Hindko and Gujari. c - SIL International

Gujari 153
untraveled groups. In and of itself, travel to areas where Urdu is
more widely spoken does not significantly influence measured
proficiency. Further investigation of language use while staying
in such an area should reveal more definite patterns.
4.2.3 Reported Use of Urdu by Peshmal Men
In addition to straightforward proficiency testing, Peshmal
subjects were asked to answer questions which would indicate
their exposure to and use of Urdu. These questions are given
below in (11). As the subject answered the numbered questions
in his own words, the interviewer chose the frequency level
which best fit his response. The seven frequency levels used by
the interviewer are listed below the questions regarding
frequency of hearing and speaking Urdu. Similarly, the five
levels of conversation length are listed below the appropriate
question.
These questions approach Urdu use from two angles, one
more quantitative and the other qualitative. The quantitative
angle is an attempt to measure the relative frequency of hearing
and speaking Urdu reported by these subjects. Included in this
general approach to quantifying the frequency of Urdu use is the
question regarding the approximate duration of the longest Urdu
conversation for each subject. The duration of the conversation
tells us something frequency does not: it gives an indication of
the quality of the interaction. For example, if the subject is
speaking Urdu many times per day but only for five minutes
while shopping in the bazaar, the domain and time involved are
quite limited and not much skill is required.