The Tribune...Sunday Reading

Chandigarh, Sunday, July 19, 1998

Weak nations produce weak languages
Linguistic development, economic growth interlinked
By Vandana Shukla
Social backwardness, cultural inertia and intellectual bankruptcy and linguistic inertia are always intimately connected. They are different facets of the same reality. In other words, strong nations evolve strong languages and the weak ones use a meek language. Thus, a politically and economically weak nation also suffers from an indifferent cultural ethos and its dominant language is likewise weak.
Thoughts, belief, customs, science and the language expressing them developed very slowly. The process of acquiring expressive sounds to articulate experiences and their codification in the form of a language was almost the same for all the civilisations. All languages expressed almost the same level of experience upto a certain period in human history. Hence, it is easy to find parallel words in many languages relating to basic human experiences. Thereafter, the process advanced at an ever increasing speed, but only for a few countries who took a leap in scientific and technological advancement. The languages that developed as a result of this development do not find parallels in other tongues.
It is, therefore, very easy to spot the generation to which a a person belongs by paying attention to the words used by him, his construction of sentences, slowness or rapidity of expression etc. Similarly, the status of a country can be determined by the status of its language because it is through the language that a country’s social, cultural and intellectual growth is reflected. The language of a dynamic and strong society reflects its verve and vitality. It becomes popular and is adopted by other weak societies.
The events of our times affect each one of us and condition our faculties, including the language and our power to express ourselves. Speech determines semantic horizons of the speaker and, collectively, the growth and enrichment of experience is reflected in the language of a society.
Ancient India was a politically and economically a strong nation. It produced languages which became the carriers of vedantic thought. Sanskrit incorporated thoughts of the highest order in philosophy, literature, music, theatre, mathematics, medicine, astronomy etc. Though it is the mother of many modern languages as it is linguistically unparalleled, it perished due to the political disintegration of the nation.
A few political powers which flourished in some parts of the country and were unaffected by foreign invasions gave rise to regional registers like Tamil and Malayalam. In the North, some languages of the medieval era-- Avadhi and Braj-- produced first rate literature but they were unable to meet the demands of the modern times as the societies they served remained economically and politically dominated.
On the other hand, the British made half the world speak their language by virtue of their political and economic power. They enriched their language by assimilating stores of knowledge available in other languages of the world. However, the British are today rubbing the Queen’s English off their sleeve and mimicking the American accent since the power equations have changed globally. Similarly, corporate kings are rushing to Japan to learn a few words of the language of the technically best people.
There is a deterministic relation of habitual thought and behaviour to language. Language determines the way in which we view the world. A simple example of this can be found in many languages, including English, where many experiences undergone by women have not been named. Therefore, they are seen by the speakers of English as less real than other concepts for which a name exists. The concepts which are important for a language- community become lexicalised--the community establishes them within a single word.
In some other language-communities, there may not exist a word for the same concept, hence, translations become a difficult task. Thus, a dictionary is not just a word list, but a record of the concepts and experiences which a particular society considers to be important.
Children, who are socialised within a community whose language unequally categories men and women or caste, will learn to think of this inequality as natural. Thus, the use of “he” as a non-specified gender pronoun in English or the use of nouns like “chairman” and “spokesman” remained common for centuries. But they were hotly debated in the mid- 60s because of the social changes taking place at that time. New gender concepts expressing equality are being lexicalised as a result of greater consciousness in the western society. In fact,the relationship between language and society in the area of lexicalisation is a dialectical one. Meanings and concepts become lexicalised as a result of social change. The fact of their lexicalisation can accelerate the rate of change or perhaps produce changes which otherwise might not happen, or would happen with greater difficulty. Concepts of “racism” and “ageism” have been trying to articulate oppression thereby making the English language more conscious of the social movements. But the lack of changing social realities has pushed many Indian languages into a state of stagnation.
It would be interesting to make a comparative study of different languages and their possibilities as channels of communication in today's world. Colonial empires created between the so-called dead languages and those of the West, a third category of languages which were rich in literature and ethnologically interesting, but unsuited to the essentially secular, technical and realistic type of communication of the present day. Most African and Asian languages, including ours fall under this category.
The colonisers gave their “word” and the natives used it. They created a class of native elite through their language, who echoed them. The native elite’s emulation of the modern language per se was stopped mid way so that they did not alienate themselves from their own class completely. However, the comparatively higher position enjoyed by the local elite made others mimic them. The natives re-discovered themselves through “their” language. The arts, culture, medicine, philosophy et al came to them in a foreign language, and the language itself brought its own influences thereby making the natives lose their soul and evolve a dependency syndrome. No Asian or African language remained strong thereafter.
These countries, once again due to the influence of western languages, made efforts towards gaining independence from the colonial yoke. At the same time, they sought to establish themselves as industrially and technically advanced communities. They also wanted to preserve their languages. But the absence of one national language and the presence of fragmented regional dialects, and the political lobbying attached to these dialects, forced many of these countries to opt for bilingualism. As such, the language of the old colonial masters became the only possible vehicle for modern culture. In India, particularly in Bengal, the access to English consciousness brought about a partial renaissance, but it failed to revive other regional languages and regional consciousness in other parts of the country to the same extent.
The growth of the industrial civilisation and economies are, therefore, bound to meet with obstacles when confronted by languages that have not been brought up to date. In the fast pace of growth, most societies, particularly the colonised ones, are left with little choice. Turned dependent and weak by years of exploitation, they adopt foreign languages along with foreign technology since adaptation of the native language for modern requirements could be time consuming and will demand effort. But, a lot depends on how strong- willed the people in their effort to preserve their identity. Many countries have taken up translation activity on the same footing as industrial and technological advancement. By adopting a foreign language as a tool of growth, the development of a society remains limited to a few people in few pockets. This kind of development has its own in-built weakness and thereby reduces the native languages, and the knowledge contained in them, to a secondary status. This results in a whole society experiencing a secondary status complex in their own country.
Many languages, like Arabic, have a great potential for expressing completely new concepts. Others, like Russian, have adopted and assimilated the most advanced technological concepts in their language system. Not that these concepts were thrust upon their language from the top, but when a society actually immerses itself in modern life, the language is forced to respond to realities and new situations in a manner that suits its own structure.
Hence, though our native languages cannot be termed as “dead languages” in terms of “ageing”, they are unsuitable for the communication of what is being said today. Or that even if they are suitable in principle, they are not actually being used as a vehicle for desired communication.
The prolonging of our optional slavery has crippled us intellectually and morally. Whether it is literature or art, music or science, we are aping what is being produced in the global language. A few original thinkers and creative talents who dare to remain original are pushed into obscurity for they refuse to use the language of the elite. Weak minds end up being recognised by the sheer use of the language of the elite.
As a result of lack of intellectual constructivity, the cognitive dimension of our language has remained low and the richness of its emotive and imaginative dimension has lost its relevance in the era of advanced technology. In our effort to be like”others” we have forgotten the importance of “content”.
Only an accuracy of imitation has become our goal. What the youngsters live and speak is labelled as Hinglish--the half-way language of a half- way people. We are being influenced all the time from all directions and proving ourselves to be a society without a back-bone. We should, therefore, rather learn to speak our own language. Efforts in this direction can be painful and will demand perseverance. But a weak language and the people who speak it will find no place in the world order.