D
US-China Foreign Language, ISSN 1539-8080
May 2014, Vol. 12, No. 5, 331-348
DAVID
PUBLISHING
Jordanian Bengali Pidgin Arabic
Fawwaz Al-Abed Al-Haq, Ibrahim Al-Salman
Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan
This study aims at providing a linguistic description of the JBPA (Jordanian Bengali Pidgin Arabic) which is a
variety in use between the Bengali workers and Jordanians who live and work in Al-Hassan Industrial City, Irbid, in
the north of Jordan. The primary purpose of this study was to find out whether or not this variety constituted a true
pidgin. Data collection was based on interviews with 10 Bengalis. To identify this variety, the author examined it
with reference to three linguistic features of the JA (Jordanian Arabic): the phonology, the verbal system, and the
negation. The study revealed that the phonology of JBPA was not fully compatible with that of the JA, and that
most of the JA sounds tended to change their phonological behavior in the JBPA. In addition, the verb was invariant
and simplified; also, the negation in the JBPA was realized by three negative particles: mafiŝ’, ‘ma, and ‘muŝ’.
Finally, the study revealed that the JBPA has the characteristics of a “pre-pidgin” rather than a “stable pidgin”.
Keywords: Jordanian Pidgin Arabic, Arabic-based pidgins, pidgin Arabic
Introduction
Jordan at a Glance
Jordan or “The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan” is one of the Levantine countries in the Middle East. The
official language of Jordan is Arabic. Jordanian Arabic (henceforth, JA) is a dialect of so many dialects in the Levant
which includes the dialects of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Palestine (Habash, 2006, pp. 12-15); differences among
these dialects, however, are minimal, i.e., linguistic differences are basically found on the phonological and lexical
levels. In JA, subdialects also exist; these subdialects are divided into three: UD (urban dialect), RD (rural dialect),
and BD (Bedouin dialect) (for the purpose of this study, the author depended on the RD).
Actually, during the last few decades, several agreements have been held between the Hashemite Kingdom
of Jordan and some non-Arabic countries mainly on the level of trade. These agreements have given people from
different countries of the world the chance to come to Jordan for work. The continuous flow of many non-Arabic
speaking workers into Jordan, in addition to the urgent need to interact with Jordanians on a daily basis and at all
places has demanded them to, maybe unconsciously, create a new simplified and reduced variety of JA that can
be used as a means of communication when speaking to Jordanians. This article, therefore, attempts to provide a
linguistic description of this variety, which the author presumed to be a “pidgin”, and which the author called
“Jordanian Bengali Pidgin Arabic” (henceforth, JBPA); the article describes the JBPA variety with reference to
three linguistic features: (1) the phonology; (2) the verbal system; and (3) the negation.
Fawwaz Al-Abed Al-Haq, professor, Ph.D., Department of English Language and Literature, Yarmouk University.
Ibrahim Al-Salman, master, Department of English Language and Literature, Yarmouk University.
332
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
Definition of a Pidgin
Unfortunately, there is no one single definition of “pidgin” approved by scholars. For this study, anyway, the
author shall adopt the definition given by Swann, Deumert, Lillis, and Mesthrie (2004) which defines a pidgin as a
new and initially simple form of language that arises when two or more groups of people who do not share a common
language come into contact with each other. Usually, pidgins evolve from an initial state called “a pre-pidgin” or
“jargon” whose grammar is reduced and simplified; the process of forming a pidgin is called “Pidginization”.
Usually, there are two or more languages out of which a pidgin is created: One is called the superstrate
language whose speakers are powerful in society; the other is the substrate language(s) whose speakers are usually
less powerful and who are, in most of the cases, unintelligible by the dominant group (Holm, 2000, p. 5). The
superstrate language is believed to be the supplier of the lexicon of the pidgin (therefore, it is called the “lexifier
language”). The substrate language, on the other hand, provides the grammar of the pidgin (Swann et al., 2004).
However, as a new generation comes, a pidgin may develop in different ways (e.g., Tok Pisin, Papua New
Guinea). In the case where a pidgin is the only common language of a community, “it will be acquired by locally
born children and will then become a fully developed language” (Bickerton, 1990, p. 120), leading to the creation
of a Creole. The process by which a pidgin develops into a Creole is called “creolization”; this process includes
the extension of the pidgin’s grammatical and lexical inventory to serve in all the domains of life and to become
an official language. Hall (1966, p. 126) argued that pidgins have a “life-cycle” where they are created in a
specific situation for an emergent need, and die out soon after the need for them has been fulfilled.
In fact, there are some characteristics that distinguish pidgins from other “normal languages”. For example,
pidgins lack grammatical complexity and have limited lexical stock; besides, pidgins lack copulas, have a
constrained number of appositions and have no sentential embedding (Hymes, 1971, pp. 65-90). Moreover,
reduction of the lexicon, unmarkedness of gender, case, number, and tense are of the main characteristics of
pidgins (McMahon, 1994, pp. 258-259). Pidgins also lack stylistic options, puns, and metaphors, and have few
sociolinguistic markers, such as politeness phenomena (McMahon, 1994, pp. 258-259). On the level of
phonology, the consonant inventory in pidgins is usually reduced. Similarly, vowels are usually fewer than their
lexifier counterparts, and length distinction is lost (McMahon, 1994, p. 260).
FT (Foreigner Talk)
FT, a term coined by Ferguson (1971), supposes that the similarities among PCs (pidgins and creoles)
are due to the simplification on the part of the target (superstrate) language speakers as a way to communicate
with the non-native speakers of their language. Actually, the social gap is much relevant to this context.
Valdman (1981) argued that “the use of FT signals to foreigners that they are unwanted guests whose
acculturation to the host community is not desired” (p. 43). In fact, Ferguson argued that FT helps in the
formation of the so-called “a pre-pidgin”.
In much the same way is the baby-talk theory, a theory coined by Bloomfield (1933), which refers to “the
simplified language used by adults in order to communicate with children” (Vicente, 2007, p. 18).
Previous Related Studies
In this part of the paper, the author has discussed two types of pidgin studies: Arabic-based pidgins and
English-based pidgins.
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
333
Arabic-based pidgins. One of the studies on Arabic-based pidgins is Smart’s (1990) of the Gulf Pidgin
Arabic (henceforth, GPA). Smart studied the GPA to find out if this variety can really be classified as a pidgin. He
based his study on some cartoon captions in Gulf newspapers in which Arab journalists imitate the language of
the workers. Smart divided the GPA verb into three types: the Y(v)—prefixed type, the unstable type, and the
imprefixed type. He also claimed that fi in GPA is used as a copula. Smart stated that GPA speakers use the Gulf
Arabic particles to negate nouns and adjectives with mū/mub and verbs with ma.
Another study on Arabic-lexified pidgins is the one conducted by Tosco (1995) in which he examined the
verbal system in JA (Juba Arabic). He concluded that JA speakers use three basic verbal markers: kan, bi (marks the
future, eventuality, and conditionality), and ge (conveys the meaning of continuative and habitual meaning), adding
that kan is assigned to the non-core markers, while the last two are assigned to the role of core verbal markers.
Tosco also proposed that JA imperative verbs are distinguished from the declarative ones in terms of
intonation, and that the negative imperative takes the person marker ta for singular and takum for plural and that
both come after the negation.
Bakir (2010) also studied the verbal system in GPA. His material included some data collected by
conducting interviews with some Asian expatriates whose native languages are non-Arabic. He concluded that
the verb in GPA is unmarked for tense, person, aspect, gender, and number, and that only one form is used to
indicate difference in tense, aspect, mood, and voice. He claimed that the common verb used in GPA is the 3rd
singular masculine imperfect form: yiǰi “come”, yabi “want” (with a variant yibga), and yaakid “take”, being
used for first person, second person singular masculine, and feminine, and third person plural subjects in addition
to different references to past and future; he added that tense can only be inferred from context or by the existence
of some adverbs of time; here are some examples (see Examples (1)-(2)):
Example (1) ʔanaa yabi…
1SG want
“I want…”
Example (2) baačir ʔanaa yabi…
tomorrow 1SG want
“Tomorrow, I want…”
Bakir (2010) also stated that aspect markers are absent, and that GPA speakers use fī to make a
progressive verb. Modality, Bakir adds, is expressed by the auxiliaries lāzim (used for necessity and obligation),
and mumkin (used for possibility), whereas futurity is indicated by the modal “rūh”. Regarding the negation
system in GPA, Bakir concludesd that the particle “māfī” is used to negate “existential and equational sentences”,
and the sentences with main verbs (see Example (3)):
Example (3) ʔana māfī nōm
1SG. NEG. sleep
“I don’t sleep”
Avram (2010) described a pidginized variety of Arabic used by Romanian and Arab oil workers in Iraq,
which he calls “Romanian Pidgin Arabic” (henceforth, RPA). He collected his data by recording some speeches
during his fieldwork in Kut (Eastern Iraq) and Rashdiya (north of Baghdad), and by conducting some interviews.
On the level of phonology, Avram (2010) claimed that the velar voiceless fricative /ḥ/ is replaced by /h/ in
334
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
word-initial position, and by /h/, /a/, or ø in a word final position; besides, the pharyngeal voiceless fricative /x/ is
replaced by /h/, whereas the voiced velar fricative /ġ/ is realized as /g/, and the emphatic sounds are replaced by
their non-emphatic counterparts. The verbal system, Avram concludesd, is invariant in form in RPA, and tense,
aspect markers and the copula are absent in RPA.
Næss (2008) tried to explore the linguistic features of GPA in order to find out whether or not the GPA
constitutes a “true pidgin”, or is just considered as “an individual strategy” used by Asian immigrant workers in
order to ease the process of communication (interlanguage).
In his study, Næss (2008) concluded that the basic phonetic inventory in GPA is reduced compared to that of
the Gulf Arabic (29 consonants are reduced into 18, and distinction in vowel length is absent).
With reference to the GPA negation system, Næss (2008) argued that two negative markers are used: “ma”,
used in front of verbs as well as in front of the expletive fi; and the particle “mafi”, used for non-verbal negation
as well as for imperative verbs. Here are some examples:
Example of the negation of non-imperative verbs includes (see Example (4)):
Example (4) bādēn ana gūl hāda bāba, ana ma tibba istogol
then 1SG say DEM boss 1SG NEG want work
“Then I told my boss that I wanted to quit”
Another example that explains negation of adjectives is the following (see Example (5)):
Example (5) minni mafi tamām
here NEG nice
“This place isn’t nice”
Considering the verbal system, Næss (2008) concluded that it is simplified, and that tense is implicit or
marked by adverbs. He also said that fi is used as a progressive aspect marker. He added, “the light verb sawwi is
common in the variety, and can be used to form compound verbs with nouns and adjectives” (p. 93).
English-based pidgins. Leechman and Hall (1955) examined the American Indian Pidgin English
(henceforth, AIPE), a variety used between Indians and the whites. They provide attestations of the AIPE from
various sources in which the whites use a pidginized variety of English in speaking with Indians, and try to
analyze its grammatical features. However, their study is only concerned with the linguistic features of the non
StdE (Standard English). Some of the grammatical features of the AIPE they provide include the replacement of
fricatives by stops, the use of a single verb form derived from the English verb form, and the equational predicate.
Here are two examples (see Examples (6)-(7)):
Example (6) “you be de white man, you have soul; when we die we fling in water, big fish come carry us to
an oder place, den we live dare and die agen, and… oder place”
Example (7) “Man, brave man, no cheat Indian. Indian no cheat white man”
In conclusion, Leechman and Hall (1955) stressed that AIPE, like any other English-based pidgin, basically
presents the features of linguistic reduction and restructuring.
For the GhPE (Ghanaian Pidgin English), Huber (1999) tried to provide an outline of the grammar of the
variety used by the uneducated group in Ghana, as opposed to the educated one. He based his description on data
collected during field trips to Ghana in 1995, 1996, and 1999. His data consists of about 30 hour recorded
speeches from different substrate languages, such as English (de facto), Akan, Dangme, Nzema, Gonja, etc.
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
335
Regarding the GhPE’s phonology, /v/ is more or less consistently substituted by /b/ or /f/ in GhPE; also, the
approximants [l] and [r] are in free variation in the major Ghanaian substrate languages. Vowels with regard to
/i/ and /u/ are not distinctive.
Huber (1999), in addition, provided an overview of the tense/aspect and mood of the GhPE. For the
tense/aspect, he presented five forms: zero, dè (Progressive/habitual), kam (sequential tense), bigin (dè)
(ingressive), and finiš (completive). For the mood, he provided four forms: gò (future/ conditional), fìt (ability/
permission), fɔ̀ (deontic modality), and wan (intentionalis), proposing that tense/aspect and mood can be put
together forming complex structures such as “futureability/permission” (e.g., gō fit). Regarding verbal negation,
Huber (1999) stated that it is expressed by no, which takes the first position in the verb phrase, before the
mood/aspect markers.
He concluded that this variety can be considered a specific GhPE that is complex and similar to other
WAPEs (West African pidgins of English).
Roberts and Bresnan (2008) conducted a study on the retained inflectional morphology in pidgins. Their
study includes 29 languages that are either pidgins or were pidgins in their early stages. Actually, they claimed
that the loss of inflectional morphology in pidgins could be partial rather than total; i.e., lexifier inflections
instead follow a continuum of reduction: full retention—partial retention—partial lexicalization—full
lexicalization—full loss, where the first two are considered retentions in their study, whereas the other outcomes
result in substantial loss of semantic content. Additionally, they stressed that the process of inflectional
simplification or reduction are strategies used to give an explanation to the difficulties of learning a new language
for the purpose of saving time and effort.
Siegel (2009) studied the CPE (Chinese Pidgin English) in Australia by collecting his data from a
70-page notebook written in English in the ninth century by a Chinese gold miner. He introduced some
morphological features found in CPE, such as go (auxiliary), got (possessive or existential marker), man
(pronominal suffix), no (preverbal negative marker). An example on got where it is used as an existential
marker is Example (8):
Example (8) got Chinaman river edge walk
“There’s a Chineseman walking along the river’s edge”
Akande (2010) also investigated the verb phrase in the NPE (Nigerian Pidgin English). He attempted to
find out whether or not this variety is a pidgin that is separate from English. He collected his data from some
recorded interviews with 30 Nigerian University Graduates from three ethnolinguistic regions; he gave them 36
prompt sentences. Actually, Akande distinguishes between NPE and StdE on the basis of the complex verb
phrases used in them, and summarized that the NPE is a distinct variety that has its independent structures,
mentioning that only a few similarities exist between the varieties in comparison.
Methods and Procedures
Population of the Study
The population of the study consisted of the Bengali workers in Al-Hassan Industrial City in Irbid in the
north of Jordan. Most, if not all, of those Bengali workers live in Ar-Ramtha district in the north of Jordan. The
estimated total number of Bengalis in Al-Hassan Industrial City was 250.
336
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
Sample of the Study
The sample of the study included 10 participants, all of whom were males. The reason why women were not
considered in this study is that my access to them was not possible. The participants’ level of education was
elementary, except for one who was an engineer. The subjects’ ages ranged between 23 to 44, while their stays in
Jordan ranged between three to eight years.
Data Collection
The author collected data by recording interviews with Bengalis workers in Al-Hassan Industrial City in
Irbid. The author used an advanced mobile phone which was tested before conducting each interview to
ensure its voice quality. In fact, to make sure that no interruption or noise of any sort was made, the author
preferred to make the interviews at the subjects’ living places in Ar-Ramtha district (only two were
interviewed at the workplace).
To gather the data, the author developed a list of personal questions which the author asked to the subjects.
The recorded data was about four-hour long. For ethicality, the author made sure to inform each participant of the
nature of my project, and then asking them if they wanted to participate in this project by conducting interviews in
JA variety as being recorded.
Data Analysis
Actually, the author based his analysis on the interviews’ recordings’ transcripts. The data collected from
the recorded interviews was analyzed and described in terms of phonology, negation, and the verbal system.
The method the author used in analyzing the data was the qualitative method which is a descriptive method
rather than statistical.
Discussion and Findings
The following description of the JBPA is based on Næss (2008).
Phonology
The phonology of JA. Consonants. There are 29 consonants in JA. Table 1, which is a modified version of
the one given by Næss (2008, p. 28), illustrates these consonants.
Table 1
JA Consonants
Bilabial
VL
VD
VL
Fricatives
VD
VL
Affricates
VD
Stops
Nasals
VD
Tap
VD
ApproxiVD
mants
Labio-d Inter-de Interdental
ental
ntal
emphatic
b
f
Θ
ð
ḍ
Alveolar
t
d
s
z
Alveolar
emphatic
ṭ
ṣ
Pal-ata
Velar
ls
k
qg
š
č
ǰƷ
m
n
r
l
j
w
Uvular
x
ġ
Phary-n
Glottal
geal
ʔ
ḥ
ʕ
h
337
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
The speakers of JA use these sounds in spoken,written and even Standard Arabic. However, phonological
variation among Jordanian dialects does exist. For example, in the UD the velar voiceless stop /k/ is usually
replaced by /č/. Additionally, the voiceless stop /g/ is sometimes substituted with the glottal stop /ʔ/ in the UD (e.g.,
“galam” “pen” becomes ʔalam); besides, the interdental voiced fricative /ð/ is pronounced as /ḍ/ in the RD and as
/d/ in the UD in some words (e.g., hāða “this” becomes hāḍa in RD; and hada in UD); also, the glottal stop /ʔ/ as /ī/
in a word-medial position in all Levantine vernaculars (e.g., biʔr “wall” becomes bēr) (Sawāʕi, 2009, p. 6).
Vowels. There are 10 vowels in JA, which can be seen in Table 2.
Table 2
JA Short and Long Vowels
High
Mid
Low
Front
i (milʕaga “spoon”)
ī (baʕīd “distant”)
e (inte “you”)
ē (bēt “house”)
Short
Long
Short
Long
Short
Long
ā (bāb ‘door’)
Central
Back
u (suʔāl “question”)
ū (maqbūl “acceptable”)
ō (lōn “colour”)
a (maktab “office”)
a: (ra:ḥ “went”)
The phonology in JBPA. The consonants. The stops. JA shares five stops with JBPA: /b/, /t/, /d/, /k/, and /g/.
Actually, the unvoiced velar /k/ seems to have undertaken a shift into /g/ in the JBPA. Example (9) illustrates this:
Example (9) ʔana sā tamanya izi hōn, ana sagin fi Ramta
1st SG o’clock eight come here, 1st SG live in Ramta.
“I live in Ramtha; I come here at eight o’clock”
Context: The participant is asked “what time do you come to work?”
Moreover, the JBPA speakers, in most of the contexts, realized the glottal stop /ʔ/ either as a long vowel [ṽ]
or sometimes never preserved it as in Example (10):
Example (10) ʔinta gadēs ūmur fī
2ndSG. Q. age COP.
“How old are you?”
Context: The participant asked the researcher “How old are you?”
Like the other Arabic emphatic sounds, the emphatic alveolar stop /ṭ/ was absent in the JBPA; the JBPA
speakers replaced it with its non-emphatic counterpart /t/. Example (11) explains this phonological change:
Example (11) ātini maj
IMP-Give water
“Give me some water”
Context: Participant was asked “How do you ask somebody for water?”
Fricatives. Labiodental fricatives. In fact, the author has noticed that the JBPA speakers would replace the
unvoiced labiodental fricative /f/ with the unvoiced stop /p/ (see Example (12)).
Example (12) ṣaddah byārap yilāb ʔana
Cards know play1st SG
“I know how to play cards”
Context: The participant was asked “Do you know how to play cards?”
338
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
Interdental fricatives. The JA interdental fricatives /Ө/ and /ð/ were not preserved in the JBPA. The
voiceless /Ө/ was replaced by the voiceless stop /t/ (e.g., “tink” for “Өink”), whereas the sound /ð/ (or /ḍ/ as in RD)
was realized as /d/ (this is a feature of the UD). In fact, Kachru (2006, p. 31) generalized that, in Hindi, the
interdental fricatives are pronounced as dental plosives in the borrowed words of English. The author thinks that
this can also be the case for Bengalis when they come to use Arabic, since Bengali and Hindi are much similar;
examples 3a and 3b below give more details:
Example (13) ʔani sagin fi Ramta
1st SG live in Ramtha
“I live in Ramtha”
Context: The participant was asked “Where do you live?”
Example (14) fi rus, fi bandōra fi hada samag kullu iš fi ōn
EXPL. rice, EXPL. tomato, EXPL. DEM fish everything EXPL. here
“There is everything here: rice, fish and tomato”
Context: The participant was asked “What type of food do you have at you living place?”
Alveolar fricatives. Regarding the voiced fricative /z/, the participants sometimes realized it as /s/; here is an
example (see Example (15)):
Example (15) ʔani bišūp bas tilivisyōn
1st SG see only television
“I see in television”
Context: the participant was asked “How do you spend your free time?”
Uvular fricatives. The JA velar fricatives are the voiced /ġ/ and the voiceless /x/. The speakers of the JBPA
would make a shift from /ġ/ into /k/ or /g/, and from /x/ into /k/; examples on the two cases are the following (see
Examples (16)-(17)).
Example (16) ʔani ōn fi sukul
1st SG here COP. work
“I work here”
Context: The participant is asked “Why are you in Jordan?”
Example (17) ʔana hōn tamān sanāt kamsa sār
1st SG. here eight years five month
“Eight years and five months”
Context: the participant is asked “How long have you been in Jordan?”
The pharyngeal fricatives. The pharyngeal /ḥ/ never appeared in the recorded material; instead, the
participants pronounced it either as a “slight” /h/ or as a long vowel [ṽ]. Actually, the author has noticed that this
sound (also the other Arabic emphatic sounds) is absent in the consonant inventory of the Bengali language.
Therefore, it was typical for the JBPA speakers not to preserve it in their speeches. Example (18) explains how
the pharyngeal /ḥ/ was lost.
Example (18) hassa fi wād māgina karbān ʔana bisallih
Now EXPL. one machine broken down 1st SG might fix
“If one machine is broken down, I fix it”
339
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
Context: The participant is asked “What is your main role in the factory?”
Similarly, its voiced counterpart /ʕ/ was absent in the JBPA; it was sometimes pronounced as /ʔ/ and in most
of the times it was totally lost [Ø], or was replaced by a long vowel [ṽ]. Example (19) makes this clearer:
Example (19) hada momgin finiš, bādu sawwi zadīd hada mudīr huwe yedfā kullu
this. might. finish, then make new this manager 3rd SG. M pay all
“This might finish, then the manager renews it for me”
Context: Participant is asked “What do you do when your visa finishes?”
Alveolar emphatic fricative. The alveolar emphatic fricative /ṣ/ was realized as /s/ by the JBPA speakers
(see Examples (20)-(21)).
Example (20) ʔana fi talata sadīg ōn
1st SG EXPL three friend here
“There are three friends here”
Context: The participant is asked “How many persons do you have in your room?”
Example (21) ana taglīp wa magas
1st SG packaging and scissors
“I do the packing and the cutting”
Context: Participant is asked “What do you do in the factory?”
Affricates. The palatal affricate /ǰ/ was frequently substituted with the voiced alveolar /z/, and only few
speakers seemed to maintain it; Example (22) clarifies this:
Example (22) nafarat bangāali kullu bizi tyārah
people Bengali all come plane
“He and I come by plane”
Context: The participant is asked “How do Bengalis come to Jordan?”
Tap. The author has noticed that in some cases the tap /r/ was pronounced as a /l/. Example (23) shows this shift:
Example (23) ʔana bilūh balad kullu talāta sana
1st SG go country all three year
“I return to my country every three years”
Context: the participant is asked “How often do you visit your country?”
Table 3
A Descriptive Table of the JBPA Consonants
Bilabial
VL
VD b
VL
Fricatives
VD
VL
Affricates
VD
Nasals
VD m
Tap
VD
ApproxiVD w
mants
Labio-de Inter-de Interdental
ntals
ntal
emphatic
Stops
f(p)
Θ(t)
ð(d)
ḍ(d)
Alveolar
emphatic
ṭ(t)
ṣ(s)
Alveolar
t
d
s
z
Pala-tal
Velar
s
k
g
š(s)
Ʒ
č(k)
ğ(z, Ʒ)
n
r(l)
l
y
w
Uvular
x(k)
ġ(g, k)
Phary-ng
Glottal
eal
ʔ(ṽ/Ø)
ḥ(h)
ʕ(ṽ/Ø)
h
340
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
Table 3 shows a basic description of the JBPA consonants, which is a modified version of the one given by
Næss (2008, p. 43). The possible substitutions of some sounds are bracketed next to them.
Verb Phrase and Negation
Arabic sentences can be divided “into verbal sentences (containing a verb) and non-verbal sentences
(containing no verb)” (Aziz, 1989, p. 11). This part will be concerned with the two types.
Verb phrase and negation in JA. Verbal sentences and negation in JA. In Arabic, the verb is of two
forms: past/perfect and present/imperfect. The Arabic tense/aspect refers to a repeated action, a fact, or ability in
the present. In addition, the past/perfect aspect refers to actions, situations before the present. Both past/perfect
and imperfect verbs are inflected for tense, person, gender and number. The prefix b- is the present/imperfect
marker. Tables 4 and 5 illustrate more (Cantineau, 1946, p. 214).
Table 4
JA Imperfect Tense
Singular
buktub
btuktub
btoktub
btuktubi
baktub
3rd masc.
3rd fem.
2nd masc.
2nd fem.
1st com.
Plural
buktubu
buktubin
btuktubu
btuktubin
bnuktub
As can be seen in Table 4, the suffix b- is added to all the verbs to indicate the imperfect. Table 5, on the
other hand, displays the structure of the perfect verbs in JA.
Table 5
JA Perfect Tense
Personal Pron.
3rd masc.
3rd fem.
2nd masc.
2nd fem.
1st com.
Singular
katab
katbat
katabit
katabti
katabit
Plural
katabu
katabin
katabtu
katabtin
katabna
To negate the perfect and imperfect verbs, the negative particle mā is inserted immediately before them, and
the RD optional morpheme -š is suffixed to the verb, making the split-morpheme mā… š (Cantineau, 1946, p. 390;
Sawāʕi, 2009, p. 40; Palva, 2004, p. 229). Example (24) shows how the imperfect verb in JA is negated:
Example (24) ʔani mā bašrab (iš)…
1st SG. NEG. drink-1st SG.M.IPF.
“I don’t drink…”
An example on the JA perfect verbs is given in Example (25):
Example (25) hī mā širbat (iš)
3rd SG. F. NEG. drank-3rd SG.F.PER.
“She didn’t drink”
To express the present progressive aspect, the auxiliary verb gāʕid is placed before the main verb: ʔani gāʕid
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
341
balʕab “I am playing”; hummu gāʕ dīn bilʕabu “they are palying”(Herin, 2010). To negate this verb, the negative
marker miš is added; hence, ʔani miš gāʕid balʕab “I am not playing”; and hummu miš gāʕdīn bilʕabu “they are
not playing”. For the past progressive, the copula kān + “was” is placed immediately before verbs. The negation
of this helping verb is realized by mā.
Futurity in JA is expressed by the prefix b-, too. Herin (2010) claimed that this prefix is a polyfunctional
morpheme used to denote progressive present or future: batġadda ʕindak yōm il ǰumʕah “I will have lunch at your
place on Friday”. Moreover, the pseudo-verb bidd + expresses futurity in all Levantine dialects (Vanhove, Miller,
& Caubet, 2009, p. 347), and takes its form from the subject pronoun; this verb is negated by mā. Examples
(26)-(28) explain this:
Example (26) ʔani biddi ʔaḥči maʕak kilimtēn
1SG. will say.IPF with-2SG two-words
“I will tell you a few words”
Example (27) hī bidha tīji
3sg. F will. come.IPF
“she will to come”
Example (28) ʔiḥna mā bidna nīji
1pl. won’t come.IPF
“We won’t come”
With reference to the imperatives, they are “formed from the non-past, and always have the long vowel of
the non-past” (McLoughlin, 1982, p. 47). They are used only with 2nd person, and are inflected for gender and
number; thus, for 2nd sg. M. we say ʔišrub “(you) drink”; and for 2nd pl. M., we say ʔišrubu “(you) drink”; also,
we say ʔišrubi “(you) drink” for 2nd sg. F. and ʔišrabn “(you drink)” for 3rd pl. F.
To negate the imperative verbs in JA, the negation marker lā plus the prefix t- (prefixed to the imperative
verb) are added (Palva, 2004; Sawāʕi, 2009); thus; lā tišrabi and lā tišrab are examples on the negation of the
imperative verbs.
Considering the modality in JA, the modal verb lāzim is used to express obligation and necessity. Examples
(29)-(30) explain this:
Example (29) (you) lāzim tiskut [obligation]
(you) TMA. shut up
“you must keep silent”
Example (30) ʔinte lāzim tšūf il-dactōr [necessity]
2nd SG.M TMA. see the-doctor
“You should see a doctor”
Furthermore, the JA makes use of the modal verb momkin “may” or “might” to express permission and
possibility: ʔinta momkin trūḥ “you may go” (indicating permission) and ʔana momkin ʔāǰi “I might come”
(indicating possibility). To indicate ability, the JA speakers use b-agdar “can” (also used for permission).
With reference to the existential construction, JA uses the expletive fi as in Examples (31)-(32):
Example (31) fī malʤaʔ taḥt l-ʔarḍ
EXPL. shelter under the-ground
342
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
“There is a shelter under the ground”
Example (32) fī ktāb ʕala ṭṭawleh
EXPL. on the-table
“There is a book on the table”
In the previous examples, the expletive fī is used to fill a syntactic position. This dummy fī can be negated
by inserting the split-morpheme “mā… š” before it, where the suffix -š is optional (Palva, 2004, p. 232);
Examples (33)-(34) become as follows:
Example (33) mā fī (š) malʤaʔ taḥt l-ʔarḍ
NEG. EXPL. shelter under the-ground
“There is no shelter under the ground”
Example (34) mā fī (š) ktāb ʕala ṭṭawleh
NEG. EXPL. on the-table
“There is no book on the table”
The nominal sentence and the negation in JA. A nominal sentence in Arabic is the sentence in which
“the subject normally precedes the predicate” (Aziz, 1989, p. 12). The copulas are the linking verbs which link
the subject and the predicate. In Arabic, a nominal sentence has no copula in the present, whereas in the past,
the copula kān “was” is added.
In JA, sentences with no copulas are negated with miš. This negative particle is “regularly used to negate the
predicate of a nominal clause, an individual word, a prepositional phrase, or an adverb” (Palva, 2004, p. 231); for
further explanation, here are some examples (see Examples (35)-(36)).
Example (35) ʕammān ḥilwah
ʕammān beautiful
“Amman is beautiful” (Sawāʕi, 2009, pp. 19-20)
To negate the predicates in Example (35) the negation marker miš is inserted before them, making the
following structures:
Example (36) ʕammān miš ḥilwah
ʕammān NEG. beautiful
“Amman isn’t beautiful” (Sawāʕi, 2009, pp. 19-20)
Sentences containing the copula kān, on the other hand, are negated by mā with attention to the person,
gender and number agreements with the subject. For further explanation, see Examples (37)-(38):
Example (37) hī kānat kwaysih
3rd sg.M. COP. good
“She was good”
Example (38) hummu mā kānūš bilbēt
3rd pl. NEG. COP. at-home
“They were at home”
The verb phrase and negation in JBPA. The verbal sentences and negation in JBPA. The past/perfect
and the present/imperfect in JBPA were not preserved. The imperfect aspect was interchangeably used for the
past and the present tense. For the listener, this lack of inflection for tense can be compensated by context (e.g.,
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
343
adverbs of time). Moreover, the tense/aspect might be expressed by the use of the JBPA copula fī. Examples
(39)-(43) illustrate more:
Example (39) ʔana binam sā dās
1st SG. slept o’clock eleven
“I sleep at eleven o’clock”
Context: The participant is asked “What time did you sleep yesterday?”
Example (40) bi-awwal huwwa momgin birōh dubai bādēn huwwa izi zōrdan
First 1st SG. might go Dubai then 3rd SG.M come Jordan
“First, they went to Dubai, then they came to Jordan”
Context: Participant is asked “How did Bengalis come to Jordan?”
Example (41) ʔana zawwaz talata sana
1st sg. marry three year
“I got married three years ago”
Context: Participant is asked “When did you get married?”
Example (42) banāt fi zawwaz kullu ʔumrā arbā tās
girls COP. marry 3SG.F. all age fourteen
“The girls in Bangladesh get married at the age of fourteen”
Context: The participant is asked “At what age do Bengali girls get married?”
Example (43) masna waditu kullu umal masna bilbahrul mayet
Factory send-3rd SG.M workers fatory in Dead-Sea
“The factory sent all the workers to the Dead Sea”
Context: The participant is asked “Have you ever been on a picnic”
Bakir (2010, p. 206) stated that the existence of some inflections on some verbs should not be taken as an
inflection of the imperfect verb (as stable), which is the case for our study.
Regarding negation, the JA negative markers mā fī (ŝ) and mā were interchangeably used to negate both
the perfect and imperfect verbs in JBPA. However, to distinguish the first form of the negation from other types
of negation (e.g. progressive, copula, and expletive negation), the author considered the first structure mā fī(ŝ)
as one particle (henceforth, māfī(ŝ) rather than two separate particles (as in other studies, e.g., Avram, 2010;
Næss, 2008). See Examples (44)-(46):
Example (44) ʔana māfīš rūḥ maqān tāni
1st SG. NEG. go. PER. place second
“I didn’t go to any other place”
Context: Participant is asked “have ever been to a country other than Jordan?”
Example (45) napar Bengali mā bilāb lēs asan huwwa kullu īzi hon sokul
One person Bengali. NEG. play.IPF. why because 3SG. all come here work
“Bengalis don’t play here, because we come here only for work”
Context: Participant is asked “What kinds of games do you and your friends play here?”
Example (46) ana mā bišūp, huwwe napar šūp
1st SG. NEG. see 3rd SG. M. person see
344
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
“I don’t see him; my friends see him”
Context: Participant is asked ‘What does your friend work in Madīnatil Hasan?’
In addition, the imperative verbs in the JBPA were not inflected for person, gender or number. The JA negative
particle lā was not attested in the JBPA; rather, the particle māfī(š) was used. Example (47) explains more:
Example (47) inte māfīš yinām asan ʔana fī sogul
2nd SG. NEG. sleep. IMP. because EXPL. work
“Don’t sleep now because we have some work to do”
Context: Participant is asked “If your friend wants to sleep, but you have some work, and
want him to help you, what do you tell him?”
Furthermore, the pseudo-verb bidd+, which is used as a future marker in JA, was attested in the JBPA; yet
no consistent distinction for person, gender, and number was noticed. To negate the pseudo-verb, the
participants used the negative marker mā (see Examples (48)-(49)):
Example (48) inta biddu rūh Banglades?
1st SG. will go Bangladesh?
“Will you go to Bangladesh?”
Example (49) la ana ma biddu rūh sūdiah asan fisa mā fīš
No 1st SG. NEG. will go Saudi Arabia because visa NEG. EXPL.
“I won’t go to Saudi Arabia because I have no visa”
Context: The participant is asked “Will you go to Saudi Arabia?”
In addition, the speakers did not preserve the JA progressive aspect; they, instead, used fī, and negated it
by mā. Examples (50)-(51) clarify this:
Example (50) Sēf, mā biddu sōt , bēbi fi nōm hassa.
Sēf NEG. want sound, bēbi TAM. sleep now
“Sēf, don’t make noise! The baby is sleeping now”
Context: Participant is asked “What do you tell Sēf if he is making noise and your son wants
to sleep?”
Example (51) ida ana mā fī sokul, ʔana bisāid huwwa mā fi muskilah
If 1st SG. NEG. TAM. work, 1st SG. help 3SG.M NEG. NEG. problem
“if I’m not working, I help him”
Context: The participant is asked “If your friend needs your help and you are free, do you
help him out?”
With reference to the JA modal auxiliary lāzim, the author has found that the JBPA speakers used it only
for expressing necessity. The auxiliary momkin, however, was fully preserved in the JBPA. Examples (52)-(54)
make this clearer:
Example (52) ʔana bilbēt īzi momgin sā sitta sā tamanya īzi [expressing possibility]
1SG. home come may o’clock six o’clock eight come
“I might come back home at six or eight o’clock”
Context: The participant is asked “what time do you come back home?”
Example (53) huwwa momkin rūh šwaya mā fī muskila [expressing permission]
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
345
3rd SG. may go little NEG. EXPL. problem
“He may go out for a while, no problem”
Context: The participant is asked “do you [a manager] allow a worker to take a five-minute
rest?”
Example (54) ʔana mudīr sarlu tamānya sana kēp maratu lāzim mawƷūd [expressing necessity]
1st SG. manager factory for eight year how his-wife should existed
“I’ve been the production manager for eight years; my wife should be here”
Context: The participant is asked “Is your wife in Jordan?”
The expletive fī was frequently seen in the data. The negation of expletive fī by the JA negative marker mā
was also attested in the JBPA (see Examples (55)-(56)).
Example (55) Banglades mā fi dajman sogul bas hōn lagetu dajman sokul
Bangladesh NEG. EXPL. always work but here found. always work
“There is no work in Bangladsh, but here there is a plenty of work”
Context: Participant is asked “why do you come to Jordan?”
Example (56) Banglades o hōn same-same mā fīš faruk bas swajja faruk
In-Bangladesh and here same-same NEG. EXPL. difference only little difference
“There is no difference between Bangladesh and Jordan, only little difference”
Context: Participant is asked “which is more expensive, Jordan or Bangladesh?”
Negation of verbless sentences. One of the main characteristics of pidgins is the absence of copulas.
However, the participants used the particle fī as a copula for both the past and present (see Examples (57)-(59)).
Example (57) kalām arabi hada kullu fī mālum
Speech arabic this all COP. understood.
“Arabic language is familiar to me”
Context: The participant is asked “Can you speak Arabic well?”
Example (58) ʔana umur fi talatin sana
1st SG. COP. thirty year
“My age is thirty years”
Context: The participant is asked “How old are you?”
Example (59) ʔana fi bēbi fi rugūb tajāra ʔana fi kaf bas hassa kuwjes
1st SG COP. baby COP. riding plane 1st SG COP afraid but now good
“When I was a child, I was afraid of planes but now it’s ok”
Context: Participant is asked “Do you fear planes?”
To negate copulas, the JBPA speakers used mā and muš for both past and present as in Examples (60)-(61).
Example (60) awwal mā fīs gāli bas hassa kullu fī gāli
First NEG. expensive now every expensive
“In the past, life wasn’t expensive; now it’s expensive”
Context: Participant is asked “is life expensive in Jordan?”
Example (61) hunak fulūs muš kuwajes bes hon fī šwai kuwajes
There mony NEG. good but here EXPL. little good
346
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
“The salaries there are not good, but in Jordan they are a little bit better”
Context: The participant is asked “where do get more money, in Jordan or in Bangladesh?”
Conclusions
This article investigated the JBPA features of the phonology, verbal system, and negation of the JBPA
against those of the JA to find out if the former is a pidgin. The study revealed that the phonology in the JBPA
was reduced and simplified, i.e., some consonants were either lost or have undergone a shift from the lexifier JA
(e.g., the velar /x/ was pronounced as /k/, and /ġ/ as /k/ or /g/); these features are also attested in other
Arabic-lexified pidgins (Watson, 1989; Avram, 2010; Miller, 1993; Næss, 2008).
Regarding the verbal system, we have clearly seen that the JBPA verb was invariant and unmarked for
person, gender, and number. The JBPA speakers neither marked the aspect in present nor in past; besides, they
did not inflect the tense/aspect for person, gender, and number. The subjects never seemed to distinguish the
perfect and imperfect; they frequently borrowed the 3rd SG.M. imperfect form to express both perfect and
imperfect. Furthermore, we have noticed that in the JBPA speakers expressed future tense either by the use of the
adverbs of time that denote futurity, or by inserting the so-called pseudo-verb bidd+, with the latter not being
inflected for person, gender, and number.
With regard to the mood, the JA imperative structure was attested in the JBPA, yet the distinction for
number was lost. Considering the modals, lāzim was “partially preserved” in the JBPA, i.e., the JBPA speakers
used it only to express obligation. On the other hand, the modal momkin was “fully preserved” in the JBPA.
When it comes to the JBPA negative markers, the author can basically divide them into three kinds: The first
is the “polyfunctional” negative particle mā, which was used for the negation of perfect and imperfect, the
particle fī as a copula, a progressive marker and as expletive. The second negative marker is māfī(š) which was
used to negate imperatives (sometimes perfect and imperfect). The last one is miš which was used with the
nominal sentences that lack copulas.
In light of what has been introduced, the author can conclude that the JBPA variety cannot be considered as
a “stabilized or conventionalized pidgin”; rather, it can be classified under the first stages of pidgins, as a
“pre-pidgin” or “incipient pidgin”. Moreover, we have seen that the study was based only on two languages
(Bengali and JA), which goes against the claim that pidgins form only when there are several languages in contact
(two or more). Actually, the period required for two languages to form a pidgin is not, and should not, be defined.
Recommendations
Since the current study was restricted to some areas of the JBPA, the author recommended some aspects which
can be taken into consideration in later relevant researches: (1) Since this study was conducted with reference to
only one substrate language, the author highly recommended that further researches be made upon other substrate
languages in Jordan; (2) Due to the restricted accessibility to the women, the author was not able to include them in
the study, which can be taken into account in later studies; and (3) considering the JBPA linguistic features, this
study investigated them with regard to phonology, verb phrase, and negation. Some other areas in JBPA, such as the
noun phrase, the numerals, reduplication, and pragmatic functions, are also recommended to be studied.
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
347
References
Akande, A. T. (2010). Is Nigerian pidgin English English?. Dialectologia Et Geolinguistica, 18(1), 3-22.
Avram, A. (2010). An outline of romanian pidgin Arabic. Journal of Language Contact, 3, 20-38.
Aziz, Y. (1989). A contrastive grammar of English and Arabic. Mosul: University of Mosul.
Bakir, M. J. (2010). Notes on the verbal system of gulf pidgin Arabic. Journal of Pidgin & Creole Languages, 25(2), 201-228.
Bickerton, D. (1990). Language and species. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cantineau, J. (1946). Les Parlers Arabes du Hōrān (The dialects of Hōrān). Paris: Librairie C. Klincksieck.
Decamp, D. (1977). The development of Pidgin and Creole languages (pp. 3-20). A. Valdman (Ed.). Bloomington: Indiana
University Press.
Ellis, R. (1985). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University press.
Ferguson, C. A. (1971). Absence of copula and the notion of simplicity: A study of normal speech, baby talk, foreigner talk and pidgins.
In D. Hymes (Ed.), Pidginization and creolization of languages (pp. 141-150). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Habash, N. Y. (2006). Arabic and its dialects. Multilingual, 17(5), 12-15.
Hall, R. A. (1966). Pidgin and Creole languages. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Herin, B. (2010). The dialect of Salt. In L. Edzard & R. Jong (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Arabic language and linguistics on-line.
Leiden: Brill.
Holm, J. (2000). An introduction to pidgins and Creoles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Huber, M. (1999). Ghanaian pidgin English in its west African context: A sociohistorical and structural analysis. Amsterdam: J.
Benjamins.
Hymes, D. (1971). Pidginization and creolization of languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jarad, N. (2012). The origin and development of expletive fī in Syrian Arabic. International Journal of Academic Research, 4(4),
127-136.
Kachru, Y. (2006). Hindi. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Pub. Co..
Leechman, D., & Hall, R. A. (1955). American Indian pidgin English: Attestations and grammatical peculiarities. American Speech,
30(3), 163.
McLoughlin, L. J. (1982). Colloquial Arabic (Levantine). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
McMahon, M. S. (1994). “Pidgins and Creoles”: Understanding language change (pp. 253-283). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Miller, C. (1993). Restructuration Morpho-Syntaxique en Juba-Arabic et Ki-Nubi: à propos du débat universaux/substrat et
superstrat dans les études creoles (Morpho-syntactic restructuring in Jub-Arabic and Ki-Nubi: A debate about
universals/substrate and superstrate in Creole studies). MASGELLAS Nouevelle Serie, 5, 137-174.
Miller, C. (2002). The relevanc of Arabic-based Pidgins-Creoles for Arabic linguistis (pp. 7-46). In G. Mansur & M. Doss (Eds.),
Al-Lugha. Cairo: Arab Development Center.
Næss, U. G. (2008). Gulf pidgin Arabic: Individual strategies or a structured variety? A study of some features of the linguistic
behaviour of Asian migrants in the Gulf countries (M.A. thesis, University of Oslo).
Nichols, P. (2004). Creole languages: Forging new identities. In E. Finegan & J. R. Rickford (Eds.), Language in the USA themes for
the twenty-first Century (pp. 133-136, 145-152). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Owens, J. (1997). Arabic-based pidgins and creoles. In S. Thomason (Ed.), Contact languages—A wider perspective (pp. 125-172).
Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Palva, H. (2004). Negation in the dialect of Es-Salt, Jordan: Approaches to Arabic dialects. A collection of articles presented to
Manfred Woidich on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday, Leiden.
Patrick,
P.
(2004).
Pidgin
and
Creole
languages:
Origins
and
relationships.
Retrieved
from
http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~patrickp/Courses/PCs/IntroPidginsCreoles.htm
Roberts, S. J., & Bresnan, J. (2008). Retained inflectional morphology in pidgins: A typological study. Linguistic Typology, 12(2),
269-302.
Romaine, S. (1988). Pidgin and Creole languages. London: Longman.
Sawāʕi, M. (2009). Al-ʕarabiah Al-Maḥkiah fil ʔordon (The spoken Arabic in Jordan). Jordan: Jadara lilkitab Al-ʕalami.
Schumann, J., & Stenson, N. (1974). New frontiers in second language learning. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House.
Siegel, J. (2009). Chinese pidgin English in southeastern Australia: The notebook of Jong Ah Siug. Journal of Pidgin and Creole
languages, 24(2), 306-337.
348
JORDANIAN BENGALI PIDGIN ARABIC
Smart, J. R. (1990). Pidginization in Gulf Arabic: A first report. Anthropological linguistics, 32, 83-118.
Swann, J., Deumert, A., Lillis, T., & Mesthrie, R. (2004). A dictionary of sociolinguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Tosco, M. (1995). A pidgin verbal system: The case of Juba Arabic. Anthropological Linguistics, 37(4), 423-459.
Valdman, A. (1981). Haitian Creole-English-French dictionary. C. Roberts, S. Yoder, & Y. Joseph (Eds.). Bloomington IN:
Indiana University, Creole Institute.
Vanhove, M., Miller, C., & Caubet, D. (2009). The grammaticalisation of modal auxiliaries in Maltese and Arabic vernaculars of the
Mediterranean area. Empirical Approaches to Language Typology, 44, 325-362.
Vicente, V. S. (2007). English-based pidgins and Creoles: From social to cognitive hypotheses of acquisition. Revista Virtual de
Estudos da Linguagem—ReVEL, 5(9). Retrieved from www.revel.inf.br
Watson, R. L. (1989). An introduction to Juba Arabic. Occasional Papers in the Study of Sudanese Languages, (6), 95-117.