Design Features of Monolingual Urdu Pedagogical Dictionary for Advanced Learners of Urdu Language
By
Asma Ashraf
Department of English Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan, Pakistan
Design Features of Monolingual Urdu Pedagogical Dictionary
For Advanced Learners of Urdu Language
BY
Asma Ashraf
Ph.D (Linguistics)
Supervisor
Prof. Dr. Zafar Iqbal
A thesis submitted in the partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in English (Ph.D Linguistics)
Department of English
Bahauddin Zakariya University
Multan, Pakistan
DEDICATION
To my dear Brother Mubasher Raza (Late),
To whom I owe more than I can express in words.
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that the thesis “Design Features of Monolingual Urdu Pedagogical
Dictionary for Advanced Learners of Urdu Language" is the work of my independent investigation except where I have indicated my indebtedness to other sources. I also declare that this thesis has not been submitted for any other degree elsewhere.
Date: ______(Asma Ashraf) Candidate
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
It is all by the grace of Almighty Allah, the Lord of the worlds, the Beneficent, the
Merciful, that I am able to complete my research work.
I feel extremely appreciative to my supervisor, Prof. Dr. Zafar Iqbal,
Department of English, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, who helped me and
motivated me throughout my research work and created a great intellectual environment
to do research work. He always motivated me in difficult times and listened all the
problems with patience and tolerance and shaped my thoughts according to my research
topic. He always encouraged intellectual curiosity in me and provided inspirations and new insights to think and to work hard.
I would also like to appreciate Prof. Dr Saiqa Imtiaz, Chariperson Department of
English, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan for all the cooperation and help she
extended during my studies.
I am extremely thankful to Mr Ramesh Krishnamurthy, lecturer of English
Studies, Aston University, Birmingham, UK, who guided me at every step during my
research when I was in the UK. He made me explore new and innovative dimensions in
my research work.
I am also obliged to the library staff of Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan,
Punjab University, Lahore and Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad.
I would also express my gratitude for my research fellows, friends and colleagues who motivated me and helped me every possible way in completing this great task.
I am thankful to my sisters and brothers for their best wishes and constant moral support. They encouraged me throughout the years of my study especially Usama and
Jahanzeb, my younger brothers who missed me a lot whenever I was away from home.
Last but not the least, I would also pay my deepest homage for my brother
Mubasher (Late) whose absence was felt the most when I was declared as pass in the exam of PhD.
Asma Ashraf
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page Dedication Declaration Acknowledgements Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures List of Appendices Abstract
Chapter 1: Introduction 17 1.1. Background to the study 18 1.2. Learners’ Dictionaries of English and Other Languages 20 1.3. Design Features of Monolingual Pedagogical Dictionaries 21 1.4. Statement of the Problem 22 1.5. Present Study 23 1.6. Key Objectives 24 1.7. Research Questions 24 1.8. Hypotheses 25 1.9. Suggested Format 25 1.9.1. Macro Structure 25 1.9.2. Micro Structure 26 1.10. Significance of the Study 26 1.11. Delimitations of the Study 27 1.12. Conclusion 27
Chapter 2: Sociolinguistics of Urdu 28 2.1. The Use of Urdu Language: An Historical Perspective 28 2.1.1. Stage 1 (1526 to 1707) 30 2.1.2. Stage 2 (1707 to 1815) 30 2.1.3. Stage 3 (1815 to 1905) 31 2.2. Role of Fort William College in Promoting Urdu 32 2.3. Educational Policies with Special Reference to Urdu 33 2.3.1. A Movement for the Promotion of Urdu in Pakistan 34 2.3.2. The National Commission for Education 1959 35 2.3.3. Language Policies in Bhutto’s regime 37 2.3.4. The National Language Policy 1978 38 2.3.5. The Existing Language Policy 39 2.4. Teaching of Urdu in Pakistan 41 2.5. Teaching of Urdu in Foreign Countries 42 2.5.1. India 42 2.5.2. China 43 2.5.3. Iran 43 2.5.4. Saudi Arabia 44 2.5.5. Qatar 44 2.5.6. Independent and Occupied Kashmir 45 2.5.7. United Kingdom 45 2.5.8. Mauritius 46 2.5.9. America 46 2.5.10. Canada 46 2.5.11. Japan 46 2.5.12. South Africa 47 2.6. Standardization of Urdu and National Language Authority 47 2.7. Conclusion 50
Chapter 3: Role of Dictionaries in Language Learning 51 3.1. The Role of Dictionary in Vocabulary Learning 51 3.2. The Role of Dictionary in Decoding Activities 59 3.3. The Role of the Dictionary in Encoding Activities 62 3.4. Pedagogical Significance of Monolingual Dictionary 63 3.5. Conclusion 65
Chapter 4: Literature Review 66 4.1. Literature Review of Questionnaire- Based Research 66 4.1.1. Barnhart (1962) 67 4.1.2. Quirk (1975) 68 4.1.3. Tomaszczyk (1979) 69 4.1.4. Baxter (1980) 70 4.1.5. Bejoint (1981) 71 4.1.6. Nesi (1984) 72 4.1.7. Griffen (1985) 73 4.1.8. Kipfer (1985) 74 4.1.9. Iqbal (1987) 75 4.1.10. Battenburg (1989) 76 4.1.11. El-Badry (1990) 77 4.1.12. Diab (1990) 78 4.1.13. Li (1998) 78 4.1.14. Boonmoh (2009) 79 4.2. Literature Review of Design Features-based Literature 79 4.2.1. Hausmann (1990) 79 4.2.2. Cowie (1996) 80 4.3. Literature Review of Corpus-based Literature 80 4.3.1. The Brown Corpus 82 4.3.2. The LOB Corpus 82 4.3.3. The London Lund Corpus 82 4.3.4. The Bank of English 83 4.3.5. The British National Corpus (BNC) 83 4.4. Urdu Corpus Literature 84 4.4.1. The EMILLE Project (2004) 84 4.4.2. Becker & Riaz (2002) 85 4.4.3. Anwer, Wang & Wang (2006) 85 4.4.4. Hussain & Ijaz (2008) 86 4.4.5. Hussain (2008) 86 4.4.6. Afzal & Hussain 87 4.5. A Review of Currently Used Monolingual Urdu Dictionaries 88 4.5.1. Feroz ul Lughat 89 4.5.2. Ilmi Urdu Lughat 90 6.6. Conclusion 91
Chapter 5: Research Methodology 92 5.1. Theoretical Framework of the Study 92 5.1.1. A Review of Questionnaire- Based Research 93 5.1.2. A Review of Design Features-Based Research 102 5.1.3. A Review of Corpus-Based Research 103 5.2. Types of Research 105 5.2.1. Selection of Topic 106 5.2.2. Reviewing the Literature 106 5.3. Deciding on the Research Method 109 5.3.1. Deciding the Research Techniques 110 5.3.2. Questionnaire Construction 111 5.3.3. Method to Construct the Questionnaire 112 5.3.4. Construction of Question 113 5.3.5. Opinion Question (Subjective measurement) 113 5.3.6. Likert Scale 114 5.3.7. A Cover Letter 114 5.4. Technique to collect data 115 5.5. Data Analysis Approach 115 5.6. Participants 116 5.7. Conclusion 116
Chapter 6: Survey of the Learners and Teachers of Urdu as Users of Urdu Monolingual Dictionaries 117 6.1. An analysis of Attitudes and Strategies of Advanced Urdu Learners As Monolingual Urdu Dictionary Users 117 6.1.1. Description of Results (strategies) 118 6.1.2. Description of Results (Attitudes) 127 6.1.3. Discussions on Results 133 6.1.4. Concluding Remarks on Learners’ Survey 134 6.2. A Study of the Attitudes of Teachers towards Monolingual Urdu Dictionaries 135 6.2.1. Description of Results 136 6.2.2. Discussions on Results 150 6.2.3. Concluding Remarks on Teachers’ Survey 151 6.3. Conclusion 152
Chapter 7: Design Features of Pedagogical Monolingual Learner’s Dictionary for Advanced Learners of Urdu 153 7.1. The Process of Corpus Development 154 7.1.1. The Main Corpus 155 7.1.1.1. Selection of the Representative of Language 155 7.1.1.2. Identifying and Acquiring the Texts 158 7.1.1.3. Seeking Copyright Permissions 158 7.1.1.4. Texts in Speech Form 159 7.1.1.5. Procedure of Capturing Selected Texts on Computer 159 7.1.1.6. Correcting the Corpus 160 7.2. Reserve Corpus 160 7.3. Design Features of a Pedagogical Monolingual Urdu Learners’ Dictionary 161 7.3.1. Macro Structure 162 7.3.2. Micro Structure 163 7.3.2.1. Spelling 163 7.3.2.2. Etymology 164 7.3.2.3. Pronunciation 165 7.3.2.4. Grammatical Information 168 7.3.2.4.1. Space for Grammar 171 7.3.2.5. Meaning 171 7.3.2.5.1. Polysemy, Homonyms and Metaphors 172 7.3.2.6. Definitions 173 7.3.2.7. Examples 174 7.3.2.8. Pictorial Illustrations 176 7.3.2.9. Stylistic Information (formal or informal) 177 7.4. Conclusion 177
Chapter 8: Conclusion and Recommendations 178 8.1. Major Findings 178 8.1.1. Survey-based Findings 179 8.1.2. Corpus Collection Possibilities 180 8.1.3. Design Feature of a Monolingual Urdu Learners’ dictionary 180 8.2. Contribution of this Study 181 8.3. Limitations of the Study 183 8.3.1. Limitations in the Methodology 183 8.3.2. Limitations in the Scope 184 8.4. Future Recommendations 185 Bibliography 187 Appendices
LIST OF TABLES
No. Description Page 1 Using Dictionary at Secondary Level 118 2 Using Dictionary at Intermediate Level 119 3 Using Dictionary to Look up Meaning 119 4 Using Dictionary to Look up Pronunciation 119 5 Using Dictionary to Look up Usage 120 6 Using Dictionary to Look up Etymology 120 7 Using Dictionary to Look up Grammatical Information 120 8 Asking Teachers about Meaning 121 9 Asking Teachers about Pronunciation 121 10 Asking Teachers about Symbols 122 11 Asking Teachers about Grammatical Categories 122 12 Using Dictionary in the Classroom 122 13 Using Dictionary Available in Library 123 14 Writing Meaning on the Text 123 15 Using more than one Dictionary 123 16 Guessing the Meaning from the Context 124 17 Writing Meaning in a Note Book 124 18 Browsing the Pages of Dictionary 124 19 Referring to the Introductory Pages 125 20 Referring to the Glossaries 125 21 Referring to the General Information 125 22 Finding Required Information in Glossaries 126 23 Finding Comprehensive Definition of the Words 126 24 Following the Abbreviated Information 126 25 Significance of a Dictionary 127 26 Information in a Dictionary 127 27 Using Dictionary is Boring 128 28 Dependence on one Dictionary 128 29 Information Provided by the Glossaries 128 30 Possession of at least one Dictionary 129 31 Use of a Dictionary on Teachers Recommendation 129 32 Effectiveness of Monolingual Dictionaries 130 33 Inclusion of Dictionary Skills Exercises in Course of Urdu 130 34 Use of Pocket Dictionaries 130 35 Role of Dictionary in Language Learning 136 36 Role of Dictionary in 2nd Language Learning 136 37 Importance of Monolingual Urdu Dictionary 137 38 Using Dictionary in Looking up Meaning 137 39 Using Dictionary in Looking up Pronunciation 137 40 Using Dictionary in Looking up Grammatical Categories 138 41 Using Dictionary in Looking up Usage 138 42 Dependence on one Dictionary 138 43 Teaching Dictionary Use 139 44 Ownership of Dictionary 139 45 Learners’ Encouragement to Use Dictionaries 139 46 Role of a Dictionary in Reading 140 47 Role of a Dictionary in Writing 140 48 Role of a Dictionary in Speaking 140 49 Use of a Dictionary while Teaching 141 50 Use of a Dictionary in Lesson Preparation 141 51 Encouragement of Learners to Buy Dictionaries 141 52 Teaching Dictionary Use 142 53 Information Provided in Glossaries 142 54 Dependence on Glossaries 142 55 Avoiding the use of Pocket Dictionaries 143 56 Using Learners’ Dictionaries 143 57 Using a Dictionary in the Classroom 143 58 Browsing the pages of a Dictionary 144 59 Pronunciation Guide in Currently Used Dictionaries 144 60 Grammatical Information in Currently Used Dictionaries 144 61 Usage of the Words in Currently Used Dictionaries 145 62 Revision of Monolingual Urdu Dictionaries 145 63 Inclusion of Definition in Dictionary 145 64 Comprehensive Pronunciation Guide 146 65 Explanation of Abbreviated Words 146 66 Inclusion of Illustration 146 67 Inclusion of Notes on Usage 147 68 Designing Dictionaries on Lexicographic Principles 147 69 Role of a Dictionary in Learning Spoken Urdu 147 70 Significance of Urdu Monolingual Dictionary for Foreign Learner 148
LIST OF FIGURES AND ILLUSTRATIONS
No. Title Page
Figure 1 Language- wise Books Publication 41
Figure 2 Dictionaries Published by National Language Authority 49
Figure 3 Knowing a Word 53
Figure 4 The Stages of Vocabulary Knowledge Acquisition 54
Figure 5 Reviewing the Literature 107
Figure 6 Construction of a Questionnaire 112
Figure 7 Graphical Representation of the Results (Learners’ Strategies) 131
Figure 8 Graphical Representation of the Results (Learners’ Attitude) 132
Figure 9 Graphical Representation of the Results (Teachers’ Attitude) 149
Figure 10 Atkins et al’s Taxonomy for Selection the Material for Corpus 156
Figure 10 From IPA to SAMPA 165
LIST OF APPENDICES
No. Description Page
A Questionnaire for Advanced Urdu Learners i
B Questionnaire for Advanced Urdu Teachers v
C Results of the survey of advanced learners of Urdu (Strategies) viii
D Results of the survey of advanced learners of Urdu (Attitudes) x
E Results of the survey of Teachers of Urdu xi
F List of Colleges Selected for Data Collection xiv
ABSTRACT
Design Features of Monolingual Urdu Pedagogical Dictionary
For Advanced Learners of Urdu Language
The lexicographic tradition in Monolingual Urdu Dictionaries is very old but the implications of modern postulates of lexicography are not evident in compiling Urdu monolingual dictionaries. The present study deals with a description of design features of a pedagogical monolingual Urdu learners’ dictionary for the advanced learners of Urdu on the tradition set by the COBUILD dictionary. Basically the study looks at three perspectives: the opinions of the user (learners and teachers of Urdu) of monolingual
Urdu dictionaries, assessing the possibilities of collecting a database or corpus of Urdu as a basis of a monolingual advanced learners’ dictionary of Urdu and design features of a pedagogical Urdu monolingual advanced learners’ dictionary.
The study is descriptive. The data regarding the opinions of the learners and teachers of Urdu was collected through a questionnaire. The theoretical framework was based on the questionnaire based studies conducted by Diab (1998) and Iqbal (1987). The responses collected from the teachers and learners of Urdu were statistically analyzed by securing the mean score against each statement. The second perspective of the study was to see how far it is possible to collect a corpus of Urdu as a basis of a monolingual learners’ dictionary of Urdu.
A number of studies (The EMILLE Project 2004, Becker & Riaz 2002, Anwer,
Wang & Wang 2006, Hussain & Ijaz 2008, Hussain 2008, Chohan & Bukhari 2009) have been reported in the area of Urdu corpus. CRULP (Center of Research in Urdu Language
Processing) collected a corpus of 19 million words which is used to design an Urdu- English dictionary. These studies maintain that there is a great potential as far as the collection of a corpus is concerned. The third and the central concern of the study is to design the features of a pedagogical monolingual learners’ dictionary for advanced learners of Urdu language and for this purpose the design features of the COBUILD dictionary were taken as model. This choice is made on the grounds that this dictionary is meant both for teachers and students; it bears some unique features in its design and has got the appraisal of many critics (see Boguraev 1990, Aarts & Meijs 1990,
Krishnamurthy 2002, 2001). Moreover the results drawn from the above mentioned surveys of both the learners and teachers of Urdu also provided insights to determine the essential features of a pedagogical monolingual learners’ dictionary for the advanced learners of Urdu. The results concluded that there is a great need to design a monolingual learners’ dictionary for advanced learners of Urdu and the compiling a corpus based monolingual Urdu learners’ dictionary for advanced learners will bring innovative changes in learning and teaching of Urdu and lexicographic tradition of Urdu. Finally, the design features of a pedagogical monolingual Urdu dictionary for the advanced learners of Urdu were established. These features were based on these aspects: the possibility of the application of the method adopted in the COBUILD and the possibility of collection the corpus of Urdu and the availability of the technical and technological needs while collecting the corpus of Urdu. The study concluded that greater possibilities are there to collect a corpus of Urdu and the selected model of COBUILD dictionary can also b applied on a corpus based monolingual Urdu dictionary for advanced learners of Urdu.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Dr Johnson said that dictionaries are as valuable as watches: to have the worst is better than to have none. They are the sum total of the whole vocabulary of a language.
Their significance, contribution and effectiveness in learning or teaching a language can never be denied. This fact calls for a need to search creative and innovative dimensions in the field of dictionary designing. These dimensions include learners as well as teachers in collecting the information on dictionary use as a basis of dictionary research. The inclusion of dictionary users in dictionary research and exclusion of intuitive knowledge of dictionary compiler leads towards the modern postulates of dictionary research or lexicography.
Lexicography can be defined as “the professional activity and academic field concerned with dictionaries and other reference works” (Hartmann & James.1998: 85).
There are two basic divisions according to the above mentioned definition: lexicographic practice (dictionary making) and lexicographic theory (dictionary research).
Lexicographic practice is concerned with the professional activity of compiling reference works and lexicographic theory is the scholarly studies in the disciplines like Linguistics especially Lexicology. It has been maintained for many years that lexicography only covers the practice of dictionary making, as Landau (1984) called it the ‘art and craft’. In recent years, however, the scholarly field of lexicography or dictionary research has been increasingly recognized. Wiegand (1984) divided the field into four areas: history of lexicography, general theory of lexicography, research on dictionary use and criticism of
17 dictionaries. Pedagogical lexicography is currently a dominating area of inquiry of
dictionary research. Pedagogical lexicography consists on scholarly studies in designing,
compiling, evaluating and using learner’s dictionaries. Research into dictionary use and
dictionary requirements can further be investigated in a number of different ways.
Hartmann (1987), in his paper for EURALEX-Leeds seminar, identified four categories of
investigation:
resrearch into the information categories presented in dictionaries
(dictionary typology),
research into specific dictionary user groups (user typology),
research into the contexts of dictionary use (needs typology), and
research into dictionary look-up strategies (skills typology).
The present research concentrates on designing a dictionary by looking at the attitudes and strategies of the learners at one hand and the attitudes of Urdu teachers towards using monolingual dictionaries on the other. This study is concerned with the lexicographic theory or designing the features of pedagogical Urdu monolingual dictionary by making an attempt to look at the possibilities of collecting a corpus of Urdu as the basis of a learners’ dictionary.
1.1. Background to the study
The history of the Urdu language begins with the Mughal period (1526-1858). The
Mughal Empire that preceded the rule of the East India Company in India was a
multilingual empire. People of different ethnic, linguistic and cultural background with
diversity of dialects constituted the Mughal Empire. It literally means “a camp language”
18 for it was spoken by the imperial troops of first Mughal king Babar that was from the
Central Asia as they mixed with the speakers of local dialects of the northern India. When
the Mughal army constituted, it included soldiers from all over the South Asian regions
and the surrounding territories like Iran, Afghanistan, Arab, Russia and Turkey. The
soldiers had problem in intra-army communication because of language variation. These
soldiers gradually developed a new language for containing words from all the languages
of all the soldiers. Hence an amalgamation of all the spoken languages resulted in the formulation of a new language. Early Urdu was quite different from today’s and was not a very fine form. Like all other languages, Urdu has to go through the stages of evolution.
After the death of Aurangzeb in 1707, Urdu took birth as a new language. New words
were created which belong only to Urdu; thence Urdu began to become famous because
of its flexibility. When the British came to India, they needed to communicate in Urdu
that is why they set up an Urdu center at the Fort William College in Calcutta to teach
British employees the Urdu language. The college helped promote the Urdu language.
John Gilchrist, head of the Department of Urdu in Fort William College, was the person
who wrote the first grammar of the Urdu language. He had full command of the Urdu
language and he decided to compile an Urdu dictionary. It was an English - Urdu
dictionary.
After the partition many steps were taken to promote Urdu as the national
language of Pakistan. Apart from having Urdu as a compulsory and optional subject in
the curriculum, many institutions were established for the promotion of Urdu and Urdu
dictionaries. These institutions include Urdu Tarraqi Board, Urdu Dictionary Board,
Muqtadra Quomi Zaban, Feroz Sons, etc. These institutions compiled a number of
19 monolingual Urdu dictionaries. These dictionaries claim to meet the needs of learners but
they are not compiled on the principles of pedagogical lexicography that are proposed by
the linguistics and lexicography after the advent of Linguistics in 20th century. Currently,
the user perspective approach in dictionary theory as well as in practice of dictionary
research is very much in vogue. In Pakistan, however, this approach is still not very much
popular. The dictionaries are compiled on the basis of the intuitive knowledge of the
compilers and the innovation idea of collecting and using a corpus (details of corpus in
chapter 6) as the basis of dictionary is still not practiced in Pakistan.
1.2. Learners’ Dictionaries of English Language
In the past thirty years, learners’ dictionaries have become increasingly a subject
of interest for language teachers, applied linguists and lexicographers. After the publication of Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary of Current English (OALD) existed for more than thirty years without a competitor, The Longman Dictionary of
Contemporary English (LDOCE) was brought onto the market in 1978. This new dictionary received much acclaim for its innovative and user- friendly features such as a controlled defining vocabulary, a clear access structure and a mnemonic grammatical
coding system. The arrival of the LDOCE set off the development of a competitive
market for learners’ dictionaries, so that lexicographically, English became “the best-
described language in the world” (Herbst 1996: 321). In 1987, the COBUILD appeared.
COBUILD was regarded as revolutionary in breaking with some lexicographic traditions
and conventions. It was the first dictionary that defined words in a full sentence format
presented a larger number of examples for words and avoided cluttering the entries with
20 codes, symbols and abbreviations by banning technical information into an extra column.
The COBUILD dictionary is considered to be the latest and the most user- friendly
dictionary. That is why, the present research attempts to design the features of a
monolingual dictionary on the set of parameters adopted by the COBUILD.
1.3. Design Features of Monolingual Pedagogical Dictionaries
Pedagogical dictionaries are the dictionaries that meet the language needs of non
native speakers. The top most rated pedagogical dictionaries in English are the following:
Cambridge International Dictionary of English
Collins COBUILD
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English
Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary
The pedagogical dictionaries are considered unique for some distinctive features of their design that are listed below:
The pedagogical dictionaries use a specific and controlled vocabulary to be used
while defining the words.
The definitions were designed by using a corpus based contextualized texts.
The examples are taken from the natural or authentic language.
The nonverbal illustrations are used for supporting the definitions (Kwary, from
www.kwery.net ).
21 1.4. Statement of the Problem
Urdu, the national language of Pakistan is the most important language of literacy, literature, office and court business, media and religious institutions of the country. In
Pakistan it is taught from primary to intermediate level as a compulsory subject and as an optional subject at degree level. Textbooks are written in the Urdu language from
Primary to Secondary level. At Intermediate and degree level most of the students of
Humanities and Social Sciences choose Urdu as a medium of education. Urdu is not an indigenous language in Pakistan and suffers from a lot of pressures of different ethnic and linguistic groups. It is taught as a compulsory subject from primary to intermediate level and as an optional subject at degree level. In Pakistan, only 8 % of the total population speaks Urdu as its first language and rest of the population learns it as its second language. Another problem in this regard is that the teachers of the Urdu language are not trained themselves what dictionary they should recommend to the learners. Mostly, the learners are not at all advised to purchase a dictionary even at the beginning level when they learn it as a second language. Moreover Urdu is taught as a foreign language in many countries of the world. A dictionary plays a very vital role in teaching or learning a second/foreign language. That is why it is required to design a Learners’ Dictionary for
Advanced Learners studying Urdu not only in Pakistan but also in foreign countries.
Although many monolingual dictionaries are available on the market and some of them even claim to be the learners’ dictionaries in their orientation, they are unable to meet all the didactic needs of the learners and they are not compiled on the recognized principles of modern pedagogical lexicography. There is a great need to take initiative to put
22 forward the idea of collecting a corpus of Urdu language as the basis of learners’ dictionaries.
1.5. Present study
The present study looks at designing a monolingual Urdu Dictionary for Advanced
Learners of Urdu and finding out the possibilities of collecting a corpus of Urdu as the basis of a dictionary following the traditions set by English, French and German lexicographers. The study deals with the status of Urdu as a national language in Pakistan and as a foreign language in other countries of the world. It deals with the teaching and promotion of the Urdu language in Pakistan and in foreign countries as well. Although many monolingual Urdu dictionaries are available on the market but they are not designed according to the principles of pedagogical lexicography. This study As far as the theoretical implications of the research are concerned, it will provide the lexicographic principles for designing a monolingual Urdu learner’s dictionary while the pedagogical implications are concerned with the evaluation of the effectiveness of different dictionaries and finally the recommendation of suitable dictionaries to learners.
This particular dictionary will focus on the corpus based on the evaluation of the currently used monolingual Urdu dictionaries and collected from the Urdu textbooks taught in the institutions as well as from daily life conversation. The proposed design features of the proposed dictionary are adopted on the lines of COBUILD dictionary. In this dictionary, pronunciation will be given in I.P.A (international phonetic alphabets) and it will be very helpful for the foreign learners in learning the Urdu language. A key to the sounds and the symbols used in the proposed model will also be designed for the ease
23 of the learners. Hopefully, it will be useful for those Pakistanis who live in foreign countries and want to learn the Urdu language.
1.6. Key Objectives
The key objectives of the research are as under:
To conduct a survey to collect opinions of teachers and the advanced learners of
Urdu regarding monolingual Urdu dictionaries they use
To find out the possibilities of collecting corpus of Urdu as a basis of a learners’
dictionary and
To design essential features of a monolingual Urdu learners’ dictionary for the
advanced learners of Urdu.
1.7. Research Questions
After studying the related literature the researcher is able to put following research questions.
Do the teachers and advanced learners of Urdu feel the need of a proper
monolingual Urdu dictionary?
To what extent it is possible to design a pedagogical Urdu monolingual dictionary
for advanced learners of Urdu?
To what extent it is possible to design a corpus based Urdu monolingual
dictionary in Pakistan?
24 1.8. Hypotheses
The teachers and advanced learners of Urdu feel the need of a proper Urdu
monolingual dictionary.
A pedagogical Urdu monolingual dictionary is essential for the advance learners
of Urdu.
It is vital to design a corpus based Urdu monolingual dictionary in the Pakistani
context.
1.9. Suggested format
While designing the features of this dictionary the two main structures of a dictionary have bee kept under consideration:
Macro Structure
Micro Structure
1.9.1. Macro structure
Macro structure refers to the overall list of items that allows the compiler and the
user to locate information in a reference work. In the proposed dictionary the most
common format i.e. the alphabetical word list will be adopted supplemented by outside
matter in the front, middle or back of the work. It includes the introductory section or the
front matter of the dictionary having a guide for the use of the dictionary. These
introductory pages include the explanation of the abbreviated words used in the
dictionary, description of grammar in general, key to the pronunciation of the words and the explanation of other symbols or key words used in the dictionary.
25 1.9.2. Micro structure
Microstructure refers to the internal design of a reference work. In this proposed dictionary, the research will focus on the following set of information to be provided:
(a) Spelling
(b) Pronunciation
(c) Grammatical information
(d) Definitions
(e) Examples
(f) Stylistic information (formal or informal)
1.10. Significance of the study
In Pakistan, Urdu is taught as a compulsory subject. So, it is the need of the
learners that they should have a learner’s dictionary in which there is no unnecessary
coinage. Although many monolingual dictionaries have been compiled, no such project
has been conducted until now. Perhaps this study would be the very first one in the field
of Urdu pedagogical monolingual lexicography. This dictionary will help the non-
native speakers as well as the native speakers in learning Urdu. The present research
will initiate the theory of modern principles of lexicography to be applied on Urdu
lexicography.
26 1.11. Delimitations of the study
It has already been discussed that in designing this dictionary the pronunciation will be given in IPA (International Phonetic Alphabets). However it will be only on segmental level. This study does not deal with supra segmental features of the Urdu language which includes the stress and intonation pattern of the language. This research pertains only to designing a learner’s dictionary for advanced learners of the Urdu language. Although there is a need to do research on other aspects as Urdu learners’ dictionary for beginners, this study will focus on the learners of advanced level.
1.12. Conclusion
This chapter outlines the background, significance and rationale of the study. The present research aims at establishing and designing the design features of a pedagogical monolingual Urdu learner’s dictionary. The next chapter deals with the sociolinguistics of Urdu with a special focus on language policies and the standardization of Urdu as the national language of Pakistan.
27 CHAPTER 2
SOCIOLINGUISTICS OF URDU
This chapter outlines a detailed introduction of the history of Urdu starting from the evolution of Urdu as a language to its standard form. The chapter discusses the use of
Urdu in different stages of history, language policies regarding Urdu before and after partition of the subcontinent and the influence of different language groups in Pakistan.
The chapter also deals with the description of teaching Urdu in Pakistan and in foreign countries. A comprehensive overview of the process of standardization of Urdu and the role of National Language Authority (NLA) is also included to determine the current status of Urdu as a national language of Pakistan.
2.1. The Use of the Urdu Language: An Historical Introduction
There are many assumptions pertaining to the origin of Urdu, differing in both time and geographic location. Urdu is an Indo-European language originated in India, most likely in Delhi, from where it spread to the rest of the subcontinent. Other major metropolitan areas with a strong tradition of the language include Hyderabad, Lukhnow and Lahore. Another view is that the Urdu language was originated during the Mughal period (1526-1858). It was borne out of the socio-administrative needs of Muslim rulers.
It literally means “a camp language”, “troops”, or “army” for it was spoken by the troops of Mughal Empire when the soldiers from Central mixed with the speakers of local dialects of northern India. When the Mughal army constituted by king Babar, it included
28 the soldiers from all over the regions of South Asia and the surrounding states like Iran,
Afghanistan, Arab, Russia and Turkey. Hence an amalgamation of all the spoken languages resulted in the formulation of Urdu. Initially it was emerged as a synthesis of
Khari Boli (Hindi), Braj Bhasha Rajhistani and Punjabi with some Arabic and Persian vocabulary.
During the first two centuries of its development, i.e. during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, ‘Urdu, cutting across the regional barriers’ (Beg 1996:40) not only became popular far and wide but also spread and developed linguistically. Thus, Urdu became a lingua franca or link language for communicating between the troops from foreign lands and the native people. Pandit regarded the Khadi Boli style of Urdu as ‘the
Northern lingua franca’. He writes:
“The lingua franca, with the continuous deployment of armies to South India,
eventually got established in the Muslim kingdoms of the South: there it was
known under the name Dakni, (Daccan = South) (1977:57).
Like all other languages, Urdu had to go through the stages of evolution and development. New words were created that belonged only to the Urdu language. Urdu began to become famous because of its flexible nature to absorb the words from other languages. Increasingly, words and grammatical structure of Persian, the official language of the Mughal administrators, were incorporated until Urdu attained its stylized, literary form in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Urdu has always been written using the Persian script.
29 Looking back to the history of the evolution of Urdu language from its birth during the Mughal period 1526 to 1905, we can divide the period into three stages.
2.1.1. Stage 1 (1526 to 1707)
The kingdom of Mughals started with the throne of Babar in 1526 but moved
towards the south when Aurangzeb was died in 1707.
Nayyer (2003) stated that the word ‘Urdu’ is a Turkish word that stands for a
“military language” or “horde”. Urdu had not taken its complete form in this era. It was
actually the mixture of the dialects spoken by the Muslims who had been ruling over the
South Asia from 14th century. The form of the language as a result of mixing various
dialects was known as Dakhni or the speech of the South may be traced back to the 15th century (Kashmiri 2003). Its use was confined only to Daccan and South India and was used in literature by the Muslims of these regions, who were less influenced by the local
Hindi spirit of the dialects and languages of North India than the Muslims living in North
India. This difference becomes quite clear from the fact that the Perso-Arabian script was used in the Daccan from almost the beginning. Gradually, the literature increasingly came under foreign influence in the sense that it became more and more Muslim and Persian in its attitude and attributes Urdu, however, continued to adopt and use a great collection from Indian vocabulary till the end of the 17th century (Nayyer 2003).
2.1.2. Stage 2 (1707 to 1815)
This era commenced when Aurangzeb died in 1707 and ended with the third
Maratha war in 1818 and Urdu was brought forth as a language during this period. Delhi
and Lukhnow were the two central places which received much influence of the
30 development of Urdu (Nayyer 2003). There was a significant contribution of both Arabic
and Persian languages seen in the development and expansion of Urdu. A strong need for the rehabilitation of the ethical and socio economic condition was felt when the situation in the Muslim society became worse due to the weaknesses in the royal authorities. The
Muslim scholars decided upon brining the Muslim community together by reforming the society on religious grounds. Arabic was considered to be the channel to meet the needs of religious rethinking among the Muslims (Beg 1996). The Muslim society was agreed upon a thought to adopt a language that would show their linguistic identity and Urdu served this purpose quite successfully in the 18th century.
Chutterji explained that:
“By 1750, Delhi Urdu entered upon its new and triumphant career, and Delhi
Urdu helped to establish the Hindustani Speech all over India’’ (1960:210).
When the British came to India, they realized the need to communicate in Urdu,
which is why they set up an Urdu center at the Fort William College in Calcutta to teach
British employees the language. The college helped promote Urdu too.
2.1.3. Stage 3 (1815 to 1905)
During 1815 to 1905, Urdu was flourished as a language of communication. A major development during this era was that Urdu was introduced as a language of literature. Nayyer (2003) explained that the language, which was born in the camps of military troops from the Hindi Khari/Khadi Boli during the later Mughal period, developed into a language of expression for religious and philosophic ideology. An Urdu translation of the Holy Quran was made in 1791. I was during this period that Urdu
31 became popular as a spoken language and replaced Persian as the language of the
educated people. During this period, Lukhnow and Rampur were the centers of Urdu. The
Aligarh Movement by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan promoted to modernize Urdu literature at the beginning of the fourth quarter of the 19th century. It was just because of the
movement by Aligarh that a large number of prose writers, historians and essayists
contributed their share to the Urdu literature.
Kashmiri (2003) added that with the passage of time, Urdu became to be regarded
as the language of the Muslims. Muslim leadership demanded before the Hunter
Commission (between 1883 to 1890) in Bengal that special and urgent step should be
taken for the primary education of Hindus and Muslims. They stressed that Urdu should
be made the medium of instruction in education. During these years, Urdu press was
launched and the books and reading material started to be published. As Indian Muslim
started identifying themselves with this language and Urdu was regarded as the language
of the Muslims, it became a bone of contention between the Muslims and the Hindus.
2.2. Role of Fort William College in Promoting Urdu
Fort William College was established in 1800. The primary purpose of the
establishment of the college was to teach the machinery of the government the language
of the people of India in order to expand and strengthen its empire. Wellesley, the
Governor General and one of the most eminent founder and promoter of the college
raised the notion that the officials of the British government needed to communicate with
the local people and this communication is not possible without learning Hindustani
languages (Sadaid 1991: 224).
32 Kashmiri (2003) stated that before the establishment of Fort William College,
Wellesley and Gilchrist had already started teaching the Hindustani languages to the
British officials in an institution called the Oriental Seminary founded by Gilchrist.
Considering the importance of the knowledge of the local languages, on 3rd January 1799,
Governor General Wellesley had declared the competence of the local languages an
important condition for the eligibility of the government officers. He ordered the junior
civil servants that they should join the lessons of Hindustani languages being conducted
in the Oriental Seminary of Gilchrist. But afterwards a gulf was created between the
Directors of the Company and Wellesley on the matter of the college. On 27th of March
1802 the Court of Directors of the Company informed Wellesley that the college could
not be permitted to continue its practice on economical grounds.
All these circumstances led to the termination of the college on 24th of June 1802.
Wellesley resigned in August 1805 and this college was converted into a school for
British servants in Bengal. Fort William College went through different stages afterwards
and, at last, was closed on 24th of January 1852 with an order from Lord Dalhousie. Meer
Amman’s Bagh-o-Bahar was the most representative literary work of Fort William
College, Calcutta that was written in Urdu language.
2.3. Educational Policies with Special Reference to Urdu
When Pakistan was emerged on the face of the world, its main demand was to
satisfy the two conflicting requirements of ‘nationism’ and ‘nationalism’ (Bell 1976: 168-
69). The urge of nationalism was satisfied by declaring Urdu as the national language and a sign to unite the masses of Pakistan. Mansoor (1993) explains that an appropriate status
33 for Bengali, that was the language of the East Pakistan, was demanded that proved a sense of resentment on declaring Urdu as the only national language. After the Dacca language riots, Jinnah, Liaqat Ali Khan and Khawja Nazimuddin suggested that there could be only one lingua franca or a link language in order to link the people of different provinces of the country and that language should be Urdu and cannot be any other regional language (Haque 1982: 6).
Haque (1982) further explains that the question of deciding upon a national language was left unresolved after Jinnah was died. English filled in the need for
‘nationism’, which was the requirement of the new government officials to start the machinery of the state at operational level. English, therefore, was decided to be the official language. The main reason behind the decision to choose English as an official language was that it could serve as a link language with East Pakistan.
2.3.1. A Movement for the Promotion of Urdu in Pakistan
The policy that was made by adopting English as an official language, the language of British rulers, and an attempt to maintain the balance of status between
English and Urdu was soon criticized and pressurized by those who were the protagonists of promoting Urdu. They demand a policy in which English would totally be replaced by
Urdu in official use. Mansoor (1993) stated that efforts to abandon English to replace it with Urdu have been a consistent and continuous policy of the government for the last 40 years and the tools used by almost all the governments to achieve this purpose of national unity were to gain authentic control of the syllabus, curriculum and the use of Urdu as a medium of instruction in the classroom. All these efforts were made to strengthen Urdu
34 so that government could make it sure that a uniform policy has been implemented throughout the state. She further added that the emergence and construction of a new system of education, however, was the only one reason and rationale to convince the people on the subject of national unity.
Rahman (1997) explained that Urdu, which is not an indigenous language to
Pakistan, came to occupy the position of the national language of Pakistan and the most commonly used medium of instruction in government schools. Rahman quoted that according to the Census of 1951:
“Urdu is the normal medium of instruction in primary and middle schools in West
Pakistan except where instruction is given in Sindhi, Pushto or English and even
there Urdu is taught as the second language. In West Pakistan therefore as a
general rule most people who can write at all, write Urdu.” (1997: 146)
2.3.2. The National Commission for Education 1959
The basic objective of the recommendation presented in Sharif Commission was that after about 15 years Urdu would developed to the point where it could become the medium of instruction at the university level. Recommendations in this regard included:
1. National language should be developed and the terminology of scientific knowledge
should be standardized.
2. Special trainings should be arranged to train the teachers in the national language.
3. Special governing bodies i.e. boards should be set up to assist the education sector in
preparing the text books and translation for the learners.
35 4. The study of English should also be continued as a second language since sources of
advanced knowledge found in English was only required for advanced study and
research (Sharif 1959: 281-89).
Those who favoured Urdu argued that English should be replaced by Urdu as a
medium of instruction as majority of learners faced difficulties in attaining required
proficiency level while learning a foreign language which caused the wastage of time.
They are of the view that learning a foreign language is an extra burden on learners and they could not comprehend the language properly and as a result the whole process of learning a foreign language ruins the standards of education (Qureshi, 1975, 175-190).
The decision to adopt Urdu as a national language was also justified with the reason of remove class discrimination and to create a sense of nationhood and it was also recommended that the affinitive strength of Urdu be positively utilized by making it function as a representative language of West Pakistan. This could be made possible by absorbing the words from other languages (Zaman 1981, 134: Sharif 1959, 283).
In Sind, a great resistance was observed against this shift to adopt Urdu as a medium of instruction where Sindhi was used for classroom instruction till class X (grade
10). The recommendations and suggestions, however, were appreciated and practiced in
Punjab, Baluchistan, Bahawalpur and Karachi where Urdu had already been used as the medium of instruction for so many years. Since the masses of Sind were quite conscious of their literary heritage, they had a deep desire to use their own language for study purposes. The implementation of Urdu caused an opposing attitude against the Muhajirs, and their mother tongue, Urdu. The attention of young Sindhis was attracted toward the
36 slogan of ‘Long Live Sind’ (Jiay Sind) and resulted in creating tensions and conflicts in the institutions of higher education and universities. The demand for Sindhi was taken as an assault on the national language by those who favoured Urdu. The university syndicate decided that Sindhi should be used as the language of education at secondary level at Sind University after the break-up of ONE UNIT in July 1970 (Zaman 1981,
132).
2.3.3. Language Policies in Bhutto’s Regime
Mansoor (1993) stated that in Bhutto’s era, educational system was promised to design an educational policy by the eminent educationists for brining a revolution. All the schools and colleges of the private sector were nationalized and education was made universal and free to class X. However, in Butto’s era, the language policy was not rigid as the problem of language was a sensitive one and many riots had already been reported in Karachi in July 1972. Education was regarded as an issue of provincial subject and the decision of the choice of the language of instruction was left to the approval of provincial assemblies. In 1973, the provincial governments of N.W.F.P and Baluchistan decided to adopt Urdu as the official language. This decision was a bid by the opposition to embarrass the central government at that time (Haque 1983). Karachi University and
Punjab University decided to adopt Urdu as the medium of teaching and Peshawar
University decided to use English as the medium of instruction (Mansoor 1993).
Hayes (1987) stated that the inability and procrastination in adopting Urdu for classroom instruction and as a national language caused many misunderstanding among those who were the protagonists of Urdu. He further added that a main reason for these
37 apprehensions was that many English medium schools were setting up in the state and were gaining popularity. The conflicts and tensions arose at that time about the problem of the medium of instruction at all levels were blamed on unsuccessful implementation of language policy by the provinces.
2.3.4. The National Language Policy in 1978
All the steps taken to promote Urdu as the national language of Pakistan and a language of instruction were proved insufficient for those who extremely favoured Urdu.
The constitutional provision to consolidate the status of Urdu as the national language of
Pakistan was also considered ineffective (Mansoor 1993). She explained that the National
Education Policy in the era of Zia-ul-Haq, Chief Martial Law Administrator and president, focused specifically at Islamization of the curriculum. This policy aimed at revising the curriculum so that a high degree of priority should be assigned to Islamiat and Arabic. In this policy, it was decided that Islamiat and Arabic should be the compulsory subjects for all students. It was planned that 30 language centers of Arabic would be set up with the help of Allama Iqbal Open University (AIOU). The private institutions, which were nationalized in the previous policy, were once again allowed to re-open. Strict observations were made for the implementation of Urdu as the medium of instruction in all educational institutions. Throughout the country, English medium schools were required to adopt Urdu or an approved provincial language as the medium of instruction and the schools where the medium of instruction was only English were closed. Haque (1983) asserts that in 1979, the first class 1 was commenced with Urdu as
38 the only language of classroom instruction to matriculate in 1989 and it was a fundamental change which would affect the whole fiber of educational system.
In 1982, study group was established on the teaching of languages to meet the requirements of the present educational policy and justifications were presented to convert all the schools from English medium to Urdu medium and the compulsion of teaching Arabic was also justified. It also gave suggestions and recommendation on how
10,000 Arabic teachers would successfully be trained by 1984 for a better implementation of the policy (Haque 1982: 32-3). The group had to face a bitter criticism on the contradiction of the objectives of the policy as far as English is concerned and another point which was badly criticized was that this policy had assigned no status to regional languages as the group was not a representative character of the whole state
(Faruki 1982: 969).
In 1986, the policy to abandon English as medium of instruction was proved to be an absolute failure and the recommendations were presented to use English as a medium of instruction for science and mathematics and it was decided that by 1988, this would be applied to all subjects (Akhter 1989: 374).
2.3.5. The Existing Language Policy
Rahman (1999) narrated that the new language policy of Pakistan was a continuation of the pre-partition policies when Pakistan came into being out of Hindu- majority Indian subcontinent. Urdu was adopted as the national language whereas
English, the elitist language, was welcomed to flourish as the 'official' language-the language of the domains of power (governance, administration, judiciary, military,
39 commerce, media and education) at the higher levels. Both policies favoured the ruling
elite: Urdu, by favouring the West-Pakistani elite which used Urdu; English, by favouring the Westernized upper classes which got easier access to jobs within the country and abroad because of English.
The language policies that have been made in Pakistan in the past 50 years satisfied the need of nationalism. A great emphasis has always been given to integrate the needs of modern changes and the national issues. There has been lesser interest to develop the regional languages. A continued conflict can be seen between Urdu and
English on the issue of the choice of medium of instruction. The changeover of replacing
English by Urdu was seen as a great failure because of improper planning and ineffective cooperation. The new language policy of the state also favours the elite class as Tariq
(1999) sated that Urdu is favoured by the elite of Western Pakistan and English is greatly welcomed by the westernized upper class and both the classes take advantage of their languages in gaining control on offices and government.
The above given discussion reveals that there has always been an urge to make
Urdu the national language and the language to link the people of the four provinces of
Pakistan. The existing language policy also aims at promoting the language inspite of the prevailing conflicts ad confusions regarding the status and significance of English which is considered the language of the ruling elites.
40 2.4. Teaching of Urdu in Pakistan
Urdu is the most important language of literacy in the country. Urdu has a highly developed Arabic script and bears close resemblance to regional languages. It also has a vast literature. In Pakistan Urdu is taught from primary to intermediate level as a compulsory subject and as an optional subject at degree level. Textbooks are written in
Urdu language from Primary to Secondary level. At Intermediate and degree level students of Humanities and Social Sciences can opt Urdu as a medium of education. .
Urdu has a vast literature. Every year the average of the books published in Urdu language is higher than that of those published in regional languages or English. See the chart below:
Figure No. 1
Language-wise Books Publication
1200 1061 1048 1000 800 720 698 551 563 600 398 318 400 235 304 200 76 43 30 34 34 0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Urdu English Other Languages
From: Mustafa & Shah (2004)
41 Only a small number of learners after doing intermediate are able to write correct
Urdu. Inspite of this widespread exposure of the Urdu language only 8%of the total
population of our country acquires Urdu as their first language. According to the CIA
World Fact Book (2004) the percentage of the major languages as native language or first
language in Pakistan is as following: Punjabi 48%, Sindhi 12%, Siraiki10%, Pushto 8%,
Balochi 3%, Urdu 8%, Hindko 2%, Barohi 1%, Others 19%. However, as time goes by,
more and more people of Punjabi and other backgrounds are speaking Urdu as their first
language. It is evident that the percentage of native Urdu speakers is increasing in urban
centers.
2.5. Teaching of Urdu in Foreign Countries
Urdu is taught almost in twenty one countries where the government of Pakistan
has established a Chair of the Urdu language. According to Javed (1996), following are
the major countries in which Urdu is taught at different levels:
2.5.1. India
India, the land where Urdu originated, developed and passed the stages of its
evolution. Every thing was happened without any proper planning as it is evident that in
the age of Aurangzeb the official language was Persian but people spoke a common
language that was Urdu. In India, Urdu is spoken as a mother tongue by many in the
northern and central states. While, in India, Muslims might ostensibly be seen as tending
to identify more with Urdu, Hindus and Sikhs naturally speak Urdu regardless of religion, especially when they have grown up in such traditional Urdu-strongholds such as
42 Lucknow and Hyderabad. Some would agree that the form of "Hindi” spoken in
Bollywood films is in fact closer to Urdu than Hindi, especially in the songs.
As far as teaching of Urdu in India is concerned, it is taught as a subject on all
levels in government institutes. Facilities of teaching Urdu are available from primary
level to Ph.D. (Islahi 1996).
2.5.2. China
In China, the teaching of Urdu was started in September 1954, in Beijing
University with the establishment of department of Urdu in Oriental Department. In the
department of Urdu of this university students learn Urdu language. A four year’s course
is offered at degree level and the people who successfully complete this course are called
‘Urdu Graduates’. A precious treasure of book on Urdu language and literature is there in the library of the university. This huge collection of books and the cultural exchange of the students show the popularity of the language among Chinse. Six students from China come to Pakistan to learn Urdu and they offered the admission in the department of Urdu in Institute of Modern Languages (Mirza, 1996).
2.5.3. Iran
Persian, the national language of Iran has contributed a big deal in the vocabulary
and grammar of Urdu. The government of Pakistan established the department of Urdu in
‘Danishgah-e-Tehran’ that is known as ‘Kursi Zuban-e-Urdu o Pakistan Shanasi’. In Iran,
Urdu is taught at degree level. In Tehran the center of teaching Urdu is Pakistan College.
In this college the medium of instruction is Urdu and English and its curriculum is
43 according to the Federal Education Board of Islamabad. This institution is only for the nationals of Pakistan. Although the national and official language of Iran is Persian, but a large majority of people who live along with the borders of Balochistan and Afghanistan can communicate in Urdu very well (Noshahi, 1996).
2.5.4. Saudi Arabia
The national and official language of Saudi Arabia is Arabic but a considerable portion of the population consists of Urdu speakers as many Pakistanis, Indians and
Bengalis have been settled the in Saudi Arabia. There are also a large number of people from Egypt, Kuwait and Jordan who can understand Urdu. In Saudi Arabia many schools and colleges are established in Jeddah, Riyadh, Taif and Al-Khubre in which Urdu is taught at various levels. In these institutions the most prominent is Pakistan Embessy
School and College in Jaddah. In this institution student receive education from Primary to Intermediate level (Shahid, 1996).
2.5.5. Qatar
In Qatar, Urdu was flourished with the partition of Indo-Pak Subcontinent when people started leaving the Subcontinent and settling in foreign countries. Noshahi (1990) stated that the sign boards written in Urdu are found everywhere on the roads, markets and even in the hospital of Doha. Urdu is considered the third most widely spoken language in Qatar. The teaching of Urdu is started with the establishment of the first non government school named as Pak Shama School in 1965. Students receive education from Primary to Intermadiate level in both English and Urdu medium. In English medium
44 Urdu is taught as a subject here and now a days it is known as Pakistan Education centre
(Rashid, 1996)
2.5.6. Independent and Occupied Kashmir
In Azad Kashmir Urdu is regarded as an official language of the state. Urdu is the
medium of instruction in education up to secondary level and it is also taught as a
separate subject as well. Urdu is taught from primary to PhD level in both Independent
and Occupied Kashmir. Almost 28 colleges offer Urdu as optional subject in Occupied
Kashmir and any of the two languages have to be selected to be studied among Urdu,
English and Hindi (Wani 1996).
2.5.7. United Kingdom
In United Kingdom teaching of Urdu was started in1818 with the establishment of
Oriental Institute in London. In 1917, School of Oriental and African Studies was established and in 1930 the department of Urdu was established and research on the Urdu
language was started. In 1963 the Readership of Urdu was established under the
supervision of Professor Ralph Russell. He designed a course for the learners of the Urdu
language that is taught in the schools of U.K even up to present. In the curriculum of
U.K, Urdu is included as a subject along with other languages. According to a survey
conducted in Birmingham and Bradeford, the most widely spoken Asian language is
Punjabi and Gujrati and Urdu are the second most widely used language (Ziyyai 1996).
45 2.5.8. Mauritius
In Mauritius, Urdu is taught from secondary to degree level. In Mauritius a large number of students are interested in learning of Urdu but administration body of the schools and colleges does not encourage the teaching of Urdu. However, about 64,000 people speak Urdu and parents teach it to their children at homes (Began 1996).
2.5.9. America
The department of Urdu of Voice of America and Urdu service of B.B.C have contributed much to introduce the Urdu language in America. Many Urdu newspapers and magzines are published in America including weekly ‘Millat’, weekly ‘Asian Times’ and ‘Jung’ etc. In Chicago University, department of South Asian Languages and
Civilizations offers Urdu as a subject at degree level. A programme is broadcasted on radio in the Urdu language (Tabassam, 1996).
2.5.10. Canada
In Canada the teaching of the Urdu language is included in the syllabus of Mc
Gill University upto degree level. Students from Pakistan and India learn Urdu with a great inerest. Moreover in the East Asia Studies Centre of British Colambia University,
Urdu is taught as a subject (Faizi, 1996).
2.5.11. Japan
Tokyo School of Foreign Languages is contributing much in promoting and teaching Urdu in Japan. A four year’s course at graduate level and one year’s course at
46 masters level is offered by the institute that is transformed into a university in 1949.
Osaka is the second big city of Japan where teaching of Urdu started with the
establishment of Osaka School of Foreign Language. It was given the degree of a
university afterwards and named as Osaka University of Foreign studies. In the
department of Hind-o-Pakistan, teaching of Urdu and Hindi is provided as two different
subjects. Urdu is taught at advanced level in this university. Currently Urdu is being
taught in four institutions at degree level. They are following: Daito Bunka University
Saitama, Traing Centre of Nihonmatsu of JIACA, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies
and Osaka University of Foreign studies (kashmiri, 1996).
2.5.12. South Africa
In South Africa Urdu enjoys the status of one of the home languages. In the
schools established by the Muslims Urdu is taught as a subject and the medium of instruction in education in these schools is Urdu (Began, 1996).
Apart from these countries, Urdu is widely spoken and taught at different levels in
Turkey, Afghanistan, Kwait, France, Norway and U.A.E.
2.6. Standardization of Urdu and National Language Authority
Urdu is a symbol of integrity and unity of the four provinces. Wright (2004) says
that in the struggle of achieving a separate state “the question of national language” is
central for gaining distinction from others. Muslims of India distinguished their language
Urdu from Hindi that became the sign of the Pakistan Movement. After Pakistan came
into being, it was given a prestigious place of the national language of Pakistan.
47 National Language Authority (Muqtadara Qaumi Zaban) or Urdu Language
Authority was established in 1979 for the promotion and standardization of the national
language of Pakistan. The major aim of the organization was to promote Urdu as a
national language of Pakistan but with the passage of time the objectives expanded to the
linguistic and orthographic research in Urdu for example lexicography (Zia, 1999).
Rehman (2004) explains that the first software of Urdu called Nuri Nastaliq was exhibited in Urdu Science College in August 1980. Jang Group of newspapers started publishing their newspapers in it. It was also very warmly welcomed by Dr Ishtiaq
Hussian Qureshi, Chairman of the Muqtadra, in 1980 (Jameel, 2002).
After that, many other soft wares like Shahkar, Surkhab, Nastaliq, Nizami and Mahir
were introduced by PDMS (Pakistan Data Management Services). One of them, Nizami,
was installed and used by the National Language Authority in 1995 (Rehman 2004). He
further adds that there was another organization CRULP (Centre for Research in Urdu
Language Processing) established at FAST University. The issue of the standardization of
Urdu code plate was resolved in a seminar held at the university. It was decided that, with
the advent of Modern age, Urdu layout should be developed and improved for teleprinters
and information processing. (Afzal, 1997)
As a result of these efforts started in 1998 Urdu Zabta Takhti (UZT) was
developed that was used in the projects like computerization of National Identity Cards.
Later in 2000, UZT 1.01 was standardized for all kinds of electronic computing,
communications, and storage (Afzal & Hussain, 2002). This organization played a vital
role in the field of Urdu language processing ang the use of the language in computer.
Computer assisted translation has also been made possible (Ahmad, 2002).
48 Center of Excellence for Urdu Informatics (CEUI) is the Urdu IT section of
National Language Authority. Dr Attash Durrani is the project Director of the section.
This section is conducting advanced research and development activities in all matters relating to Urdu standardization for computers and localization. National Language
Authority has also published several general and technical dictionaries. The Qaumi
English – Urdu dictionary was designed on the lines of Webster’s Dictionary. Urdu –
Urdu dictionaries published by NLA are following:
Fig. 2