[lg policy] bibitem: Migration Language Policies: The Malaysian Experience

[Harold Schiffman]

Migration Language Policies: The Malaysian Experience

Posted by ONWUBIKO EMEKA CYPRIAN on April 14, 2010 at 9:06am
View ONWUBIKO EMEKA CYPRIAN's blog



By:



ONWUBIKO EMEKA CYPRIAN



INSTITUTIONAL AFFILIATION: UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA






Abstract



This paper explores the language policy in Malaysia vis-à-vis its
diversity preserves those expectation which indicates the national
attitudes about how linguistic diversity should be handled.

Malaysia as presently constituted is made up of 3 major ethnic groups- the
dominant Malay, Chinese and Indians. The migration of Indians to
Malaysia started
in the second half of the 19th century, primarily as laborers who
were brought by the British to work on plantations, roads, railway lines and
ports. On their part the Chinese community has increased before political
independence in Malaysia. However, Malay was adopted as the national language
and medium of instruction in schools. Be that as it may, the Chinese and Indian
communities were allowed by the government to run schools which medium of
instruction is in Chinese and Tamil languages. From the foregoing, one thing is
obvious. These immigrants who have adopted Malaysia as their country still see
themselves as people from one culture. They speak their language and maintain
their cultural heritage and traditions and ensure that their
identities are preserved
even as they try to integrate in their host country.



Keywords: Language policy, diversity, culture



Introduction



In any multicultural and multiethnic society the issue of language
policy has been a serious concern for policy makers. In making the
policy for such a pluralistic society a lot of
considerations have to be made to accommodate all the different groups that
make up such a society. The language policies in Malaysia are quite complex due
to the existence of three major ethnic groups: Malays, Chinese and Indians who
speak different languages and practice different cultures. David (2007). In his
views Hassan (1994) observed that Malaysia as presently constituted is a
diverse mixture of ethnic backgrounds, languages and subcultures. The Malays
are the dominant group of the three. However, there are other minority ethnic
groups that make up the country.



The Malaysian nation is based upon cultural differences and is
evolving a political culture that takes account of its plural
culturalism (Cheah,2002). Be that as it may, the government has been
able to integrate the different races despite some misunderstandings.



This paper tries to examine the language policies in a diverse society
such as Malaysia, its effect on the three different ethnic groups,
Malays, Chinese and Indias as speakers of their own
language and the Malay language. However, inspite of the differences efforts by
the government to integrate the various races into one united and indivisible
country even as the immigrants maintain their cultural heritage and tradition.
Sharing the same view, Cheah, (2002) said: …….the government policies have been
aimed at the accommodation of the non-Malays in the short term and at the
integration of them over a longer period, but not to the extent of making the
non-Malays drastically alter their way of life or abandon their cultural
heritage.



Malaysia as a Plural Society



It should be noted that there are other minority ethnic groups aside
the three major groups. This makes the country a heterogeneous
society. The Malays are regarded as the original inhabitants,
sons of the soil otherwise referred to as
the “bumiputras” in local parlance. The other two ethnic groups
emigrated from China and India. The migration of Indians to Malaysia started in
the second half of the 19th century, primarily as laborers who were
brought by the British to work on Plantations, roads, railway lines
and ports. On
their part the Chinese community who came to Malaysia to trade have increased
before political independence in Malaysia. During this period political parties
were formed to liberate the country from British rule.



The main political party is known as the United Malays National
organization (U.M.N.O). It also has the responsibility to defend the
rights and privileges of the Malay. The other two races have
their own political parties-the Malayan Chinese Association(M.C.A.) for the
Chinese and the Malayan Indian Congress (M.I.C.) for the Indians. These two
political parties were racial in composition but national(in terms of the
Malayan nation) in aspiration. Asmah,(1979). They later joined together to form
an alliance to fight for independence.



The then prime minister Tunku Abdul Rahman had this to say about the
Chinese community:



The early Chinese settlers have been in this country for many hundreds of years.



In the early days they came here to trade and later to like the
country and decided



To settle down, and they were absorbed by the country and followed local customs



And speak the Malay language while at the same time retaining some of their own



Culture and traditions…………



On the Indians he said: those Indians who had come to realize that
Malaya was not just a temporary haven but a home had shown their ready
acceptance of the national language.



The two races did not object to the issue of the national language.
This was because the Malays used the issue of citizenship as a
bargaining tool, where before citizenship was granted to
non-Malays by right of birth in the post independence period, a non-Malay could
apply for citizenship ‘provided’ he or she met with the three stipulated
requirements: residential, good conduct and language. Asmah, (1979).



Language Policies in Malaysia



Bearing in mind the linguistic diversity of the Malaysian cultural
landscape policy makers came up with a language policy that reflects
the heterogeneous nature of the society.Holmes,(2001)
supports this view when he said, in making the language policies it requires
certain process which starts from selection, codification, elaboration and
securing acceptance of the language. The Reid commission among other things
recommended the use of Malay as the national and official language. English is
the second language. The language policies in Malaysia are quite complex due to
the existence of the three major ethnic groups: Malay, Chinese and Indians who
speak different languages and practice different cultures. It was felt a
national language would help to create national unity notwithstanding cultural
and linguistic diversity, David, (2007).Similarly, supporting the adoption of
Malay as the national language. Asmah, (1979) said, “an immigrant language
would not be able to give the nation the characteristics that it required to
justify an identity which it could call its own.”



The education review committee headed by Abdul Rahman Talib in 1960
recommended the use of the national language as the medium of
instruction in secondary schools which hitherto had used English as
the medium of instruction. However, two types of school were established at the
primary level and these are the national schools which uses Malay as the medium
of instruction and national type schools which uses either English,Chinese or
Tamil but Malay was made compulsory subject.However, it was recommended that
public secondary schools should use English or Malay as the medium of
instruction. Even the Chinese medium secondary schools was phased out. Asmah,
(1979) argued that the policy to terminate Chinese medium secondary schools was
taken in the interest of national unity in the sense that this category of
schools would henceforth admit children of other races. At the tertiary level,
English and the national language was used as medium of instruction.



Be that as it may, in 2002 there was another change in policy in the
teaching of Science and Mathematics.The government announced that
henceforth Mathematics and Science will be taught in
English instead of the national language. However, there has been resistance to
this policy by those in the rural areas. The controversy still rages on.



Language and Identity



Language and identity to some extent can be said to be interrelated
because when a native speaker speaks we can easily identify him or
her. This is also the case when a second language learner of
the language, especially adult learners speak the same language. Arguing in the
same direction, Spolsky, (1999) said language is a central feature of human
identity when. When we hear someone speak, we immediately make guesses about
gender, education level, age, profession and place of origin. We can also
identify a person’s nationality by the way he or she speaks. In
addition,Crystal,(2000) argued that the disappearance of the language of a
group has immense repercussions for healthy self regard



Similarly, Wright, (2004) believes that language is a robust marker of
group membership and one that is not easily changed. It is one the
strongest markers of identity because there are
cognitive as well as psychological barriers to be overcome when individuals
shift language.



Be that as it may, Wright, (2004) asked one fundamental question thus:
Can immigrants who assimilate linguistically in the host country
maintain their identity?. In the case of Malaysia Chinese for
instance, though they speak the national and official language which
is bahasa Melayu or Malay, they speak
their own language be it Mandarin, Cantonese or Hokkien and also have their own
traditional and religious belief intact. For instance the Chinese in Malaysia
also celebrate the Chinese new year at the same time their Kith and kin all
over the world are also celebrating. Reasoning along the same view
Wright,(2004) said identification with the land of origin may continue to be
very strong and maintained through religious practices or cultural maintenance
in diet, and dress, even where given the need to survive and the hope of
prospering in the new environment, there is linguistic accommodation.



Conclusion



This paper outlines the efforts of the authorities in fashioning a
language policy that would suit its diversity. A policy that would
foster unity in spite of race, religion and culture. However,
it is worthy of note the effort by the government to accommodate the
immigrants. As Hassan(2004) puts it Malaysia has achieved some respectable
measure of success. Status (role) planning has certainly transformed Malay into
a viable language used in education, administration and regional communication
(between four south east Asian countries.). In addition, all other immigrant
languages were accorded recognition they deserve. Asmah,(1979) argues that the
government has given a great deal of attention to the welfare of the Chinese
and Tamil schools. More and more of such schools have been built since the
beginning of independence, and the training of teachers for these schools has
been taken over by the government. However, it should be noted that the
implementation of the national language policy has some adverse effects on the
populace as the emphasis is on the national language to the detriment of more
globalised second language-English. An effort by the government to wield all
the different ethnic groups together is commendable. It is a mean of
integrating the immigrants.



But however, from the foregoing one thing is obvious. These immigrants
who have adopted Malaysia as their country still see themselves as
people from one culture.They can speak their language
and maintain their cultural heritage and traditions and ensure that their
identities are preserved even as they try to integrate into their host country.



References



Asmah,H.O. (1979) Language Planning for Unity and Efficiency, Kuala
Lumpur: Penerbil Universiti



Malaya.



Cheah, B.K. (2002),Malaysia: The Making of a nation, ISEAS Singapore.



Crystal, D. (2000) Language Death Cambridge: University Press.



David,M.K. (2007) Changing Language Policies in Malaysia Ramifications
and Implications. Paper



Presented at the 2nd International Conference on Language, Education
and Diversity.



Hassan, A. (1994) Language Planning in South East Asia, Kuala
Lumpur:Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.



Holmes, J. (2001) in David, M.K. (2007) Changing Language Policies in
Malaysia, Ramifications and



Implications.



Legislative Council debates: Official report of second legislative
council (second session) October,1956



To August 1957. Government Printer, Kuala Lumpur, 1958.



Malaysia (1960) Report of the Education Review committee 1960. Abdul
Rahman Haji Talib chairman



Kuala Lumpur: The Government Press.



Spolsky, B. (1999) Second Language Learning In J. Fishman (ed)
Handbook of Language and ethnic



Identity (pp 181-192) Oxford: Oxford University Press.



Wright, J. (2004) Language Policy and Language Planning From
Nationalism to Globalisation, New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.

http://community.vanguardngr.com/profiles/blogs/migration-language-policies


-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
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.
(H. Schiffman, Moderator)

For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/
listinfo/lgpolicy-list
*******************************************

_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list