Colonialism and Grammatical Representation

A detailed study of Gilchrist’s grammatical praxis which presents a picture of the complex relationship between grammatical inquiry and the politics of colonial discourse in the early years of the Indian Empire.

• 
  
• Develops a method of reading colonial grammars that acknowledges both the technical and the political dimensions of the text
  
• Explores the political consequences of the choices that grammarians made that could easily elicit reactions of fear, confusion, and even contempt in colonial observers
  
• Presents a picture of the complex relationship between grammatical inquiry and the politics of colonial discourse in the early years of the Indian Empire

Preface.

Introduction.

Part I: Contexts:.

1. The Political Context.

2. The Personal Context.

3. The Intellectual Context.

Part II: Case Studies:.

4. Noun Case.

5. The Verbal System.

6. Dialogues and Familiar Phrases.

7. Etymology.

Conclusion.

Bibliography

"Steadman-Jones deftly weaves his biographical, political and linguistic strands into an engrossing account." (Historiographia Linguistica, April 2009) Richard Steadman-Jones teaches in the School of English at the University of Sheffield. Between 1787 and 1796, John Gilchrist, a surgeon in the service of the East India Company published the first really detailed analysis of the ‘Hindustani’ language for the use of his compatriots in India. The study of colonial linguistics has tended to follow one of two paths, characterising texts like Gilchrist’s either as exercises in technical problem-solving or as reductively political examples of ‘colonial discourse’. This study develops a method of reading colonial grammars that acknowledges both dimensions of the text - the technical and the political.

Steadman-Jones offers contextual discussion of the political, biographical, and intellectual contexts of Gilchrist’s work. He also goes on to provide detailed readings of Gilchrist’s grammatical praxis and, through them, presents a picture of the complex relationship between grammatical inquiry and the politics of colonial discourse in the early years of the Indian Empire.