The irony of the Hindi-English debate is that practices involving these are prejudicial to the interests of all other Indian languages. Second of a two-part series
The recalcitrant debate over two languages or three in the Indian education system is centered on the question of Hindi and English. Amid the chaos and confusion of this raging issue, two questions vital to language in education policy are conveniently sidetracked: multilingualism and mother tongue (MT).
The evolution of the three-language formula (TLF), even in its lingering irrelevance, has always included, in principle, a choice of mother tongue (MT) as the medium of teaching and as a school language. The debate is not just about one language or the other; it is more about the relative supremacy of the already dominant languages.
Read Part 1 here: Three-language formula: A bridge to nowhere
Hegemony of dominant languages
Privileging one language over another in a truly multilingual society is an imperialistic design ideologically rooted in the belief glorifying the dominant languages and stigmatizing the others, particularly the MTs of indigenous tribal minority/minoritized (ITM) communities. The conspicuous absence of the question of MTs in the Hindi-English debate is a sign of the hegemonic structure of linguistic imperialism accepting the dominance as “normal”.
The hegemony of the dominant languages is pervasive; it is educational, cultural, economic and political, leading to inequality, hierarchy, injustice, exploitation, and deprivation. Unfortunately, the hegemony is also internalized by the victims of the process of unjust dominance.
The irony of the current national debate over Hindi or English is that practices involving these two dominant languages are prejudicial to the interests of all other languages in our multilingual society and often lead to a violation of linguistic human rights of the speakers of other MTs, especially those belonging to the ITM linguistic communities. The dominance of these two languages is both unjust and mythical.
English and education in Indian multilingualism
English is often projected as a language of emancipation, a language of development, global economy, science and technology. In India, English is inaccurately projected as a lingua franca. As a non-native language in India, English is not a culturally neutral medium; the extent to which it can be considered as a lingua franca varies across class, caste, gender, location, language communities, and identities.
Multiple varieties are in fact used as the lingua franca in rural and urban areas, different socioeconomic and caste groups and across formal and informal contexts. Diverse, context-specific, and, often, code-mixed varieties, including local and regional languages, Hindi, Hinglish and English with underlying continuities between them serve as the lingua franca in multilingual contexts across the country.
The characterization of English as a language of development is more rhetoric than substance. The growth of education in English and in the number of English-knowing/speaking citizens are sometimes linked to different parameters of development.
Also read: Take a cue from Tamil Nadu: Top Kannada body proposes two-language formula in Karnataka
The projected relationships between English and development are not definite; the demonstrated relationships are contextually limited and correlational. It is wrong to suggest that English causes development. Critical analyses of the socio-economic consequences of English in post-colonial societies show that English is associated with elite formation, social stratification and exclusion of the masses.
Is English education really effective?
As a result of systematic efforts by the British colonial powers, the complex multilingual realities and linguistic identity conflicts in post-colonial India, and the forces of linguistic imperialism, English has positioned itself as a dominant language even if it is a non-native and demographically minority language. The scheduled and major regional languages of India constitute a larger share of the population, but they are clearly less powerful than English which has a greater control over the national economy and resources.
Over 40 per cent of schoolchildren in India are in private English-medium (EM) schools and the number is projected to increase by over 10 per cent annually. The state governments are now joining the bandwagon by opening government EM schools. The belief in the EM superiority is propagated despite several studies showing that, when quality of schooling and socioeconomic status differences among the pupils are controlled, MT and regional language schools are more effective.
From Doon schools to Doom schools
The myth of superiority of EM schooling is perpetuated by the visible success of the high-cost elite EM schools for the super-rich and the privileged classes, pushing the level of public demand for EM schools. Many relatively low-cost and poor-quality EM schools have opened in urban and rural areas catering to the less privileged classes. I have labelled the different types of EM schools as ranging from “Doon schools to Doom schools”. The children in this latter type are subjected to a very poor-quality school education in English and, with little or no home-based support for learning in a non-native language, they are doomed to failure.
Jawaharlal Nehru rued the divisive impact of education in a foreign language, and, in 1956, expressed his concern about a new caste system being perpetuated in India — “an English knowing caste separated from the mass of our public”.
Also read: Hindi imposition 2.0? NEP brings TN language warriors back to forefront
However, with the proliferation of EM schools of divergent quality and cost, English now divides society further. With a large number of EM schools widely varying in cost and quality (besides those educated in MT or regional-language-medium schools where English is taught as a school subject), there are now “English-knowing” sub-castes; a new caste and sub-caste system based on the quality of English proficiency — those with excellent English, average English and poor English.
Whose development does English promote? Children from the less privileged segments of society, whose parents believe in the emancipatory power of English and invest a major share of their limited resources in EM education, end up getting cheated since the promised benefits remain elusive.
English opens doors for the privileged
Viewing English as a language of development without a critical assessment of its consequences for different segments of the population in a multilingual society is not only one-sided, but also political.
Furthermore, it is also wrong to assume that English is inevitable for science and technology. No single language has monopoly over knowledge systems and modern developments in science and technology in the world; contributions from many non-English countries in Asia, Europe and other continents have shown that English is not a necessary condition for such development.
English opens doors for the privileged who are already on the other side of development with (material and non-material) support for English, but it also closes the doors for many others. The current policy debate privileges English as a “political imperative” at the expense of other languages in our multilingual society and has unwittingly synergized linguistic imperialism.
(Concluded)
