The Kuki-Chin Communities of Bangladesh.pdf

7/28/2019 The Kuki-Chin Communities of Bangladesh.pdf

1/127

DigitalResources

Electronic Survey Report 2011-025

The Kuki-Chin Communities of

Bangladesh:

A sociolinguistic survey

Amy Kim

Palash Roy

Mridul Sangma


2/127

The Kuki-Chin CommunitiesofBangladesh:

A sociolinguistic survey

Researched by:

Amy Kim

Palash Roy

Mridul Sangma

SIL International

2011

SIL Electronic Survey Report 2011-025, March 2011

Copyright 2011 Amy Kim, Palash Roy, Mridul Sangma, and SIL International

All rights reserved


3/127

Abstract

There are five people groups in Bangladesh whose languages are classified as Kuki-Chin

languages: the Bawm, the Khumi, the Khyang, the Lushai, and the Pangkhua. This paper

reports on sociolinguistic research that took place among speakers of each of these language

varieties. The goals of the research included better understanding the linguistic relationship

among these languages, investigating regional differences within each of these languages, and

examining speakers attitudes towards and bilingual abilities in other languages. Fieldwork for

this research took place from October 2007 through January 2008. The appendices are available

in the Bangla version only.

k-k, g, , , i o einn ute

i ep eigtm, eig

peeig an

pedoiei akn ei


4/127

1

Contents

Abstract

Table of Figures

Preface

1. Introduction

1.1. Purposes and goals

1.1.1. Study of the language varieties

1.1.2. Language attitudes, vitality, and bilingualism study

1.2. Language

1.3. Geographical location

2. Summary of Findings

2.1. Study of the language varieties

2.2. Language attitudes, vitality, and bilingualism study3. Study of the Language Varieties

3.1. Procedures

3.2. Discussion of sample

3.3. Results

3.3.1. Pangkhua

3.3.2. Bawm

3.3.3. Lushai

3.3.4. Khyang

3.3.5. Khumi

4. Language Attitudes, Vitality, and Bilingualism Study

4.1. Procedures


4.3. Results

4.3.1. Language use

4.3.2. Language attitudes

4.3.3. Language vitality

4.3.4. Bilingualism

5. Recommendations

References

Appendix A (). WordlistsAppendix B (). Questionnaires

Appendix C (). Sociolinguistic questionnaire responses

Appendix D (). Subject demographic information

Appendix E (). Bangladesh Kuki-Chin community information


5/127

2

Table of Figures

Figure 1: Outline of the research work

Figure 2: Classification of Kuki-Chin languages in Bangladesh

Figure 3: Map of Bangladesh (Chittagong division shaded)Figure 4: Map of location of villages visited for this research

Figure 5: Wordlist collection sites

Figure 6: Lexical similarity chart

Figure 7: Bangladesh Kuki-Chin community language use information chart

Figure 8: Information about which language should be used as the medium of

education in primary school

Figure 9: Reasons for sending children to mother tongue and Bangla classes

Figure 10: Responses to language vitality questions

Figure 11: Responses to one other language vitality question

Figure 12: Responses to sociolinguistic questionnaire question 2



6/127

3

Preface

As one part of SIL Bangladeshs efforts to help in the development of Bangladeshs

minority languages, language research was done among the Kuki-Chin communities

of Bangladesh. To do this research we travelled in the Chittagong Hill Tracts fromManglung Headman Para of Thanci subdistrict (Bandarban district) to Konglak

village of Sajek union in Baghaichari subdistrict (Rangamati district). This report is

a result of this Kuki-Chin language research.

We give our heartfelt thanks to those who helped us in a variety of ways as we did

this research. We want to give special thanks to the Kuki-Chin community leaders

who helped us by giving their valuable time, information, and advice. We are also

very grateful for all the people in each village we visited who enabled us to do this

work more efficiently by welcoming us into their midst and answering our questions.

Finally, we want to say thanks to those who generously fed us and gave us places to

stay at night. We pray for full blessings for each of these people.

Dhaka, Bangladesh

June 2008


7/127

4

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Purposes and goals

The main purpose of this sociolinguistic research was to gather information that

could be of use in a language development program for any of Bangladeshs Kuki-

Chin communities.1 Through this research we wanted to learn which Kuki-Chin

languages actually exist in Bangladesh and what the linguistic similarity is among

these languages. Furthermore, we sought to learn what peoples attitudes are

towards various languages, what the approximate populations of the various Kuki-

Chin communities are, whether there are regional differences within a given Kuki-

Chin language, and what languages members of different Kuki-Chin language

communities use to communicate with each other. To fulfill these purposes, we set

the following goals:1. To know which Kuki-Chin languages are used in Bangladesh2. To determine the extent of the linguistic relationship among these Kuki-Chin

languages

3. To investigate regional differences within each of the various Kuki-Chinlanguages in Bangladesh

4. To better understand speakers attitudes towards other Kuki-Chin languagesand also towards Bangla

5. To have a better understanding of the bilingual abilities of the members ofthe various Kuki-Chin communities in Bangladesh.

To accomplish all of these goals, this research work was divided into two parts: 1) a

study of language variation among the Kuki-Chin languages in Bangladesh and 2) a

language attitudes, vitality, and bilingualism study. Figure 1 shows the methods

used in this Kuki-Chin research.

1Originally written in Bangla by Mridul Sangma; portions translated by Amy Kim.


8/127

5

Figure 1: Outline of the research work

Study Method Description Focus Number

Study of the

language

varieties

Leader

interviews

Conversations

with various

Kuki-Chin

community

leaders

Geographical

locations, population

figures, language

differences

At least 10

interviews

Lexical

similarity

comparison

List of 306

words

Lexical similarity and

variation among

various communities

2 wordlists

from each

community

Intelligibility

study

5 questions

Language variation

and intelligibility

among variouscommunities

83 subjects

from 8

villagesrepresenting

5 language

communitiesLanguage

attitudes,

vitality, and

bilingualism

study

Sociolinguistic

questionnaire19 questions

Language

preferences, domains

of language use,

ability in a second

language, and

education medium

Community

information

questionnaire

32 questions 9 villages

1.1.1. Study of the language varieties

Lexical Similarity Comparison

An initial method used in the language research of the Kuki-Chin communities of

Bangladesh was the gathering of a 306-item wordlist. We went to a total of nine

villages and collected two wordlists from each of five language communities,

making a total of 10 wordlists. Four villages were in three different subdistricts of

Bandarban district, and five villages were in three different subdistricts of

Rangamati district. These villages were chosen based on the information and advicegiven us by leaders of the five Kuki-Chin language communities studied. All of the

wordlists were compared with each other in order to ascertain the degree of lexical

similarity among these five language varieties. Appendix. (A.1) in the Bangla

version of this report gives information about how wordlists were compared with

each other.


9/127

6

Intelligibility Study

On a language tree, the Kuki-Chin languages of Bangladesh are of the same

language family, but they lie on different branches. As a result, their lexical

similarity is low. Also, within a given language community some regional

differences can be seen, and because of geographical difference, speakers of a singlelanguage community may have neighbors from different language communities. In

light of these differences, we did an intelligibility study to get an idea of how much

speakers from the various communities can understand each other. The

intelligibility study consisted, however, of only a questionnaire. We didnt use other

methods as part of the intelligibility study.

1.1.2. Language attitudes, vitality, and bilingualism study

A sociolinguistic questionnaire was used to better understand topics such as the

attitudes that speakers from a particular Kuki-Chin community hold towards other

languages, whether each of these Kuki-Chin language varieties will survive in the

future, and what speakers abilities are in languages other than their mother tongues.

We also wanted to know peoples opinions regarding medium of education. All of

these questions are given in appendix (B) of the Bangla version of this report.

1.2. Language

Language is mans chief way of expressing thoughts, of exchanging ideas, and of

preserving communication. The worlds languages are divided into different familiesand branches and sub-branches. In the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh there

are about eleven indigenous people groups (Chakma, Marma, Tripura, Mro,

Tangchangya, Bawm, Chak, Khumi, Pangkhua, Khyang, and Lushai) (Loncheu 2004).

The languages of a majority of these eleven communities have been classified as

part of the Sino-Tibetan, Tibeto-Burman language family, and five have been

classified within the Tibeto-Burman language family as being Kuki-Chin-Naga, Kuki-

Chin. These five languages are Pangkhua, Bawm, Lushai, Khyang, and Khumi

(Gordon 2005). Although all five of these languages are Kuki-Chin languages, all do

not belong to the same language branch or sub-branch. For example, Pangkhua,

Bawm, and Lushai are all central Kuki-Chin languages. Among these there are no

sub-branches. Among thesouthern Kuki-Chin languages, however, two sub-branches

are the Sho and the Khumi. Khyang (also known as Chin, Asho) is included in

the Sho sub-branch. Two languages included in the Khumi sub-branch are Chin,

Khumi and Chin, Khumi Awa. Figure 2 depicts the language classifications and


10/127

7

relationships of the Kuki-Chin languages in Bangladesh. The shaded boxes contain

the names of the five languages themselves.

Figure 2: Classification of Kuki-Chin languages in Bangladesh

Mizo (Lushai) is the official language of the state of Mizoram, India. There is a

variety of literature in Mizo, which is written in Roman script. There is also

literature available in Bawm and in Khumi, both of which are written in Roman

script. In Pangkhua and Khyang, however, there is essentially no literature although,

of course, there are oral folk tales and songs in these languages. Pangkhuacommunity members use Lushai literature, and those Khyang who live near Bawm

speakers use some Bawm literature.

1.3. Geographical location

The Chittagong Hill Tracts are situated in the southeast of Bangladesh. Most parts of

this area are covered with hills and dense forests, and the area has many waterfalls

Sino-Tibetan

Tibeto-

Burman

Kuki-Chin-

Naga

Kuki-Chin

Central

Chin,

Bawm

Pangkhua Mizo

(Lushai)

Southern

Khumi Sho

Chin,

Khumi

Chin, Asho

(Khyang)


11/127

8

and more than 100 mountain streams. Along the southeast border of the Chittagong

Hill Tracts lie Myanmars Chin and Rakhine states, to the east and northeast is

Indias Mizoram state, and to the north and northwest is Indias Tripura state.

Within Bangladesh the western and southern borders of the Chittagong Hill Tracts

are made up of the Chittagong district and the Coxs Bazar district borders,respectively. The Chittagong Hill Tracts are divided into three districts: Rangamati,

Bandarban, and Khagrachari. Approximately half of the total population in these

three hill districts are from indigenous communities (Wikipedia 2008). The Kuki-

Chin communities discussed in this report live in this area along with members of

other indigenous communities. Figure 3 shows all of Chittagong division in relation

to the country of Bangladesh.


12/127

9

Figure 3: Map of Bangladesh (Chittagong division shaded)

Most members of the Kuki-Chin communities live in Rangamati and Bandarban

districts of Chittagong division. The Kuki-Chin villages we visited for the purposes

of this research are given in figure 4.

DhakaDivision

Rajshahi

Division SylhetDivision

BarisalDivision

KhulnaDivision

Chittagong Division

N

Division boundaryInternational boundary

ChittagongDivision

SE

MMYYAANNMMAARR


13/127

10

Figure 4: Map of location of villages visited for this research


14/127

11

Pangkhua

At present many people from the Pangkhua community in Bangladesh live in

Bilaichari Pangkhua Para, a village in Bilaichari subdistrict in the southeastern part

of Rangamati district. There are also a few Pangkhua villages in Barkal and

Jorachari subdistricts of Rangamati district, and there are a couple more villages inSajek union of Baghaichari subdistrict, which is along the borders of the Indian

states of Mizoram and Tripura.

Along Kaptai lake in Jorachari, Barkal, and Bilaichari subdistricts, there are many

small islands that look like hills in the lake. To get to any Pangkhua villages in this

area, one must go by motor boat. It is best to travel there during or just after rainy

season because at these times the lake is full, making travel by motor boat to any

area possible. In summertime before rainy season, however, the water level in the

lake is lower, making travel difficult. During this time one must walk long distances

to most places. Most Pangkhua villages in Sajek union of Baghaichari subdistrict are

situated in difficult-to-access hilly areas.

Bawm

The Bawm live in both Rangamati and Bandarban districts, but most are in

Bandarban district. Bethel Para in Ruma subdistrict of Bandarban district is one

large Bawm village. The Bawm live in other places in Ruma subdistrict and also in

various places in Rowangchari and Thanci subdistricts of Bandarban district. In

Rangamati district there are some Bawm living in Rangamati Sadar and in Barkal

and Bilaichari subdistricts.

Lushai

The population of the Lushai in Bangladesh is very small. Although there are some

Lushai families living in Bandarban Sadar subdistrict, most of these families have

become mixed with other people groups, especially with the Bawm. At present

Mahmuam Para in the Ruilui area of Sajek union in northern Rangamati district is

the only known Lushai village in Bangladesh. There are also reportedly a few Lushai

families living in Sylhet Sadar subdistrict in Sylhet district.

Khyang

The majority of the Khyang in Bangladesh live in Ghilachari union of Rajasthali

subdistrict in Rangamati district and in Bandarban Sadar, Rowangchari, and Thanci


15/127

12

subdistricts in Bandarban district. In addition, there are several Khyang community

members living in Chandanaish subdistrict of Chittagong district.

Khumi

The Khumi generally live in relatively difficult-to-access villages in the forests of

Rowangchari, Ruma, and Thanci subdistricts of Bandarban district. Among these

three subdistricts there are more Khumi people in Thanci than in the other two.

Nearly all of the above-mentioned places are in hilly areas, and to reach most of

them one must travel by paths in the hills. An exception to this is the area where the

Khyang live in and around Ghungurumukh Para in Bandarban Sadar subdistrict,

which is more of a plains area.

2. Summary of Findings

2.1. Study of the language varieties

There is not a great amount of linguistic similarity among the five Kuki-Chin

languages found in Bangladesh, and each should be considered a language that is

separate from the others. The amount of similarity among the Pangkhua, Bawm, and

Lushai languages is a little greater than is the similarity in any other combination of

languages. The lexical similarity percentages among these three languages is 30

47%. Thus, even a speaker of any one of these three languages must learn the other

two languages to understand them well.

Within each of the Pangkhua and Lushai languages, there are small language

differences but no great regional or dialectal differences. Among Bawm speakers,

those who live rather far away from the center of the Bawm people group recognize

some regional differences in Bawm speech. In spite of these differences, Bawm

people from any one area have good understanding of the language of Bawm people

from any other area.

Among each of the Khyang and Khumi language communities, however, notableregional differences do exist. The names of the two main Khyang language varieties

are Laitu (plains area Khyang) and Kongtu (hill area Khyang). The lexical similarity

percentage between these two varieties is 78%. The plains area Khyang can

reportedly understand Kongtu better than the hill area Khyang can understand Laitu.


16/127

13

Although regional language differences also exist among the Khumi, most

questionnaire subjects said they can understand most of the speech of Khumi people

from other areas. It is also very possible that, although there are differences between

the Khumi language of Myanmar and that of Bangladesh, these people, too, can

understand each other. Based on researcher observation, the use of Khumi literaturefrom Myanmar, and a lexical similarity percentage of 6872% between Myanmar

Khumi and Bangladesh Khumi, it can be said that Bangladesh Khumi people can

probably communicate somewhat easily with the Khumi from Myanmar. Detailed

information of all the lexical similarity percentages are given in section 3.3, figure 6.

2.2. Language attitudes, vitality, and bilingualism study

Mother tongue use among the people from each of the five Kuki-Chin communities

in Bangladesh is strong. They still use their mother tongue among themselves, but

with their neighbors from other language groups they speak the neighboring

language or Bangla. With the exception of the Khumi, people from each of the other

four language groups said they think their children and grandchildren will speak

their mother tongue in the future. Given this and the strong mother tongue language

use taking place today, it is probable that these languages will remain vital for at

least a few more generations.

In the not-too-distant future, however, Lushai may no longer be used in Bangladesh

because their population is very small and continues to decrease. In India, however,Lushai or Mizo language may remain vital for ages to come because in Mizoram

there is a lot of literature written in Lushai and Lushai language use is strong.

Among the other four languages discussed here, Khumi is possibly the least vital.

For very practical reasons, people from Bangladeshs Kuki-Chin communities

expressed the opinion that the language of instruction in primary school should be

Bangla. They believe that if their children are taught in Bangla, then these children

will be able to learn Bangla well. They also said, however, that their children should

firstlearn in their mother tongue and then in Bangla. It should be noted that the

Bawm community has an especially strong positive attitude towards their mother

tongue. Among the other four communities, peoples attitudes towards their mother

tongue do not seem to be negative, but they also are not notably positive.


17/127

14

The languages that Bangladeshs Kuki-Chin community members speak as second

languages are largely determined by who their neighbors are. Speakers of a given

Kuki-Chin community may speak Marma, Chakma, Tripura, or another Kuki-Chin

language if these are who their neighbors are. Many also speak some Bangla. This

research shows, however, that none of these five Kuki-Chin communities hassufficient ability in either Bangla or in a neighboring language to be able to use that

languages written or oral literature well.

3. Study of the Language Varieties

3.1. Procedures

Comparing the words of different language varieties is one way to measure lexical

similarity. In this research of Bangladeshs Kuki-Chin languages, 306-item wordlists

were collected in different Kuki-Chin languages. Lexical similarities were then

calculated as a percentage of these 306 words which resemble each other in sound

(Blair 1990). Normally a wordlist is collected in the same village from two separate

people so as to ensure greater accuracy and certainty of the words. During this

survey, however, in each area where a wordlist was collected there were several

people sitting with the wordlist informant. Thus, the wordlist was not collected a

second time because through the group we could be sure that the word given by the

main informant was accurate and used in that area. In Konglak, however, it was not

possible to follow this method when collecting a Pangkhua wordlist because otherthan the one wordlist informantwho was not even born or brought up in that

neighborhoodnobody else knew Pangkhua well. The wordlists were written using

the International Phonetic Alphabet. They were then compared according to the

established procedures given in appendices.. and..in the Bangla version ofthis report. The WordSurvcomputer program designed by SIL (Wimbish 1989) was

used to do the final lexical similarity calculations.

A sociolinguistic questionnaire, a community information questionnaire, and leader

interviews were used to better understand how well speakers of one Kuki-Chin

language variety are able to understand other Kuki-Chin languages in Bangladesh.

Questions 7ad and 8 of the sociolinguistic questionnaire were about language

variation and intelligibility. These questions are given in appendix . (B.1) in the

Bangla version of this report. Other questions of the sociolinguistic questionnaire


18/127

15

were used to study bilingualism, language attitudes, and language vitality, all of

which are discussed in section 4 of this report.

The questionnaires were asked directly in Bangla with subjects who could

understand Bangla. With those subjects who could not understand Bangla well, the

questions were asked in that persons mother tongue with the assistance of someone

from their community.


Wordlists were collected in a total of nine villages in two hill districts. These nine

villages represent five Kuki-Chin communities. Figure 5 shows which community

each wordlist was collected from and which subdistrict and district that collection

site is located in.

Figure 5: Wordlist collection sites

Village Community Subdistrict and district

Bilaichari Pangkhua Bilaichari, Rangamati

Konglak Pangkhua Baghaichari, Rangamati

Bethel Para Bawm Ruma, Bandarban

Jamunachari Bawm Bilaichari, Rangamati

Bethel Para Lushai Ruma, Bandarban

Mahmuam Para (Ruilui area) Lushai Baghaichari, RangamatiBoro Kukyachari Khyang Rajasthali, Rangamati

Ghungurumukh Para Khyang Bandarban Sadar, Bandarban

Manglung Headman Para Khumi Thanci, Bandarban

Prongphung Para Khumi Ruma, Bandarban

These wordlist sites were chosen based on information given by leaders of the

various Kuki-Chin communities. In talking with various leaders and other people,

we came to know that, apart from Lushai, there is some variation within each of the

other languages, and this language variation is often based on geographical

difference. Thus, to better understand these differences or similarities, two sites

were chosen for each language community. Importance was also given to distance

and transportation to a village. In Bangladesh most Kuki-Chin villages are in

difficult-to-access areas of Rangamati and Bandarban districts, and some villages

have small populations while others have a larger number of people. Those villages


19/127

16

which have comparatively large populations were chosen as long as they could be

accessed. As much as was possible, we chose villages where a good and accurate

wordlist could be collected and where it was possible to get a good sample of

subjects for the sociolinguistic questionnaire.

At present the Pangkhua people live in Bilaichari, Jorachari, Barkal, and

Baghaichari subdistricts of Rangamati district. Within Baghaichari they live in only

a couple villages in Sajek union. In comparison with Baghaichari, Jorachari and

Barkal are closer to Bilaichari. Also, the Pangkhua in Bilaichari said that in the three

subdistricts of Bilaichari, Jorachari, and Barkal the Pangkhua is the same. Within

Barkal and Bilaichari subdistricts the largest Pangkhua village is Bilaichari

Pangkhua Para. Thus, Bilaichari Pangkhua Para was chosen as one data collection

site. Because Konglak village of Sajek union in Baghaichari subdistrict is remote,

this was chosen as a second Pangkhua site in order to be able to understand if there

is any language difference based on distance. Konglak was chosen over other

villages in Sajek union because other villages are very difficult to access, and there

wasnt time to go by foot to these villages which take a long time to reach.

According to Bangladeshs Bawm community leaders, there is a little difference in

the pronunciation and intonation of the Bawm spoken by those in Rangamati as

compared to that spoken by those in Bandarban. Thus, Jamunachari Bawm Para in

Bilaichari subdistrict of Rangamati district and Bethel Para in Ruma subdistrict of

Bandarban district were chosen as the two Bawm data collection sites. These sites

were also chosen because they are far from each other, and there isnt much contact

between the two, so these would give a good measure of language differences. Also,

these two particular villages have larger populations than others and therefore made

better subject sampling possible.

The population of Lushai in Bangladesh is small, and the only Lushai village in

Bangladesh is Mahmuam Para in the Ruilui area of Sajek union in Baghaichari

subdistrict, Rangamati. There are still fifteen families there, and they use their ownlanguage. Thus, a wordlist was collected from Mahmuam Para. Also, at the time of

collecting a Bawm wordlist in Bethel Para, we learned that there was an older

Lushai man living there who still can speak Lushai well, so a wordlist was also

elicited from him in order to get what could possibly be a pure Lushai wordlist.


20/127

17

Discussions with Khyang leaders revealed that, among the Khyang, those who live in

hilly areas are called Kongtu and those who live in plains areas are called Laitu, and

there are some differences in words and pronunciation between these two groups

(Thoisafrue Khyang 2007, personal communication). To better understand the

amount of language difference between these two groups, Boro Kukyachari, which isin the hilly area of Rajasthali subdistrict in Rangamati district, and Ghungurumukh

Para, which is in the plains area of Bandarban Sadar subdistrict in Bandarban

district, were the two Khyang sites chosen.

According to two young, educated Khumi men, Khumi people in Rowangchari and

Ruma subdistricts of Bandarban district speak the same, but those in Thanci

subdistrict speak Khumi with different pronunciation and intonation (Thanghloi

Khumi and Shiong Khumi 2007, personal communication). To understand how

similar or different the Khumi varieties spoken in these areas are, one village from

Ruma subdistrict and one village from Thanci subdistrict were chosen even though

they were difficult to access. Also, to see how similar the Khumi of Myanmar and

that of Bangladesh are, a Myanmar Khumi wordlist collected by a linguist working

there was compared with the ten Kuki-Chin wordlists collected in Bangladesh.

Finally, a standard Bangla wordlist was compared with each of these wordlists.

The sociolinguistic questionnaire was used in eight villages with a total of 83 people.

Among them 11 were Pangkhua, 21 were Bawm, 10 were Lushai, 20 were Khyang,

and 21 were Khumi. In each village the questionnaire was asked of at least 10

people including both men and women, more-educated and less-educated people,

and people of varying ages. In Bethel Para the questionnaire was not asked of the

Lushai because, other than the one wordlist informant, there were no other Lushai

people. Similarly, the questionnaire was not used in the Pangkhua village of

Konglak because the people no longer consistently use Pangkhua as their mother

tongue and therefore do not speak Pangkhua well. The wordlist informant from

Konglak, however, said he still knows the Pangkhua language.

This sociolinguistic questionnaire was used to gain a better understanding of

Bangladeshs Kuki-Chin language varieties, speakers attitudes towards each others

language, intelligibility, language vitality, and bilingualism. Most of these issues are

covered in section 4 of this report, so a more detailed discussion of the


21/127

18

questionnaire sample is given in section 4.2. Demographic information on each

subject is given in appendix.(D.2) in the Bangla version of this report.

3.3. Results

Thus, a total of 10 wordlists from the five Bangladesh Kuki-Chin communities, aKhumi wordlist from Myanmar, and a Bangla wordlist are included in this report.

Lexical similarity between each pair of wordlists is given in figure 6. The letter in

parentheses is that villages code letter for the wordlists given in appendix. (A.3)

of the Bangla version of this report.

Figure 6: Lexical similarity chart

(a) Bilaichari

88 (l) Konglak

38 41 (i) Bethel Para

36 38 84 (b) Jamunachari

31 32 47 47 (j) Bethel Para

30 33 46 46 91 (m) Mahmuam Para

12 12 9 9 8 8 (c) Boro Kukyachari

10 10 8 8 8 7 78 (k) Ghungurumukh Para

8 8 8 8 7 8 11 11 (g) Manglung Headman Para

8 8 8 8 8 8 10 10 82 (h) Prongphung Para Khumi

7 7 8 8 8 9 9 8 68 72 (e) Myanmar

3 2 1 2 2 2 3 1 1 1 0 (0) Bangla

3.3.1. Pangkhua

The lexical similarity between the two Pangkhua wordlists is 88%, which indicates

there is not substantial difference within the Pangkhua language, especially

considering that these two Pangkhua villages are far apart and that speakers from

these two villages do not have regular contact with each other. Among the few

Pangkhua questionnaire subjects who said in reply to question 7a2 that there are

2 7a. Are there any (mother tongue) speakers who speak differently than you?

Pangkhua

Bawm

Lushai

Khyang


22/127

19

some Pangkhua who speak differently, all then replied to question 7d3 that, in spite

of these differences, they can understand all of this different type of Pangkhua.

In response to sociolinguistic questionnaire question 8 Among Bawm, Khumi,

Lushai, Khyang, Pangkhua, and Mro [name all but subjects mother tongue] which

one is easiest for you to understand?four Pangkhua subjects said Lushai is easiest

for them. Three of these four subjects were educated. Because the Pangkhua are

Christian and use Lushai language Christian literature, it is possible that these three

who are more educated understand Lushai better than those who are uneducated.

The other seven questionnaire subjects said Bawm is easiest for them to understand,

and five of these seven were uneducated. The Pangkhua in this area have regular

contact with the Bawm, so they have had good opportunity to use Bawm. It should

be noted that the questionnaire was asked only of Pangkhua living in Bilaichari. The

Pangkhua in Konglak can understand Lushai just as well as their own language

because they live near the Lushai and their languages are related.

3.3.2. Bawm

The Bawm wordlist from Jamunachari in Bilaichari subdistrict of Rangamati district

and the Bawm wordlist from Bethel Para in Ruma subdistrict of Bandarban district

have a lexical similarity of 84%. Even though these two villages are located in two

different districts with a lot of distance between them, still the lexical similarity is

fairly high. Based on this one lexical similarity figure alone, it is difficult to saywhether the people from these two villages use the same language. Thus, to try to

get a clearer understanding of this issue, the sociolinguistic questionnaire was used

with 21 people from these two villages. Of these 21 people 12 replied to question 7a

that there are regional differences in the Bawm language. It is worth mentioning

that 10 of these 12 subjects were from Jamunachari, and the other two were from

Bethel Para. Possibly because they live far from the main Bawm people group area,

those from Jamunachari are more aware of such regional differences. In response to

question 7d, however, each of these 12 people said that, although there are Bawm

people who speak differently than they do, they can understand all of these peoples

speech. Thus, although the lexical similarity percentage is not conclusively high, it

3 7d. When you speak with someone from (each of) these places, how much do you understand?

(little, half, most, all)


23/127

20

can be assumed from the questionnaire responses that, although they live far apart,

Bawm people from one area have good comprehension of the Bawm used in another

area.

Because the languages share some similarity, Bawm people can also understand

some Lushai. This seems to be especially true for the Bawm living in Bethel Para.

Among the 11 questionnaire subjects from Bethel Para, seven replied to question 8

that Lushai is the easiest Kuki-Chin language for them to understand. This does not

mean, however, that their understanding is sufficiently good to be able to use Lushai

literature. Among the 10 questionnaire subjects from Jamunachari, nine said

Pangkhua is the easiest Kuki-Chin language for them to understand because they

live near the Pangkhua community.

3.3.3. Lushai

The lexical similarity percentage between the two Lushai wordlists is greater than

that between any other two wordlists. The lexical similarity between the two

villages is 91%, and this in spite of the fact that the two villages are in two separate

districts and are very far from each other. Based on this similarity percentage it can

be said that the Lushai still use one language. The answers to question 7a of the

questionnaire support this: all 10 subjects from Mahmuam Para said there are no

Lushai speakers who speak differently than they do, and there is no place where

Lushai is spoken differently.

Because Pangkhua, Bawm, and Lushai all lie on the same branch of the Tibeto-

Burman language family, the lexical similarities among them are greater than they

are between other Kuki-Chin languages in Bangladesh. As is shown in figure 2, these

three languages are all classified as Kuki-Chin, Central languages. The lexical

similarity between Pangkhua and Bawm is 3641%, and that between Pangkhua

and Lushai is 3033%. Among these three languages the greatest lexical similarity is

found between Bawm and Lushai: 46%. These percentages are not high enough to

maintain that these are dialects of the same language, but the lexical similarities

among these three languages are still greater than any of the other lexical similarity

percentages. If speakers of these three languages have regular contact with each

other, they will be able to learn one anothers languages more easily than they could

learn the other Kuki-Chin languages.


24/127

21

3.3.4. Khyang

The lexical similarity between the Khyang of Rajasthali and that of Bandarban is

78%. Although these wordlists are from the same people group, the lexical

similarity between them is less than the similarities between wordlists from each of

the above-mentioned groups. In addition, 17 of the 20 sociolinguistic questionnaire

subjects replied to question 7a that there are, in fact, some regional differences

within the Khyang language. For example, there are differences between the

language spoken by the Khyang who live in the hills and that spoken by the Khyang

who live on the plains. They call the Khyang who live in the hills Kongtu and

those who live in the plains Laitu. Of the two Khyang villages visited, the people

in Boro Kukyachari of Rajasthali are Kongtu and those in Ghungurumukh Para of

Bandarban are Laitu. Nearly all of the questionnaire subjects from Boro Kukyachari

said they are able to understand about halfof the plains area Laitu language. On theother hand, most of the Ghungurumukh Para subjects said they can understand most

of the hills area Kongtu language. This limited information lends itself to the

hypothesis that the plains area Khyang (the Laitu) can understand hills area Khyang

language (Kongtu) better than the hills area Khyang (the Kongtu) can understand

the language of the plains Khyang (Laitu). This data is not sufficient to be able to

say whether or not all of the Khyang in Bangladesh will be able to use the same

literature.

3.3.5. Khumi

The lexical similarity between the two Khumi wordlists from Ruma and Thanci

subdistricts of Bandarban district is 82%. That is to say, there is some difference

between the Khumi varieties spoken in these two areas. Community leaders had

mentioned that there are some differences between the words and the sounds of the

Khumi varieties spoken in Ruma and in Thanci. Also, a total of 21 subjects from

these two areas were asked the sociolinguistic questionnaire. Nineteen of the 21

subjects said in response to question 7a that there are differences in the way Khumi

is spoken, and they, too, especially mentioned differences between the variety

spoken in Ruma and that spoken in Thanci. Among the 19 subjects who mentioned

differences, 15 said they are able to understand mostof the speech of the other

variety.

The two Khumi wordlists collected in Bangladesh were also compared with a Khumi

wordlist collected in Myanmar. The wordlist from Myanmar was collected by a


25/127

22

linguist doing this same type of language research sometime after 2002 (Helga So-

Hartman 2008, personal communication). The list from Myanmar did not have all

the items in the 306-item wordlist used in this research, but there were enough of

the same items present that comparison was possible. The resulting lexical

similarities were 6872% similarity between Bangladesh Khumi and MyanmarKhumi.

While doing Kuki-Chin research in Bangladesh, some of us were privileged to sit in

on a conversation between a young Bangladesh Khumi man and a young Khumi

man who had just come into Bangladesh from Myanmar. These two Khumi men

from different countries talked quite easily with each other, and each could

reportedly understand all of the others speech. During this same meeting a small

portion of some Khumi literature published in Myanmar was read, and each Khumi

person who heard it said he could understand everything he had heard. Thus, it

seems likely that Khumi speakers in Bangladesh could use Khumi literature from

Myanmar either as it is or after some adaptation has been done.

In response to question 8 on the sociolinguistic questionnaire, most of the Lushai,

Khyang, and Khumi subjects said that no Kuki-Chin language other than their

mother tongue is even remotely easy for them to understand. Thus, it can be

assumed that people from these three communities cannot use literature in any

other Kuki-Chin language.

Although the above-mentioned languages are all classified as Kuki-Chin languages

within the Tibeto-Burman language family, they are not all of the same branch.

Thus, their lexical similarity is quite low. As was mentioned, the Pangkhua, Bawm,

and Lushai all belong to the central branch of Kuki-Chin languages. Within this

central branch there are no smaller branches. Thus, there is more lexical similarity

among these languages than between any of these and Khyang or Khumi. Khyang

and Khumi both belong to the southern branch of Kuki-Chin languages. The

southern branch, however, is further divided into smaller branches (see figure 2).

For example, Khyangalso known as Chin, Ashois part of the Sho branch of

Southern Kuki-Chin. Chin, Khumi is part of the Khumi branch along with Chin,

Khumi Awa. Thus, even though Khumi and Khyang are both Southern Kuki-Chin

languages, they are only 811% lexically similar because they are on different sub-


26/127

23

branches. This leads to a more detailed discussion on each communitys bilingualism,

which is explored in section 4.3.4.

Each of the above-mentioned Kuki-Chin languages was also compared with a Bangla

wordlist, but none of these languages has much lexical similarity with Bangla. Thelexical similarities between Bangla and the five Kuki-Chin languages in Bangladesh

are 13%. This indicates that there is minimal borrowing of Bangla words by

speakers of these Kuki-Chin languages.

4. Language Attitudes, Vitality, and Bilingualism Study

4.1. Procedures

A study of language attitudes is generally carried out in an effort to ascertain

peoples perceptions of the different speech varieties with which they have contact.

By studying how various languages are perceived, it is possible to get an idea of

how positive or negative people are towards their own language and towards other

language varieties. A sociolinguistic questionnaire was used to study language

attitudes. On this questionnaire there were five questions about language attitudes

(questions 13, 14a-b, and 15a-b).

A language vitality study was done in order to better understand whether children

of these people groups will speak that groups mother tongue in the future. This was

done by asking subjects which language they use in various domains, everyday

situations in which one language variety is considered more appropriate than

another (Fasold 1992). The vitality of a language is also understood by asking

questions such as, What language will the next generation of children speak?

What language do children speak best? Can children speak their mother tongue

well? What other languages can children speak? Questionnaire questions 3, 9,

10a-b, 11, and 12 are about language vitality.

Bilingualism refers to the ability of an individual or a group of people to use alanguage other than their mother tongue. There are several ways to study

bilingualism. For this Kuki-Chin research bilingualism was studied through

observation, through talking with various Kuki-Chin community members, and

through the questionnaire. Sociolinguistic questionnaire questions 2, 4, and 5 are

about bilingualism.


27/127

24

Through the help of their own community members, most Kuki-Chin questionnaire

subjects were asked these questions in their mother tongue. Those who could speak

and understand Bangla well enough were asked the questions directly in Bangla.

The questions are in appendix . (B.1) and the responses are in appendix (C) of

the Bangla version of this report.


The sociolinguistic questionnaire was used with people in eight villages. It was not

used in Bethel Para with Lushai people or in Konglak with Pangkhua people. In each

of these two particular villages only a wordlist was collected. In Bethel Para there

are no Lushai people other than the wordlist informant, so it was not possible to use

the questionnaire there among the Lushai. In Konglak people other than the wordlist

informant no longer know the Pangkhua language well, so in this village, too, the

sociolinguistic questionnaire was not used. The researchers generally decided which

villages to visit after talking with various community leaders.

In each of the eight Kuki-Chin villages where the sociolinguistic questionnaire was

used, it was administered to at least 10 people. Among these 10 people there were

men and women, younger and older people, and more-educated and less-educated

people. Subjects whose ages were 1834 years old were considered younger, and

those whose ages were 35 years old or greater were considered older. Those who

had studied through less than class 8 were counted as less-educated, and thosewho had studied through class 8 or more were considered educated.

In each village where the sociolinguistic questionnaire was administered, the

researchers tried to ask the questionnaire of at least five people in each of those six

demographic categories mentioned. This, however, was not possible in every village.

For example, other than in the Bawm and Pangkhua villages, it was not possible to

find five educated people. This was particularly true for the Khumi village of

Manglung Headman Para, where not even one person who had studied through at

least class 8 could be found. In each of three other villages (the Khumi village of

Prongphung Para, the Khyang village of Boro Kukyachari, and the Lushai village of

Mahmuam Para), the questionnaire was administered to only two or three people

who had passed at least class 8. Finally, because there are few older people living in

Mahmuam Para, it was not possible to get a good balance of older and younger

questionnaire subjects.


28/127

25

4.3. Results

The following discussion about Kuki-Chin speakers language attitudes, the vitality

of their languages, and bilingualism is based on responses to the sociolinguistic

questionnaire, the opinions of various community leaders, and the researchers

observations.

4.3.1. Language use

The first step in researching the language attitudes, vitality, and bilingualism of a

people group is to study what languages they use in various domains. There were

five questions about language use in the sociolinguistic questionnaire (questions 1a

d and 6). Following is a discussion about what languages Kuki-Chin speakers in

Bangladesh use in various domains. It should be mentioned that, because some

subjects said they use more than one language in a given domain, the sum of

percentages for some questions is greater than 100 percent.

Figure 7: Bangladesh Kuki-Chin community language use information chart

Key: MT = mother tongue

Question

Response

Community

What language do you

use most of the timePangkhua Bawm Lushai Khyang Khumi

at home? MT 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

with your MT

friends?MT 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

at church/ temple?

MT 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Bangla -- -- -- 10% 5%

Marma -- -- -- 40% 48%

Mro -- 5% -- -- --

with shopkeepers in

the market?

MT 9% 48% -- 50% 14%

Bangla 82% 95% 90% 90% 33%

Marma -- 38% -- 20% 76%other 9% -- 20% 5% 33%


29/127

26

Language used most of the time at home, with mother tongue friends, and at

church/temple

As is shown in figure 7, all the subjects from each Kuki-Chin community said they

use their mother tongue to communicate both at home and with friends from their

language group. The Pangkhua and the Lushai all said they use their mother tonguemost of the time at church, too. All of the Bawm subjects also said they use their

mother tongue at church although one Bawm preacher added that he uses his own

Bawm language when attending church with Bawm people but uses the Mro

language when preaching among people from the Mro community. All of these

responses indicate that the people from each of these three communities still use

their own language among themselves most of the time.

Each of these three communities is Christian, and people from other communities

generally do not attend their churches. Thus, they have good opportunity to use

their mother tongue most of the time. The Khyang and Khumi subjects also said

they use their mother tongue at home and with friends from their language group.

Among these subjects, however, nearly half said that at church or a temple they use

Marma along with their mother tongue. Interestingly, those Khyang subjects who

said they use Marma at church or the temple are all from Ghungurumukh Para. The

majority of people from this village are Buddhist. There are many Buddhists among

the Khumi, too, and the religious teachers for both Khyang and Khumi Buddhists are

Marma. Thus, along with their mother tongue, the Khyang and Khumi have to use

Marma. It is possible that, because of their religion, these peoples languages will be

increasingly influenced by Marma in the future.

Language used with shopkeepers in the market

Regarding language used with shopkeepers in the market, the fact of the matter is

that almost all Kuki-Chin people in Bangladesh use the language of the shopkeeper.

Thus, if the shopkeeper is Bengali, they use Bangla; if he is Marma, they use Marma;

and if he is from their own community, they use their own language. The

researchers of this report did notice that some Bengali shopkeepers who had lived in

the area for a long time had become quite competent in using Marma or Bawm, and

with these shopkeepers Kuki-Chin people speak Marma or Bawm.

Compared with the other Kuki-Chin communities, the situation of the Khumi is

different. Most people from Manglung Headman Para use Marma in the market


30/127

27

because the markets in their neighboring areas are in Marma areas, and most of the

shopkeepers are Marma. It is worth noting that none of the questionnaire subjects

from Manglung Headman Para said they use Bangla in the market. On the other

hand, of the 11 Khumi subjects from Prongphung Para, seven said they use Bangla

with shopkeepers, eight said they use Marma, and five said they use Bawm. Thus, ofall five Kuki-Chin communities, only the Khumi use Marma rather than Bangla in

the market most of the time.

Language used most in a typical week

There was one other question about language use on the sociolinguistic

questionnaire. It asked, In a typical week what language do you use the most? To

this question nearly all subjects replied that they use their mother tongue. This is

because in a normal week they are with people from their own language community

most of the time, and with their own people they use their mother tongue. One

Khyang and two Bawm preachers did say that for their preaching work they use

another language along with their mother tongue because they preach among

people groups other than their own. Another two Khyang subjects said they use

Bangla most of the time. Both of these subjects are teachers and they must use

Bangla for their work.

Although this language use research among the Kuki-Chin of Bangladesh is not very

comprehensive, the data does show that they still use their mother tongue whenever

possible. The data also shows that they often must use another language such as

Bangla, Marma, or Bawm when they go outside of their community. Especially the

Pangkhua, the Jamunachari Bawm, the Boro Kukyachari Khyang, and the Lushai use

Bangla in the market while the Khumi use Marma a lot in the market.

4.3.2. Language attitudes

Understanding language attitudes is another part of language research. Thus, the

sociolinguistic questionnaire has questions about language attitudes along with

questions about other topics. To gain a better understanding of the language

attitudes held by the various Kuki-Chin communities, the following question was

asked, What language should be used as the medium of education in primary

school? Responses from subjects from the five Kuki-Chin communities are given in

figure 8. Because some respondents gave more than one language name, the sum of

percentages for some communities is greater than 100 percent.


31/127

28

Figure 8: Information about which language should be used as the medium of

education in primary school

CommunityResponse

mother tongue Bangla English

Pangkhua 9% (1/11) 82% (9/11) 9% (1/11)

Bawm 20% (4/20) 95% (19/20) 25% (5/20)

Lushai 20% (2/10) 50% (5/10) 50% (5/10)

Khyang 25% (5/20) 95% (19/20) --

Khumi 10% (2/21) 100% (21/21) --

As figure 8 shows, mostof the subjects from the Pangkhua, Bawm, and Khyang

communities said Bangla should be used as the medium of education in primary

school, and all of the Khumi subjects were of the opinion that Bangla should be used

in this situation. Some subjects gave reasons for their opinions, saying that Bangla is

the one language in Bangladesh that is used for education and that only Bangla can

be used in all situations. Thus, they said, to live a more developed life and to

accomplish positive change in life through education, there is no alternative to

learning Bangla.

Especially some of the Bawm and Khyang subjects were also of the opinion that

their mother tongue should be used as the medium of education in primary school.Among these subjects many said that in primary school the children should first be

taught in their mother tongue and then later be taught in Bangla.

Among the Lushai subjects one-half said Bangla and one-half said English should be

the medium of primary school education. Among those who said English should be

used, two people said their mother tongue should also be used alongside English to

teach their children. In explaining why they said English should be used, some of

the Lushai subjects said that this would be helpful for their childrens higher studies

in the future and also that this would help them become more developed.

All of the Khumi subjects said Bangla should be the medium of education in primary

school. Also, among the 21 Khumi subjects, two people said that their mother

tongue should be used as an education medium alongside Bangla so that the

children do not forget their mother tongue.


32/127

29

Not a lot can be said based on this limited information, but it can be said that, other

than the Lushai, the majority of subjects from each of the other communities think

that because they live in Bangladesh, Bangla should be the medium of education in

primary school. Some subjects, however, did say their mother tongue should be

used alongside Bangla or English for giving teaching instruction at the primaryschool level.

In studying language attitudes, two sets of questions about a language education

program were asked along with the question mentioned about education medium.

The first set of questions was used only in villages where there was an existing

mother tongue class, and these questions asked about the success of the class.4 The

second set of questions was used in villages where there was not an existing mother

tongue class, and these questions asked subjects if they would send their children to

a multilingual education class and why.5

The first set of these two questions was asked only of the Bawm because only among

the Bawm is there already a mother tongue education program running. The second

set of questions was not asked of the Bawm because it was not applicable given that

they already have a language education program. Bawm community members

explained that the Bawm language education program is being run by their own

efforts and is successful because of community members cooperation. The result of

this language education program is that Bawm children can freely read literature in

their own language. Among the Kuki-Chin communities in Bangladesh, only the

Bawm are running their own education program, and this largely through their own

efforts. Though other factors are possible, this indicates the Bawm have a stronger

positive attitude towards their mother tongue than do the other communities.

Because there is not a mother tongue education program running among the

Pangkhua, the Lushai, the Khyang, or the Khumi, the second set of questions about a

language education program was asked of members of these communities. Each of

4 14a. I have been told there is a mother tongue literacy program here. Do you know any children

who go to these classes? 14b. If yes, how successful do you think these classes are?

5 15a. If your community leaders set up a class to teach young children first how to read and write in

their mother tongue and then how to read and write Bangla, would you send your children? 15b.

Why or why not?


33/127

30

the Khyang and Khumi subjects responded that they would send their children to

such a class. Of the 11 Pangkhua subjects eight said they would send their children,

two said they didnt know if they would send their children or not, and one said he

would not send his children, reasoning that they can learn their mother tongue at

home and therefore do not need such a class.

To this same question eight of the 10 Lushai subjects said they would send their

children to such a class, and two said they would not. One of these two said this

countrys provision for education is not good, so he will send his children to India

for school. The other subject who first said he wouldnt send his children to this

type of class then explained that if the class was good he would send them, but

otherwise he, too, would send his children to India for their education.

Those subjects who answered yes to this question were also asked why they wouldsend their children to such a class. A summary of their various reasons is given in

figure 9. The numbers in parentheses represent the number of subjects from each

community who answered yes to this question.

Figure 9: Reasons for sending children to mother tongue and Bangla classes


Reason

Response Rate

Pangkhua

(8)

Lushai

(8)

Khyang

(20)

Khumi

(21)

For education 38% 25% 15% 52%

For learning language 25% 50% 25% 33%

To preserve their MT -- -- 20% 14%

For their future development 13% -- 15% --

To learn Bangla well 13% 13% 5% --

To learn their MT 13% -- 10% --

For development of their MT -- -- 5% --

To be able to express their thoughts -- -- 5% --

Do not know -- 13% -- --

Figure 9 shows that most people from each community said they would send their

children to mother tongue and Bangla classes for reasons having to do with

education and learning language. Because the education rate among most of these


34/127

31

communities is very low, they have given importance to education of their children

and recognize that for good education to happen, the children must learn Bangla

along with their mother tongue.

Many subjects from each community also said they would send their children to this

type of class because their children will be able to learn Bangla along with their

mother tongue, and if they are able to learn Bangla along with their mother tongue,

they will be able to learn Bangla well, which will lead to improved lives for them.

Other subjects want to send their children to such classes because they think that

preserving their language is important and that this will be possible through this

type of education program.

This language attitudes data shows that nearly all of the communities questionnaire

subjects said the medium of education should be Bangla instead of their mothertongue and that half of the Lushai subjects said the education medium should be

Bangla, and half said it should be English. This does not, however, mean that these

communities have a negative attitude towards their mother tongues. Rather, for

practical reasons they advise using Bangla and to a lesser extent English for

education. Similarly, just as some of the subjects said it is important to preserve

their language, many also said it is imperative that Bangla be learned.

We researchers perceived a positive attitude among the Bawm towards their mother

tongue, for in each of their villages there is a mother tongue education center. For

the other four communities, however, information is too limited for us to say

whether their attitudes towards their mother tongues are positive or negative. They

did express interest in an education program that teaches their children to first learn

in their mother tongue and then in Bangla, but they do not have any such programs

at present nor did the researchers notice real interest in the community as a whole

in starting such a program. This could be due not only to language attitudes but also

to issues such as a groups economic position or a lack of information about how to

start such a program.

4.3.3. Language vitality

In addition to language use and language attitudes, language vitality was also

studied as part of this research. The vitality of a language is dependent upon

language use, especially upon the language use of children. Thus, to study language


35/127

32

vitality, some questions about childrens language use were included in the

sociolinguistic questionnaire. Questions 3 and 912 are about language vitality. A

summary of responses to most of these questions is given in figure 10.

Figure 10: Responses to language vitality questions

Abbreviations:

Subjects best language = 3. What language do you speak best?

Kids first language = 9. What language do children in your village speak first?

Kids best language = 11. What language do young people (age 10) in your village

speak best?

Other language before school = 10a. Before starting school, do many children in

your village speak any language besides your MT?

Which language = 10b. If yes, which one(s)?

MT = mother tongue

Community

Subjects

best

language

Kids

first

language

Kids

best

language

Other language before

schoolWhich

language

MT MT MT yes no dont know

Pangkhua 100% 100% 100% 18% 82% -- Bangla

Bawm 100% 100% 100% -- 95% 5% --

Lushai 100% 100% 100% -- 100% -- --

Khyang 100% 100% 100% -- 100% -- --

Khumi 100% 100% 100% -- 100% -- --

The information in figure 10 indicates that the Kuki-Chin communities of

Bangladesh are still able to speak their own languages well. Even their children

speak their mother tongue as their best language, and their mother tongue is the

language they use when they first start to speak. Also, most children cannot speak a

language besides their mother tongue before starting school. Out of all the

sociolinguistic questionnaire subjects, only two Pangkhua subjects said many

children from their village speak another language in this case Bangla before

starting school, and one of these subjects qualified his answer by saying they speak

a little Bangla.

In all of the communities that the researchers of this report have researched in the

past, never before has 100% of any communitys subjects said that they and their


36/127

33

communitys children speak their mother tongue as their best and first language.

This indicates that Bangladeshs Kuki-Chin languages are very vital.

One other question concerning language vitality was used in this study. Figure 11

displays the answers from the various communities.

Figure 11: Responses to one other language vitality question

Question 12: In about 30 years, when the children of this village grow up and have children

of their own, what language do you think those children will speak?


Community

Response

MT BanglaMT &

Bangla

Bangla &

English

MT &

English

dont

know

Pangkhua 100% -- -- -- -- --Bawm 76% 10% 5% 5% 5% --

Lushai 100% -- -- -- -- --

Khyang 75% 15% -- -- -- 10%

Khumi 38% 43% 5% -- -- 14%

In response to the above-mentioned question, each of the Pangkhua and Lushai

subjects said in the future their communitys children will speak their own language.

Among the Bawm and the Khyang mostof the subjects said their communitys future

generation of children will speak their mother tongue, but three Khyang subjects

(15%) and two Bawm subjects (10%) said that in the future children in their village

will speak Bangla, explaining that they would be educated in Bangla and would

therefore speak it. There was also one Bawm subject who said the children would

speak both Bawm and Bangla, another one who said they would speak Bangla and

English, and one other who said they would speak Bawm and English.

On this issue the Khumi community is somewhat of an exception. Khumi subjects

said they speak Khumi as their best language, and at present Khumi children speakKhumi as their best and first language. Still, almost half of the subjects (9 out of 21

subjects) said that in the future Khumi children will speak Bangla while nearly the

same number (8 out of 21 subjects) said future Khumi children will still speak

Khumi. Of those who said future Khumi children will speak Bangla rather than

Khumi, one subject went on to explain that they will do so because they will be


37/127

34

educated in Bangla. One other subject said the future generation of Khumi children

will speak both Khumi and Bangla.

In summary it can be said that, although some Kuki-Chin peoplemost notably nine

of the Khumi subjectsthink the future generation of children in their community

will speak Bangla instead of their own communitys language, it is highly unlikely

that the various Kuki-Chin languages of Bangladesh will be lost. This is because in

almost every community most of the members speak their own language among

themselves. The situation of the Lushai, however, is different in that the Lushai

language may no longer be used in Bangladesh in the not-too-distant future.

According to the headman of the one remaining area in Bangladesh where Lushai is

still used today, it is possible that some day the Lushai from that area will move to

India. In India, however, Lushai is a very vital language.

4.3.4. Bilingualism

Along with language use, attitudes, and vitality, bilingualism was a part of the

sociolinguistic research done among Bangladeshs Kuki-Chin communities. Three

questions on the questionnaire (questions 2, 4, and 5) were used to better

understand the bilingualism abilities of these various Kuki-Chin communities. A

discussion on the responses given to each of these three questions follows.


Question 2: What languages can you speak in addition to your mother tongue?

The information given in figure 12 shows that most subjects from each community

said they are able to speak a neighboring language along with Bangla. For example,

the Pangkhua subjects who are from Bilaichari Pangkhua Para live near Chakma

and Bawm communities and have regular contact with them. Because of this, many

of the Pangkhua subjects said they are able to speak Bawm and Chakma in addition

Commu-

nity

Responses

Bangla Marma Chakma Lushai MroBaw

m

Tri-

pura

Tang-

changya

Pang-

khua

Eng-

lishnone

Pangkhua 82% 9% 73% 82% -- 91% -- -- X -- --

Bawm 70% 62% 43% 57% 14% X 14% 14% 48% -- --

Lushai 100% -- 40% X -- -- 90% -- -- 10% --

Khyang 95% 80% 35% -- -- 25% 20% 15% 15% -- 5%

Khumi 62% 90% -- -- 38% 5% -- -- -- -- 10%


38/127

35

to their mother tongue. Additionally, 82% of the Pangkhua subjects said they can

speak Bangla. The same percentage of Pangkhua subjects also said they can speak

Lushai. The Pangkhua are Christian, but there is not Christian literature in their

language, so they use Lushai Christian books. Thus, although there are not Lushai

people living in Bilaichari, many Pangkhua people there can speak some Lushai.

People living in the two Bawm villages where this language research took place

have opportunity to use Bangla. Thus, 70% of the Bawm subjects said they are able

to speak Bangla in addition to their mother tongue. Also, because they live near

Marma communities and have regular contact with them, 62% of the Bawm subjects

said they can speak Marma. Because the Bawm from Jamunachari have neighbors

from several language communities, a few of the subjects from there said they can

speak Tripura and/or Tangchangya, all but one subject said they can speak Chakma,

and each of the Jamunachari subjects said they can speak Pangkhua. None of the

Bawm subjects from Bethel Para of Ruma subdistrict reported being able to speak

Tripura, Tangchangya, Chakma, or Pangkhua.

Figure 12 shows that 57% of the Bawm subjects said they can speak Lushai.

Although it is not regular, the Bawm do have contact with the Lushai and therefore

have some opportunity to speak Lushai. They are naturally able to understand

Lushai more easily than other languages because there is some similarity with their

language. Thus, more than half of the Bawm subjects said they can speak Lushai.

Each of the Lushai subjects said they can speak Bangla along with their mother

tongue. This is because when they go outside of their village or speak with people

from other communities, they must use Bangla. Therefore they, too, have had an

opportunity to use Bangla. The Lushai living in Mahmuam Para have Tripura

neighbors living close by and therefore hear and use the Tripura language most days.

Thus, 90% of the Lushai subjects said they can also speak Tripura. Finally, a few of

the Lushai subjects said they can speak a little Chakma.

The information given in figure 12 shows that, besides their mother tongue, most of

the Khyang can speak Bangla and Marma. This is because when the Khyang go

outside of their community, they often speak Bangla and Marma. In addition to

speaking these languages, many of the subjects from Boro Kukyachari in Rajasthali

said they can speak Chakma, Tripura, and/or Bawm. Thus it seems that the Khyang

living in the Rajasthali area can speak several languages to at least some extent.


39/127

36

As was their language vitality situation, the bilingualism situation of the Khumi

community in Bangladesh is different from those of the other Kuki-Chin

communities. Compared with the other Kuki-Chin communities, the Khumi

communitys Bangla ability is low. This is probably because the Khumi live farther

from Bengali communities and have little communication with Bengalis and so donot have much opportunity to use Bangla. On the other hand most of the Khumi

subjects said they can speak Marma in addition to their mother tongue because

when they speak with people from other language communities in their area, they

use Marma more than Bangla or any other language. It should be noted that

Bandarban district of the Chittagong Hill Tracts is predominantly a Marma area.

Thus, Marma is used as a language of wider communication among most of the

indigenous peoples of Bandarban. Some of the Khumi subjects also said they can

speak Mro because they live near Mro communities. Finally, two older femalesubjects from Manglung Headman Para of Thanci district said they cant speak any

language other than their mother tongue because they do not have interaction with

people outside of the Khumi community.

Because the populations of these communities are small, speakers from them find

that in important situations they generally must use the languages of larger,

neighboring communities. Thus, although they may not be very fluent in these

neighboring languages, they are able to say what they need to when needed. People

from the various Kuki-Chin communities in Bangladesh speak not only some Bangla

but also neighboring minority languages. Different minority language groups live in

different geographical areas, and the various Kuki-Chin communities also live in

different areas. Thus, a communitys ability in a minority language is dependent on

where that community is located and who their neighbors are. One goal of this

Kuki-Chin research was to better understand how well Kuki-Chin speakers can

understand the languages mentioned. Discussion on this follows.


40/127

37


Question 4: What language do you speak second best (after your mother tongue)?

Commu-

nity

Responses

Bangla Bawm LushaiPang-

khua

Chakma MarmaTri-

pura

not

applicablePangkhua 36% 36% 18% X 9% -- -- --

Bawm 62% X 5% 24% -- 10% -- --

Lushai 50% -- X -- -- -- 50% --

Khyang 70% -- -- -- -- 25% -- 5%

Khumi 10% -- -- -- -- 81% -- 10%

The information in figure 13 shows that four Pangkhua subjects (36%) said they

speak Bangla as their second-best language. Each went on to say that they canalways say what they want to say in Bangla, and each of these four subjects was

educated. Four other Pangkhua subjects said Bawm is their second-best language,

but three of these four said that, although Bawm is their second-best language, they

cannot always say what they want to say in Bawm. The other one said he can

always say what he wants to say in Bawm. Also, none of these four subjects who

named Bawm as their second-best language had been educated up to class 8. This

data indicates that those Pangkhua who are educated have good bilingual ability in

Bangla, but the Pangkhua community as a whole does not have sufficient ability in

Bangla to be able to use Bangla literature. Two other Pangkhua subjects said that

they speak Lushai as their second-best language and that they can always say what

they want to say in Lushai. One other Pangkhua subject said her second-best

language is Chakma.

The discussion in the previous paragraph is about only those Pangkhua from

Bilaichari Pangkhua Para. It can be assumed that other Pangkhua villages in this

area have a more-or-less similar situation with regards to bilingualism. The situation

among the Pangkhua living in Sajek union of Baghaichari subdistrict in Rangamatidistrict, however, is different. There is not a lot of detailed information available,

but a little formal research, travels through that area, and conversations that the

author had with people from that area all indicate that this area is near the Mizoram,

India, border and that the Pangkhua living there have regular contact with the

Lushai of Mizoram. This and the fact that this area is separated from Bengali


41/127

38

communities indicate that the Pangkhua there speak Lushai much better than

Bangla. In fact the Pangkhua people from Konglak village in Sajek union no longer

use Pangkhua as their mother tongue but instead speak Lushai as their first

language.

Among the Bawm subjects 13 (62%) said Bangla is their second-best language. Four

of these 13 people are from Jamunachari, and each of these four said they could

always say what they wanted to say in Bangla, presumably because each of them is

educated. The other nine Bawm subjects who said Bangla is their second-best

language are from Bethel Para, and eight of these people said they cannotalways

say what they want to say in Bangla. The one subject who said he can always say

what he wants in Bangla is a health worker. It is assumed that because Bangla is

important for his work, he knows more Bangla than the other subjects. Two other

Bawm subjects said Marma is their second-best language, and one said Lushai is his

second-best language. Each of the two who named Marma said they had lived in

Marma areas for some time and therefore had the opportunity to learn and use

Marma. They each said they can always say what they want to say in Marma.

Five other Bawm subjects said they speak Pangkhua as their second-best language.

All of these subjects said they can always say what they want to say in Pangkhua,

and all are from Jamunachari Bawm Para. These peoples closest neighbors are

Pangkhua, they have regular contact with the Pangkhua, and they have opportunity

to use the Pangkhua language. In other areas where the Bawm live, however, there

are not Pangkhua people living nearby. Thus, in areas other than Jamunachari, the

Bawm do not know the Pangkhua language or at least do not speak it as their

second-best language. For the Bawm community as a whole, then, it can be

concluded that they are not sufficiently bilingual in Bangla, Marma, or Pangkhua.

Among the Lushai subjects five (50%) named Bangla as their second-best language,

and five others (50%) named Tripura. Of the five who named Bangla, four said they

are always able to say what they want to say in Bangla. The population of theLushai in Bangladesh is very small, and, other than with their closest neighbors, the

Tripura, they have to use Bangla to speak with other people in most situations.

Perhaps for these reasons these people speak Bangla as their second-best language.

In spite of the fact that half of the subjects said Bangla is their second-best language,

the researchers had to use the help of a translator to speak with many of them


42/127

39

because they could not directly understand the researchers Bangla. Thus it can be

assumed that this level of Bangla ability is not sufficient to understand Bangla

literature or to maintain a conversation in Bangla.

Of the five Lushai subjects who named Tripura as their second-best language, four

said they can always say what they want to say in Tripura. This is because the

neighbors living closest to the Lushai in Mahmuam Para are Tripura, and the

population of the Tripura is greater than that of the Lushai. Thus, the Lushai must

learn Tripura in order to be able to have regular interaction with their Tripura

neighbors. The result is that they are able to speak Tripura along with their mother

tongue. It seems, therefore, that a Lushai persons second-best language is

dependent upon whom they have the most regular contact with and upon who their

neighbors are.

Seventy percent of the Khyang subjects named Bangla as their second-best language,

and among these subjects most (86%) said they can always say what they want to

say in Bangla. In spite of these responses, it is suspected that the Bangla ability of

the Khyang as a community is not as great as that of some other communities. They

usually use Bangla only for simple chatting and cannot speak about or understand

deep topics in Bangla. Notably, many people had difficulty understanding the

language used in this researchs sociolinguistic questionnaire.

Some Khyang can also speak Marma. This is because the Marma live near some of

them, some have regular contact with the Marma, and some share a religion with

the Marma. Thus, five of the Khyang subjects (25%) said Marma is their second-best

language, and three of these people said they can always say what they want to say

in Marma. The other twowho said they cannotalways say what they want to say

in Marma even though it is their second-best languageare older women who stay

at home most of the time and therefore have little opportunity to use Marma. One

other Khyang subject said she doesnt speak any language other than Khyang, so this

question was not applicable for her.

Of all the Kuki-Chin communities in Bangladesh, the education rate of the Khumi is

the lowest. Between the two Khumi villages where research was done, only two

people who had been educated through at least class 8 could be found, and both of

these people were young men. Furthermore, only these two men named Bangla as

their second-best language. They said they can always say what they want to say in


43/127

40

Bangla because during their school years each of them stayed with other students

from a mix of ethnic communities and there had a lot of opportunity to use Bangla.

Another 17 of the Khumi subjects (81%) said Marma is their second-best language.

Nine out of these 17 subjects said they can always say what they want to say in

Marma because they have to use Marma in many situations. The other eight subjects

who named Marma as their second-best language cannot always say what they want

to say in Marma, and of these eight people seven are from Manglung Headman Para.

People from this village generally do not go out much and therefore have little

contact with people from other communities and little opportunity to use Marma or

any other second language. Thus, although Marma is their second-best language,

they do not have strong bilingual ability in Marma. Two Khumi women who were

both over 40 years old said they cannot speak any language other than their mother

tongue. Thus, question 4 would not be applicable for them and therefore was not

asked of them.

In conclusion, the Kuki-Chin people of Bangladesh speak their own language as their

best language, and after that they can speak Bangla and also some neighboring

languages. They especially find that they must learn the languages of neighboring

communities who have a greater population than their own or whose language is

used as a language of wider communication in the area. Thus, people from the same

language community who live in two different areas may be able to speak different

languages. Although they can speak various neighboring languages, no community

has sufficient ability in any given neighboring language to be able to understand

literature in that l

Documents

The Kuki-Chin Communities of Bangladesh.pdf