The Influence of English on the History of Hindi Relative Clauses

Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268 brill.nl/jlc

Th e Inﬂ uence of English on the History of Hindi Relative Clauses

Vandana Puri University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign [email protected]

Abstract Th e infl uence of Hindi on English has been well documented; however, little has been said about the infl uence of English on the structure of Hindi. In this paper I provide evidence that Hindi “embedded” (i.e. post-nominal) relative clauses result from English infl uence. Hindi originally had Relative-Correlative (RC-CC) constructions that could adjoin to the left or the right of the main clause. Since evidence from early Hindi is limited, I draw on Awadhi and Braj Bhakha to provide greater time depth for the earlier history of Hindi. In addition I examine early 19th century grammars and texts. None of these provide unambiguous evidence for embedded relative clauses. By contrast, late 19th century and early 20th century Hindi texts translated from English exhibit many instances of central embedded relative clauses (besides the old adjoined relative- correlatives), thus supporting the argument that Hindi embedded relative clauses result from the infl uence of English. I argue that what may have helped in this developed is the occasional occurrence of potentially ambiguous structures in earlier Hindi, which could be reinterpreted as involving embedding, rather than a relative-correlative construction with deleted correlative pronoun.

Keywords Hindi ; English ; India ; language change ; syntax ; embedded relative clause

1. Introduction

Th e infl uence of Hindi on English has been a topic of research for many years (Agnihotri 1991 , 1999 ; Agnihotri & Sahgal 1988 ; Bansal 1962 ; Bhatia 1978 ; Chaudhury 1985 ; Kachru, B. 1983). Th e infl uence of English on Hindi has also been discussed in the literature (Hock 1992 ; Kachru, B. 1979; Kachru, Y. 1989; Krishnamurty and Mukherjee 1984; Mishra 1963 ). In this paper I look at one eff ect of such infl uence, namely central-embedded relative clauses in Hindi. I present arguments in favor of the view that central-embedded relative clauses were not found in Hindi syntax originally and have become a part of Hindi due to the infl uence of English.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268 251

Since evidence from early Hindi is limited, I draw on 17th and 18 th century Awadhi and Braj Bhasha texts to provide greater time depth. Even though both of these language varieties are not immediate ancestors of standard Hindi, they are closely related to it. I also looked at well-known 19th century Hindi grammars and 19th century Hindi texts. A close examination of all of these grammars and texts shows evidence of relative-correlative constructions but not of central-embedded relative clauses. By contrast, texts translated from English to Hindi in the late 19 th century and early 20th century by non-native speakers of Hindi exhibit many instances of both relative-correlatives and of central-embedded relative clauses, thus supporting the argument that central- embedded relative clauses found in Hindi are due to the inﬂ uence of English. In section 2, I provide background information about English in India and relative-correlative structures in Hindi. Section 3 provides evidence of the lack of central-embedded relative clauses in Hindi, Awadhi and Braj Bhasha. In section 4, I show how central-embedded relative clauses came about in Hindi due to the inﬂ uence of English. I conclude this paper by showing that even though central-embedded relative clauses exist in Hindi today, they are still not as widely used as the other RC-CC constructions.

2. Background Information

In this section I outline the background information necessary for this paper. More speciﬁ cally, I discuss how English became a part of India (section 2.1); the relationship between Hindi, Hindustani and Urdu (section 2.2); and introduce the relative-correlative structures that Hindi traditionally had and the central-embedded relative clauses that it later acquired (section 2.3).

2.1 English in India

Th e British imperial rule brought English to India. With the East India Company becoming a political power in the mid-18 th century, English was slowly introduced as a media of instruction for administrative purposes. Th is was initiated in 1835 on T. B. Macaulay’s recommendations to have English as the medium of instruction in universities and schools in India. Th e main reason behind this was to create a population that would act as interpreters between the British and the people that they governed in India. Th is historic policy was called the Macaulay’s Minute (Agnihotri and Khanna 1995). Over time English slowly became the language of the elite and still continues to be so. Th ere were many stages of nativization of English in India and this has

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access 252 V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268 been well documented (Agnihotri 1991 , 1999 ; Agnihotri & Sahgal 1988 ; Bansal 1962 ; Bhatia 1978 ; Chaudhury 1985 ; Kachru, B. 1983). With English becoming the language of power and of the elite, Hindi and other Indian languages also underwent a number of changes due to extensive English-to-Hindi translations, Hindi-English bilingualism, and the growing importance of English in the Indian subcontinent. Much has been said about the lexical modernization of Hindi under the inﬂ uence of English and the Sanskritization of Hindi due to polarization of Hindi and Urdu (Kachru, B. 1979; Kachru, Y. 1989; Krishnamurthi and Mukherjee 1984; Mishra 1963 ; Hock 1992 ). In this paper I analyze the inﬂ uence of English on Hindi relative clauses.

2.2 Relationship between Hindi, Hindustani and Urdu

According to Grierson ( 1906 ) Urdu and Hindi developed from Hindustani. Th e origin and development of Hindustani can be attributed to the Western dialects (in particular Vernacular Hindustani and Bangaru) and Eastern Punjabi (Chatterji, 1969 ). Socio-culturally Urdu and Hindi are counted as diff erent languages, but linguistically Urdu and Modern Standard Hindi are not even diff erent dialects. Th ey are considered diff erent literary styles of the (linguistically) same sub-dialect (Masica, 1991 ). ‘Urdu’ is confi ned to the variety where Persian words are of frequent occurrence and which is written in the Persian script. On the other hand ‘Hindi’ is the variety of Hindustani where Sanskrit words are in abundance and is written in the nagari script. Also, Urdu has a few sounds that Hindi does not have. However, both Hindi and Urdu are essentially the same syntactically. Although the main focus of this study is on Hindi, I also include evidence from texts in Urdu/Hindustani.

2.3 Relative-Correlatives in Hindi

In this section I discuss the relative-correlative constructions and central- embedded relative clauses in Hindi. Hindi like most other South Asian languages (Marathi, Bangla) has relative-correlative (RC-CC) structures. Hindi inherited these RC-CCs from Sanskrit. However, RC-CC constructions in Sanskrit and Hindi are extremely diﬀ erent from each other today (Davison 2006 ). 1

1 According to Davison (2006 ) Hindi and Sanskrit diﬀ er in the adjunction relation of relatives: Sanskrit has symmetric adjunction of CP to CP, but Hindi has asymmetric adjunction of CP to TP with the corresponding correlate XP. Hindi has asymmetric c-command that rules out stacked relatives, but Sanskrit has symmetric adjunction that permits stacked relatives.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268 253

An RC-CC structure is deﬁ ned as a relative clause (RC) containing a relative pronoun (RP) which is followed or preceded by a correlative (main) clause (CC) introduced by an (optional) ‘correlative’ pronoun (CP) (Hock 1989 ). Th ese RC-CC constructions allow the relative clause to adjoin to the right [1] or left [2] edge of the main clause.

[1]. [MC vah baccaa sundar hai ] [ RC jo nahaa rahaa hai ] that child beautiful is REL bath PRS-PROG-M-SG is Th e child who is taking a bath is beautiful.

[2]. [ RC jo baccaa nahaa rahaa hai ] [MC vah sundar hai ] REL child bath PRS-PROG-M-SG is that beautiful is Th e child who is taking a bath is beautiful Contemporary Hindi also allows central-embedded constructions like [3] and [4] where the RC is embedded in the main clause after the head noun.2 Th ere are two ways of deﬁ ning ‘embedded relative clauses’: one where there is embedding in the main clause and second where it is adjoined to the main clause. For ease of exposition in this paper I use the term “embedded” to refer only to central-embedded relative clauses and reserve the term “RC-CC” for the relative-correlative structures of the type shown in examples [1] and [2]. In [3] the correlative and the head noun precede the embedded clause. Example [4] shows an alternative “embedded” type in which the correlative precedes the head noun and follows the embedded clause.

[3]. [MC vah baccaa [RC jo nahaa rahaa hai ] sundar hai ] REL child who bath PRS-PROG-M-SG is beautiful is Th at child who is taking a bath is beautiful

[4]. [ MC vah raanii [ RC jo kile me rahatii hai ] vah merii sahelii hai ] Th at queen REL fort in live-PRS-HAB-F-SG is she my friend is Th e Queen who lives in the fort is my friend It should be noted that in this paper no distinction has been made between Restrictive relative clauses (those that restrict the reference of the head noun) and Appositive relative clauses (those that give some extra but relevant information about the head noun). To make the following discussion easier for the readers not familiar with Hindi or its antecedents, I brieﬂ y outline the morphology of the relative and the correlative pronouns in Table 1 . Th e relative pronoun jo , jaun and jis and the correlative vah , so/taun, us and tis are earlier forms of Hindi and are not used anymore.

2 In this paper I refer to ‘head noun’ as the head of the noun phase which is modiﬁ ed by the relative clause.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access 254 V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268

Table 1 Morphology of the relative and correlative pronouns in standard Hindi, Awadhi and Braj Bhasha Standard Hindi Singular Plural Oblique Oblique Singular Plural Relative Pronounjo jo jis jin Correlative Pronounvah (pronounce vo ) ve us un Modern Awadhi (Saksena, 1997) Relative Pronounjo, jaun jo, joun, jii jii, jehi jin, jinh Correlative Pronoun so taun so, taun tii tii, tehi tin, ting Braj Bhasha (Snell, 1991) Relative Pronoun jo, ju jo je ja, jihin Correlative Pronounso, su te taa, tihi tin

3. Relative Clauses in earlier Hindi

In order to explore if embedded RC-CC constructions were traditionally a part of Hindi syntax or not, it is important to take a look at the relative-correlative structures in a slightly earlier stage of standard Hindi. Th ere were three phases in the development of the Indo-Aryan languages: the Old-Indo Aryan (OIA) (1500 BC - 600 BC); Middle Indo-Aryan (MIA) or Pali, Prakrit and Apabhramśa (600 BC - 1000 AD) and New-Indo Aryan (NIA) or Hindi, Bangla, Oriya, Gujarati, Nepali, Marathi, Punjabi, etc. (1000 AD -). Th ese are approximate dates as it is proposed that diff erent linguistic stages were reached at diff erent times in diff erent geographical areas (Masica, 1991 ). One proposed taxonomy of the development of MIA to NIA is believed to have fi ve groups of dialects: 1. Purbi (Eastern dialects) 2. Pachhanha (Western dialects) 3. Rajasthani 4. Punjabi 5. Bihari Th e Western dialects consist of Braj-bhasha, Kanauji, Bundeli on the one hand, Vernacular Hindustani (Meerut, Rohilkhand and Ambala) and Bangaru or Harianvi on the other. Th e Eastern dialects consist of Awadhi, Bagheli and Chhattisgarhi (Grierson, 1906 ). Th e origin and development of Hindi (Hindustani/ Hindavi) can be attributed to the Western dialects (in particular

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268 255

Vernacular Hindustani and Bangaru) and Eastern Punjabi (Chatterji, 1969 ; Masica, 1991 ).3 In the next section I present texts from the 17th century Braj Bhasha and Awadhi to show the status of embedded structures.

3.1 Braj Bhasha and Awadhi

Where Hindi was adopted as the literary medium4 for prose around 1850, both Awadhi (Eastern Hindi) and Braj Bhasha (Western Hindi) were regional spoken dialects and the main literary media in the medieval period (1350-1850) of Hindi literature (Kachru, Y. 1980). As mentioned earlier since evidence from early Hindi is limited, I draw on 17th and 18th century Awadhi and Braj Bhasha texts to provide a greater time depth. Th ese are not direct ancestors of Hindi, but are among the closest relatives of Hindi, and the only close relatives for which there are early texts. However, there are two main problems in looking at texts from this period. First, the literary languages usually thrived at periods subsequent to those they represent linguistically (Masica, 1991 ). Th e actual date of how much earlier the spoken dialects preceded the literary texts has not been determined in most cases. Second, the published version of texts in Awadhi and Braj bhasha could range from many decades to many centuries after the proposed date of compilation of the texts. Th us, it not only makes it diﬃ cult to not ascribe a particular grammatical feature to the author, it also makes it hard to accurately date a text/ feature to a particular stage of language/dialect accurately. Awadhi has some important literary texts but not as many as Braj bhasha. It has a poetic literary tradition. According to Saksena (1971) Awadhi writers in the 16th -17th century borrowed freely from neighboring dialects such as Braj bhasha and Kanauji. Some important texts of old Awadhi are Rāmcharita- mānas by Tulsidas (1575A.D.) and Padmavat by Malik Muhammad Jayasi (1540A.D.). A more recent Awadhi text Malukdasji ki baani consists of sayings by Saint Malukdasji (1631-1739) was published in 1871. Here we ﬁ nd many (approximately 73) RC-CC constructions. However, no embedded relative clauses were found. An example of the sort of RC-CC constructions found in this text is given below in [5]:

[5]. [RC jo bhuukhe ko ann khavaavai ] [CC so sitaab saaheb ko paave ] REL hungry to food feed he quickly lord to ﬁ nd Who feeds the hungry ﬁ nds the lord quickly.

3 See Masica ( 1991 ) for alternative taxonomies. 4 It might be relevant to mention here that pre-modern literary dialects such as Sant Bhasha and Maithili were sometimes subsumed under the rubric of Hindi.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access 256 V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268

Also, in his book Evolution of Awadhi, Saksena (1971) provides a detailed com parison between old and new Awadhi relative clause pronouns (p. 185- 191). None of the examples and explanations given in this book are embedded structures. Braj Bhasha like Awadhi has a poetic literary tradition. In the 17th century where Sanskrit was the language of serious scholarly writing like medicine and dharma-shāstrās etc., Braj-Bhasha was used for literary compositions of poems (kāvya ) especially during the bhakti movement (Panikar, 1997 ). One such text, the biography of a famous poet Dadu Dayal, was written by Jan Gopal dated 1610-1620 and later revised in 1720-1730 (Callewaert, 1988 ). Here we ﬁ nd RC-CC construction like [6]. Th ere are many (approximately 34) RC-CC constructions in this text. However, no embedded constructions were found.

[6a]. jab maataa kahayu [RC darsan paiiye jyuu prapati hai ] [CC tyuu hii kahiye ] when mother said vision found REL success fi nding is that emphasis say When mother said “how can I fi nd him, tell me how he is to be found”. In his Braj Bhasha Reader , Snell (1991) looks at various early Braj Bhasha texts. For instance Snell (1991) gives an example of a 17th century Braj Bhasha text where one can fi nd relative correlative clauses such as [6b], but none of the examples have any embedded relative clauses. [6b]. [jin-neeN yah kiirtan kiyau hai ] [soo braj men rahtaa hai ] REL-ERG this hymn do-PRF is that Braj in stay is Th e one who made this hymn stays in Braj. (Snell 1991:71) Th us, we see that in the Awadhi as well Braj Bhasha texts examined for this study no evidence of embedded relative clause structures was found.

3.2 RC-CC in early 19th century Hindi literature

Raani Ketkii Kii Kahaanii is a short Hindi story written by Insha Alla Khan in 1803 (Dalvi 1974 ). Th is story is probably not in the post-independence stan- dardized (Sanskritized) Hindi as we know it today, but more like Hindustani, with a heavy component of Persian/Arabic vocabulary. In this story we ﬁ nd many (approximately 24) instances of RC-CC constructions. However, no embedded relative clauses were found. A common RC-CC construction in this text is of the following type:

[7]. sach hai [ RC jo banaayaa huaa ho ] [ CC s o apane banaanewaale true is REL has been created he own creator ko kyaa saraahe aur kyaa kahe ] DAT what appreciate and what say It’s true, he who is created what should he appreciate and say to his creator.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268 257

Another 19th century Hindi text examined was Naad Vidyaa (Deb 1898 ). Th is book basically consists of instructions on playing two types of musical instruments: the Harmoni-fl ute and Harold-fl ute . In this text as well we fi nd many RC-CC constructions. For instance in [8] we fi nd a compli- cated example with two RC-CC constructions. Here the fi rst relative pronoun jis 1 corresponds with the correlative pronoun usii 1 (here the correlative pronoun is us; hii which is shortened to ii when combined with us is the emphatic marker) and the relative pronoun jo 2 corresponds with the correlative pronoun vah 2 .

[8]. [RC jis1 caabii ke uupar jo 2 angulii macalit karne kii icchaa hoye ] REL key on REL ﬁ nger move to do of wish happens

[CC v a h 2 angulii usii 1 caabii ke upar anaayaas se paRe that fi nger that emphasis key on ease with fall aisaa abhyaas karnaa caahiye ] this type practice to do should (You) should practice so that your fi nger should move on the very same key with ease on which you wish to put your fi nger. Again we fi nd many (approximately 43) RC-CC constructions in this text but no embedded relative clauses were found. Another text examined for this study was the Gyaan Diipiikaa (1870). Th is book was published by the ‘Literacy Society for Women’ and pertains to all the skills that women of that period were expected to know, i.e. cooking, sewing etc. One can fi nd many (approximately 138) RC-CC constructions in this text, for instance:

[9]. [RC uske duusrii taraf jo cinh dhaage kaa paRtaa hai ] [CC vah silaaii kaa ulTaa muh it of other side REL mark thread of put is that stitch of back face kahlaataa hai ] called is Th e thread mark that is made on its other side is called the back face of the stitch. We do not ﬁ nd any examples of embedded relative clauses in this text either. Hence, thus far we have seen that the 19th century Hindi texts examined in this study frequently employ RC-CC constructions but no embedded constructions. In the next section I look at traditional Hindi grammars for their view on relative clauses.

3.3 Relative Clause constructions in traditional Hindi grammars

In this section I present evidence from traditional Hindi grammars to show that like the Hindi texts examined in section 3.2, these grammars do not

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access 258 V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268 provide any evidence for the existence of embedded relative clauses in earlier Hindi. John Shakespear wrote a grammar of the Hindustani language in 1818. Th e only mention of relative-correlatives in this grammar is with reference to the position in which relative pronouns can occur. According to J. Shakespear the relative jo or jaun may frequently precede its substantive and the demonstrative pronoun is often substituted for the correlative so . Th e example of a RC-CC given by Shakespear ( 1818 ) is in [10].

[10]. [ RC jis raani ko bahut saa caahtaa thaa ] us hii ko vah phal de-kar kahaa REL queen DAT a lot quite love was-M-SG that emphasis to that fruit give after said Which queen he liked best, to her after giving that fruit he said. In his grammar of the Hindustani language Platts ( 1878 ), states that ‘the correlative ( so, taun or vo ) generally accompanies the relative as its comple- ment’. Two examples of RC-CC constructions found in this grammar are given in [11] and [12].

[11]. [RC jo caRhegaa ] [CC so giregaa ] REL climb-M-3SG-FUT that fall--M-3SG-FUT He who will climb will fall

[12]. [RC jo log cust aur caalaak the ] [CC ve kaʃtiyoM par kuud kar savaar hue ] REL people healthy and smart were they boats on jump after ride is-PAS-PL Th e people who were healthy and smart jumped and embarked the ship Neither Shakespear nor Platts mention any examples of embedded relative clauses in their grammars. A more detailed account of RC-CC constructions can be found in Kellogg ( 1893 ). Here Kellogg provides a list of possible relative-correlative pronouns and the type of relative clause constructions that existed in Hindi. According to Kellogg ( 1893 ) a relative clause may be regarded as ‘a simple expansion of the correlative pronoun’. Furthermore, Kellogg describes diﬀ erent structures for relative clauses in Hindi: a. demonstratives (yah, vah, aisaa, or the pronominal sab ) may take the place of a correlative pronoun in the principal clause:

[13]. [ RC jaisii terii daʃaa ho rahii hai ] [CC aisaa hii koi chand bhii banaa de ] type your state happening is that type emphasis some verse also make give Compose some such verse as shall correspond to your condition b. Th e use of the head noun in both the clauses:

[14]. [RC raak ʃsoM kaa dal jo ghir aayaa thaa ] [CC so dal baadal saa chaayaa thaa ] demons of army REL surround come had that army cloud type shadow was Th e army of demons which had come up around them, that army cast a shadow as a cloud.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268 259

c. In a left adjoined RC, there may be deletion of the head noun from the matrix clause:

[15]. [RC jitne ʃastr hari par daale ] [CC titne prabhu ne sahaj hii kaaT Daale ] number of weapons god on cast that many god ERG easily emphasis cut Th e lord with perfect ease broke every weapon which was cast at Hari d. In a right adjoined RC, there may be deletion of the head noun from the RC and additionally no CP in CC:

[16]. [CC raajaa du ʃyant chuTaavegaa ] [RC jo sab tapovan kaa rakhwaalaa hai ] king Dushyant will deliver REL all forest of guardian is King Dushyant will deliver (you), who is the guardian of the whole forest. e. Deletion of the head noun from both the clauses (when no particular person is talked about or the referent is well known to the subject):

[17]. [RC jo tere yogya thaa ] us hii se aaMkh lagii RELyour worthy was him emphasis with eye met Th e eyes met (love happened) on him who was worthy of thee f. Insertion of an interrogative pronoun (kaun ‘who’) in place of the correlative or demonstrative in the principal clause:

[18]. [CC kaun aisaa hai ] [RC jo in ri ʃii kanyaaoM ko sataataa hai ] Who such is REL these holy-sage’s daughters DAT troubles is Who is such (a person) that troubles these daughters of these holy sages. Kellogg also gives an example where, according to him, there is deletion of the correlative pronoun: [19a]. mere man kaa sool jo khaTaktaa hai nikaalo my mind of thorn that troubles is take out Take out (that) thorn, which is rankling in my heart Th e structure in [19a] is a priori ambiguous; permitting a reading either as a RC-CC with omitted CP (see 19b) or as a structure with embedded RC (see 19c).

[19b]. [RC mere man kaa sool jo khaTaktaa hai ][ ø CP nikaalo ] my mind of thorn that troubles is take out Take out (that) thorn, which is rankling in my heart

[19c]. [mere man kaa sool [ RC jo khaTaktaa hai ] nikaalo MC ] my mind of thorn that troubles is take out Take out (that) thorn, which is rankling in my heart However, in the absence of any unambiguous embedded RCs in Kellogg’s discussion of Hindi relative clauses, the analysis of an RC-CC with an omitted CP [19b] would seem preferable.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access 260 V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268

Th e evidence of early Hindi grammars thus is compatible with the evidence from Awadhi and Braj Bhasha and 19th century Hindi literature examined earlier in this section. In all of these texts we ﬁ nd many instances of RC-CC structures, however, no embedded clauses were found.

4. Development of embedded structures in Hindi

In this section I show that clear evidence for embedded structures is fi rst found in Hindi texts translated from English. It seems reasonable to assume that there may have been other channels for English infl uence including oral ones. However in the absence of any textual evidence available to me at this point this possibility must remain speculative. 5 Translation is a form of language contact that can lead to language change. Baumgarten & Onuktav ( 2006 ) provide evidence from diachronic qualitative and quantitative analyses of translation and comparable text corpora of popu- lar scientifi c texts and business communication to show that English source texts induced language variation in German translations and comparable German texts. Baumgarten & Onuktav (2006 ) argue that connectivity markers, deictic elements and modality markers in German are undergoing change with respect to the frequency of their occurrence, their co-occurrence patterns and collocations due to English translations. According to Danchev (1981 ), while translating it is the ‘negative’ transfer that usually amounts to partial translation which leads to structural changes (that might lead to permanent changes) in the target language. Negative transfer is transfers from L1 to L2 like incorrect rule addition, deletion, substitu- tion, reordering etc. which usually is a result of non-native like control of L2. Unconscious transfer from L1 into L2 can also lead to structural changes in L2. Danchev ( 1981 ) suggests that many syntactic changes can be linked to unconscious transfers in translations and that it is important to introduce translation theories in diachronic analysis of syntactic change. Danchev ( 1981 ) gives an example from Bulgarian to illustrate this. Due to frequent translations from Russian to Bulgarian there has been a change in the use of the verb kasae ‘concern’. Th is verb was used only refl exively and only with a prepositional object. However, due to frequent translations from Russian over the last few years this verb is now used with a direct object and without a refl exive particle se. Danchev (1981 ) also suggests that unconscious transfers

5 For future research the government and army documents in the Indian national libraries or private archives can be accessed.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268 261 can also be blamed for many changes in some European languages due to the inﬂ uence of Bible translations from classical languages. In terms of Hindi translations of English texts, the presence or absence of embedded structures depended the translator’s understanding and knowledge of the grammatical and pragmatic use of the target language. Th ere are two trends found in texts translated from English to Hindi during the later stage (1890-1947) of British Raj in India. On the one hand translators who were native speakers of Hindi mainly show evidence of transcreation6 of the western texts by Indianizing them possibly because their native speaker instincts did not permit them to create sentence structures that were not possible in their language. A case in point is Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet that was translated into Hindi by Gopinath ( 1898 ), a native speaker of Hindi. Gopinath uses transcreation to make this text culturally relevant for the Hindi readers of those times. For instance the author has translated the idiomatic structures in English appropriately by not translating the literal meaning but their idiomatic meaning. If the idiomatic structures were translated literally they would not make sense in the Hindi text. For instance, in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, Act I, scene I, (Furness, 1871 ) Gregory says “Th at shows thee a weak slave; for the weakest goes to the wall”. Instead of literary translating this structure as [20] Gopinath (1898 ), translates it more appropriately by giving the idiomatic meaning of the sentence [21] and thus makes the text semanti- cally accurate and culturally relevant for the readers. [20]. isse prakaT hotaa hai kii tu nirbal daas hai kyuMki from this appears is that you weak servant is because

[RC jo bahut nirbal hotaa hai ] [CC vahii diivaar ke paas jaataa hai ] REL very weak PRS-PROG that emphasis wall near/to goes From this appears that you are a weak servant because the one who is weak goes to the wall. [21]. isse prakaT hotaa hai kii tu nirbal daas hai kyuMki from this appears PRS-PROG that you weak servant is because

[RC jo bahut nirbal hotaa hai ] [CC vahii diivaar kaa aaʃre DhuunDtaa hai ] REL very weak PRS-PROG that emphasis wall of support fi nds From this appears that you are a weak servant because, the one who is weak fi nds the support of a wall. Th e sentence [21] is also an example of the kind of RC-CC constructions used in this text. As in the other Hindi texts discussed in section 2, one can fi nd

6 Transcreation is an aesthetic re-interpretation of the original work suited to the readers/ audience of the target language in the particular time and space (Gopinathan 2002 ).

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access 262 V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268

36 RC-CC structures in this text but there is no evidence of central embedded structures. On the other hand translators who were non-native speakers of Hindi exhibit evidence of transfer in the use of several central embedded relative clauses in their translations. For instance, in an early translation of the New Testament in Hindi (Dharmpustak ka Antbhag, 1874 ) by a non-native speaker of Hindi, we not only ﬁ nd RC-CC (jo-so ) constructions in abundance, but also examples of structures where the correlative is dropped (see 22). [22a]. us samay ke anuusaar betleham aur uske saare sivaanoM ke sab baalak that time of accordance Betleham and its all surroundings of all children

[RC jo do baras ke aur do baras se choTe the] marvaa Daalaa

REL two years of and two years than younger were killed According to that time, in and around Bethlehem, all the children, who were two years of age and younger, were killed. Th is structure could be analyzed along the same lines as 19a, b, c above, as either having an RC-CC structure with omitted CP [22b] or as having an embedded RC structure [22c]. [22b]. us samay ke anuusaar betleham aur uske saare sivaanoM ke sab baalak that time of accordance Betleham and its all surroundings of all children

[RC jo do baras ke aur do baras se choTe the ] [ø CP marvaa Daalaa ] REL two years of and two years than younger were killed

[22c]. [us samay ke anuusaar betleham aur uske saare sivaanoM that time of accordance Betleham and its all surroundings

ke sab baalak [RC jo do baras ke aur do baras se choTe the] marvaa Daalaa MC ] of all children REL two years of and two years than younger were killed However, given the unambiguous evidence for embedding in examples such as [23], it is perhaps more likely that [22a] should be analyzed as embedded.

[23]. [MC vah suuraj [RC jo sab ko ʃaktii detaa hai ] Dhal jaaegaa ] Th at sun REL everyone DAT strength gives set will Th at sun that gives strength to everyone will set. In the book of Matthew, chapter 1-9 one can ﬁ nd many (approximately 33) RC-CC constructions, one possible embedded clause (see 22) and 3 clear examples of embedded relative clauses. Th e ambiguous nature of structures like [19] and [22] seems signiﬁ cant for the emergence of embedded relative clause structures in Hindi. While in traditional Hindi these (19b, 22b) would be analyzed as RC-CC structures, it seems that their ambiguous nature made it appear to English speakers that

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268 263 embedded structures were permitted in Hindi (19c, 22c). Th is could have allowed the English translators to use embedding in English-Hindi translations and thus could have led to the emergence of embedded relative clauses in Hindi. In terms of Hindi translations, there is another Bible translation (Kitáb i Muqaddas, ya’ní Puráná aur Nayá ’Ahdnáma , 1914 ) written in Roman Urdu. Roman Urdu is basically Hindi-Urdu written in the Roman script. Th is was an innovation of the British Empire partly as a result of the availability and low cost of Roman movable type for printing presses. Roman Urdu was used to write several government documents, army instructions and correspon- dence with the Indian masses (Rahman, 2007 ). Roman Urdu also became a famous method of writing amongst the then Indian elite. Th is Bible has been translated from English to Hindi-Urdu by a non-native speaker of Hindi and one can ﬁ nd an abundance of embedded structures here. For instance:

[24]. [MC khudaawand ne aaj ke din un sab se [RC jo terii God ERG today of day those all from REL your mukhaalafat meM uTh e the] teraa badlaa liyaa] (Sam 18.31) against in rise were your revenge took Th is day God took revenge for you from all those people who were against you. Th ere is such an abundance of embedded relative clauses that just in the Book of Matthew one can ﬁ nd at least 8-9 embedded relative clauses on each page. One can also ﬁ nd some RC-CC constructions in this text, although they are not very common. For instance:

[25]. [RC jo kuch tu mujh se maaMgegaa ] [CC so tere liye maiM karuMgaa ] REL something you me from will ask that you for I will do Whatever you ask for from me all that i will do for you Similarly in another Bible translation done by a non-native speaker of Hindi (Dharmshastra, puraanaa aur nayaa dharm niyam, 1914 ) there are some 56 instances of RC-CC constructions in the Book of Genesis but we also ﬁ nd 9 embedded structures. For instance:

[26]. [MC ve putr [RC jo utpann hue ] ʃ urviir the ] those sons RELborn were brave were Th ose sons that were born were brave. Th e existence of embedded clauses in this translation is no surprise since this was translated by a non-native speaker of Hindi as well. At this point it seems reasonable to say that the translator’s non-native knowledge of Hindi resulted in such an abundance of embedded structures in

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access 264 V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268 this text. Also, this seems to be one of the starting points of embedded structures creeping into the syntax of Hindi via the inﬂ uence of English. In the early part of the 20th century one can also ﬁ nd a few embedded structures creep into the famous Hindi writer Premchand’s stories. Premchand was a native speaker of Hindi-Urdu. A case in point is a story written by him titled Kafan (Zide, 1965 ). Th e actual date for this story is not readily available; however this is the last story he wrote. Premchand (1880-1936) made use of Urdu (Persianized words and script) in his early writings and switched to more Sanskritized words and Devanaagarii script later in his life. Kafan is a 3 page story that has only 6 relative clauses out of which one is embedded [27]. Th is is an important transition from embedded RCs only in the Hindi of non-native speakers to an instance in a text by a native speaker.

[27]. [MC ve log [RC jo kisaanoM kii durbaltaaoM se laabh those people REL farmers of weaknesses of advantage uTh aanaa jaante the] kahiiM zayaadaa sampann the] take know were much more established were In comparison with the villagers, those people who used to take advantage of the weakness of the villagers were much more prosperous. A quick survey of six other stories by Premchand (do bailoM ki kathaa,duudhkaa daam, naʃaa, merii pehlii racnaa, prem kii holii, ʃatranj ke khilaaRii in Zide 1965 ) show no evidence of embedded structures. It is possible that Premchand was inﬂ uenced by English later in his life and thus we ﬁ nd embedded structures in his later work. Most common RC structures found in Premchand’s writings are like the following structure from his story baRe bhaaii saahab (Zide, 1965 ).

[28]. [RC jo log abhii ek paisaa nahiiM de rahe haiM ] REL people right now one paisa not giving

[CC ve hii kal bulaakar deMge ] those people emphasis tomorrow calling after will give Th ose people who are not giving a single cent now, those very people will call us and give (it to us) Today, one can ﬁ nd embedded structures in Modern Hindi texts in almost all medias- textbooks, newspapers, stories, magazines and even grammars. For instance, in her Hindi Grammar, Jain (1995) argues that sometimes as in English the relative clause may be embedded in the main clause in Hindi. Jain (1995) illustrates this with the following example of an embedded relative clause:

[29]. [MC vah niibandh [ RC jo aap ne likhaa ] bahut achhaa hai ] that essay REL you ERG wrote a lot good is Th at essay that you wrote is very good

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268 265

Th e media, newspapers, government documentation and even the prescriptive Hindi textbooks seem to be using embedded structures. However, as Bhatt (1997 ) notes although embedded relative clauses are grammatical in present- day Hindi, their distribution is still limited compared to that of RC-CC constructions. I looked at 5 articles each from two Hindi newspapers- ‘Dainik Bhaskar’ and ‘Rajasthan Patrika’. Th ese articles were of comparable length and the top- ics of these articles were varied. In all I found 16 relative clauses out of which there was only 1 embedded clause (see 30) and the rest were instances of both left and right adjoined RC-CC constructions (see 31 for an example of a left adjoined RC).

[30]. [ MC ve log [RC jo jaipur ke paas rehte the ] baarish na hone se pare ʃaan the those people who Jaipur of close live were rain not happen from troubled were Th ose people who used to live close to Jaipur were troubled because of scarcity of rain (Dainik Bhaskar, June 2007)

[31]. [RC jo baat daakTar boltaa hai ] [CC usse log jaldii nahiiM sunte ] REL thing doctor say pr. Hab. to that people fast not hear People don’t listen to the doctor says soon enough (Dainik Bhaskar, Dec 2007) Today an alternative “embedded” type like in [4] (repeated as [32a] below) can also be found. Th is seems to be a possible innovation and a blend between an RC-CC construction and a central embedded structure. Here there are two correlatives: one before the head noun and one following the RC. Both those correlatives refer to the head noun raani ‘queen’.

[32a]. [MC vah raanii [RC jo kile me rahatii hai ] v a h merii sahelii hai ] that queen who fort in live-PRS-HAB-F-SG is she my friend is Th at Queen who lives in the fort is my friend. Th is seems to be a blend of a RC-CC and embedded construction because such sentences can be interpreted as either an RC-CC construction or an embedded construction. On the one hand the clause [CC vah merii sahelii hai ] can be interpreted as a CC following a RC because it has a correlative pronoun of its own. On the other hand like an embedded structure the RC is embedded in the main clause. It is possible that there were two stages for the development of sentences like [32a]. First the RC was embedded in the main clause [ 32b].

[32b]. [MC vah raanii [ RC jo kile me rahatii hai ] merii sahelii hai ] that queen REL fort in live-PRS-HAB-F-SG is my friend is Queen who lives in the fort is my friend.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access 266 V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268

Th en another correlative was added after the RC to make this structure similar to the more abundant RC-CC constructions in the language [32c].

[32c]. [MC vah raanii [ RC jo kile me rahatii hai ] vah merii sahelii hai ] that queen REL fort in live-PRS-HAB-F-SG is she my friend is Queen who lives in the fort is my friend. Of course there could be alternative ways in which this hybrid developed, but what is important is that not only did Hindi adopt central embedded relative clauses in the last 100 years but also introduced a further development like hybrid structures in [32a].

5. Conclusion

Th us we have seen that originally Hindi did not have embedded relative clauses. Since evidence from early Hindi is limited, I draw on 17 th and 18th century Awadhi and Braj Bhasha texts to provide a greater time depth. A close examination of these texts shows that Awadhi and Braj Bhasha had RC-CC constructions but reveals no evidence of embedded clauses. Th ree 19th century Hindi texts and three 19th century Hindi grammars were also analyzed. A close examination of all of these texts shows evidence of relative-correlative constructions but not of central-embedded relative clauses. However, when we analyze English to Hindi translations we ﬁ nd an abundance of embedded structures in translations done by non-native speakers of Hindi. It seems that ambiguity of RC-CC structures like [19] and [22] with omitted CP may have led to a reinterpretation of these structures as having embedding, thus opening the door for unconscious transfer of embedded relatives from English to Hindi by non-native translators. Th us, like Danchev (1981 ) I argue that translation theory must be kept in mind while looking at diachronic evolution of syntactic change in a language. Today not only embedded clauses but also hybrid structures like [32a] have become a part of Hindi syntax and can be found in newspapers, magazines, government documentation, Hindi grammars and even the prescriptive Hindi textbooks. However, these are not as common as the RC-CC constructions. For further research it would be interesting to look at Government and army documents from the 19 th and 20th century to explore various stages of the emergence of embedded structures in Hindi. It would also be interesting to analyze texts from early and modern Urdu to illustrate the possible relative clause constructions and to see if the development of embedded relative clauses in modern Urdu is similar to that in Hindi.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268 267

Notes

Th e number of RC-CC constructions quoted from various texts in this paper is approximate because some of the microﬁ lms for the old texts had missing or blank pages.

References

Agnihotri , Rama Kant . 1991 . Sound Patterns of Indian English: A Sociolinguistic Perspective . In Gupta , R.S. and Kapoor , K . (eds.). English in India: Issues and Problems . Delhi : Academic Foundation . Agnihotri , Rama Kant . 1999 . India: English in India (A Report) . In Singh , R . (ed.). Th e Yearbook of South Asian Languages and Linguistics . New Delhi : Sage Publications . 161 - 183 . Agnihotri , Rama Kant . & Khanna , Amrit Lal . (eds.). 1995 . English Language Teaching in India . New Delhi : Sage . Agnihotri , Rama Kant. and Sahgal , Anju . 1988 . Indian English Phonology: A Sociolinguistic Perspective. English World-Wide 9 . 1 : 51 - 64 . Audishtya , C . 1911 . Romeo Juliet : Shakespeare Romeo Juliet naaTak kaa aakhyaan ruup se aunvaad . Calcutta : Babu Ramlal Berma Propriter . Bansal , R.K . 1962 . A Study of the Vowel System of Indian English as Spoken by Educated Hindi Speakers of Delhi, East Punjab and West Uttar Pradesh . Central Institute of English Bulletin , 2 , 27 - 32 . Baumgarten , Nicole and Onuktav , Demet 2006 . Language variation through language contact in translation. Presented at the Language contact and contact languages Colloquium. Hamburg, 6–8 July 2006 . Bhatia , S.C . 1978 . Towards a Non-native Standard in Indian English , Indian Linguistics , 39 , 225 - 32 . Bhatt , Rajesh . 1997 . Matching eﬀ ects and the Syntax-Morphology Interface: Evidence from Hindi Correlatives’ in Th e Proceedings of Eight Student Conference in Linguistics, pages 53-68 , ed. Benjamin Bruening , MIT Working Papers in Linguistics . Callewaert , Winand. M . 1988 . (ed.) Th e Hindi biography of Dadu Dayal . Delhi : Motilal Banarsidass . Chatterji , Suniti Kumar 1969 . Indo-Aryan & Hindi . Delhi : Skylark Printers . Chaudhury , A . 1985 . Th e Evolution of Indian English: Some Socio-Cultural and Psychological Considerations . Calcutta : Linguistics Research Unit , Indian Statistical Institute . Dainik Bhaskar. June 2007. http://www.bhaskar.com Dainik Bhaskar. December 2007. http://www.bhaskar.com Dalvi , Abdussattar Muhammed . 1974 . (ed.) Raani Ketkii Kii Kahaanii (by Insha Alla Khan) . Mumbai : Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Research Centre . Danchev , Andrei . 1981 . Translation and Syntactic change . In Fisiak , J (Ed.) Historical Syntax: Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 23 . Walter de Gruyter . Davison , Alice. L. 2006. 2006 Syntactic eﬀ ects of correlative clause features in Sanskrit and Hindi/Urdu. 9th Diachronic Generative Syntax Conference , University of Trieste , June 8- 10 , 2006 . Deb , H. C . 1898 . N ad Vidy a: Harmoni-Flute & Harold-Flute Tutor . Calcutta : Harold & Co . Dharmpustak ka Antbhag (Th e New Testament in Hindi ) 1874 . Allahabad : Mission Press .

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access 268 V. Puri / Journal of Language Contact 4 (2011) 250–268

Dharmshastra, puraanaa aur nayaa dharm niyam . (Th e Holy Bible: Old and New Testament) 1914 . Allahabad : British and Foreign Bible Society . Furness , Horace Howard . 1871 . A new variorum edition of Shakespeare: Romeo and Juliet . Philadelphia : Lippincott company . Gopinath , P . ( 1898 ) Premlila. . Banaras : Chandraprabha Prem Company Limited Gopinathan , G . 2002 . Transcreation, Translation and Culture: Th e Evolving Th eories of Translation in Hindi and Other Modern Languages . Presented in the Workshop for Understanding Translations Across Cultures . London : University of London . 19-20 June 2002 . Grierson , George. A . 1906 . Linguistic Survey of India. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas. Gyaan Diipiikaa . 1870 . Bareli : Rohelkhand Literacy Society . Hock , Hans Henrich . 1992 . A Note on English and Modern Sanskrit . World Englishes , 11 (2/3) 163 - 171 . Hock , Hans Henrich . 1989 . Conjoined we Stand: Th eoretical Implications of Sanskrit Relative Structures . Studies in Linguistic Sciences . 19 (1) , 93 - 126 . Jain , Usha 2005 . Introduction to Hindi Grammar . Berkeley : University of California . Kachru , Braj Behari . 1979 . Th e Englishization of Hindi: language rivalry and language change . In Th e Linguistics Method Papers: in honor of H. Penzl . Edited by I. Ranch and G.F. Carr . Th e Hague : Mouton . Pp. 199 - 211 . Kachru , Braj Behari . 1983 . Indianisation of English: Th e English Language in India . Delhi : Oxford University Press . Kachru , Yamuna . 1980 . Aspects of Hindi Grammar . New Delhi : Manohar Publications . Kachru , Yamuna . 1989 . Corpus Planning for Mordenization: Sanskritization and Englishization of Hindi. Studies in Linguistic Sciences , 19 (1) , 127 - 152 . Kellogg , Samuel. H . 1893 . A Grammar of the Hindi Language . New Delhi : Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers . Kitáb i Muqaddas, ya’ní Puráná aur Nayá ’Ahdnáma . 1914 . London : British and Foreign Bible Society . Krishnamurti , Bhadriraju. and Mukherjee , Aditi , eds ( 1984 ). Modernization of Indian Languages in News Media . Hyderabad . Malukdasji ki baani . 1871 . Allahabad : Welvidiyar printing company . Masica , Colin P . 1991 . Indo-Aryan Languages . Cambridge : Cambridge University Press . Mishra , Vishwanath . 1963 . Th e inﬂ uence of English on Hindi language and literature 1870- 1920 (in Hindi) . Dehradun : Sahitya Sadan . Panikar , Ayyappa K . (ed.) 1997 . Medivial Indian Literature: An Anthology Vol. 2 . Ayyappappanikkar , Sahitya Akademi Platts , John . 1878 . A grammar of the Hindustani or Urdu Language . London : Oxford University Press . Rajasthan Patrika . 8th December 2007 . http://www.rajasthanpatrika.com/ Rahman , Tariq . 2007 . Th e British Learning of Hindustani . Pakistan Vision . Vol 8 . No. 2 . http:// www.pu.edu.pk/psc/journal/PDF-FILES/Tariq-2%20new.pdf Saksena , Baburam . 1971 . Evolution of Awadhi (a branch of Hindi) . Delhi : Motilal Banarshidass . Snell , Rupert . 1991 . Th e Hindi Classical Tradition: A Braj Bhāshā Reader . London : Th e School of Oriental and African Studies . Shakespear , John . 1818 . A Grammar of Hindustani Language . London : Cox & Baylis . Zide , Norman . 1965 . A Premchand Reader . Honolulu : East-West Centre Press .

Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 01:48:12AM via free access