“We have published a number of letters…. from correspondents who question the statement that English is the language of the oppressors. They protest against any attempt to identify it with the shortcomings of British rule and emphasise that the movement against that rule had its inspiration in English literature and history and was led by men who spoke and wrote it with a mastery which showed that they were using it not as an alien language but as their very own. As Mr. C. Rajagopalachari and others have pointed out if we could continue to use and profit from the railways, telegraphs and other products of British rule in India, we do not see any sense in any merely sentimental revolt against the use of English.”
OCTOBER 25, 1957
Official language
AS THE TIME APPROACHES FOR THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY Committee to give its findings on the Report of the Official Language Commission, public opinion is declaring itself increasingly in many parts of India and more particularly in the South, against any hasty move by Government. Our correspondence columns and the reports of meetings and demonstrations organised in this connection testify to the strength of the feeling that English must continue to be the official language of the Indian Union for a long time to come and that its replacement by Hindi when the country is not ready for the change-over would be considered an unwarranted imposition. Non-party leaders of opinion like General Cariappa, whose closely reasoned article we published on Tuesday, have pointed to the proud and pre-eminent position that English occupies in the world today as the language of international thought, art and science and have warned us against cutting ourselves off from the main stream of world communications. They do not see any justifiable objection to having English as our national language as long as the studying of our own languages, each of which has a rich culture, is fully kept up and our youths are induced to learn one or two other languages in addition to their own regional language”. The other, day, the Chief Minister of Kerala, while conceding that English was “the language of the oppressors”, himself came out in strong opposition to the recommendations of the Official Language Commission that it should soon give place to Hindi as the official language at the Centre, because he felt that such replacement should wait until the regional languages were in a position to take over from English as the official language of the respective States. In any event, Hindi could not serve as the official language at the State-level. We have published a number of letters, including one today, from correspondents who question the statement that English is the language of the oppressors. They protest against any attempt to identify it with the shortcomings of British rule and emphasise that the movement against that rule had its inspiration in English literature and history and was led by men who spoke and wrote it with a mastery which showed that they were using it not as an alien language but as their very own. As Mr. C. Rajagopalachari and others have pointed out if we could continue to use and profit from the railways, telegraphs and other products of British rule in India, we do not see any sense in any merely sentimental revolt against the use of English. Such a revolt would only add to our troubles. When all our efforts must be concentrated on economic and scientific development, we would only be wasting precious time, not only in compelling our young men and women to study Hindi but in raising Hindi itself to the level required to enable it to function as the medium of higher scientific and other thoughts.
The plain truth is that, right now and for some years to come, Hindi cannot function as such a medium. Mr. Rajagopalachari, in his recent speeches, has exposed the fallacy of those who reason that it is the language spoken by the largest group of people in the country and he has given facts and figures to show that they are vastly out-numbered by those who do not speak Hindi. He has reaffirmed that this “majority theory” could not be accepted because there is a solid vaccum so far as Hindi is concerned, from Nagpur to Cape Comorin”. It would be mere fanaticism to seek to impose Hindi on this vast region. It would be in conflict with the spirit and letter of our Constitution which assures all citizens equality of opportunity. The people in South India and other non-Hindi-speaking people would harbour a sense of grievance. All interested in the future of India and in the development of harmony among our people expect the Parliamentary Committee and the Government of India to proceed with caution. There are other and more satisfactory ways of developing the study of Hindi than imposing it with unseemly haste on a large and unwilling mass of people as the official language of the Union. We must reiterate that it is more desirable that Parliament and the Government should have the ready and unforced support of all sections in their decisions than that objectives, on which not all are agreed, should be achieved according to some kind of schedule.
Reference:
The First 100
A Selection of Editorials, 1878-1978, THE HINDU, VOLUME I