War of words

marwatone · #1 Tuesday, February 26, 2008

War of words

The UN General Assembly has declared 2008 as the ‘International Year of Languages’. Language issues are central to the UNESCO’s mandate in education, science, social and human sciences, culture, communication and information. The UNESCO invites governments, civil society organisations, educational institutes, professional associations and all other stakeholders to celebrate the International Year of Languages. The main purpose of all the activity is to protect all languages, particularly endangered languages, in all individual and collective contexts.

Pakistan is a multilingual country. While multilingualism is not denied, though the 1981 census contained not a single question on language, the state denies the multinationality thesis endorsed by ethno-nationalist leaders. The thesis argues that there are four main nationalities in Pakistan: the Punjabi, Sindhi, Pakhtun, and Baloch (Bangladesh, former East Pakistan, has been left out here). To this list, Siraiki was added in the 1960s. The official point of view is that there is one Pakistani nation united by the bonds of Islam and the national language, Urdu.

However, Urdu is the native language of only seven percent of the country’s population. Urdu’s imposition has caused ‘language riots’ since the establishment of Pakistan, and language-focused unrest was at the centre of struggles that resulted in the formation of East Pakistan into Bangladesh in 1971. Other struggles about language policy have continued since that time, especially with respect to the role of Sindhi language.

As Alyssa Ayres points out in the article, ‘The politics of language policy in Pakistan’, “Conflicts over language identity are not merely about language: They are intertwined with struggles over power and access to it. The vast majority of Pakistan’s rulers and policymakers have been Punjabi and Mohajirs (settlers), while the military has been ruled by a Punjabi-Mohajir-Pathan nexus. The story of Pakistan’s Sindhi language movement (and language riots) parallels that of the Bengali language movement from partition in 1947 through Benazir Bhutto’s first regime (1988-90). During Benazir Bhutto’s first term in office, tension between Karachi’s numerous ethnic groups exploded. Sindhi, like Bengali, enjoyed regional hegemony throughout the time of the British Raj. It has a literature and a widespread presence both colloquially and administratively. Sindh had been a separate province during the Raj. This was due in part to the Sindhi language movement of the 1930s, which had resulted in Sindh separating from the Bombay presidency in 1936. This institutionalisation of a Sindhi ethnic identity linked directly to language was therefore in place even before 1947. Partition would trigger Sindhi ethnic mobilisation for two reasons: cultural insensitivity and economic subjugation.”

The privileging of Urdu by the state has created ethnic opposition to it. However, as people learn languages for pragmatic reasons, they are giving less importance to their heritage languages and are learning Urdu. It is observed that a powerful majority in Pakistan does not want to teach their heritage language to their children because they think that would be overburdening the children with far too many languages. For instance, Sahibzada Abdul Qayyum Khan reported in 1932 that Pashtuns wanted their children to be instructed in Urdu rather than Pashto. Even in 2003, the MMA government chose Urdu, not Pashto, as the language of the domains of power, including education in NWFP. The same phenomenon was noticed in Balochistan.

Perhaps the most important result of resistance to Urdu has increased the importance of English. A relatively worse situation has been observed regarding the language or lingo-style of few big political leaders of Pakistan. Benazir Bhutto’s Urdu was notoriously poor “Benazir’s poor Urdu inspires many a joke” a headline claimed in Express India and Pervez Musharraf’s Urdu is apparently also often criticised, though Urdu is his native tongue.

The state’s use of Urdu as a symbol of national integration has had two consequences. First, it has made Urdu the obvious force to be resisted by ethnic groups. This resistance makes them strengthen their languages by corpus planning, i.e. writing books, dictionaries, grammars, orthographies, etc., and acquisition planning, i.e. teaching languages, using them in the media, pressurising the state to use them. Secondly, it has jeopardised additive multilingualism as recommended by UNESCO. As Urdu spreads through schooling, media and urbanisation, pragmatic pressures make other Pakistani languages retreat. In short, the consequence of privileging Urdu strengthens ethnicity while, at the same time and oddly enough, threatens linguistic and cultural diversity in the country.

The writer is a freelance columnist.

http://thepost.com.pk/OpinionNews.as...46620&catid=11

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
More Than 2000 Words to enhance Vocabulary	Qurratulain	English (Precis & Composition)	22	Saturday, June 13, 2020 01:55 PM
A Word Identification Strategy	Sureshlasi	English (Precis & Composition)	7	Monday, December 03, 2007 06:13 PM
Most Frequent Words	Faryal Shah	English (Precis & Composition)	0	Tuesday, September 11, 2007 02:42 AM
:::::: How To Speak And Learn Egnlish ::::	free thinker	Tips and Experience Sharing	4	Monday, August 06, 2007 03:20 AM

The Following User Says Thank You to marwatone For This Useful Post:
theprofession (Monday, March 17, 2008)