International Opinion on Language Policy: Dr Joga Singh (III)

III. Foreign Language Learning and Mother Tongue Medium vs. Foreign Language Medium

It would be proper to start with a statement from the UNESCO:

“What seems to be standing in our way is a set of myths about language and learning, and these myths must be revealed as such to open people’s eyes. One such myth is that the best way to learn a second (read foreign – JS) language is to use it as a medium of instruction. (In fact, it is often more effective to learn additional languages as subjects of study.) Another is that to learn a second language you must start as early as possible. (Starting early might help learners to have a nice accent, but otherwise the advantage goes to learners who have a well developed first language.) A third is that the home language gets in the way of learning a second language. (Building a strong foundation in the first language results in a better learning of additional languages.) Clearly these myths are more false than true, yet they guide the way policymakers tend to think about how speakers of other languages must learn dominant or official languages.” @ (UNESCO, 2008:12).

This statement is based on studies from 12 countries spread over all continents. The study included India too and it was funded by the World Bank, not an opponent of English.

A similar study is based on Finish children who migrated to Sweden. This study showed, “Overwhelmingly, the better a student knew Finish (as a function of having attended school for several years in Finland), the better he learned Swedish. An examination of language skills of siblings found that who moved from Finland at an average age of 10 have preserved an almost normal Finnish language level, and they also approach the normal level in Swedish of Swedish pupils… The children who moved under the age of six, or who were born in Sweden, do not do as well. Their Swedish language development often stops at the age of about 12, evidently because of their poor grounding in the mother tongue.”  @ (Paulston, 1977:92-3).

“Strong demand for EMI (Englis as medium of instruction) as a means of promoting fluency in English conflates two distinct areas of practice: EMI and English as subject (EaS). The confusion of language learning (EaS) with language and learning has created difficulties for schoolchildren and can pose a barrier to inclusive and equitable quality education. There is little or no evidence to support the widely held view that EMI is a better or surer way to attain fluency in English than via quality EaS. Expert estimates are that it takes pupils six to eight years to develop the cognitive and academic language proficiency (CALP) needed to support learning across the curriculum. A move to EMI in or just after lower primary, commonly found in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, yields too shallow a foundation of English to sustain learning across the curriculum from the upper primary years onwards. Early introduction of EMI is thus viewed as impairing learning in the formative years and limiting educational attainment.

The evidence-based position on MoI taken by major donors and development partners is one that supports a mother tongue-based multilingual education model of basic education. It rests on a wealth of data showing that children’s participation in well-designed multilingual programmes underpins learning in all subjects, including English, through use of the mother tongue or a familiar indigenous language. The British Council’s position on MoI likewise reflects a mother tongue-based multilingual education approach to basic education in low- and middle-income countries”. (pp.3).

British Council. 2017. English language and medium of instruction in basic education in low- and middle-income countries: a British Council perspective. London: The British Council.

Thus, it is clear that foreign languages are better learned by studying through mother tongue medium. The following tells why it is so:

“Butzkamm insists that we have to re-define the role of the native language as the major resource in foreign language learning and teaching. As children grow into their mother tongue, (1) they have learnt to conceptualize their world and have fully grasped the symbolic function of language; (2) they have learnt to communicate; (3) they have learnt to speak and use their voice; (4) they have acquired an intuitive understanding of grammar and have become aware of many of the finer points of language; (5) they have acquired the secondary skills of reading and writing. The mother tongue is therefore the greatest asset people bring to the task of foreign language learning. It provides an indispensable Language Acquisition Support System and makes instruction possible in the first place. @ (WIKIPEDIA).

“Successful learners capitalise on the vast amount of both linguistic skills and world knowledge they have already accumulated via the mother tongue. For the most part, they need not reconceptualise their world in the new language. They have acquired an L1 along with its accompanying discourse skills and pragmatic knowledge, which are directly available for incorporation into the target language system. For instance, they need not be told that requests, wishes or warnings can masquerade as statements. Also, the path breaking power of L1 grammar is not dependent on the fact that both languages share similar grammatical features. It is because all languages have evolved means of expressing abstract ideas such as possession, number, agent, instrument, negation, cause, condition, obligation etc., no matter how they do this; one natural language is enough to open the door for the grammars of other language because all languages are cut from the same conceptual cloth. In a deep sense, we only learn language once”. @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfgang_Butzkamm

The facts described so far should suffice to take the blinders off the eyes and pull the deafening wax out of the Indian policy makers. However, it won’t do any harm to look into what is happening in the rest of the world language wise.

In fact, wherever English has been the medium of instruction, though it being a foreign language there, it has been phased out or is at least diminishing day in and day out. Few examples should suffice as evidence.

Uganda decided in 2007 that for the first three years the mother tongues should be used as medium of education and English should be taught as a subject. This has brought them success too. An appraisal done in 2008 itself showed that the new policy had contributed to improvement in literacy.

It needs to be particularly mentioned here that there are 52 language groups in Uganda. The change in Uganda was based on the idea that a student learnt a foreign language better if he had a good foundation in the mother tongue. Before this new policy, the school education in Uganda used to be in English medium from the very start. (See Kavuma, 2009 for these facts). 

Malaysia decided in 2009 to teach Math and Science in Bhasha Malasia in National schools and in Chinese and Tamil in the Local schools.

There can’t be a better comment on the illiteracy of Indian policy makers than that Malaysia finds it correct to teach science in Tamil medium to Tamils but it is considered almost a crime here in India. There is a proverb in Punjabi which means that ‘without sense, even wells go dry’. We may not know much about that, but the English infected Indian heads have certainly gone empty. Anyhow, it won’t be bad to have some more evidence here.

“New Zealand and Britain have shown more regard for their indigenous minority languages (though not for immigrant languages) in recent years, which also shows in their employment as the medium of instruction in schools. The recent history of New Zealand’s policy regarding the Maori language and culture is highlighted by S. May, with an optimistic outlook (pp. 21–41). Initial assessments of the newly institutionalised Maori elementary schools (Kura Kaupapa), with Maori medium instruction, ‘suggest that the academic progress of children ( . . . ) is comparable to their mainstream peers, while providing the added advantage of bilingualism’ (p. 35). In the case of Hong Kong there has been an increase in the use of Puntonghua, which has also been introduced as a widely taught school subject, while indigenous Cantonese still serves as the medium of instruction together with English. Malaysia, in contrast, has restrained the status and function of English and substituted it by Malay (Bahasa Malaysia) as the sole official language of the country and the sole medium of instruction in public schools and universities (S. Kaur Gill, pp. 135–152).” @ (Ammon, 2004)  

It is clear, thus, that all English infected nations of yester years are bidding it farewell. The reason seems to be that none wants to be a friend of ignorance (except us, the Indians, highly addicted to mental slavery, and ignorance).

But why is it happening in India, then? The real reason for this is the Indian Manuvaad; The Indian elite want to plunder all and deprive other Indians of everything through the instrument of English language. Therefore, we need to demolish the ideological bases which sustain this Indian Neo-Manuvaad in the digital age. These bases are some myths, which have been nicely unmasked in a Stockholm (Sweden) University Report (see Benson, 2005). Some of these myths are described below.

III.2. Some More Myths Surrounding Language

III.2.1. “The one nation—one language myth. The colonial concept that a nation-state requires

a single unifying language has influenced policy-makers in many parts of the world,

yet imposition of a so-called “neutral” foreign language has not necessarily resulted

in unity, nor have relatively monolingual countries like Somalia, Burundi or Rwanda

been guaranteed stability. In fact, government failure to accept ethnolinguistic

diversity has been a major destabilizing force in countries like Bangladesh, Pakistan,

Myanmar and Sri Lanka (Ouane 2003).” @ (Benson, 2009)  

III.2.2. “The myth that local languages cannot express modern concepts. Another colonial

concept is the supposed inherent worth of European languages in contrast to others,

but all human languages are equally able to express their speakers’ thoughts and can

develop new terms and structures as needed. Léopold Senghor once illustrated this by

translating Einstein’s Theory of Relativity into Wolof, a lingua franca of Senegal.

The difference lies in which languages have historically been chosen for

“intellectualization,” or development, through writing and publishing (Alexander

2003).”  @ (Benson, 2009)

As is made amply clear by the statements above, each language is capable of expressing any kind of concept. But such an ignorance prevails around in this regard that we need to go in a bit of detail.

No language can be dubbed rich or poor in terms of sentence formation. A cursory reading of  grammar books of any two languages should reveal this. Even a language without a grammar book is grammatically as rich as the ones with written grammars. So, sentence structure –wise, all languages are equally rich. It is the vocabulary which is root of all misconceptions about poverty or richness of any particular language.

It is often heard that our languages do not possess words for subjects like science and technology. But this view is based in a complete lack of knowledge about vocabulary.

Actually, each language has similar word power, because all words of a language are constructed from some basic elements called ‘roots’ and ‘affixes’.  And, there is no marked difference among languages in terms of the number of these basic elements. The following English words can illustrate this very easily:

1. “Haem. A prefix signifying blood.
2. Haemacyte. A blood cell.
3. Haemagogue. Medicine that promotes the catamenial and haemorrhoidal discharges.
4. Haemal. Pertaining to the blood.
5. Haemalopia. An effusion of the blood into the globe of the eye; bloodshot eye.
6. Haemngiectasis. Dilatation of a blood vessel.
7. Haemangioma. A malformation of a blood vessels which may occur in any part of the body.
8. Haemarthrosis. The presence of blood in a joint cavity.
9. Haematemesis. The vomiting of blood.
10. Haematin. An iron-containing constituent of haemoglobin.
11. Haematinic. An agent improving the blood-quality.
12. Haematinuria. The presence of haematin in the urine.
13. Haematocele. A swelling filled with blood; haematoma.
14. Haematocolpos. Retention of the menses due to a congenital obstruction of vagina.
15. Haematogenesis. The development of the blood.
16. Haematoid. Having the nature or appearance of blood.
17. Haematology. The science dealing with the formation, composition, functions and diseases of the blood.
18. Haematolysis. Destruction of blood cells and liberation of haemoglobin.
19. Haematoma. The blood tumour; H. Auris, the blood tumour of the external.”

( With thanks from Rawat, 1985)

At first sight, it would appear that our languages do not have words equivalent to these ones. But the truth is that all of the words above are derived by adding suffixes (endings) to the root (base) ‘Haem’, meaning ‘blood’. The following Hindi parallels, respectively, of these words will make it clear that either our languages have their equivalents or we can get them in no time.

1. rakt 2. rakt-koshika 3. rakt-prerak 4. raktiya 5. raktiya-netr 6. raktvahini-pasar 7. rakt-massa 8. raktjor-vikar 9. rakt-vaaman 10. lauhraktiya 11. raktvardhak 12. raktmuutr 13. rakt-granthi/suujan 14. rakt-maasdharmrodh 15. rakt-utpaadan 16. raktruup 17. rakt-vigiyan 18. rakt-hraas 19. rakt-granthi

Thus, to state that our languages lack in vocabulary can only be a sound proof of one’s not being in a sound state of mind.

The English words cited above bring out another significant fact about the touted richness of English language; none of these words is an English one; all of them have been borrowed directly from Latin. It is a misconception, thus, to believe that one would understand the scientific vocabulary better if one were fluent in English, because most of the scientific vocabulary in English is either Latin or of Greek origin.

Another myth responsible for the chronic English infection is the misconception that fluency in English will open the doors to the whole world. It is essential, therefore, to know what is happening in the world around linguistically.

III.2.3. “The L2 as global language myth. The foreign L2 is often seen as necessary for

further education, work and other opportunities, yet, as Phillipson (1992) points out,

this has not happened in a political vacuum but is the result of deliberate promotion

by powerful countries or groups of their respective languages. Meanwhile,

employment in the informal sector of low-income countries involves 50 percent or

more of the population and is increasing, and primary schooling is still terminal for

most. The vast majority will not be integrated into the global marketplace and will

have little use for the L2 (Bruthiaux 2002).” @ (Benson, 2005)

Joga Singh, Ph.D. (York, U.K.), Mobile: +91-9915709582; E-mail: jogasinghvirk@yahoo.co