Monday, June 30, 2014

A perspective of a language problem

A perspective of a language problem

On several occasions, I have faced a question here in West Bengal that left me, to an extent, perturbed and annoyed. This question, first of all, stems from a genuine sentiment and therefore cannot be avoided; and, it is quite relevant in terms of the fact India is a nation within all sorts of diversity. This question pertains to the lingual problem of the Indian nation. The question that I have faced occasionally is that if a person there in Bihar does not talk to a Bengali fellow in Bangla then why a Bengali should talk to a Bihari in Hindi while being in Bengal. The question is genuine. This is the sentiment that has always been there since we declared ourselves a nation under a constitution. Every time I confronted this ‘genuine question’ someone within me inspired me to say something on this problem. First of all, let us know that the language of interaction between a Bihari and a Bengali would be Hindi. And here sentiment of a Bengali gets hurts when he find that the Bihari has a clear cut opportunity to express in his ‘own’ language, whereas, the later is rather forced to Hindi, an ‘alien’ language, for his reply. Such a sentiment is based on the assumption that the mother tongue of the Biharis is Hindi. Second assumption may be that Hindi is an alien language. Let us see how far the first assumption is well founded.
In 1900s, the proportion of population speaking Hindi was not more than 10 to 20 percent which was roughly comparable to the literacy rate in Bihar. There were only few people in the rural areas that were able to read write or speak in Hindi. Census data of that period might not be truly reflective of the lingual status of the rural population as there are instances where census officers were at liberty to enter the answer asked in the lingual column of the questionnaire. Very few were quite aware of their own lingual status. That area where literacy was sizable, mother tongue is claimed in terms of their local affinity to the language the population had. For example, the Maithili speaking areas of Bihar always insisted on their mother tongue and not Hindi. Over the years this trend has grown, and now many of the Bihari identify themselves in the censuses as a Maithili, Bhjpuri, Magahi, or Vajjika speakers. Here, Hindi is registered only as the second language. Hindi as a mother tongue is claimed by only those Biharis who reside in urban regions. In this way one can find that in the due course of time Biharis have accepted Hindi as a language of interaction for inter regional interaction. This was due to the belief that Hindi was to be the national language of the ‘new India’. Other factor for the acceptance of Hindi ‘as their own’ was the lack of rivalry with any local allegiance. Sense of allegiance towards local dialects was emerging only in few areas like in Mithila. Acceptance was also facilitated by the political expediency. If Hindi would not been accepted as a common language for administrative or interactive purposes, Bihar as a political reality would not have been possible. Here politics played a determining role in the growth and acceptance of a language. This situation is not just unique in the context of Bihar; it applies to almost every part of so called Hindi-belt of India. Everywhere Hindi is the language of urban and literate population; the local languages still occupy the majority rural population. Here, the feeling of alienation toward Hindi is not politically strong; the fact has been accepted as for granted. This is historically established and accepted which is not the case in the context of Bangla and Hindi.
The sentiment against Hindi is also buttressed by the assumption of 'one language one people'. In fact, with the advancement of culture, man has been moving from uni-lingual to multi-lingual cultural atmosphere. With growing social, economic, cultural and political complexities lingual fabric of a society change to give rather more complex patterns. In the same society, there emerge languages of different hues and identity for different classes. Hardly one would find any complex society with only one language. Locally one can use one language at the home, in the street switches to another, and for official purposes still some another is used. This is the a reality, beyond sentiments and prejudices.
First of all, Bangla was a well established language with a fully fledged literature. Overall, Bengal was not so politically integrated with either Delhi sultanate or during the Mughal era. Political integration of Bengal into Imperial set up of India was only accomplished in the wake of British period. Bangla personality emerged as a vanguard of modern India. Modern Bangla language and literature that emerged during the nineteenth century created such a strong sentiment of ‘Bangla consciousnesses’ that it always stood against anything in its way.  Politically, Bangla language has acquired such a strong and dignified position in a well defined geographical region that it appears to be in natural confrontation with Hindi. This confrontation is not natural, but only apparent, because here the language ‘Hindi’ is not to compete with Bangla; rather it is to supplement it in the wider reality of Indian nation. It is something like a utility of interaction between the persons of two lingual regions of India. It facilitates exchange of views, ideas, feeling between a Bengali on the one side and a Gujarati, Marathi, Punjabi, or a Kannada on the other. Here the political reality of India has given rise to the spread of a language which, despite being apparently alien to the peripheral lingual communities, is only serving as a link language.
Evolution of Hindi is a phenomenon reflecting the complex evolutionary process of the Indian nation. It started with the emergence of Delhi sultanate in the thirteenth century and gradually and intermittently, passed through the phases of history, to the modern age. This Hindi is connotative of the need of a common language of interaction between so many diverse motley of people in the northern part of India. Hindi was language that occupied the space provided by the creation of an empire from Kashmir to Karnataka and from Sindh to Assam. It was an evolution of a language in the wake of the rise of an empire. Here, one should be careful in making a conclusion that Hindi was imposed by anyone. Before Hindi, Persian was the language of official interaction, which was alien, and an imposed one. In this respect Hindi, quite denotative in its meaning, emerged and spread in the Indian soil to serve the new needs of a community that came into existence. Hindi served, in the Indian context, somewhat the same purpose as the English is serving globally today. With the spread of English among upper classes of the Indian society the use of Hindi has come down in that class. In the wake of globalization, liberalization and the most importantly, in the age of internet, there has emerged a class of English speaking people in the county. This is a new phenomenon that one can welcome or decry, but cannot avoid. Emergence of a common global language, sic English, is due to a demand created by an emergence of global community. Therefore, one can find that the cultural, political, and economic interaction over geographical set up gives rise to a very dynamic change in the lingual pattern. Languages emerge out of political reasons, cultural interaction and economic factors. Emergence of internet has created a very complex type of opportunities as well as challenges for various lingual communities. Now, languages are in a position to live within a community which is scattered geographically but so well kitted in the cyberspace. This new space has provided an extra lease of life to numerous languages with very limited numbers of speakers. On the other hand, the cyberspace has enabled people to reach out to the whole world without moving in real space. In turn, this ease in connectivity has enabled a person with limited knowledge of English to learn it quickly; thus in turn enlarging the scope of one language globally even larger. Any view in regard to language should be borne out in one’s mind in a dynamic form. It is not static, not unidirectional, not having a fixed form. It is always provisional.