|
Search JoyZine with Google Site Search! |
This article deals with the actual utterances of Aboriginal speakers, and how they differ from those of Standard English. Though different localities and situations have produced many varieties of Aboriginal English, their linguistic features are sufficiently similar to treat them as one for the purposes of this analysis. In many cases, the context will clarify a speaker’s meaning, even where linguistic differences are marked. However, ignorance of where differences lie can lead listeners to place too heavy a reliance on context, with the result that they make unwarranted assumptions and misconstrue what is being said. Pronunciation Consonants and vowels Standard English makes use of certain consonant sounds that are not found in Aboriginal English and is unusual in that it distinguishes between f, v and th (and between these sounds and p, b, t and d).
Another feature of Standard English is the prevalence of words that end in more than one consonant sound, especially in creating past tense. Example
Vowel sounds, too, have a characteristic pronunciation in Standard English. Why is this a problem? There is no h sound in traditional Aboriginal languages, and f, v and th sounds are rare. Many speakers of Aboriginal English omit, overcompensate for or give approximations of these sounds. So h sounds can be dropped from, or sometimes added to, the beginning of words, the f and v sounds can be pronounced as p or b, and the th sound can be pronounced as t or d. The resulting words can at times be mistaken for words that sound similar but are quite different in meaning. Examples
Many speakers of Aboriginal English tend to simplify the multiple-consonant endings of words. This can lead to misunderstanding, particularly where questions of tense are concerned, as the past tense can be rendered as present or present-continuous tense. Example
Speakers of Aboriginal English tend to give vowels a particular accent and many do not distinguish between long and short vowels. For instance, were may be pronounced so that it sounds the same as where, and the vowel sound in home may be the same as in on. Also, why and where can sound very similar. When these differences are combined with differences in the pronunciation of consonants, the potential for misunderstanding is multiplied. Example
Sometimes the misunderstanding is so complete that the court transcript is actually in error. Examples
Actually said: That’s where we lived after that horse fell down there.
Actually said: That’s where we got that place down there.
Actually said:. . . to open the guts... (Confusion arises because of the lack of distinction between g and c/k.)
Actually said: Properly his father. (i.e. his real father) Confusion arises because of the lack of distinction between b and p and because of the simplification of the bI cluster to l.) How can the problem be avoided? Reduce the chance of misunderstanding by:
Example Witness: They bin put ‘im longa lokap. Counsel: They put him in the lock-up that night, right? Grammar There are various ways in which Aboriginal English can differ from Standard English in its grammar, some of which are significant enough to disrupt communication. Ten are dealt with in this section:
The ‘Inverted sentence’ form of question In Standard English, a statement can be converted to a question by introducing the sentence with an auxiliary verb (do, does, did; is, am, are, was, were; has, have, had) or an interrogative term (where, when, why, how, which, what, who). This ‘inverts’ the standard word order. Examples
Why is this a problem? It can be a problem for speakers of Aboriginal English because:
How can the problem be avoided?
Examples
He said why he was there? Speakers of Aboriginal English commonly ask questions by using the standard statement form with rising intonation:
They may also add the question marker eh? to questions that seek to verify a statement:
The use of the inverted sentence form and auxiliary verbs can be particularly confusing when the question is complex or when it is one of several rapid-fire questions, such as:
Indicating plurals and possession Plurals In Standard English, the plural form of a noun is usually indicated by the addition of s or es to the end of a word, and, in agreement with this, the usual s is dropped from the present-tense form of the verb. Example
Of course, many nouns have irregular plural endings, but they are usually in the form of a suffix (for example child/children). (Some words do not change their form at all.) Why is this a problem? In Aboriginal English, the plural is often signaled by context rather than being marked by the noun: Examples
Problems can arise when the context does not provide the necessary information. Example
How can the problem be avoided? Check whether the sense is singular or plural: Example Possessives The usual way of indicating possession in Standard English is by adding an s sound: Example
Why is this a problem? In Aboriginal English, possession is often indicated by juxtaposing two nouns or by using the preposition blonga, blong, or bla rather than following the Standard English pattern of adding ‘s. Examples
How can the problem be avoided? Clarify the meaning of the phrase with a question: Examples
Prepositions Prepositions (small connecting words like of, from and to) show how various parts of a sentence relate to other parts. There are times when the meaning of the sentence depends crucially on which preposition is used: Examples
How can the problems be avoided? Use Standard English to repeat the answer that the witness gives: Examples
Why is this a problem? Speakers of Aboriginal English often follow a grammatical pattern of local Aboriginal languages in their use of prepositions, rather than the conventions of Standard English. Examples
Some speakers of Aboriginal English use Ia or longa (from Kriol) as a preposition meaning on, in, at or to. Examples
While this might not seem particularly problematic, it has to be seen in the context of many other differences, both ‘pragmatic’ and linguistic, all of which tend to interfere with comprehension. The difficulty lies in the danger not only that legal personnel will misinterpret the answers that witnesses give, but also that juries will find it difficult to follow what is being said. Standard English conveys tense by modifying its verbs. For past tense this can be done by:
Examples
Future tense is shown by using the auxiliary verb will or shall with the main verb, or occasionally by using is, are, am with the phrase going to plus an infinitive. Examples
Why is this a problem? For many speakers of Aboriginal English, these devices do not come easily. As discussed earlier, many Aborigines have problems with multiple-consonant endings of words, so the ed commonly used to indicate past tense is inherently difficult (e.g. locked). Instead of using ed endings, Aborigines may signal the past tense with particular expressions, such as before, that time or, among speakers of heavier varieties of Aboriginal English, bin, followed by the verb. Examples
The difficulties are compounded by the fact that speakers of Aboriginal English tend to omit auxiliary verbs. However, they may also use never as a negative auxiliary verb (i.e. as the equivalent of did not), rather than as an adverb. Unless the context makes it clear which tense is intended, confusion can result. Examples
How can the problem be avoided? Use special tense signifiers when putting a question to the witness: Examples
Check which tense the witness means by referring to a particular event in the past, present or future: Examples
Pronouns and demonstratives: Words that refer to something already mentioned In Standard English, continuity of focus is maintained by using words that refer to something already mentioned (anaphorism). Certain pronouns (he/him/his, she/her/hers, they/them/their, it/its, this, that) are typically anaphoric, but the article the can also function in the same way. Examples
Why is this a problem? Aboriginal English uses fewer distinct anaphoric expressions. Pronouns and demonstratives, such as he, him and this, may be used in Aboriginal English in ways that seem ambiguous to speakers of Standard English, so shifts in focus are not always apparent. Example
This example is typical in that the speaker, a North Queensland man, does not ‘introduce’ the characters in his account of a fight, but refers to two (or more) people as he/him. It is not clear from the passage whether ‘that other fella’ was the victim of the thrown water or a third person. How can the problem be avoided? Check frequently that you know exactly whom the witness is referring to: Examples
Gender Unlike many other languages, Standard English is not characterised by a pervasive use of gender. However, gender does remain in certain sex-related nouns (such as woman/man, girl/boy, mother/father, sister/brother, daughter/son, and their variants and animal equivalents), and in the pronouns that accompany them (he/him/his, she/ her/hers). Examples
Why is this a problem? In the heavy varieties of Aboriginal English, he (or ‘e) is used to mean either he or she. This difference on its own does not cause problems when the context is clear. Example Assuming that the speaker is using a heavy variety of Aboriginal English, there is nothing in the language to indicate whether the person at whom the water was thrown is male or female.
And in fact, fella doesn’t even have to refer to humans:
How can the problem be avoided? Ask clarifying questions: Examples
However, in cases where a speaker uses pronouns without a particular noun as a referent, people who are unfamiliar with Aboriginal English can become confused about the meaning. For example, fella can refer to females as well as males. Example
Superlatives Standard English distinguishes three degrees of adjectives and adverbs—positive, comparative and superlative. These are usually indicated by the base form of the word for positive, and the addition of suffixes for comparative and superlative (er for comparative, and est for superlative), or the addition of more (comparative) or most (superlative). Some words change their form entirely. Examples
Why is this a problem? Speakers of Aboriginal English frequently use the superlative form of an adjective in an exclamatory way—that is, simply for emphasis—not strictly with its Standard English superlative meaning. Example
In the courtroom situation, where it is often necessary to remove any ambiguity by distinguishing one situation from another, Aboriginal witnesses may seem to be giving conflicting information when in fact they are simply observing a different language convention. How can the problem be avoided? When trying to compare two or more events, make the comparison explicit: Example
Either/or questions When presenting alternatives, speakers of Standard English commonly use the word or, sometimes in combination with either. Examples
The negative form is neither/nor. Example
Why is this a problem? Speakers of Aboriginal English are likely to be confused by this type of sentence construction and in their answers will often, but not always, refer to the last alternative mentioned. Example
How can the problem be avoided? Do not use either/or questions—i.e. questions that ask the respondent to choose one of two alternatives. Instead:
Example
Example
Word order In Standard English, the order of the major elements of a regular declarative sentence is fairly fixed: the subject precedes the verb and the object follows. Example
Why is this a problem? Heavy varieties of Aboriginal English, like the majority of Aboriginal languages, do not restrict the order of these constituents as much as English does. For instance, a noun or noun phrase that belongs with the subject often follows the verb: Examples
Meaning: That’s why the old people moved. Misunderstood as: That’s why they moved the old people.
Meaning: All of us Jakamarras and Jupurrulas get painted up. Misunderstood as: We paint up all the Jakamarras and Jupurrulas. This can result in legal personnel and juries so badly misinterpreting an Aboriginal witness that they confuse the agent (usually the subject) with the person acted upon (usually the object). How can the problem be avoided? When an Aboriginal witness uses a pronoun (such as they) before the verb—i.e. as the subject—and a noun (such as people) after the verb, clarify the meaning by rephrasing the sentence: Example
Vocabulary Though most of the actual words used by speakers of Aboriginal English are part of the lexicon of Standard English, the heaviest varieties of Aboriginal English include some words from traditional Aboriginal languages, some expressions borrowed from Kriol, and some Standard English words that have a special meaning in Aboriginal English. Particularly important is the special use of kin terms. Aboriginal English in Queensland is enriched by words and phrases from traditional Aboriginal languages, both local and from other parts of Australia. These traditional languages are referred to in Aboriginal English as ‘Lingo’. Examples
These are examples only and do not have universal use or uniform meaning across the State. Like English before the introduction of mechanisms such as the Oxford English Dictionary that tended to fix the meanings of words, Aboriginal English is subject to enormous variation in use throughout Queensland. Consequently, the usage of words and the meanings given to them are different in each community. Most speakers of Aboriginal English are reluctant to use English terms for genitals, and there is considerable variation throughout Queensland in the terms that are considered acceptable. Why is this a problem? Lingo is not going to be understood by the court. Example
Numu, which is a general marker of negation, sounds like no more. So this statement could be understood as:
In fact it means simply that the Warimpana were not living in the area at the particular time. How can the problem be avoided? Check to make sure you’ve understood the answer. Example
Also ensure that you have a communication facilitator from the same community as the witness. Words with special meanings in Aboriginal English Many Standard English words have slightly different meanings in Aboriginal English.
Once again, these are only examples and it should not be assumed that every speaker of Aboriginal English will use these words or attach the same meanings to them. Aboriginal society pays close attention to the fine-tuning of relationships between individuals, an attention that traditional Aboriginal languages reflect in their rich set of first- and second-person pronouns. Examples
Standard English vocabulary is also inadequate when it comes to expressing kinship, so some English words have acquired different shades of meaning in Aboriginal English. Usually the meaning is extended to reflect the broader kinship network. Examples (traditionally oriented communities)
Examples (less traditionally oriented communities)
Why is this a problem? While many of these differences in usage are unlikely to cause difficulties in the courtroom, the danger is that in some cases questioners and witnesses will be at cross purposes, and that juries will be seriously misled. This danger is most real with kinship terms because a witness could seem to be giving contradictory evidence about one person while in fact referring at different times to two (or more) people. How can the problem be avoided?
Example
Examples
Example
Non-verbal Features Aboriginal English makes considerable use of nonverbal signs, especially when discussing direction. These are an integral part of the communication process and should not be ignored. Differences between indigenous non-verbal features and those of other cultures provide additional scope for misinterpretations. This is especially so for people of Anglo-Irish decent who usually downplay non-verbal features. Gestures Hand gestures and movements of the eyes or head are features of any language, but in Aboriginal English they are systematised and integrated in a way that makes them an essential part of the vocabulary of the language. They have their roots in the rich sign languages that are used in traditional languages, particularly when hunting or during mourning. Many of these signs are common to Aboriginal people throughout Australia, particularly hand movements indicating relatives or other people. Examples
Why is this a problem? Aboriginal people normally use the relevant word (with or without the sign) when talking with non-Aboriginal people. However, the more subtle movements, which are often very slight and quick, could well pass unnoticed in the courtroom situation, with the result that the full meaning of a witness’s response is not conveyed. How can the problem be avoided? Be alert to any movements of hands, eyes, head or lips and, if necessary, clarify the answer with further questions: Examples
Eye Contact In mainstream Australian culture, making direct eye contact with a conversation partner and speaking clearly and loudly are interpreted as signs of confidence, moral uprightness and politeness. Avoiding eye contact, particularly with someone who is asking questions, and mumbling or speaking in a low, soft voice can be seen as signs of dishonesty and insecurity, or at the least lack of interest or respect. In Aboriginal societies, on the other hand, the converse is true. Direct eye contact with anyone other than one ’s most intimate peers or relations is seen as a sign of rudeness, disrespect or even aggression, and the appropriate strategy to convey polite respect is to avert or lower one’s eyes in conversation. Similarly, a loud, clear tone of voice can be associated with aggressive, rude and disrespectful behaviour, and the appropriate demeanour in some contexts is to speak in a low voice and to slur one’s consonants (resulting in somewhat muffled or mumbled diction). Why is this a problem? Even if lawyers, judges and magistrates are aware of these differences, there is a danger that this behaviour will be misinterpreted by (non-Aboriginal) jurors in criminal proceedings. How can the problem be avoided? The only way to address this problem is to draw the jury’s attention to these cultural differences, and to direct them not to interpret the behaviour as a sign of dishonesty or disrespect, as they might naturally tend to do. Silence Another major difference is in the use and interpretation of silence. Long periods of silence are generally avoided in mainstream Australian discourse except among intimate friends or relatives. Particularly in formal proceedings, there is a felt need to ‘fill in’ silent periods. In Aboriginal societies, on the other hand, lengthy periods of silence are the norm, and are expected during conversation, particularly during information-sharing or information-seeking. Why is this a problem? A person’s silence or lack of overt acknowledgment during questioning will often be interpreted as unwillingness to participate or answer. How can this problem be avoided? People seeking information of Aboriginal witnesses would do well to allow longer periods for them to answer questions, and not rush to fill in the silence. The court should be made explicitly aware that such periods of silence are normal and do not indicate that the witness is unwilling to respond or that the witness is ‘concocting’ an answer to the question. |
