Abstract

This study aims to investigate which form of Bengali, Chittagonian or Standard, is most commonly used by native Chittagong speakers in their everyday lives. In other words, it seeks to determine if there is a language shift and the maintenance of Chittagonian amid Standard Bengali's dominance. The native speakers of Chittagonian from 19 distinct locations in the Chittagong district participated in the study. The study's time frame was from May 2022 to August 2022, and 117 respondents were interviewed using a formulated questionnaire. Descriptive statistics is used for quantitative analysis. The study's findings demonstrate that language usage preferences vary depending on the context. According to the results, most respondents are comfortable using Chittagonian with family and in their neighborhoods. In contrast, Standard Bengali is widely used in education and public settings because it effectively conveys information. The study concluded that as most of Chittagong's local people continue to speak Chittagonian, it is not at imminent risk of being completely displaced. Although the Chittagonian language is shifting in education and public places, the transition is gradual, and the language is still safe. It indicates that Chittagonian is preserved by locals and will continue to be used for generations to come.

Keywords

Language Shift, Language Maintenance, Chittagonian language, Standard Bengali,

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  1. Ahmad, K. (2013). Chattagrami Bhasha ki ekti shotontro Moulik Bhasha? (Is Chittagonian a Distinct Original Language?)
  2. Alam, M.U. (2011). Language and Dialect: An Emerging Cultural Conflict.
  3. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. (2022). Preliminary Report on Population and Housing Census 2022 (pp. 27-30). Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh. Retrieved November 7, 2022, from http://www.bbs.gov.bd/site/page/b588b454-0f88-4679-bf20-90e06dc1d10b/
  4. Chatterji, S.K. (1926). The origin and development of the Bengali language (Vol. 2). Calcutta University Press.
  5. Chowdhury, F.Y. (2019). Language and culture maintenance among Bangladeshi migrants in Southeast Queensland. The University of queenland, Australia.
  6. Clyne, M., & Kipp, S. (1999). Pluricentric Languages in an Immigrant Context. De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110805444
  7. Crystal, D. (1987). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge University Press.
  8. Dyers, C. (2008). Language shift or maintenance? Factors determining the use of Afrikaans among some township youth in South Africa. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics, 38, 49-72. https://doi.org/10.5774/38-0-22
  9. Faquire, A.B.M.R.K. (2010). Language situation in Bangladesh. The Dhaka University Studies, 67(2), 4-5.
  10. Farisiyah, U., & Zamzani, Z. (2018). Languange Shift and Language Maintenance of Local Languages toward Indonesian. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research Proceedings of the International Conference of Communication Science Research (ICCSR 2018), Published by Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/iccsr-18.2018.50
  11. Fasold, R.W. (1984). The Sociolinguistics of Society. Basil Blackwell, Oxford
  12. Fishman, J.A. (1991). Reversing language shift: Theoretical and empirical foundations of assistance to threatened languages. Multilingual matters, 76(4), 542. https://doi.org/10.2307/330061
  13. Gal, S. (1979). Language shift: Social determinants of linguistic change in bilingual Austria. Academic Press, New York.
  14. Grenoble, L.A. (2021). Language Shift. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.347
  15. Gunarwan, A. (2001). Indonesian and Balinese among native speakers of Balinese: A case of stable bilingualism?. In Makalah pada Third International Symposium on Bilingualism, Bristol, UK.
  16. Holmes, J. (2013). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Routledge.
  17. Holmes, J., Roberts, M., Verivaki, M., & AIPOLO, A. (1993). Language maintenance and shift in three New Zealand speech communities. Applied linguistics, 14(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/14.1.1
  18. Hoque, M.A. (2014). Chittagonian Variety A Dialect of Bangla or A Distinct Language. Manarat International University Studies, 3(1), 162–171.
  19. Hoque, M.A. (2016). Chittagonian Variety: Dialect, Language, or Semi-Language? IIUC Studies, 12, 41–62. https://doi.org/10.3329/iiucs.v12i0.30580
  20. Krauss, M. (1992). The world's languages in crisis. Language (Baltimore), 68(1), 4-10. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1992.0075
  21. Letsholo, R. (2009). Language maintenance or shift? Attitudes of Bakalanga youth towards their mother tongue. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 12(5), 581-595. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050802153459
  22. McCrae, J.P., Ojha, A.K., Chakravarthi, B.R., Kelly, I., Buffini, P., Tang, G., Paquin, E. & Locria, M. (2021) Enriching a terminology for under-resourced languages using knowledge graphs. Electronic lexicography in the 21st century (eLex 2021) Post-editing lexicography, 67.
  23. Meyerhoff, M. (2018). Introducing Sociolinguistics. Routledge.
  24. Mia, M.A., Nasrin, S., Zhang, M., & Rasiah, R. (2015). Chittagong, Bangladesh. Cities, 48, 31-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2015.05.011
  25. Milon, H.R., Sabbir, S.N.U., Inan, A., & Hossain, N. (2020, June). A Comprehensive Dialect Conversion Approach from Chittagonian to Standard Bangla. In 2020 IEEE Region 10 Symposium (TENSYMP), IEEE, Bangladesh. https://doi.org/10.1109/TENSYMP50017.2020.9230714
  26. Moniruzzaman. (2007). Language and Literature (Cultural Survey of Bangladesh Series-6). Dialect of Chittagong Asiatic Society of Bangladesh.
  27. Ostler, N. (2011). Language maintenance, shift, and endangerment. The Cambridge handbook of sociolinguistics, Cambridge University Press, 315-334. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511997068.024
  28. Pauwels, A. (2016). Language maintenance and shift. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107338869
  29. Potowski, K. (2013). Language Maintenance and Shift. The Oxford Handbook of Sociolinguistics, 321–339. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199744084.013.0016