|
Table 1.1: Examples of the disguise rule in Shelta
3
Shelta
Irish
English
rodas
doras
door
laicin
cailín
girl
tobar
bóthar
road
3
Adapted from Crofton (1886 cited in Binchy, 1994: 135).
8
Interestingly, one method of word formation in
Verlan
, a non-standard variety of
French, occurs in the same way. The word from standard French is split into its
composite syllables and these are then inverted, for example,
basket
, the French for
trainers, becomes
sketba
in Verlan (Ellis, 2002). Hancock (1984) claims that this
supposedly Irish element in the language accounts for between 2,000 and 3,000 words.
However, Butler (1979, cited in Hancock 1984: 385) believes that too much has been
made of this rule and that many Shelta words cannot be etymologised in terms of Irish
or any other known language. Apart for phonological variation, Shelta is further
disguised by the inclusion of archaisms and items from English Cant and Romani
(Hancock, 1984).
Shelta’s uniqueness has been negatively tagged because of the distrust that exists
between the settled and Traveller communities. Instead of being actively promoted as a
symbol of identity, it has been described as a ‘secret language’ (see Cleeve, 1983) and
one of ‘exclusion’ (see Gmelch, 1989). Hancock (1984: 396) claims that Shelta is a
language designed to ‘erect barriers between people, rather than to break them down.’
This is in stark contrast to other studies such as research into dialects spoken in Norway
which seeks to explain difference from a positive viewpoint. Blom and Gumperz (1972)
have investigated the differences between urban and rural dialects in Norway. They
investigated the people of Hemnesberget in Norway and discovered that:
...a person’s native speech is regarded as an integral part of his family
background, a sign of his local identity. By identifying himself as a dialect speaker
both at home and abroad, a member symbolises pride in his community (p. 411).
Throughout their study they constantly reiterate the bond between speakers of both the
local dialect and the standard. They claim that when local dialectal phrases are inserted
metaphorically into conversations, for example during business transactions, this may
add a special social meaning of confidentiality or privateness to the conversation
reinforcing the dual relationship that exists between the interlocutors. This emphasis on
the special nature of difference is the antithesis of the negative slant often put on Shelta.
9
Cleeve’s, Hancock’s and Gmelch’s studies echo Halliday’s (1978) concept of
antilanguage
. According to Halliday (
ibid
: 164), an antisociety is ‘a society that is set
up within another society as a conscious alternative to it’. This alternative society is a
mode of resistance and can be either passive or hostile in form. In turn, each antisociety
spawns an antilanguage which corresponds to the same sociolinguistic norms as does a
language to a society. The antilanguages cited by Halliday include an Elizabethan
vagabonds’ cant, the language of the underworld in modern Calcutta and
grypserka
, the
language of Polish prisons and reform schools. Hancock (1984), Butler (1995) and
McLucas and Weir (1997) have added Polari, Gangster Rap and the Mafia respectively
to this subgroup. All these dialects grew from the need for some type of social
resistance and protest. Characteristic of these antilanguages are new words for criminal
acts, law enforcement representatives and penal institutions, words or phrases that can
be used to exclude outsiders and disguise the group’s activities. Gmelch (1989: 310
footnotes
) maintains that in the case of Shelta:
It is used primarily to conceal meaning from outsiders, especially during business
transactions and in the presence of the police. Most Gammon utterances are terse
and spoken so quickly that a non-Traveller might conclude the words merely has
[sic.] been garbled.
This corresponds to Halliday’s (1978: 181) assertion that an antilanguage can be
characterised by phonological and lexicogrammatical variation. In addition, it is defined
as a systematic pattern of meanings exchanged under specific circumstances. He claims
that speakers of an antilanguage are constantly attempting to maintain a counter-reality
that is continually under pressure from the established order (
ibid
: 180). Seaholm (1977,
cited in Hancock, 1984) maintains that the origin and perpetuation of Shelta is rooted in
the asocietal status of its speakers. Furthermore, he argues that the distinction between
standard and non-standard dialects is one of language versus antilanguage, though in a
more moderate form. Standard English is bound up politically with notions of national
identity and is connected socially with the middle and upper classes and consequently
with education, correctness and prestige. It attracts adjectives like
pure
or
proper
and
similarly its speakers attract terms like
articulate
and
intelligent
(Thomas, 1999). Tovey
and Share (2003: 472) claim that language has emerged as a significant marker of
10
ethnicity for Travellers. There is increasing evidence that for the first time Travellers
see themselves as a distinct ethnic group with their own language as a central symbol of
this distinctiveness. Two examples of this are the foundation of
Mincéir Misli
– a
Traveller-run organisation which uses Shelta words as its title – and also Travellers
choosing the name
Pavee
, again a Shelta word, to refer to themselves.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
