<div dir="ltr"><h2 class="">Found in translation</h2>
<div class="">
<ul><li> Linguistic justice cannot be guaranteed unless the state equally promotes and preserves all languages</li></ul>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="">
<em>
- <a href="http://www.ekantipur.com/tkp/reporter/9101.html">Miranda Weinberg</a> </em> </div>
<div class="">
<div class=""> <a class=""><div class=""><span style="vertical-align:bottom;width:78px;height:20px"></span></div></a> <a class=""><span></span></a> </div>
</div>
</div>
<span class="">
<span id="detail-news">
<div class="">
<span class=""> <a>
<img src="http://www.ekantipur.com/uploads/tkp/news/2015/gallery_07_19/miranda-photo_20150720081341.jpg" alt="" class=""></a>
</span>
<span class=""> <div style="padding:10px 0px">
<ins id="aswift_1_expand" style="display:inline-table;border:medium none;height:250px;margin:0px;padding:0px;width:300px;background-color:transparent"><ins id="aswift_1_anchor" style="display:block;border:medium none;height:250px;margin:0px;padding:0px;width:300px;background-color:transparent"></ins></ins>
</div> </span>
</div>
<p>JUL 19 -
</p><p>
One of the great promises of federalism is the possibility of inclusive
language policies in federal states. Such language policies would
benefit all Nepalis, no matter what languages they speak. The over half
of Nepal’s population that does not speak Nepali as a first language
would benefit most. Inclusive language policies would permit the use of
local languages in government administration, allowing people who feel
uncomfortable using the Nepali language to equitably access government
and other public services. Inclusive language policies would also
finally deliver on the promise to allow students to attend school in the
language they speak, beginning to even a playing field made unequal by
multiple factors including language. More importantly, such language
policies recognise the principle of social justice and ensure access and
equity of linguistically minoritised children in education and other
fields. The clauses related to language policy in the draft
constitution, however, make the promise of inclusive language policies
more distant rather than closer.</p><p>
</p><p>
<strong>Language of government</strong></p><p>
The draft constitution both maintains discriminatory language from
previous documents, and also limits the ability of federal states to set
their own working languages. Following the wording of the 1990
Constitution and the 2007 Interim Constitution, the current draft states
that “the Nepali Language in Devanagari script shall be the official
language of Nepal” (Article 7). </p><p>
This is extremely discriminatory and reflective of a
one-nation-one-language ideology rather than accepting and celebrating
the multilingual reality of Nepal. This provision discriminates against
speakers of languages other than Nepali in three ways. First, the
legitimation of the Nepali language as the ‘official language’ of Nepal
contradicts with Article 6, which recognises all languages of Nepal as
national languages. Second, this provision implies that the use of
languages other than Nepali in courtrooms, administrative offices,
schools, and other public spaces is unconstitutional. Third, the
provision of ‘Devanagari script’ implies that only the standard written
Nepali will be the official language. There are many non-standard
varieties of Nepali, which should be considered legitimate ways of
speaking in legal or official contexts.</p><p>
The draft constitution severely restricts the ability of federal states
to set their own language policies. Article 7(2) states: “In addition
to the Nepali Language, states can determine one or more than one
languages of the nation spoken by the majority of people as its official
language on the basis of law.”</p><p>
This provision is against the principle of an inclusive nation. In
particular, stating that a language must be spoken by the majority of
people in a state in order to be employed as an official language is
problematic, and makes the phrasing of this provision nonsensical as it
would be impossible to have multiple majority languages in a state. It
is very difficult to determine ‘majority’ and ‘minority’ languages in
terms of census data. Many Nepalis are multilingual in their own
community languages, Nepali, and several other languages, but the census
does not provide data on multilingualism. In addition, this provision
makes it impossible for smaller languages, such as Danuwar, Dhimal,
Kisan, Kaike or Koche, among many others, to be used for official
purposes. Rather than this restrictive approach, the constitution should
adopt true multilingual policies that allow local government offices to
use the most appropriate languages in administration.</p><p>
<strong></strong></p><p><strong>
Language of schooling</strong></p><p>
From the vantage point of English-crazed urban areas, it can be easy to
forget that many Nepali students struggle to speak Nepali, let alone
English, at the start of school. Over the last two decades, several
studies have found that a Nepali-only school language policy has been
one factor keeping speakers of other languages from achieving in school
at levels equivalent to first-language Nepali speaking peers. Students
who do not speak Nepali fluently at the start of school must struggle
not only to learn Nepali with no teaching of Nepali as a second
language, but must also attempt to keep up to pace with academic work.
This situation leads to high drop-out rates and low academic achievement
among students who speak Nepali as a second language. </p><p>
Since the 1990 Constitution, communities have been given the right to
education in their own ‘mother tongues’; the present draft takes a
positive step by extending that right from primary education up to the
secondary level. However, the implementation of that promise has been
hindered by the ambiguous wording of the relevant constitutional
provision, wording that remains the same in the present draft. Rather
than merely allowing communities to operate schools in their own
languages, a provision that makes it sound as if such schools are the
responsibility of communities themselves, the constitution should ensure
that the state will make necessary arrangements and provide support for
such schools. </p><p>
<strong></strong></p><p><strong>
Language policy for inclusion</strong></p><p>
Nepal’s earlier language policies were based on an ideology of
one-language, one-nation. Evidence from around the world, including
neighbours like India and Sri Lanka, demonstrates that such policies not
only fail to foster unity among diverse populations but also
marginalise speakers of languages other than the official language and
can even lead to violence. Countering arguments that a ‘poor’country
such as Nepal cannot afford to work or teach in multiple languages,
economists have found that inclusive multilingual language policies are
tied to economic benefits as they allow previously marginalised people
to benefit from government programmes. In schooling, too, using multiple
languages can prove to be cost-effective by promoting learning. Studies
have further shown that most low-achieving students from all over the
world speak languages other than the languages used in school. </p><p>
Rather than maintaining language policies that exclude large portions
of the population and maintain the dominance of first-language speakers
of Nepali, the constitution could lay a groundwork for true linguistic
inclusion by ensuring multilingual policies in government administration
and in schools. The rights of all Nepalis to use their languages in
court, government offices, and schools, should be protected, not
restricted. Linguistic justice cannot be guaranteed unless the state
takes responsibility to equally promote and preserve all languages. Thus
we argue that the new constitution should include “the state shall take
full responsibility to promote equitable multilingualism in Nepal”as
the new directive principle on language.</p><p>
</p><p>
<em>Weinberg is a PhD Candidate in Educational Linguistics and
Anthropology at the University of Pennsylvania and Phyak is a PhD
candidate in Second Language Studies at the University of Hawaii <br></em></p><p><em><a href="http://www.ekantipur.com/the-kathmandu-post/2015/07/19/oped/found-in-translation/278606.html">http://www.ekantipur.com/the-kathmandu-post/2015/07/19/oped/found-in-translation/278606.html</a><br></em></p></span></span><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature">**************************************<br>N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to its members<br>and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner or sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal, and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message. A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)<br><br>For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to <a href="https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/" target="_blank">https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/</a><br>listinfo/lgpolicy-list<br>*******************************************</div>
</div>