In multilingual India, why are we stuck with TLF’s straitjacket?

Does India have a language policy? The answer is no because the three-language formula (TLF) is just that— a formula. A policy would be rooted in some theoretical understanding about the nature, structure and acquisition of language, its relationship to education, to the local community’s funds of knowledge and to society.

TLF, on the contrary, was born out of a compromise among chief ministers of different states to create a homogenised straitjacket for all communities in India. This one-shoe-fits-all solution assumes that English is necessary for every Indian and each student should learn it as a second language; the first language would be the mother tongue/ regional language and for the third language, students of South India would learn Hindi and North India would learn a South Indian language such as Tamil, in the name of “national unity”. TLF looked so attractive on paper that all policy documents since the 1966 Kothari Commission recommended TLF. This includes the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. In actual practice, TLF is known more for its failures across the country. North Indians see no merit in learning Tamil or any other South Indian language and South Indians see no merit in learning Hindi. Why should they? South India sticks to its regional languages and English; states like Tamil Nadu are proud that they have produced better language and educational outcomes with a two-language policy. In North India, Sanskrit is allowed as a third language, in addition to Hindi and English; however, language proficiency levels in all the languages and educational outcomes remain generally low.

Imagine a Santal child growing up in a part of Assam where Santali (a Munda language) and Bodo (a Tibeto-Burman language) are commonly spoken. But as this Santali child goes to school, she notices that she cannot understand a word as all classroom transactions are in Assamese; Hindi and English will soon follow. What is her mother tongue? In terms of TLF, which languages should legitimately be considered as her first, second and third language? Language is not just a medium of education but constitutive of it. In such common multilingual situations, any child whose voice is not heard in the classroom gets pushed out of the education system sooner or later.

NEP 2020 is a case of confusion worse confounded. There is great emphasis on education in the mother tongue with its use recommended “until at least Grade 5”, “but preferably till Grade 8 and beyond”. However, its definition travels long distances: mother tongue/ home language/ language spoken by local community/ regional language. Multilingualism is highly recommended, but it is understood in linear and additive terms as L1+ L2 +L3 etc. NEP 2020 is claimed to be benevolent in permitting states to choose any three languages they wish to. But three it must be. Why? In the case of the Santal student mentioned above, it may end up being four or five languages.

South India’s fear of Hindi imposition has a long history marked by violence, suicide, and threats of separation. In the Constituent Assembly debates, Hindi enthusiasts felt that South Indians should simply agree to have Hindi as the national language in the name of Indian unity. G Durgabai Deshmukh of Madras said that they had already made a great sacrifice in accepting Hindi in Devanagari script as the official language of India, particularly given “the Gandhian proposition, namely, that the official language of India should be only that which is commonly understood and easily spoken and learnt.”

Human beings are defined by multilinguality. It is not only India that officially speaks in 1,652 languages, Papua New Guinea speaks in 800, France in 24, Germany in 25, Spain in 16 and the UK in 13, excluding several languages that are simply erased in counting or invisibilised in practice. English is regarded as a textbook case of ‘a language’. However, it is a classic case of multilinguality, diachronic and synchronic. In addition to its Germanic roots, it has a strong influence of Latin and Romance languages in its vocabulary and syntax; it borrows heavily from other languages including Greek, French, Italian, Spanish, Hindi, Chinese, among others.

Once the universal aspects of language and humanity are recognised, we must respect the local contexts of linguistic diversity and local funds of knowledge and cultural practices. Every community must have the freedom to choose its languages and the pedagogical strategies to transmit existing knowledge and create new ones.

It is in the national interest that the Union government provides greater autonomy and funding to states and states, in turn, do not look for homogenised solutions. Recent research has shown that it is eminently possible to provide a space to the languages of all students, that it is possible to walk out of the suffocating paradigm of ‘a teacher’, ‘a textbook’ and ‘a language’. Multilingual resources learners bring to the classroom can be used for enriching rational inquiry, cognitive growth, and social tolerance, ensuring that the teacher remains a learner.

END OF ARTICLE