Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 293 Download : 221

Main Article Content

Abstract

Loanword adaptation has long proved field as an intriguing object of study.  Loanword borrowing often takes place within languages to fill the glossary of the new terminology. The direction of borrowing is primarily linked to the sociolinguistic status of a language in a community. In the scenario of Malaysia, Malay as a national language and English as a global language plays an essential role in the process of loanword adaptation, technologically, culturally and politically. English and Tamil languages have two disparate grammatical elements. Some grammatical rules accepted in English is illicit in Tamil. In particular, consonant clusters in the English language are prohibited in Tamil. Therefore, words borrowed from English into Tamil are subject to choose one of these two contradictory rules, whether adapt the consonant cluster in its authenticity or repairing to satisfy the grammar of the recipient language. The study results show that some borrowed English loan words obey Tamil grammar, while others violate the rules. This raises questions about the adaptation process's possible representational versus phonetic underpinnings. This paper examines the phonetic adaptation of  English loanwords in Tamil adaptation, focusing primarily on the process of vowel epenthesis. It finds that the place features of the epenthetic vowel overcome illegal consonant clusters. The paper concludes that the language-specific phonological phenomena are central to this process. Data for this research were obtained from Tamil short stories (2000-2016). Many studies have been conducted to examine loanword adaptation in Malaysian Tamil. However, this study explores the repairing process of phonetic variations in the adapted words.

Keywords

Tamil loanwords vowel phonetic repair

Article Details

Creative Commons License

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

How to Cite
Selvan, P. R. S. (2022). English Loanwords in Tamil: Fix Illicit Consonant Clusters. Ilomata International Journal of Social Science, 3(2), 146-155. https://doi.org/10.52728/ijss.v3i2.438

References

  1. Abdullah, A. N., & Leo, A. R. (2014). Language Choice and Use of Malaysian Tamil Christian Youths: A Survey. Frontiers of Language and Teaching, 4, 149–166. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342923450_Language_Choice_and_Use_of_Malaysian_Tamil_Christian_Youths_A_Survey
  2. Adler, A. N. (2006). Faithfulness and perception in loanword adaptation: A case study from Hawaiian. Lingua, 116(7), 1024–1045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2005.06.007
  3. Aggarwal, A. (2012). Second Language Acquisition at the Phonetic-Phonological Interface: A proposal. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 1(5), 208–218. https://doi.org/10.7575/ijalel.v.1n.5p.208
  4. Aghagolzadeh, F., & Farazandeh-pour, F. (2013). The Analysis of English-Persian Legal Translations Based on Systemic Functional Grammar Approach (SFG). Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.1.126-131
  5. Aitchison, J. (2018). Language Change: Progress or Decay? (4th ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://assets.cambridge.org/97811070/23628/frontmatter/9781107023628_frontmatter.pdf
  6. Bellik, J. (2018). An acoustic study of vowel intrusion in Turkish onset clusters. Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology, 9(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.5334/labphon.112
  7. Bermúdez-Otero, R., & Börjars, K. (2006). Markedness in phonology and in syntax: the problem of grounding. Lingua, 116(5), 710–756. http://www.bermudez-otero.com/markedness.pdf
  8. Chang, C. B. (2008). Phonetics vs. Phonology in Loanword Adaptation: Revisiting the Role of the Bilingual. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 34(1), 61. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v34i1.3557
  9. Chen, H., & Xu, H. (2019). Quantitative linguistics approach to interlanguage development: a study based on the Guangwai-Lancaster Chinese Learner Corpus. Lingua, 230, 102736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2019.102736
  10. Davis, S., & Cho, M.-H. (2006). Phonetics versus phonology: English word final /s/ in Korean loanword phonology. Lingua, 116(7), 1008–1023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2005.06.006
  11. Davis, S., & Kang, H. (2006). English Loanwords and the Word Final [t] Problem in Korean. Language Research, 42, 253–274. https://cl.indiana.edu/davis/DavisKang2006.pdf
  12. Guo, H. L. (1999). Mandarin Loanword Phonology and Optimality Theory : Evidence from Transliterated American State Names and Typhoon Names. 13th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation, 191–202. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/http://hdl.handle.net/2065/12118
  13. Harb, M. A. (2015). On Gender and Apology Strategies: The Case of Arabic. Gender Studies, 14(1), 224–265. https://doi.org/10.1515/genst-2016-0014
  14. Hemat, M. G., Abdullah, A. N., Heng, C. S., & Tan, H. (2015). The Influence of Gender and Ethnicity on the Choice of Language in the Transaction Domain of Language Use: The Case of Undergraduates. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 4(5). https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.5p.249
  15. Hemat, M. G., & Heng, C. S. (2012). Interplay of Language Policy, Ethnic Identity and National Identity in Five Different Linguistic Settings. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 1(7), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.7575/ijalel.v.1n.7p.1
  16. Kager, R. (1999). Optimality Theory (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://acasearch.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/kager_1999.pdf
  17. Kang, Y. (2003). Perceptual similarity in loanword adaptation: English postvocalic word-final stops in Korean. Phonology, 20(2), 219–273. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675703004524
  18. Karim, K. (2003). First Language (L1) Influence on Second Language (L2) Reading: The Role of Transfer. WPLC: Working Papers of the Linguistics Circle, 17, 49–54. https://journals.uvic.ca/index.php/WPLC/article/view/5164
  19. Karim, K. (2010). Vowel epenthesis in Bengali: An Optimality Theory analysis. WPLC: Working Papers of the Linguistics Circle, 20(1), 26–36. https://journals.uvic.ca/index.php/WPLC/article/view/5670
  20. Karim, K., & Nassaji, H. (2013). First language transfer in second language writing: An examination of current research. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 1(1), 117–134. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267865491_First_language_transfer_in_second_language_writing_An_examination_of_current_research/link/5706025008ae44d70ee34b38/download
  21. Karpagavalli, S., Viji Gripsy, J., & Nandhini, K. (2021). Speech assistive Tamil learning mobile applications for learning disability children. Materials Today: Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.01.050
  22. Kenstowicz, M. (2010). Loanword Phonology and Enhancement. International Conference on Linguistics, Universal Grammar and Particular Languages, 104–112. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/71827
  23. Kim, K. (2010). Licensing of argument structures by functional heads: evidence from English have. LSA Annual Meeting Extended Abstracts, 1, 26. https://doi.org/10.3765/exabs.v0i0.505
  24. Rahman, M. M., Rashed, A., Heng, C. S., & Abdullah, A. N. (2008). What determines the choice of language with friends and neighbors? the case of Malaysian university undergraduates. Language in India, 8(10), 1–16. http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/17638/
  25. Rose, Y., & Demuth, K. (2006). Vowel epenthesis in loanword adaptation: Representational and phonetic considerations. Lingua, 116(7), 1112–1139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2005.06.011
  26. Rose, Y., & Inkelas, S. (2011). The Interpretation of Phonological Patterns in First Language Acquisition. In The Blackwell Companion to Phonology (pp. 1–25). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0101
  27. Silverman, D. (1996). Phonology at the interface of phonetics and morphology: Root-final laryngeals in Chong, Korean, and Sanskrit. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 5(3), 301–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00132606
  28. Silverman, D. (1992). Multiple Scansions in Loanword Phonology: Evidence from Cantonese. In J. Ann & K. Yoshimura (Eds.), Arizona Phonology Conference (pp. 61–75). Department of Linguistics, University of Arizona. https://repository.arizona.edu/handle/10150/227271
  29. Venkatraman, K., & Thiruvalluvan, V. (2021). Development of narratives in Tamil-speaking preschool children: A task comparison study. Heliyon, 7(7), e07641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07641
  30. Yaakop, M. R. bin M. (2010). The British Legacy on the Development of Politics in Malaya. TAWARIKH: Journal of Historical Studies, 2(1), 41–60. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2121/tawarikh.v2i1.381
  31. Yip, M. (1993). Cantonese loanword phonology and optimality theory. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 2(3), 261–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01739135