April 23, 2006
Media Scrapbook
The Importance of Linguistic Parity.
1. Neil DeVotta (2004), “Ethnic nationalism and Indo-Sri Lanka relations” in South Asian Journal, 6/2004
Neil DeVotta gives a historical and political background to the current ethnic conflict between the Tamils and Sinhalese of Sri Lanka, citing one of the reasons for this conflict as being a linguistic one.
When Sri Lanka was liberated, English became the national language. However, very soon, DeVotta maintains, language became a political tool and the politicians of Sri Lanka found victory by lobbying the vast Sinhalese cultural and linguistic majority exclusively. Despite belonging to one nation, it is clear, as Clyne, M. argues: “Cultural identity takes precedence over national identity” (1992, p.455)
So in this article, we see an issue of social stratification of language raised. Tamil became the ‘low’ language, with those of Tamil backgrounds often denied educations and jobs.
This development, over time, “legitimised the Tamil demand for increased autonomy”, and violated what is considered by many people in the world what is considered a human right: “The right of people to exist, to practice and reproduce their own language and culture should be inalienable.” (Nettle and Romaine, 2000 p.173)
2. TamilNet (2005), “Sinhala-Only for President”, TamilNet, December 06, 2005
TamilNet, a news site dedicated to Tamil issues and an apparent supporter of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), has reported on a speech by president Mahinda Rajapakse, claiming he “declared … that as a matter of policy he will address all important events in Sinhala … He pointed out that “Sinhala was his Mother tongue.”
Underlying this article is a sense of Tamil resentment at their language being dismissed as substandard. Notably, the article makes reference to English, “There would, however, be a translator, he said, who would translate what he says into the English language.” It is also stressed that the Sinhala and English usage would be matters of policy. However, there is no reference to Tamil, further marginalizing the language.
The article reports that Mahinda Rajapakse was “elected with the overwhelming backing of the Sinhala people, particularly the nationalist voters”, implying that they are being unfairly treated as an ethnic minority. Again, as Nettle and Romaine argue, “Democracy is severely limited when people can not use their own languages” (2000 p.173).
3. TamilNet (2004), “India to declare Tamil as classical language”, TamilNet, September 18, 2004
Perhaps as a response to the seemingly overt exclusion of Tamil culture and language in Sri Lanka, Tamil media promotes their own culture and literature fervently. As Heller, Monica noted, “Not only [do] differences in language practices get perceived as exclusionary, they [contribute] to active rivalries.” (1991, p.181)
Tamil, the root of many Dravidian languages, is a factor that links the Tamil minority of Sri Lanka to Tamil Nadu in India. “Smaller groups (e.g., Malaysian and Singaporean speakers of Tamil…) need the “protection” of the dominant centre” (Clyne, Michael 1992, p.461)
This ties in to a point Neil DeVotta stresses in his article – that the Tamil the minority of Sri Lanka derives part of its strength from the power the Tamil population of India exerts on Indian politics, which in turn exerts a huge amount of pressure on the government of Sri Lanka.
That “the declaration merely recognises a fact known about Tamil and will not create a new status for the language” is heavily stressed in the article. The writer also ponders “In trying to discern why Tamil has not been recognized as a classical language, I can see only a political reason”. This is not exclusively a Tamil issue. Nettle and Romaine state of American and British press “The negative attitude to multilingualism … reflects more of the dominant class’s resentment of any form of knowledge or organization they do not control than any real problems associated with it.” (2000, p.173)
4. Noor, F.A., Dr. 2005 Interview: Dr Wan Kadir Che Man, “Insensitivity has inflamed the troubles in the South” in The Nation, Nation Multimedia, June 23, 2005
A Muslim academic asks plainly “Why should we Malays assimilate to Thai culture, learn the Thai language, eat and dress like the Thais when we are in fact living in our own territory and the homeland of our fathers and forefathers?”, asking the same question that the linguistic ‘other’ groups ask, and expressing a similar sentiment found in Heller, Monica’s study: “[The language] is a symbol of colonial oppression…” (1999, p.140) and that “the [dominant] group is foreign and strange, … who’s practices make no sense, or worse, threaten … sense of identity.” (p. 160).
He warns that although ten years ago the Muslim population were nationalists, “today the resurgence of Islam worldwide gives the separatist movement a more religious flavour, and we see the Islamists working closer with the nationalists.” Here, religion and language have gone hand in hand: “Arabic is a symbol of ‘shared Arabness’ that all nations using it converge to the same standard norms which are not the property of any of them” (Clyne, Michael 1992, p.461)
5. The Nation 2005 “SOLUTIONS FOR STRIFE: Schools in South to teach Yawi” Nation Multimedia, Bangkok, August 06, 2005
Some members of the Thai parliament apparently are introducing some ‘progressive’ ideas. Chatu-ron Chaisang said “he would push through a proposal to have Malay language incorporated in the curriculum of public schools in the troubled South, saying this reflected the needs of the local community.”
It would be a positive attempt by a large ethnic majority to recognize a disgruntled minority group if such a proposal went though. The writer of the article questions the motivation for this move, saying “The move comes amid a spate of violence that has rocked the region over the past 19 months and increased tensions between the Buddhists and Muslims.”
If people are not accorded the due respect their language and culture deserve, they may end up concluding, as did the young subjects of Heller, Monica’s study “that the only sensible explanation for what [is] happening to them [is] racism, whether overt or systemic.”
Letter to the Editor:
Re: The Nation 2005 “SOLUTIONS FOR STRIFE: Schools in South to teach Yawi” Nation Multimedia, Bangkok, August 06, 2005
Thailand, similar to Sri Lanka in theological demographic – with a majority Buddhist population and minority Muslim population concentrated territorially and divided ethnically (CIA World Fact Book 2000) – can not afford to follow in the footsteps of its South Asian counterpart.
The demands of the Malay population are not outrageous, especially given that there seems to be overt discrimination in the availability of school curricula. Chatu-ron Chaisang mentions that Chinese language curricula will also be considered for the three north-easternmost states of Thailand. What he fails to mention is that in the southern provinces of Jala, Patani and Narathiwat, there are already several schools that offer curricula in Chinese, as well as one entirely Chinese school per province (Noor, F.A. 2005).
Although the Malay ethnicity in Thailand is smaller in number than the Chinese, in these three provinces (CIA World Fact Book 2000), they are a clear majority. If linguistic determination is one of the factors that sparked off violence in Sri Lanka, why should Thailand repeat these mistakes?
Last Sunday’s elections show, again, that while the governing TRT party has wide support in the Northern provinces, they are hugely unpopular in the South. TRT ran uncontested in all of Thailand, due to the election boycott by other parties. Out of the 76 constituencies in Thailand, 31 of the TRT’s ‘one-horse candidates’ failed to meet the constitutional demand for 20% of the votes. 30 of these were in the South. (The Nation, 03 April 2006)
Obviously, it would be naïve to declare that the cause for conflict is simply a linguistic one. However, it would also be a testimony to the blindness of our Kingdom should we ignore the basic request for linguistic parity by our Southern citizens.
References
CIA World Fact Book 2006, Central Intelligence Agency, USA, viewed 03 April 2006,
Clyne, M. 1992, ‘Epilogue’ in Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations, Mouton, de Greyter
DeVotta, N. 2004, ‘Ethnic nationalism and Indo-Sri Lanka relations’ in South Asian Journal, Lahore, Pakistan, viewed 30 March, 2006,
The Nation 2005 ‘SOLUTIONS FOR STRIFE: Schools in South to teach Yawi’,
Nation Multimedia, Bangkok, August 06, 2005,
The Nation 2006 ‘31 Thai Rak Thai one-horse candidates fail: unofficial results’,
Nation Multimedia, Bangkok, April 03, 2006,
Nettle, D., & Romaine, S. 2000, ‘Language Rights and Human Rights’ in Vanishing Voices, Oxford University Press, New York
Noor, F.A., Dr. 2005 Interview: Dr Wan Kadir Che Man, ‘Insensitivity has inflamed the troubles in the South’ in The Nation, Nation Multimedia, Bangkok, June 23, 2005,
TamilNet 2005, ‘Sinhala-Only for President’, TamilNet, December 06, 2005, viewed 31 March, 2006,
TamilNet 2004, ‘India to declare Tamil as classical language’, TamilNet, September 18, 2004
fon @ Sunday, April 23, 2006 link to post * *