Indo-UK News & Discussion 9th Aug 2011

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 15 Nov 2012 02:31

MI6 ‘should hold talks with CIA about Scottish independence’ - expert

MI6 should hold immediate talks with the CIA and other US security services about the prospect of Scots voting for independence in 2014, a leading international relations experts has said.

It remains unclear how intelligence sharing as part of the UKUSA Agreement would be affected if Scotland goes it alone, according to Dr Daniel Kenealy of Edinburgh University.

The UKUSA Agreement was first signed in 1946 and has since been expanded to include Australia, Canada and New Zealand. It is seen as a key tool to combat the growing terrorist threat.

London and Edinburgh would also have to establish a “close relationship” in intelligence sharing, Dr Kenealy adds in a submission to Westminster’s Foreign Affairs committee.

The “special relationship” between the UK and US is often “oversold”, according to the academic, but he states: “This in not the case in the realm of intelligence co-operation.”

He added: “The Foreign Affairs committee should urge the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) and the UK Intelligence services to begin discussions with their US partners about how Washington DC would react to Scottish independence.”

The US is likely to want to ensure that the security of all the British Isles remains as “robust as possible.”

“What remains unclear is the extent to which intelligence sharing arrangements between the UK/US/Canada/Australia/New Zealand would have to be revisited as a result of Scottish independence,” Dr Kenealy adds.

“This is not an area where discussions should be left until 2014. Forward planning is essential.”

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Nov 2012 05:03

"Vengeance is mine saith the Lord,I will repay".A close friend,eminent editor loves to quote this when I get hot under the collar about "slings and arrows" on various issues.I think that the decline of Britain has been vengeance enough for the excesses of imperialism.As Gandhiji said,about the Middle East,the "eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth" attitude will see a lot of blind and toothless men around! We are still seeing it being played out in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with the latest assassination of the Hamas leader.

What I find after 65 years of Independence is that our current rulers are behaving as badly or even worse than the British.Our sacred institutions that are supposed to strengthen our democratic way of life are collapsing.Wherever you look,parliament,the judiciary,the bureaucracy are crumbling thanks to the venality and utter corruption,moral and material of the ruling elite.The looting going on is far worse than when we were under imperial rule.The rule of law is absent in most states-if you want the cops to act,you have to pay the piper ad nauseum.I strongly urge our countrymen to fight the new battle to save our Independence and freedom as the country is sold off ,piece by piece to the robber barons of the MNCs.Instead of ranting and raving about what the British did,what are we doing to the scumbags,sh*tworms and pigs who are destroying India today?

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 05:13

lakshmikanth wrote: This is not a miracle, or magic, or some divine superiority that English has. There were around 5 - 10 posts above explaining why this is so, please read them. English is not some Miracle portion you take and get upward mobility. It is the result of colonial destruction of the native language economy. It has also caused a split between the elites and the non elites, which has to be somehow rectified at the earliest. English is not some nectar that the British Gods gave us to consume from their heavenly abode, it is what it is for a reason. It is an ugly, ugly reason.

Just curious - in the pre-british era, how exactly did the native language economy work? Did every Indian language receive equal opportunities in every kingdom - or did there exist certain 'court languages' for upward mobility?

Second, what were the avenues for upward mobility in the absence of language? Birth? So would you say that the probability that someone could learn a language and get himself (herself) upwardly mobile was greater (and therefore more desirable) than the probability for him/her being born in an 'upwardly' mobile family?

Third, I know that the youngistan brigade are particularly proud that they are ready to hate the english for their despicable treatment of India but are quite content to live in the west (a manifestation "Yankee go home, but take me with you

?) and I found that remark on the 'treatment' Cameron received in Delhi to be particularly amusing - given that the government of the time was being led by an 80 year old gentleman who is supposed to be an anglophile (and praised the english while he was there on an official visit).

Fourth, it would be interesting to get some youngistani views on what additional policies that GOI could have undertaken to improve the lot of the native language?
1. Ban english?
2. impose hindi or some other 'link' language?

The first anti-Hindi agitation was launched in 1937, in opposition to the introduction of compulsory teaching of Hindi in the schools of Madras Presidency by the first Indian National Congress government led by C. Rajagopalachari (Rajaji). This move was immediately opposed by E. V. Ramasamy (Periyar) and the opposition Justice Party (later Dravidar Kazhagam). The agitation, which lasted three years, was multifaceted and involved fasts, conferences, marches, picketing and protests. The government responded with a crackdown resulting in the death of two protesters and the arrest of 1,198 persons including women and children. The mandatory Hindi education was later withdrawn by the British Governor of Madras Lord Erskine in February 1940 after the resignation of the Congress Government in 1939.

Adoption of an official language for the Indian Republic was a hotly debated issue during the framing of the Indian Constitution after India's independence from Britain. After an exhaustive and divisive debate, Hindi was adopted as the official language of India with English continuing as an associate official language for a period of fifteen years, after which Hindi would become the sole official language. The new Constitution came into effect on 26 January 1950. Efforts by the Indian Government to make Hindi the sole official language after 1965 were not acceptable to many non-Hindi Indian states, who wanted the continued use of English. The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), a descendant of Dravidar Kazhagam, led the opposition to Hindi. To allay their fears, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru enacted the Official Languages Act in 1963 to ensure the continuing use of English beyond 1965. The text of the Act did not satisfy the DMK and increased their skepticism that his assurances might not be honoured by future administrations.

As the day (26 January 1965) of switching over to Hindi as sole official language approached, the anti-Hindi movement gained momentum in Madras State with increased support from college students. On 25 January, a full-scale riot broke out in the southern city of Madurai, sparked off by a minor altercation between agitating students and Congress party members. The riots spread all over Madras State, continued unabated for the next two months, and were marked by acts of violence, arson, looting, police firing and lathi charges. The Congress Government of the Madras State, called in paramilitary forces to quell the agitation; their involvement resulted in the deaths of about seventy persons (by official estimates) including two policemen. To calm the situation, Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri gave assurances that English would continue to be used as the official language as long the non-Hindi speaking states wanted. The riots subsided after Shastri's assurance, as did the student agitation.
The agitations of 1965 led to major political changes in the state. The DMK won the 1967 assembly election and the Congress Party never managed to recapture power in the state since then.

I hope people understand that the strategic imperative for India in its first 40 years was to survive as a single entity.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 15 Nov 2012 05:46

arnab wrote:Just curious - in the pre-british era, how exactly did the native language economy work? Did every Indian language receive equal opportunities in every kingdom - or did there exist certain 'court languages' for upward mobility?

It was Persian. Before that, before we became a colonized country, it used to be Sanskrit. Because Sanskrit has an intrinsic and "pre-natal" connection with all Indian languages, it is the only one fit to be the 'court language'. Just because these other impositions usurped Sanskrit's rightful place does not put them in the same category in terms of their effect on India or the world. As the Sanskrit proverb goes - प्रासादशिखरे काकोsपि न गरुडायते -- "A crow doesn't become Garuda just because it is perched on the steeple of the king's palace."

I agree with the rest of your post; I don't hate English at all, and I consider it an important accessory in this iteration of India rising.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 15 Nov 2012 06:07

Philip wrote:If you want to understand the difference amd similarities between an Indian elite school and a British one like Eton,just read this fine piece on Eton.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/201 ... flourishes

However,the overwhelming demand from the Indian public is knowledge of English.How do you account for the mushrooming numbers of English tutorial institutes found in every city? With improvements in their ability to speak and understand English,youngsters find that their career opportunities are better.Many industries and corporate houses also send their employees to such institutes or get them to train their staff at the workplace.It is a fallacy to say that Britain controls English today.The growing numbers of successful Indian authors in English is just one phenomenon.As said before,it is the global lingua franca ,knowledge of it that gets you places.The sun has long since set on the British Empire and we now have the Mittals and Tatas picking up the best pieces of British family silver like JLR!

Bashing the Brits 65 years after Independence is truly passe.The great danger today is that from the east not the West....China,which is destroying indigenous industry worldwide,including India,dumping its cheap and shoddy goods as well and building up a mighty military machine which when it starts rolling will be all but unstoppable.

And China is learning English too - after growing militarily and economically. Does it add to or mitigate the danger?

A good example to study - the role of christianity, mission-mindedness, "leftism", "christian radicalism" and the British imperial matrix in which it all happened, can be "Charlie" Andrews. The reason he is a very good study about this - should be apparent from the Indians he closely connected to, his position on labour-capital relations, on autonomy for colonial subjects - and his crucial connection to Indian congress leaders and intellectuals of a certain spectrum [ideologically] that led to his pivotal role in shifting MKG to India.

He appears on superficial reading to be a genuinely likeable and pro-India Brit. But when I first studied him as a teenager [on a hint from my "second granddad" who had a very good collection on him] it struck me that MKG formally asked him to leave the "freedom movement". I knew less about other circumstances of MKG's subsequent journey to assassination then, to identify this [which I did later] as the turning point in MKG's life where he recognized the effective impact of the british regime on Indian political development and thought - and perhaps the signal he gave unknowingly to the Brits that MKG would start walking away from them.

This was 1935 I think, [correct me if I am wrong] - just two years before the taste of state power that congrez disciples of MKG would be given, and it was at this crucial stage - when MKG's vision and congrez's vision probably started their inevitable eventual departure from each other. In roughly 11 years his key disciples would no longer listen to him over questions of state power - and in roughly 12 years he would be assassinated in a brilliant move that would both remove him from the scene and nail the blame on a common enemy of the imperialist HQ and post 1917 congrez - the politically active "hindu".

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 07:14

arnab wrote: Just curious - in the pre-british era, how exactly did the native language economy work? Did every Indian language receive equal opportunities in every kingdom - or did there exist certain 'court languages' for upward mobility?

Exactly as it is (and was) in Japan or Germany. When Japan industrialized after the Meiji restoration, they were working on translating most of the scientific and industrial works on the west to Japanese. That means anyone who knew Japanese had access to knowledge which can give them better opportunity. There was no discrimination of opportunity based on language.

This is clearly not the case with English or India. There is a language discrimination. Knowing Hindi cannot get you a job anywhere. Knowing Tamil does not get you a good job anywhere (except a prof of Tamil literature or something).

This may seem funny, but the poor folks in India get a double whammy, because learning English is an investment. Where as a Japanese person who is poor need not have to invest in learning English to get a good job.

arnab wrote:
Second, what were the avenues for upward mobility in the absence of language? Birth? So would you say that the probability that someone could learn a language and get himself (herself) upwardly mobile was greater (and therefore more desirable) than the probability for him/her being born in an 'upwardly' mobile family?

BTW, I dont know what this means. What has family got to do with all this?

Back in 1947 the only way one could get a job that pays well was to learn English, and the reason for it is because the previous invaders created a schism, willingly or unwillingly. They did it by creating an elite and an industry (or whatever was left of it) that completely transacted in Engleesh and also by destroying native industry (which had the local language of instructions for functioning).

arnab wrote: Fourth, it would be interesting to get some youngistani views on what additional policies that GOI could have undertaken to improve the lot of the native language?
1. Ban english?
2. impose hindi or some other 'link' language?

Funny you say this! When have I said ban it? My position with respect to Engleesh: rape it, change it, make it our b*tch, make it suitable for pan-Indic consumption while not ignoring the fact that it is a fundamentally alien tongue. Pan Indic == everyone in India should be speaking "some form" of Engleesh. Need not be Queen Hag's version.

Engleesh might have created a "unity" in India. But that was not the intention of the Briturds. The intention was to create a set of Brown Babu's who think like the Brits and also speak the native tongue. To that extent they have succeeded.

The fact that "English" became a "unifying" language is not the British gift, it is an unintended consequence. If they knew the unintended consequence of teaching the Indians English, they would have done everything in their power to not do so.

arnab wrote: Third, I know that the youngistan brigade are particularly proud that they are ready to hate the english for their despicable treatment of India but are quite content to live in the west (a manifestation "Yankee go home, but take me with you ?) and I found that remark on the 'treatment' Cameron received in Delhi to be particularly amusing - given that the government of the time was being led by an 80 year old gentleman who is supposed to be an anglophile (and praised the english while he was there on an official visit).

200 years of loot, plunder and pillage and then a peaceful transition to an Elite structure that was built to protect the Queen Hag's jewels. That structure still continues (anyone know what a District "Collector" used to do before Independence, collect being the keyword

). That structure has created India as it is right now, and you are right that most Indians would hate the Briturds for what they have done, rightfully so. And for the same reason they are justified in spreading out to the West. The irony is that it appears as hypocrisy and contradiction. The more deracinated one is, the more hypocrisy one sees in such a position.

Try to be more compassionate of the people of India. Maybe you will understand.

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 07:34

lakshmikanth wrote:Exactly as it is (and was) in Japan or Germany. When Japan industrialized after the Meiji restoration, they were working on translating most of the scientific and industrial works on the west to Japanese. That means anyone who knew Japanese had access to knowledge which can give them better opportunity. There was no discrimination of opportunity based on language.

This is clearly not the case with English or India. There is a language discrimination. Knowing Hindi cannot get you a job anywhere. Knowing Tamil does not get you a good job anywhere (except a prof of Tamil literature or something).

.

Saar Japanese and German situations are not comparable to India since they did not have to contend with 22 different languages within the boudaries of their nation state. It is quite untrue that you cannot get a job if you only know hindi or tamil. Sure you can - every state government allows that (when relevant to their region). But will they rise at par with someone who knows hindi and english (or tamil and english)? No. But that is what multi skilling is all about. So I see it as an investment to what you consider a barrier (and one which has existed even in the pre-british time as Carl has noted. Even in Mahabharata you find barriers to education as I'm sure you know the story of Ekalavya. So your contention that the Brits raised some new and unique barriers for Indians through imposition of English is IMO untenable). Besiders - if you see that it is not that GOI did not try to include a native Indian (sort of) language to supplant english officially. Did you note the reaction?

Funny you say this! When have I said ban it? My position with respect to Engleesh: rape it, change it, make it our b*tch, make it suitable for pan-Indic consumption while not ignoring the fact that it is a fundamentally alien tongue. Pan Indic == everyone in India should be speaking "some form" of Engleesh. Need not be Queen Hag's version.

The fact that "English" became a "unifying" language is not the British gift, it is an unintended consequence. If they knew the unintended consequence of teaching the Indians English, they would have done everything in their power to not do so.

No you didn't but you did approvingly note the view of another poster who did

(he said something along the lines of - 'let's face it GOI has not tried hard enough to impose a national language and if they had, I doubt people would have protested'; to which you responed along the lines of "you said it much better" etc).

Of course english dissemination was an unintended consequence - though I'm not sure why one should lament that so much. I'm sure the impact of internet / outsourcing on western jobs was an unintended consequence too - If they had known the aggregate impact, they would have prevented it. But it happenned. That is how the wheel of history turns.

That structure still continues (anyone know what a District "Collector" used to do before Independence, collect being the keyword ).

Actually these are the dangers of holding on to earlier grudges and not implementing the right policies. Because the hated english collectors used to collect taxes from farmers - India till today has been unable to impose an agriculture based income tax, thereby creating huge policy distortions. How about this for unintended consequences?

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 07:53

arnab wrote: Saar Japanese and German situations are not comparable to India since they did not have to contend with 22 different languages within the boudaries of their nation state. It is quite untrue that you cannot get a job if you only know hindi or tamil. Sure you can - every state government allows that (when relevant to their region). But will they rise at par with someone who knows hindi and english (or tamil and english)? No. But that is what multi skilling is all about. So I see it as an investment to what you consider a barrier (and one which has existed even in the pre-british time as Carl has noted. Even in Mahabharata you find barriers to education as I'm sure you know the story of Ekalavya. So your contention that the Brits raised some new and unique barriers for Indians through imposition of English is IMO untenable). Besiders - if you see that it is not that GOI did not try to include a native Indian (sort of) language to supplant english officially. Did you note the reaction?

This is how I see it :- English had been IMPOSED on India by the Briturds, everywhere uniformly. It was an invaders tongue, it was a non native language. There would be resistance against anyone trying to impose another language on anyone, and that is what you pointed out. I dont know what is it that you are trying to say here. It was a convenient way to "unify" by continuing using engleesh since the rape had already been complete (unintended consequence).

Knowledge in English could only be afforded by few of the elites, so its a barrier and not an opportunity. Evidence is that Engleesh medium schools (pvt) were priced much higher than local language schools. Hence the poor folks will have to bear with the extra cost of learning English for better employment.

My point (tangentially) is that we have to work on re-engineering Engleesh to make it easier to teach, and not so alien to anyone. Even so, it becomes an extra burden on the nation to teach people this extra language in order to be productive. Since we have chosen it to be English, we have to own it, change it, re-engineer it, rape it.

arnab wrote:
Funny you say this! When have I said ban it? My position with respect to Engleesh: rape it, change it, make it our b*tch, make it suitable for pan-Indic consumption while not ignoring the fact that it is a fundamentally alien tongue. Pan Indic == everyone in India should be speaking "some form" of Engleesh. Need not be Queen Hag's version.

The fact that "English" became a "unifying" language is not the British gift, it is an unintended consequence. If they knew the unintended consequence of teaching the Indians English, they would have done everything in their power to not do so.
No you didn't but you did approvingly note the view of another poster who did (he said something along the lines of - 'let's face it GOI has not tried hard enough to impose a national language and if they had, I doubt people would have protested'; to which you responed along the lines of "you said it much better" etc).

Of course english dissemination was an unintended consequence - though I'm not sure why one should lament that so much. I'm sure the impact of internet / outsourcing on western jobs was an unintended consequence too - If they had known the aggregate impact, they would have prevented it. But it happenned. That is how the wheel of history turns.

True, the caveat is that I wanted the language to be changed to make it less of a barrier. Hybridize Queen Hag's Engleeshu and create Hinglish, Tamlish, Kanndalish, take common words out of them and change the grammar to bring a native speaker upto speed.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 08:10

Philip wrote:"Vengeance is mine saith the Lord,I will repay".A close friend,eminent editor loves to quote this when I get hot under the collar about "slings and arrows" on various issues.I think that the decline of Britain has been vengeance enough for the excesses of imperialism.As Gandhiji said,about the Middle East,the "eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth" attitude will see a lot of blind and toothless men around! We are still seeing it being played out in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with the latest assassination of the Hamas leader.

What I find after 65 years of Independence is that our current rulers are behaving as badly or even worse than the British.Our sacred institutions that are supposed to strengthen our democratic way of life are collapsing.Wherever you look,parliament,the judiciary,the bureaucracy are crumbling thanks to the venality and utter corruption,moral and material of the ruling elite.The looting going on is far worse than when we were under imperial rule.The rule of law is absent in most states-if you want the cops to act,you have to pay the piper ad nauseum.I strongly urge our countrymen to fight the new battle to save our Independence and freedom as the country is sold off ,piece by piece to the robber barons of the MNCs.Instead of ranting and raving about what the British did,what are we doing to the scumbags,sh*tworms and pigs who are destroying India today?

You mean our leaders created artificial famines that killed more than 90 million people? I guess I should read newspapers more often.

Is their decline "enough" to avenge the deaths of 90 million Indians? Who decided that?

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 08:11

lakshmikanth wrote:?
This is how I see it :- English had been IMPOSED on India by the Briturds, everywhere uniformly. It was an invaders tongue, it was a non native language. There would be resistance against anyone trying to impose another language on anyone, and that is what you pointed out. I dont know what is it that you are trying to say here. It was a convenient way to "unify" by continuing using engleesh since the rape had already been complete (unintended consequence).

Knowledge in English could only be afforded by few of the elites, so its a barrier and not an opportunity. Evidence is that Engleesh medium schools (pvt) were priced much higher than local language schools. Hence the poor folks will have to bear with the extra cost of learning English for better employment.

So if it was UNIFORMLY imposed (surely not in the erst while princely states though?) - it was not only a priviledge of the elites. If I understand correctly, your argument is that if English had not been imposed, people across India would have been more amenable to the imposition of another 'indian' language across the whole of the Indian nation state - which would be as foreign to certain parts of India as English had been; but people could have taken solace in the fact that at least it is 'native' to some of India instead of being wholly imported

. I'm not sure to what advantage - except for the fact that it would be 'not English'.

Sir - there was a period when education itself was a barrier (it still is). Pvt English medim school pricing are set based on the market demand. As is the same with many other goods and services. India does provide access to cheaper options too.

True, the caveat is that I wanted the language to be changed to make it less of a barrier. Hybridize Queen Hag's Engleeshu and create Hinglish, Tamlish, Kanndalish, take common words out of them and change the grammar to bring a native speaker upto speed.

Fair enough - I see any language that is 'alive' as an organic thing - so I have no problems really

I think even Mark Twain had a similar idea:

A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling

For example, in Year 1 that useless letter c would be dropped to be replased either by k or s, and likewise x would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which c would be retained would be the ch formation, which will be dealt with later.

Year 2 might reform w spelling, so that which and one would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish y replasing it with i and Iear 4 might fiks the g/j anomali wonse and for all.

Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants.

Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez c, y and x — bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez — tu riplais ch, sh, and th rispektivli.

Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 08:14

^^^ Keyword is "UNIFORMLY" ... NOT

It was imposed everywhere, but not uniformly across the strata of the society.

I had a tough time learning English, my mom knew it but was not fluent with it. My cousins had it worse because their parents were not English literates. I ended up getting better opportunities than they did despite many of them being smarter than I am. My cousins belong to the lower middle class, which means half of India is poorer than they are, and one can only imagine their state.

Mark Twain's idea is a rather crude joke, but hey, you at-least get the idea. I am glad.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 08:26

arnab wrote:
So if it was UNIFORMLY imposed (surely not in the erst while princely states though?) - it was not only a priviledge of the elites. If I understand correctly, your argument is that if English had not been imposed, people across India would have been more amenable to the imposition of another 'indian' language across the whole of the Indian nation state - which would be as foreign to certain parts of India as English had been; but people could have taken solace in the fact that at least it is 'native' to some of India instead of being wholly imported . I'm not sure to what advantage - except for the fact that it would be 'not English'.

A language like Sanskrit other than being "not English" would also contain a lot of words native to the language. In addition to grammatical similarities.

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 08:26

lakshmikanth wrote:^^^ Keyword is "UNIFORMLY" ... NOT

It was imposed everywhere, but not uniformly across the strata of the society.

I had a tough time learning English, my mom knew it but was not fluent with it. My cousins had it worse because their parents were not English literates. I ended up getting better opportunities than they did despite many of them being smarter than I am. My cousins belong to the lower middle class, which means half of India is poorer than they are, and one can only imagine their state.

Mark Twain's idea is a rather crude joke, but hey, you at-least get the idea. I am glad.

I understand. My dad went to a bengali medium school (english was taught as a subject). He did get into IIT. He sent me to an english medium school. Guess what my 5 year daughter is learning in her school as an 'additional' language - Mandarin. Perhaps her daughter will learn -Hindi. We would have then come a full circle.
It is an iterative process in the sense that future generations will get more opportunities. The important thing is not to exclude options.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 08:31

^^^^ Sure, your dad might be one in ten-thousand. The rest 9999 would probably wont have such a good story to tell.

Mandarin will be learned, because China has it as a language that will give her opportunities in China. Hindi will not give you an edge in India

. Spot the difference.

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 08:35

lakshmikanth wrote:^^^^ Sure, your dad might be one in ten-thousand. The rest 9999 would probably wont have such a good story to tell.

Mandarin will be learned, because China has it as a language that will give her opportunities in China. Hindi will not give you an edge in India . Spot the difference.

The Chinese are learning English too and having been to China - let me assure you it won't give her any opportunities

No - there is a huge move in some western nations to learn asian languages. For their own purpose - presumably engagement.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 08:38

You must be kidding. In my company if you want to be in customer relations, you better know the language of the country your customer is in. Her Mandarin would be a trump card that can be used while engaging China

.

Can that be done with Hindi?

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 08:53

lakshmikanth wrote:You must be kidding. In my company if you want to be in customer relations, you better know the language of the country your customer is in. Her Mandarin would be a trump card that can be used while engaging China .

Can that be done with Hindi?

Depends on where you are based presumably. Yes if in Delhi, No if in Chennai. For China - if they do manage to learn English as they are trying hard to do - knowing mandarin will possibly become irrelevant at the macro level. Unless you are trying to engage at the really grass root level (then knowing a local language becomes as important in India).

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 08:58

arnab wrote:Depends on where you are based presumably. Yes if in Delhi, No if in Chennai. For China - if they do manage to learn English as they are trying hard to do - knowing mandarin will possibly become irrelevant at the macro level. Unless you are trying to engage at the really grass root level (then knowing a local language becomes as important in India).

You can go on fine in Delhi with English. Why do you need Hindi? There is no need for anyone abroad to learn Hindi or any local language.

You will always find some English interpreter for you at a cheap cost. Its the SOP of EJs, get white man to India, get translator, start conversions in earnest.

In China that interpreter is going to be costly (much more than it is in India). That creates demand for Mandarin in the West.

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 09:01

lakshmikanth wrote:In China that interpreter is going to be costly (much more than it is in India). That creates demand for Mandarin in the West.

That is because of the income differential between the two countries and not because the Chinese have a single uniform language. It is equally important for China to engage with the rest of the world - Why do you think they are desparately learning english? They want opportunities too - and not merely to be translators when the west wants to engage.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 09:06

Let me bring this back to the topic.

Learning English as an alternate to your mother tongue to be used internal to the country vs learning it to do business with foreigners :-- Completely different, no? Why make a leap of logic?

Germany and Japan are managing fine without knowing much English.

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 09:08

lakshmikanth wrote:Let me bring this back to the topic.

Learning English as an alternate to your mother tongue to be used internal to the country vs learning it to do business with foreigners :-- Completely different, no? Why make a leap of logic?

Knowing additional language offers mobility. Instead of learning 22 local languages if one can learn one foreign language which is also used locally - I consider that to be a superior outcome.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 09:15

arnab wrote: Knowing additional language offers mobility. Instead of learning 22 local languages if one can learn one foreign language which is also used locally - I consider that to be a superior outcome.

We are going around in circles

.

The big problem that needs to be resolved is to make it less alien, and easy to access, learn and internalize for every Indian, otherwise it is an additional barrier for the poor to jump across in their journey upward. Sanskrit or any other Indian language is less alien and easy to learn because it is fundamentally derived from Sanskrit and would thus have a lot of linguistic similarity.

If I meet an Indian and he is comfortable in Hindi, we immediately switch to that. Even if both of our mother-tongues are not the same. I hope it drives home the point.

EDIT: If our economy was not in the shape it was when the briturd exited from the country, and it had the time to catch up with the west, there would not be a need to know one foreign language that can be used locally. The foreigners would be learning our language to get business.

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 09:21

lakshmikanth wrote:If I meet an Indian and he is comfortable in Hindi, we immediately switch to that. Even if both of our mother-tongues are not the same. I hope it drives home the point.

Precisely - that is because you have learnt multiple languages. Not because you have participated in a state led effort to converge to a single language (the administrative, political difficulties with that have been noted. This would be even more so if one tried to resurrect a native language like Sanskrit which had stopped being the lingua franca for well over a 1000 years). If each of you had only known your mother tounges (assuming they were different), you wouldn't have much to talk about. So why this antipathy against english language hain jee?

EDIT: If our economy was not in the shape it was when the briturd exited from the country, and it had the time to catch up with the west, there would not be a need to know one foreign language that can be used locally. The foreigners would be learning our language to get business.

Let us not get into alternate histories. In that alternate world, I do not know if I would have needed a passport to visit your state (country)

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 09:25

arnab wrote:
lakshmikanth wrote:If I meet an Indian and he is comfortable in Hindi, we immediately switch to that. Even if both of our mother-tongues are not the same. I hope it drives home the point.
Precisely - that is because you have learnt multiple languages. Not because you have participated in a state led effort to converge to a single language (the administrative, political difficulties with that have been noted. This would be even more so if one tried to resurrect a native language like Sanskrit which had stopped being the lingua franca for well over a 1000 years). If each of you had only known your mother tounges (assuming they were different), you wouldn't have much to talk about. So why this antipathy against english language hain jee?

Err the onleee reason I knew Hindi phrom Malluland (where i went to school) was because of state led efforts onleeee. That helped me so much during my college and first job

.

The "anti-pathy" against Engleesh is because it carries a colonial baggage, and also because it is elitist, and also because it is difficult for an Indian to learn it without good guidance.

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 09:29

lakshmikanth wrote:
Err the onleee reason I knew Hindi phrom Malluland (where i went to school) was because of state led efforts onleeee. That helped me so much during my college and first job .

The "anti-pathy" against Engleesh is because it carries a colonial baggage, and also because it is elitist, and also because it is difficult for an Indian to learn it without good guidance.

Then what are you complaining about?

The state taught you an Indian language (1 of 22). You learnt English because it offered international and social mobility. At least the knowledge of english (while being elitist) is also aspirational. Anyone can learn it (the lady who worked at our house saved and sent her daughter to an english medium school. the daughter now works as a nurse in Dubai). What if in the alternate world my mobility was limited to my regional language or my birth? Neither of which is in my control.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 09:34

My complaint was due to people giving it divine status, without understanding the reasons behind it. It was treated as a gift given to Indians by the Gods sitting in the Great land of GreatBritain, without which we would never grow economically. The aim is to make people realize the reason for what it is, and the cost/price we paid for it. We paid 90 million odd people, fought and funded two wars, lost ungodly amounts of wealth in form of natural resources... and got English in return.

The problem with its elitism is that it cuts out a portion of the people (who read up English media) from the vernacular folks. This schism is a social problem that needs to be addressed. Were you even reading the posts above? Or was I not writing it in English?

Alternate histories were not being discussed, no?

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 09:46

lakshmikanth wrote:My complaint was due to people giving it divine status, without understanding the reasons behind it. It was treated as a gift given to Indians by the Gods sitting in the Great land of GreatBritain, without which we would never grow economically. The aim is to make people realize the reason for what it is, and the cost/price we paid for it. We paid 90 million odd people, fought and funded two wars, lost ungodly amounts of wealth in form of natural resources... and got English in return.

The problem with its elitism is that it cuts out a portion of the people (who read up English media) from the vernacular folks. This schism is a social problem that needs to be addressed. Were you even reading the posts above? Or was I not writing it in English?

Alternate histories were not being discussed, no?

I don't think anyone was saying it was a divine gift (we agreed that it was an unintended consequence). The solution to 'elitism' (presumably associated with the knowledge of english) would then be to try and make english easily available to everybody. Then the 'elitism' would disappear (but the mobility advantages would remain), rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater by saying that we all need to learn sanskrit instead.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 15 Nov 2012 09:55

I have just gone through the thread, trying to figure out which post to reply to and which not... but the thread is taking a comical turn, so I will stay out of it for now...

As it appears now, it's OK to learn English...we are all suitably patriotic if we learn and use it, but we should keep in mind that we were screwed by the Brits, and - probably as a matter of general principle - elitism is not good. Noted.

Personally, I look for guidance on certain matters to the RSS (which is by no means an elitist organisation), and its position on the English language is quite clear from its website.

http://www.rss.org/

Frankly, I think they are not sufficiently robust in their efforts to promote our own languages.

Meanwhile, it might be useful if participants occasionally go through the archives.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 15 Nov 2012 10:04

I asked this before and I ask again - what advantage are we going to get by sticking to "traditional knowledge"? This was proposed in OIT thread - IIRC by Arun_G - and I asked the same question there and never got an answer. The world has moved on and there is progress in every sphere of science. We know more about the universe/nature. While it is a good thing to not get deracinated, we should also be pushing the envelop and be at the forefront of thought. We need to learn Sanskrit by all means, but there is no point giving up English either. This course of action does not exclude political goals where the jewel in the crown expands in size to replace the crown itself.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 10:04

arnab wrote: I don't think anyone was saying it was a divine gift (we agreed that it was an unintended consequence). The solution to 'elitism' (presumably associated with the knowledge of english) would then be to try and make english easily available to everybody. Then the 'elitism' would disappear (but the mobility advantages would remain), rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater by saying that we all need to learn sanskrit instead.

Control of Economic growth of various groups (castes) of people was carefully calibrated by the Briturds. For ex: Brahmins in TN were the chosen English speaking group. It has a large impact to this day. Since there was an elite layer of people with economic differential over the others, English became a sought after commodity (unintended consequence).

What you are saying now is that Sanskrit == English, that is progress. You are claiming English > Sanskrit only because one can do business in English with the Anglo Saxon countries. I am saying it could have been that Sanskrit > English because its the mother language, and it would be easier to learn because of similarity hence lesser elitism. English provides no such benefits.

We may pay a bigger cost to eliminate English Elitism than Sanskrit Elitism. The only plus being we can do business with outsiders easily with English (that does not improve the lives of the non-elites too much in any case). Exports dont contribute economic growth, internal economy does.

I do agree however, that we should not "throw" out English. We should change it to make it easier on the not-so-elite bunch of folks to avail of better opportunities of upward social mobility.

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 10:06

JE Menon wrote:As it appears now, it's OK to learn English...we are all suitably patriotic if we learn and use it, but we should keep in mind that we were screwed by the Brits, and - probably as a matter of general principle - elitism is not good. Noted.

Note to myself - have to get back to work. Shall be away from the forum for a few weeks. Cannot procrastinate any more

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 10:14

JE Menon wrote:I have just gone through the thread, trying to figure out which post to reply to and which not... but the thread is taking a comical turn, so I will stay out of it for now...

As it appears now, it's OK to learn English...we are all suitably patriotic if we learn and use it, but we should keep in mind that we were screwed by the Brits, and - probably as a matter of general principle - elitism is not good. Noted.

Personally, I look for guidance on certain matters to the RSS (which is by no means an elitist organisation), and it's position on the English language is quite clear from its website.

http://www.rss.org/

Frankly, I think they are not sufficiently robust in their efforts to promote our own languages.

Meanwhile, it might be useful if participants occasionally go through the archives.

Although I keep wondering what was inconsistent ~~from~~ in my position from the beginning to the end of this tamasha (My English educated brain cannot see any inconsistency), I shall cease and desist

EDIT: Fixed usage. My English not so good

EDIT: Itch to reply does not die in me even though its too late here. I just went through the RSS website and had an epiphany

. RSS may not be elitist organization. The internet for sure is Elitist (not many in India have access to it). So it is natural that they would present it in the language of the Elites. I am glad that they are trying to have a large part of the content in Hindi, so that some of us can read it (or atleast try to

).

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 15 Nov 2012 10:15

>>>This course of action does not exclude political goals where the jewel in the crown expands in size to replace the crown itself.

Fantastic. Thank you for that ... Will be using as widely as possible ...in short "the jewel is the crown"

one letter change wonly.

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 10:22

lakshmikanth wrote: Control of Economic growth of various groups (castes) of people was carefully calibrated by the Briturds. For ex: Brahmins in TN were the chosen English speaking group. It has a large impact to this day. Since there was an elite layer of people with economic differential over the others, English became a sought after commodity (unintended consequence).

Yes - they were thrown out of their state (so much so that they are now asking for state based reservations as a minority) and had to take recourse to central government service

What you are saying now is that Sanskrit == English, that is progress. You are claiming English > Sanskrit only because one can do business in English with the Anglo Saxon countries. I am saying it could have been that Sanskrit > English because its the mother language, and it would be easier to learn because of similarity hence lesser elitism. English provides no such benefits.

We may pay a bigger cost to eliminate English Elitism than Sanskrit Elitism. The only plus being we can do business with outsiders easily with English (that does not improve the lives of the non-elites too much in any case). Exports dont contribute economic growth, internal economy does.

No I'm saying that english is alive and sanskrit has been dead for a 1000 odd years. The cost of resurrection and imposition of sanskrit in every sphere of life (spoken, educational, official) would be hugely costly and would not offer any advantages to the non-elites except the 'hope' that because it is the root of most vernacular languages, people may find it easier to adapt to it. It would involve huge logistical nightmare to find teachers, trainers, translators in numbers to carry out these changes (It would infact be a Mohd-bin Tughlaqian solution).

The 'pluses' of english goes beyond interaction with the west. It is the only language which can be adopted all encompassingly without the fear of language chauvanism that was so evident in the 1940s to 1960s.

I do agree however, that we should not "throw" out English. We should change it to make it easier on the not-so-elite bunch of folks to avail of better opportunities of upward social mobility.

Agreed

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Nov 2012 10:26

arnab wrote:My dad went to a bengali medium school (english was taught as a subject). He did get into IIT. He sent me to an english medium school. Guess what my 5 year daughter is learning in her school as an 'additional' language - Mandarin. Perhaps her daughter will learn -Hindi.

arnab wrote:there is a huge move in some western nations to learn asian languages. For their own purpose - presumably engagement.

arnab wrote:For China - if they do manage to learn English as they are trying hard to do - knowing mandarin will possibly become irrelevant at the macro level. Unless you are trying to engage at the really grass root level (then knowing a local language becomes as important in India).

There is so many ironies here at so many levels.

1) If China learns English, why would an Indian girl be learning Mandarin?

2) OK, it is because in the West people are learning Mandarin. So we do it too! If something manages to impress the West, we should follow.

3) I see a family moving from Bengali to English to Mandarin. I see British civilizational influence. I see Chinese civilizational influence. Where is the Indian civilizational influence in all this?

But then some Indians, like the flies, not anybody specific in mind, like to boast that they get to sit on the biggest, tastiest buffalo in the field and to nurture themselves from their hides. Basically parasite mentality. It is anathema for those in the Marxist Nehruvian mould to ever consider themselves as worthy of being buffaloes too. Our strength should lie in being the biggest swarms of flies being able to clean the hides of any buffalo, no matter how big. That is where our pride should be. We should be able to suck up to any big boss.

When people start learning languages for economic and religious reasons and to a lesser extent due to popular culture, than one knows that the latter's civilization is on the rise. So is anybody in the West learning Hindi or some Indian language for economic reasons? Do they need to learn something like that at all? After all we are most willing to accommodate each and everybody, because we know English and now Mandarin, should they have any desire to communicate with us.

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 10:31

RajeshA wrote:1) If China learns English, why would an Indian girl be learning Mandarin?

2) OK, it is because in the West people are learning Mandarin. So we do it too! If something manages to impress the West, we should follow.

3) I see a family moving from Bengali to English to Mandarin. I see British civilizational influence. I see Chinese civilizational influence. Where is the Indian civilizational influence in all this?

School policy sir jee (she goes to school in the bhesht and we did not put her in that school because they teach manadarin. They also teach french for that matter)

My daughter appears to be reasonably good with languages so speaks fairly good bangla, a smattering of hindi, english and claims she speaks mandarin (cannot be corroborated)

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Nov 2012 10:35

arnab wrote:School policy sir jee (she goes to school in the bhesht and we did not put her in that school because they teach manadarin. They also teach french for that matter) My daughter appears to be reasonably good with languages so speaks fairly good bangla, a smattering of hindi, english and claims she speaks mandarin (cannot be corroborated)

So how does the school policy of some school in the West become a factor in explaining what Indian language policy ought to be?

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 10:38

RajeshA wrote: So how does the school policy of some school in the West become a factor in explaining what Indian language policy ought to be?

It doesn't. I was just giving an anecdotal evidence of how desire to learn certain languages are correlated with economic rise of nations. People learnt english because they saw economic opportunities in the west. Some feel the same about manadarin (China) as the future. I was commenting that hindi might be the language to learn some-time further down the road.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 15 Nov 2012 10:41

^^^ If English becomes universal in India sometime down the road, there would be no need to learn Hindi sometime down the road. No? So it will not be correlated with economic rise of India sometime down the road, which is the reason kids are learning other languages according to you above (I dont even know why this is being discussed).

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 15 Nov 2012 10:45

lakshmikanth wrote:^^^ If English becomes universal in India sometime down the road, there would be no need to learn Hindi sometime down the road. No? So it will not be correlated with economic rise of India sometime down the road, which is the reason kids are learning other languages according to you above (I dont even know why this is being discussed).

Search me

Ok presumably the indianised version of english will become the language to learn though I don't think English will ever take over the Indian regional languages. Unlike in the west, most Indian children learn 3 languages (which IMO gives them a huge advantage).