India
is a multi-ethnic society containing a large number of ethnic groups varying from
highly localized caste and tribal groups to dominant and boundaries between them
are not entirely fixed. These groups vary in terms of their awareness of a common
group identity different from other such constituent groups. There exists not
only a multiplicity of groups but also of ethnic features which are not always
congruent or cumulative. Thus it is a system in which the segments are characterized
by parallel ethnic features which are not always congruent or cumulative. Thus
it is a system in which the segments are characterized by parallel ethnic structures,
which are in turn hierarchically divided within themselves. This has resulted
in the rationalisation of the different ethnic groups as a result of inter-group
competition but has shun short of real and sustained confrontation between polarized
communities for the dominance of the entire system. Thus India is, in fact, a
developing multi-national state containing a number of dualized or pluralized
nationalities without a dominant single nationality. There have always been efforts
to accommodate the political demands of diverse language, religious and cultural
groups in a pluralistic set-up which dose not distract but confirms and promotes
the unity and integrity of the country.
A
community refers to an ethnic group whose members have developed an awareness
of common identity on the basis of language, cultural traits, territorial bonds,
diet and dress etc., which define the membership of the group. Such a community,
when it mobilizes for political action and becomes politically significant is
well set on the way to become a nationality. Language being one of the most significant
explicit markers plays a pivotal role in the development of a nationally and in
keeping it apart from other nationalities. In India
as
elsewhere language has thus become a significant rallying point of focus for socio-political
action and in creating, sustaining and furthering the awareness of a common identity
among the members of a group. In further forms a basis for permitting or denying
entry into a specific group. Multiplicity of different language movements in the
country has to be viewed and interpreted from this point of view. They become
more meaningful and significant social actions in the development of the pluri-ethnic,
pluri-cultural and pluri-linguistic character of the country. They also explain
the competition, conflict and tension among different communities in the country
on one hand and the development of national on the other.
The role of language as a focal rallying point for nationality formation and in
the creation and development of nation-states has been studied by linguists and
studied by linguists and social scientists, especially sociologists and political
scientists in the past decades. Such studies have analysed the causes for the
success of such movements or the deficiencies and shortcomings thereof when they
have not made much headway and have not yielded successful results. Studies of
such political movements and language movements in the Indain context have been
made in recent years. Social scientists and linguists have studied this role of
language from the point of view of their disciplines and their specialized interests.
Such studies have revealed the role language has played and is playing in the
wider socio-political matrices of the concerned countries.
In India different ethnic and language movements have developed and have been
launched in the past hundred years in different parts of the country. Such movements
have had two main focuses :
1.
Concern with the nature and form of the standard language and/or the
language
of written literature.
2.
Concern with the political demands involving creation of separate State or
administrative units based on linguistic and cultural considerations, granting
of certain rights and privileges, including the use of language in education,
administration and mass media.
Movements of either or both kinds have developed and/or are still in progress
in different parts of the country. The vast and farflung Hindi region has also
witnessed both kinds of movements.
The latter part of the nineteenth century saw the replacement of the Braja based
standard literary language of the region by the Khar Boli based form of modern
standard Hindi. At that time Braja was the accepted vehicle of literary writings
in the entire Hindi region from
Rajasthan to Bihar. However, the bulk of the literary output of the period is
in poetic form ; only stray instance of prose writings are found in Braja. With
the advent of prose writings in the area, a form of language based on and akin
to Khari Boli started coming in vogue. This resulted in a clevage in the language(s)
of literature in this period with Braja being used for poetic writings and Khari
Boli based from of language for prose. Many authors and writers of this period
including Bharatendu Harishchandra are attested to have followed this practice.
This was an anamolous and highly artificial situation and soon a movement for
displacing Braja as the language of poetry came into being which ultimately resulted
in the use of the Khari Boli based language uniformly resulted in the use of the
Khari Boli Hindi for prose was initially promoted and patronized by the Ford William
College authorities from the beginning of the nineteenth century.
The movement for the use of Khari Boli Hindi as the sole literary language of
the area drew support of the elite. Social reformers, journalists, cultural and
political leaders of the period supported the movement. Names of persons like
Munshi Tota Ram can be mentioned in this regard. The Governmental policy was in
favour of this replacement anyway. It was under the governmental patronage initially
that Khari Boli Hindi was used for literary prose writings and the Government
had all along advocated its adoption and propagation. Another factor which favoured
this switch over was that it brought the language of literature closer to the
lingua franca of the region, called Hindustan or the vernacular. A historical
survey as well as an analytical study the movement of the twenth century, there
is no need to delve into greater details here in the moment. It, however, illustrates
the existence of the languages movement of the first kind mentioned in the Hindi
region.
The earlier decades of the present century witness the emergence and establishment
of a clearly defined form of standard Hindi. This is also the heyday of the reform
movements like Arya Samaj and of the revivalist movements in the region. These
movements also favoured and advocated the establishment and spread of Khari Boli
Hindi not only as the literary language of the region but also took steps to popularize
this as the language of the masses in the Hindi tract and the national language,
as it advocated Hindi as one of the symbols of national
independence
struggle. Mahatma Gandhi favoured and made efforts for the integration of Hindi
and Urdu speaking communities by trying to evolve and popularize a common language,
Hindustani. As this paper is primarily concerned with the language movement based
on Hindi dialects, we will not go into the details of the Hindi-Urdu-Hinsudtani
controversy in the pre-independence era or since.
Movements in the Hindi tract in the present century have been either for the creation
of separate states based on regional, socio-cultural-cum-linguistic criteria or
for the development and recognition of regional dialects. The movements of the
first kind involve the demands for the creation of Bhojpur, Vishal Haryana and
Bundelkhand. These movements started soon after independence in the wake of the
central Government's commitment to recognize the States on linguistic basis. However
in each case the arguments advanced in favour of creating such separate States
were the following :
1.
The existing state boundaries are artificial and do not con
firm to either
natural and Linguistic boundaries. The state
boundaries cut across linguistic
boundaries. Thus the speakers
of Bhojpuri are spread in U. P. and Bihar,
the speakers of
Bundeli in U. P. and M. P. and the speakers of Haryanvi in
Haryana, U. P. and Delhi.
2.
The region has distinctive characteristics of its own :
Thus
(a)
It has a separate and independent areal history.
(b)
There exist separate and distinct symbols of culture
and social practices,
which on one hand, unify the
area and on the other keep it separate from other
regions.
(c) It has a distinct language, with a past literary tradi
tion in the case
of Bhojpuri and Bundeli and also
the existence of contemporary literary and
creative
writings in all the three cases.
(d)
It is distinct in terms of dress and diet.
(e)
It has a distinct folklore tradition.
3.
There exists a discrimination in the allocation of political power and economic
Resources and benefits incompatible to the size and importance of the community.
Thus the regional community is being exploited deliberately in the present set
up.
These
politico-language movements besides demanding separate statehoods, also agitated
for certain specific rights and privileges, including the recognition and use
of their languages in education, administration and mass media. As mentioned earlier
such movements started after the independence in the wake of the anticipated recognisation
of States on linguistic grounds. The States Reorganisation Commission report and
its background materials give sufficient evidence to these facts. These movements
did not cut much ice with the States Reorganisation Commission, which did not
accede to their? demands. Some of the significant reasons for the failure of these
politico-language movements can be analyzed as follows:
1.
The elite failed to create conciousness in the masses so that the masses identify
themselves with the movements. This resulted due to the lack of communication
as well as the lack of strong, widespread and sustained socio-political mobilization.
2.
The regional elite was integrated effectively with the all-India elite on the
basis of nationalist, ideological and caste symbols and not in terms of original,
linguistic and cultural symbols.
3.
Symbols of national identification were given priority over the regional symbols
by the regional elite.
4.
There was differential social mobilization which had resulted in the absorption
and assimilation of regional dialect speakers in standard Hindi.
5.
The regional languages lacked standardization.
6.
The parameters of social differentiation were not compatible with those of language
differentiation.
The
Maithili movement is a political-cum-language movement. The movement on one hand
promoted the development, standardization and modernization of Maithili ; on the
other hand it utilized language together with other socio-cultural parameters
for the development of the Maithili nationally and creation of a separate Mathili
State. The beginnings of the Maithili movement can be traced to the founding of
the All India Maithili Mahasabha in 1910. Another organisation, Maithili Sahitya
Parishad also came into being some what later but as early as 1931. At present,
there is another very effective organisation, Chetana Samiti, which was formed
in 1955. There are some journals and news letters also published in Maithili.
The language was recognised by
Calcutta University in 1919 as a modern Indian language for study upto M. A. stage.
Banaras Hindu University recognized it in 1933. It is only in 1939 that it was
recognized by Bihar University and Patna University. Some other universities of
Bihar have also followed suit. Bihar University created a Vidyapati Chair in 1964.
The protagonists of the Maithili movement base their demands on the following
grounds :
1.
The existing boundaries of Bihar are artificial. They
are not in accordance
with either natural or linguistic boundaries.
2.
Mithila has had a separate and independent regional history all along in
the past.
3. Mithila has a distinct and common historical and cultural tradition.
4.There
exist separate and distinct symbols of culture and religion on which the regional
consciousness is based.
5.There
are common symbols of regional identity like language, social customs and practices,
dress, diet, etc.
6.Maithili
as the mothertongue of the region is a great unifying force. It has a long and
glorious literary tradition.
7.It
has a distinct folk literature tradition.
8.There
is a discriminatory allocation of political power and economic resources and benefits.
The Mathilis are being deliberately exploited as a result of their being part
of Bihar.
The
Maithili movement has had some measure of success. Due to the
efforts of
the protagonists of the movement, the number of persons reporting Maithili as
their mothertongue has risen from 87,674 in 1951 to 49, 82, 615, in 1961, i.e.,
from 0.23% to 10.73% in Bihar. As mentioned earlier the language has been recognised
as a subject of study in different universities not only in Bihar but even in
other States. It is accepted as a subject and is also allowed as medium of instruction
upto the school stage in Bihar. PEN, India recognised it as a distinct literary
language as early as in 1947. Some programmes are broadcast in Mithili by AIR.
The most significant achievement has been its recognition by the Sahitya Akademi
in 1965.
In spite of all these successes there has been no significant gain in acceding
to the demand for the creation of a Mithila State. In short, it can be said that
the movement has more or less failed in achieving
its ultimate and most significant
objective. The reasons for such a failure are manifold. The prominent ones can
be summarized below:
(1)
The movement was started mainly by certain case groups, Brahmins and Kayasthas
of the region, who comprised caste groups, Brahmins and Kayasthas of the region,
who comprised the elite of the area. They have not associated the Maithils of
other caste groups with them. As a matter of fact, till the sixties the membership
of the Mithila Mahasabha was not open to persons of other caste groups. Thus the
propagators of the movement have not been able to bring the entire Maithil community
within their fold.
(2) The Maithil elite gave priority to symbols of
national identity over the regional symbols.
(3)
Political elite of Mithila have been integrated effectively in the all-Bihar movements
and life on the basis of nationalist, ideological and caste symbols and not on
the basis created among the entire body of Maithili speakers.
(4)
The social mobilization of the Maithils has taken place in a differential manner
and the result has been that the community cansciousness as a whole has been created
among the entire body of Maithili speakers.
(5)
In spite of the rich literary tradition, the language has not developed a full
gamut of styles and registers to enable it to function effectively as the
vehicle of modern communication. Lack of standardization and modernization has
been a prime factor in this regard. The protagonists of the movement have also
not stressed the development of non-literary forms of language and literature.
(6)
The community consciousness as well as regional identification has not been
strong enough in the area. One evidence of it is that the Maithili script which
was in vague till the 19th century disappeared from the scene in this century.
(7)
The exclusiveness of the term 'Mithili' has been another obstacle to the
development of community consciousness in the region.
Thus lack of political mobilization and lack of mass support have been responsible
for the withering away of the Maithili movement. Although the movement has not
completely died out, its effectiveness has been seriously impaired by now. The
history of the Maithili movement shows that "Language is not a sufficient
condition for community identification." (Brass : 80)
Now
we turn our attention to the two other language movements of the Hindi region-Rajasthani
movement and the Pahari movement. I am considering them separately from the movements
discussed earlier in the paper because the objectives of these two movements are
quite different from the rest. In the case of the three political movements (movements
for the creation of Bhojpur, Bundelkhand, and Vishal Haryana states) and the Maithili
movement, the prime demand of the protagonists was for the creation of separate
political entitles to satisfy their cultural and linguistic aspirations. In the
case of these two movemnst creation of Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh was undertaken
on considerations other than purely linguistic. As a matter of fact, the regional
language movements in these two cases draw their support to a great measure from
the existence of separate and independent political entitles: Rajasthan State
was created by the merger of various princely States in the region into a viable
political unit. The same has been true to a very great extent in the case of Himachal
Pradesh. It is true that in the case of the people of the States so merged has
shared a common regional culture, social customs and beliefs, mode of life and
folk traditions etc. The regional dialects spoken in different parts of the so
amalgamated princely States are also close enough to permit a high degree of mutual
intelligibility. In case of Himachal Pradesh the same has been true. However,
much after the reorganization of the Sates on linguistic basis certain areas belonging
to erstwhile Punjab and Haryana have also been merged with Hmachal Pradesh on
linguistic and cultural reasons.
Once
Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh emerged as separate political units the socio-political
elites of the regions have been searching for certain symbols which can be utilized
as rallying points for a better integration of the region and language has been
selected as such a symbol. Thus the problem in both these cases has been to search
a basis for developing and cementing common ties between the peoples of different
princely sates and thus create a state which is politically and emotionally integrated.
Language has seemed to be the focal point to the elites of both the areas.
Although
the idea of Rajasthan and Pahari as a regional language in each case either competing
or co-existing with the standard language of the area, viz., Hindi has been cases
in selecting the particular dialects which run into problems in both cases in
selecting the particular dialect which can be developed into standard regional
language. In the case of can be developed into standard regional language. In
the case of Rajasthani, Marvari, one of the Western Rajasthani dialects have come
to the forefront and the political as well as educational leaders of the Marwar
are have been propagating for its adoption in the entire
Rajasthan. This insistance of Marwari elite has been resented by the speakers
of other Rajasthani dialects and has impeded the development of Rajasthani as
snch. Unless the issue on what dialect base Rajasthani should develop, the question
of its standardization and modernization does not arise. The same story holds
true to a very great extent in the case of Pahari also. There in also there is
a competition between different Pahari dialects for being accepted as the base
for a standard Pahari. Although Kangri speakers are in majority, though not absolute
majority, this very fact makes speakers of other dialects look with suspicion
any proposal about the acceptance of Kangri as the base for standard Pahari. The
claims of Mandeali are also being pushed by one group of people but in terms of
language dialects. Moreover the number of Mandeali speakers is also not sizable.
In both these States, state governments seem to be convinced that retaining Hindi
as the language of education, administration and mass communication is not only
a matter of political expediency but will also help in checking divisive tendencies
within the State. It is believed that recognition of dialects would only 'retard
the process of regional unification and assimilation'. However, the state governments
are also concerned with their development as symbols of regional identity and
thus in both these States the state governments have set up organizations for
the promotion of regional dialects. The task assigned to such organizations is
survey of regional dialects, compilation of regional vocabularies, finding out
common and shared vocables among the regional languages in due course. Such organizations
have also been given the responsibility of looking after the development of creative
writings in the regional language dialects of each region to preserve collect
are grant giving and as well as research conducting agencies. This has satisfied
the protagonists of the regional language movements and has created a mechanism
for the preservation of social and cultural traditions of the area.
None of the two movements have made much political impact yet. The main reason
seems to be lack of social mobilization and also dialect differentiation in the
area.
Looking at the history of various movements in the Hindi region it is evident
that none of them have really been successful as they lacked mass support. They
have been more an affair of the political, social or
caste elites, who have not been able to purusade the masses and bring them into
their fold so that the movements may become mass movements, which seems to be
a necessary condition if they have to succeed.