing what you are: compare References in scholarly literature to "Indian English" and references in the scholarly literature to "Pakistani English". That generally means that while there probably are some distinctive features of the English spoken in Pakistan, these features are probably neither clear nor stable yet. The formation of Pakistani English as a distinct dialect of English will probably take more time. One way to establish that there are special features of Pakistani English is to look at the different corpora of English (such as the Oxford Corpus, the International Corpus of English (at University College London) as well as some others. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you might be right, but I stand by my comments as I was speaking from personal experience, there will probably be clearer distinctions identified but as Pakistan is still a relatively young country; it'll take some time. Khokhar (talk) 07:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

"Hoax"?

Someone is continually adding the factual accuracy banner on this issue, and it really needs to stop. A "hoax"? Unless the honourable editor is claiming that English in Pakistan is a hoax, I really don't see how that assertion can be supported at all. The fact that Pakistans official, military, judicial, legislative and business language is English, that it has several English language newspapers and media, that all higher education and most secondary education is in english, that it has had several authors who write in the English language (Sarah Suleri, Bepsi Sidwa, Mohsin Hamid) is not as far as I know disputed. Cites have been provided. Either come up with actual factual arguements against or please refrain from continually adding the "hoax" banner. Thanks 138.40.152.22 (talk) 23:29, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I just noted that user Raguib is reponsible for the banner, I invite him to share the issues he has on this page, rather than merely putting up a banner.138.40.152.22 (talk) 23:32, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I have added the tag. And am going to restore it, now that you've removed it again. Here are the reasons:

• This is a hoax ... I DO NOT claim that English isn't used in Pakistan, but I doubt it is (a) any different from Indian English, (b) recognized as a different type of English in reliable sources.

So far, the only "references" shown/added here do not support this being any different from Indian English. Of course, if you wanted an article on the use of English in Pakistan, and Pakistani news papers, feel free to move this article to English language in Pakistan or something similar.

Unless reliable sources say that "Pakistani English" is distinct from Indian English, this article will continue to be a hoax and Original research. --Ragib (talk) 03:58, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Well if thats the case, you can well argue that Sri Lanakan english is the same as Indian English or that Malayan english is the same as well; after all it was only introduced to Malaya via the Indian government apparatus.

Am removing the tag, you have accepted the crux of my arguement, and as for sources, kindly give me reasons why you think they are "unreputable". This article needs fixing, no doubt. But it is NOT a hoax.

138.40.152.22 (talk) 16:42, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

My point is very clear -- there is no such term as "Pakistani English", as accepted by reliable sources. The English accent spoken in Pakistan is just Indian English, and this article is a POV fork, and a bad example of Original research. As for your comment about references, Ecommercetimes link does NOT support that Pakistani English is different from Indian English. It merely mentions that Pakistan has a lot of English speakers. The reference is not from a reliable source to begin with, but that's another issue. I don't see any other reference in the article that can be used to support the existence of the term "pakistani English". --Ragib (talk) 16:46, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Some works (journal works) that use the term "Pakistani English".

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ424591&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ424591

(overview, need premission to access full article)

http://books.google.com/books?id=0iJD7lZR8WYC&pg=PA219&lpg=PA219&dq=use+of+english+in+pakistan&source=bl&ots=v8IO7B3b-Z&sig=cPYLQxXv4tvw4z0tJJhChVjtULk&hl=en&ei=Dx4cSqO-LuSrjAfjsNjyBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6

(bit out of date, statistics that are used are rom 1961 census, which is one very out od date and two would include modern day bangladesh.)

and a massive study done here: http://eprints.hec.gov.pk/1631/1/1191.HTM

Thank you and good night

195.102.21.7 (talk) 17:06, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Agree with Ragib. Pakistani English might one day become an independent dialect of English, but it seems that the different corpora of English don't include it yet. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Original research maybe, but the hoax tag is a little excessive, I don't think there is any reason to doubt the authors goodwill. You only have to listen to English news readers from each country to notice some clear differences. Khokhar (talk) 07:12, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I have added references and changed the lead to indicate that the term merely refers to the English as spoken in Pakistan, noting that whether it is a separate dialect is disputed. This seems sufficient to justify removal of the "hoax" banner; there is plenty of reason to keep the fact and original research tags. YBG (talk) 09:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Clearly none of the above users (raquib especially) have bothered to read the links provided (i wonder why?). The first a study by a US Professor in its intro says (Examines the origin, development, and nature of Pakistani English as a distinct language variation with its own cultural and linguistic identity. Lexical borrowing from Urdu is discussed as is the formation of new words through the use of English affixes with Urdu and English bases and though semantical or grammatical shifts. )

The second one states Pakistani English in the very first Paragraph (http://prr.hec.gov.pk/Chapters/1191-1.pdf)

Heres another one

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ZVIBxksRuEgC&pg=PA1045&lpg=PA1045&dq=%22Pakistani+English%22&source=bl&ots=n4rPZqCVTY&sig=EO3Yjor4gms5bINOGJd5cLhmGuk&hl=en&ei=rLoqSpTFCcuHkQW286z5Cg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9

Note it says "Pakistani English".

There is no dispute in acedemia that there is a dialect called Pakistani English, I have not yet seen a shread of evidence from ANY (let alone reliable) source that it dose not exist or that it is the same as Indian English. With all due respect to user raquib, his asssertions do not displace the acedemic articles and summerys I have put here. Sparten (talk) 19:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

You can always find one or two books that use the expression "Pakistani English," however, that doesn't mean that there is consensus among scholars that such a dialect (i.e. distinctive one) of standard English exists. There isn't even much of a controversy about the issue that we can report. It is more the case that "Pakistani English" has as yet not made it into the various corpora of English that are used in linguistics and descriptive grammars. The Oxford English Corpus, for example, includes only India (among South Asian countries) (see "full picture" section) and only Indian English among different (South Asian) standard dialects of Global English. If you want to claim that Pakistani English is a "highly differentiated local dialect of Indian standard English," then you'll have to produce sources that say that. It is more likely though that "Punjabi English" or "Sindhi English" might constitute such local dialects. Producing examples of English authors who are citizens of Pakistan is not enough because they don't write in the local dialect of English. As I've said above, perhaps Pakistani English might someday become an independent dialect or subdialect, but it hasn't yet. We can't, therefore, pretend that it does. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:06, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

South Asian English

From my point of view it makes more sense to have just one article South Asian English with separate sections, perhaps, on the various local dialects, instead of separate articles on "Indian English," "Pakistani English," "Bangladeshi English," "Sri Lankan English," .... In other words, I would prefer "Indian English" to be redirected to "South Asian English" (and all the other regional Englishes as well) instead of the reverse. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:37, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I think this article can be expanded to full length, just needs a little attention. --lTopGunl (talk) 21:53, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Not reading again

Obviously you have not read the links again, not a book, there are two acedemic peer reviewed articles which use the term and showcase its differences. If you want something to be so, fine, but they fact is that you have acedemic articles saying that Pakistani English is different.

Sparten (talk) 15:38, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I did take a look at the articles. They compare "Pakistani English" to "standard British or American English." What is the point of that? What they need to compare it to is standard Indian English (as described, for example, in the Oxford Corpus above), for which the comparisons with the British and American standards have already been done long ago. I don't see anywhere how a "Pakistani" construction is different from the corresponding Indian one. That is why I am in favor of a single page South Asian English. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:58, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Fowler&fowler that it would be good to have a generic South Asian English article, with a section for Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and the rest. For no other reason, it seems a bit myopic to have South Asian English redirect to Indian English. Why not get a brief start on the SAE page with just lead and a section for each variety with links to the specific pages. Then maybe work on merging them together. Who knows, maybe it would be an opportunity for cooperation on WP where the politicians have failed. But maybe I'm just dreaming .... after all, we'd not only have the nationalists on both sides to battle each other but then there is the WP battle royale between joiners and splitters. YBG (talk) 06:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

It is inappropriate to create an article called South Asian English given that the use of Bollywood Urdu is called Hindi and the emotional attachments to various issues, not least, languages is very close to heart. Moreover the very basic fact of totally different pronunciations z as j, hard r as d and the sound of kh (as in Khan) voiced as in Khanna etc. all lend the two types of English are very much apart and cannot be lumped together. As a British citizen, of Pashtun background in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, I am able to appreciate the kind of diversity of regional languages in Pakistan - these different languages have Arabic/Farsi and Turkic linguistic heritages in common. The literature, culture, poetry, folk stories, emotional attachemnt to the Ummah and of course the creation of Pakistan in common,which are extremely powerful denominators in forging an identity that has huge impact on the kind of English spoken/written there. If, despite Anglo-Saxon origins and constant flow of Britons into Australia, Australian/Newzealand English is recongnised as such then the dichotomy between Pakistan and India must be obvious to all but some blinkered individuals. Take note that everyday/Bollywood Hindi is colloqual Urdu but Hindus nationalists refuse to compromise and call it at least Hindustani - please readup Urdu-Hindi controversy to ascertain insights into this issue. Incidently, Hindi, Hindu and Hindustan are of Arabic-Farsi origin and thus defacto Urdu words. Just to re-iterate I am fluent and literate in Pushto, Urdu, varietes of Punjabi (thet, Potowahri, Seraiki, Hindko etc.) in addition to working knowledge of Arabic, Farsi and Turkish. And my academic interests include linguistic/cultural anthropology. Moarrikh (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree, I created a disambiguation page at South Asian English which would be the most appropriate thing as of yet. Anyway you are replying to a 3 year old comment :) --lTopGunl (talk) 18:12, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Pakistan

90% of the Pakistan can't speak Urdu properly and you are telling us that every other Pakistani speak intermediate level of English. 174.95.7.198 (talk) 21:23, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pakistani English. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120316003619/http://bsl.co.in/india/news/investors-lose-rs-44-lakh-crore-in-four-days/416306/ to http://bsl.co.in/india/news/investors-lose-rs-44-lakh-crore-in-four-days/416306/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:15, 14 December 2017 (UTC)