Relationship With Indian English
See also: Indian EnglishPakistani English (PE) shares many similarities with Indian English, however since independence there have been some very obvious differences. Rahman argues that PE is an interference variety of English created by the use of the features of Urdu, Punjabi, Pashto, Sindhi and other Pakistani languages in English. He further divides PE into Anglicised English (which is very similar to the speech and writing of the speakers of British Standard English (BSE); acrolectal PE which is used by Pakistanis educated in English-medium schools; mesolectal PE used by ordinary, Urdu-medium educated Pakistanis; and basilect PE which is used by people of little formal education such as guides and waiters etc. Words and espressions of PE have been noted by a number of scholars, including unique idioms and colloquial expressions as well as accents. Foreign companies find accent neutralisation easier in Pakistan than in India. However like Indian English, Pakistani English has preserved many phrases that are now considered antiquated in Britain.
Read more about this topic: Pakistani English
Famous quotes containing the words relationship, indian and/or english:
“Christianity as an organized religion has not always had a harmonious relationship with the family. Unlike Judaism, it kept almost no rituals that took place in private homes. The esteem that monasticism and priestly celibacy enjoyed implied a denigration of marriage and parenthood.”
—Beatrice Gottlieb, U.S. historian. The Family in the Western World from the Black Death to the Industrial Age, ch. 12, Oxford University Press (1993)
“Every New Englander might easily raise all his own breadstuffs in this land of rye and Indian corn, and not depend on distant and fluctuating markets for them. Yet so far are we from simplicity and independence that, in Concord, fresh and sweet meal is rarely sold in the shops, and hominy and corn in a still coarser form are hardly used by any.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“The apparent rulers of the English nation are like the imposing personages of a splendid procession: it is by them the mob are influenced; it is they whom the spectators cheer. The real rulers are secreted in second-rate carriages; no one cares for them or asks after them, but they are obeyed implicitly and unconsciously by reason of the splendour of those who eclipsed and preceded them.”
—Walter Bagehot (1826–1877)