[lg policy] blog: Language and social cohesion

Tue May 1 15:13:10 UTC 2012

Language and social cohesion

Language is very sensitive which may create social disintegration if
it is not used and planned properly.  We all know that Paramanda Jha,
the first Vice President of the Federal Republic of Nepal took his
oath in Hindi on July 23, 2008. The whole nation was brought to a halt
for more than a week due to strikes against his action. People chanted
slogans saying that he ignored the linguistic identity of the nation
by taking the oath in Hindi, the national language of India. Although
the Supreme Court declared his oath in Hindi unconstitutional and
ordered him to take one in Nepali, he refused to do so. To resolve
this issue, the Legislative Parliament passed the seventh amendment to
the Interim Constitution on January 28, 2010. The amendment allows the
President, Vice President, Prime Minister and other ministers to take
the oath of office in their first language. On February 7, 2010, the
Vice President took a fresh oath in both Nepali and Maithili, his
first language.

Such issues emerge due to lack of clear language policy. It is clear
that a society functions cohesively in a country where inclusive
multilingual policy is adopted. But conflicts and social
disintegration of different nature take place in a country like Nepal
where language policy is not inclusive. In a democratically just
society all linguistic communities expect their linguistic identity to
be addressed and protected. In order to discuss how language issues
can be settled down for social cohesion, the 9th Language and
Development International Conference was organized in Colombo, Sri
Lanka with the theme ‘Language and Social Cohesion’ on 17-19 October,
2011. There were papers from 22 countries that discussed how proper
planning of languages foster socio-economic development, educational
performance, political stability, and identity (gender, ethnic, and
national) of a country and its people. Being a paper presenter I
collected some major inputs that can be instrumental for language
planning to build a cohesive Nepalese society.

The grand opening ceremony in the presence of the President Mahinda
Rajapaksh, ministers and high ranking officials was conducted in three
languages – Sinhala, Tamil and English. It is the government’s policy
that all formal programmes should be conducted in three languages. As
it was the international conference, all government officials
including the President Rajapaksha addressed the gathering in English.
 In his thought-provoking speech, the President mentioned that one of
reasons for previous conflict in Sri Lanka was the discriminatory
language policy (i.e. Only Sinhala as official language policy)
adopted by the country. There were two booths in the conference hall
from where all speeches were translated into Sinhala and Tamil that
can be tuned into a wireless headphone. The trilingual policy of Sri
Lanka is clearly seen in marketplaces, bus station and the city. All
sign boards and public notices can be seen in three languages. Both
Sinhala and Tamil languages are taught in schools and universities. In
various informal discussions I learned that Tamil-speaking children
are doing well after the introduction of Tamil in schools. It is also
very interesting to learn that Sri Lankan job market prefers
trilingual candidates than monolingual ones.

Sri Lankan language policy provides some significant issues to
formulate inclusive language policy in Nepal. First, it is clear that
Nepal has to prepare a comprehensive language policy. As mentioned
above, the issue of oath taking in Hindi by the Vice-President,
Paramananda Jha, emerged as there was no clear language policy of the
country. Second, the country has to remove the maxim of ‘one language
one nation’. Such a narrow nationalism defined only in terms of the
Nepali language undermines the indigenous identity of Nepal as a
multilingual country. As Tamils agitated against the discriminatory
one language policy of the country, different indigenous linguistic
communities have been demanding their linguistic rights for about two
and half centuries. Although the country seemed to be unified with its
one language policy, people from various linguistic communities have
been discriminated. Due to lack of proficiency in the Nepali language
people from indigenous communities could not access wider
socio-economic opportunities. Their children could not continue their
education as they could not perform well due to Nepali only medium of
instruction in schools. This clearly indicates that there is a need of
formulating a feasible language-in-education policy which creates a
cohesive atmosphere among children’s home languages and medium of
instruction in schools.

Another important implication is that the country has to be cautious
while developing language planning policies in its federal structure.
As in Sri Lanka, the federal states can decide at least one local
language (based on the number of speakers) to be used as an official
language along with Nepali as another official and link language. In
the case of other minority languages the federal states can devise a
policy to introduce them in education and other domains. Considering
English as an important international language, its role has to be
clearly defined. English can be used while addressing international
communities (e.g. conferences, political dealings and business). But
the country should manage to translate English into Nepali and other
federal languages. Although it is not easy to devise multilingual
language policy, it is not impossible if there is strong political
will. For this, the country has to ensure the participation of
linguistic groups in the process of language policy making. Because
the linguistic situation of the country is so adverse and delicate,
the top-down approach of language planning (i.e. planning based on the
ideas of elites only) may not really address linguistic complexities.

We have not only more than 140 languages but also have a treasure of
knowledge constructed through them. All languages have to be
preserved. For this the country has to make a long-term plan. One of
the important lessons we can learn from Sri Lanka in this regard is
the establishment of a separate ministry for the development of
national languages. Sri Lanka has the Ministry of National Languages
and Social Integration which is fully responsible for the promotion of
national languages and fostering social cohesion. There is an urgent
need of the Ministry of National Languages and Social Integration in
Nepal as well to address linguistic complexities of the country and to
ensure linguistic rights of the people. While promoting national
languages the country can preserve a vast treasurer of knowledge on
literature, culture, ecology, history, education, society, conflict
resolution, religion and so on.

(The author researches on issues of language planning in multilingual
contexts and language-identity connection. His recent article on
language-in-education planning in Nepal has been published in the
Current Issues in Language Planning, Routledge, London)

http://pphyak.blogspot.com/2012/04/languageis-very-sensitive-which-may.html

-- 
**************************************
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,
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)

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