NUML Journal Critical Inquiry Analysis

III
NUML Journal of Critical Inquiry ISSN 2222-5706
Vol 14 (II), Dec, 2016
Indexed & Abstracted by Proquest & Ebscohost
HEC Recognized Multidisciplinary Journal in “Category Y”
Chief Editor
Dr. Muhammad Safeer Awan
Dean, Faculty of English Studies & Languages
National University of Modern Languages
Editor
Dr. Farheen Ahmed Hashmi
Director Publications
N
A
T
I
O
N
A
L
U
N
I
V
E
R
SITY OF MOD
E
R
N
L
A
N
G
U
A
G
E
S
PUBLICATION BRANCH
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF MODERN LANGUAGES
ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN

V
Patron-in-Chief
Maj. Gen. (R) Zia Uddin Najam HI (M)
Rector, National University of Modern Languages
Patron
Brig. Riaz Ahmed Gondal
DG, National University of Modern Languages
Editorial Board
Dr. Randi Reppen
Professor
English Department
Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, USA
Dr. Robin Truth Goodman
Professor
The English Department
Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA
Dr. James D'Angelo
Professor
Department of World Englishes
Chukyo University, Nagoya, Japan
Dr. Almuth Degener
Associate Professor
Department of Indology
University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
Dr. Sergei Serebriany
Director
E. M. Meletinsky Institute for Advanced Studies in
the Humanities
Russian State University for the Humanities,
Moscow, Russia
Dr. Haj Ross
Professor
Department of Linguistics and Technical
Communication, College of Arts & Sciences
University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA
Dr. Masood Ashraf Raja
Associate Professor
Department of English
College of Arts & Sciences
University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA
Dr. Steven Talmy
Associate Professor
Department of Language & Literacy Education
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
Dr. John Gibbons
Adjunct Professor
School of Languages, Cultures and Linguistics
Monash University, Malbourne, Australia
Dr. Maria Staton
Assistant Professor
Ball State University, Muncie, IN, USA
Dr. Ryan Skinnell
Assistant Professor
Department of English & Comparative Literature
College of Humanities & the Arts
San José State University, San José, CA, USA
Dr. Ummul Khair Ahmad
Associate Professor
Language Academy
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia
Dr. Jesse Egbert
Assistant Professor
Department of Linguistics & English Language
Brigham Young University, Prove, UT, USA
Dr. Claire Chambers
Lecturer in Global Literature
Department of English and Related Literature
University of York, Heslington, York, UK

VI
Dr. Dawn Langley
Dean
General Education & Development Studies
Piedmont Community College, Roxboro, NC, USA
Dr. Bernhard Kelle
Professor of Linguistics
University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
Dr. Nelofer Halai
Professor
Institute for Educational Development
Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan
Dr. Samina Amin Qadir
Vice Chancellor
Fatima Jinnah Women University Rawalpindi,
Pakistan
Dr. Waseem Anwar
Dean of Humanities & Professor of English
Forman Christian College
(A Chartered University), Lahore, Pakistan
Dr. Amra Raza
Chairperson/Associate Professor
Department of English Language & Literature
University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan
Dr. Aalia Sohail Khan
Principal
Government Post Graduate College for Women
Satellite Town, Rawalpind, Pakistan
Dr. Shahid Siddiqui
Vice Chancellor
Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad, Pakistan
Dr. Arshad Mehmood
Dr. Naveed Akhtar
Director QEC
Dr. Sibghatullah
Assistant Professor
Dr. Marium Deen
Assistant Professor
Education Department

VII
Vol 14 (II), Dec, 2016 ISSN 2222-5706
CONTENTS
Editorial Board V
Contents VII
Contributors VIII
Research Papers
Muhammad Safeer Awan 1
Teaching the Empire to Write Back: Locating Kipling’s “english”
In the Postcolonial Literatures of the Subcontinent
Zawar Hussain Shah Hashmi 18
Motivation and Willingness to Communicate in English (WTCE):
Synthesizing Socio-Educational and WTCE Models
Zohra Fatima 38
Humor, Satire and Verbal Parody in The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the
Galaxy: A Relevance Theoretic Approach
Muhammad Ilyas Chishti & Muhammad Aslam 54
Marked Cultural Cues, Folk Traditions and Social Representations
Embedded within Schimmel’s As Through a Veil
Syeda Saira Hamid 70
Transforming Teacher Education for the Globalization of Education
Musarrat Azher & Muhammad Asim Mahmood 86
Exploring Variation across Pakistani Academic Writing: A
Multidimensional Analysis
Book Review
Liaquat Ali Channa 114
All American Yemeni Girls: Being Muslim in a Public School
Copyright Statement 119
Disclaimer 120
Call for Papers 121
Subscription Form 122

VIII
Contributors
Teaching the Empire to Write Back: Locating Kipling’s “english” in the
Postcolonial Literatures of the Subcontinent
Professor Dr. Muhammad Safeer Awan is the Dean of Faculty of English Studies
and Languages at the National University of Modern Languages (NUML) Islamabad,
Pakistan. The areas of his academic interests, teaching and research, have been
postcolonial studies, comparative literature, and Pakistani Literature in English and
Urdu. Currently, he is the chair of National Curriculum Revision Committee (NCRC)
for English, constituted by Higher Education Commission (HEC) Pakistan.
Email: msawan@numl.edu.pk
Dr. Zawar Hussain Shah Hashmi is currently working as an Assistant Professor at
Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, KSA. His permanent appointment,
as an Assistant Professor, is at National University of Modern Languages,
Islamabad in the Faculty of English Studies (FES). He completed his doctorate from
the same university in 2015. As a PhD scholar, he availed a research fellowship at
University of North Texas (USA) sponsored by US State Department. The academic
and scholarly pursuits of Dr. Hashmi are led by his multidisciplinary interests. His
research work, done so far, reflects this approach in mergence of applied
linguistics with sociolinguistics. He is further interested in Socio-cultural
Perspective of L2 and Cultural Studies. He is also interested in Transculturalism and
Transnationalism as consequent phenomena of Globalization and their impact on
South Asian Literature and culture.
Email: zawarhashmi1@gmail.com
Humor, Satire and Verbal Parody in The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy: A
Relevance Theoretic Approach
Zohra Fatima is working as a Lecturer at Fatima Jinnah Women University, The
Mall Rawalpindi and holds an MPhil in English (Linguistics) from the same
university. She is currently doing her PhD in English (Linguistics) from National
University of Modern Languages (NUML), Islamabad. She has been teaching English
Language courses at university level for more than two years. Her research
interests include Experimental Linguistics, Pragmatics and Second Language
Learning, Semantics and Pragmatics Interface, and Intercultural Semantics and
Pragmatics.
Email: zohrafatima5829@gmail.com

IX
Marked Cultural Cues, Folk Traditions and Social Representations
Embedded within Schimmel’s As Through a Veil
Dr. Muhammad Ilyas Chishti (Main Author) is currently working as Assistant
Professor at NUST-School of Natural Sciences, Islamabad. He is a PhD in English
Linguistics from National University of Modern Languages, Islamabad. His PhD
work encompasses a critical discourse dimension of Schimmel’s works Pain and
Grace, Mystical Dimensions of Islam and As through a Veil. His research interests
include Critical Discourse Studies, Pragmatics, Sociolinguistics and Sufi Discourse.
He has diverse teaching experience and has taught at International Islamic
University, Islamabad, Foundation University, Rawalpindi, and UET Taxila as a
visiting faculty. He is in GEC panel of various universities. He has expertise in
debates, declamations and dramatics. Other than his academic responsibilities, Dr.
Chishti has the honour of conducting events at high profile and literary events at
prestigious forums and is often invited to judge the proceedings of All Pakistan
Declamation Contests.
Email: ilyas_chishti2007@yahoo.com
Muhammad Aslam (Co-Author) is a PhD scholar in English Linguistics at
International Islamic University, Islamabad. He was declared as a gold medalist
from Beaconhouse National University, Lahore during his MPhil studies in TESL. He
is currently working as a lecturer of English Language Teaching and Linguistics in
Institute of Education and Research, University of the Punjab, Lahore. Muhammad
Aslam also worked here as the Head of Department for three years. He is working
as an external examiner at University of Lahore and Lahore College for Women’s
University and teaching as a visiting faculty at University of Lahore. His research
interests include English Language Teaching, Critical Discourse Studies, and
Pragmatics.
Email: maslam_pu64@yahoo.com
Transforming Teacher Education for the Globalization of Education
Syeda Saira Hamid is pursuing her PhD from National University of Modern
Languages, Islamabad. She is currently working as a Senior Subject Specialist
Biology at Government, Teachers Training College, H-9 Islamabad. She is the
author of Punjab Text Book Board of Biology class XII, Ecology (3- chapters) 2003.
She has won the presidential award on book writing title Everyday Science for
Youngsters. She topped Punjab Public Service Commission (PPSC) as subject
specialist Biology in province Punjab in 1993. She has deep interest in educational
planning, management, and teachers’ training in new trends of globalization. She is
well-equipped in training teachers from preschool to higher secondary level in
subjects of educational administration, school management, ESD, Environmental
Biology, Science, humanities, to serve all school audiences.
Email: mehdipkisd@gmail.com

X
Exploring Variation across Pakistani Academic Writing: A
Multidimensional Analysis
Dr. Musarrat Azher (Main Author) is currently working as a lecturer in the
department of English Language and Literature in University of Sargodha. She has
more than 18 years of teaching experience. Her research interests include
Pakistani English, Register variation studies, academic writing, multidimensional
analysis and corpus linguistics. She has published multiple research papers on
Pakistani academic writing, register variation, and English language teaching and
learning both in national and international journals.
Email: musarratazher@gmail.com
Dr. Muhammad Asim Mehmood (Co-Author) is currently working as an
associate professor and chair of the department of Linguistics in Government
College University, Faisalabad. His contribution in the field of corpus linguistics and
in the recognition of Pakistani English as an indigenous variety is recognized
worldwide. He has exclusively worked in the areas of corpus linguistics, Pakistani
English, and English Language Teaching. In addition, he has vast teaching
experience at graduate and post graduate level.
Email: masimrai@gmail.com
All American Yemeni Girls: Being Muslim in a Public School
Dr. Liaquat Ali Channa is currently serving BUITEMS, Quetta as an Associate
Professor in the Department of English. He is a Fulbright PhD alumnus. He teaches
courses related to theory and research and practice in applied linguistics. His areas
of interest are Educational Linguistics, Language Policy and Planning,
Second/Foreign Language Learning and Teaching, Bilingual Education, Research on
research methodology, and English as a/the Medium of Instruction. He has
published his scholarship in both national and international journals.
Email: channauga@gmail.com

1
Teaching the Empire to Write Back: Locating Kipling’s “english”
in the Postcolonial Literatures of the Subcontinent
Muhammad Safeer Awan
Partly because of empire, all cultures are involved in
one another; none is single and pure, all are hybrid,
heterogeneous, extraordinarily differentiated, and
unmonolithic (Said, 1993, p. xxix).
Abstract
The paper traces the literary legacy of postcolonial literatures, particularly
many of their linguistic features, and claims that, long before any other writer from
the British colonies, it was Rudyard Kipling who set the foundation of postcolonial
“englishes” by using English in a bold and innovative manner. The paper not only
upholds the earlier critical propositions – that Kipling’s Indian fiction has inspired a
vast body of postcolonial fiction in India and Pakistan as suggested by Richard
Cronin (1985), Sara Suleri (1992), Michael Gorra (1994), Feroza Jussawalla (1998)
and B. J. Moore-Gilbert (2002) – but proposes further that it was Kipling whose
linguistic innovations, strategies of appropriation, and stylistic deviations from the
“standard English,” particularly in his Indian fiction, paved the way for the
postcolonial writers and critics to appropriate English through various linguistic
strategies. Those linguistic features and strategies that Kachru (1983), Ashcroft et
al. (1998), and others have discovered in the postcolonial creative writings have
been first employed by Kipling as this paper demonstrates. Keeping in view
Kipling’s reputation as an empire man, the basic claim of this paper would sound
problematic and ironic, to some Kipling critics at least.
Keywords: Kipling, postcolonial english(es), linguistic appropriation
Introduction
Since the rise of postcolonial literatures and theory, new varieties of
English language began to emerge not only on the literary landscapes of the
former colonies but even in the former metropolitan/colonial centers. Of course,
the earliest of such ‘deviations’ was American English. This phenomenon had been
studied by a number of critics such as Kachru (1983), Baumgardner, Kennedy and
Shamim (1993), Fowler (1996), and more recently by Schneider (2007), Kachru and
Nelson (2009), and Kachru (2009). Most of these critics trace the development of
such varieties in socio-linguistic factors. However, as the present study claims, the
genealogy of postcolonial “englishes” begins with the linguistic experimentation of
Rudyard Kipling, a writer who is often regarded as a hardcore imperialist. By taking
an original, critical departure from the existing studies, I intend to explore to what
extent Kipling can be given the credit of initiating a linguistic “revolution” of sorts
that resulted into the formation and evolution of varieties of English around the
NUML Journal of Critical Inquiry Vol 14, (II), Dec, 2016 ISSN 2222-5706

2
world, especially in postcolonial literary texts. The paper especially emphasizes the
strategies of linguistic appropriation for creative purposes by a number of
postcolonial/post-Independence writers from the Subcontinent.
Kipling and the Question of Postcolonial Language
In 1998, Feroza Jussawalla proposed, “Consider the possibility that one can
read Rudyard Kipling as the father of postcolonial literature, if not the father of
postcolonial theory” (1998, pp. 112-30). Clara Claiborne Park made the explicit
claim that Kipling’s magnum opus, Kim, can be easily read as a
postcolonial/postmodern text (1997, pp. 43-62). On these lines, Moore-Gilbert
explored the possibilities of a postcolonial reading of Kim (2002, pp. 39-58). In this
regard, the question of Kipling’s originality as a writer with Indian themes would be
central. Although a number of Anglo-Indian writers were writing on Indian themes
and settings, as early as the 1860s, none of them experimented linguistically as did
Kipling in his short stories published in The Civil and Military Gazzette, (later
collected in Plain Tale from the Hills).1
Unlike writers prior to him, Kipling’s
depiction of India is mostly free from the racial and cultural stereotypes that
characterize many other nineteenth century creative writings by Anglo-Indian
writers like William Browne Hockley, Philip Meadows Taylor, W. D. Arnold, and
others.2
That Kipling was a novel and distinguished presence among the Anglo-
Indian writers is supported by the reviewers of his work even before he reached
London in September 1889. J. M. Barrie, for example, declared that Kipling “owes
nothing to any other writer. No one helped to form him” (Moore-Gilbert, 1986, pp.
19-20). Similarly, Francis Mannsaker omits Kipling from his The Literature of Anglo-
India 1757-1914 because his “thinking is not typical of the bulk of these Anglo-
Indian writers” (Moore-Gilbert, 1986, p. ii). Not only in terms of themes and style
he is different from all major Anglo-Indian writers of his time, Kipling developed a
distinct idiom to capture the richness and variety of Indian life and culture.
Kipling’s contrapuntal patterns, in terms of the employment of a culturally-
specific language in his Indian fiction, clamor for positioning in the postcolonial
discourse. In terms of form and style, his linguistic and cultural hybridity draws on
the “eastern religious epic . . . Western forms of spy thriller and Bildungsroman”
(Moore-Gilbert, 2002, p. 39) that make him master of culturally hybrid texts. In
particular, he has created complex, hybrid characters like Kim who are liminal
figures, living on the cusp of cultures. That is why Kim, as one conspicuous
example, is ambivalent about his identity and tries to recover his selfhood, in the
manner of many “postcolonials” that one encounters in the fictional creations of
Rushdie, Naipaul, Ghose, Kureishi, and others.
However, keeping in view the cultural politics of postcolonial theory as well
as Kipling’s own politics of Empire, it would be considered controversial to give
Kipling the full credit of founding postcolonial writings. What can be conceded,
however, is that Kipling must be acknowledged as a source of inspiration, at least

3
in terms of the employment of a “hybrid” language, for a number of writers who
adopted (and adapted) English as the medium of their creative writings. The
question of Kipling’s notion of “The Whiteman’s Burden” is bound to crop up in
this debate. To which I would only suggest that even his idea of Empire is stalled on
the verge of ambivalence, particularly his Indian fiction is an achievement in
cultural syncricity.3
Kipling’s rectification of Empire, subtle and nuanced in its own
right, has often been glossed over. Suleri concedes that
As a study of cultural possession and dispossession Kim remains one of the
most disturbing narrations of nineteenth-century colonial astonishment . . .
the text distributes cultural surprise equally between colonizer and
colonized. The protagonist embodies both aspects of such surprise, in that
his status as dispossessed colonizer is perpetually mediated by his intimacy
with and filiation to the cultures of the colonized … the ambivalence of the
narrative allows for no easy resolutions of such questions. (Suleri, 1992, pp.
117-8)
Suleri has underscored the value of Kim as a narrative of ambivalence and cultural
complexity. Such suggestions as those of Suleri, Jussawalla and Moore-Gilbert
underscore multiple possibilities of postcolonial re-readings of Kipling’s Indian
stories.4
Evolution of Postcolonial Literary Discourse
I envisage the evolution of English in the Subcontinent in the following four
stages, that is, (a) imposition of English curriculum after Macaulay’s intervention
through his Minutes on Indian Education, (b) beginnings of imitative writings in
English, (c) appropriation of the colonizers’ language by the native creative writers,
and (d) development of a “deviant” variety of English for creative purposes. Going
through these stages, the new variety of English began to acquire new forms in
terms of syntax, grammar, vocabulary etc. Such new varieties of English were
dubbed by the metropolitan critics as “deviant,” something lesser than the
“standard” English. These “deviant” varieties have been shaped due to the
incorporation of indigenous speech patterns that not only won social/cultural
acceptability it also established an “interanimation of languages”5
as sources of
literary consciousness and creative medium.
One of the earliest “imitative” writings produced in India was Sake Dean
Mohammad’s Travels which appeared in 1794 and established the Subcontinent
“as one of the first regions outside the United Kingdom and the United States of
America to have used English for literary purposes” (Hashmi, 1989, p. 110).6
The
style and language of Dean Mohammad’s Travels reveals that the Indian writers,
before Kipling, were writing in mere imitation of the canonical writers. Kipling, in
my view, within the Indian context, was the first writer whose artistic contributions
provided impetus to many subsequent Indo-Pakistani writers to follow his lead and
write independently of the colonizers’ original language by appropriating and

4
shaping it as a new variety. Appropriation is a process which reconstitutes the
language of the centre to express the “differing cultural experiences.” It seizes the
language of the centre and replaces it in “a discourse fully adapted to the
colonized place” (Ashcroft et al., 1989, pp. 37-38). This process results into the
formation of new “dialects” that are, at times, referred to as “languages” for
political reasons, as, for example, the evolution of “many englishes,” providing a
scope to reject the illusion of standard and correct use of English (Ashcroft et al.,
1989, p. 37). The function of such new varieties is to encompass the multiplicity of
one’s own culture since it is “maltreated in an alien language” (Rao, 1938, p. 5).As
Riemenschneider writes about Indian English “that Indian English can and does
embody many different distinctly Indian realities; it is a more multi-cultural
language medium in its many effective uses, poetic and practical, than probably
any other language used in India” (2004, p. 181).
A number of Indo-Pakistani writers have developed an elaborate local
idiom to write in English for artistic and creative purposes. But the question is who
initiated and evolved such multi-cultural language? Kipling’s influence, in terms of
the innovative use of language, is obvious on such writers as Raja Rao, Mulk Raj
Anand, R. K. Narrayan, Ahmed Ali before the 1947 Partition of India and, since
Independence, on Salman Rushdie, Bapsi Sidhwa, Arundathi Roy, Khushwant Singh,
and others. Taufiq Rafat, the renowned Pakistani poet, has been influential in
shaping a local, Pakistani idiom which is not formed merely with translations of
Urdu or Punjabi words into English. In an essay, Rafat has explained the nature of
such an idiom, culminating into a language, thus:
It is not by the use of Hindi or Urdu words that you can create Indian or
Pakistani English. These are mere superficialities. The roots of an idiom lie
much deeper. It is untranslatable. One has merely to refer to the dictionary
to know what an idiom really is: a characteristic mode of expression; a
vocabulary of a particular dialect or district. (Rafat, 1970, p. 66)7
However, what needs to be conceded and further explored is that such an idiom
did not shape itself; it did evolve from the uses of English by Kipling in his Indian
fiction. Before we illustrate this aspect of Kipling’s contribution, it would be
appropriate to outline various linguistic strategies usually adopted by a number of
postcolonial writers.
Appropriation and Indigenization of English
Kachru notes that the theoretical grounds of indigenization of English are
almost the same in Asia and Africa, but the linguistic innovations are culturally
specific. Since colonization during eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and
subsequent decolonization in the twentieth, various strategies of language
appropriation have been employed by the native creative writers. Both Kachru
(1980) and Ashcroft et al. (2002) have pointed out those strategies.

5
Kachru (1980) and Ashcroft et al. (2002) have analyzed a number of postcolonial
writings8
to discuss these strategies. Drawing on those strategies, Chelliah (2006)
has established that many postcolonial Indian writers use Indian English as
strategies of appropriation and textual apparatus to depict “authentic topoi of
Indian culture.” She has created a database of dialogue for each character by
analyzing Rohinton Mistry‘s Such a Long Journey (1991) and Arundhati Roy‘s The
God of Small Things (1998).
It is interesting to note that Kipling used almost all these linguistic devices:
Glossing, untranslated words, syntactic fusion, code-switching, vernacular
transcription, lexical innovation, translation equivalence and contextual
redefinition. He negotiated the “gap between the worlds” imparting the cross-
cultural sense to literature (Ashcroft et al., 2002, p. 39). To substantiate this claim,
I have culled a number of examples from Kipling’s Indian fiction. Under each
strategy, I first give the cluster of words, phrases, native idiomatic expressions,
translations, code-switching, etc. derived from various Kipling stories and then
quote the relevant sentences to show how Kipling has used them in different
contexts.
1 Glossing
Telis, mata, takkus, cloaks, izzat, bhai-bund, dooli, Be-shukl, be-ukl, be-ank, Bus, dikh,
dikh-dari, bunao, khitmatgar, Panee lao, Belait, gali, ghi, paharen, Dekho, Choor, bhusa.
1. … it was mata –the smallpox. (“Little Tobra”)
2. We be Telis, oil-pressers, said Little Tobrah. (ibid.)
3. Paying only once for the takkus-stamps on the papers. (ibid.)
4. Nothing but dikh, trouble, dikh. (ibid.)
5. So he went, that very night at eleven, into Amir Nath's Gully, clad in a boorka,
which cloaks a man as well as a woman. (“Beyond The Pale”)
2 Untranslated Words
Kismet, Sirkar, bundobust, Jehannum, vakils, chaprassis, bustee, dhak, kerani, Fakir,
Khitmutgaar, "Kubber-kargaz-ki-yektraaa,", Sansis, ‘Huzoor!’, ‘Khodawund!’, Chubara,
benowti, huqa, purdahnashin, Sais, kutcherry, Jadoo-Gher.
1. That was Kismet. (“Watches of the Night”)
2. Mark again how Kismet works! (Ibid.)
3. I am, I said, a kerani –one who writes with a pen upon paper, not being in the
Ashcroft et al. (2002) Kachru (1980)
1. Glossing
2. Untranslated Words
3. Interlanguage
4. Syntactic Fusion
5. Code Switching and Vernacular
Transcription
1. Lexical innovations
2. Translation equivalence
3. Contextual redefinition
4. Rhetorical and functional styles

6
service of the Government. (“Preface to Life’s Handicap”)
I am not a fool, and why should the Sirkar say I am a child? (“Tods’ Amendment”)
4. And he says: At the end of five years, by this new bundobust, I must go. If I do not
go, I must get fresh seals and takkus-stamps on the papers, perhaps in the middle
of the harvest, and to go to the law-courts once is wisdom, but to go twice is
Jehannum. (ibid.)
5. And Ditta Mull says:--Always fresh takkus and paying money to vakils and
chaprassis… (ibid.)
6. Deep away in the heart of the City, behind Jitha Megji's bustee, lies Amir Nath's
Gully. (“Beyond The Pale”)
3 Inter-language
Talk the straight talk, said the Head Groom, or I will make you clean out the stable of
that large red stallion who bites like a camel [seedhi tarah baat karo]. (“Little Tobra”)
The child nodded resolutely. Yea, I DO play. PERLAYBALL OW-AT! RAN, RAN, RAN! I
know it all. (“The Finances of the Gods”)
For five years I take my ground for which I have saved money, and a wife I take too,
and a little son is born.
If I am a fool and do not know, after forty years, good land when I see it, let me die!
My little son is a man, and I am burnt, and he takes the ground or another ground,
paying only once for the takkus-stamps on the papers, and his little son is born, and at
the end of fifteen years is a man too.
When a man knows who dances the Halli-Hukk, and how, and when, and where, he
knows something to be proud of.
If your mirror be broken, look into still water;
but have a care that you do not fall in.
4 Syntactic Fusion
The Chubara of Dhunni Bhagat, fakirs, sadhus, sannyasis, Sansis, bairagis, nihangs,
mullahs, Telis, murramutted, vakils, chaprassis, Musalmans, tazias.
1. In northern India stood a monastery called the Chubara of Dhunni Bhagat.
(“Preface to Life’s Handicap”)
2. They trooped up, fakirs, sadhus, sannyasis, bairagis, nihangs, and mullahs, priests
of all faiths,… (ibid.)
3. Oh, I know all about that! Has it been murramutted yet, Councillor Sahib?
(“Tods’ Amendment”)
4. Murramutted--mended.--Put theek, you know--made nice to please Ditta Mull!
(ibid.)
5 Vernacular Transcription
Hutt, you old beast! (“The Bronckhorst Divorce Case”)
I play ker-li-kit like the rest.

7
Thou play kerlikit! PERLAYBALL OW-AT! RAN, RAN, RAN! I know it all.
te-rain’
I must fink in English
"This interferin' bit av a Benira man," said Mulvaney, "did the thrick for us himself; for,
on me sowl, we hadn't a notion av what was to come afther the next minut. He was
shoppin' in the bazar on fut. Twas dhrawin' dusk thin, an' we stud watchin' the little
man hoppin' in an' out av the shops, thryin' to injuce the naygurs to mallum his bat.
Prisintly, he sthrols up, his arrums full av thruck, an' he sez in a consiquinshal way,
shticking out his little belly, 'Me good men,' sez he, 'have ye seen the Kernel's
b'roosh?'--'B'roosh?' says Learoyd. 'There's no b'roosh here--nobbut a hekka.'--'Fwhat's
that?' sez Thrigg. Learoyd shows him wan down the sthreet, an' he sez, 'How thruly
Orientil! I will ride on a hekka.' I saw thin that our Rigimintal Saint was for givin' Thrigg
over to us neck an' brisket. I purshued a hekka, an' I sez to the dhriver-divil, I sez, 'Ye
black limb, there's a _Sahib_ comin' for this hekka. He wants to go jildi to the Padsahi
Jhil'--'twas about tu moiles away--'to shoot snipe--chirria. You dhrive Jehannum ke
marfik, mallum--like Hell? 'Tis no manner av use bukkin'_to the Sahib, bekaze he
doesn't samjao your talk. Av he bolos anything, just you choop and chel. Dekker? Go
arsty for the first arder mile from cantonmints. Thin chel, Shaitan ke marfik, an' the
chooper you choops an' the jildier you chels the better kooshy will that Sahib be; an'
here's a rupee for ye?'
6 Lexical innovations
Fakements, police-wallas.
7 Translation equivalence/Native Proverbs, idioms, songs, etc.
Talk the straight talk [a literal translation of ‘seedhi tarah baat karo’]; When Man and
Woman are agreed, what can the Kazi do? [a literal translation of Mian Bevi razi to kia
karay ga qazi]; Nothing at all does the Servant of the Presence know [Huzoor ka ghulam
kuch nahi jaanta]; Have a care [apna khayal rakho]; From the mouths of many [kai
logon ki zubani].
1. Talk the straight talk, said the Head Groom, or I will make you clean out the
stable of that large red stallion who bites like a camel. (“Little Tobrah”)
Kipling is conscious that a lot of cultural specificity is lost in translation. As he writes in
“Beyond the Pale”:
Directly the gongs in the City made the hour, the little voice behind the grating took up
"The Love Song of Har Dyal" at the verse where the Panthan girl calls upon Har Dyal to
return. The song is really pretty in the Vernacular. In English you miss the wail of it. It
runs something like this:--
Alone upon the housetops, to the North
I turn and watch the lightning in the sky,--
The glamour of thy footsteps in the North,
Come back to me, Beloved, or I die!

8
Below my feet the still bazar is laid
Far, far below the weary camels lie,--
The camels and the captives of thy raid,
Come back to me, Beloved, or I die!”
8 Contextual Redefinition
1. Amma-ji,
2. Khitmutgaar (“Bronckhoorst Divorce Case”)
3. Nay, Sahib, nay. (“The Finances of the Gods”)
In the above table, only a few examples of various strategies are taken from the
eighteen selected stories. It is not possible to discuss all of them in detail.
However, code-switching is discussed in detail as it encompasses other strategies
such as syntactic fusion, glossing, untranslated words, etc. The choice of a non-
English expression by an author is an indication that the selected code is the most
appropriate for the given occasion. Kipling frequently codeswitches, employing its
different types – inter-sentential, intra-sentential or intra-word and tag switching.
Intersentential Codeswitching: Some examples of intersentential codeswitching
are found in Kipling’s works which occur at the boundary of a clause or sentence
confirming the rules of both the languages. For instance, instead of using an
English counterpart, the author prefers to codeswitch, as in “In The House of
Suddhoo,” “I heard her say "Asli nahin! Fareib!" scornfully under her breath”
(Kipling, 1994[1888], p. 56).
Similarly, he switches to the local vernacular on other occasions as in “William the
Conqueror” (part 1):
Kubber-kargaz-ki-yektraaa," the man whined, handing down the
newspaper extra - a slip printed on one side only, and damp from the
press.
“Ham dekhta hai” (Kipling, 1994[1888], p. 61).
Through codeswitching Kipling demonstrate that he is quite familiar with the
Indian culture and he is not writing about it as an alien/ outsider. Likewise,
Kipling’s familiarity with the religio-cultural conventions, permeated in the Indian
Muslim society especially, provides him the opportunity to codeswitch. As in “The
Story of Muhammad Din” he greets the child as "Salaam Muhammad Din."
Intra-sentential Codeswitching: Further there are many examples of intra-
sentential codeswitching that is within a clause or sentence boundary or mixing
within a word boundary, as in “William the Conqueror” (part 1):
-It's declared! he cried. One, two, three - eight districts go under
the operations of the Famine Code ek dum.

9
-It's pukka famine, by the looks of it (Kipling, 1994[1888], p. 69). Or
as in The Son of His Father.
-Father, I am a man. – I am not afraid. It is my izzat – my honour.
-There will be none of my bhai-bund [brotherhood] up there, he said
disconsolately, ‘and they say that I must lie in a dooli [palanquin] for a day
and a night…
-Sheer badmashi
-there has been great dikh-dari [trouble-giving]
-It was all for the sake of show that they caught people. Assuredly
they all knew it was benowti (Kipling, 1994[1888], p. 87). Similarly,
in “The Story of Muhammad Din,” Kipling has relied on
codeswitching on a number of occasions:
-This boy, said Imam Din, judicially, "is a budmash, a big budmash.
He will, without doubt, go to the jail-khana for his behavior.
-You put some juldee in it. Juldee means hurry. (Kipling,
1994[1888], p. 97)
But since “juldee” is noun, Kipling has used “put” to make it an
action word.
Tag-switching: Insertion of discourse markers or tag-switching is also evident in a
number of stories, as “Bus [enough] said Adam, between sucks at his mango” in
“The Son of His Father” and “Hutt, you old beast!” in “Bronckhoorst Divorce Case.”
In "Laid Low" (1884), the narrator gives instructions to a gardener and shows him
how to prune trees and plants:
Dekho! Look here. Ye burra hai,
And this is chota, don't you see?
And Priest of that dread creed am I
Which worships Uniformity.
Iswasti, baito by the beds
And cut kurro the lumbar heads (Islam, 1969)
Kipling’s use of Hindustani (or Urdu/Hindi) is a testament to his vast knowledge of
Indian customs, creeds, castes and cultures. According to A Glossary of Hindustani
Urdu-Hindi Words to be found in Kipling’s Works, prepared by Michael Smith,9
there are more than 400 words and phrases that Kipling has used. Not only
individual words, there is a vast number of proverbs, anecdotes, and references to
folklore that Kipling has effectively incorporated in his works.

10
Language of Kim
Some of those strategies listed above have been used more elaborately in
Kim that transpired from his Indian experience. It is marked by a strong local idiom.
He uses Arabic, Persian, Urdu, Hindi, and Panjabi words and phrases10
that has
become a standard practice now for many postcolonial writers. It has been noted
by Kipling critics that he uses the vernacular only in his early writings since at that
time he was writing for a limited Anglo-Indian audience. However, the fact is that
Kipling continued to incorporate Indian languages and dialects in his work long
after he left India. Kim, published in 1901 (and written during 1899-1901), is a
prominent example of such vernacular, “deviant” usages that Kipling seems to
have imbibed from the oral literary tradition of the Subcontinent. David Stewart in
his article, “Orality in Kipling’s Kim,” claims that in Kim Kipling makes use of at least
four “languages,” each distinct from the other:
(i) Kipling’s or the narrator’s language which is his trademark.
(ii) Standard English or the voices from England (or Balait as Kim says)
(iii) Kim’s language, a mixture of the normative and the native English.
(iv) Urdu translated and at times transliterated into English (Stewart, 1987,
pp. 101-02).
Shamsul Islam has also suggested that the use of the vernacular languages in
Kipling's works is highly functional and artistic. He has pointed out not only
Urdu/Hindi words and phrases but also a number of Punjabi expressions. Islam
suggests that Indo-Pakistani words and phrases in Kipling’s work (a) contribute to a
particular atmosphere; (b) add realism and conviction; (c) create a distance
between the story and the reader; and (d) are instrumental in the production of a
highly complex effect of involvement and detachment simultaneously (Islam,
1969).
The linguistic and cultural creolization and hybridization that Kipling
achieves in Kim is one of the byproducts of colonial experience, and it has become
a standard practice now in most postcolonial writings. His work is the prime
example of the transformative influence of the colonized cultures and languages
upon those of the colonizers and their texts. Kipling, in spite of his imperialist
tendencies, was one of the earliest writers who realized that no culture, including
those of the colonizers, would be in a position to claim purity after going through
the colonial experience. The nature of such cultural and linguistic hybridization has
been sufficiently explained by Bhabha and Bakhtin. As Bakhtin informs, it is a
mixture of two social languages within the limits of a single utterance, an
encounter, within the arena of an utterance, between two different linguistic
consciousnesses, separated from one another by an epoch, by social
differentiation, or by some other factor (Bakhtin, 1974, p. 358).

11
Kipling has displayed such a complex consciousnesses in his Indian fiction
that facilitated him to create linguistically and culturally hybrid texts. If pure
English culture existed on one side of that cultural interstice (where Kipling could
be located), on the other side of it were located a host of Indian cultures – Hindu,
Muslim, Buddhist, etc – that influenced Kipling’s sensibility and made him what he
turned out to be – a writer of complex cultural texts.
Some of the following examples have been culled by Stewart, though with a
different thesis, that is, to study orality in Kim. I have added more examples to
demonstrate how Kipling has contributed in shaping later postcolonial varieties of
English. According to Stewart, Kipling has generously translated from the
vernacular that “creates an unusual aural medium.” One of the characteristic
features of Urdu language is that it uses an “elevated” vocabulary in order to show
respect to those who are socially at a higher pedestal. Such a use, according to
Stewart, would seem “inappropriate in plain English.” For example:
Kim tells Colonel Creighton, "it is inexpedient to write the names of
strangers." The Jat farmer says of his sick son, "he esteemed the salt
lozenges"… Such diction is incompatible with these characters' vocabularies in
English, but here in "translation" it seems normal, therefore doubly
suggestive. A second example: the novel is full of oral formulae—
“Let the Hand of Friendship turn aside the Whip of Calamity”—
that are unknown in English yet familiar because they conform to the
structure of maxims. A speaker of Urdu can actually translate some of them
back into the original, so that he may read
I am thy sacrifice
but hear
“Main tum pe qurban jaoon,” (as cited in Stewart, 1987, pp. 110-
112)
Urdu had evolved out of a long oral tradition in the multilingual, multi-
racial ambience of the Indian Mughal army. Therefore, by its nature and history, it
is a hybrid language that contains Arabic, Persian, Turkish and other linguistic
traditions. The orality of Urdu is also reflected in Kim. Urdu/Hindi oaths, slang
expressions, exclamations and imperatives abound in Kim. Dialogue is sparingly
written in the “Standard English”:
“Hear and obey!—Let all listen to the Jâtakas!—The Search is
sure!—Hear the most excellent Law!—It is found!—Be quiett!—“
“Ohe, Mahbub Ali!” he[Kim] whispered, “have a care” (Kipling,
1995[1901], p. 148).

12
“Have a care” is the literal translation of the Urdu expression apna khayal
rakho; it became a standard expression in the Victorian English.
Compare the above dialogue with the speech pattern of a character in
Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children: “Come on phaelwan: a ride in my Packard, okay?”
And talking at the same time is Mary Pereira, “Chocolate cake,” she is promising,
“laddoos, pista-ki-lauz, meat samosas, kulfi. So thin you got, baba, the wind will
blow you away” (Rushdie, 1981, p. 239).
Rushdie’s “inscription of alterity” when he switches between two codes is
analyzed thus by Juliette Myers who writes, “verbal play, internal rhyme, and
strange verbal conjoinings characterize the linguistics of postmodernism” (Myers,
1996). However, while exploring postmodernist features in the use of language by
such writers as Rushdie, one may not ignore the historical processes and the
contribution Kipling who, long before Rushdie, achieved such diversity and
multiplicity of meanings through language use. Here are a few more examples
from Kim:
(a) Have I not said a hundred times that the South is a good land? Here is a
virtuous and high-born widow of a Hill Raja on pilgrimage… She it is
sends us those dishes (p. 76).
(b) --that she must eat gali [abuse] as men eat ghi [cooking fat] (p. 80).
(c) That is a nut-cut [rogue], she said. All police constables are nut-cuts; but
the police-wallas are the worse. Hai, my son, thou hast never learned all that
since thou camest from Belait [Europe]. Who suckled thee? (p. 82).
(d) A paharen –a hillwoman of Dalhousie… (p. 82).
(e) [Kim] heard this sort of speculation again and again, from the mouths of
many whom the English would not consider imaginative (76)11
[emphasis
added].
The emphasized expressions are translations from Urdu dialogue that
Kipling seems to have thought first in Urdu and then converted them into English.
They confirm that Kipling has extensively employed the “vernacular formations,
and ‘Indianized’ English, the occasional use of Hindi terms, and an abundance of
folk-sayings, proverbs, and parables. Kipling here carefully differentiates between
the cultural idioms of various speakers, highlighting the Islamic-rooted expressions
of Mahbub Ali and the Lama’s Buddhist ones” (Adam, 1997, pp. 66-78).
Such words as “te-rain” for train in Kim are reminiscent of the language
that Zulfikar Ghose, the Pakistani-American novelist and poet, uses in his novel The
Murder of Aziz Khan; it underlines the idiosyncratic speech patterns of various
characters. Tariq Rehman has characterized this feature as “rhotic” (1990, p. 67)
since it gives double stress to certain letters, particularly words ending on the
letter ‘r’. This feature is due to the influence of Urdu and Arabic in which certain

13
letters get double stress in pronunciation. The following dialogue between Akram
Shah’s wife, Faridah, and a cloth merchant, is a typical example of such stress
patterns. When Faridah asks whether pink color is available, the shopkeeper says:
“Begum Sahiba, I have each and every culler for your sootability, pink, saalmun red
turkwise, emmaruld green, purrpel… the cumpleet range, Begum Sahiba, the
cumpleet range” (Ghose, 1998, p. 76) [emphasis added].
Similarly, in Kim, Babu Hurree Chander’s dialogues are marked by certain
linguistic features that one may call as characteristic of “Indian English” now.
Kipling “seems … to recognize that British English is not fully adequate to describe
India: his own narrative language implies that the development of a special Indian
literary variety of English will be necessary” (Tulloch, 1992, pp. 35-46). Not only
the natives of India, even the British characters speak in their regional dialects of
English. For example, the Drummer-boy from Liverpool, Colonel Creighton and the
Irish priest, all speak in their native, regional accents. There is no question of one
“standard” monolithic language for cultural expression in the multicultural settings
of this novel.
Due to such innovative linguistic strategies, Kipling, I believe, may easily be
regarded as the first English writer who has paved the way for generations of
postcolonial writers, especially those writing in India and Pakistan, to devise new
phrases, employ local idioms and thus create new varieties of English like
“Singlish,” “Paklish,” “Inglish”12
etc. Since the end of colonial rule in India, many
Indo-Pakistani writers like Ahmed Ali, Rushdie, Bapsi Sidhwa, Taufiq Rafat, Sara
Suleri, Vikram Seth, Arundathi Roy, and others, taking their cue from Kipling’s
multi-lingual experiences and experiments, were encouraged to employ various
linguistic strategies of appropriation to give a distinctive cultural flavor to their
writings. In Ice-Candy-Man (1988) Sidhwa sounds like Kipling when she uses words
like “Churrail,”13
and idioms like “Hassi tay Phassi,” or “to paint their hands yellow”
(referring to the tradition of henna-decorated hands of Punjabi brides).14
She also
uses verses from many Urdu poets such as Iqbal and Faiz, empowering her
narrative with the local cultural crossings. The postcolonial Indo-Pakistani writers
have emulated Kipling’s linguistic and stylistic experiments, though often without
acknowledging their debt to Kipling. Some of them have definitely admired his
work, as Rushdie, Nirad C. Chaudhuri, Sara Suleri and others but few of them as
unambiguously as Kipling deserves.
Thus language in Kipling’s Indian fiction is fashioned out of his hybrid vision
about the Indian social and cultural life. From my own experience of reading
Kipling and comparing his use of English with that of a number of postcolonial
Indo-Pakistani writers, I have realized that Kipling is the first master of the
Subcontinental creole. Kipling might not be the father of postcolonial literatures,
as Jussawala proposed, but is most certainly the father of postcolonial english(es)
in the Subcontinent and even beyond.

14
Notes
1. It was only in the 1930s that the Indian writers began to experiment creatively with
the lexical expressions and syntax of the English language to give an indigenous look
to their creative writings, long after Kipling became known both in India, the US and
Europe. For details please see, for example, Meenakshi Mukherjee, Twice Born
Fiction, pp. 170-203; William Walsh, The Big Three, pp. 26-36; Leela Gandhi, Novelists
of the 1930s and 1940s, pp. 168-192.
2. For details please see Udayon Misra’s The Raj in Fiction. Delhi: B. R. Publishing, 1987.
3. Kipling is generally perceived as a hidebound imperialist and calibrated as a canonical
construct. Since Said’s contrapuntal critique of Kim, the postcolonial critics have
consistently bracketed Kipling with other 19th
century white canonical writers like
Lord Macaulay, John Ruskin and others (Please see Edward Said’s Culture and
Imperialism, New York: Vintage, 1993, particularly the section “The Pleasures of
Imperialism,” pp.159-196). However, in his exploding the socio-cultural stereotypes
(in Kim especially) about the East (particularly India) paddling in the West, Kipling
transcends the Raj mantra.
4. It is further supported by the fact that Kipling adopted an anti-colonial stance vis-à-vis
colonial educational system in India. In one of his articles, “A Little Morality,”
published in the Pioneer in January 1888, he strongly takes exception to the radical
Evangelical agenda that succeeded in imposing English literary education on the
Indians and treated culture as a “deus ex machine” to transform the ‘natives’ into the
servants of Empire. It means Kipling was conscious of the dangers of such cultural
impositions. Such an astute observation, from a writer like Kipling who was
otherwise regarded as the spokesperson of the British Empire, is highly significant. It
means his politics of Empire is too complex to be reduced to any simple postcolonial
critique. It is also ironic that the curriculum of English literary education, devised by
Lord Macaulay, and implemented in most former colonies, is almost the same even
now. In his article, Kipling mentioned Milton, Shakespeare, Chaucer, Pope, Macaulay
and others who are imposed upon the Indians as canonical writers. These writers are
still part of the curriculum in English studies in most Pakistani universities that
produce the culturally hybrid monsters that Kipling abhorred so much. For details of
this article, please see Angus Wilson’s biography of Kipling, The Strange Ride of
Rudyard Kipling, pp. 115-16.
5. Mikhail Bakhtin. The Dialogic Imagination Four Essays, (trans.) Caryl Emerson and
Michael Holquist (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1974, p. 358). This concept of
interanimation of languages is also valid to explain the development of Urdu
literature in India and American literature in the USA. Similar is the case of South
Asian novelistic discourse as the Indian, Pakistani, Bengali and Sri Lankan novelists
incorporate their respective local languages for cultural expression, thus paving the
way for what Bakhtin terms as polyglossic writing. However, the evolution of such
writings went through different stages as suggested above.
6. Alamgir Hashmi, “Prolegomena to the Study of Pakistani English and Pakistani
Literature in English,” in Radhika Mohanram and Gita Rajan, English Postcoloniality:
Literatures from Around the World. London: Greenwood Press, 1996. P.110. Hashmi’s
paper was originally presented at the first International Conference on English in
South Asia, held at Islamabad, Pakistan, January 4-9, 1989.

15
7. Rafat’s observation is reminiscent of Bakhtin’s notion of “intentional hybrid,”
commonly found in South Asian fiction. God of Small Things by Arandhati Roy, Train
to Pakistan by Khushwant Singh, The Untouchable by Mulk Raj Anand, The World of
Nagaraj by R. K. Narayan, Family Matters by Rohinton Mistry, and Émigré Journeys by
Abdullah Hussain all abound in the use of a hybrid and syncretic language
appropriated by the novelists for specific characters to orchestrate various themes.
8. For example, Furphy’s Such is Life, 1903; Lisser’s Jane’s Career, 1913; Reid’s New Day,
1949; Lamming’s The Emigrants, 1954: Naipaul’s The Mystic Masseur,1957; Achebe’s
No Longer at Ease,1963, Okara’s The Voice 1964, Ngugi’s A Grain of Wheat 1967,
Harris’ Ascent To Omai 1970, Eri’s Crocodile 1970; Naipaul’s One out of many,1971;
Selvon Moses Ascending, 1975; Stow’s Visitants, 1979; Maniam’s The Cord, 1984;
Twain’s Huckleberry Finn,1885; etc.)
9. Available at the official site of Kipling Society:
http://www.kipling.org.uk/facts_glossintro.htm. visited on 1/11/2005. From my own
readings of various Kipling stories, I have gathered that Smith’s glossary is by no
means exhaustive. There are still many words and phrases which are not included in
that list. Also, Margaret Pelley mentions in her excellent study of the manuscript of
Kim, “Kim that Nobody Reads,” that Kipling reduced the number of Hindustani words
in order perhaps to make it more palatable to his European and American readers. It
implies Kipling was much more rooted in the Indian cultures and languages than one
may realize from the reading of Kim.
10. It does not mean that he knew all these languages. The fact is that Urdu is a language
that emerged and evolved mainly as a result of interactions among the soldiers in the
Mughal Indian army consisting of various linguistic and ethnic groups from Persia,
Afghanistan, Central Asia, North and South India etc.
11. The novel is full of such constructions and expression. In fact, most of the book is
written in this English in which vernacular plays the dominant part. An Urdu reader
can perfectly translate it into Urdu while reading it. Here are a few more examples:
(i) he is very holy (p. 93)
(ii) They call me Kim Rishti ke. That is Kim of the Rishti.'
What is that—"Rishti"?'
Eye-rishti—that was the regiment—my father's.'
Irish, oh I see.
Yess. That was how my father told me. (p. 92)
(iii) He is a chabuk sawai [a sharp chap]. (p.116)
(iv) But what is to pay me for this coming and re-coming? (p. 129)
(v) chup! [be still or be silent]. (p.161)
12. See for example, Yamuna Kachru and Cecil L. Nelson. World Englishes in Asian
Contexts. Hong Kong University Press, 2006; Rajend Mesthrie and Rakesh M. Bhatt.
World Englishes: The Study of New Linguistic Varieties. Cambridge University Press,
2008; Braj B. Kachru, Yamuna Kachru, Cecil L. Nelson (eds). The handbook of world
Englishes. Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2006; and Yamuna Kachru, Larry E. Smith.
Cultures, contexts, and world Englishes. Taylor & Francis, 2008.
13. In fact, Kipling too has used this very word in Kim (p.148), though with a different
spelling.
14. See Bapsi Siddhwa’s Ice-Candy-Man (1988) for such numerous examples. Also see
Ahmed Ali’s Twilight in Delhi (1941), and his short stories, particularly “Our Lane”in

16
Ahmed Ali (ed.) Selected Short Stories from Pakistan. Islamabad: Pakistan Academy of
Letters, 1983. Sara Suleri in her Meatless Days and Boys Will Be Boys extensively uses
Urdu words without bothering to translate them into English as those are culturally-
specific words and their parallels in English are often not available.
References
Adam, I. (1997). Oral/Literate/Transcendent: The Politics of Language Modes in
‘Kim’. The Yearbook of English Studies, 27, 66-78.
Ashcroft et. al. (1989/2002). The empire writes back: Theory and practice in
postcolonial literatures. London: Routledge.
Bakhtin, M. (1974). The dialogic imagination four essays. (C. Emerson & M.
Holquist, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Baumgardner, R. J., Kennedy, A. E. H., & Shamim, F. (1993). The Urduization of
English in Pakistan. In R. J. Baumgardner (Ed.), The English language in
Pakistan (pp. 83-203). Karachi: Oxford University Press.
Chelliah, S. L. (Dec, 2006). The Representation of Indian English in Indian novels in
English. South Asian Language Analysis Roundtable Conference (SALA) 26.
Mysore, India.
Ghose, Z. (1967/1998). The murder of Aziz Khan. Karachi: Oxford University Press.
Harrex & S. Hosking (Eds.), Raj Nostalgia: Some Literary and Critical
Implications. Adelaide: Centre for Research in the New Literatures in
English.
Hashmi, A. (1996). Prolegomena to the study of Pakistani English and Pakistani
literature in English. In R. Mohanram & G. Rajan (Eds.), English
Postcoloniality: Literatures from around the World. London: Greenwood
Press.
Islam, S. (1996). Kipling's use of Indo-Pakistani languages. The Kipling Journal, 36,
15-19).
Kachru, B. (1983). The indianization of English: The English language in India. Delhi:
Oxford University Press.
Jussawalla, F. (Fall, 1998). Re-reading Kim: Defining Kipling’s masterpiece as
Postcolonial. Journal of Commonwealth and Postcolonial Studies, 5(2).
Kipling, R. (1901/1995). Kim. London: Everyman’s Library.
Kipling, R. (1888/1994). Plain tales from the hills. New Delhi: Penguin.
Moore-Gilbert, B. J. (1986). Kipling and “Orientalism.” London: Croom Helm.
Moore-Gilbert, B. J. (2002). “I am going to rewrite Kipling’s Kim”: Kipling and
Postcolonialism. The Journal of Commonwealth Literature, 37(2).

17
Myers, J. (Spring, 1996). Postmodernism in Salman Rushdie's Midnight's Children
and The Moor's Last Sigh. Retrieved from
<http://www.art.man.ac.uk/ENGLISH/MS/rushdie.htm>
Park, C. C. (1997). The River and the road: Fashions in forgiveness. American
Scholar, 66(1).
Rafat, T. (1969). Towards a Pakistani Idiom. Venture: A Bi-Annual Review of English
Language and Literature, 6(1), 60-73.
Rafat, T. (1985). Arrival of the Monsoon: Collected poems 1947-78. Lahore:
Vanguard.
Rao, R. (1938/1970). Kanthapura. New Delhi: Oriental Paperbacks.
Rehman, T. (1990). Linguistic deviation as a stylistic device in Pakistani English
fiction. The Journal of Commonwealth Literature, 25(1). Retrieved from
http://www.sagepuclications.com
Riemenschneider, D. (2004). Marginalizing the centre – centering the periphery:
The reception of Indian literature in English. In Rajan, P. K. (Ed.), Indian
Literary Criticism in English (Critics,Texts and Issues). New Delhi: Rawat
Publication.
Rushdie, S. (1982). Midnight's children. London: Picador.
Said, E. (1993). Culture and Imperialism, New York: Vintage.
Schneider, E. W. (2007). Postcolonial English: Varieties around the world. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Suleri, S. (1992). The rhetoric of English India. New Delhi: Penguin Books.
Stewart, D. H. (1987). Orality in Kipling’s Kim. In H. Bloom (Ed.), Rudyard Kipling’s
Kim. New York: Chelsea House.
Tulloch, G. (1992). Voices of the Raj: Linguistic diversity in Kim. In A. Greet, Syd

18
Zawar Hussain Shah Hashmi
Abstract
This study explores the relationship between factors of language motivation
and Willingness to Communicate in English (WTCE). The aim was to test motivation
as a causative factor of WTCE by confirming a path from motivation to WTCE
through Structural Equation Modeling. It follows an existing tradition whereby
both Willingness to Communicate and motivation were studied as causes of each
other in exclusive studies (see for example MacIntyre & Charos 1996 and Yashima
2002). The participants of this study consisted of the teachers who were expected
to employ English as Medium of Instruction (EMI) while teaching content subjects
at secondary school level in Punjab (a province of Pakistan). It was conducted in
the wake of a state order issued to make the use of EMI compulsory regardless of
the fact that 94% of the teachers were not proficient enough at all. Hybridization
of Socio-educational model and WTC model was used as a framework for this
study. A questionnaire designed after adaptation from AMTB (Attitude Motivation
Test Battery) and WTC (Willingness to Communicate) scales was used for survey.
For statistical analysis of data SPSS version 21.0 and Amos version 21.0 were used.
A significant path from motivation (as an aggregate of factors selected from socio-
educational model) to WTC was found existent while the individual motivational
factors from Socio-educational model showed varying trends. The additionally
introduced factor i.e. ELLE (English Language Learning Experience) was found not
to be a direct cause of WTCE. However, it proved to be a highly significant direct
cause of motivation.
Keywords: motivation, willingness to communicate, anxiety
1. Introduction
The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between factors
of language motivation used by Gardner in his Socio-educational model (1985) and
Willingness to Communicate (WTC) as a construct used in WTC model by
MacIntyre (1998). The study was conducted on teachers of Secondary School Level
in the rural areas of Punjab (a province of Pakistan). These teachers used
vernacular (Punjabi – a language spoken in Punjab province of Pakistan) as medium
of instruction or Urdu (Pakistan’s national language) before the imposition of EMI
through a state order issued by Government of Punjab. It created an adverse
situation for the teachers as 94% of them were not proficient enough (PEELI 2013).
The importance of the motivation of teachers to use EMI became unquestionably
very important in such a situation. The study of motivation became even more
important in view of its significance for the success or failure of this policy.
NUML Journal of Critical Inquiry Vol 14 (II), Dec, 2016 ISSN 2222-5706

19
Affective response of the teachers in terms of motivation and willingness
to use English as Medium of Instruction (EMI) was elicited on a scale
(questionnaire) designed through the combination of AMTB (Attitude Motivation
Test Battery) and WTC after necessary adaptation. The aim was to confirm the
existence of a direct path from motivation (measured on the scales of Socio-
educational model) to Willingness to Communicate following a study by Yashima
(2002). Both the models were synthesized for the purpose of this study following
an existing tradition (see e.g. MacIntyre & Charos 1996; Yashima, 2002;
Hashimoto, 2002 etc).
Language motivation, in Socio-educational model, is typically subdivided
into 6 constructs (see Gardner, 2010) each of which is designed to cover a distinct
dimension of motivation. These constructs are used in a standardized scale named
Attitude Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) developed and evolved in the research
conducted using this framework for more than last fifty years. Following were the
constructs selected for this study from the socio-educational model;
1. Interest in Foreign Languages (IFL)
2. Desire to Learn English Language (DLEL)
3. Attitude towards English as Medium of Instruction (ATEMI)
4. Anxiety (ANX)
In WTC model the construct WTC is used as an outcome or effect of Language
Apprehension (that equals Gardner’s anxiety in its conceptualization) and Self-
Perceived Communicative Competence. In this study anxiety to use EMI has been
taken as a construct common between both the models while Linguistic Self-
Confidence (LSC) has been used as a replacement for Self-Perceived
Communicative Competence in view of its suitability to the context of the study. It
is because the participants of the study go through the experience of learning
English language with the focus solely on literacy skills while the Oracy skills are
completely ignored. Therefore, asking about their Self-Perceived Communicative
Competence would make no sense which is considered to be the measure of the
evaluation of one’s own ability to communicate (orally) in a given situation using
target language. Linguistic Self-Confidence, on the other hand, stands distinct by
involving just confidence in one’s ability to be a successful language learner
(Gardner 2010) rather than ability to communicate in the given language. English
Language Learning Experience (ELLE) was included as an extra construct to see
how far it could possibly fit in the adapted model. It was done in response to the
proclaimed adaptability of the Socio-educational model (see e.g. Gardner, 2010).
The context of this study differs from the preceding ones in the following respects:
1. The participants of this study were under-proficient or non-proficient
teachers who were made to use English language as medium of instruction
while teaching English as a school subject or other content subjects. Earlier

20
studies, on the other hand, were typically conducted on language learners
undergoing a formal language learning process.
2. This study measured affective response of the participants towards English in
its particular status as medium of instruction in contrast to the earlier studies
which dealt with the affective response towards English as a language in
general.
1.1. Objectives of the Study
Following were the objectives of this study;
1. To identify the relationship between the constructs selected for this study.
2. To know the extent to which the selected motivational constructs predict WTC.
3. To determine a gross-causative effect of the motivational factors from Socio-
educational model on WTC
4. To see significance of the causative effect of ELLE as an extra variable on
motivation and WTC.
1.2. Research Questions
Q. 1. To what degree do the motivational constructs taken from socio-educational
model i.e. Interest in Foreign Languages, Desire to Learn English Language,
Instrumentality and Attitude towards English as Medium of Instruction cause
Willingness to Communicate?
Q. 2. How does English Language Learning Experience (ELLE) relate to Motivational
constructs taken from socio-educational model and to Willingness to Communicate
in English (WTCE) adapted from WTC model?
Q. 3. To what extent can a path from motivation (as an aggregate of the variables
adapted from Gardner’s socio-educational model) to WTC, as hypothesized by
Yashima (2002) - in distinction to the one hypothesized by MacIntyre and Charos
(1994) as well as Hashimoto (2002) i.e. from WTC to motivation - be
established/confirmed through empirical data?
2. Literature Review
Motivation is seen as one of the core predictors of achievement in L2
learning. It is given importance at par with the most important factors of individual
difference in L2 learning. It is considered as significant a factor as language
aptitude or intelligence in predicting achievement in L2 as well as its actual use in a
given situation (Gardner, 2010). Over the last fifty years a whole plethora of
studies in the area of motivation was unleashed. It was found to be one of the
most elusive and complex constructs to deal with in research. The field was
doomed not due to the lack of theories but due to their abundance instead
(Dornyei, 1998). Despite profuse controversies existent in the literature regarding
nature, formation, causation and measurement of motivation the significance of its
role in language learning remains almost completely uncontroversial.

21
The outcome of such development and its attendant complexity was seen
in the appearance of mutually contending theories, approaches and models. The
pioneering and almost the most influential among these being the Socio-
educational model (1985) which emerged as a product of almost 25 years of
consistent research by Gardner and his colleagues. On the other hand, Willingness
to Communicate (WTC) as a construct was first studied in the context of L1. Later
on, it was transported to SL and FL situations which yielded WTC model founded
by MacIntyre (1996). Later, hybridization of these models was used by a number
of studies. The first attempt in this regard was made by the founder of WTC model
himself while working together with his colleague. In the following literature
related to the selected models has been reviewed.
2.1. Socio-educational Model
It is based on extensive studies conducted by Garner and his associates. Socio-
educational model conceived integrativeness and instrumentality as two major
reasons of motivation for second language learning while anxiety was seen as a
construct having negative effect on motivation (Gardner, 1985). Integrativeness
was identified as learner’s purpose to learn language as being the desire to be able
to have contact with the native speakers of target language while instrumental
purpose was conceived as linked with the utility of learning target language in
material terms. Attitudes were considered as predispositions towards motivated
behavior.
This model went through many phases of its development and
contribution, in this regard, was made by a lot many researchers but it maintained
its core idea that a complex of cognitive, affective and social factors which define
integrative motive predict success in second language learning (Gardner, 1985;
Gardner & MacIntyre, 1992; Gardner & Lambert, 1972; Gardner, Tremblay &
Masgoret, 1997). After a series of studies Gardner and Smythe (1975) were able to
put forth a prototype of this model. This model included four possible categories of
the characteristics related to motivated behavior inducing learning effort by the L2
learners, i.e. Motivational indices, attitudes specific to a group, characteristics
related to the course and general attitudes.
However, it was modified later by Gardner (1979) where he made a
distinction between different components essential to the study of L2 learning
motivation. These included Individual differences, the context of second language
acquisition, Social milieu and outcomes. In this version of the model he showed
attitudes affecting motivation level which in turn had an effect on language
learning achievement. He also asserted that success of the learners can be
manifested both in linguistic as well as non-linguistic consequences which would
affect attitudes and attitudes again would bear on motivation thus giving a cyclical
relationship between attitudes, motivation and achievement. The model has gone
through a number of revisions and explanations (Gardner, 1985; Gardner, 2001;
Gardner & MacIntyre, 1993; Gardner, 2006; Gardner, 2010).

22
In spite of the fact that the findings of Gardner and his colleagues
corresponded to the experiences of language learners in most of the cases many
researchers (Crookes & Schmidt, 1991; Dornyei, 1994; Oxford & Shearin, 1994)
showed their interest to include variables from educational psychology in the
framework of second language learning research. In order to respond to this
demand Tremblay and Gardner (1995) added some new variables related to
motivation like self-efficacy, expectancy, valence, goal setting and causal
attribution in the consideration of the construct of motivation. After this the
relationship among these variables was examined through Gardner’s socio-
educational model developed in 1985. How the measures in psychology developed
through other models fit into the studies conducted through socio-educational
model became a focus of investigation and it was found that many of these
variables coming from other models mediated the relationship between attitudes
and motivational behavior established in socio-educational model. The most
important mediators among these were found to be valence, goal salience and
self-efficacy. It was shown that specification of goals and then frequent references
to the goals had a positive effect on motivation. Self-efficacy was found to be
influenced by language attitudes and then influenced motivational behavior in its
turn.
2.2. Willingness to Communicate (WTC)
It is believed that the origin of the construct of Willingness to Communicate (WTC)
can be traced to the literature on interpersonal communication more specifically
from the work of Burgoon (1976) giving idea of unwillingness to communicate. The
idea was followed by McCroskey and Richmond (1987, 1991) later who assumed a
regular pattern existing in the avoidance of communication and other tactics
through which an individual devalued the act of communication. They traced the
causes of avoidance of communication to both the social and individual factors.
However, the major contribution was yet to be made by MacIntyre (1998) who
conceptualized WTC in his famous heuristic model more typically known as
pyramid model. In this model, he organized the diversity of factors influencing
second language WTC. The model captures a wide range of intrapersonal,
intergroup, communication, linguistic and situational factors which contribute in
the ultimate decision to either communicate in second language or desist doing so.
After entering into the arena of language related studies WTC was
primarily used as a construct related to communication in L1. It was seen as the
tendency of individuals to involve or keep from communicating in L1 when they
were free for both the choices (McCroskey & Baer, 1985). It was believed that
people generally differ in their communication behavior regardless of the
language. Some are very talkative while others reticent and people vary in their
communication behavior while talking to different people, an individual feels free
and talks much with some while to others s/he is reserved. It was conceived that
WTC is a construct based on personality which happens to be very consistent with

23
an individual so far as their communication behavior is concerned (McCroskey &
Baer, 1985; McCroskey & Richmond, 1987, 1991).
MacIntyre (1994) discovered perceived communicative competence and
communication apprehension as the two most important antecedents of WTC.
Then it was found through other researches that L1 WTC could incorporate both
trait (stable) and state (transient) properties of WTC (MacIntyre, Babin, & Clément,
1999). MacIntyre and Charos (1996) used a combination of both the socio-
educational model by Gardner (1985) and the path model by MacIntyre (1994) in
order to study the influence of personality variables, attitudes and motivational
variables on L2 communication and it was justified that WTC construct is applicable
to SLA contexts. It was proposed that L2 communication was dependent both on
situational as well as enduring influences which means that WTC encompasses
both trait-like as well as situation-based influences. WTC was conceptualized as “a
readiness to enter into discourse at a particular time with a specific person or
persons, using a L2” (MacIntyre et al. 1998, p. 547).
2.3. Synthesizing Socio-Educational and WTC Models
It can be easily seen from the literature reviewed in the previous sections that the
field of language motivation has been fertile so far as studies in this area are
concerned. A number of theories have developed over time through a lot of
research conducted in the field. Many studies have been conducted by combining
socio-educational model of Gardner and WTC model of MacIntyre. In this case, the
first step was taken by MacIntyre and Charos (1996) who combined Gardner’s
model with MacIntyre’s (1994) path model to see whether the factors of
attitudinal motivation used in socio-educational model bear any effect on L2
communication or not and it was found that WTC model applies to the situations
of SLA as well as to the situations of L2 communication.
Yashima (2002) combined both of these models in a research on Japanese
students with the aim to examine the relationship between L2 learning motivation
and its use for communication. It was found in this study through structural
equation modeling that motivation, as conceived in socio-educational model,
influences self-confidence of communication in L2 which in turn affects willingness
to communicate in the target language. Kim (2005) conducted a study with a
similar framework to examine the effect of other affective variables on willingness
to communicate among Korean students. The study was conducted on university
students and it was found that the measure of these students on WTC scale was a
strong predictor of the performance of these students in English.
The link of language learning motivation with WTC has been confirmed
through many researches. Some researchers find that it plays a role in merely
extending the construct of motivation (Dörnyei & Skehan 2003). It was seen as
only a new angle provided to look at language motivation study by MacIntyre,
MacMaster and Baker (2004). They found in a study based on factor analysis that

24
L2 learning motivation was strongly correlated to L2 WTC. Dornyei and his
associates (Dörnyei & Kormos, 2000; Kormos & Dörnyei, 2004) used WTC as a
background variable in their research on language motivation.
Socio-educational model has been applied to many WTC researches but
the results have not been uniform in all the cases. The paths postulated by
MacIntyre and Charos (1996) in their study based on Clament’s contextual model
were not statistically supported. Similarly in the study by Yashima (2002) which
was conducted following MacIntyre et al.’s (1998) model the hypothesized direct
path from language learning motivation to L2 WTC was found missing in the model
developed through structural equation modeling. This relationship was not
confirmed in some of the qualitative studies as well (Kang, 2005).
However, the studies conducted by Hashimoto (2002) show converse
results. In a study in Japan on 56 students a significant path was confirmed leading
from L2 WTC to language learning motivation or motivation as conceived in
Gardner’s model. Structural equation modeling was used in this study to identify
the existing path. Some studies by MacIntyre and associates (MacIntyre et al.,
2002, 2003), which are very important in providing ground to the current study
dealt with motivation and L2 WTC in immersion programs. A significant correlation
was found between integrative motivation and WTC in these researches. The
inconsistent findings may be attributed to varying contexts of the studies and
different socio-cultural as well as academic backgrounds involved in the studies
conducted in different environments.
Gardner’s model must be given credit in terms of its accommodative
capability and expandability. Many researches, over time, have been conducted
which introduced different variables to see their impact on other constructs within
the model (see Gardner 2010). In various ways researchers conducted their studies
using this model. The constructs and variables used in this model were tested for
their correlations in different frameworks guided by socio-educational model. New
variables were also included and the resulting models were put to tests for their
structural validity through Amos in structural equation modeling which proved the
adaptability and viability of this model see (for example Hashimoto, 2002;
MacIntyre & Charos, 1996; Yashima, 2002).
3. Research Method
The study was based on survey design involving quantitative methods. The
survey was conducted across the Punjab province. Six districts were selected
purposively from the list provided in a report published by SPDC (Social Policy and
Development Center) wherein all the districts were ordered on the basis of their
HDI (Human Development Index) ranking. For the purpose of selection, the list was
divided into three groups i.e. the top 11, the middle 11 and the bottom 12. Then,
two districts were selected from each of the groups following the convenience
technique to conduct the survey.

25
3.1. Sampling and Population
Multi-stage sampling technique was followed in this study. At the first stage
districts were divided into three groups on the basis of their HDI ranking
systematically. Then following convenience technique two districts were selected
from each of the groups. After that, schools were selected from the rural areas of
these districts again on convenience basis. In the last stage, purposive sampling
technique was followed in selecting those teachers who were either teaching
through EMI at the time or had had the experience of teaching through EMI. One
hundred questionnaires were distributed among teachers from each of the
selected districts. A total of 600 questionnaires were distributed out of which 407
were returned by the participants. Thus, size of the sample for this study was 407.
All the teachers of secondary school level in the rural areas of Punjab who were
teaching or had taught through EMI were considered the population of this study.
3.2. Instrumentation
AMTB and WTC measurement scales were adapted to suite this study. It was done
through selection of relevant constructs and selection - as well as adaptation - of
the items used to operationalize the constructs in these scales by modifying
wording of the items so as to suit the participants in the particular situation
involved in this study. It was also done by introducing new items where necessary.
The questionnaire thus designed had 57 close-ended items with seven point likert
scale (as suggested by Gardner 2010) which ranged from strongly agree to strongly
disagree. WTC scale was adapted by converting anticipated frequency of using
English to communicate from percentage scale to 7-point likert scale. The
percentage scale ranged between 0% chances to 100% chances of using English
while the scale constructed for the study ranged between chances of using English
always to that of using it never. The reliability coefficient of the designed
questionnaire was determined as 0.81 on Cronbach Alpha scale. Cronbach alpha
value of the individual subscales on the questionnaire is as under:
Table 1: Cronbach Alpha values of subscales of the questionnaire
Constructs Cronbach’s Alpha
IFL (Interest in Foreign Languages) .76
DLEL (Desire to Learn English Language) .70
INST (Instrumentality) .75
ELLE (English Language Learning Experience) .72
ATEMI (Attitude Towards English as Medium of Instruction) .46
ANX (Anxiety) .75
LSC (Linguistic Self-Confidence) .44
WTCE (Willingness to Communicate in English) .85

26
3.3. Data Analysis
SPSS version 21.0 was used for statistical analysis of the survey data. Similarly,
Amos version 21.0 was used for analysis through Structural Equation Modeling
(SEM).
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Correlation and Regression Analysis
The equation in the following represents the model that was initially tested for
fitness.
𝑌 = 𝛽0 + 𝛽1𝑋1 + 𝛽2𝑋2 + 𝛽3𝑋3 + 𝛽4𝑋4 + 𝛽5𝑋5 + 𝛽6𝑋6 + 𝛽7𝑋7 + 𝜖
Where:
𝑌 = WTCE (Willingness to Communicate in English)
𝑋1 = IFL (Interest in Foreign Languages)
𝑋2= DLEL (Desire to Learn English Language)
𝑋3 = INST (Instrumentality)
𝑋4 = ELLE (English Language Learning Experience)
𝑋5= ATEMI (Attitude towards English as Medium of Instruction)
𝑋6 =ANX (Anxiety)
𝑋7 = LSC (Linguistic Self-Confidence)
So the above equation can be stated as;
Willingness to Communicate in English = 𝛽0 + 𝛽1Interest in Foreign Languages +
𝛽2Desire to Learn English Language + 𝛽3Instrumentality +
𝛽4English Language Learning Experience +
𝛽5Attitude towards English as Medium of Instruction + 𝛽6Anxiety +
𝛽7Linguistic Self − Confidence + 𝜖
Correlation Structure
Table 2: Correlation Statistics
WTCE IFL DLEL INST ELLE ATEMI ANX LSC
WTCE 1 .102 .037 .283 .217 .316 .190 .238
IFL .102 1 .551 .308 .295 .089 -.219 .292
DLEL .037 .551* 1 .386 .428 .018 -.282 .363
INST .283* .308* .368* 1 .367 .170 .088 .276

27
ELLE .217* .295* .428* .367* 1 .088 .054 .426
ATEMI .316* .089 .018 .170 .088 1 -.126 .126
ANX .190 -.219 -.282* .088 .054 -.126 1 .031
LSC .238* .292* .363* .276* .426* .126 .031 1
The above table shows the correlation structure of the model. A phenomenon of
weak multicolinearity can be observed here. Both the regression and correlation
analysis are related as both describe the relationship among the variables.
Coefficient of correlation indicates the linear association found between two
variables while regression, on the other hand, shows how and to what extent one
variable influences the other. Correlation coefficient has value between -1 to +1
where the former indicates a perfectly negative linear association between two
variables whereas the later indicates a perfectly positive linear association.
However, in case of zero value a complete absence of correlation is concluded.
Both, regression and correlation are not used to indicate and measure cause and
effect relationship. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is used for this purpose.
It can be seen that there are seven correlations which are insignificant. The
first among these is between WTCE and DLEL (.037), the second is between IFL and
ATEMI (.089), the third between DLEL and ATEMI (.018), the fourth between ELLE
and ATEMI (.088), the fifth between INST and ANX (.088), the sixth between ELLE
and ANX (.054) and the seventh between LSC and ANX (.031). Here again tendency
consolidates the findings whereby a gap was identified as the distinction between
English language in general and English as medium of instruction. People have
positive attitude towards English in general and have motivation to learn and
develop it. They are even wishful of using it but to grapple with it as medium of
instruction is seen to be problematic by them and they have shown a low level of
motivation and attitudinal positivity. As it is evident from the table that all the
weak correlations are between the constructs where one presents English as
language in general while the other presents it as medium of instruction.
The first insignificant correlation can be identified between Desire to Learn
English Language (DLEL) and Willingness to Communicate in English (WTCE). It is
because the situations identified in WTCE naturally involve English as medium of
instruction in most of the items while desire to learn English includes items which
measure the desire to learn English as a language in general and not as medium of
instruction. Similarly, Interest in Foreign Languages (IFL) as a construct has
insignificant correlation with WTCE for the same reason as well as all the rest of
the measures (variables) mentioned in the preceding paragraph.

28
Co-linearity Diagnostics
Table 3: Co-linearity Diagnostics
Variable VIF Tolerance
IFL 1.7 .59
DLEL 2.0 .51
INST 1.4 .70
ELLE 1.6 .64
ATEMI 1.1 .92
ANX 1.3 .77
LSC 1.3 .74
The table above shows variance inflation factor (VIF) and tolerance statistics which
are used to check the strength of multicolinearity. As all the VIF values are below 5,
and above 1 it can be concluded that there exists weak multicolinearity. It
indicates that the variables used in this study, though related to each other, are, at
the same time, sufficiently distinguished from each other. It means that all the
variables used in this study measure same phenomenon from distinguished points
of reference or various dimensions.
Coefficient of Regression
Table 4: Regression statistics
Variable Coefficient Standard Error T Statistic P-Value
IFL .159 .075 2.119 .035
DLEL -.173 .093 -1.868 .063
INST .444 .103 4.304 0.000
ELLE .172 .105 1.628 .1
ATEMI .707 .102 6.967 0.000
ANX .347 .079 4.401 0.000
LSC .667 .190 3.507 0.001
Constant 3.594 4.908 .732 .464
Using the table above, regression equation can be stated as under:

29
𝑌
̂ = 3.594 + .159𝐼𝐹𝐿 − .173𝐷𝐿𝐸𝐿 + .444𝐼𝑁𝑆𝑇 + .172𝐹𝐿𝐿𝐸 + .707𝐴𝑇𝐸𝑀𝐼
+ .347𝐴𝑁𝑋 + .667𝐿𝑆𝐶
Regression coefficient shows the extent to which a dependent variable
changes/varies in response to the change in independent variable/s. P-Value of the
given variable shows the level of the significance of any independent variable.
Using P-values, it can be concluded that one constant term is not affecting WTCE
significantly while all the other variables have a highly significant influence on the
dependent variable except ELLE which is significant up to only 10%. It means that
in response to a complete change in ELLE, only 1/10th
of the WTCE will be changed.
DLEL is another variable with its P-Value above .05. The possible reason of it can be
the orientation of DLEL which covers desire to learn English from a general
perspective and not specifically as medium of instruction. However, all the other
variables have their value < .05 which shows that they significantly influence the
dependent variable i.e. WTCE.
Diagnostics
Table 5: Regression Coefficient
Indicator Statistic P-value (if any)
𝑹𝟐 .318 -
Adjusted 𝑹𝟐 .306 -
Durbin Watson 1.9 -
Regression Mean Square 2834.298 .000
As P-value of regression mean square is less than 0.05, the model is best fit.
However, 𝑹𝟐
and Adjusted 𝑹𝟐
are very low explaining only 31 to 32 percent of
variation. It means that independent variables have been found to explain only 31
to 32 percent of the variation in the dependent variable while the remaining
variation is explained by other factors. It is due to the variables/constructs dealing
with English language in general. As regression is best fit and coefficients are
significant also correlations among independent variables are very low, variance
inflation factor is near 1 in most cases. We can interpret our regression coefficient
as under.
Interpretation of Regression Coefficient
1) When IFL increases by one score, WTCE will increase by .159 scores on
average.
2) When DLEL increases by one score, WTCE will decrease by .173 scores on
average.

30
3) When INST increases by one score, WTCE will increase by .444 scores on
average.
4) When ELLE increases by one score, WTCE will increase by .172 scores on
average.
5) When ATEMI increases by one score, WTCE will increase by .707 scores on
average.
6) When ANX increases by one score, WTCE will increase by .347 scores on
average.
7) When LSC increases by one score, WTCE will increase by .667 scores on
average.
The interpretation of coefficients above shows that IFL, DLEL and ELLE group
together in having low regression value for the dependent variable i.e. WTCE. It is
interesting to note that all these three variables measure the affective response of
the participants towards English as a language in general and not English as
medium of instruction. On the other hand it can be found that the other four
variables eliciting response towards English as Medium of Instruction show a high
regression value on WTCE. These variables explain above 50% of the variation in
dependent factor (WTCE) which is highly significant.
4.2. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
Structural equation modeling (SEM) is also known as analysis of covariance
structures, or causal modeling (Arbuckle & Wothke, 1999). It is a statistical
methodology through which conceptualized models are verified and/or paths
confirmed. It is tested through this how far the hypothesized paths – of cause-
effect relationship are coinciding with the data driven paths. Analysis through
structural equation modeling have, been given in the following.
Model Fit No 1
Table 6: Analysis through Structural Equating Model
Indicator Statistic ( P- Value)
Chi- SQ 2.245 (.325)
CMIN 2.245 (.325)
GFI .998
AGFI .983
CFI .999
PCFI .200
RMSEA 0.017 (.620)

31
Above table shows some indicator relating model fit.
 P – Value for chi-square and CMIN indicates that our model is best fit.
 GFI, AGFI, CFI and PCFI also indicating good fitting
 RMSEA = 0.017 with p – value greater than 0.05 also shows best model fit.
Following is the diagram of fitted model. All the estimates are significant. * shows
significance at 10% level, ** for 5% and *** for 1%
Figure 1: Structural Equation Modeling; Path Analysis 1
The figure above shows the following:
1) Motivation (an aggregate/sum of the variables selected from Gardner’s socio-
educational model i.e. IFL, DLEL, INST, ATEMI) is a highly significant and positively
related causal factor to WTCE
2) Motivation is a highly significant causal factor to Linguistic Self-Confidence (LSC)
3) LSC is a highly significant and positively related causal factor to WTCE
4) English Language Learning Experience (ELLE) is a highly significant and positively
related causal factor to Motivation
5) ELLE is a significant and positively related Causal factor to LSC
6) Anxiety shows an insignificant value as a causal factor to LSC
7) Anxiety is a highly significant and negatively related causal factor to motivation
MOTV
ELLE ANX
WTCE
LSC
.48***
.652***
-
.792***
.143*
.038
.664**
*
.198**

32
Motivation has been found to be significant cause of WTCE (as can be seen
in the figure). However, it can be noted that motivation exercises greater influence
on WTCE indirectly through LSC. ELLE is found to have its highest influence
indirectly through motivation as in the other figure it can be found that ELLE
remains completely insignificant in its direct influence on WTCE. This trend shown
by ELLE serves as answer to research question no 5. Anxiety also shows its indirect
relationship with WTCE as found in earlier studies by MacIntyre and Charos (1996)
and Hashimoto (2002). However, the path followed by Anxiety in this study is not
through LSC as was expected if it were in line with earlier studies. Instead, it is
through motivation which shows that higher the anxiety lower will be the
attitudinal motivation (as MacIntyre 2001, would call it) which will lead to lower
level of WTCE. This part provides answer to the research question no 6.
However, English Language Learning Experience has proved to be a very
important factor in defining motivation on the scales introduced by Gardner (1979,
1985, 2006 & 2010). Nakata (2006) through empirical studies proved Language
Learning Experience as an important construct in defining or measuring language
motivation which has been confirmed through this research. ELLE has shown a
highly significant influence in causing motivation.
Thus it can be concluded that those having good learning experience in any
language (English in this case) are expected to show a relatively higher level of
motivation to move further in learning that language. However, ELLE has not
shown to be a direct cause of WTCE. These findings with regard to ELLE provide
answer to research question no 5. Thus, the path hypothesized by Yashima (2002)
(from motivation to WTC) that was found not confirmed; has been confirmed in
this study as an answer to research question no 4 in this study.
Model Fit No 2
Table 7:
Indicator Statistic ( P- Value)
Chi- SQ 1.358 (.244)
CMIN 1.358 (.244)
GFI .999
AGFI .977
CFI .999
PCFI .067
RMSEA 0.030 (.452)
Above table shows some indicator relating model fit.

33
 P – Value for chi-square and CMIN indicates that our model is best fit.
 GFI, AGFI, CFI and PCFI also indicate good fit.
 RMSEA = 0.030 with P – value greater than 0.05 also shows best model fit.
Following is the diagram of fitted model. All the estimates are significant accept
ELLE to WTCE. * shows significance at 10% level, ** for 5% and *** for 1% level of
significance.
Figure 2: Structural Equation Modeling; Path Analysis 2
The figure above shows that;
1. The value of significance level of motivation in causing WTC has increased to
.377*** after exclusion of DLEL in which case it was .198**.
2. DLEL is a highly significant (with the value .753***) causal factor of motivation.
3. DLEL is a completely insignificant causal factor of LSC.
4. ELLE is a completely insignificant causal factor of WTCE.
5. Anxiety has a significantly negative causal relationship with motivation but an
insignificant but positive one with LSC.
6. LSC is a highly significant positively related causal factor of WTCE.
The decrease in the value of motivation as causal factor of WTCE is due to the fact
that DLEL deals with English as a language in general. It has been noted in this
study that such factors(treating English as a language in general and not as MOI)
are weakly correlated to the variables which focus English as MOI (medium of
LSC
MOTV
ELLE
DLEL
WTCE
ANX
.034
. 603
*** -.001
.377**
*
.655**
**
-.161**
.753*
**
.097*
**
.097**
*

34
instruction), have low or insignificant regression value with them and have proved
to be poor/insignificant causes of WTCE - that also focuses English as MOI.
However, DLEL has been found to have a highly significant causal value for other
motivational factors from socio-educational model. ELLE has emerged as having no
value as direct cause of WTCE; however, it proves to be highly significant indirect
factor of influence.
ELLE has shown a highly significant causal relationship with motivational
factors taken from socio-educational model. It has also shown highly significant
correlation and regression value with the factors from socio-educational model
dealing English as a language in general. In view of all this, ELLE can be grouped, in
the first place, with the variables dealing English in general in this study while, in
the second place, with all the variables of socio-educational model as an expansion
of this model for further enquiries which can produce valuable literature as an
extension on the existing debate. Such researches would confirm theoretical
importance of Nakata’s (2006) contribution on one hand while the tenacity of
socio-educational model owing to its flexibility on the other. This last point in the
preceding discussion adds to the idea of expandability of socio-educational model
which was empirically proved by many researches over the time in this field.
Anxiety, in contrast to the study by MacIntyre and Charos (1994) and its
replication by Hashimoto (2002) does not emerge as a negatively related direct
cause of LSC which has been used as an alternative of Perceived Communicative
Competence in the already mentioned studies. However, it has been found to be a
significantly related negative cause of motivation (refer to research question no 6).
The possible reason for it can be that LSC is not an appropriate replacement of
Perceived Communicative Competence. However, such a conclusion without
further empirical evidences after necessary modifications will be too careless a
jump towards this end.
5. Findings of the Study
The results on ELLE confirm Nakata’s (2006) findings for it being a
significant construct for language motivation. However, it has been found not to be
a direct cause of willingness to communicate. ELLE can successfully be
incorporated in Socio-educational model as an expansion of it.
6. Conclusion
Motivation as a sum-total of the constructs used by Gardner in his Socio-
educational model has proved to be a significant cause of WTC. It has been found
in path analysis through Structural Equation Modeling. However, regression and
correlation analysis has provided intriguing insights into the relationship of
individual constructs to WTC. All the items designed for WTC scale treated English
as Medium of Instruction (EMI). It is interesting to note that those constructs for
which the items used in the questionnaire treated English as Medium of
Instruction proved to be far more significant causes of WTC than those where it

35
was treated as a language in general. The systematic trend in the segregation of
constructs into two groups i.e. English as a language in general and EMI proves that
language motivation is strictly specific to the situation which defines the status and
role of the language in question. Finally, the successful introduction of English
Language Learning Experience (ELLE) and other adaptations to contextualize the
study speak positively about the accommodative capacity of the selected models.
References
Burgoon, J. K. (1976). The unwillingness‐to‐communicate scale: Development and
validation. Communications Monographs, 43(1), 60-69.
Crookes, G., & Schmidt, R. W. (1991). Motivation: Reopening the research
agenda. Language learning, 41(4), 469-512.
Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom.
The modern language journal, 78(3), 273-284.
Dörnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (2000). The role of individual and social variables in oral
task performance. Language teaching research, 4(3), 275-300.
Dornyei, Z., & Skehan, P. (2003). 18 Individual Differences in Second Language
Learning.
Gardner R. C. (1979). Social Psychological aspects of second language acquisition.
In H. Giles & R. St. Clair (Eds.) Language and Social Psychology (pp. 193-220)
Oxford; Basil Blackwell.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of
attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R. C. (2006). The socio-educational model of Second Language
Acquisition: A research paradigm. Eurosla Yearbook, 6.
Gardner, R. C. (2010). Motivation and second language acquisition: the socio-
educational model (Vol. 10). Peter Lang.
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second-
language learning.
Gardner, R. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1992). A student's contributions to second
language learning. Part I: Cognitive variables. Language teaching, 25(04), 211-
220.
Gardner, R. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1993). A student's contributions to second-
language learning. Part II: Affective variables. Language teaching, 26(01), 1-11.
Gardner, R. C., & Smythe, P. C. (1975). Second language acquisition: A social
psychological approach. Department of Psychology, the University of Western
Ontario.

NUML Journal Critical Inquiry Analysis

NUML Journal Critical Inquiry Analysis

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (14)

Similar to NUML Journal Critical Inquiry Analysis

Similar to NUML Journal Critical Inquiry Analysis (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

NUML Journal Critical Inquiry Analysis