news details |
|
|
| Language: for torture or communication? | | |
Kesava Menon
Given India's demographic mix, the link language should primarily be a tool for communication.
"Kawwa kis se leth hai, koel kisko deth; mithi boli bol kar jag apna kar leth." It is surprising that this couplet (perhaps by Tulsidas and hopefully rendered accurately) still lurks in my memory. Almost every other trace of the Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha's efforts to instil knowledge of the rashtra bhasha in a young southern mind has either vanished or has been subsumed by the workaday language picked up later. Personal experience suggests that little long-term benefit was conferred by the hours spent in preparing for the Prathamic and Madhyama exams.
A little over a year after I had closed my last Hindi textbook I found myself in Delhi quoting the above couplet to Bihari seniors only too eager to show the "Madrasi" fresher his place. That they reacted with irritated consternation was no surprise given the context. A fellow who could not communicate with a chaiwallah in Kingsway Camp or a shopkeeper in Kamala Nagar had no business alluding to the works of the greats of Hindi literature. Moreover, the seniors might never have learnt the couplet or had probably forgotten it if they had since it would have been superfluous to their knowledge of their mother-tongue. The Madrasi found acceptance only after he had fashioned a working knowledge of Delhi's tough, crude patois after many weeks on DTC's old 610/210 route.
This reminiscence was triggered off when a friend recently spoke of her sixth-grader's struggle to come to terms with Hindi. Why should a child trying to cope with the CBSE's grotesquely burdensome servings of science and maths be tortured further by being made to behave like a Jesuit learning Mandarin in the 17th century? Isn't skill in the practical use of a language more than enough for children in middle school? Can't we dump the excruciatingly rigorous textbooks and instead use kits of the sort that advertise "Learn Serbo-Croat in Six Weeks"?
That, my friends, is not a joke. Five years down the line, I still remember the immense pleasure of holding a conversation with a little Arab boy in his own language in a café in East Jerusalem. The talk did not progress far beyond the initial stages of the language-kit variety. "Kaif Halek?"; "Zain, AlHamdolillah!"; "Enta kaif halek?"; "Taifham Arabi?"; "Shwai". But the basic purpose that should be served by any language was achieved. Two strangers could exchange the message that they were well disposed towards each other. It was nothing more than a passing contact but it certainly made my day and, hopefully, his as well. This was certainly a memory to be treasured. Quite a contrast to the embarrassment still felt when remembering the time I unwisely asked whether a bus would "Jayega" to a particular place and was sternly told — "Jayegi!!"
Grammar and syntax are undoubtedly indispensable for proficiency in any language. Even those who feel defeated as soon as they try to learn a new tongue will still be able to appreciate its beauty. After all, only a philistine would not aspire to speak Hindi with the mellifluous fluidity of Atal Bihari Vajpayee or Urdu with Bina Rai's sparkling clarity. But, surely, the ability to communicate at a basic level has a validity of its own.
Given India's demographic mix and its secular ideals, the link language should primarily be a tool for communication with the cultural wealth it has sprouted in the course of its development treated as an optional extra. It is an unavoidable cliché that Hindi movies have done more to disseminate a basic knowledge of the language than the heavy-handed efforts of governments and cultural evangelicals from the North.
A functional link language, quite different from that taught in schools, is already in widespread use. In form it is basically Hindi. But its grammar is very flexible and it freely takes in words from the local languages of the region where the speakers happen to be. A CRPF jawan sitting in a Kerala toddy shop wouldn't think twice before asking his mates, "Maththi [sardine] khaoge ya motta [egg]?" Couldn't those who script school textbooks recognise this reality and focus primarily on functionality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
