Cover not available

Article published In: International Journal of Language and Culture
Vol. 11:1 (2024) ► pp.95–122

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Women have no honour of their own

Conceptualizations of honor in Indian English and Pakistani English

 | Develop Diverse
 | University of Copenhagen
Published online: 7 March 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijolc.00057.ebe
Abstract
This article presents a corpus-based Cultural-Linguistic study of the usage of the word honour in Pakistani and Indian Englishes, addressing underlying cultural conceptualizations of the notion of honor. Honor emerges as a complex cultural model which involves several cultural schemas, cultural categories and other cultural conceptualizations, in which women are cast as responsible protectors and upholders of the honor of men, families, and communities, their bodies being the very locus of men’s honor. The study is based on a relatively simple qualitative and quantitative analysis of two specialized corpora representing discourse on honor and related phenomena in Pakistani and Indian Englishes.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Honor as a cultural phenomenon
  • 3.Theoretical background
    • 3.1World Englishes and linguistic glocalization
    • 3.2Culture as a complex adaptive system of conceptualizations
      • 3.2.1Cultural schema
      • 3.2.2Cultural category
      • 3.2.3Cultural metaphor
      • 3.2.4Cultural model
  • 4.Data and method
    • 4.1Description of data
    • 4.2Concordance analysis
    • 4.3Collocational analysis
  • 5.Honor
    • 5.1The cultural model of honor in IE and PE
    • 5.2The complex kinship system in the cultural model of honor
    • 5.3Concretizations of honor
    • 5.4Towards a cultural model of honor
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Declaration of interest statement
  • References
References (50)
References
Baker, P. (2010). Sociolinguistics and corpus linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baroni, M., & Barnardini, S. (2004). BootCaT: Bootstrapping corpora and terms from the web. In M. T. Lino, M. Xavier, F. Ferreira, R. Costa, R. Silva, C. Pereira, F. Carvalho, M. Lopes, M. Catarino & S. Barros (Eds.), Proceedings of LREC 2004 (pp. 1313–1316). Lisbon: Universidade Nova de Lisboa.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, L. (2017). Honour-based abuse in England and Wales. Who does what to whom? PhD-dissertation: University of Bristol.
Begagić, M. (2013). Semantic preference and semantic prosody of the collocation make sense. Jezikoslovlje, 14(2–3), 403–416.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, J., & Hopper, P. (2001). Introduction to frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. In J. Bybee & P. Hopper (Eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (pp. 1–26). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chakravarti, U. (2005). From fathers to husbands: Of love death and marriage in North India. In L. Welchman & S. Hossain (Eds.), ‘Honour’: Crimes, paradigms and violence against women, (pp. 308–331). London: Zed Books. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Churchill, P. (2018). Women in the crossfire: Understanding and endling honor killing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W., Taoka, C., & Wood, E. (2001). Argument linking and the commercial transaction frame in English, Russian and Japanese. Language Sciences, 231, 579–602. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
D’Andrade, R. (1987). A folk model of the mind. In D. Holland & N. Quinn (Eds.), Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 112–148). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Das, P. (2020). Euphemism, rhetoric and prosody. London: New Central Book Agency.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, M. (2022). Corpus of contemporary American English. URL: [URL]
D’Lima, T., Solotaroff, J., & Pande, R. (2020). For the sake of family and tradition: Honour killings in India and Pakistan. Indian Journal of Women and Social Change, 5(1), 22–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dousset, L. (2011). Australian aboriginal kinship. Marseille: Manuels du Credo. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ermers, R. (2018). Honor related violence. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evison, J. (2010). What are the basics of analysing a corpus. In A. O’Keeffe & M. McCarthy (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics. (pp. 112–135). London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Finzel, A. (2021). Innate or acquired? Homosexuality and cultural models of gender in Indian and Nigerian English. In H.-G. Wolf, D. Lati, & A. Finzel (Eds.), Cultural-Linguistic Explorations into Spirituality, Emotionality, and Society (pp. 186–212). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flowerdew, L. (2004). The argument for using English specialized corpora to understand academic and professional language. In U. Connor & T. Upton (Eds.), Discourse in the professions: Perspectives from corpus linguistics (pp. 11–33). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frank, R. (2015). A future agenda for research on language and culture. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), Routledge handbook of language and culture (pp. 593–612). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gegeo, D., & Watwon-Gegeo, K. (1999). Adult education, language change, and issues of identity and authenticity in Kwara’ae (Solomon Islands). Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 30(1), 22–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gill, A. K., & A. Brah. (2014). Interrogating cultural narratives about ‘honour’-based violence. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 21(1), 72–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glushko, R., Maglio, D., Matlock, T., & Barsalou, L. (2008). Categorization in the wild. Trends in cognitive science, 12(4), 129–135. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goossens, L. (1990). Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(3), 323–340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hunjan, S., & Towson, S. (2007). “Virginity is everything”: Sexuality in the context of intimate partner violence in the South Asian community. In S. Dasgupta (Ed.), Body evidence: Intimate violence against South Asian women in America (pp. 53–67). Chicago, IL: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kamir, O. (2019). Betraying Dignity: The Toxic Seduction of Social Media, Shaming, and Radicalization. Oxford: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kachru, B. (1990). World Englishes and applied linguistics. World Englishes, 9(1), 3–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaushal, K. (2020). No honour in honour killing. Comparative analysis of Indian traditional social structure vis-á-vis gender violence. Indian Journal of Women and Social Change, 5(1), 52–69. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kemmer, S., & Barlow, M. (2000). Introduction: A usage-based conception of language. In M. Barlow & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Usage-based models of language (pp. vii–xxvii). Chicago, IL: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Turner, M. (1989). More than cool reason. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mandelbaum, D. (1988). Women’s seclusion and men’s honor: Sex roles in North India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. Tuscon, AZ: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martsa, S. (2013). Conversation in English: A cognitive semantic approach. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nishida, H. (1999). A cognitive approach to intercultural communication based on schema theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23(5), 753–777. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Polzenhagen, F., & Wolf, H.-G. (2021). Culture-specific conceptualisations of corruption in African English: Linguistic analyses and pragmatic applications. In M. Sadeghpour & F. Sharifian (Eds.), Cultural linguistics and world Englishes (pp. 361–399). Singapore: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Polzenhagen, F., Finzel, A., & Wolf, H.-G. (2021). Colonial cultural conceptualizations and World Englishes. In A. Onysko (Ed.), Research Developments in World Englishes (pp. 199–230). London: Bloomsbury. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quinn, N. (1987). Convergent evidence for a cultural model of American marriage. In D. Holland & N. Quinn (Eds.), Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 173–192). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quinn, N., & Holland, D. (1987). Culture and cognition. In D. Holland & N. Quinn (Eds.), Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 3–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Radden, G. & Kövesces, Z. (1999). Towards a theory of metonymy. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 17–59). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosch, E. (1973). Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 328–350. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Advances in Cultural Linguistics. In M. Yamaguchi, D. Tay & B. Blount (Eds.), Approaches to language, culture, and cognition: The intersection of cognitive linguistics and linguistic anthropology (pp. 99–123). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strauss, C. (2015). Language and culture in cognitive anthropology. In F. Sharifian (ed.), Routledge handbook of language and culture (pp. 593–612). London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tonsing, J., & Barn, R. (2016). Intimate partner violence in South Asian communities: Exploring the notion of ‘shame’ to promote understandings of migrant women’s experiences. International Social Work, 60(3), 628–639. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walker, L., Augoustinos, M., & Donahie, N. (1995). Social cognition: An integrated introduction. London: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walsh, M. (1993). Classifying the world in an aboriginal language. In M. Walsh & C. Yallop (Eds.), Language and culture in aboriginal Australia (pp. 107–122). Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wikan, U. (1984). Shame and honour: A contestable pair. Man, 19(4), 635–652. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wolf, H.-G., & Polzenhagen, F. (2009). World Englishes: A cognitive sociolinguistic approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Dorazahi, Mah Jan, Deepthi Mungara, Yasemin Acar & Harshini Sri Ramulu
2025. Proceedings of the 2025 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, ► pp. 1949 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue