Indian literacy and the renewed importance of vernaculars

For this entry I simply want to summarise and comment on an article by Samanth Subraiman for the New York Review of Books* earlier this month. It discusses the recent victory of Narendra Modi in the Indian elections and suggests that the country’s obsession with English may be weakening.

At independence in 1947, 1500 languages were spoken in India and a national language was needed to unite the new country. The first prime minister, Jwarharlal Nehru, had suggested Hindi, which was widely understood by both Hindus and Muslims in the north of the country. But many people in the south resisted Hindi because it is not related to most of the languages spoken there, such as Tamil and Kannada. The other choice was English, introduced by the British and spoken proficiently by a small but successful minority of people like Nehru himself, who was educated in the UK, and Gandhi, who had been a barrister. As well as linking the north and south, English offered a poor country access to advanced technology and information.

Over the last 60 years, there have been many attempts to promote Hindi, and also regional languages. But all this time English has continued as the language of the elite. It has been assumed that most people who are literate and economically successful know English. The country’s recent economic growth and its success in producing software engineers and running call centres have been closely connected to the abilities of the English-speaking elite.

According to Subraiman, the election of Modi suggests a change of direction. He is not from a wealthy background and had to work his way through university. Although he does speak English, he is much more comfortable in Hindi or his native Gujerati. Meanwhile India’s economic growth has helped to increase literacy. Only half the population could read and write in 1981. By 2001 this was up to 65% and now it is over 73%. This means that many more people in small towns and rural areas can read, and most of them prefer to do so in Hindi or in local languages. So there has been a huge growth in non-English newspapers. Their quality is getting better and they are writing about international issues and business and technology, not just local stories.

Subraiman is not saying that English is no longer important, but that to be successful in India you do not necessarily have to know English any more.

At first the article made me think of China. China’s economy has grown so fast and its population is so large that, like America, it can now maintain a strong economy even when there are economic problems in the rest of the world. And although millions of Chinese are learning English, I don’t think they need to know the language in order to become rich and successful. Could India be going in the same direction?

The article also made me wonder about other parts of Asia. I don’t think Malaysia or the Philippines are going to reject English in the near future. However, they may begin to think of it more as a foreign language and as a useful tool for international business, rather than as the main language of their own elites and the only path to success in their own countries.

*
http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/jun/09/india-newspapers-after-english/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=June%2010%202014&utm_content=June%2010%202014+CID_2e5778eea30b0b5cdd212d088a98bfda&utm_source=Email%20marketing%20software&utm_term=India%20After%20English