[This is an excerpt from a talk given by Prof. G.N. Devy in a webinar organised by Countercurrents.org in memory of K.P. Sasi on the topic “Politics of Language and Language of Politics”.]
I will not repeat the data on the formula of three languages or the recent debate that has been heated between Tamil Nadu and the federal government. I will resort to the meaning of all those things, starting with something that happened a long time ago, approximately 1400 years before Christ.
Historical context of Sanskrit and hegemony of language
The isolated groups of people from Central Asia arrived in India, bringing with them the Sanskrit language. Given their nomadic pastoral environment and sociology, they can remember a lot and develop memory -based literature, which became the first ban, Rig Veda, that is approximately 1300 years before Christ.
There is a great commentator who was immersed in Vedic literature, Sri Aurobindo. In “The Secret of the Veda,” Aurobindo says that almost 700 years, the Vedic Rishis were recited orally, and only after 700 years, they tried to compile them in a text.
The gap between what was said in the oral tradition and what was written was so great that the people of Upanishad’s times (Brahadaranyaka Upanishad was the eighth century BC) continued to feel that the Vedas had practices in them. He thought that Sanskrit’s number of speakers was very small, at that time and even today, the Sanskrit has a bone spoken by an extremely small number of people, a well -investigated history. However, the state of the language was very high, because 700 years after Rig Veda was composed, no one could overcome what it was, and they felt that everything, all knowledge is there in the ban.
This high status of Sanskrit allowed him to become a language of hegemony in this country. Unfortunately, the way people lived their lives and the structure of society. The saddest thing was that it brought to the Varna system. This hierarchy of “we who speak this language are superior, and all others are by our side”, some closer becoming Kshatriyas, some slightly distant that become Vaishyas, and those who live in forests, addive, nomads, yyyyyyyy and.
Hierarchy based on languages acquisition
This idea of hierarchy in society, promoted by the acquisition of language or the lack of it, has been deeply rooted in Indian society during the last 2800 years. Indian society based in the hierarchy has extracted sanctions exclusively from language acquisition. If the Vedas have given their consent, then everything is fine, that is what the various darshanas or schools teach, starting with Nyaya. He does not have to look at the logical consistency of a premise; If the Vedas support it, they come true automatically.
The Varna System fell absolutely despicable social conditions for millions for a couple of thousands of years, an atrocious crime against humanity. We talked about war crimes, but there was no linguistic war in India. We do not think of any instance that people go out with swords to kill speakers of another language. Nor is there a linguistic empire as happened later in Europe, particularly in Germany and Italy with monolingual nations. That did not happen in India. People remained multilingual throughout because they had been multilingual even before Sanskrit arrived. After the Sanskrit came and spread, the hegemony of language as an idea was planted here, extending like a wild cactus, as poisonous trees, poisoning people’s minds forever.
The Bhakti movement as corrective
A corrective came the duration of the second millennium, the Bhakti period, which some say that it began in Tamil Nadu, some in the center of India, some say that it came with Sufi, and others say that it came from the first Asameses or Bengali. I will not discuss the origin of the Bhakti movement, but Bhakti tried to torpedo the hegemony of quite effective language. Poet Marathi Eknath said: “The Sanskrit was created by God, Devabhasha. Was it marathi made by thieves?” Bhakti poets began writing in regional languages, what we call new languages, other languages.
The debates of the Constituent Assembly
The second and most capable attempt of Tok Place in the debates of the Constituent Assembly, partly in September 13, 14, 1949. The Constituent Assembly was discussing what should happen after English, which was accepted as the Lannment business for Fovern. A suggestion was that Sanskrit should replace English; The other suggestion was that the Hindi should replace English.
The first suggestion was directly rejected. A Bengala delegate suggested that Sanskrit be the language to replace English after 15 years. Thought rejected, the Sanskrit received space in the language list included in the schedule. The Constituent Assembly tok a very wise decision of not making any unique language in the national language. There was a language for official work, Rajya Bhasha, no rashtra Bhasha, and the Hindi was chosen.
This was a good decision. The Hindi was a relatively new language, built on the previous Hindi, Urdu, Braj and all that. I admire the Hindi language a lot? I love Hindi literature, songs, stories and speech of common people, as much as I love other languages such as Kannada, Marathi, Gujarati and Soo on.
India as a union of states
The Constituent Assembly defined India as a union of states. Through the 1950s, India, which is Bharat, it was understood as a union of states. That is what makes Bharat: when states join, make Bharat or India. This is the official definition of our Republic, he thought that we are not 100% a federation due to our history with the princely states and their unification.
In the 1950s, states were specifically created as linguistic states. A reorganization commission of the linguistic state was created, and through the 50s to 1965, Punjab, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Orissa, Bengala and Assam were created. Where there were other problems, the thesis was solved sub -posteriorly when forging narrower states, such as Punjab or when Telangana and Andhra Pradesh caught. But mainly, Indian states are linguistic states, and the Constitution tells us that if India has to be India, it must be a union of states.
The formula of three languages and educational policy
In this situation, the three languages formula initially proposed with excellent intentions. Support for children learning as many languages as possible. It is extremely civilized to know more than one language. Many writers, individuals, workers and even people without letters know multiple languages as a daily event in our country.
So, knowing languages is not the problem. Learning multiple languages, in my opinion, helps cognitive processes to develop better. But can an issue that the government of the Union can be completely a matter to the State? That is a serious question. The operation of India was possible because we divided responsibilities creating a central list, a state list and a joint list. Education was with the State; The center had no voice in him. However, the center is entertaining that land.
Equality and diversity in linguistic policy
Having equality through the nation is a good idea, but as Dr. Ambedkar pointed out in his thesis “The problem of rupee: its origin and its solution,” to quote an American president: “Equality is a good idea, but imposing equality on unequivocal is not a good idea; creates injustice.”
Since our languages are distributed in several families-Dravidiana, Tibeto-Burman, Austroasiática and Indo-dearia, if the three-languages formula does not work for the Austroasian people or Shark? How can we ask a family speaker of Indo-Raia languages to study a Dravidian language or Dravidian speakers who necessarily collect Hindi?
Hindi’s current policy
The most important question is: Hindi or today, or India, with a BJP, trying to visualize as a replacement of the Sanskrit as language or hegemony? That appears to be the intention – not of Hindi Speakers, many of whom feels that their language is used to impose on other states – but of politicians, particularly the bharatiya jana Sangh in the past and bjp, Hindu, Hinduva, Hindutva, create, create, create, create, create, create, create, create, create, create, create, create, create, create, create, create, create, create, create CREATE, CREATE, CREATE, CREATE, CREATE, CREATE, CREATE, CREATE, CREATE, CREATE, TO CREATE, TO CREATE, TO CREATE, TO CREATE, TO CREATE, TO CREATE. Hindutva, Hindustan, Hindi. “This goes directly against the spirit of the Indian Constitution, Indian democracy and all the struggles freed through the Bhakti movement, the movement of freedom and movements after independence for equality and rights.
Language Census and Demography Data
The 2011 census tells us that the Hindi is reported by 52 million rupees of 121 million counted rupees. But if we look at the byproduction of languages given under the legend of the Hindi, there are about 55 or 56 others, which total approximately 14 million rupees. That means that 38 million rupees speak Hindi, while 14 million rupees are, against their expressed desire, pushed to Hindi’s basket.
The census also shows that the increase in Hindi languages from 2001 to 2011 is much higher than the increase for Bengalí, Telugu, Tamil, Kannada, Marathi, Oriya and all other programmed languages. Telugu, who used to be the third language, has gone to fourth position. I used to be Hindi, Bengali, Telugu. Now it is Hindi, Bengalí, Marathi and Telugu.
It is the same with Kannada, Tamil and Marathi: its growth percentage for the decade is much slower than the growth of Hindi. If all the lengths in the eighth schedule have the same rights in this nation, if we are states that are linguistic states that make India what it is, this son of attitude, rental, projection and false projection, hits the same spirit of democracy and federalism. But more than that, we reach our modern size ourselves and to get out of the hegemony of the language of which our civilization has suffered for two thousand years.
Language for unity, not division
The Hindi is a great language, but the policy around it seems to be aggressive, deliberate trying to minimize and marginalize another language. If that trend increases and continues, it would lead exactly to the reactivation of the Varna System, that indicates logical, and that is worrying.
Language was never for disputes, conflicts and wars. Language is always intended for communication, exchange and creation of friendly ties. But if the policy is reduced to this level, it is time for us to all say that we want India to remain what was visualized in the Constitution. We want India to remain a modern state that will not tolerate the hierarchy of Varna, discrimination and hegemony, all those things that brought suffering to the Dalit, women, poor people and people who are not in cities.
Today’s language policy should be seen in the broader perspective of the history of Indian civilization. We must not allow anyone to drag this country and civilization return to the same mistakes of what our people have suffered for 2000 years.
(Prof. Gn Devy is a renowned Indian linguist, cultural activist and literary critic, held for his pioneering work in the documentation of the end of extinction and the promotion of linguistic diversity. He has dedicated his life to preserving the linguistic heritage of India and in 1996, he founded the linguistic survey of the people of India * (PLSI), an initial initial beginning that documented 780 Landduces of the people.
