Problems
of Unrecognized Speech Forms in India
Aspects of Language Study
I am using the expression
language study in the widest sense possible, so as to include not
only the study of this or that language for achieving a practical
command of it but also the theoretical study of language under linguistics,
psychology, and sociology. It should be obvious that all these different
aspects of language study have a part to play.
We
are also assuming that the so-called ‘tribal’ or ‘Adivasi’ or ‘preliterate’
peoples of India, in spite of their racial, linguistic, cultural and
ecological variety and wide geographical spread, do constitute a well-defined
segment of the Indian population. The three terms suggest different
ways of drawing the line around them—the first indicates their position
outside the communal framework, the second represents a historical
claim, and the third marks them off from the illiterate. They are
not literate in their mother tongues simply because these tongues
have never been written at least until recently. (They may of course
be literate in some other language—like the regional language or even
English).
“We”
and “They”
Now
in what way are the Tribals a “problem”? Or is it simply that “we”—the
non-tribals—are presuming too much? The very posing of this question
hints at the answer. It is not as if “they” are a burden on “us” or
“we” to take in “both” in spite of the fact that tribals and non-
tribals alike are in the same historical, geographical, economic,
and political boat. It is the creation of a more meaningful “we” that
is a problem. Their problems should become ours and, yes, the other
way round too. Does this sound, “romantic nonsense”? No, this is hard
commonsense. The happenings in the various tribal areas in the last
few years have brought it home to us. For the purposes of this paper,
I shall simply assume that integration based on reciprocity is a desirable
and desired goal; that is, we are not envisaging for the tribals either
wild life preservation or conservation into eminently exploitable,
unskilled labour.
Now,
why would any one take the trouble to learn a language to which he
has not been exposed in early childhood? Learning a language (or even
more than one language) in early childhood is no problem; a child
cannot help doing so. Learning a language is of course not the same
as becoming literate in a language; though the latter presupposes
the former and can indeed be taken to be extension of the former.
(This point is important and we shall have occasion to return to it
later).
Mother
–tongue
A
different though related question is: why does any language group
maintain a language it has learned? Why does a group maintain its
mother tongue, rather than let it be displaced by some other adoptive
tongue? Again, why would a group take the trouble of adopting bilingualism
as a way of life?
The
cost of learning a new language and the cost of maintaining a mother
tongue or an adoptive language are both justified by the services
to the individual and the community performed by the languages concerned.
Three
Main Functions of Language
Language
(whether we choose to spell it with a capital or not) fulfils certain
functions in human life. These functions may be grouped into three
headings:
i)
utilitarian
ii)
sociative
iii)
spiritual
Utilitarian
First, language helps
its user to gain a better control of its non-human environment. A
tribal walking through a forest feels more at home with its flora
and fauna: the plants have their names and categorizations—poisonous,
edible, medicinal and so forth; and so have the animals, birds, insects,
fish. The forest is not merely a riot of colours, sounds, smells,
feels. The fact that the tribal language vocabulary is likely to be
far richer than the mere townsman’s is only a symptom of a general
principle—namely, that language crystallizes this ‘at-home’-ness in
the specific environment. The environment includes the human environment,
too—indeed, language has grammatical devices like questions, imperatives,
and optatives and lexical devices like terms of endearment and insult
specially designed for the effective designed for the effective manipulation
of this social environment. But man’s relations to his fellow-beings
are not all exploitative or manipulative. (After all, this is precisely
the reason we are worried about the tribals!).
Sociative
This leads us naturally
to the next, sociative function of language. If you have ever been
surrounded by people, with whom you don’t share a language, you may
notice that people often take pleasure in talking to you even when
they are fully aware that they are not being understood. The simple
greeting to a passing neighbour or the endless babble-game indulged
in by a mother and the infant are other charming manifestations
of the same principle. More seriously, language holds a community
together across generations, across social and geographical barriers.
Language is the most important vehicle for the transmission and maintenance
of a group’s culture. People who interact more, share more things,
and the other way round.
Spiritual
You may find yourself a little intrigued by my
third heading—“spiritual”, a term which is as much at a discount in
some circles as is at a premium in others. I hope to have steered
clear of both these usages of the term, by the spiritual function
of language I mean nothing more than the use of language as it were
for its own sake and not as a means to an end, whether utilitarian
or sociative. Man—even child—has the capacity to enjoy language, to
play with it, to become engrossed in it. Simple word games, poems,
riddles, philosophical puzzles are varied manifestations of this aspects
of language. People who, in the interests of some utopia, lightly
speak of stamping out sight of the spiritual function altogether and
grasp the sociative function in a one-sided manner. Being wrenched
from one’s language, can be as much a threat to an individual as it
can be to a community.
A Western
parallel
Some of the points touched on above are vividly
illustrated in the U.S. National Education Associations report on
the Spanish- speaking Americans of Mexican descent (summary quoted
from New-york Times, 8 Aug, 1966).
“The
child of Mexican descent knows some English, but has used it infrequently.
The language of his home, his childhood, his first years is Spanish.
His environment, his experiences, his very personality have been shaped
by it. And yet in some schools the speaking of Spanish is forbidden,
both in the classroom and on the playground, and not infrequently
students have been punished for lapsing into Spanish even with corporal
punishment. In addition, the Mexican-American child encounters a strange
and different set of culture-patterns, an accelerated tempo of living
and more often than not, teachers who, though sympathetic and sincere,
have little understanding of the Spanish-speaking people, their customs,
beliefs, and sensitivities. The end result discloses a grim prevalence
of low grades and high rates of dropping out from school. The National
Education Association, who made a year’s study of this state of affairs
recommend bilingual instruction in pre-school programmes and early
grades, the explicit teaching of standard English as a second language
instead of leaving the children to fend for themselves, the employment
of Spanish-knowing teachers or teachers’ helpers, making the teachers
aware of the bilingual situation when training them, and (where the
child speaks non-standard forms of Spanish) emphasis on good Spanish
no less than good English”.
While
this account shows the results of unplanned assimilation the dangers
of isolation are equally clear. If we are to strike a middle path
of integration based on reciprocity, special attention has to be devoted
to language in relation to education. In so doing, a consideration
of the three functions of language and the way the tribal, the regional,
and the union languages fulfill these, can serve as a guide-line.
Proposals
A
proposal that emerges from such a consideration can be outlined as
follows: We plan (a) to make the tribals literate in their own language
(b) to use it as medium or a co-medium in the initial stages; and
finally (c) to teach the contact language and to make them literate
in that language. It is obvious that the preparation of suitable teaching
material and preparation of suitable teaching material and the training
of teachers will be an important requirement. The study of the tribal
language by non-tribals (of “their” language by “us”) should also
be encouraged especially among social workers, teachers, welfare officials,
even administrators.
It
is at this point that the language specialist especially the student
of linguistics—enters the picture to play his behind- the- scene-
role of advisor, analyst, spade-worker. The tasks he can take over
wholly or in part are:
(a)
a reliable linguistic survey
(b) careful scientific descriptions of
the phonology, grammar, and vocabulary of the tribal languages
(c) re-education of teachers, administrators
social workers, and the general public with respect to their attitudes
toward tribal languages and the linguistic prospects before the tribals
(d)
Preparation of literacy primers in
tribal languages preceded by the designing of orthographies for them
(e) Preparation of courses for teaching
tribal languages as second language
(f) Preparation of simple teaching materials
in other subjects for the monolingual and bilingual stages, i.e. preliminary
and transitional stages.
Some
work has already been started in the Tribal Language Division of the
Central Institute of Indian Languages. A link could be established
between this work, the work being done at the universities, and the
work being done at the State level through the Tribal Welfare departments
and the Tribal Research Institutes and…. Through bodies like the Girijan
Cooperative Corporation.
Rapport-first
priority
If
reciprocity and winning over the tribals, rather than treating them
like children, is going to be our goal, establishment of rapport and
communication and overcoming of mutual distrust arising as a legacy
of previous errors has the first priority. What better earnest can
we offer to them learning to talk to them in their language?
COLOPHON:
This
was in Vivekananda Kendra Patrikā 1:2 Hill India number, p.113-6,
August 1972 (Chennai). It was originally presented as a lecture at
pune. August 1971. A lecture in Marathi was delivered in June, August
1971, and appeared in Samāj- Prabodhan-patrikā, no 45, May-June
1972.
