Language chauvinism rears head again

No sane person would approve the ‘arrogance’ of Balasaheb Thackeray who has the cheek to fault with Cricket icon Tendulkar’s assertion that Mumbai belongs to all Indians.

Likewise no sane person worth his/her salt will condone Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) members’ assault of a Samajwadi legislator when he took oath in Hindi in the Maharashtra state assembly. Many think that the ‘punishment’ of suspension of the four MNS members from the state assembly for four years was rather ‘mild.’

It is time however to debate why language chauvinism erupts periodically. The culprits aren’t parties like the MNS, alone, who otherwise never stop trumpeting their super patriotism. Undoubtedly, unbridled language chauvinism poses a danger to the country’s unity and integrity.

Unpalatable as it may sound to many, the biggest language ‘chauvinists’ would appear to be the native speakers of Hindi whose obduracy in not learning other Indian languages often arouses anger among the non-Hindi speakers.

The haughty Hindi speakers have, however, an august company. People in the English-speaking world also refuse to learn other languages. Why the English-speaking people generally restrict themselves to learning only their mother tongue? Well, that is because their English is enough to see them through life. And they do not feel the need to learn any other language to find a job that too when everyone else in the world is trying to pick up ABCD from childhood.

Such a mindset alone should not be a good reason for not learning any other Indian language, especially in a multi-lingual country like India, which recognises at least 23 languages as national languages. An American or an Englishman may be geographically separated from, say, the French speaking population. In India the various languages are spoken within one geographic entity. ‘Unity in diversity’ requires not only non-Hindi speakers to learn Hindi but also for Hindi-speakers to learn at least one more Indian language—and at school level.

True, when a Hindi-speaker takes up permanent or long residence in another part of the country he or she acquires some proficiency in the ‘local’ language. But the ‘three-language’ formula had enjoined upon the residents of the Hindi heartland to learn at least one other Indian language at school. How disdainfully this was neglected is best illustrated by the example of the way Urdu, a language very close to Hindi in grammar and speech, has been treated in its original ‘home’, Uttar Pradesh.

Once upon a time Urdu thrived in UP and in many other north Indian states. Every educated person could read and write Urdu and speak it fluently. Today the Hindus have totally spurned the language, reducing it to a ‘Muslim’ language. Somewhat intriguingly, even ‘Maulana’ Mulayam Singh Yadav, when he was chief minister, did nothing to restore the status of Urdu in UP beyond talking about it. Anyone who knows Urdu would find that the ‘Maulana’ himself speaks no Urdu; the few Urdu words that he uses are horrible on the ear.

The moral here is that if people in a Hindi-speaking state are unwilling or unable to learn a language that is almost like Hindi--it is mainly the Persian alphabets that separate Urdu from Hindi-- how can they be expected to show any enthusiasm, much less respect, for the language of any other reason?

There was a time, lucky now far behind us, when the slogan ‘Hindi imperialism’ had gained wide currency in Tamil Nadu in particular – the state that has gifted many Hindu film heroines from ‘Dream Girl Hemamalini to Sri Devi. The ‘three language’ formula was devised to serve as a palliative to ease the tensions that the ‘war’ against Hindi had set off.

The ‘three language’ formula worked very well—but only in non-Hindi speaking states. Now even in the non-Hindi speaking states this formula is in danger as language chauvinists of the MNS variety spew venom against Hindi. In addition, English has always been a favourite whipping boy of our language fanatics, who are not ashamed to send their wards to ‘Convent Schools’ even while branding the English speaking Indians as ‘slaves’!

There may be some discernible differences in the way Raj Thackeray and his MNS are fighting for the language of the ‘Marathi Manoos’ and the respect or lack of it shown by the language chauvinists in other parts of the country. The MNS resorts to violence at the drop of a hat, mostly picking up hapless and vulnerable victims. The Samajawadi Party legislator, Abu Azim, may not exactly qualify to be called a hapless person but the fact is that at the time he was assaulted by the MNS lawmakers he was totally unarmed and in no position to retaliate in kind.

The chauvinists of other languages have, as far as one knows, not so far taken their battle to inside an assembly and that too in the violent “MNS style’. Outside the house, these fanatics too have resorted to mob violence. But again as far as one knows the latter brand of language fanatics have not, unlike the MNS, served ultimatums and quit notices to those who do not speak the language espoused by the linguist leaders.

MNS is completely off the mark if it thinks that taking the oath of office in any other official and ‘national’ language other than Marathi in the state assembly amounts to disrespect for Marathi or Marathi culture. Its chief stands on weak wicket when he accuses ‘North Indians’ of deliberately not learning Marathi when they come to Mumbai.

Those who have to interact with the Marathi-speaking populace quickly learn the language. Others may not because they get by with the knowledge of Hindi and English in the country’s original cosmopolitan and polyglot metropolis. The Thackeray family apparently wants to see Mumbai as a provincial cocoon.

The tribe of Raj Thackeray does a great injustice to the great city of Mumbai by insulting the ‘outsiders’ whose contribution has made Mumbai what it is today—the number one industrial and economic hub of India and a true melting pot of Indian culture, as Sachin Tendulkar said in his ode to Mumbai.

MNS tribe deliberately overlooks the fact that one who migrates or settles down in a different linguistic city may not be proficient in the language of the region but his progenies pick up the language and speak it like the natives.

But some of the sting from Raj Thackeray’s venom might be diluted if the Hindi-speaking ‘North Indians’ also started to learn at least one language from other regions from school. The ‘three-language’ formula applies to all Indians.

- Asian Tribune -