Cover not available
Part of
Constructions in Contact 2: Language change, multilingual practices, and additional language acquisition
Edited by Hans C. Boas and Steffen Höder
[Constructional Approaches to Language 30] 2021
► pp. 191–232

Non-Dravidian elements and (non)diasystematic change in Malayalam

 | University of MichiganAnn Arbor
This chapter applies a Diasystematic Construction Grammar (DCxG) approach to account for non-Dravidian vocabulary and phonology in Malayalam, a high-contact Dravidian language. The distinction made in DCxG between diaconstructions, which are language non-specific, and idioconstructions, which are language-specific, proves useful in accounting for semantic specialization and phonological heterogeneity due to language contact. Notably, increased contact with English has led in some cases to decreased phonological adaptation, as some constructions change from diaconstructions to idioconstructions: Non-diasystematic change. Taken together, this chapter argues that any analysis of Malayalam must account for non-Dravidian subpatterns, and including language labels as part of speakers’ linguistic knowledge enhances our understanding of the dynamics of language contact.
Keywords: Malayalam, English, language contact, language change, semantic specialization, loanword adaptation, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics
Article outline
  • 1.High-contact languages are not categorically different
    • 1.1“Stratified lexicon” without a lexicon
    • 1.2Note on the data
  • 2.Language contact in Malayalam
    • 2.1Sanskrit
    • 2.2Arabic
    • 2.3Portuguese and Dutch
    • 2.4English
      • 2.4.1English pre-1950s
      • 2.4.2English post-1950s and today
    • 2.5Interim summary: History and hybrid Malayalam
  • 3.The role of non-Dravidian words across social and semantic domains
    • 3.1Sanskrit
    • 3.2Arabic
    • 3.3Portuguese and Dutch
    • 3.4English
      • 3.4.1Semantic specialization
      • 3.4.2Semantic specialization with Western connotation
      • 3.4.3Motivations for using English-origin words
      • 3.4.4English-origin words requiring further explanation
    • 3.5Interim summary: Word origins and meaning
  • 4.Heterogeneity in Malayalam phonology
    • 4.1Heterogeneity in sounds
    • 4.2Heterogeneity in syllable structure
  • 5.Socio-cognitively motivated non-diasystematic change
  • 6.Word-final schwa as a Phonological Language Marker of Malayalam
  • 7.Malayalam as a hybrid language
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 3 June 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.30.07nam
References (64)
References
Abraham, F. (2019). Mother tongue influence of Malayalam in the English loanwords used in Malayalam. Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Science, 7(2), 32–34.Google Scholar
Adler, A. N. (2006). Faithfulness and perception in loanword adaptation: A case study from Hawaiian. Lingua, 116(7), 1024–1045. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alves, M. (2009). Vietnamese. In M. Haspelmath, & U. Tadmor (Eds.) World Loanword Database. Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig. Retrieved from [URL], date of access 14 May 2019.
Asher, R. E., & Kumari, T. C. (1997). Malayalam. Descriptive Grammars Series. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fourteenth Kerala Legislative Assembly. Malayalam Language (Compulsory Language) Bill. (2017). Kerala Niyamasabha Printing Press: Thiruvanthanthapuram. Retrieved from [URL], date of access 30 June 2017.
Backus, A. (2013). A usage-based approach to borrowability. In E. Zenner & G. Kristiansen (Eds), New perspectives on lexical borrowing (pp. 19–40). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bahauddin, K. (2012). Kerala muslim history: A revisit. Calicut: Other Books.Google Scholar
Bryant, E., & Patton, L. L. (2005). The Indo-Aryan Controversy: Evidence and Inference in Indian History. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bucholtz, M. (2001). The whiteness of nerds: Superstandard English and racial markedness. Journal of linguistic anthropology, 11(1), 84–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cheerangote, S. (2012). An analysis on hybridization in Arabi Malayalam. International Review of Social Sciences and Humanities, 3, 96–103.Google Scholar
(2018). Contact-induced elements in Arabi-Malayalam. Language in India, 18(5), 333–341.Google Scholar
Cody, F. (2013). The light of knowledge: Literacy activism and the politics of writing in South India. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cyran, E. (2001). Parameters and scales in syllable markedness: the right edge of the word in Malayalam. In K. Dziubalska-Kolaczyk (Ed.), Constraints and Preferences (pp. 1–40). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dobbin, C. E. (1970). Basic Documents in the Development of Modern India and Pakistan, 1835–1947. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
Downing, L. J. et al. (2006). Canonical forms in prosodic morphology. Number 12. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elman, J. L. (2009). On the meaning of words and dinosaur bones: Lexical knowledge without a lexicon. Cognitive science, 33(4), 547–582. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Faraclas, N., & Klein, T. B. (2009). Simplicity and complexity in creoles and pidgins. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
Gamliel, O. (2013). Voices yet to be heard: On listening to the last speakers of Jewish Malayalam. Journal of Jewish Languages, 1(1), 135–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gargesh, R. (2006). On nativizing the Indian English poetic medium. World Englishes, 25(3–4), 359–371. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
George, K. M. (1972). Western influence on Malayalam language and literature. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi.Google Scholar
Govindankutty, A. (1972). From proto-Tamil-Malayalam to west coast dialects. Indo-Iranian Journal, 14(1), 52–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hay, J., Nolan, A., & Drager, K. (2006). From fush to feesh: Exemplar priming in speech perception. The Linguistic Review, 23(3), 351–379. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Höder, S. (2012). Multilingual constructions. A diasystematic approach to common structures (pp. 241–258). In K. Braunmüller, & C. Gabriel (Eds.), Multilingual Individuals and Multilingual Societies. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Phonological schematicity in multilingual constructions: A diasystematic perspective on lexical form. Word Structure, 12(3), 334–352. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ilias, M. (2007). Mappila Muslims and the cultural content of trading Arab diaspora on the Malabar coast. Asian Journal of Social Science, 35(4–5), 434–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Itô, J., & Mester, A. (1993). Japanese phonology: constraint domains and structure preservation. In J. Goldsmith (Ed.), The handbook of phonological theory (pp. 817–838). Cambridge, Mass. & Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kala, C. (1977). Hybrid conversational Malayalam the role of English in the Kerala social situation. Anthropological Linguistics, 19(6), 265–273.Google Scholar
Kay, G. (1995). English loanwords in Japanese. World Englishes, 14(1), 67–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kerala Department of Education. (2011). Kerala Department of Education Statistical Report. Technical report. Retrieved from [URL], date of access 10 November 2016.
Koshy, M. (1989). The Dutch Power in Kerala, 1729–1758. New-Delhi: Mittal Publications.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, G. (2008). Style-shifting and shifting styles: A socio-cognitive approach to lectal variation. Cognitive sociolinguistics: Language variation, cultural models, social systems, 45–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kurien, P. (1994). Colonialism and ethnogenesis: A study of Kerala, India. Theory and Society, 23(3), 385–417. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lieten, G. (2002). Human development in Kerala: structure and agency in history. Economic and Political Weekly, 37(16), 1539–1544.Google Scholar
Manilal, K. S. (2012). Hortus Malabaricus and the socio-cultural heritage of India. Indian Association for Angiosperm Taxonomy, Department of Botany. University of Calicut.Google Scholar
Mathew, E. (1999). Growth of literacy in Kerala: State intervention, missionary initiatives and social movements. Economic and political weekly, 34(39), 2811–2820.Google Scholar
McConvell, P. (2009). Gurindji. In M. Haspelmath, & U. Tadmor (Eds.) World Loanword Database. Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig. Retrieved from [URL], date of access 14 May 2019.
Meakins, F., Hua, X., Algy, C., & Bromham, L. (2019). Birth of a contact language did not favor simplification. Language 95(2), 294–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mohanan, K., & Mohanan, T. (1986). The Theory of Lexical Morphology. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Mohanan, T. (1989). Syllable structure in Malayalam. Linguistic Inquiry, 20(4), 589–625.Google Scholar
Mohanan, T., & Mohanan, K. (2003). Towards a theory of constraints in OT: emergence of the not-so-unmarked in Malayalee English. Available as ROA-601 from the Rutgers Optimality Archive.Google Scholar
Mufwene, S. (2000). Creolization is a social, not structural, process. In I. Neumann-Holzschuh, & E. Schneider (Eds.), Degrees of restructuring in Creole languages (pp. 65–84). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Myers-Scotton, C. (1997). Duelling languages: Grammatical structure in codeswitching. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Namboodiripad, S. (2017). An experimental approach to variation and variability in constituent order (Doctoral dissertation, UC San Diego).Google Scholar
Namboodiripad, S., & Garellek, M. (2017). Malayalam (Namboodiri dialect). Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 47(1), 109–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Namboodiripad, S., Garellek, M., & Baković, E. (2015). Moraic geminates in Malayalam: Evidence from loanwords and minimal word constraints. Paper presented at the Old Word Conference in Phonology. Barcelona, Spain.
(in prep.). Moraic geminates in Malayalam: Evidence from loanwords and minimal word constraints.
Namboodiripad, U. (1989). The speech of Namboodiris: A sociolinguistic study. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Kerala.Google Scholar
Nayar, P. (1991). Sociological Implications of Language Contact. Anthropos, 86(4/6), 528–535. Retrieved from [URL], date of access 10 May 2019.
Nayar, P. B. (2008). English in Kerala: Plus ca change?. TESL-EJ, 12(3), 1–3.Google Scholar
Niedzielski, N. (1999). The effect of social information on the perception of sociolinguistic variables. Journal of language and social psychology, 18(1), 62–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Park, H., & de Jong, K. J. (2008). Perceptual category mapping between English and Korean prevocalic obstruents: Evidence from mapping effects in second language identification skills. Journal of Phonetics, 36(4), 704–723. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pillai, K. S. (1962). Malayala Kaavya Ratnaakaram. Thrissur: Kerala Sahitya Akademi.Google Scholar
Rantattani, H. (2007). Mappila Muslims: a study on society and anti colonial struggles. Calicut: Other Books.Google Scholar
Ricci, R. (2011). Islam translated: Literature, conversion, and the Arabic cosmopolis of South and Southeast Asia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez-Ordóñez, I. (2017). Reexamining differential object marking as a linguistic contact phenomenon in Gernika Basque. Journal of Language Contact, 10(2), 318–352. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosa, J. D. (2016). Standardization, racialization, languagelessness: Raciolinguistic ideologies across communicative contexts. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 26(2), 162–183. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sridhar, S. (1981). Linguistic convergence: Indo-Aryanization of Dravidian languages. Lingua. 53(2–3), 199–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Srinivas, M. N. (1989). The cohesive role of Sanskritization and other essays. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Staal, J. F. (1963). Sanskrit and sanskritization. The Journal of Asian Studies, 22(3), 261–275. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomason, S. G. (2001). Contact-induced language change and pidgin/creole genesis. Creole Language Library, 23, 249–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vaish, V. (2005). A peripherist view of English as a language of decolonization in post-colonial India. Language Policy, 4(2), 187–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Valentine, E. (1976). The enunciative vowel in Malayalam. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics, 1, 16–22.Google Scholar
Wittmer, E. (2019). Phonetic reduction effects in Malayalam. Unpublished ms.Google Scholar
Wray, A., & Grace, G. W. (2007). The consequences of talking to strangers: Evolutionary corollaries of socio-cultural influences on linguistic form. Lingua, 117(3), 543–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Krishnan, Gayathri G., Arathi Raghunathan & Vaijayanthi M. Sarma
2023. Malayalam and Core Dravidian Phonology. In The Oxford Handbook of Dravidian Languages, DOI logo
Cheng, Lauretta S. P., Danielle Burgess, Natasha Vernooij, Cecilia Solís-Barroso, Ashley McDermott & Savithry Namboodiripad
2021. The Problematic Concept of Native Speaker in Psycholinguistics: Replacing Vague and Harmful Terminology With Inclusive and Accurate Measures. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 january 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.