Trilingual Language Policy to make SL knowledge hub

Ishara JAYAWARDANE

Dr. Amal Gunasena is a Oriental scholar now residing in England. He graduated from the University of Ceylon, Peradeniya in 1967 with an Honours degree in Sinhala. Subsequently he obtained his B.Phil from York University and Ph.D. from the London University. Presently he serves as Senior Researcher and Senior Lecturer in Sri Lankan Culture and Sinhala Language at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. Daily News interviewed Dr. Gunasena to find out his views on the relevance of government’s Trilingual Policy

Q: What was the language policy followed by the government under the British rule?

Dr. Amal Gunasena. Picture by Saliya Rupasinghe

A: Until 1948, the education policy was such that it was a one way system promoting only English. The British rule came into full force in 1815. The language policy was used to convert people into Christianity and also to inculcate British values and morals. They did not want to promote the educational institutions that existed in the country.

Even Frederick North, the first British Governor, acknowledged that there were flourishing Pirivenas – Buddhist educational institutions - when the British occupied the island. But he openly declared that they were useless as those institutions were not serving the British interests. Colonel Colebrooke said: “The education provided by the Buddhist Sangha in the monastic schools deserves little or no attention.” As the British did not promote vernacular schools, all the elite schools were Christian schools.

Even Anagarika Dharmapala went to S. Thomas’ College which was a Christian school although he came from a prominent Buddhist family. There weren’t any other prominent schools in Colombo.

Through the English medium, what they were teaching was all about British. For administrative purposes, they wanted to create a small class of learned people with British values and morals. The missionary schools were intended to serve this purpose.

English was soon made compulsory in schools and it was considered a prerequisite to obtain higher positions in the government. The academy or the seminary in Colombo was created after amalgamating the three existing Sinhala, Tamil, and English schools and later it was known as the 'Colombo Academy' and later 'Royal College' of Colombo. Cardinal James Cordiner was appointed the Head of the Academy. Every effort was made to propagate the Christian faith and values throughout the school curriculum. The number of English schools in the country increased rapidly.

So the language policy was a one way system. We had a highly developed education system.

Renowned scholars came from foreign countries to study Buddhism as well as languages such as Sinhala, Pali, Sanskrit and Tamil. Our vernacular education suffered under the colonial rule due to the lack of recognition and financial support.

The textbooks written in the Sinhala and Tamil languages were not prescribed to be used in schools.

It should be noted however that the 'English Only' language policy and religious discrimination created a lot of frustration in the society.

With the arrival of Colonel Olcott, an American theosophist, a number of Buddhist schools were established.

At the same time, with the support from Hindu organizations such as 'Brahma Samaj' and 'Arya Samaj' several Hindu schools were founded. The Ceylon Social reform League also played an active role in demanding that Sinhala and Tamil be recognized as compulsory subjects in the school curriculum.

In the State Council also there were leaders such as Sir Ponnambalam Arunachalam, Kanagaratnam, Philip Gunawardene, and J.R. Jayewardene who agitated for the recognition of the Sinhala and Tamil languages.

Q: Despite all the efforts to promote the English language under British rule, only a very small percentage of the total population in the country gained proficiency in English. Also the introduction of the Free Education system necessitated a new language policy. Therefore, it was natural that the governments during the post-independence period had to adopt a new language policy promoting vernacular languages. Where did we go wrong in formulating the new language policy?

A: There was no crisis soon after independence.

The linguistic and cultural atmosphere prevailing at the time was almost trilingual.

As far back as 1939, members of the State Council Phillip Gunawardena and J.R. Jayewardene proposed to legalize the usage of Sinhala and Tamil in the administration of justice and in the state administration and the motion was passed with majority. In other words, there was a general recognition of the need to adopt a bilingual policy.

At the same time there was no resistance or unhealthy national feeling against learning English. On the other hand, we should recognize the fact that since the granting of Universal Suffrage, political parties were trying to exploit people’s emotions for political gains. They tried to arouse the deep seated feelings of national, cultural and language deprivation under the alien European rule for more than four centuries. The Sinhala community constituted nearly 74 percent of the population in this country and therefore, during the 1956 Election the promises were given to make Sinhala the official language within 24 hours. The 'Sinhala Only' policy was a fundamental mistake we did.

The Tamil leaders were fighting with us against British imperialism.. Tamils have been living with us for many centuries. But the Tamil language was not given its due place. The second mistake was that we allowed the standard of English language to deteriorate in our educational system. I think that is where we went wrong.

Take India and Pakistan where there were wars between communities on issues over religion and language.

Until 1956 we were a very fortunate nation; no war was declared on the basis of language. The 'Sinhala Only' policy brought about very unfortunate consequences. We lacked vision in that respect.

Take for instance Switzerland. Romansch is spoken only by 1 percent of the total population but it has been elevated to the status of other major languages such as Italian, German, and French.

Q: What do you think of the subsequent attempts made by the government to rectify this situation?

A: We tried to improve the situation later but those attempts were too late and also not properly implemented.

With the 1978 Constitution, Tamil was recognized as a national language but we had to wait till the Indo-Lanka Peace Accord of 1977 to recognize Tamil as an official language. Because of this delay, the language issue became a part of the Tamil liberation movement which finally led to the emergence of terrorism in this country. The other issue was the problems of implementation.

The language policy was not effectively implemented with a clear strategy. Take the status of the English language. The teaching of English was confined mostly to urban areas. No appropriate action plan had been designed to teach English in rural areas.

There were no teachers or training facilities available. That created dissatisfaction and frustration among thousands of young people in rural areas.

It created a wide gap between the English educated students and Sinhala-educated students who were not proficient in English.

They were ready to learn English but the facilities were not there. These are the problems which cannot be postponed any longer.

Q: How do you describe the language policy of the present government?

A: As you know, President Mahinda Rajapaksa was able to put an end to the terrorist war which lasted for more than three decades because he had the determination as well as a proper strategy to accomplish his task. Even on the language issue he has a vision and a strategy. He has advocated a 'tri-lingual policy.' The important thing to note is that it is not an isolated policy but an integral part of his overall strategy to transform Sri Lanka into a morally, economically and globally successful country.

President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s vision is to adequately equip the whole nation with two global literary skills - technology and English. Therefore, language skills constitute an important aspect of transforming this country into a knowledge hub in the Asian region.

For practical reasons, President Rajapaksa has clearly rejected the language policy which created a havoc in this country. In his Mahinda Chintanaya, he says: “How can we expect under a single official language policy to breed good, self- reliant, upright, well informed and public-spirited citizens in our country. The time has come for me to always look forward but not to repeat on what happened in the past to overcome our difficulties.”

This is no mere rhetoric. He has formulated a 10- year National plan. This year 2012 has been declared the 'Tri lingual Year.' The President is taking a personal interest in this trilingual policy.

English is an international medium of communication and everyone has the right to learn English. Every child should have the opportunity to learn English well. English is also a life skill. You can see how much emphasis China, Japan and India are placing on English. Teachers have been trained to teach English all over China. We are learning English to be competitive in the world market. We need people to go to meetings and put our case before world leaders.

The novelty of the President’s approach is that it has a local flavour giving priority to local needs. According to our President’s instructions, everything has to be done by our experts. In the preparation of syllabuses, teaching material and training programmes, the local context should be properly understood. We don’t have to teach British English and our aim is not to create a class of people who are going to imitate British English. That is not our concern. While retaining and appreciating our values, we should be able to learn a world language. We want to use English as a tool to access knowledge and to equip ourselves in the task of building a proud nation. That is the major difference in our President's language programme. Even in Singapore now, they are trying to teach English in a Singaporean way.

This approach has another advantage. Unlike in the past, it would not exacerbate the inequality between the rich and poor. It will only empower the masses with an access to English which is de facto lingua Franca of international communication.

Q: How do you see the importance of the Tri-Lingual policy in the context of promoting national integration and ethnic harmony?

A: If we know each others’ languages, it is easier to understand each other and to appreciate commonalities and to respect differences. Then we become attached to each other. It is through a language that you can communicate and exchange ideas. A good quality of a human being is to learn the language of the neighbour.

The President has directed to establish 'Language Centers of Excellence' in all major cities. The Sister School Programme is also a great idea that has been introduced. The purpose is to exchange students between Sinhala and Tamil schools. Tamil and Muslim students will get an opportunity to go to Sinhala schools and to learn Sinhala whereas the Sinhala students will have access to Tamil schools to study Tamil. The language policy means a lot in finding a long-lasting solution to the ethic problem in the country.

Nobody expected the LTTE to be decisively defeated, but President Mahinda Rajapksa was able to achieve that victory. Likewise, with his determination and foresight, we hope that he will be able to achieve full success in the implementation of his trilingual policy. It’s good for the country.