Muhammad
Muhsin Ibrahim
Bayero University, Kano
INTRODUCTION
Some might think the title suggests a banal subject, which has been at the centre of hot debates among many
writers, particularly the Nigerian Chinua Achebe and the Kenyan Ngugi wa
Thiong’o, for many years. However, India is exceptional, as the country is unique in the world. India is a place of myths and legends; a birthplace
of some of the world’s leading religions and creeds; miscellaneous cultures and traditions, and
other peculiarities. It is the second most populous country after China—and
would, as projected, overtake China in the ranking within a few years—with over a billion inhabitants. People are divided mainly into mass
and massive ethnically heterogeneous societies with little or nothing in common. It was
gathered in a recent report that ‘Over 1652 languages belonging to four
different language families…’ (http://www.ciil.org)—eighteen of which were given
recognition by the government—are spoken in the varied and vast geographical
entity of India. Nonetheless, one such language, understood by more citizens than the others, enjoys a special, elevated status above them and is widely accepted. The language is Hindi, an Aryan language with more than 300 million speakers across India and beyond.
However, because it was among the earliest places where British colonialists settled and maintained a prolonged presence, the Hindi language has, for many, its antithesis: the English
language. Like all other former British colonies, English was introduced (or
imposed, as the nationalists would have us believe) to the people for
governance and other leadership undertakings of the British imperial government
in India; hence, it occupied a considerable place, yet a very rare one, much unlike in the
other former colonies like Nigeria, the country I come from. There was a shift
in the mission of Britain, which was comparatively akin to the French assimilation policy in
Africa, as they intended to breed people that are “Indian[s] in blood and
colour, but English in taste, in opinion, in morals and in intellect (Macaulay,
1835). It’s, again, unique because Macaulay’s goal was met with steep opposition
and rejection. One of the greatest Indian statesmen expresses his opinion, which was shared by others, about that language thus:
Our
language is the reflection of ourselves, and if you tell me that our languages
are too poor to express the best thought, then I say that the sooner we are
wiped out of existence, the better for us. Is there a man who dreams that
English can ever become the national language of India? (Cries of ‘Never’)
(Gandhi’s Speech at Banaras Hindu University, February 6, 1916, cited in
Saksena 1972: 28).
What followed afterwards is history. Great Britain finally relinquished control of India and handed the mantle of
power to the Indians. The country was declared an independent state as
early as 1947. Although still in use, the English language was officially designated an auxiliary language, intended to terminate after fifteen (15) years of independence. English, however, remains the vital language of India, as that decision has yet to be finalised. Pavan K. Varma, a very realistic Indian writer on contemporary
India, says, in his illuminating book, Being
Indian (2004), that the decision to axe English out of official dealings “could
never be implemented” because of what he calls “linguistic chauvinism” of some
pan-Indian English-speaking elites. Those ‘chauvinists’ are in conflict with
more or less the majority pan-Indian Hindi-speaking ‘ordinary’ people, among
whom some even immolated
themselves for the agitation during a protest and whose
resistance is backed by some powerful politicians.
Politics of English and on English
India is a country where the issue of the English language has been heavily politicised. And I use the word politics in its broadest sense. For
instance, speaking ‘Standard’ English, especially in public, can give one pride—even narcissism, at times—and associate them with elitism, as it simply means they were able to attend
English-medium schools known as “convent” schools. The politicians, perhaps because of their
concern to bridge that gulf and to more thoroughly and systematically
decolonise India, have intruded into the matter. It was India’s foreign minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who, in 1979, famously addressed the United Nations General Assembly in Hindi. Though very subtly, there were, and still are,
movements to kick English out of the country. This has affected the spread of
English in India. According to a recent discovery, Communist
‘anti-American’ China now has more English speakers than the largest democracy and pro-American India, an advantage that hitherto the latter (India) had bragged about against the former (China), its salient rival. Discovering this,
nonetheless, raises the eyebrows of some concerned Indians.
It is in one of such bans on English movements to curtail any potential or perceived threat of marginalisation of minority languages by a foreign language that it was made compulsory for students throughout the country to learn three languages (namely, English, Hindi and their mother tongue) except in regions where Hindi is the mother tongue. A massive translation of all books in science, technology, finance, and literature commenced. The
government of India, in many instances, funds the translation project. For
example, all of William Shakespeare’s plays and some other major critical works on
him are translated into Hindi and/or other major regional languages. Therefore,
since the need to learn English is not much, crippled by the avalanche of
translated books, at least locally speaking, learning aims cannot be defined in
terms of specific purposes. This brings us to the issue of English in India’s education system.
English in Indian Schools
Chetan Bhagat, one of the leading
Indian writers in English and a columnist, wrote
in the article, Learn and Share English
Lessons With All that “Hindi is our mother, English is our wife, and it is
possible to love both”. Nonetheless, only a minuscule percentage sees the
truism in Bhagat’s words. This I say, for it is, I understand, very common in India to meet a professor, even in the Arts, whose English competence is no
better than that of a good secondary school student in Nigeria. It is, again, to say
the least, a disappointment to me as an international student in the country. I
had never expected anything like this before I came, knowing long ago that
English had been taught and learned in India for over a century. Moreover, I was so reliably used to thinking that English would be the only language for teaching in a country more than mine in terms of linguistic heterogeneity.
Historically, the British colonial
government established their first universities in India in 1857. The medium of
instruction and a major concern of the universities was teaching English
and European history. This makes the status of English in India distinct from that in
many countries. For instance, English is considered a foreign language in the Philippines, Japan, and China; in India, it is a second language and is widely used in the media, schools, administration, and business. Although English was the medium of instruction in schools and universities during the British regime and beyond, it is now primarily used as the medium of instruction in English-medium schools in most large cities and towns. However,
as efforts by the government and other ‘concerned’ bodies intensify toward a thorough Indianization, the status of English, particularly in schools, is rapidly waning. The movements
aim to elevate the status of Hindi to approximately that of a National Language, on par with English. This gives birth to some sort of nonchalant
attitudes that many Indians, though mainly from lower and lower-middle classes,
show because they cannot access the ‘prestigious’ language, which is almost only
for the privileged ones who can afford the elite schools.
Some schools prohibit students from speaking in English on school premises. In other non-English-medium schools, English is taught only as a subject within the curriculum. In
this case, the English teacher is often the most disliked in schools.
However, language use at the university level generally becomes more intense, but this is often met with students’ strong disapproval and dismissal at pre-graduation, graduation, and post-graduation levels. The
university in which I study is one such. Only a handful of truly prestigious institutes use English
as the medium of instruction, examination and administration. Two additional similar and clear-cut cases reinforced this belief: First, several Bhutanese students were officially transferred from a university in Chennai to my university (in Punjab) because the lecturers there could not accommodate non-Hindi-speaking students in their classes. Second, a Nigerian student was formally transferred from another university in Gujarat to the university due to the same issue. In his case, the university certified his ‘wasted’ year and
gave him a “To Whom It May Concern” that boldly indicates (laments, I suppose)
their reason for the action. However, unknown to them (the students above),
it is the same as running from the lion’s den to the tiger’s.
However, not all universities are in
the same league; according to a friend who is doing his PhD at a neighbouring university, the professors there demonstrate strong proficiency. However, among the students, he complained that proficiency varies widely, as if they belonged to different countries. This, however, is due to a reason—primarily the students’ socioeconomic status—as described above. Those who studied in English-medium primary and secondary schools, which not everyone could afford, especially in relatively urbanised states such as Punjab, are significantly better than those who studied in Hindi- or Punjabi-medium schools. And the schools in this second
category are much more popular. For a typical instance, an Associate Professor in
my department, on seeing my wife and me together in one of our early meetings, falteringly
commented thus: “Muhammad, your wife is more longer than you”. I was visibly taken
aback. The surprise does not stop there; he always speaks Hindi and
Punjabi in class. When I challenged his choice of language and threatened to report him for failing to use English, as enshrined in university policy, he
honourably confessed that his English is very weak. He further revealed that throughout his educational career, he attended non-English-medium schools, as he came from a poor family.
Another lecturer assigned two member-students
of the class who majored in English in their first degree to translate
what he said during the lectures. His reason, also noted in the form of confession, was that he could not have mental rest to allow a free flow of
thought when giving lectures, and he emphatically added that he possesses “many
vocabularies”. While chatting outside the class about how things were, one of the two appointed translators, determinedly, defended his kinsmen and mother, India, saying: “English is a foreign language in Japan, and nobody
doubts their development”. But, unbeknownst to him, English is now a compulsory
subject in schools there (Japan), while in China, as mentioned earlier,
learning the language has become a national mission. Thus, their take on English ought to be reconsidered for India to remain relevant in the contemporary, competitive world of technology, military affairs, and
finance. Undoubtedly, the country has some of the best users of English, especially in its media (mainly print), but that seems to be the case; as of now, conditions are deteriorating.
Conclusion
I am not simply bewailing my
predicament; I wake up to fix it. I have been procuring as many books as possible to keep my head above water. Otherwise, I would be left far behind. However, some of the lecturers could, yes, communicate well in English, but the fact (a painful one) is that the majority cannot. They undoubtedly possess
knowledge of their subject but lack the medium to ‘impart’ it. No matter their abhorrence, aloofness and apathy towards it, the English language has come
to stay and to be used for many purposes. Although I also don’t believe in linguistic imperialism, this is a fact that, regardless of how many times one tries to jettison it, one will constantly fail. It remains an immune
truth. Do you want to keep pace with this contemporary world? Learn the English
language.
Comments
Post a Comment