宗教差异、殖民政治和格里尔森的《印度语言调查》

IF 0.2 3区 文学 Q2 HISTORY
J. Majeed
{"title":"宗教差异、殖民政治和格里尔森的《印度语言调查》","authors":"J. Majeed","doi":"10.1080/17597536.2022.2117506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Grierson’s Linguistic Survey of India (1903–1928) is one of the most complete sources on South Asian languages. It has influenced all subsequent studies of the language situation in India. However, there are indications in the Survey’s volumes, in its unpublished files, and in Grierson’s correspondence, that extra-linguistic considerations affected his approach to some Indian languages. Drawing on these sources, this essay focuses on Panjabi, Siraiki, Assamese, and Hindi-Urdu. It shows how factors stemming from Grierson’s views on religious difference and on language as a basis for nationality, as well as colonial politics of governance, may have influenced his characterisations of these languages. However, this does not invalidate the Survey, which is not straightforwardly ‘colonial’. Moreover, each of these languages is also described using linguistic argumentation, as reflected in the LSI’s skeletal grammars and its focus on dialectal variation. As such, we have to work with this tension in the LSI, without trying to resolve it either by rejecting the Survey in toto because of the instances of politics affecting its analyses, or by accepting it wholesale while ignoring the extra-linguistic considerations which influenced how it characterised some Indian languages.","PeriodicalId":41504,"journal":{"name":"Language & History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Religious difference, colonial politics, and Grierson’s Linguistic Survey of India\",\"authors\":\"J. Majeed\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17597536.2022.2117506\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Grierson’s Linguistic Survey of India (1903–1928) is one of the most complete sources on South Asian languages. It has influenced all subsequent studies of the language situation in India. However, there are indications in the Survey’s volumes, in its unpublished files, and in Grierson’s correspondence, that extra-linguistic considerations affected his approach to some Indian languages. Drawing on these sources, this essay focuses on Panjabi, Siraiki, Assamese, and Hindi-Urdu. It shows how factors stemming from Grierson’s views on religious difference and on language as a basis for nationality, as well as colonial politics of governance, may have influenced his characterisations of these languages. However, this does not invalidate the Survey, which is not straightforwardly ‘colonial’. Moreover, each of these languages is also described using linguistic argumentation, as reflected in the LSI’s skeletal grammars and its focus on dialectal variation. As such, we have to work with this tension in the LSI, without trying to resolve it either by rejecting the Survey in toto because of the instances of politics affecting its analyses, or by accepting it wholesale while ignoring the extra-linguistic considerations which influenced how it characterised some Indian languages.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41504,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Language & History\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Language & History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17597536.2022.2117506\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language & History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17597536.2022.2117506","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

格里森的《印度语言学概览》(1903–1928)是南亚语言研究的最完整的文献之一。它影响了后来对印度语言状况的所有研究。然而,在《调查》的卷本、未出版的文件和格里森的信件中,有迹象表明,语言外的考虑影响了他对一些印度语言的处理。根据这些来源,本文重点介绍了旁遮普语、西拉基语、阿萨姆语和印地语-乌尔都语。它表明,源于格里森对宗教差异和语言作为民族基础的观点,以及殖民统治政治的因素,可能影响了他对这些语言的描述。然而,这并没有使调查无效,因为调查并不是直接的“殖民地”。此外,这些语言中的每一种都是通过语言论证来描述的,这反映在LSI的骨架语法及其对方言变体的关注上。因此,我们必须处理LSI中的这种紧张关系,而不是试图通过因为政治影响其分析而拒绝调查来解决它,或者通过全盘接受调查而忽略影响其如何描述某些印度语言的语言外因素来解决它。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Religious difference, colonial politics, and Grierson’s Linguistic Survey of India
ABSTRACT Grierson’s Linguistic Survey of India (1903–1928) is one of the most complete sources on South Asian languages. It has influenced all subsequent studies of the language situation in India. However, there are indications in the Survey’s volumes, in its unpublished files, and in Grierson’s correspondence, that extra-linguistic considerations affected his approach to some Indian languages. Drawing on these sources, this essay focuses on Panjabi, Siraiki, Assamese, and Hindi-Urdu. It shows how factors stemming from Grierson’s views on religious difference and on language as a basis for nationality, as well as colonial politics of governance, may have influenced his characterisations of these languages. However, this does not invalidate the Survey, which is not straightforwardly ‘colonial’. Moreover, each of these languages is also described using linguistic argumentation, as reflected in the LSI’s skeletal grammars and its focus on dialectal variation. As such, we have to work with this tension in the LSI, without trying to resolve it either by rejecting the Survey in toto because of the instances of politics affecting its analyses, or by accepting it wholesale while ignoring the extra-linguistic considerations which influenced how it characterised some Indian languages.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Language & History
Language & History Multiple-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
20.00%
发文量
13
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信