Language : For communication or conflict?
The present debate about the use of Creole ( or the mother tongue in general) in the early education of the child is not new, and it is not a debate that has been taking place in Mauritius only. It is common sense to start teaching a child in a language that s/ he understands.
But the fundamental questions are: Do we need a written language for that or does oral communication suffice? For how long do we need to stick to the mother tongue? How do we relate internationally in the global village? The answers to these questions are not easy to find. It would be easier to look at what has been happening throughout the ages and how multilingual nations or societies have been able to use both the language of the environment and an international language to evolve policies that will help the child start his/ her voyage of discovery and understanding and move on to the world market place.
English is today the undisputed international language par excellence.
It has been able to accommodate new words and expressions as well as regional peculiarities much better than other languages in spite of purists who, like Prof Higgins in “ My Fair Lady” is more interested in teaching how to pronounce “ the rain in Spain stays mainly in the plain” snobbishly. Today ‘ Queen’s English’ is not the perfection that speakers of English use to communicate internationally. American, Indian or African English have now been accepted as international currency. Some people are even looking to a sort of Euro- English that will sound more like German! But English marches on, enriching itself with words and expressions from different cultures.
Human beings, unlike other animals belonging to the same species, use different languages for communicating among themselves, and this is very often a source of conflict. But it was not so in the ancient world when only a small elite was using a written language. Sanskrit, Latin, Greek and Arabic were used for the transmission of culture and knowledge and also in international commerce. These languages later broke down naturally and through usage into more widely spoken and written languages.
After India emerged from colonial rule in 1947, the demand for states to be created along linguistic lines grew to such an extent that new states had to be carved out of larger ones in order to avoid conflict.
Today we cannot impose any language either as a vehicle of communication or as a medium of instruction. In India itself the policy of trying to have Hindi as the national language was resisted, particularly in the South, until a three- language formula was evolved. But, strange as it may seem, it is English which has kept all the different parts of India together administratively and has helped India diversify its economy into the BPO sector. Fifty years after independence tens of thousands of Englishmedium schools operate throughout the length and breadth of the country.
But Hindi alsoi has become more acceptable mainly because of the popularity of Hindi films and songs. This has been achieved through a natural process and not by imposition as it was originally envisaged.
Kreol also is the undisputed lingua franca of all Mauritians without it being imposed. But most Mauritians, given the choice, will reject an imposed written Kreol as the medium of instruction in primary schools.
In the field of education Singapore and the Seychelles started with different policies but have arrived at similar conclusions. Singapore wanted its population to choose from among English- medium, Chinesemedium, Malay- medium and Tamil- medium schools. But the overwhelming majority of Singaporeans chose English- medium schools. Today the situation has evolved further. Whilst the medium of instruction can be Chinese, Malay or Tamil in pre- school and lower primary education, English is now the medium of instruction at the upper primary stage and beyond. The Seychelles, which wanted Kreol to be the medium of instruction throughout at least the primary stage, is now restricting it to the lower primary. Most of those who were dissatisfied with the previous policy were leaving the country to have their children educated in English- medium schools.
In a world in which even China is making colossal efforts to make its students and working population acquire a good knowledge of English can we afford to keep saying: “ francais je conne, anglais je debrille”? There is no doubt that teaching young children in a foreign language will hamper their understanding and development. But is this the only or major impediment in the learning process? What about the social and economic environment of the children, class size, methodology and the curriculum and examination systems? Aamir Khan, the visionary Indian filmmaker and actor is giving us, through his film ‘ Three idiots” which is being screened to packed houses in Mauritius, some insight into the narrow and unrealistic aspect of bookish knowledge. Just as a couple of years ago his award winning film “ Taare zameen par” made us feel the injustice being done to children with special problems, however gifted they may be otherwise. We cannot make partial value- judgments and send thousands of children into a ghetto.
We do not want to make any effort to address the real issues in our education system, preferring to engage in a blame game and allowing ourselves to be led by the nose by short- sighted political, social and religious leaders and others.
We have the same attitude when dealing with climate change, electoral reforms, law and order, alienation of the youth and other important issues. We are lucky to live in a country where competence and fluency in two European and a number of Asian languages can be acquired rather easily. But instead of using this situation to our advantage we prefer to get bogged down in futile conflicts within “ narrow, domestic walls” as Tagore would have put it.
Et Aussi:
Posted by 
