THE MISUNDERSTOOD LANGUAGE OF CARIBBEAN HINDUSTĀNĪ: CULTURAL PRESERVATION AND RETENTION THROUGH DISPELLING MISCONCEPTION

Visham bhimuLL

National Council of Indian Culture

Trinidad and Tobago

Abstract

Much of the colonial Indian diaspora, like India, have recognized Modern Standard Hindi (MSH) as the authoritative form of the Hindustani language. The nationalistic move by India to adopt the Khaṛī Bolī vernacular of Delhi as the standard of

Hindustani seemed to have been mirrored in the international Indian diaspora. In

Trinidad & Tobago (T&T), despite English being the offi cial language and Trinidad

English Creole being the lingua franca, MSH is still taught within the community

of the Indian diaspora. These efforts are in an attempt to retain any manner or

form of an ancestral language of this community for the purpose of being an ethnic

language that fulfi lls the role of cultural expression and identity. Despite this MSH

only fulfi lls a role of communication in a very small portion of the diaspora community that comprises postcolonial Indian immigrants.

However, the language and culture that came with indentured Indian immigrants

during the colonial period 1845-1917 came from a time in India when a different

philosophy and linguistic situation prevailed. The language that comprised their

expression and philosophical understanding came from a different literary era than

MSH. Thus, a problem is presented to the diaspora in the search for their identity

when they look towards present day India for answers.

If we closely examine Trinidad Hindustani as one of the vernaculars of the Hindustani of the international colonial Indian diaspora, it becomes clear that this

language, apart from being one that belongs to a completely different literary era

from MSH, it may be a different language from MSH altogether.

This paper analytically examines the various forms of expressions Trinidad Hindustani, e.g. storytelling, speech conversation, proverbs, and songs. In doing so,

the peculiarities of the language are highlighted to bring an appreciation of how it

best suits the unique culture of the colonial Indian diaspora of T&T. Indeed, MSH

has served as a substitute for this language as, unlike Trinidad Hindustani, it is

well studied, documented and has published materials from which one can learn

it. However, it comes from an Indian nationalistic perspective which differs from

the unique Uttar Pradesh/Bihar culture brought by indentured Indians. It is hoped

Conférence internationale : Langues de l’Inde en diasporas : maintiens et transmissions 343

that this research will bring a renewed view of the Hindustani of the diaspora and

would emphasize the need for documentation of the various forms of expression of

this language, for the purpose of propagation of the unique cultural identity of the

colonial Indian diaspora.

Key words: Caribbean Hindustani, Hindustani, Hindi, Trinidad Bhojpuri,

Trinidad Hindi, Trinidad, Hindustani, Language, Culture, Overseas Hindi,

chutney Music.

Résumé

Une grande partie de la diaspora indienne de l’époque coloniale, ainsi que l’Inde,

a reconnu l’hindi standard moderne (MSH) comme modèle authentique pour la

langue hindoustani. Cette décision de l’Inde d’adopter le Khari Boli, langue vernaculaire de Delhi, comme le standard de l’hindoustani semble se refléter dans la

diaspora indienne internationale. À Trinidad et Tobago (T&T), malgré que l’anglais

soit la langue officielle et que le créole à base anglaise de Trinidad soit la « lingua

franca », le MSH est toujours enseigné dans la communauté de la diaspora indienne.

Cependant, la langue et la culture qui arrivèrent avec les travailleurs engagés

indiens pendant la période coloniale 1845-1917 venaient d’une époque où une philosophie et une situation linguistique différentes prévalaient en Inde. Par conséquent,

un problème se pose à la diaspora en recherche d’identité lorsqu’elle se tourne vers

l’Inde actuelle pour obtenir des réponses.

Ce document analyse les différentes formes d’expression de l’hindoustani de

Trinidad et met en lumière les particularités de la langue afin de montrer comment elles s’adaptent au mieux à la culture unique de la diaspora indienne de T&T.

Bien sûr, le MSH a servi de remplaçant car, contrairement à l’hindoustani de Trinidad, il est bien étudié, documenté et de nombreuses publications permettent de

l’apprendre. Toutefois, il correspond à une perspective nationale indienne qui est

différente de la culture propre à l’Uttar Pradesh/Bihar apportée par les travailleurs

engagés indiens. Nous espérons que cette recherche suscitera une approche renouvelée de l’hindoustani de la diaspora et soulignera le besoin de documentation sur

les différentes formes d’expression de cette langue, afin d’assurer la diffusion de

cette identité culturelle unique de la diaspora indienne de l’époque coloniale.

Mots-clés: hindoustani caribéen, hindoustani, hindi, bhojpuri trinidadien,

hindi trinidadien, hindoustani, langue, culture, hindi d’outremer, musique

chutney.

The terms Hindī and Hindustānī present a conundrum, not only to the colonial

Indian diaspora, but to the nation of present day India itself. In the time of

Amīr Khusrow, the renowned Sufi mystic and poet of the 13th-14th century AD,

the adjective Hindī, or more often Hindavī (Hinduī), was often used. It was

derived from the Persian noun “Hind” which is a cognate for the word “Sindh”

the Sanskrit name for the Indus River. After the Islamic conquest of the Indian

subcontinent, the adjective Hindavī was used by the Mughal aristocracy to

describe the people, culture and language of their new empire in the land

Visham Bhimull

344

International Conference : Indian Languages in Diasporas : Retention and Transmission

beyond the Indus River (amrit 1984). Naturally, during the time of the Mughal

empire, the language of the Hindūs, Hindavī, was in direct contact with the

heavily Arabicized Persian of the Muslim ruling class, and the reciprocity

of influence was indespensible (bahri 1960). Out of this interaction, was

metamorphosed a language, that was referred to as Hindustānī by the British

during their decades of westward conquest of Hindustān. In fact, the word

“Hindustānī” was another adjective, this time a designation by the British,

for anything of, or from Hindustān (The Place of the Hindūs). This language

that was encountered by the British as the lingua franca on the North Indian

subcontinent during the 18th-19th century AD, had different designations in

the various strata of society. In the Mughal court it was called Rextā (mixed

language), in the army it was called Urdū-Ē-Zabān (the language of the camp),

and among the hoi polloi it was known as Hindustānī, the language of the

people of Hindustān.

During the period of the westward British conquest of Hindustān, from

Calcutta to Delhi, slavery was abolished. This resulted in the loss of cheap

labor on the agricultural estates of many European colonies all over the world.

As the British were gradually gaining control over Hindustān, they also gained

control of the human resource in this slowly expanding new colony. The use

of Indians as a cheap source of labor was an all too ingenious idea to fill the

void that was left on the estates by the freedom of African slaves. During the

period of 1833-1920, about 3.5 million Indians emigrated from Hindustān,

under a contract system of Indentureship, to work on the agricultural estates in

European colonies worldwide. The places of immigration included Mauritius,

Fiji, South Africa, Suriname, Guyana and the Caribbean. This exodus of

Indian emigrants from the South Asian subcontinent saw the transplantation

of a resilient ancient culture and its dynamic language, that have endured even

to today on these erstwhile colonies.

The pattern of recruitment that was influenced by the westward move

of the British was rather interesting. This pattern was evident in the language spoken by the Indentured Laborers and their descendants. In all

the colonies, the majority of laborers referred to the language they spoke

as Hindustānī. However, despite being mutually intelligible, the variety of

Plantation Hindustānī that developed on each estate did differ to some extent.

In addition to being influenced by unique circumstances on each colony, this

was also largely due to the fact that, earlier on, in the indentureship period,

the British was only limited to recruits from south and west Bihār. Later,

as the empire expanded westward, recruits began also being sourced from

eastern and central United Provinces (modern Uttar Pradesh or U.P.). Hence,

the Hindustānī spoken on the estates, Plantation Hindustānī, in places where

laborers were brought earlier during indentureship, like Mauritius, Guyana,

The Misunderstood Language of Caribbean Hindustānī

Conférence internationale : Langues de l’Inde en diasporas : maintiens et transmissions

345

and Trinidad, had a heavier Bihārī flavor. The colonies that received laborers

later on, like Suriname and Fiji, had a Plantation Hindustānī of the U.P. style.

East Indian indentureship in Trinidad lasted from 1845 to 1917. During that

period, 147,592 Indian immigrants were brought to the shores of Trinidad.

The majority of emigrants left from the port of Calcutta, the then British

capital of Hindustān. Hugh Tinker reports that, from 1845 to 1860, many

recruits comprised the Hill Coolies of the Chota Nagpur Plateau, formally

part of the state of Bihār. A small number of recruits left from the southern

part of Madras (mohan 1978). As the British expanded to the west, recruits

were then sourced from the Gangetic plains. This started with western Bihār

and then expanded into eastern and central UP. Hindustānī was the language

the majority claimed to have spoken.

Here, the conundrum rears its ugly head, creating fodder for misrepresentation. In modern day India, the term Hindustānī refers to a pluricentric language with two official standard forms, Modern Standard Hindi (MSH) and

Modern Standard Urdu (MSU). These terms only consolidated after the partition of Hindustān into India and Pakistan, and the declaration of both countries

being separate independent nations in 1947. This would have been roughly a

century after Indian indentureship started in Trinidad. From this modern definition of the term Hindustānī, one can infer that Plantation Hindustānī or the

Hindustānī of the diaspora are just dialects of MSH. In fact, in modern times,

MSH is seen to be the formal and authoritative vernacular of Hindustānī, the

shining glory and bearer of Indian national cultural heritage. On the other

hand, the Hindustānī varieties of the diaspora, like Trinidad Hindustānī, are

viewed as broken and corrupted forms of MSH and exist as flickering flames

on the verge of being extinguished. However, MSH only began reaching its

pinnacle as the standard variety of Hindustānī about thirty years after the

commencement of Indentureship. This fact calls into question the notion that

the various varieties of Hindustānī in the diaspora are derived from MSH (rai

1984). Interestingly, in T&T, the literature handed down from the indentured

immigrants to their descendants was not verses in MSH. In Trinidad, ever

popular and alive are the verses of Tulsīdās’ Rāmcharitramānas in Avadhi, the

Kṛṣnā poems of Surdās and Mīrā Bai in BrajBhāṣā, and the mystic Bhōjpurī

compositions of Kabīr. These literary works date back to the Bhakti Movement

of India around the 14th-17th century AD and represent earlier literary standards of Hindustānī. Around that era, the vernacular of MSH was hardly cultivated as a literary language. This means that the linguistic situation in the

colony of Hindustān during Indentureship was different from present day

India. The term Hindustānī, may not have had the same definition during that

period, as the references of the standard vernacular of the language would have

been different. The communal conflict which lead to the Partition of India

Visham Bhimull

346

International Conference : Indian Languages in Diasporas : Retention and Transmission

and Pakistan in 1947, thirty years after Indentureship ended, involved much

change in the religious and political ideology and philosophy in Hindustān.

This change was represented in many facets in Indian expression, but one of

the aspects in which it was most evident was the language.

The vernacular known as MSH was actually derived from the dialect of

Hindustānī in and around the capital of New Delhi, an area in the proximity

to the seat of power, both of the Mughal and the British Empires. This vernacular is known as Khaṛī Bōlī (established speech). Its rise to power is a

rather complex story. Straddling its stream of development the two standards.

MSH on one end and MSU on the other. Their relative centers of gravity being

the Hindū community and Islamic community respectively. The evolutions

of these two varieties as the standard registers of Hindustānī in the modern

times, was heavily influenced by the direction of the expansion of the British

sovereignty and their imperial policy of “divide and rule”. However, it is

noteworthy at this point to mention that Khaṛī Bōlī was hardly cultivated as

written language during the medieval period. In fact, poetry in Khaṛī Bōlī did

not appear until the last quarter of the 19th century. Before the rise of Khaṛī

Bōlī, the literary dialects of Hindī were the ones adopted by the Bhakti saints:

BrajBhāṣā (Kṛṣhnā devotees), Avadhī (adopted by Rāma devotees) and Maithilī

(Vaiṣṇavaites of Bihār) (bahri 1960). The prime style of literary Hindustānī

from the late fifteenth century onwards was the western variety of Braj Bhaṣā

from the Braj area to the south east of Delhi. These related the story of the

escapades and adventures of the Hindū mythological figure Kṛṣhnā. It was

not until the closing decades of the 19th century that Braj Bhaṣā, and not the

neighbouring Khaṛī Bōlī, was meant by the designation of the term “Hindī”

Patronage towards its cultivation as a literary standard was received by the

local Mughal capital of Agra in this Braj area. More easterly was the Mughal

capital of Lucknow in the Avadh region, the location of the Rāma myth, that

gave patronage to the eastern variety of Hindustānī known as Avadhī. In

this vernacular, was written the Rāmacharitramānas of the 16th century poet

Tulsīdās, which is still regarded as forming the crowning glory of the whole

of Hindī literature (ShackLe & SneLL 1990). The conquest by the British from

Calcutta in the east to Delhi in the west over the 18th-20th Centuries did much

to influence the linguistic situation in India. The standards of BrajBhaṣā and

Avadhī of the old Mughal capitals were superseded by the Khaṛī Bōlī dialect

of Delhi, the new Capital of the British Raj from 1911 onwards. The turning

point was after the establishment of the Fort William College by the British

at Calcutta in 1800 to impart some knowledge of Indian languages to British

officials and young servants of the British East India Company. Around this

time, prose works neither existed in Hindī nor Urdū. Neither varieties had

prose traditions of any importance (kinG 1994). At this institution, it is said

The Misunderstood Language of Caribbean Hindustānī

Conférence internationale : Langues de l’Inde en diasporas : maintiens et transmissions

347

that the genesis of writings in Khaṛī Bōlī took place, and the first important

expressions of differentiation of the two variants of this vernacular, Hindī and

Urdū also began here (kinG 1994). The drive towards this change was also fueled by the replacement of Persian in the courts of justice by provincial standard vernaculars. This meant that from the start of Indentureship, KhaṛīBōlī

would have started its climb towards becoming an authoritative standard.

However, it only reached respectability in full during the 1920’s (kinG 1994),

some years after Indentureship ended. Because of this lack of antiquity in

Khaṛī Bōl īHindī’s literary tradition, supporters and historians of MSH of the

19th and 20th centuries include the older literary traditions of BrajBhaṣā and

Avadhī, and other regional standards in the discussion of “Hindī literature” of

the more distant past. However, when discussing the literature of more recent

and the present, they largely ignore these other traditions in favor of Khaṛī

Bōlī. Thus, the myth of the antiquity of “Hindī” literature masks the reality

that Khaṛī Bōlī literature lagged far behind from the vernaculars understood

to be standard varieties of Hindustānī by the indentured Indian immigrants.

We can now make the statement that the Hindustānī spoken by East Indian

indentured laborers belonged to a time when a dynamic linguistic change

was taking place in the former British colony of Hindustān. It would follow

that, the understanding of the linguistic term Hindustānī, handed down by

the laborers to their descendants in the present day Indian diaspora, as in

erstwhile colonies like Trinidad, would have been one from that pre-partition linguistic situation in Hindustān. During the period of Indentureship in

Trinidad, the Indians recruited spoke a fragmented spread of dialects of a

language they called Hindustānī. To get a better understanding of the spread

of vernaculars they spoke, and which ones mostly contributed and influenced

the Hindustānī that was developed on the estates (Plantation Hindustānī),

we must now look, even more closely, at the areas in Hindustān from where

they were recruited. According to Tinker, in the earlier part of Indentureship

(1845-1860) they were recruited mostly from Hazārībāgh and Choṭānāgpur

of the Chota Nagpur Plateau, formerly the southwestern part of Bihār. These

Hill Coolies spoke mostly Nagpuriā (Sadani Bhōjpūrī) and some also spoke

various tribal languages of the Astro-Asiatic language family. There were

also a few untouchables who departed from Madras and spoke the Dravidian

language of Tamil. However, from about 1857, as the British expanded westwards, recruits were sourced from the Gangetic plains in the areas of western

Bihār and eastern UP. From Bihār, these areas included: Muzaffarpur, Paṭnā,

Gayā, Champāran, Śahabād, Sāran and Darbhangā. From U.P. these areas

included: Gōrakhpur, Basti, Gōndā, Fyzābād, Jaunpur, Banāras, Āzamghar,

Ghāzīpur and Balliā. The spread of the vernaculars of Hindustānī over these

recruitment areas are better illustrated in Table 1.

Visham Bhimull

348

International Conference : Indian Languages in Diasporas : Retention and Transmission

Recruitment Area Dominant Hindustānī Vernacular

The ChotāNāgpur Plateau

Hazārībāgh Magahi and Tribal Austroasiatic languages

Choṭānāgpur Nagpuriā or SadaniBhōjpurī

Bihār

Muzaffarpur Maithilī

Patnā Magahī

Gayā Magahī

Champāran Standard Northern Bhōjpurī

Śahabād Standard Southern Bhōjpurī

Sāran Standard Southern Bhōjpurī

Darbhangā Maithilī

United Provinces

Gōrakhpur Standad Northern Bhōjpurī

Basti Standard Northern Bhōjpurī

Gōndā Avadhī

Fyzābād Avadhī

Jaunpur Avadhī

Banāras Standard Western Bhōjpurī

Āzamghar Standard Western Bhōjpurī

Ghazīpur Standard Western and Southern Bhōjpurī

Balliā Standard Southern Bhōjpurī

Table1

In T&T, there are no comprehensive accounts of the languages brought to

Trinidad by the Indian indentured laborers (mohan 1978). To conduct any

inquiry into this matter would prove to be very difficult for two major reasons.

Firstly, there is no substantial record of the languages to give a clear picture

of vernaculars of Hindustānī brought by the indentured laborers. Secondly, as

proven above, indentureship lasted about eight decades during a period when

the South Asian subcontinent was going through dramatic linguistic change.

Thus, the vernaculars of Hindustānī brought to Trinidad over that period,

would have been at different stages of the language evolution and development.

The data clearly points to the fact that the majority of Indian immigrants to

Trinidad were native speakers of various dialects of Bhōjpurī. This is not

The Misunderstood Language of Caribbean Hindustānī

Conférence internationale : Langues de l’Inde en diasporas : maintiens et transmissions

349

a surprising fact, as the areas where most of the Indians were recruited from

was the Bhōjpurī speaking area of North East India: the western part of Bihār,

the eastern part of U.P. and the southern, or Rānchī plateau of ChōṭāNāgpur.

This linguistic area is demonstrated in Figure 1.

Figure1. From The Origin and Development of Bhojpuri (Tiwari 1994).

The Bhōjpurī brought to Trinidad was not particularly homogenous, since

laborers were recruited from many different parts of the Bhōjpurī speaking

territory. The Bhōjpurī brought from the subcontinent was an atomized spread

of peasant dialects. The preponderance of Bhōjpurī speakers among the Indian

indentured laborers taken to Trinidad is evident, not just from an examination

of the areas from which the recruits were drawn for emigration, but also from

the striking similarities between this variety of Hindustānī widely spoken in

Trinidad and the different varieties of Bhōjpurī spoken in India. However,

as can be seen from Table 1, Bhōjpurī was not the only Indic language taken

Visham Bhimull

350

International Conference : Indian Languages in Diasporas : Retention and Transmission

to Trinidad during this period. There were some recruits from areas of U.P.

and Bihār which were directly contiguous to the Bhōjpurī speaking territory,

which resulted in smaller groups of Avadhī, Magahī and Maithilī speakers.

There is also anecdotal evidence that these languages were once spoken in

Trinidad, as well as languages from further afield, such as Bengali, Nepali

and Telugu. Similarly, the immigrants from Madras brought with Tamil other

Dravidian languages of south India (mohan 1978). The fact that Bhōjpurī was

the largest group of regional vernaculars brought to Trinidad from Hindustān,

meant it formed the “critical mass” that could make it a reasonable choice as

a link language (mohan n.d.). Its dominance resulted in these various village

dialects of Bhōjpurī crystallizing as the lingua franca of the Trinidadian Indian

diaspora with the gradual disappearance of other vernaculars of Hindustānī

brought by smaller groups of laborers from other regions outside the Bhōjpurī

area (motiLaL 1885). Tamil was the only other Indian language that survived

to some extent due to the significant numbers recruited from the untouchable

community in Tamil Nadu (mohan n.d.). But even this small community

assimilated Bhōjpurī as a necessity for communication with the rest of the

diaspora. A new community had now come into existence, centered around

Bhōjpurī that linked and identified the community. Bhōjpurī, was thus the

vernacular on which Trinidadian Plantation Hindustānī had its foundation.

Bhōjpurī, in fact, found new life in Trinidad and elsewhere in the world

through indentureship. As we saw before indentureship began shortly after

Khaṛī Bōlī began its ascent towards becoming the standard Hindustānī. Around

that time, Bhōjpurī was not a language with a center of gravity.

Figure2. The Hindi Belt or region where the varieties of Hindi in the broadest

sense are spoken Source: Hindi Bealt; Wikipedia

The Misunderstood Language of Caribbean Hindustānī

Conférence internationale : Langues de l’Inde en diasporas : maintiens et transmissions

351

Literary expression and political power were, by now, both in KhaṛīBōlī,

the first indication that this vernacular was MSH. By the time indentureship

began, Bhōjpurī was already “colonized” by MSH, rendered submissive and

menial. It was a language stunted and unable to grow as it had been cut off

at every pass by MSH (mohan n.d.). It was indeed a miracle that Bhōjpurī

survived the way it did in Trinidad. In India however, Bhōjpurī and many other

vernaculars that enjoyed their day in the sun, especially in the literary world,

had fallen to Khaṛī Bōlī as the authoritative standard, being granted the title

of MSH due to politico-linguistic developments in the modern period. This

resulted in the designation of the “Hindī Belt” that now considered vernaculars from Rajasthan to Bihār being vernaculars of MSH. This is illustrated

in Figure 2.

At the time, Indian immigrants came to Trinidad under the contract of

indentureship, such an understanding of MSH and so called vernaculars

of this perceived standard did not exist. As mentioned before, most of the

immigrants here in Trinidad and elsewhere in other colonies who came from

the northern regions of Hindustān designated their language Hindustānī. At

that time there seemed to be no linguistic differentiation between vernaculars

and even languages. The idea of differentiation of the Hindustānī language

into further subdivisions was initiated in 1898, when Sir George Grierson

was appointed superintendent of the Linguistic Survey of India. In 1903, he

began compiling all the data collected about the languages of India for the

purpose of classifying them. Some conclusions that came out of that survey

is demonstrated in Figure 3 below.

Figure3.Classification of North Indian

(Indo-Aryan Languages. Source Wikipedia)

Visham Bhimull

352

International Conference : Indian Languages in Diasporas : Retention and Transmission

Towards the end of the 19th century, Grierson noted that two distinct prose

styles had evolved out of Khaṛī Bōlī (kinG 1994). These were to become MSH

and MSU, languages that came to bear nationalistic pride after the Partition

and independence from the British. They represented politico-religious forces

within India and threatened to absorb much of the diversity of India’s rich

heritage under the banner of Indian nationalism. As an outcry to preserve

their unique identities, the language definitions and classification that came

out Grierson’s survey were utilized by the various regions of India to designate their unique linguistic and hence cultural heritage. Thus, previously

in the Bhōjpurī speaking area, during indentureship, the western Bihār and

eastern UP residents called their language Hindustānī . Those who emigrated

left behind the final stages of the linguistic conquering of Bhōjpurī to become

known as one of the vernaculars of MSH on the eastern end of the Hindī Belt.

To hold on to their Bhōjpuriyā linguistic and cultural heritage they began

calling their speech Bhōjpurī, a vernacular of the Bihārī dialect (a term coined

by Grierson) of Hindustānī, still misunderstood today as being a dialect of

MSH. A half a world away in Trinidad however, the central core of Bhōjpurī

came to life as a language still referred to as Hindustānī.

As mentioned earlier, Trinidad Hindustānī is seen to be a koine derived

from a heterogeneous mix of Hindustānī dialects of Bhōjpurī speaking

area. Thus Bhōjpurī, being the Hindustānī variety with the “critical mass”,

became the central core of Trinidad Hindustānī, and fusion of it obliterated

all other Indian languages that had come to Trinidad, and all the dialects of

Bhōjpurī outside this core (mohan n.d.). This language spoken on the estates

in Trinidad, continued to evolve after Indentureship ended in 1917, assimilating many words and grammar elements from French and English. Its evolution

yielded a variety of Hindustānī unique to Trinidad called Trinidad Hindustānī

(often also referred to as Trinidad Bhōjpurī).

During the time of Indentureship, and shortly after, Trinidad Bhōjpurī

remained within the realm of being only a spoken language, much like the

French Creole and English Creole that existed on the island. It was an ethnic

language of the Trinidad Indian diaspora, however, it was not a language

utilized for formal expression and documentation of Indian culture. Much of

the essential written material that was necessary for the community’s knowledge on Indian culture came out of India. By this time MSH was the official language in which such material was written. Many of the anthologies,

manuscripts and documents that came out of India which served to educate

the diaspora on their Indian heritage were in MSH. It is also worthy to note

that, even from the time of Indentureship many of the laborers never saw

Bhōjpurī as anything but a vernacular of MSH. The same politico-linguistic

agenda in India that saw the Hindustānī varieties of classical literary acclaim,

The Misunderstood Language of Caribbean Hindustānī

Conférence internationale : Langues de l’Inde en diasporas : maintiens et transmissions

353

such as BrajBhāṣā and Avadhī, become considered mere dialects of MSH,

also had crippled Bhōjpurī in a serious way. The indentured immigrants had

already had a notion that their speech of Bhōjpurī was not even a vernacular

of MSH, but a broken or corrupted form of it. This notion was passed on

to the descendants of these immigrants and is a major reason for it virtual

extinction in the present day.

Bhōjpurī, since much before the 19th century, has always remained an

oral tradition. It has never enjoyed great literary fame like other forms of

Hindustānī. During the time of the Linguistic Survey of India, Bhōjpurī was

classified as being part of the “Bihārī” group (see Figure 3). Grierson was

the first to use this term “Bihārī”. His reasoning for this designation differed

from the understanding of earlier scholars who called Bhōjpurī a branch of

Eastern Hindī. But this was a ground breaking idea as for the first time the

Bihārī dialects were beginning to be viewed as descended from a separate

branch of the Indo-Aryan family of languages than MSH. Grierson, through

his Linguistic Survey, had gathered enough evidence to show that while MSH

was postulated to have descended from Śaurasenī Prākrit, the Bihārī group

of speeches had evolved out of Māgadhī Prākrit, two distinct spoken vernaculars of Sanskrit. B. Saksena, in 1937, gives the following isoglosses in an

attempt to establish the linguistic boundary between Avadhī (derived from

Ardha-MāghīPrākrit) and Bhōjpuri (SakSena 1971):

“The distinguishing features of Bhōjpurī”

1. The present tense with the enclitic “lā”

2. The past tense –l

3. The dative postposition “lā”

Figure4 The Bihārī Languages.

These features are shared in all three Bihārī speeches which are the most

western of what is known as the Māgadhan branch of the Indo-Aryan family of

Visham Bhimull

354

International Conference : Indian Languages in Diasporas : Retention and Transmission

languages. This branch of languages has been derived from Māgadhī Prākrit.

Figure 4 illustrates these three members of the Bihārī group.

Even much later, in the 20th century, U.N. Tiwari further argued that within

the trio of Bhōjpurī, Magahī and Maithilī, Bhōjpurī should be considered

separately from the latter two as they are closer in form and literary tradition

(tiwari 1994). These new considerations of the Indo-Aryan languages of

Northern India gave rise the revolution that redefined this family tree. Figure 5

illustrates the current concepts of the Indo-Aryan group of languages.

Figure5 Indo-Aryan Family Tree.

As clearly seen in Figure 4, MSH/MSU are not even a sister language to

Bhōjpuri, but are more like cousins.

Based on the evidence presented thus far, a linguistic analysis of the ethnic language referred to as Hindustānī in T&T gives a classification of the

Trinidadian variant of Bhōpurī (Trinidad Bhōpurī designated by mohan).

As proven by the above analysis, Bhōpurī is in fact a language distinct from,

rather than a derivate of MSH. Many in T&T still refer to Bhōpurī as “Broken

Hindi”. One fact that lent credence to this notion is that there is a high degree

of lexical similarities between Bhōpurī and MSH in contrast with grammatical

difference between them (mohan 1978).

Because they come from sister Prākrits (spoken varieties of Sanskrit) they

share a great deal of vocabulary, however, they differ in inflection and conjugation. Phonetics is also another aspect in which they differ. The following

are some examples of how these two languages differ:

 Phonetics

Vowels

1. The closed vowel “a” in MSH is pronounced as “a” in the English “what’;

in Bhōjpurī it is more rounded and sounds like the “o” in the English “owl”.

The Misunderstood Language of Caribbean Hindustānī

Conférence internationale : Langues de l’Inde en diasporas : maintiens et transmissions

355

2. Short vowels are seldom found at the end of a word in MSH but are

often found in Bhōjpurī.

3. In MSH diphthongs are pronounced smoothly, however they tend to be

split into two separate vowels in Bhōjpurī.

4. There is a tendency to nasalize more in Bhōjpurī than MSH.

5. Short vowels in MSH are sometimes lengthened in Bhōjpurī.

6. Long vowels in MSH are sometimes shortened in Bhōjpurī.

Consonants

1. The sounds “ś” and “ṣ” in MSH are pronounced as “s” in Bhōjpurī.

2. “y” in MSH is pronounced as “j” in Bhōjpurī.

3. “l” in MSH is pronounced as “r” in Bhōjpurī.

4. “v” or “w” in MSH is pronounced as “b” in Bhōjpurī.

5. The guttural consonants that occur in MSH from Perso-Arabic loan

words are not existent in Bhōjpurī.

6. “z” in MSH, a Perso-Arabic sound, is pronounced as “j” in Bhōjpurī.

7. Compound consonants in MSH are pronounced as two separate consonants in Bhōjpurī.

8. The consonant “ksha” in MSH becomes an aspirated “ch” in Bhōjpurī.

 Vocabulary

There are shared words in both MSH and Bhōjpurī that are commonly

used in the daily speech of both languages:

MSH and Bhōjpurī English

Din day

Rāt night

Pānī water

Kām work

Hāth hand

Hawā wind

Rōtī flat bread

There are some words that both MSH and Bhōjpurī share, but they occur

at different frequencies in both languages:

Visham Bhimull

356

International Conference : Indian Languages in Diasporas : Retention and Transmission

MSH Bhōjpurī English

Kuttā kukur dog

Sōnā sūte to sleep

Chākū chhūrī knife

Chakkī jātā grinding stone for grain

Ubalanā khaule to boil

Kaddū kōnhaṛā pumpkin

Pānw gōṛ foot

There are words that are unique to each language that come from their

respective Prākrit predecessor:

MSH Bhōjpurī English

Qasam kiriyā promise

laghu lahū small

brāhmaṇ babhan Brahman

Bālak hōril child

Chullū churwā cupping of the hand as if to

hold water

In MSH there may be diminutive feminine words used for objects in a

miniature form as opposed to the masculine form denoting the same object

but in a larger form. The diminutive feminine form is used in Bhōjpurī for

both large and small forms:

MSH Masculine Form MSH Feminine Form/

Bhōjpurī English

jhanḍā jhanḍī Flag

Karailā karailī bitter gourd

Thālā thālī/thariyā Plate

khāṭ khatiyā Bed

 Grammar

Nouns

1. In MSH all nouns have a grammatical gender that dictate gender agreement, however, in Bhōjpurī gender of nouns may be limited to animate

object, especially people. In Bhōjpurī grammatical gender agreements

are nonexistent.

The Misunderstood Language of Caribbean Hindustānī

Conférence internationale : Langues de l’Inde en diasporas : maintiens et transmissions

357

2. In MSH the concept of definite and indefinite articles do not exist and

it is inferred in context. However, suffixation achieves this in Bhōjpurī.

Adding the suffix –wā and

–iyā creates definiteness for the noun:

MSH: ghōṛā (a horse or the horse)

sēj (a bed or the bed)

Bhōjpurī: ghōṛā (a horse); ghōṛwā (the horse)

sēj (a bed); sejiyā (the bed)

These suffixes can also be used with animate objects, especially people, to give an affectionate, diminutive or pejorative sense.

Tenses in MSH and Bhōjpurī have different systems of conjugation in

each language. These are the hallmark sign that they have descended from

different branches of the language tree. Here we conjugate the verb “dēkh-”

(to see) in both languages:

Tense MSH Bhōjpurī English

past dēkhā dēkhal saw;seen

present dēkhtā dēkhēlā/dēkhat see(s)/seeing

future dēkhēgā dēkhab will see

We can conclude here that the standard variety of Hindustānī in modern

day India, Khaṛī Bōlī, designated MSH, is not the same that formed the

Hindustānī of the diaspora, specifically of T&T. Bhōjpurī, the Hindustānī of

the diaspora, is in fact not even a vernacular of MSH, but a separate language

in its own right. It comes from a rich oral tradition that highlights the day

to day life, philosophy, festivals and religious practices of the Bhōjpuriyā

people who formed the majority of the T&T Indian diaspora. The Mauritian

Indian diaspora, who share a similar Bhōjpuriyā history to T&T, has been the

exemplars in promoting language within the context of culture. We look upon

Mauritius with great pride as, apart from being the advocates of promoting

MSH, more than even India itself, it has gone a step further and succeeded in

introducing Bhōjpurī as a language being taught at primary school level. It is a

fact that in all diaspora countries, the ethnic language of the diaspora peoples

is on the decline and is threatened with extinction in the face of globalization.

Even India itself is no exception. MSH is only spoken among the preferred

language of the uneducated lower classes in India. The upper classes who can

still understand and speak Hindī, now seldom prefer to speak in English, the

language that represents upward social mobility. A story that is very similar

to Bhōjpurī in T&T. Despite these negative telltale signs, there may still be

hope. In the Lesser Antilles of the Caribbean many of the erstwhile French

Visham Bhimull

358

International Conference : Indian Languages in Diasporas : Retention and Transmission

colonies have taken pride in their French Creole culture. There have been

efforts to preserve the language of French Creole by creating an orthography and standardized grammar. The fruit of all these efforts is seen in the

establishment of grammar books and dictionaries to teach French Creole to

adult and child alike. All this is for the purpose of cultural maintenance and

sustainability. This is an asset in preserving the identity of a people, a quality

so essential in the psyche of an individual. The same can be done for Bhōjpurī

and MSH. We have seen the beginnings of it in the work done by Sarita

Boodhoo in Mauritius and Motilal Marhé in Suriname. In Mauritius there are

books available to learn Bhōjpurī and in Suriname there is documentation of

a “Sarnami Byakaran” (Surinamese Hindustānī Grammar). Recently there is

a Surinamese Hindustānī dictionary available online. In the spirit of uneSco’s

rights of a child to know his identity through his ancestral/ethnic language,

we must strengthen efforts to preserve whatever we can of the Hindustānī

language of the Indian diaspora.

References

bahri, Hardev (1960) –“Persian Influence on Hindi.” Bharati Press Publibations.

kinG, R. Christopher (1994) –“One Language, Two Scripts: The Hindi Movement in

Nineteenth Century North India.” Oxford University Press.

mohan, Peggy (1978) –“Trinidad Bhojpuri: A Morphological Study.” University of

Michigan; unpublished doctoral dissertation.

mohan, Peggy (n. d.) – “Trinidad Bhojpuri: A Brief History of Power.” Unpublished.

motiLaL, Marhé (1885) –“SarnamiByakaran: EenElementaireGrammatica Van Het

Sarnami.”, Cip-GegevensKoininklijkeBibliotheek.

rai, Amrit (1984) – “A House Divided: The Origin and Development of Hindi/

Hindavi.” Oxford University Press.

SakSena, B.R. (1971) –“Evolution of Awadhi (A Branch of Hindi).” Motilal Banarsidass

Publishers.

ShackLe, Christopher & Rupert Snell (1990) –“Hindi and Urdu 1800: A Common

Reader.” Heritage Publisher.

tiwari, UdaiNarain (1994) –“The Origin and Development of Bhojpuri.” The Asiatic

Society, 1960.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindi_Belt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Aryan_languages

Dear Colleagues,

Please see this article on a topic I presented at the Diaspora Conference in Guadeloupe in 2015 entitled

” THE MISUNDERSTOOD LANGUAGE OF CARIBBEAN HINDUSTĀNĪ: CULTURAL PRESERVATION AND RETENTION THROUGH DISPELLING MISCONCEPTION”

I represented both the Hindi Foundation and the National Council of Indian Culture at this conference.

I thank you for the opportunity!

Regards

Dr Visham Bhimull