Vast countries like India always remain in a language dilemma. With some 22 languages
recognised under Eighth schedule, 39 languages in waiting, and hundreds of dialects spoken all over, it is a humongous task to link them all into one standardised language. Rather, states have been integrated and disintegrated according to languages. Some native languages and scripts are even dying their own death after globalisation and urban migrations, with dwindling number of speakers. Do we need to unify the scripts and make clear distinction between dialects and languages? Or one should aim to revive and save the languages from extinction? Should the existing norm of English as official communication language be continued or Hindi should lead the charge as Rashtrabhasha (national language)?
It is quite surprising for Europeans when they see a North Indian communicating fluently with a Pakistani in chaste Hindi/Urdu, but switching to English when speaking to a South Indian. Well, the country of over billion people deserves to have such diversity. But, even a small country like Nigeria boasts of having 1500 languages! Its quite possible that you have a flock of hundred Nigerians, completely incomprehensible to each other. And the only connecting link between them is English. In spite of having such a variation, do we need to classify them all as languages? Or should we just call them dialects ?
As Max Weinreich has put it, “A language is a dialect with an army and a navy.” A simplified concept may be that the dialect is just spoken, while language is written too. Does that mean if one writes a book in Caribbean dialect of English, it becomes a separate language? It seems the distinction isn’t that simple.
When a Norwegian, a Swedish and a Danish meet at job, they speak in their own languages, yet understand each other. To a stranger, it might seem like dialects of same language. Actually, its true to some extent, yet they have classified them as three different languages with their own grammar, own literature and unique geography. Technically, its geographical division and standardisation of written language, which draws the line. This also rules out logic that lan guages should have their own script as most European languages bear a common script.
Recently, in capital of Bihar, this language-dialect debate was re-ignited. States like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh were not exactly formed on basis of languages, and unofficially had been regarded as ‘Hindi belt’. While Hindi remains an official communication language, Maithili has already made its foray in 8th schedule. Surprisingly, Bhojpuri variants have already been recognised as language in countries like Fiji, Guyana, Suriname and Mauritius, but not in India. With vast literary history as well as contemporary literature, Maithili has justified its language status. Bhojpuri too has its own pandora box of literature, song traditions and several plays making strong foundation of a language. Besides, these languages have strongly supported the rise of Hindi as an integrating language in pre-independence nationalism. While rich languages like Awadhi and Brajbhasha gave up their literary traditions almost merging into ‘khari boli’, these languages (Maithili and Bhojpuri) continued to flourish their literature in a symbiotic relationship with Hindi. This mutual recognition and respect is vital for co-existence and sustenance of rich literary traditions. But, the question is – Do we really need such diversified status? Shouldn’t Hindi just take over as a national language?
Well, the answer to first question is surely a ‘yes’. Indians have historically adapted well to this diversity, with umpteen books in languages like Bengali, Tamil, Marathi, Maithili, Gujarati, Punjabi and many more. As far as Hindi as national language is concerned, the obvious resistance is from some southern states. This deadlock needs to be solved with a sensitive and respectful attitude, and certainly not disregarding a historically established language as a dialect. Another vital impetus for this implementation is a dialogue with educationists and representatives from different languages, and the uniformity of education system across the states.
This uniformity of three-language primary education system is well implemented in Scandinavian countries and in some Indian establishments too. If the national consensus is made, the implementation may include Hindi as a national integrating language, a second language from state (for example, Tamil, Punjabi , Bengali, Maithili , etc.) and English as internationally recognised language. A dual-language system in north and triple-language system in south is obviously a partisan approach. In fact, a native Hindi speaker should be encouraged to pick a south Indian language as second language. This would integrate the nation to the core with respect to each other’s languages. One might argue about the feasibility of primary language teachers, but in a phase-wise manner, will would give the way in this digital and global world.
(Dr. Praveen Jha is a Norway based radiologist, a columnist and an author.)