TRILINGUALISM for getting along...

Lionel Wijesiri

We are surrounded by language during nearly every waking moment of our lives. We use language to communicate our thoughts and feelings, to connect with others and identify with our culture, and to understand the world around us. And for many people, this rich linguistic environment involves not just one language but two or more. In fact, the majority of the world’s population is bilingual or multilingual. The Associated Press reports that up to 66 percent of the world’s children are raised bilingual. How a nation deals with language differences says a great deal about the status of people who speak particular languages in that society.

National Master Plan

Sri Lankan society, is based on the belief that our nation should be simultaneously supportive of pluralism and dedicated to unity. Making this ideal a reality, however, has been tricky. Language diversity in our nation has always been complicated. It has been both lauded and vilified, seen as a terrible disability by some and as a precious resource by others.

Sri Lanka is a multi-ethnic, multi-faith, multi-cultural country, where different ethnic groups live together. Consequently, our policy-makers have to decide how to accommodate language diversity in a way that promotes rather than hinders overall integration.

But what is the best and most democratic language policy? Is it one that promotes cultural assimilation or is it language pluralism? What are the political consequences of pursuing one or the other policy?

These are difficult questions to answer. But some answers could be found with the recent comments made by Presidential Advisor and Coordinator to the Presidential Task Force on English and IT, Sunimal Fernando. He said that the 10-year National Master Plan for a Trilingual Sri Lanka has provided equal opportunities for all Sri Lankans to obtain skills in Sinhala and Tamil as languages of communication and debate with English as a life skill at levels suitable individual needs and ambitions.”

As a general rule, ethnic harmony is promoted if a country adopts a policy of cultural pluralism that recognizes the language rights of minorities while at the same timing to form a common civic and cultural identity. To do so, policy makers unavoidably have to make a critical choice. Is one language designated as the official language with other languages given some space? Or should all languages be given official status? The policy makers must decide on these issues, and their decisions will affect the power and identity of linguistic groups; this is the 'politics of language.' Language pluralism is the most democratic and sensible approach for multilingual societies; but there are alternative policies as well. Many countries that have engaged in nation building have had either an explicit or implicit policy of language assimilation. The USA, for example, presents a case where language assimilation for the sake of civic integration has been an explicit policy. Bilingualism is common among second-generation children, i.e., those growing up in immigrant households: most speak an immigrant language at home, but almost all are proficient in English. In the third (and later) generation, the predominant pattern is English monolingual: that is, children speak only English at home, making it highly unlikely that they will be bilingual as adults.

France, on the other hand, has had an implicit policy. Since the French Revolution, becoming a French citizen has meant that French was the only language used in schools, administration, the army, and public life in general. Assimilation was one ideological basis of French colonial policy. In contrast with British policy, the French taught their subjects that, by adopting French language and culture, they could eventually become French. Despite some minority protest, it has been a successful policy of assimilation. Similar examples of assimilationist success can be found in other parts of the world, but one also can find just as many examples of assimilationist failure. Assimilation is most likely to fail if it is involuntary and if it involves territorially based minorities. Assimilation is no panacea, as it involves the loss of one identity for the sake of another.

Language pluralism, by contrast, assumes that every group – if the group wants to retain its identity, has the right to do so. To avoid conflict, and to create civic consensus, policy makers need to grant convincing guarantees for the retention of sub-cultures. Advocates of pluralism recommend the parallel use of two or more languages by saying "let us each retain our own language in certain spheres, such as schools, but let us also have a common language for joint activities, especially in civic life."

Politics of ethnicity

In Sri Lanka, language has become core issue in the politics of ethnicity. Fortunately, it is an easier issue to deal with than other ethnic issues because language allows for multiple identities. People can speak several languages, and several languages can coexist. It involves a two-track policy whereby one track gives space and guarantees for minority languages, and the other track promotes the learning of one or more national languages to allow communication and enhance mutual understanding. Experiences in other countries show that language conflicts can be managed by giving incentives to learn languages, other than one’s own. People have a remarkable ability to learn languages when it is to their advantage to do so.

This can be promoted by an appropriate social reward structure, for example by making language facility a criterion for professional qualification and promotion.

The pluralist language policy has a number of advantages. It will grant minorities space within the main society's culture and it will represent both a policy of practical and symbolic inclusion. When two or more languages are accommodated in public schools or in other public domains, a country is demonstrating that there are 'win-win' situations in ethnic politics. In this way, language pluralism has the potential of preventing the ethnic polarization of the population. In addition, by demonstrating a constructive solution to ethnic issues in one sphere, it can have a spillover effect to other spheres of ethnic relations.

Drawbacks

Switzerland is a classic example of how culturally diverse groups can coexist amicably and how the accommodation of diversity can be a source of political consensus. Rather than trying to melt ethnic groups into a new cultural whole, the Swiss have used the assertion of distinctiveness to bind them into one political unity. Citizens need to have a shared sense of belonging. In fact, this is the classic definition of a nation.

However, there is a drawback in a pluralist language policy. The potential problem is that language differentiation can be perceived as negative discrimination.

The implementation process must make sure that separate ethnic institutions, such as minority schools or separate administrative offices, preserve rather than undermine the rights of minorities. Ethnic accord is most likely to be enhanced if such arrangements are voluntary.

Recognizing that the efficient management of linguistic diversity poses many challenges, it is necessary that we plan building up human capacity in translation and interpreting, phasing in implementation over a reasonable period. In addition to existing structures, taking a lesson from South African experience, the writer suggests that three new structures be set up to support policy implementation:

* Language Units in each Government Department and province to manage translation, editing and interpreting services with a view to the envisaged increase in the demand for these services and also for terminology development in the indigenous languages.

* A National Language Forum, a collaborating network of representatives from government and non-government structures, to monitor the implementation process, priorities language-related projects and drive policy advocacy campaigns under the leadership of the relevant Departments.

* A Language Practitioners' Council, a statutory body to manage the training, accreditation, and registration of translators and interpreters to raise the status of the language profession and improve the quality of language products. This body will set and maintain standards. Clearly, the fostering of our linguistic diversity in support of the very social transformation that we have achieved in other domains, as well as the role of language policy in promoting economic growth and development, should be integrated into the national planning agenda.

And yet, a thorough analysis of developments over the last six decades, against the background of 500 years of colonialism, suggests that language is one of the pivotal factors that will determine the direction in which our society will develop in next few decades.