THE ROLE OF LANGUAGE IN THE RADICALISATION OF EDUCATION
Language in the Context of Formal Education
A change from subjugation to self-rule, from a privileged to an egalitarian, and from an elitist to a people oriented society presupposes radicalisation if edcation which shapes thought and action in a society. Whether the country would adopt a capital intensive or a lobour intensive approach to economy, whether it would adopt the technology of mass production or appropriate technology for all round development would even depend upon the polity sought to be created through the education system of the country. In India education system has been elitist in character. The fact that during the 30 years from the first plan to the fifth, allocation to the primary education has fallen from 56 per cent to 28 per cent and higher education has risen from 8 per cent o 15 per cent of the total allocation to education and primary education has grown threefold whereas higher education has grown sixfold goes to prove this point. Even within this over-all picture, 85 per cent drop out and stagnation between class I-V and 70 per cent of illiteracy in the country goes to prove that the current education system creates and nurtures an elitist society.
In a multilingual, multicultural society, language can be a source of weakness as it may divide and isolate one group from another. It can also be a source of strength, representing diverse manifestation of one underlying culture. Forced on an unmotivated learner, language like any other subject, can be a burden, but when acquired, it enriches the mind beyond any individual subject, as it provides better understanding of the people and ht universe using it. Language, being emotive and related to the question of identity, can stir human easily and therefore, language planning needs to be considered and important context of economic planning needs to be considered an countries, Indonesia, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Malaya in Asia, and even the language discord in Canada is sufficient to show that in multilingual developing countries where there are competing demands on scarce resources, language can be exploited as an instrument for furthering group interest and thus determining the composition of the dominant polity.
When Macaulay, in utter contempt of India's past, wrote in his famous Minutes of 2nd February 1835 his judgement in favour of English, dismissing the claims of Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian and other major Indian languages, he laid the foundation of an elistist society alienated from the people. In ancient times when Sanskrit became a preserve of the priests of courts, the poplar movement led to the simplification of the class restricted Sanskrit code and development of Pali, Prakrit and the modern Indian Languages which permitted free flow of communication within the society. With acceptance of English, this natural process was arrested. Any simplification of this code at the most was called 'Babu English', 'Butler English' or 'Babur chi English', which further lowered the self-image of the stigmatised 'Indian English' speakers. Most of those who fulfilled Macaulay's dictum of being 'Indian by birth but English in manners, moral and taste', gained a passport to a new world, but they were alienated from their own. In the ancient times people may have been illiterates, but they were not uneducated. In the rural community centers people could participate in discourses on abtruse philosophy. But with Indian languages losing the knowledge base and English becoming the only vehicle of knowledge and being inaccessible to them, the vast majority of illiterate people were made uneducated.
Literacy is essentially a language related competence. It is most unfortunate that, in this vital sector, all activities are conducted without any reference to the existing linguistic expertise. In a country with about 700 languages, each with its dialects, styles, registers and competing standards, present a formidable challange for literacy. With the major writing systems and a host of minor ones, with the challange of reducing the large bulk of unwritten languages into writing, the problem of traditional spelling and current pronunciation in languages having long tradition of writing, and the problem of languages using more than one script, the task of literacy becomes all the more difficult. One is confronted with the problem of instant communication coming in conflict with the
standardisation and modernisation of the language. Unless literacy efforts take into account these twin focuses, they are bound to fail. Unless literacy is functional and aims at creating language competence to a level which will not permit the learner to lapse into illiteracy the problem is bound to elude solution. Since non-formal education has to be resorted to for adult education, this question will be discussed further in that context.The problem of literacy is linked with that of primary education as the 80 per cent drop-out is a major source of the 70 per cent illiteracy in the country. Primary education through the mother tongue is a constitutional obligation in India. It is also accepted by educationists, psychologists and linguists that the interest of the child is the centre of primary curriculum which must ensure identity affirmation, harmonious cognitive growth and lay the foundation for learning for individual, community and national development. In a multilingual society with multiple streams of mother tongues and home languages different from school languages, it is all the more important that the linguistic experience a child brings to the school be considered as the foundation for building further competencies in language communication and cognition. Unfortunately there is little awareness of this problem and consequently little research and investigation in language as a factor in us equal opportunities, drop out, wastage and stagnation in education.
Deheriyev, the famous Russian Linguist and Educationist, says that language is the content as well as medium of primary education. The interdependence of language skills and mathematical skills is recently underlined by the UNESCO report on interactions between Linguistics and mathematical Education (1974). When a child is asked, say, about a set of re and blue balls he is confronted with the ambiguity of language. The knowledge, whether in a lot of balls some are blue and some are red, or ,all are partially blur and partially red, is necessary for defining 'set'. It will thus be seen that the child must fully understand the decay, the inaccuracy, the ambiguity as well as the social acceptability or otherwise a language acquires in usage. Making a distinction between philosophy and thinking and talking about the latter, Martin Heidegger says, "And it demands a new accuracy for language rather than the invention of new terms, as I once thought; on the contrary it demands a return to the original contents of our own constantly decaying language" (Heideggar 1977). Research has shown that language competence is cumulative and any weakness in the early childhood language experience shows up in the higher stages of education.
The general reluctance to recognise dialects, tribal and other minority languages has led to reluctance of education planners to consider providing an academic strategy of switch over from the home language to the school language. Besides girls, there is no wonder that this sector accounts for the largest drop out, stagnation and wastage. Even if minority mother tongue primary schools are on the increase, lack of language planning is likely to make generations of students carry the burden of inequality. If the children are given monolingual education all through the primary stage and confronted with the school language which is the medium of higher education only at the post-primary stage, then they are bound to remain unequal to those whose home language is the same as the school language. Unless a strategy of bilingual primary education of the transfer model providing for a planned phased switch over from home language to school language is different, standard of education is bound to be affected adversely.
Language teaching is equally erratic in secondary and post-secondary stages. First of all there is no awareness of the difference between a language as a subject and a language as medium. Teaching a language, teaching about a language and teaching through a language are not clearly distinguished. Secondly, the notions of mother tongue, second language and foreign language are ill defined and the curricular objectives are never clearly stated. Thirdly, skill oriented language teaching is foreign to the teachers. Fourth, in the name of language only ancient and medieval literature is taught. There is no place for conceptual prose in any literature course. Fifth, there is little research into the area of transition from a purely language based competence to the development of literacy sensibility. Sixth, the interdisciplinary bearing of sociology, psychology, pedagogy, linguistics, stylistics, etc., are not brought to the attention of the teachers as well as learners. Seventh, although the multilingual character of the country makes it contingent on its citizens to learn many languages, even the three-language formula is considered a burden by some. Eighth, even those who accept the three-language formula are ambivalent about their role. As Julian Dakin rightly point out "Until an effective demarcation of the roles of Hindi, English and the regional languages has been generally accepted, attitudes to language will remain the last and most serious obstacle to the full deployment of education in the interest of the national development" (Dakin, Julian 1968).
It is most unfortunate that those who have vested interest in the elitist education keep up the group tension by juxtaposing Hindi, English and the other major Indian languages against one another. It must, first of all, be understood that the role of Hindi, English and Indian languages is complementary and not competitive. The 4 per cent population of India who, in some form or other, or exposed to some variety of English enjoy rank, status and wealth bestowed by this education and are therefore, naturally eager to perpetuate it. The other language speakers sometimes join Hindi in wresting some of the privileges from English and sometimes join against Hindi lest it may appropriate to itself all the privileges. This fear is unfounded as by defining the domains of these languages one can see that both Hindi and English are link languages at different levels and the cultivation of both is in the best national education interests.
Many arguments are advanced for and against Hindi. Without going into the details, it may suffice here to say that it is the language of widest communication in India where both the Union as well as States are multilingual. As in any multilingual state the dominant state language stands as the identity token for that state, in the multilingual. As in any multilingual for that state, in the multilingual nation Hindi stands as the national identity token. That the Hindi area spread over six north-Indian states provides better economic opportunities to a non-Hindi speakers in comparison to any other non-Hindi language which is restricted to one state needs no elaboration. That in any scheme of education in the country Hindi must find a place, therefore, needs no further justification. However, the rationale of a three language formula with Hindi as a necessary component will be examined a little later.
There is a great demand for English education in the country today. This demand comes from many sources. There are few who believe in its ability in liberating the mind from the traditional superstitions and prejudices. There are many who believe with Lord William Bentinck that English is necessary for administrative convenience in this multilingual country. They support this argument with the pseudo-academic argument of equal disadvantage for all. That the socially weaker sections who do not have education in their families for generations are handicapped more than the privileged sections is completely ignored by them. Most people, however, demand English education as a passport to better opportunities, if not in this country at least abroad. This group would rather opt for creating cheap educated labour for foreign countries than developing and educated polity for this country. Unfortunately as the political and educational system is manned by people with elitist orientation little effort is made to give good mother tongue education with a good second-language-English course and one is extolled at the cost of the other. Even within the country a second class English graduate is preferred to a first class Tamil or Bengali graduate for jobs.
Another demand for English comes form linguistic minorities. Partly it is done due to a combination of lack of language planning and uniform educational leadership. When the Kannadigas start English medium schools in Tamilnadu in the name of protection of minority rights, it falls under this category. The other is a combination of vested interest with pseudo-academic commitments. The stand of the Anglo Indian Association of India falls in this category. It is most unfortunate that the Association which represents Anglo-Indians whose mother tongue is English, instead of fighting for the protection and enrichment of English as the mother tongue of a minority group, has confused the issues and identified itself with those who demand English education for the other Indian language mother tongue children.
There is an unthinking acceptance of the myth in the country that the longer English is taught, the better proficiency is attained by the learner. Even educated persons who should know that in the absence of trained teachers, improved teaching materials, and appropriate methods merely by teaching a language longer one cannot attain proficiency, are taken by the myth. In a State like Karnataka or Andhra Pradesh if English is to be started from the 3rd standard about one lakh teachers will be needed. Not to speak of the state in the whole country there are only ten institutions for training English teachers. There is no wonder that after learning English for 12 years the students when asked 'how are you?', reply 'we are in the well'. First of all primary English education to children from homes where there is no English leads to rote learning. Secondly a clarity of concepts is affected adversely. Thirdly, bad English education at the early stages involves learning wrong English at the later stages and thus slows sown learning. What is worse is that while good English teachers are not available, people expect good science and humanities teachers who are also good English teachers.
It is often argued that no Indian language can match the output of English books and therefore, English Education is superior. It must be understood that the vested interest of the entire English speaking world is behind the production of English books. In the Indian context, the frequency and range of use of English books in comparison with books in Indian languages is so low that the number of books produced become meaningless. In any case, if English is the window to the world of knowledge, then in the Indian context it should not be learnt to know merely the foreign culture, but learnt as a medium of expressing and interpreting the diverse culture obtaining in this country, and to translate knowledge obtained through English into ones own language. As English is taught more like a mother tongue than a second language in this country, English education, in spite of the demand, remains irrelevant to the society. In the midst of these irrational demands, the need for implementing a good second-language English teaching programme is submerged. English is part of the rich cultural heritage in this country. It has to be acquired by all those who aspire for higher education. But by thinly plastering it all over the system and making it a fake passport to jobs rather than a true one to knowledge, a kind of antagonism with other Indian languages sought to be built by the vested interests which hurts the education system in general and the cause of English in particular.
It is in this context that use of Indian languages other than English as media of higher education would result in the inhibition of mobility of students and thus promote insularism. It is also that this will lead to the balkanisation of the country. The various committees of the University Grants Commission at different times have pleaded for English and against the Indian languages. The Report of English Review Committee (1965) holds that "the regional languages have not yet developed to a point where they can replace English as a total of knowledge and as a medium of communication" (p.33). The Report on Standards of University Education (UGC 1955) further asserts that a change of media from English to regional languages "is justified only when the University is raising standards by doing so" (p,71). Lack of books in Science and Technology and lack of technical terminology id cited as the principal drawback for unsuitability of Indian languages as tools of knowledge and even of communication.
Without going into the details of a case for Indian languages (Pattanayak 1974), it can be pointed out that the multiplicity of languages has at no time been a hindrance for emotional integration of this country. In spite of hundreds of languages belonging to four language families spoken by different ethnic groups, India has become one Linguistic Area. As regards mobility of teachers and students is concerned, at the worst, one may compare India to Europe. In Europe mobility of teachers and students had not at all been adversely affected and both students and teachers are attracted to Universities which have established reputation for standards of education. Today in India, more effort is spent in catching up with the theories of the English-speaking West rather than doing original work. Unless language education is given due attention right from the primary stage and Indian languages regain their knowledge base supplemented by a strong second language English education, the standards of education are unlikely to develop. Books are written in subjects only if there is a need. The need is artificially plugged by making English the sole medium of higher education. Once the need is created by making these languages tools of knowledge and communication books are bound to be written. The same thing is true to technical terms. Technical terms in languages develop through usage, Heat, Light, Field, Resistance, Velocity, Demand, Supply, Market, Money, technical terms in Physics and Economics, are the oft-used words in the English language. They have assumed technical meanings through usage. Even if technical terms are borrowed, their assimilation would need an understanding of the natural process of language. A lot of uninformed debate could be avoided if academic solutions were sought to academic issues. The fact that 52 per cent of the Indian language medium, and therefore books in those languages, though inadequate, are being produced, should abate unnecessary recriminations.
Language curriculam, as it stands today, does not equip learners to manipulate through that language at higher stages of learning. Therefore in order to bridge the gap between the language acquisition at the end of the school stage and the language requirement at the beginning of college entrance it is necessary to offer Bridge Courses emphasising skill based teaching of conceptual prose. Such Bridge Courses could be redundant once the much needed curriculum reform takes place. However, acceptance of the ideas of a Bridge Course as remedial measure to bridge the gap between the language learnt and the language needed for special purpose will go a long way in bringing about curricular changes.
Why Three Languages
By now it must have been apparent that a case is being made for the study of three Languages. It is necessary to critically examine the rationale for this. In a complex, multilingual and multi-ethnic society both policies and solutions are interdependent. For example, one cannot speak of a policy about language use in education without taking into account the language use in administration and in mass communication. Further, a solution to a problem in education cannot be sought which will ultimately harm cognitive development of the individual and larger interests of the country.
Three major views are expressed today in regard to language use in education. One view pleads for a one-language formula. It is argued that India is an agricultural country, the pace of life is relatively static and 90 per cent of the rural population have hardly any need to move out of their locality. Therefore, one language is sufficient for the bulk of people in this country. People expressing such views are further divided as to whether they plead for the mother tongue, the State language, Hindi or English. The view itself is essentially static, parochial, anti-development, anti-national. It condemns people to perpetual bondage to the existing state of affairs.
A second view pleads for a two language formula. It is argued that in the Hindi region a person can mange with Hindi and English. So is the case of the Tamil region where a person can manage with Tamil and English. There is no need to learn a third language. Thus, this group pleads for Hindi and Tamil with English as the second language in each case. Some people propagating this view would plead in favour of Tamil and Hindi, with another Indian language rather than English as the second language. However, this group seems to be in the minority at present.
This view is based more on the fear for and opposition against Hindi and English respectively. For example, while one group pleads against the imposition of Hindi, the other group pleads against the imposition of Hindi, the other group pleads agains imposition of English and thus both have reached the consensus of two languages. This view also suffers from another serious limitation. While those who plead for the local and international forget the national, those pleading for local and national forget the international. Both the groups forget that the silent community of scholars cut across boundaries of the local and the national and exist at all the three levels. The two language-formula further seems to be based on an imposition of restriction on learning rather than any rational need of the people.
It is often assumed that the motivation for learning language other than one's own is instrumental. In the quarrel about which language is more useful for whom, which language is more easy or difficult for whom, which language is more or less advantageous for whom, all those who argue have lost sight of the integrative need of learning about the various people constituting the nation. It is humanly impossible to lern all the 1652 streams of mother tongue, for everybody. How ever, it is not impossible to learn one language other than one's own for identifying oneself with an entity which is larger than one's community or state. It is, therefore, assumed that there is a great need to learn another Indian language other language for integrative purpose. Each language speaker has an option to choose the language which he needs to learn. Assuming that the three-language formula as is envisaged today is accepted as the basis of argument and the Hindi speakers learn one of the Indian languages preferably a South Indian language for integrative purpose and the non-Hindi speakers learn any Indian language other than their own preferably Hindi for the same purpose, the following consequences will flow. The non-Hindi speakers learning Hindi would have an advantage over the Hindi speakers as to the instrumentality of the language of their choice. Even those non-Hindi speakers learning Hindi will have a distinct advantage over those learning another Indian language. In other words while the language learnt by the Hindi speakers will be of doubtful instrumental value and an Indian language other than Hindi learnt by the non-Hindi speaker will be of limited instrumental value, Hindi to the non-Hindi speakers will be of much greater instrumental value. In spite of this apparent advantage to the non-Hindi speakers the problem arises because integrative motivation as driving factor behind the three-language formula has been lost sight of most persons entering the fray.
The objective conditions existing in the country require establishing hierarchies of language use in different domains and contexts. Each state in India reflects the national multiplicity of language and cultures in its microcosm. In a state like Tamilnadu, where there are significant Telugu, Kannada, Malayalam and Sourashtri speakers, they have to learn the State language Tamil, both for integrative as well as instrumental purpose. Even if a Toda or a Badaga, speaker of a minority language, or a Padayachi, speaker of a non-standard dialect, could probably mange his livelihood within his community speaking his own tongue, still it would be necessary for him to learn the state language. Similarly, within a nation even if somebody may not have and need to get out of his state, he would be better off learning a language other than his own for purpose of establishing an identity larger than his own. The realities of life are such that if an Oriya learns Telugu he can operate in Andhra Pradesh, with Bengali he can operate in Bengal, but some variety of Hindi he can operate in the whole of the country. Therefore, the need for learning Hindi for the non-Hindi speaking areas can be justified both form integrative as well as instrumental motivations. It is neither to acknowledge the supremacy of the Hindi speakers, the Hindi language, nor to accept a second class citizenship in a nation dominated by Hindi that the non-Hindi speaker is to learn Hindi.
In Tamilnadu, leading Tamil scholars with Telugu as their home language have strengthened and contributed to the purist movement in Tamil. The PSG family started first Tamil medium in Colleges. All of them are Telugus settled in Tamilnadu. Ramaswami Naiker, who was a Kannadiga, was the father of the Dravidian movement. This is not an isolated phenomenon. Masti, a Timil, Bendre, a Marathi, have contributed to the development of modern Kannada literature as much as Radhanath Ray a Bengali and Madhusudan Rao, a Marathi, have contributed to the development of modern Oriya literature. If in the name of anti-Hindi and anti-English movement, this inherent integrative factor is forgotten, then the states which house as many cultural and linguistic minority groups as the Union will come to grief. There is also another aspect to this question. There are about 17 lakh Hindi speaking people in Bombay. Almost 52 per cent of the total population of Bangalore City in Karnataka is Tamil and one-seventh of the Kannadigas are outside the State. This linguistic interdependence in spite of the linguistic delimitation of States is often lost sight of. If the integrative factors are not emphasised and importance of dominant languages in a State is not understood, then the unity of the States in turn don not take into consideration the integrative factors in the context of the nation, then the national identity will be threatened. Integrity of the States and the Union are interdependent. Any policy of language, education and culture is bound to fail unless this basic fact is understood by the policy makers.
The fear of domination of Hindi, however, is real and it cannot be swept under the carpet. If Hindi stands as a barrier against equality of opportunity in getting Central Government jobs for speakers of different non-Hindi languages then it is bound to be resisted. Therefore, it is necessary to provide checks and balances:
(i) By setting up impatial professional bodies for conducting national level
selection tests;(ii) By ensuring that each person has a change to appear in or through his
language (restricted to the scheduled language);(iii) By ensuring that the knowledge in Hindi expected of the non-Hindi speaker is
comparable to the knowledge of other Indian language expected of the Hindi
speakers; and(iv) By ensuring that no advantage on grade point and consequently in rank in the
competetive examination is dependent on the control of one or the other
language.The decision about the use of languages for languages for administration continues to be erratic both in the states and in the Centre. English was the language through which people acquired wealth, status and rank in the society. The sole aim with which English was adopted as the language of education was to restrict education in India. Those who are privileged by English Education are naturally clamouring to make the benefits secure for their descendants. They have less concern either for literacy or for education of the whole country including people from their own group. Otherwise they could not argue in favour of a formula which is lesser than three language formula.
In ancient India, knowledge could percolate to the common man through oral transmission. With Indian languages losing their knowledge base and English education being the preserve of a few, the vast majority of illiterate people have been made under-privileged. Unless this policy is reversed by giving more emphasis on Indian languages as carriers of modern knowledge, education would continue to serve a minority of privileged. Therefore in the scheme of things relation to language, education and a democratic socialist polity, an Indian language other than a State language must receive priority attention over English.
There are scholars like Julian Dakin (Dakin, Julian 1968), who claim that 'the campaign for the mother tongue arose out of a middle-class, rather than a popular movement'. Such people conveniently forget that even the campaign for English is in the same sense a middle-class effort, and much more restricted than the former. The refuse to see that an education system cannot be viewed insulated from socio-economic, psychological and pragmatic considerations such as national cohesion. If English education isolates the English educated from his family, friends, society and nation and in the words of Le Page puts education in 'a linguistic polythene bag'. (Le Page 1964) then the teaching of various national languages had the effect of homogenising education so as to be an instrument of a social purpose-in building a democratic socialist polity.
It must be understood that the three-language formula is not a goal, but a strategy for this country. It does not aim at imposing a limit to learning, but it aims at the minimum needed for identifying oneself with the immediate group, with the nation, and with the international community. One they have to learn more languages that these for meeting specific needs and purposes. One may have differences about which three languages to learn; but there is no escape from accepting the three-language formula as a lunching pad for innovative and experimental educational programmes in the country.
It is popularly believed that the three-language formula is an imposition of the Centre on the States. First of all it must be understood that the three-language formula represents a national concensus, blessed by the father of the nation suggested by the Constituent Assembly, resolved by the CABE in 1956, approved by the Chief Ministers' Conference in 1961, adopted as the National Policy of Education in 1968 and approved by the Parliament in the same year. It has been supported by the Conference of Vice-Chancellors at different times. Secondly, education is a state subject and the states have treated language as a political weapon to fight the Centre rather than treating it as a door of knowledge and window to a larger world. Even though Anna Durai for example, announced as early as 1961 that Telugu and Malayalam are the most important languages for the bulk of population in his State, none of the successor governments ever thought of providing instruction with in the school curriculum in those languages in the State. Blind opposition to Hindi handicapped generations of students who today find themselves handicapped in competing for jobs. The politicians may have scored a point, but it is at the cost of a generation of young men.
It must also be emphasised that both anti-Hindi and anti-English movements have weakened the foundation of education in the country and his the weaker sections of the society most. While the privileged find their way into learning Hindi and English, the weaker sections of the society are condemned to mediocrity. All the so-called educational experiments are conducted at their cost. Both the anti-Hindi and anti-English elitist, while confusing issues, and keeping the large majority of people tied down to the culture of silence.
Study of SanskritThere is a good deal of ambivalence about the teaching of Sanskrit. While many think that it should be taught as a spoken language, others think that it should be taught as a classical language. Unfortunately in spite of the ling tradition of Sanskrit teaching in this country no research has been done in modern terms about teaching Sanskrit as a classical language. There is also the problem of fitting Sanskrit in the Three Language Formula. Unless a proper perspective towards Sanskrit is developed arguments for and against Sanskrit are bound to continue.
Lynn White Jr., writing in the American Historical Review (1060), observed that the Indian concept of perpetual motion 'not only helped European Engineers to generalise their concept of mechanical power, but also provoked a process of thinking by analogy that profoundly influenced Western scientific views'. It is not only in this field of Engineering. But in fundamental concepts like the discovery of zero, delineation of the decimal system, the Indian savants made such significant impact that the Arabs referred to mathematics as the "Indian Art". Books on medicine written as early as the 2nd century and on surgery written in the 4th century gave a respectability not only to the disciplines and scholars, but also to the vehicle of this thought the Sanskrit language. Whether one wishes to study the encompassing concept of Dharma, the Indian attitude to God and the Gods, the relationship of Gods with man in this birth and beyond, existence and speculations on it or the myths and realities about the life cycle, one has to study Sanskrit, the language of the Gods and men in India. In studying the history, the economics, the politics or the attitudes towards social change of ancient and medieval India it is impossible to ignore the study of Sanskrit.
More than 2000 years ago, there flourished a science of phonetics in India, which does not have any parallel in the world. The Indian grammatical tradition continues to inspire linguists all over the world even today. Leonard Bloomfield, writing in Language (v.270 ff 1964) observes that "Indo-European comparative grammar had (and has) at its service only one complete description of a language, the grammar of Pa¸ini. For all other Indo-European languages it had only the traditional grammars of Greek and Latin, woefully incomplete and unsystematic. For no language of the past have we record comparable to Pa¸ini record of his mother tongue, nor is it likely that any language spoken today will be so perfectly recorded". The tribute paid to Pa¸ini by the modern linguists is based on the recognition of the long traditions of Sanskrit grammatical studies in general and insightful analysis of Sanskrit by Pa´ni in particular. The discovery of Sanskrit by the European scholars established a firm bond between the East and the West. The growing tribute of Sri William Jones (Lecture before the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, February 2, 1786) that is a testimony of this bond: "The Sanskrit language, whatever may be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure; more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either; yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in the roots of verbs and in the forms of grammar, than could possibly have been produced by accident; so strong that no philologer could examine the Sanskrit, Greek and Latin, without believing them to have sprung from some common source, which perhaps no longer exists". There is a reason, though not quite so forcible for supposing that both the Gothic and Celtic, though blended with a very different idiom, had the same origin with the Sanskrit; and the Older Persian might be added to the same family. Subsequent research establishing the Indo-European family of languages has confirmed the views of Sir William Jones. Scholarly tradition from Bohtlingk, Wackernagel, Weber, Maxmuller, Goldstucker to Thieme and Rau in Germany; from Th. S. Bayer and P. S. Pallas to Secrebrykov, Ivanov, Zugrov, Kalyanov, Elizarenkova in the USSR; form Whitney. Bloomfield to Brown, Ingalls, Emeneau, Van Buitenen, Stall and Stoler-miller in the USA; From Wilkins, Macdonell, Colebrooke, Turner to Burrow, Allen, Brough in the UK and in many other countries including Indonesia, Iran, Laos, Nepal, Thailand, Burma, Japan and China has kept the study of Sanskrit alive outside India.
The utility of the study of Sanskrit is not confined only to the study of ancient and medieval India. Though the Middle Indo-Aryan developments Sanskrit spills over the New Indo-Aryan languages. The Modern Indo-Aryan languages were the carriers of Buddhist and Jain thoughts. The spread of Bhuddhism as far as China and Japan established closer kinship among the Asian countries and provided a strong motivation for the study of Sanskrit and Middle Indic languages in the countries concerned. Like the transmigration of soul, the Sanskrit language transformed itself into the Modern Indo-Aryan languages and is living entity today.
The cultural miscegenation of the past 2000 years or more has resulted in such changes in the ad-stratum language Sanskrit and the sub-stratum Dravidian Munda languages that all of them show a good deal of typological similarities. This similarity is manifest in phonology, morphology and syntax. In the area of lexicon, percentage of Indo-Aryan loan words in some of the Dravidian languages reaches 'seventy and even more' and as Emeneau and Burrow (1962) point out "there is a tendency for all four of the Dravidian literary languages of the south to make literary use of the total Sanskrit lexicon indiscriminately". Andronov rightly observes that 'In any case one of the consequences of this mixture was a sharp change in the direction of the development of Indo-Aryan and new elements, typologically similar or typologically allied to those found in Dravidian, appeared in each of these languages an gradually increased in number. Simultaneously, the number of relationship elements, which connected the Indo-Aryan languages with the rest of the Indo-European gradually diminished". Arguing at the same breath Andronov (1968) observes that the so called 'genetic' relationship is not primordial and perpetual and that "if the direction of their development does not change in future, the no observed tendency to develop the formal similarity may gain strength and result in the formation of new relationship ties and of a new language family, which will be neither Indo-European, nor Dravidian".
It is not only in the field of language that the study of Sanskrit has direct relevance, but also in the study of Indian literature one cannot ignore Sanskrit. Sanskrit has not only provided themes and plots, but also has influenced the styles, dictions and modes of expression of the diverse Indian literature thus making the whole country one culture area. In the study of current religious and philosophical thought in any part of the country one can easily discern the underlying Sanskritic tradition. In the process of the Great Tradition co-existing with the many little traditions and nourishing them through their independent existence, Sanskrit has transformed itself to the sociological concept 'Sanskritisation' and assumes a dynamic functional role in the changing India society. Study of Sanskrit, therefore, is a compelling necessity even for the understanding of modern India with its multifarious facets of life and culture.
In a multilingual society like India where learning of three languages becomes a must for any one aspiring for education, there is naturally great difficulty in fitting Sanskrit into the curriculum. However, in one form or other, Sanskrit is taught in the school stage all over the country and in 42 Universities upto the Post-Graduate level. There are also the Central Institute of Sanskrit and Sanskrit Universities doing advanced research in different areas of Sanskrit studies. The Union Government helps preserve the Gurukula system and at the same time provides financial assistance for the modrenisation of the conventional system. It must be understood that Sanskrit is to be developed as a research tool for humanities and social sciences, and learnt for the understanding of its grammatical and literary tradition. For this purpose the teaching methods and materials need to be reviewed with a view to bringing the new insights to bear on them. Those involved in Indian studies in India have to do a lot of heart searching in this regard. Although there is come difference about the duration of study, education, the technique of teaching and the manner in which this is to be incorporated in the curriculum, there may be no second opinion about teaching Sanskrit as a component of allied disciplines. For instance, while Sanskrit can be taught as part of ancient Indian history and culture, Indian Philosophy, Indian Archaeology, Numismatics and Epigraphy, Philosophy, etc., it can also be taught as an integral part of the modern Indian language course. It is only then that any promotional activity for Sanskrit will be meaningful and Sanskrit will be a window to India for all those interested including Indians.
Languages in the Context of Non-formal Education
Language in education is not only important in the context of formal education, but also assumes equal importance in the context of non-formal education.
Language use in the context of non-formal Education has assumed importance as (a) Literacy which forms an indispensable component of Non-formal Education for adults i essentially a language related task and (b) Language is the most important medium of communication of ideas. In the context of multiplicity of languages, dialects, styles and registers in the country, it has not only become imperative to correct choice of the variety of language to be used for instant communication, but also link this language with the process of standardisation conventions of the language. At this stage the taking place in various languages at various levels.
It is important to be clear about the strategies of language learning before venturing into the task. As an adult person who is going to learn language through non-formal education already has mastery over a variety of spoken language, the major problem for him is 'to relate the language, to the writing following types of problems can be visualised:
(a) Non-literate languages for which either a script is to be devised or adopted pose serious problems before a literacy worker. Tribal languages and minor non-tribal languages come under this category. The first problem they meet is the choice of a script. The question whether to use the script of the dominant regional language, Nagari, Roman or specially designed script has to be answered by them. Problems of writing length, stress, tone, etc., have to be sorted out and problems of spelling need to be solved before any material is produced in these languages.
(b) Languages like Tamil where there is considerable divergence between spoken, read and written forms pose a different set of problems. It may further be mentioned that in this language spoken forms are almost never written using the Tamil alphabet.
(c) Languages like Telugu where textbooks used to be invariably written in a style which is almost never spoken present yet another set of problems. It may be mentioned that a decision has been taken to switch over form the written Granthika style to the spoken standard Sista Vyavaharika style in a phased manner in 5 years. Following this decision, although the switch over has been effected to some extent at the higher levels, the gap between the primary and the post-primary is considerable. The primary books continue to be in the Granthika style.
(d) Situations like Kuvi, or Gondi where there is considerable dialect variation in a smaller area. Production of material which is acceptable in the entire language speaking area, however, small has its own problems which need to be solved.
(e) Situations in places like Koraput in Orissa, Ranchi in Bihar where large number of small aggregates of tribal and non-tribal people use Desia, a dialect of Oriya in the first place, and Sadri or Sadni, a dialect of Hindi in the second place as communication languages. Here is a three step movement from mother tongue to communication language to the standard, which has to be taken note of by any one interested in non-formal education.
(f) Situations like Nagaland, where the existance of a large number of mutually unintelligible languages, a pidgin contact language has led to the use of foreign language completely unrelated to either used as the language of education and administration.
(g) Speakers of languages like Tulu and Konkani where Kannada in the first place and Kannada. Marathi and Malayalam in the second are used as culture languages, language for communication in practically all areas other than home communication.The above illustrative list which focuses attention on some of the dimensions other than the better known dimensions like dialect variation, etc., would justify advanced research not only about problems relating to making choices of varieties of languages to be used but also problems relating to implementing this choice once it is made. In implementing the teaching of writing and reading, for example-different kinds of problems would have to be solved indifferent cases.
Once the choice of the script is made the way of presenting the script and relating to the spoken word would assume importance. Methods such as phonic method, word method, sentence method, etc., have been suggested by various experts in this context. The Central institute of Indian languages, for example, after closely scrutinising the other available methodology and taking into consideration their string points and inadequacies has developed its own method of presentation based on the twin principles of patterned perception and contrastive observation. The Institute has also prepared a film for learning Devanagari and filmstrips for learning Bengali and Urdu scripts. A lot more research needs to be done in this area.
Vocabulary presents another broad area of research. As initial literacy is bound to be functional, courses which would cater to the specific needs of people have to be developed. The Andhra Sahitya Academy, under the title of "Vrutti Pada Kosa", has brought out several volumes of professional terminology used in different regions of Andhra Pradesh. Similar project need to be undertaken in other areas and other languages. In any case quick surveys need to be done about functional vocabulary which is available with the people for whom the courses are designed. The Central Institute of Indian Languages has complied 'Recall Vocabulary' in all major languages other than Hindi which represents vocabulary in active command of educated native adult speakers of a language. Similar diagnostic studies may have to be done in the rural areas.
The proverbs, folk tales, folk songs, etc., should be utilised for transmitting contents to the target areas concerned in an interesting manner.
It is important to recognise that good grammars of even the major languages are not available today. Without this grading of material into levels could be well-nigh impossible. In case of minor languages and tribal languages the situation is still worse. Instant grammatical analysis has to be simultaneously undertaken for target areas, where grammars are non-existent.
The content to be transmitted for a farmer's literacy programme, for a programme for workers education, for programmes for 15 to 25 age group and for weaker sections of society are bound to dictate the use of different standards. Very often translations have to be resorted to from English or Hindi into other Indian languages. Translation requires considerable ability in manipulating both the source and target languages. A lot of the material which is translated from English becomes almost unintelligible to the Hindi speakers because of following English syntax closely. This aspect also needs to be looked into by the linguistic experts.
Use of audio-visual media such as films, radio and TV add entirely new dimensions of communication. Radio in particular where dependence is entirely on the spoken word has to rely heavily on the language experts to ensure immediate communication. Since film and TV combine visual with the audio-material there is considerable scope for building bridges between different kinds of speech.
Thus it would be seen from the illustrative list above that whether it is teaching reading and writing or using language for transmitting ideas, messages and information language has a pivotal role in non-formal education. Different between home language and school language has been responsible for a good deal of wastage and stagnation in the formal education system. If non-formal education does not ensure instant communication and simultaneously build bridges which would permit a person to move into self study in the areas of his interest then the very purpose of non-formal education would have been defeated.
Language use in education, in administration and in mass communication needs serious attention in any multilingual developing country. As a retrograde language policy can create a restrictive education and consequently and elitist society, a well-planned language policy can lay the foundation for democratic socialist polity and harness the country's man power for national development. It is acclaimed at all quarters that the present day education in India is elitist in orientation. By adding layers to it and effecting
sporadic surface changes no great revolution can be brought about either in education or in the society. A national language policy is a major step towards such a revolution. I hope that linguists and language scholars will take note of this and provide necessary leadership in formulating and implementing such a policy.