|
Language inferiority complex:
Colonial hangover
Sajitha Prematunge
No offense to linguists, but she has the capacity to make the most
boring subject sound intriguing, which her students would undoubtedly
vouch for. She has a unique panache about her that - upon entering a
lecture room - would rouse even the most lethargic student, and an 'r'
that rings out in justice to the sing-song quality of Sri Lankan
English, she so proudly admits to speaking.
 |
|
Professor Manique Gunasekara. Pictures
by Ranjith Asanka |
 It was a major detour from the law faculty she was hoping to enter
after A-Ls, but reading English at Kelaniya had apparently turned out
well for Dr Manique Gunesekera. She turned out to be the Kelaniya
University Faculty of Graduate Studies Dean and Professor of English.
She has also worked as a Senior Fellow in the Singapore Nanyang
Technological University Business School and as Adjunct Lecturer in the
Michigan University Ross School of Business.
As a member of the Presidential Task Force on English, Dr Gunesekera
was responsible for re-introducing English at Grade 1 in schools, and
for launching the new General English at GCE A-Ls. Dr Gunesekera's
publications include The Postcolonial Identity of Sri Lankan English
(2005), and a non-academic book, Oosha: A Life of Dance in Sri Lanka
(2006).
Daily News spoke with her on topics ranging from post colonial
literature to linguistics.
Most Sri Lankan English writers have been accused as being out of
touch with the Sri Lankan reality, lacking that essential 'Sri
Lankanness' in their writing. Are Sri Lankan English writers truly Sri
Lankan?
I wouldn't go so far as to condemn them by saying that they are not
Sri Lankan. It could be said that they are westernised, but that is no
crime.
But wouldn't that reflect on their writing?
It would. But I see nothing wrong with that. Westernization is part
of being colonised, it can hardly be helped.
Some universities are blamed for not conducting Master's courses for
some subjects, English in particular, because the existing staff wants
to protect their hierarchy. What is your opinion?
I can only speak on behalf on the Kelaniya University and the reason
we don't conduct a Master's course for English is that we lack qualified
staff. Twenty five years ago we had five lecturers in the department, we
still have only five lecturers on the cadre and we have four time as
many students. It is virtually impossible to conduct a proper Master's
with the already existing workload. That's all that's stopping us.
How could language education in Sri Lanka be improved?
A step in the right direction is trilingualism, which the
Presidential Task Force has set out to do. We have been polarised for
too long, people who use the three major languages - Sinhala, Tamil and
English.
What is your opinion on 'Speaking English our way' programme?
As a speaker of Sri Lankan English, I promote the initiative, because
it is a variety, which is really the norm in the Sri Lankan context. But
there are many misconceptions. Our residual respect for RP (Received
Pronunciation) prevents most from embracing Sri Lankan English as the
Sri Lankan standard.
A more pressing problem has unfortunately been unveiled by the
programme, which is the notion that the programme promotes speaking of
English any way one pleases. The committee is often blamed for ruining
English language education. We do not promote incorrect use of English.
We are promoting a variety of English that is accepted in Sri Lanka,
which is obviously different from British or American English.
But is it wrong to promote RP or British English?
There is nothing wrong in any variety. Why would we promote a variety
no longer in use even in the Britain? Nobody expects people to speak in
ancient Sinhala, which is considered as an ideal, nor does anyone speak
in classical Arabic, in which the Koran in written. In fact the trend is
now American English. People think it's 'hip' to speak US English.
What are the dangers of these varieties (Sri Lankan English, Indian
or Malaysian English) one day becoming unintelligible from the original?
According to Robert Burkfeild, the former Oxford English Dictionary
Editor, these varieties would be the death knell of English, like all
descendant varieties of Latin survived it. But looking at the phenomenal
growth of electronic communication, I find that hard to believe.
This can't be considered as stunting the growth of English, in fact a
whole new variety seems to have emerged.
One of the strengths of Sri Lankan English is that it is a mixture of
the other two languages - Tamil and Sinhala. And the sing-song cadence
of Sinhala and to some extent Tamil, tend to seep into Sri Lankan
English. This makes Sri Lankan English very clear. We should in fact
consider ourselves lucky to have such an attractive variety.
In spite of many years of English tutoring, some fail to master the
language. Why has English education in Sri Lanka been unsuccessful for
so long?
The problem is the position of English in Sri Lankan society. It's
fraught with a lot of issues. Teaching per se has not been a total
failure. Its success or failure is judged using different parameters,
which has nothing to do with the syllabus. The role of English goes
beyond what can be taught in a classroom.
Most judgements are based on pronunciation. For example a Chinese
student may be oblivious to the various differences in intonation in
Chinese that would help a native speaker understand what the student is
trying to say. But as opposed to a foreign language, where there is only
one standard, we have our own varieties of English.
An English speaker can be immediately identified as a fluent speaker
of standard Sri Lankan English, not so fluent speaker or a speaker of an
ethnic variety, such as English influenced by Jaffna Tamil. Because
there are many varieties of English, a person's pronunciation gives o
much information. Sri Lankans can manage a conversation; it's just that
the context is wrong.
Does this lag have anything to do with the 'linguistic servitude' you
have mentioned in you book The Postcolonial Identity of Sri Lankan
English?
Perhaps the fact that we are a post colonial society and we tend to
think the 'best' in terms of English comes from the British Isles could
contribute to this. It was an elitist variety to begin with - RP,
subsequently called BBC or Oxford English. Anyone who approximates RP is
considered 'good'. This was the norm for most of the colonies. We
inadvertently thought that this was the correct variety. This is a part
of our colonial hangover.
For a long time elocution schools only taught this variety. There
were many attempts to erase our accent. This still exists in some
sections of Sri Lankan society, who still believes that the foreign
standard is correct.
Conventional English language teaching as well as 'Speak English our
way' has left out a significant component like listening, extensively
made use of in foreign language teaching. Why?
We had introduced the listening component for A-L General English, in
the form of an audio cassette. But it is very difficult to conduct the
listening test unless for small groups and if only the right equipment
are available.
Moreover rural students do not have equal opportunities not only when
taking tests but while preparing for them. The initiative 'speak English
our way' has incorporated listening into teaching. By teaching speech,
listening is also perfected.
|
