*
First of all, let me say that this article is a serious one. My profoundest apologies. And it's longish - that just couldn't be helped. If you'd prefer to get right to the meat of this article, you can skip right ahead to the reasons, caveats, objections and rejoinders. Read on upto the next *, though.
This article is meant to be an argument for including English, rather than any older Indian language, as a compulsory course in primary and secondary education, and in various other walks of Indian life. While many readers may not agree with some of the arguments presented, it should at least give rise to an engrossing debate. Besides, I believe I've just scratched the surface here. I'd like to hear any other argument for and against English. Especially against, as I haven't got too many ideas in that direction.
After reading the entire article, I get the feeling that I got a little carried away sometimes... sorry if it sounds harsh at places.
*
India, as a country, is heavily prejudiced against English. It is the language of the British, whose years of misrule in India have turned us against many things that are British in nature. All the same, English has been part of Indian history for nearly three hundred years now - first as the language of the colonists, and then, after independence, as an official language of the Indian union. Three hundred years is a long time. Long enough for us to put our bitterness aside and accept the fact that in India, English is no longer a foreign language.
Unfortunately, it is not always seen in that light by our countrypeople. Many who converse in English in public places often draw a lot of attention to themselves, most of it unpleasant. They are met with stares, followed by frowns. I myself had several such experiences: One old lady, when she heard me speaking in English in a Metro Rail coach, demanded to know why, being an Indian, I spoke English. This attitude is a result of constant indoctrination by some of our country's public heavyweights, notably the politicians. The fear that English might overshadow one's own language also has something to do with the attitude. Still, I believe that the attitude is not born of any concern that has real significance today.
Politicians today persist in avoiding the English language, although this is definitely an abating trend. West Bengal is a prime example of this: the Communist government has steadily tried to eradicate English from the state. Not content to do this in the schools which it runs, it has attempted to prevent Ramakrishna Mission schools from teaching English.
(The CPI(M) government may have reasons other than those put forth above for hating English. I'm only speculating here, but I think it has something to do with their general opposition to the ways of the democratic West.)
The governments of most other states do not go to such extremes, but at the same time, regional languages are always given priority.
Here are some arguments for making English the primary language of education in India:
4. There are more educational resources available in English than in all other Indian languages put together. Indeed, in most subjects, education beyond a certain level would be impossible without a base in English. (That's why ISI has the remedial English course.) Scientific research published in English is overwhelmingly greater in quantity, as well as quality, than that in any other language in the world. The scenario is similar for primary and secondary education. There are more, and better, educational resources available in English than in any other language. Once again, the Internet, that vast repository of knowledge, provides a prime example. Most of that knowledge would be inaccessible to people without knowledge of English. Of course, it is possible to cast much of the knowledge available into an Indian language (Hindi strikes one as a sensible alternative to English), but that would be reinventing the wheel.
6. This reason isn't exactly an argument for English. Various Indian governments have tried ridiculous schemes in their time, but none more ridiculous than trying to make Sanskrit a compulsory language. Without meaning any disrespect to Sanskrit, I'd like to say that Sanskrit happens to be a dead language. It's been a dead language for hundreds of years. The uses of Sanskrit are highly specialized: it's used mainly for understanding the Hindu religion and using ancient texts for purposes such as understanding living conditions in those days. There are no other practical uses. If the government has enough resources to make such a language compulsory, those resources would be better used in the teaching of English.
The arguments given above can't be left unqualified. Here are some caveats:
Here are some of the reasons I could think of for not making English the main educational language:
5. I didn't think of this myself; it was suggested by a friend. The idea is that instruction in English will facilitate brain drain. If more of our bright youngsters know English, more of them will attempt to leave the country. If, on the other hand, they remain ignorant of English, they would have to stay in the country and contribute to its well-being.
These are compelling objections, but the following rejoinders can be made:
Rejoinder to 2. While it is true that English may overtake the Indian languages in spread, they need not be replaced by it. Of course, the Indian language base may be eroded slowly, but by the time that happens, I doubt that people will feel so strongly about them. Additionally, there's no such thing as a free meal. The long-term good of the nation will demand some sacrifices... Think about this, too: The long-term welfare of the state is more important than the proliferation of the indigenous languages. If giving up our traditional languages is the price we have to pay for development, perhaps we should consider doing so.
Rejoinder to 5. It is true that knowledge of English does facilitate brain drain. If the students of our country didn't know English, they wouldn't be able to leave. Widespread use of English would likely increase the amount of brain drain. However, the marginal increase in the amount of brain drain won't be so high. For example, if a thousand English-educated students are produced in a given year, all of them will be able to leave. If a million English-educated students are produced in a particular year, only (say) a lakh will be able to leave. The remainder would stay back - and perform better because they have access to all those English resources. If those million were educated in indigenous languages, we would have one lakh more minds staying, but none of them would be able to access English language resources. I feel that it's better to have 9,00,000 brains with access to English-language resources than to have 1,000,000 brains without.
All in all, I think English would be the best vehicle for improving the state of our country.
*
Once again, I'd appreciate it if you let me hear other opinions on this topic, especially reasons why English should not be made the main medium of instruction and any possible errors in my reasoning above. Of course, more reasons supporting English are also welcome. Mail them to the editor of the magazine.
*