Stephen van Vlack
Sookmyung Women`s University
Division of English Language and Literature
English in the Era of Globalization
Fall 2007
Week 12 - Answers
Sonntag (2003) Chapter 4
1. How has the role of English in Indian society changed over the last hundred years or so?
English has played a pivotal role in Indian society over the last hundred years especially on the political front and as such provides a good example for us of the global power of English. In a very general sense, the last hundred years or so of Indian history can be described in three different periods, each of which is quite different in how English was used in Indian society.
The Colonial Period
Obviously during the colonial period (app. Mid 1700s with the military conquest of India until independence in 1946, so longer than 100 years) English played an important role in all aspects of government. For one to get a job in the colonial government once had to speak and write English. All official schooling was done largely in English to the extent that many of the people who could read and write at all were only able to do so in English. English, especially its written form, was restricted to the elite, but these were elites in all parts of the country. We can see that still today the literacy rate in India is still a paltry 36-52%. The vast majority of the people had no access to English and the riches that this language could possibly promise them. Access to English was divided among caste lines, with only the upper castes having the resources for an English-based education. Despite the dire situation for most Indians at the time, English played an important equalizing role. Under the colonial government no single local language was more important for advancement within the government. In this way local elites speaking local languages were also able to participate in the government provided they were willing to learn and speak English. In a sense English played an important role in keeping the Hindi nationalists at bay.
The Congress Party Period
The Congress party period, which lasted from the time of independence in 1946 through to the end of the 1970s, was marked by serious a struggle between three main opposing forces. The first of these was the Congress Party, fronted by Nehru, who saw English as indispensable for the advancement of the country both economically and politically. Nehru was one of the elites who had worked booth for and against the colonial government and as a result was a fluent speaker of English. He wanted to continue to use English as a important unifier and equalizer for a culturally and linguistically diverse nation. Another important force in the initial platy for power was that of Gandhi. He believed that a local language should and could unify the country if it was one which everyone felt comfortable speaking. He believed that the northern Indian lingua franca Hindustani should come to represent all the different peoples of the country, including the simpler lower castes. He wanted an India that was not dominated by elites, but one in which everyone, no matter where they came from economically, had the same chances. His reasoning was that Hindustani was local and would therefore be much easier for locals to learn and use. It simply fit India better. The third powerful force was a movement pushing for the development of Sanskritized Hindi (a very formal literary version of this language) as the national language. This solution was sponsored by the north Indian elites who saw their culture is being superior to other cultures within the country and therefore the only viable local element strong enough to contend with the immense power and allure of global English. A fourth, decidedly less powerful player in this language struggle was the anti-English movement, fronted by Lohia, who sought to empower local languages in a more pluralist manner.
It is interesting to note that despite the Congress Party period being long since lost a lot of the same issues are still out there, not only in India but across the world. More and more countries, even ones thought to be monolingual, need to come to terms with globalization and the linguistic effects this brings. As India becomes a more mature democracy, there are still Hindu nationalists pushing Hindi as a national language as well as all large number of supporters for English, in addition to Yadavs and other subalterns who are pushing for more local languages.
From the book, we know that, at the time, the English movement won and the Congress party of Nehru ran the country setting policy for 30 years. The main reason that it won was because of the support it got from Indians in the southern part of India who were, and still are, leery of the Hindu elites in the north. For them English was (and still is) an equalizer in this highly complex and diverse society, particularly as education levels rise.
The Subalterns Rise
In the late 1980s Indian politics took another sharp turn with the final demise of the Congress party and the Nehru dynasty with the ousting of his grandson Rajiv Gandhi and the rise of the subaltern politicians. Interesting to note in this new chapter of the struggle is that much of politics now revolves around feelings regarding the use of English. The English issue is alive and well India still almost 60 years after independence. The more developed India becomes technologically an economically the more they are confronted with English and a plethora of issues surrounding it.
2. How have the subalterns in India used English to their advantage in local politics?
It is interesting to note how important a role English still plays in Indian politics. This of course would seem to be the norm and almost all post-colonial countries of Kachru`s so-called inner circle. It must also be acknowledged that as English becomes a globalized norm or a lingua franca, it increasingly becomes an important political issue in every country, including countries in the outer circle like Japan, China and South Korea. No country can afford to avoid English. Therefore, English becomes a political topic and, as we shall soon see, a weapon in different countries, for different reasons, and in different ways. This is why looking at the politics of English not only in India but in other countries can be very interesting for Korean students as well as Chinese and Japanese students, for these countries are not only currently grappling with English issues but will need to grapple with them even more in the future. In this respect countries like Korea and maybe also China and Japan have similarities with the Indian situation in that English is still a language very much a language of the elite in these countries. While common people certainly know about English and may even want to learn English they simply lack the means to be able to do so. This creates conflict between elites and subalterns.
India, and not Korea yet, is a very interesting place to study such issues because of their history, diversity, and also do deeply embedded democratic structures in the country. Indian politics may seem very chaotic, sleazy and dirty, but it is democratic. Votes do count (even the votes of the most poor) and people do have freedom to express themselves openly, and when that fails as it frequently does, they take the streets and riot (which seems to be a fairly common occurrence actually). As in South Korea, rioting in India does seem to work and actually plays a very important role in the democratic process.
Now what is interesting about how the subalterns in India have used English is really related to the word used. As it is explained in the book (Sonntag, 2003) two major subalterns leaders at approximately the same time in the late 1990s managed to come to political power as governors of two different northern Indian states and decided to deal with English in their individual states in opposite ways. One decided to revise the anti-English stance of Lohia and ban English altogether in the hope that this would revitalize and support the use and legitimization of local languages. Looking at how language actually works we can certainly understand or empathize with this situation. In the local situation where the local language is constantly being compared to a global language like English, instances of local language use will diminish and people make a conscious choice to learn English and pass it on to their children. In such situations, the two languages are going to be valued very differently and of course the language with the higher value is going to take precedence over the language with a lower value. So, to a certain extent, in order to develop highly undervalued local languages maybe restricting English use is one way to achieve this goal. In the nearby state and about the same time the exact opposite occurred where the subaltern governor of the state decided to promote English. This of course is harder to understand coming from a person who was supposed to be supporting the subalterns. English has never been a language of subalterns in India, not during colonial rule and certainly not in the post-colonial period. Remember, most of these subalterns are illiterate and if they are literate in any language it`s not going to be in their local language. So they are fighting a battle for rights, recognition, and the ability to advance in their own culture and society, not unlike the Breton people.
Right now, in India there are two linguistic means to advance through society; Hindi and English. It seems that this pro English subaltern governor has done a quite remarkable thing. He has appropriated (taken) the language of the elites and democratized it. He is pushing English so that it will no longer be an elitist language but will become a tool for subalterns. He himself speaks English but not the polished formal English of the elitists but a very vernacular and high daily localized version of English. He`s taking the weapon of the elite and turning it against them. And why? The simple answer is that he mistrusts Hindi more than he mistrusts English. English is not only far away, but it is also an important tool for globalization. India is embracing globalization as a way of developing the country quickly, and so far it has worked. More dangerous to some of these subalterns is not the globalization threat posed by English, but the Hindu nationalist threat pose by a different and extremely indigenous type of elite. This is the elite that lives right down the road and has the means and ability to restrict development of the subalterns. This is his ploy. It is going to be hard to see whether it is going to work well or backfire in the long run, simply because most policies in India, like South Korea again, are not around long enough to have lasting effects. Policies change very often, and of course this is also part of the democratic process and may be a part which is not particularly conducive for effective development.
3. How has English affected democratic politics in India?
From our discussion of this book, we can see that English plays an extremely important role in the democratic politics of India. It as a tool not only for development (maybe), but it is certainly a tool for restricting and limiting the powers of the poor. As we mentioned earlier in this course, for every force there is a counterforce. Thus, for all the good things that English can bring to an individual person as well as a country, there are old ways inevitable bad things or problems which come. Language is a weapon and English is currently the world`s strongest linguistic weapon. While it provides access to so many things, access is not free. Especially in a foreign language situation people have to be granted access (as is the case in India) or they need to buy access (as is the case in Korea) to the language.
What is interesting about the subaltern movement in India, and particularly the pro-English movement, is that is does not advocate or represent a passive acquisition of the standardized norm. The learning of English among the Indian subalterns is an excellent example of appropriation. We have discussed this term in our discussion of Kecskes and Papp (2000) and its use here is clear. These Indian subalterns are not taking the standard form of the elites (who can afford to live in two worlds), but are making English their own. They are appropriating it and moulding it and transforming it into a local form a form which is designed to empower locals. They are creating a new form of English, almost a secret language which the elites cannot understand. It is, in a way, a creolization process but one not dominated from above but appropriated from below, right under the nose of the elites. This is a smart idea for the short-term. Long-term it might also be seen ans being positive in that a local variety of a language can be used to build a bridge to a standard norm. Not coincidentally, this is exactly how children learn their L1.