How Many Chin Languages Should Be Taught In

Home , Bawm language, Daai Chin, Daai language, Ethnic media, Falam District, Falam language

Abstract anguage-in-education policies have constituted an enduring concern under the successive political eras L 1 in Burma/Myanmar, with critical implications regarding cultural and linguistic diversity, access to education, as well as the emergence of a nation. While this issue has often been described too sim- plistically, the overall sidelining of ethnic minority languages in formal education under military regimes is nevertheless patent.

The national language-in-education policy has recently evolved, slowly at first, in the wake of the 2011 political transition towards democratization and decentralization (Salem-Gervais and Raynaud, 2020). In 2019–2020, 64 languages were taught in government schools throughout the country, a few periods every week, as subjects. While this shift is insufficient for proponents of Mother Tongue-Based Education (MTBE), the ongoing development of the Local Cur- riculum gives the possibility to States and Regions to progressively incorpo- rate some local content in the syllabus, including the languages, cultures and histories of the groups living in their respective territories, supposedly up to high school.

Based on an analytical framework developed in previous publications (notably Salem-Gervais and Raynaud, 2020) and series of interviews conducted in Photo: NICOLAS SALEM-GERVAIS AND SALAI VAN CUNG LIAN 2019 and 2020, this paper deals with the teaching of Chin languages in gov- How Many Chin Languages ernment schools, with a focus on Chin Should Be Taught in State itself. We discuss the rationale for including ethnic minority languages in Government Schools? formal schooling in the Chin context, provide a brief historical background Ongoing developments and structural challenges of the issue, and examine the latest of language-in-education policy in Chin State developments and prospects of language-in-education policy in Chin State, By Nicolas Salem-Gervais and Salai Van Cung Lian such as the project of promoting a limited number of “major” languages as KEYWORDS: schooling, language policy, Chin State, ethnic minority, “common languages.” decentralization, language standardization, local curriculum The challenges involved in producing a list of languages with official recognition, as opposed to dialectal variations

with a less formal status, constitute a cial life: maintenance of language and populated by Chin people). The primary central question in this paper. As noted culture diversity; performance of ethnic method of data collection used in that by linguist Peterson (2017), the classical minorities in the education system; and perspective is the semi-structured inter- language vs dialect issue is indeed par- fulfilment of the State’s “national recon- view, conducted by both authors succes- ticularly relevant in highly multilingual ciliation” objective. sively in May–June 2019 and April–June Chin State, where language politics, un- 2020, and including LCCs, Ministry of derpinned by a multitude of faith-based Until recently, little attention was given Education (MoE) and Ministry of Ethnic written cultures, often militates against to the ongoing shift of language-in-ed- Affairs (MoEA) representatives, Region- the idea of two regional varieties being ucation policy in government schools, al ministers, members of the Chin State considered two dialects of the same lan- attended by a total of nine million chil- parliament, political party leaders, local guage. Illustrating the fractal patterns dren (including five million from prima- teachers, headmasters and educators, often observed by language ideology ry school). The current policy, of which retired Chin State education experts, as scholars (Irvine and Gal, 2000), this the State governments as well as liter- well as UNICEF representatives. situation leads to what seems to consti- ature and culture committees (LCCs) tute two opposite threats: the prospect are critical actors, is largely based on We will first discuss different aspects of what could be called “ethno-linguistic the 2014–15 education law (Salem-Ger- of the rationale for including ethnic mi- balkanization,” on the one hand, and vais and Raynaud, 2020). This legal text nority languages in the schools of Chin the perspective of giving priority to cer- was until recently, at best, described as State, before moving on, in the next sec- tain languages over others, which would not going far enough, notably for not tion, to a brief historical background of entail multiple and significant tradeoffs prescribing mother tongue-based edu- the issue, ending with the description (in terms of maintaining language diver- cation (MTBE), a model which entails a of the ongoing policy shifts in Myanmar sity, improving access to education, and transition of the medium of instruction in general and Chin State in particular. promoting “national reconciliation”) on from the local “ethnic” language to- In the third section, we will describe the other. wards the national language throughout what seems to be two of the main chal- primary education, and is used by some lenges in the process of including Chin Introduction of the Ethnic Basic Education Providers languages in formal education, namely: With 135 officially recognized ethnic (EBEPs—and most emblematically the schools catering to children from mul- groups and an estimated 117 living lan- Mon National Education Committee). tiple ethnolinguistic backgrounds (a guages,2 Myanmar is a country of com- situation which is relatively common in plex ethnolinguistic diversity. Managing These language-in-education policy con- urban areas) and the difficulties often this diversity and the issue of ethnic versations are certainly relevant to Chin attached to the process of determin- minorities’ political representation has State, a region of Myanmar where the ing what constitutes a language, to be constituted a central challenge in the sheer ethno-linguistic diversity, even by taught in schools, or rather a dialect, process of building a nation-state, with Myanmar standards, creates acute chal- with a less formal status. Finally, we will critical implications in a chaotic con- lenges. Historically, the elusive prospect provide a few case-studies outlines, and temporary political history marked by of a common language has been a cen- briefly discuss the implications of priori- decades of multiple conflicts and suc- tral aspiration in the mobilization, most tizing a small number of Chin languages cessive military dictatorships. notably by cultural elites and various in formal education. political actors, of a common “Chin” Among these issues, the language-in-ed- identity, a term that finds its origins, ac- 1. Why include ethnic minority languages ucation policy, and more specifically the cording to Bradley (2019) in a “Burmese in the schools of Chin State? place attributed (or not) to ethnic mi- collective exonym for a cluster of Tibe- While the 20th century has largely nority languages in formal education, to-Burman speaking groups.”3 Mean- been characterized by the building of has constituted an enduring concern. while, the much-disputable (and dis- nation-states around single standard- The absence (or scarcity) of ethnic mi- puted) official nomenclature recognizes ized national languages, the 1990s nority languages in formal education not fewer than 53 Chin groups, and none and 2000s, parallel to an increasing has indeed regularly been pointed out of the alternative ethno-linguistic classi- consciousness of the eroding world by actors from multiple ethnic minori- fications appears consensual. biodiversity, have witnessed a growing ties as tangible evidence of a “Burmani- awareness of the diminishing cultural sation” process, by contrast to the feder- In this paper, through a lens that has and linguistic diversity (Grinevald and al grounds the country was supposedly been used to discuss language-in-edu- Costa, 2010). During these two de- built on. To this day, choices in terms cation policy throughout Myanmar (Sa- cades, most countries, including Myan- of language-in-education policy contin- lem-Gervais and Raynaud, 2020), we mar, have ratified international declara- ue to have deep implications in several thus aim at bringing the focus on Chin tions initiated by the United Nations or critical dimensions of the country’s so- State (as well as neighboring regions INGOs, aiming at protecting minorities’

122 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 123 RESEARCH ARTICLE | CHIN LANGUAGES cultural and linguistic rights.4 These relayed by ethnic cultural rights advo- least to the trauma of colonization, as far declarations, the latest of which is the cates in Myanmar (Mon, 2014). Other as Burmese nationalism is concerned. 2019 Bangkok statement on language researchers’ observations lead to some- The subsequent centrality and domina- and inclusion, encourage a departure what qualifying these statements, as the tion of Burmese identity and language from the largely monolingual education majority of the children’s language de- in the independent nation-state has cre- models used to build most nation-states velopment often happens outside of the ated the conditions for similar percep- around the world, including in South- schools (Murray, 2016). Nevertheless, a tions within minorities. Sayings along East Asia (Sercombe and Tupas, 2014). genuine shift towards a more inclusive the lines of “စာေပ်ာက္ရင္ လူမ် ိဳးေပ်ာက္မယ္” In this regard, during the last decade, language-in-education policy is gener- (“if the written language disappears, the heterogenous and limited, but nonethe- ally considered one of the key aspects ethnic identity does too”) support lan- less significant developments have oc- to the preservation of the linguistic and guage revitalization projects all around curred among Southeast Asian nations cultural diversity of a country (Asia-Pa- the country, and literature and culture (Kosonen, 2017), including Myanmar cific Multilingual Education Working committees often strive to avoid resort- (Salem-Gervais, 2018; Bradley, 2019). Group, 2013). ing to loan words in their oral and written productions, in order to promote The rationale for including ethnic mi- The ongoing language policy shift in what they perceive as a more authentic nority languages in education can be Myanmar is thus liable to have a signifi- version of their respective languages, described as three-fold: preserving lin- cant impact in this dimension, which is and thereby defending their respective guistic and cultural diversity, fostering certainly relevant to linguistically hetero- identities (Salem-Gervais and Raynaud, “national reconciliation” and improving geneous Chin State and its 478,801 in- 2020). access to education. We will now de- habitants (2014 census). Out of the 29 scribe these three dimensions and brief- Chin languages identified by Ethnologue These perceptions and efforts to protect ly examine their relevance to the specific (see later in this paper for a discussion the language and culture from external situations of Myanmar in general, and of linguistic classifications), only 5 are threats and influences are prevalent in of Chin State in particular. described as dispersed, or threatened, Chin State too. In 2017 and 2018 for but 20 of them count less than 20,000 instance, signpost saying “Lai people, Preserving linguistic and cultural speakers, including 8 that are spoken by speak Lai language”6 or “In order to free diversity less than 5,000. ourselves from being swallowed by oth- According to a 2016 estimate of the er ethnic groups, let’s no longer include Summer Institute of Linguistics’ Eth- Fostering “national reconciliation” the language of other people when we nologue database, there are 7,117 living The most direct and obvious link be- speak”7 could be seen in many shops languages spoken in the world today. tween inclusiveness in language-in-ed- of Thantlang and Hakha, exhortations Out of these, 1,249 are spoken in South- ucation policy and the political aim of primarily directed against the abun- East Asia and 117, including 111 “indige- “national reconciliation,” reaffirmed by dant use of Burmese loan words when nous,” in Myanmar.5 About 50% of these successive governments, is maybe the speaking in Lai. While the multiple and are somewhere in the lower half of Eth- inclusion and participation of the EBEPs sometimes conflicting implications of nologue’s Expanded Graded Internation- (those linked to ethnic armed organi- a society mobilized for the defense of al Disruption Scale: 41 are vigorous but zations first and foremost) into some numerous, often multi-layered and in- unstandardized, 16 are in trouble, and sort of national education framework, tertwined ethnic identities will be dis- 4 are dying (Lewis, Simons and Fennig, in connection with the peace process. cussed later in this paper, in Chin State 2016). Some of the languages which While this particular aspect has little just like in the rest of the country, the were documented in the 1960’s (such direct implications in Chin State, just reintroduction of local languages in for- as Megyaw and Samang) are no longer like in the rest of the country, the overall mal education is thus likely to constitute spoken today (Bradley, 2015, 2018). idea, backed by tangible evidence, that an important step towards diminishing the State is not a threat to ethnic minori- the perceptions of a systematic “Bur- The absence or scarcity of ethnic mi- ty identities is likely to induce long term manization” policy, thus contributing to nority languages in education has been political benefits. “national reconciliation.” described as “one of the most important direct causal factors in this (pro- Parallel to actual language diversity ero- Improving access to education cess of) disappearance” of languages sion, the theme of linguistic and cultural Finally, research around the world shows around the world today, amounting to a endangerment, and the necessity to re- that the inclusion of ethnic minority form of “linguistic and/or cultural geno- sist it, is central in Chin politics. These languages in schooling often improves cide” and “crime against humanity” views echo wider perceptions of cultural access to and performance in education (Skutnabb-Kangas and Dunbar, 2010). loss, which seem particularly prevalent of these populations. This is particular- These strong terms are sometimes in Myanmar, and can be traced back at ly true for MTBE models, which entail a

transition from the local language to the Access to education is certainly a con- sons that include their local language national language, throughout primary cern in Chin State which, according to skills, which sometimes prove to be a and secondary cycles, thereby alleviating the 2014 census, has the third lowest double-edged sword. While using local the “language-barrier” faced by children literacy rate of the country for the aged languages to “explain” the Burmese lan- whose mother tongue is not the nation- 15 and over: 79.4%, against 89.5% for guage curriculum is often useful for low- al language (see for instance, Dutcher, the whole country, but with a strong er levels of primary,13 in the absence of 2001; Malone and Paraide, 2011). gradient between northern townships— clear guidelines for bilingual education close to 90%—and southern townships and given the inertia of rote-learning Implementing such system throughout —close to or below 70% (as well as an teaching methods, anecdotal evidence Myanmar and its 47,005 government important gap, for older generations, suggests that in certain situations, over- schools (MoE, 2019) appears particular- between males and females).10 Accord- using or using inappropriately local lan- ly challenging for the foreseeable future ing to MoE’s figures, primary comple- guages in the classroom may also ham- (Salem-Gervais and Raynaud, 2020). tion rate was below 58% in 2017–2018 per the process of acquisition of certain Nonetheless, the specific difficulties (against 69% for the national level, and skills in the national language. Regard- faced by children whose mother tongue with the lowest figures in Paletwa, Min- less of this specific issue, in Chin State is not Burmese have been explicitly ac- dat, Tonzang and Thantlang townships). like elsewhere in the country, the acqui- knowledged by the ministry of educa- Chin State is also often at the bottom sition of literacy skills in the local lan- tion in its National Education Strategic of the ranking regarding success at the guages during early grades of schooling Plan (NESP) 2016–2021 which states matriculation exam, typically under 20% is likely to have significant educational that: “The ‘language barrier’ is also a (while Mon State, for instance, is often benefits. significant factor for children from na- close to or above 40%). In this regard, tionalities groups that contributes to according to a recent survey,11 the per- 2. Shifting language-in-education policy their dropping out of school.”8 formance of Chin State’s students is in Chin State particularly low in English and subjects Questions linked to literacy and lan- In practice, assessing the relative im- for which the textbooks are in English, guage diversity have constituted an portance of this particular issue com- findings that are deeply counter-intu- enduring and central issue for the di- pared to other obstacles to formal ed- itive to most outsider’s perceptions of verse groups inhabiting what is today ucation appears complex. The Burmese Chin State. Chin State and its surroundings. Scott language-based education system has (2009) suggested that during precolo- often been described as a central, if not While we are not aware of studies focus- nial times, nonliteracy may have been the main problem in the education of ing specifically on language and access part of an overall willingness to keep the ethnic minority children (Shalom, 2011; to education issues in Chin State, oth- lowland States at bay, for the inhabitants South and Lall, 2016; Ethnic National- er factors, such as poverty (Chin State of Zomia (a term itself directly rooted in ities Affairs Center , 2018). It must be is often described as by far the poorest the Mizo-Kuki-Chin context, since it is noted that the education system has region of the country, with 58% of its derived from “Zomi”—“Zo people,” un- had plenty of pressing issues during population considered poor)12, conflict derstood as “highlanders,” Van Schen- the last decades (e.g., with funding, cor- (notably in Paletwa township since the del, 2002). Similarly to traditions in ruption, and teaching method) and that beginning of the clashes between the other borderland regions of Myanmar, other factors contribute to early drop- Arakan army and the Tatmadaw in 2015) these issues are also rooted in folktales outs (including poverty, conflict, topog- and remoteness (many villages do not and origin myths of “lost magic letters” raphy and distance to schools, student/ possess middle or high schools, and ac- or “eaten leather book,” cursing the lo- teacher ratio, attraction of neighboring cess to school is thus often a challenge cal populations with babelian disunity, countries, rural/urban differentiated in the steep terrain of Chin State, par- by contrast with the Burmans, whose perceptions, attitudes and practices).9 ticularly during rainy season) are cer- language survived the “age of dark- Emphasizing language issues above tainly critical elements of explanation of ness,” because it was written on stone other educational problems, in reso- the relatively poor performance of Chin (Sakhong, 2003; Hu, 1998). nance with the global trend to encourage State in education. the use of ethnic minority languages in While local population did possess rich education, is habitually associated with Like in other regions of Myanmar, the oral traditions and records, the creation a political position inclining towards appointment of teachers from outside of written languages, starting in the federalism and/or ethno-nationalism, Chin State sometimes creates prob- mid-nineteenth century through con- and away from centralization—an il- lems, most notably with vacant posi- tact with the missionaries14 (see Fig. lustration of the fundamentally political tions left between postings. However, 1), is often explicitly presented by the nature of language-in-education policy it should also be noted that villagers do different Chin groups as the beginning issues. not always favor local teachers, for rea- of their respective histories.15 However,

124 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 125 RESEARCH ARTICLE | CHIN LANGUAGES - Creator of the written language Creator Stilson Lyman Rev. S.R. Tickell Captain Lewin T.H Captain Rev.F.W.Savidge R.A. Lorain Thomas Herbert Lwein DJC Mcnabb AGZ Newland Harry H Tilbe Dr. and Rev. Arthur E Carson Rev. Herbert Cope Dr. Rev. F.M Rundal Captain Pau Chin Hau Herbert Cope Dr. Rev. Herbert Cope Dr. Rev. U Aung Shwe and Mang Kin Herbert Cope, Dr. Rev. Francis E.W. U Aung Bawi and Lalsuana Paw Khaw Ming Ngai Tim Johnson and Rev. Rev. Andre Bareights and Michael Mg. Hre Hmung Rev.Fr. U Khine Sho and Ms. Halga So Hart Manno Ral Bawi and Prof.Kenneth Gregerson Dr. Rev. and LSDO- Language Social De Kyaw Kyaw Rev. velopment Organization Year 1891 1891 1910 1842 1852 1869 1908 1908 1874 1894 1900 1908 1902 1924 1929 1949 1930 1933 1954 1960 1976 1998 2014 1930- Dai Siyin Lemi Kcho Asho Mara Matu Lautu Lushai Khumi Zophei Zotung Zotuallai Language Hkhongso Hakha (Lai) Tedim (Zolai) Tedim Falam (Laizo) Falam Figure 1: Years of creation of orthographies for certain Chin languages17

until today, the elusive emergence of 20th century, the American Baptist mis- presents a serious difficulty which is a common language appears to be a sion judged that Burmese was a better increased by the fact that pioneer ed- central missing piece in the process of suited language to spread the Gospel. ucational work began, and the chief mobilizing the overarching “Chin” iden- Relying on their previous experience in educational center is consequently tity, itself largely constructed in relation- Thayetmyo (in today’s Magway Region), situated, among people whose dia- ship with Christianity on the one hand, as well as on already Christianized Kar- lect (khamhow) is not widely used.” and the Burmese polity on the other en teachers, they used Burmese, a lan- (Report on The Administration of (Sakhong, 2003, 2007). Unsurprisingly guage often unfamiliar to the locals, as Burma for the years of 1923–1924, p. and like elsewhere in Myanmar (Taylor, a medium of instruction in the mission 102) 2006; Salem-Gervais and Metro, 2012), schools that they progressively opened, the realm of education has played a starting in 1900 (Sakhong, 2003; Hu, In 1924, when the British government central role in these processes of identi- 1998). took over all the mission schools, ty-building; the shifts in language-in-ed- amidst diverging views regarding which ucation policies, throughout successive However, in 1922, in the wake of the language should be promoted in edu- political eras, have profoundly contrib- Anglo-Chin war of 1917–19, the mis- cation, Reverend Cope, the most influ- uted to shape Chin State’s contempo- sion school in Hakha was burned down ential administrator (who also played rary society. by angry locals. Instead of stirring re- a central role in the creation of scripts sentment by taking actions, the British for Laizo, Kamhau/Khamhow/Zolai and Chin languages in education under administration sought to appease the Lai) decided that these three languages colonial rule defeated chieftains by changing their would be used in the schools (Sakhong , In the second half of the nineteenth own education policy towards using a 2003). The priority was thus to produce century and most notably following the vernacular language as a medium of in- textbooks in these three languages (see British annexation of 1890, administra- struction. In the Chin context, however, Fig. 2) and spread the Gospel through tors and missionaries started to create selecting that language was a challenge, education, in the 45 schools that were orthographies for some of the vernac- as stated in an official report: operating in Chin State in 1923 (Re- ular languages of the Chin hills.16 How- port on The Administration of Burma ever, during the early decades of the “The multiplicity of Chin dialects for the years of 1923–1924). According

126 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 127 RESEARCH ARTICLE | CHIN LANGUAGES

to Hu (1998), all subjects were taught in these local languages, at least up to fourth standard, while English was the medium of instruction starting in middle schools, Burmese becoming merely a compulsory subject.

In the following years, this linguistic shift away from Burmese contributed to a rapid increase of the number of schools and children receiving formal education, as well as the spreading of the Christian faith, which was soon widely perceived as a marker of an ed- ucated person. However, a number of Chin cultural elites and political actors today look back at these developments with mixed feelings, as only a partial re- alization of the “magic of letters.” From the perspective of building a common Chin identity, the decision of using three languages in education is indeed often Figure 2: Covers of geography textbooks used by the American Baptist Mission in Laizo and Kamhau perceived as a major missed opportuni- “dialects.”18 ty to promote a common language for complexity of ethnic settings and local languages such as K’cho and Siyin may the Chins (Sakhong, 2003; Mang, 2018). balance of demography and power of- have been used, in addition to Lai, Laizo ten constituted enduring obstacles, es- and Zolai. Interviews also suggest that Language-in-education policy in Chin pecially for the smaller groups (Hlaing, textbooks in these languages were not State in independent Burma/Myanmar 2007; Mong, 2004). necessarily available. Inspired, to a large extent, by Burmese nationalist movements and the patriot- In the Chin context, however, Burmese The post-independence language-in-ed- ic education dispensed in the National was seldom used in education since ucation historical outlines regarding schools that existed since 1920, the ed- 1924, and Pau Chin, one of the Chin Burma/Myanmar are sometimes overly ucation system set-up after Burma ob- representatives in the 1947 Frontier simplistic, with blanket statement along tained independence was much more Areas Committee of Enquiry, request- the lines of “teaching ethnic minority centralized than what General Aung ed the lowering of Burmese language languages was forbidden after 1962,” San suggested in the years and months standards for the matriculation exam in against an idealization of the parliamen- preceding his assassination. In the con- Chin State, so the students could com- tary era language policy (Salem-Gervais, text of a 1947 Constitution attributing a pete with native speakers of Burmese 2018). However, and while further re- “special position” to Buddhism without (Report of the Frontier Areas Commit- search on this issue would be needed, mentioning languages other than Bur- tee of Enquiry, 1947, p. 80). According the data collected for this article does mese, ethnic languages could be taught to Hu (2006) as well as several inter- suggest a very significant step back in in public schools, up to Grade 3 (Htut, viewees who attended school during the terms of using Chin languages in formal 2000; Callahan, 2003). 1950s, the colonial policy of using some education under the BSPP. of the Chin languages as medium of in- In practice, the presence or absence of struction up to fourth standard (as well Following the military coup in 1962, particular languages in the government as teaching them as subjects) was con- while article 152 (B) of the 1974 consti- schools depended on the socio-linguis- tinued. According to a current member tution officially stated that “Burmese tic situations and readiness of the dif- of the Chin State parliament, Geogra- is the common language. Languages ferent groups: while some, including the phy was then called “Khuaram,” Science of the other national races may also be Mons, Shans and Karens managed to in- was “Thilri” and Mathematics were taught,” the teaching of ethnic minority troduce their languages in government “Kanaan.” Further research would be languages as subjects was largely limit- schooling, sometimes beyond Grade 3, needed to determine which languages ed to Grade 3 in government schools, the lack of trained teachers and teaching were actually used and in which schools and the nationalization of private edu- materials, the necessity to invent scripts (many Chin languages not possessing cation in 1965–66 virtually suppressed or standardize dialects, as well as the an orthography yet) but it seems that the alternatives to Burmese-medium

Figure 3: (Data collected at the Chin State office of the MoE; cartography by MIMU)

Figure 5: Textbooks used for the teaching of Zotung, Kaang and Mro languages in primary schools and/or summer school programs.

Figure 6: Covers of some of the story books in 27 languages produced by the LCCs, UNICEF and the MoEA.

128 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 129 RESEARCH ARTICLE | CHIN LANGUAGES formal education. In Chin State, a deep early 1990s the official national program widely criticized (and famously protest- shift towards Burmese as the medium from the Ministry of Education (MoE) ed against by student movements) for of instruction was initiated, Chin lan- indicated that schools could choose to different reasons, including not grant- guages being taught only as subjects, allocate up to two sessions of 30 min- ing enough “autonomy” in education up to Grade 3 (Hu, 2006; Vumson, utes a week to the subject of ethnic and failing to establish MTBE. Howev- 1986). In the 1970s and the 1980s the languages, a modest slot that seemed er, this law does constitute an import- readers produced by the Ministry of to have disappeared altogether from ant step in terms of making the States/ Education for the teaching of some of the updates of the official program at Regions-level political actors—the Re- the main ethnic minority languages in some point during the mid-1990s (Oo, gional governments and local literature government schools included at least 1999; Htut, 2000). In practice, despite and culture committees (LCCs), first a series of textbooks in Lai (Kio, 2014; this absence of State support, in Chin and foremost—in charge of decisions Hlaing, 2008), and anecdotal interviews State like in other regions of the coun- regarding which languages should be of individuals who attended primary try, some interviewees (as well as one taught in the schools. In addition, since schools during this period suggest that of the authors of this paper) anecdotally 2017, the teaching of ethnic minority Laizo (for Falam) and Zolai (for Tedim confirmed that they had received basic languages is included in the develop- and Tonzang) were also taught. trainings in literacy in a Chin language ment of what is called the Local Curricu- in a government school, as late as the lum, a portion of the syllabus developed During the decades following the mili- early 2000s, seemingly because of the in each of the State and Regions, which tary takeover, a number of organizations willingness of their teachers and head- also includes the teaching of local his- aiming at teaching Chin languages out- masters to provide such teaching, rely- tory, geography, customs and cultures, side of the schools were also created. ing on old textbooks. through Local Knowledge curricula. The Yangon Chin Literature and Culture Committee was founded in 1964, and The return of chin languages classes in As of 2020, while frustrations regarding in March 1979 an Executive Committee government schools the pace of implementation of this poli- of the Hakha Township People’s Coun- The decade following the dissolution cy on the ground and questions regard- cil formed the Lai Literature Commit- of the State Peace and Development ing its efficiency in practice remain com- tee, which started to create textbooks Council (SPDC), in 2011, has witnessed mon, official figures state that a total of for teaching this language in Hakha, significant developments regarding de- 64 languages are being taught through- Thantlang and Matupi townships, up to centralization in general and the intro- out Myanmar as subjects, and three to Grade 5 (Hu, 2006). In the second half duction of ethnic minority languages five periods a week, to 766,731 children, of the 1980s, multiple Christian organi- in government schools in particular. by 24,792 teachers, within school hours zations increased their cooperation and These developments are based on the in most cases. efforts to promote religious and cultur- 2008 Constitution (articles 22, 354 and al activities, including the teaching of 365), as well as, later on, the 2014–15 In Chin State, the teaching of some their respective languages, outside of Education law (Salem-Gervais and Ray- languages in government schools has the schools. For instance, after failed naud, 2020). While the beginnings of slowly started around the school year attempts to obtain State-approval for these classes, in the years following 2013–2014. In 2019–2020, out of the their Lai grammar, a number of Baptist their official announcement by the Min- 1,212 schools of Chin State, a total of associations from different townships istry of Education in 2012, were rather 47,354 children in Grades 1, 2 and 3 were founded the Chin Christian Literature frustrating (ethnic languages could be being taught one of the 22 languages Society in 1988 (reorganized into the taught only out of regular school hours approved by the Chin State government Chin Association for Christian Commu- by teachers receiving extremely modest (see Fig. 3), by a total of 2,499 teachers, nication in 1993). Since then, the activi- salaries), this policy has progressively including 911 Teaching Assistants19 (see ties of this organization include tertiary gained momentum, notably since the Fig. 4). Textbooks for most of these lan- level trainings in theology and the pro- 2017–2018 school year, with the ap- guages have been produced by their reduction of material for teaching the Lai pointment of a first batch of more than spective LCCs, often with the support of language outside of the schools, such 5,000 ethnic languages Teaching Assis- the MoE and Ministry of Ethnic Affairs as readers, lesson books for Sunday tants (TAs). The mission of these TAs (MoEA, see Fig. 5) and the Chin State schools, Lai-English dictionaries, as well is both to teach their respective ethnic government now has a yearly budget as hymn books (Hu, 1998). minority languages as subjects, and to (15 million kyats for each township for help children understand the lessons by 2020–21) to support the LCCs in their Meanwhile, with the arrival of the post- using these languages as classroom lan- activities (such as production of text- 1988 military juntas, ethnic minority guages, “explaining” the lessons through books and training of teachers). languages tended to be further side- code-switching, when necessary. lined out of government schools. In the The 2014–15 education law has been In accordance with the Basic Education

Curriculum Framework, the local cur- er non-state actors, such as the Bawinu and their written languages less devel- ricula, which are in the process of be- Foundation, also promote the use of lo- oped and entrenched. ing gradually developed, could include cal languages in education, and media the teaching of ethnic minority lan- in Chin languages are active, notably in In the following paragraphs, we will guages and cultures, up to high school the form of magazines, although lan- focus on two specific challenges that (Salem-Gervais and Raynaud, 2020). guage diversity does constitute one of materialize all around Myanmar, but UNICEF, in partnership with the MoEA, the main challenges they are facing.21 seem particularly daunting in certain has also produced story books, which Chin contexts: the specific situation of include 27 Chin languages (see Fig. 6), 3. Language-in-education policy urban areas, which tend to be ethnical- in order to promote early literacy and challenges in the Chin context ly and linguistically diverse, on the one the development of the children’s skills Despite all these developments and hand, and the difficulties and tradeoffs in both the mother tongue and the na- increasing momentum, challenges are involved in producing a list of standard- tional language. Other recent measures many in the process of introducing eth- ized languages (as opposed to dialec- aiming at including ethnic identities in nic minority languages in formal edu- tal variations) that should be taught in formal education include the possibility cation in Myanmar, and linguistically the schools, on the other. These chal- to register students with their ethnic ti- highly heterogeneous Chin State is cer- lenges thus correspond to answering tle (Salai or Mai instead of the Burmese tainly no exception. These imbricated a question that may seem simple, but Maung or Ma, for instance) in front of challenges include resources, and the which was already boggling colonial au- their names.20 cost attached to producing material and thorities: which particular language(s) hiring teachers for a large number of should be taught in which school? Outside of the MoE system, Lai lan- languages. Certain aspects of language guage is also used in theological higher development, such as producing the Urban areas and multiethnic settings education studies, increasingly taught vocabulary needed for a formal educa- The first challenge observed all around as a subject and used as “classroom tion context is also a concern for some the country is the situation of schools in language” in urban private schools, groups, notably in the southern part and urban settings and close to main roads while many groups continue to hold beyond the borders of Chin state, where where—as a general rule in a country of yearly summer school programs. Oth- ethnic groups tend to be more diverse striking diversity—populations tend to

(Ethnic) Teaching Assistant (TA) (Ethnic) Total ethnic languages Townships (hired in 2017–2018 or in Language Teacher (LT)22 teachers 2019–2020)

Thantlang 89 149 238

Paletwa 182 280 462

Matupi 221 34 255

Kanpalet 91 112 203

Mindat 52 162 214

Tonzang 75 113 188

Tedim 113 142 255

Hakha 56 155 211

Falam 32 441 473

Total 911 1,588 2,499

Figure 4: Number of (ethnic) Languages Teachers (LT) and (ethnic) Teaching Assistants (TA) for each township of Chin State. (Data collected at the MoE and MoEA offices of Chin State)

130 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 131 RESEARCH ARTICLE | CHIN LANGUAGES be more diverse in terms of ethno-lin- the hiring and training of teachers, the as schools offering five languages and guistic background. These populations printing of textbooks and the availability above, the local LCCs interviewed are also tend to have better skills in the of classrooms, which all come at a cost. sometimes considering reverting to national language and to be particu- Interviews in Chin State also suggest teaching outside of the school year, in larly eager to formally learn languages that in some cases, locally dominant order to simplify logistics for everyone. perceived as higher values in terms of groups may try to impose the learning Some of them suggested that using the life and economic opportunities, in- of their language to others, in specific school premises—a strong political cluding Burmese and English. Beyond towns or schools. symbol of recognition—but for sum- the question of their self-identification mer classes, could be an effective com- in “ethnic” terms, in many instances, This kind of challenge appears more promise.24 The Chin State Government these populations also possess a lesser common in the more multilingual and Hluttaw (Parliament), as well as the command of their (supposed) moth- towns of southern Chin State, such as Chin State MoEA, also seem wary of sit- er-tongue(s), the language(s) attached Kanpalet, Paletwa and Mindat, where up uations where many languages are be- to a particular “ethnic” identity. to three or four languages are taught in ing taught (see next sections); over the certain schools (No. 1 Basic Education last few years, these institutions have These types of situations, where stu- High School in Paletwa, for instance, been trying to push toward a simpler dents from diverse ethno-linguistic offers Khumi, Dai and Rakhine languag- framework, such as a single language backgrounds are attending the same es). In reality, however, the more com- per township, or at least a single lan- school, create challenges when devel- plex situations are to be found outside guage per school.25 oping a language-in-education policy, of Chin State, in neighboring towns and the magnitude of these challenges such as Tamu and Kalaymyo (Sagaing Challenges and tradeoffs of language is proportional to the ambitions of the Region) or Gangaw (Magway Region), standardization in Myanmar policy. Understandably, making these which gather highly diverse popula- The second challenge, that was dubbed languages available as subjects, a few tions, often originating from Chin State. “the minority language standardization periods every week, is logistically less conundrum,” in earlier publications complex than using them as media of In neighboring Sagaing Region, a total (Salem-Gervais and Raynaud, 2019, instruction, following an MTBE model. of 21 languages, so far, are taught or in 2020), corresponds to the philosophical This second prospect, which would en- the process of being included as sub- contradictions underpinning the stan- tail separating, at least to some extent, jects in government schools, including dardization of ethnic minority languag- children according to discrete ethnic Chin, Naga, and Shan languages. In es, notably in the process of introducing identities within urban primary schools, townships such as Tamu and Kalaymyo, them in formal education (as opposed would have considerable repercussions where populations from different parts to less formal “community” teach- in terms of resources, but also debat- of Chin State have settled, respective- ings). This prospect, especially in the able political implications, in already ly eight (Shan, Thado, Falam, Hakha, more ambitious perspective of MTBE, fragmented societies. Tedim, Lushai, Kante and Zo) and six indeed strongly suggests using written (Lushai, Tedim, Falam, Hakha, Zoton, and standardized languages, in order One of the specificities of the Chin con- Hualngo) languages are already being to produce curricula and train teachers. text, in that regard, is multilingualism. If taught, and other LCCs are in the pro- This endeavor of transforming what in the mastering of Burmese seems to be cess of getting ready. Situations in which Myanmar is frequently a variety of dia- well-correlated to a rural/urban gradient children from up to five to six different lects and scripts into common, written (urban population being, as a general ethno-linguistic backgrounds are pres- and somewhat standardized languag- rule, more proficient in the national lan- ent in a single school are relatively com- es, each attached to single ethnonyms, guage), moving towards urban centers mon, not only in the towns themselves, also corresponds to the nation-building does not necessarily entail a process of but often also in surrounding villages.23 agendas of a multitude of actors who language loss throughout generations, wish to defend, mobilize and strengthen and mastering four or more languages Offering classes in several ethnic lan- a particular ethnic identity. is common among Chins. guages in a single school is often manageable, but usually entail compromis- However, while the official list of 135 Regardless, the unfolding language-in es—which can negatively impact the ethnic groups remains contentious, -education policy, despite being much number of children attending—such producing a list of discrete languages less ambitious than an MTBE model, as lessons out of school hours in order attached to their respective ethnonyms already has logistical implications for to deal with classroom availability, or is, to a significant extent, an arbitrary schools located in certain multilingual aggregating students of different levels exercise, directed by considerations that urban centers. Being able to offer all the because of the shortage of teachers. are often more political than linguistic. relevant languages, as subjects, requires In particularly complicated cases, such Agendas of the actors involved tend

132 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 133 RESEARCH ARTICLE | CHIN LANGUAGES

Figure 7: Focus on Chin State of Ethnologue's language mapping

to conflict, in a pattern that was de- ty” within what has been described as a tions) starting with an ethnonym and scribed through the image of “Russian “Burmanization” project. finishing in “-ization” (such as Sgawiz- dolls” (Salem-Gervais and Raynaud, ation, Jinghpawization, Shanization…) 2019, 2020), but may also be depicted A variety of similar actors, associated seems to be appearing or strengthen- through the mathematical analogy of a with different components of the said ing, denouncing cultural and linguis- fractal: “a shape made of parts similar perceived groups, do not fail to notice tic situations, projects or aspirations to the whole in some way” (Mandelbrot, these similarities and inherent contra- perceived as hegemonic. In a number 1982), which has been used to describe dictions. Appealing to their own “ethnic of situations, the aim of helping pu- certain aspects of Kachin societies rights” (which are now inscribed in the pils understand their teachers better (Sadan, 2013), as well as phenomena law), they often seek to consolidate their indeed seems to take a backseat to the observed by language ideology special- own ethnolinguistic identity by affirm- nation-building objectives of the actors ists, describing “fractal recursivity” in ing their distinctiveness, emphasizing involved (Salem-Gervais and Raynaud, various cultural contexts (Irvine and cultural and linguistic differences from 2019, 2020). Gal, 2000). the group that they perceive as trying to “swallow” them (Salem-Gervais and In other words, this seemingly unavoid- In a variety of situations in Myanmar, ac- Raynaud, 2019, 2020). able “discretization” process—going tors seeking to represent and mobilize from a situation where a virtually un- a particular identity (such as literature Standardizing ethnic minority languag- countable number of variations of a and culture committees, religious insti- es in order to introduce them into the large number of languages are spo- tutions, armed groups, political parties, schools is thus liable to amount to sup- ken in the homes of primary school ethnic media) wish to promote linguis- pressing diversity, in the very name of pupils across Myanmar to a situation tic and political “unity” (စည္းလုံးညီၫြတ္မႈ) diversity. This underlying “Faustian bar- where a limited number of standard- as a remedy to the “division/difference/ gain” (Lane, Costa and Korne, 2018) is ized languages are taught in govern- heterogeneity” (ကြဲျပားျခားနားမႈ) within not conducive to compromises, espe- ment schools—is much easier said what they perceive as their group. How- cially in a point and time of Myanmar’s than done. This process, which seems ever, these discourses on “unity” be- political history where a multitude of particularly relevant in the case of Chin tween “brothers and sisters” often have actors are mobilized to defend their par- State, is also likely to entail significant a lot in common, both in terms of phi- ticular “ethnic rights.” tradeoffs in the three dimensions of the losophy, narrative and vocabulary, with rationale for introducing ethnic minority the propaganda of the former military Echoing the accusations of “Burmaniza- languages in formal education (cultural government, and its own cult of “uni- tion,” words (or corresponding percep- diversity preservation, reduction of the

How many Chin languages? In contrast with the relative fluidity of identity and language practices in the mountainous borderlands of what progressively became British Burma, through colonial census categories and the development of written languages by missionaries, language has been widely perceived as the critical marker of a “race” (a concept that evolved into “ethnicity”) in Burma/Myanmar (Mc- Cormick, 2016, 2019; McAuliffe, 2017). Bennison, the author of the 1931 census report, striving to approach the “true racial classification” of the “indigenous races of Burma,” identifies 44 Kuki-Chin languages, although he does state that this classification “is a matter of some difficulty,” which would require further study, and that “there does not appear to be any unanimity of opinion” (Benni- son, 1931, pp. 246–184).

And indeed, beyond the lack of research at that time, the classic quip “a language is a dialect with an army and navy” is a good reminder of the arbi- Figure 9: Covers of the textbooks created by the Matu (Chin), Matu, and Matupi (Chin) literature and trariness of the distinction between lan- culture committees guage and dialect. Establishing a definite and official list of languages, especially among Kuki-Chin languages, a branch described for Myanmar in general, in for a linguistically highly heterogeneous of the Tibeto-Burman languages spo- the case of Chin languages: mountainous region such as the one ken in what is today western Myanmar, The Kuki-Chin group includes doz- inhabited by Chin people, is always, to northeastern India and western Ban- ens of named varieties for what may some extent, an arbitrary endeavor, un- gladesh (see Fig. 7 and 8). These clas- number as many as fifty indepen- derpinned by political considerations, at sifications propose slightly different dent languages, although the usual least as much as linguistic ones. While overarching categories from one an- issues regarding the language vs. a religion-based written culture appears other (such as “Northern,” “Southern,” dialect are very much relevant in the to be a critical feature of languages in the “Central,” “Maraic”…). Interestingly, the present context. For instance, there Chin context, trying to compile a double speakers of some languages, such as is a high degree of mutual intelligi- entry table, associating ethnonyms with Anu-Hkongso, self-identify as “Chin,” bility between Hakha Lai, spoken in the creator of their respective orthogra- while their language seem rather related Hakha, and Laizo (or Zahao) spoken phies and their year of creation (such to a different, Mruic branch (Peterson, in Falam; nevertheless, language as Fig. 1), is often a tricky exercise, as 2017). Inversely, some Zolai speakers, politics militate against recognizing different components of the said group whose language is generally classi- these as mere dialects of a single may refer to different written traditions, fied as part of the Northern Kuki-Chin language. (p. 190) corresponding to different dialects and/ branch, often refuse to be identified as or different denominations. “Chins” in political life, arguing that Myanmar’s official nomenclature, which “Zo” is in fact the authentic name for attributes a list of ethnonyms to each of Linguists, such as VanBik (2009), “Chin” (Vumson, 1986; Lehman, 1963). the eight overarching ethnic categories DeLancey (2015) and Peterson (2017) (corresponding to the seven states’ have nevertheless offered useful classi- Peterson (2017) explicitly states the par- names + Bamar) has 53 categories for fications, to make sense of the diversity ticular relevance of the issues we have Chin groups alone (out of a total of 135).

134 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 135 RESEARCH ARTICLE | CHIN LANGUAGES

This classification is widely described as for other, less structured inaccurate and problematic, and ahead groups, which are often of the 2014 census, a Chin National Ac- grappling with fault lines tion Committee on Census has produced and competing claims a list of what they regard as its mistakes over what should consti- and incoherencies: tute their “official” ethnic identity. These fault lines • Some of these ethnonyms have may involve the mobili- never been considered belonging zation of endonyms and to “Chin” (Naga, Thanghkul, Malin, exonyms, be linked to Anun, Lhinbu, Meithei) variations in the languag- • Some do not seem to have ever es/dialects (depending on been understood as ethnonyms who is making the claim), (Saline, Mi-er, Laymyo) to different denomi- • Many are spelled, either in Bur- nations and churches, mese, in English, or both, in a way which may have different that is different from common us- written traditions, or to age (Khami/Khumi, Khawno/Khu- political affiliations and ano, Khaungso/Hkongso, Gunte/ various networks of in- Gangte, Zo-pe/Zophei, Tiddim/ fluence of personalities Tedim…) trying to mobilize a par- • At least one name corresponds to ticular ethnic identity. what is today regarded as two sep- arate groups (Dai (yinthu) for Dai/ While a discussion of the Daai and Daa Yinthu) very concept of State rec- • The overarching ethnonym “Chin” ognition for ethnic iden- is itself a category, with a code, just tities and languages is like other categories beyond the scope of this Figure 8: Chin State language map elaborated by the Language and • In some cases, two categories cor- paper, the number of Chin Social Development Organization (LSDO).28 respond to what the committee per- languages to be taught in ceive as a single group (Lushai and the government schools is thus depen- tween 2013 and 2016. This list, however, Lushei for Lashai, Khaungsai and dent on the settling of these debates, is likely to evolve. Other groups (such Thado for ThadouKuki…) within ethnic communities. Linguists, as Lautu, Asang Hkongso and Kaang) • And finally, some well-identified looking primarily at linguistic criteria, are in the process of seeking the intro- groups are totally absent from this have produced different figures of the duction of their languages in govern- list (Ng’gha, Hlawn Ceu, Sometu, number of Kuki-Chin languages within ment schools and relatively well-identi- Larktu, Laisaw, Laitu, Mayin, Lung- and beyond Chin State (such as 65 for fied groups, such as Zyphe, are not yet paw, Minkya, Bawm). Bareigts (1981), 23 for VanBik (2009), teaching their languages within formal and 54 for the Ethnologue website). Oth- education. In addition, the differences Despite this classification being indeed er typologies include the one presented between some of the already recognized problematic, the Union Minister of La- by Sakhong (2009), with six overarching 22 languages appear much more politi- bor, Immigration and Population has re- categories (Asho, Cho, Khuami, Laimi, cal than linguistic (see for instance the affirmed, in 2019, that the government Mizo and Zomi) and 63 sub-categories. case of the different Matu languages in had no plan to change this nomencla- In 2014, the Chin National Action Com- the next section) which could set a prec- ture.26 In the post-SPDC political con- mittee on Census suggested a typology edent for further factionalism. As op- text, the process of producing a list of with six similar overarching ethnic cat- posed to Kayah, Kachin, Mon and Karen State-approved Chin ethnic identities egories of Chins (Laimi, Zomi, Khumi, States, where UNICEF has supported (each conceived as corresponding to a Asho, K’cho, and “being discussed,” the development of primary school text- single language and a single written tra- ေဆြးေႏြးဆဲ) for a total of 51 sub-catego- books in a total of 25 languages (in the dition) is indeed likely to be contentious. ries.27 frame of the Local Curriculum), the UN While some of the groups have relatively agency is not yet involved in such a proj- well-established ethnic identities, corre- As of 2019–2020, 22 languages are be- ect in Chin State, precisely because of sponding to entrenched written tradi- ing taught in the government schools the difficulties involved in selecting lan- tion and fairly standardized languages, of Chin State, after being approved at guages.29 these attributes may be more debatable township, State and Union levels, be-

Daai, Matu, Lautu, Zophei and Paletwa parties and contacts in the local admin- is needed to make sense of that diver- township: a few case-studies outlines istration. Meanwhile, some of the actors sity, there seems to be, for instance, not Different groups present very different associated to Lai (Hakha) language, are fewer than six to eight Khumi LCCs. The situations in the process of agreeing also advocating for the continuation of term “Hkongso,” too, is used by differ- on a standard language corresponding the promotion of this language in Matu- ent groups. The Anu and Hkongso, who to an ethnic identity. The term “Daai” pi township, with more or less success speak similar languages, tried to unite (Dai), for instance, refers to populations in convincing the different local LCCs.32 into a single LCC with a common liter- designated by multiple ethnonyms that ary project, in 2004. However, the small have been shifting over time, speak- Other groups, whose distinct written differences between these two languag- ing multiple dialects (seven according language is still young, such as the Lau- es/dialects proved to be a challenge, to Kheng, 2017), with several written tu (1960s) and Zophei (1997), are in dif- and the organization split again in two traditions, and scattered over the four ferent positions regarding the teaching “Anu” and “Hkongso” LCCs, around southern townships of Chin State. De- of their languages in schools. The dif- 2007. Meanwhile, another group, pre- spite these multiple challenges, these ferent Lautu groups agreed in 2015 to a viously known as “Kasang,” speaking a populations seem to be having success- common literary standard, and they are different language (which seems related es in the process of structuring a com- reportedly ready to teach soon, unlike to Khumi) also claim to be “Hkongso”; mon linguistic project. Further research the Zophei, who may favor the teaching this group is currently known as “Asang would be needed to understand this of Lai in formal education (as opposed (Hkongso).”35 process in-depth, but regular confer- to religious context). These groups also ences were held in the different town- often face internal divergences, which Towards (a) common language(s) for ships, after the foundation of the Daai seem only superficial so far, on issues Chin State? Literature and culture committee in 2008, such as the spelling of their ethnonym, As described earlier in this paper, the leading to the production of textbooks, with some actors advocating for an or- elusive emergence of a common lan- and the introduction of Daai in gov- thography corresponding to the sound guage for the Chins has often been ernment schools of the four southern in their own language (Lutuv instead of perceived as an unfulfilled promise of townships in 2014–2015.30 Other cases Lautu, Zyphe instead of Zophei). the “magic of letters,” and the central of agreement over a common project missing piece in the process of mobi- seem to include the Mara, despite the Diverging views seem numerous in lizing and strengthening a common existence of several, not always mutually the southern townships of Chin State, identity. Within Chin’s highly multilin- intelligible, dialects.31 such as Paletwa, which present a diver- gual context, some of the northern lan- sity of groups with multiple endonyms guages are used beyond the population Compromises have been harder to reach and exonyms, and various understand- of their native speakers (such as Lai, in the case of Matu, which used to be de- ings of what constitutes the language which is understood not only in Hakha scribed as a single language, for which (ဘာသာစကား) of an ethnic group (လူမ် ိဳး, and Thantalang townships, but also to an orthography was created in 1954. or Miphun in Lai), as opposed to a dialect some extent in Matupi) and can serve as The Matu LCC, founded in 1963, split in (ေဒသိယဘာသာစကား၊ ေဒသႏၲရဘာသာစကား), lingua franca in certain situations. How- 2003, over a disagreement regarding the associated to a “sub-group” or a “clan” ever, promoting a single Chin common replacement of “y” and “o” by “ue” and (မ် ိဳးႏြယ္စု, or phun in Lai). While ten language today is more than likely to be “oe.” To this day, actors speaking the languages (including Rakhine) are be- contentious, and in practice, a meeting same language (also known as Doem) ing taught, so far, in the government gathering representatives of different and inhabiting the same regions are di- schools of Paletwa (see Fig. 3), inter- parts of Chin State today generally takes vided between the Matu LCC, which re- views suggest that there are significantly place in Burmese. fused the orthography change, and the more LCCs in this township (estimates Matu (Chin) LCC, using the new script. range between 12 and 22), which have In other contexts around the world, one Later on, in 2013, a Matupi LCC was also been appearing, merging, splitting and possible answer to the political prob- created, for the promotion of a closely shifting their names during the last de- lems, which often come with the choice related dialect (known as Ngala) most- cades.33 and often seem to be working of a particular “prestige” language/ ly spoken in the town of Matupi itself. towards teaching their respective lan- dialect/script over the others (Trudell The three committees have managed to guages in government schools. and Young, 2016), is to mobilize a com- produce their respective textbooks (see mittee of experts to devise a common Fig. 9) and introduce their respective Paletwa has jokingly been nicknamed language, combining features of the dif- languages in government schools (see “Literatures City” (စာေပမ်ားရဲ႕ၿမိဳ႕ေတာ္) ferent languages involved in the project. Fig. 3). They strive to mobilize resources by some locals,34 and mapping the Similar to other endeavors among the and influence, through their respective languages of this region is certainly a Palaung and Naga, the All Chin Society networks, including churches, political complex endeavor. While further study has been working towards such Chin

“Esperanto” (called “Chin language”) regarding the overall political accept- First, this process could arguably back- but, like elsewhere, this enterprise ap- ability of two levels of recognition for fire on language and culture preserva- pears extremely challenging in practice. Chin languages, as well as the feasibility tion, by transforming the “main” lan- of a policy entailing the teaching of four guages into the most direct threats to In 2019, the Chin State Government languages within the course of school- the survival of the “smaller” languag- and Hluttaw, reportedly responding to ing (1. local, 2. “major/common five” 3. es. Second, in terms of accessibility of Union government calls to try to reduce Burmese and 4. English). education, this project is very different the number of languages to be taught in from the prospect of using the mother the schools, started to discuss the prior- Conclusion tongues as “bridge languages,” and the itization of five (sometimes referred to The (re)introduction of ethnic minority “common languages” might even be as “major,” အဓိက, or “common” ဘုံသုံး) languages in government schools (both perceived as additional burdens, as far languages: Zolai (for Tedim and Ton- as subjects and “classroom languag- as non-native speakers are concerned. zang), Laizo (for Falam), Lai (for Hakha es”), which has gained momentum in And third, from a political, “national and Thantlang), Khumi (for Paletwa), Myanmar over the last few years, has reconciliation” standpoint, this project and Kcho (for Mindat and Kanpalet).36 also made significant progress in Chin could contribute to shift the perceptions The exact implications of this prioriti- State since the 2013–2014 school year. regarding a political will of assimilation zation are not clear: among our inter- Despite not going as far as the mother (the Lai term “a kan dolh” is often used viewees in the Hluttaw, some went as tongue-based education demanded by in the Chin context), from the Myanmar far as stating that only the teaching of some political and educational actors, state (i.e. “Burmanization”) to the dom- these five languages will receive direct this policy seems more manageable for inant Chin groups. support from the Chin State and Union the foreseeable future, and is likely to governments, while others said that the bring some benefits in different dimen- Just like Lai and other Chin languages project was indeed underpinned by the sions of Chin State’s social life, such as and identities are frequently perceived idea that a small number of common preservation of cultural and linguistic as threatened by the domination of Bur- languages would benefit Chin State, but diversity, access to education, and “na- mese culture in the national frame, ac- that other languages could nevertheless tional reconciliation” within the Myan- tors belonging to smaller Chin groups continue to be taught in school, with mar nation-state. often fear the additional threat of being some kind of support. “swallowed” by bigger or more influen- Chin State and the neighboring territo- tial groups, that they perceive as trying Some of the stakeholders were appar- ries inhabited by Chin populations, how- to impose their domination over the ently ready for certain compromises ever, constitute a linguistically highly different townships. Elites associated during the discussions of November heterogeneous region, and the process with the dominant groups may dismiss 2019 at the Chin State Hluttaw, however, of composing a list of languages with the resistance of smaller groups as a number of complaints have also been official recognition, to be taught in the “primordialist” and “localist” (ေဒသစြဲ, submitted to the Chin State Govern- schools, is particularly complex. Cur- or phuntanh in Lai) attitudes – an argu- ment by the representatives of several rently, 22 languages are being taught, ment that could easily be turned against LLCs in the following months. They ar- but this list does not seem exhaustive them in conversations regarding langue that this prospect is not in line with and it is likely to evolve as multiple eth- guage policy at the national level. On the Ethnic Rights Protection Law, that pri- no-linguistic projects obtain recogni- the other hand, actors claiming to rep- mary school students should learn their tion, split or merge. resent less influential and structured mother-tongue, that in some cases the groups appeal to the protection of their “major/common” languages are total- Meanwhile, the project of selecting a own “ethnic rights”(တိုင္းရင္းသားအခြင့္အေ ly unfamiliar to the students and that handful of languages (five as it stands ရး), which are now inscribed in the law, the whole project is a denial of the ex- at the time of writing this paper) to be but may also provide ground for unre- istence of 53 Chin groups, which is likely promoted as common Chin languag- strained factionalism. to cause tensions between them. Some es through education raises concerns. of the LCC explicitly state that they will While the desire to spare public re- The particularly complex case of Chin refuse to teach these five languages. sources and avoid what could become State thus constitutes an additional il- Others suggested that these languag- a process of “ethno-linguistic balkaniza- lustration of the intrinsically political na- es could indeed be taught as common tion” are certainly understandable, the ture of language-in-education policies, languages, but only starting in middle prioritization of these five supposedly of the fractal patterns often observed schools, while preserving more diversi- “major” languages also entails deep in language ideology (Irvine and Gal, ty at primary level. The latter prospect, tradeoffs in the three dimensions of the 2000), and of the tradeoffs involved in which may be a step towards construc- very rationale for introducing ethnic mi- the selection of languages to be used tive compromises, still raises questions nority languages in education. in formal education, as opposed to

136 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 137 RESEARCH ARTICLE | CHIN LANGUAGES dialects, especially when their written 4. Such as the United Nations Declaration on 17. This information is incomplete and indicative forms are involved. Nevertheless, the the Rights of Persons Belonging to National only. Multiple groups linked to a single eth- last few years have witnessed significant or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities nonym may have different conceptions and and positive developments, and while (1992) or the Universal Declaration of Linguis- references regarding what constitutes their challenges are many, one can hope that tic Rights (1996). respective written traditions, which may have through the policy of gradually introduc- 5. Latest estimates by Ethnologue give a slightly been elaborated in successive steps. ing locally produced content in formal higher figure, with 114 “indigenous” languag- 18. The authors wish to thank Van Cung Lian education, the post-junta ethnic identity es. (UK) for sharing these illustrations. renegotiation process will tend towards 6. “Laimi, Laiholh in Holh.” 19. Appeared in 2017–2018, the “ethnic” Teaching compromises and consensus, in Chin 7. “Miphun dang nih an kan dolhnak in kan ih- Assistant positions, with a salary of 4,800 kyat State like in other regions of the Union lihphuah khawh naklai kan holh tikah miphun per day, is a comparatively better position than of Myanmar. dang holh telh ti hlah usih.” the Language Teacher (LT). See Salem-Gervais –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 8. Ministry of Education (2016), National Educa- and Raynaud, 2020. tion Strategic Plan 2016–2021, p. 48. 20. Students can use ethnic titles but adults must ABOUT THE AUTHORS 9. Ministry of Education (DERPT), UNICEF, use Burmese titles. (2020, May 28). Mon Salai Van Cung Lian is a researcher based in UNESCO. (2018). Myanmar report on out- News Agency.

Hakha, Chin State, Myanmar. He works as Principal of-school children initiative; မိခင္ဘာသာစကား 21. Bik, R. (2017, October 24). The Chin media is for Victoria Academy (a community school), သင္ၾကားေရး ေမွ်ာ္လင့္ခ်က္ (2019, December 30). The in a poor state. Frontier Myanmar. as Strategic Partnership Advisor for Chinbridge Myanmar Times. 22. Language Teachers (LT) positions entail only Institute (Center for Research and Social Studies) 10. The 2014 Myanmar Population and Housing the teaching of ethnic minority languages, a and as a Programme Associate of The Hills Census, Chin state, Falam district, Tedim Town- few periods every week, and for a much low- Education Foundation. Van has been working with ship Report. (2017, October). Department of er salary (30,000 kyats/month) than the TA. Urbanize as a Fellow since March 2019. Population, Ministry of Labour, Immigration These LT positions seem to be in the process Email: [email protected] and Population. of slowly disappearing, as more TAs are being 11. Conducted by Chinbridge Institute in January hired (Salem-Gervais and Raynaud, 2020). Nicolas Salem-Gervais is a Maître de conférence 2020 for Chin Education Initiative. 23. Interviews with local LCCs and local offices of at the Burmese language section, Institut National 12. Poverty report - Myanmar living conditions the MoE and MoEA, 2019, 2020. des Langue et Civilisations Orientales (INALCO) survey 2017. (2019, June). Myanmar Central 24. Interviews with local LCCs and local offices of in Paris, and is affiliated to Centre Asie du Sud-Est Statistics Organization, UNDP and the World the MoE and MoEA, 2019, 2020. (CASE). Since 2007, his research has been dealing Bank. 25. Interviews with Ministry of Ethnic Affairs with various aspects of education and nation- 13. See for instance Paing, T. H. (2019, Decem- (Chin State Office) and members of Chin building in Myanmar. He has been collaborating ber 9). Mother tongue helps learning in Chin State Government and Hltuttaw, April 2020. with Urbanize since October 2018. State. UNICEF. 26. No plan to change list of Chin sub-tribes, says Email: [email protected] 14. An important exception is Zotuallai, a script Union Minister. (2019, September 12). Kho- linked to the Laipian religion, which was in- numthung News. Both authors wish to warmly thank Mael Raynaud, vented in the early 20th century by Pau Cin 27. 19 groups for Laimi, 10 for Zomi, 4 for Khu- Head of Research at Urbanize, for making this Hau, based on the Tedim language. mi, 5 for Asho, 3 for K’cho and 10 “being dis- collaboration possible, as well as the Konrad 15. Dr. Luke Sui Kung Ling, from the Chin Chris- cussed” including Hkongso, Mro, Dai, Daa Adenauer Stiftung, which has supported research tian University writes, for instance: “Do Lai Yinthu, Matu, Rongtu, Mara, Cumtu, Larktu, leading to the present article. people have a history before AD 1800? In Laisaw and Laitu. –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– other words, do Lai people have history be- 28. Although details could certainly be discussed fore we became Christian? We didn't have any, (see for instance the case of Matu, detailed ENDNOTES why? Because we don’t have any literature. below, which corresponds to multiple proj- 1. In this paper, we use “Burma” to refer to the The history we have today emerged only after ects) this map is useful to provide a general country prior to 1989, and the official name, we became Christians and after we have had idea of language distribution in Chin State. “Myanmar” afterwards. literature. So, our history began with Christi- For a discussion regarding the utility, limita- 2. www.ethnologue.com anity." (Translated from Lai Chin). Ling, L. S. tions and inherent biases of language map- 3. According to Lehman (1963, p. 5) “No single K. (1999). Laica Kong Ah Kan Ruahawk Pahra ping, see Salem-Gervais and Raynaud, 2020. Chin word has explicit reference to all the (Tran. “Ten Things We Should Think About 29. Interviews with UNICEF, Hakha, 2019, 2020. peoples we customarily call Chin, but all—or Lai Literature,” in “Lungrawn.”) https://lun- UNICEF has, however, supported, with the nearly all—of the peoples have a special word grawn.wordpress.com/kan-ruah-awk-pahra/ MoEA, the production of story books for early for themselves and those of their congeners 16. Surgeon Major Newland’s A Practical hand- literacy in 27 Chin languages. with whom they are in regular contact. This book of the language of the Lai was for in- 30. Interviews with the Dai LCC of Kanpalet town- word is almost always a variant form of a sin- stance published in 1897 in Rangoon (Hu, ship, May 2020. gle root, which appears as Zo, Yo, Ysou, Shou 1998). 31. This success, however, appears less surpris- and the like.”

138 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 139 RESEARCH ARTICLE | CHIN LANGUAGES

ing, since the Mara are among the first groups McCormick, P. (2016, Autumn). Does language မိခင္ဘာသာစကားအေျချပဳ ဘာသာစကားစုံပညာေရးစနစ္. who received an orthography (see Fig. 1), and Grinevald, C., & Costa, J. (2010). Langues en danger: equal ethnicity in Burma? The Newsletter. En- the Tlosai dialect already constitutes a sort of le phenomène et la reponse des linguistes, couraging Knowledge and Enhancing the Study lingua franca (Bhatia, 2010). Faits de langues, 35–36(1), 23–37. of Asia (International Institute for Asian Stud- 32. Interviews with the Matu (Chin) LCC, Matu Hlaing, K. Y. (2008). The politics of language policy ies), No. 75, 29–43. LCC and Matupi (Chin) LCC, May 2020. in Myanmar: Imagining togetherness, practic- McCormick, P. (2019). Language policy in Myan- 33. According to a map produced by the Lan- ing difference? In L. H. Guan & L. Suryadiana- mar. In A. Kirkpatrick and A. Liddicoat (Eds.), guage and Social Development Organization ta (Eds.), Language, nation, and development The Routledge international handbook of lan- (LSDO) and an interview of the chairman of in Southeast Asia (pp. 150–180). Institute of guage education policy in Asia (pp. 243–256). the Khumi LCC and Paletwa Township Litera- Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore. Routledge. ture Committee, June 2020. Mon, P. N. (2014, October 3–4 ). Education reform Htut, T. (2000). ျမန္မာပညာေရး ရႈခင္းပညာတန္ေဆာင္. 34. Title of a post by Ro Sang (LSDO) in May Hu, B. (1998). Literacy and language maintenance and national reconciliation in Burma. Paper 2020. As noted by McCormick (personal com- in Chin State, Myanmar. Chin Association for presented at the 2014 Western Conference munication), there is often sort of a confusion Christian Communication. Association for Asian Studies, Arizona State between “literature” and the idea of “literacy” Hu, B. (2006). “Laica le Sianginn Ngeihnak” in Chin University, Phoenix, Arizona. in English translations of Burmese. Sining Tuanbia (“Lai Literature and School” in Mong, S. K. (2004). The history and development of 35. Interviews with the Hkongso LCC, Paletwa Chin History). Chin Association for Christian the Shan script. Silkworm Books. Township Literature Committee, Department Communication. Oo, T. (1999). (1948–1998) Ministry of Education, of Ethnic Languages and Cultures, and LSDO, Irvine, J. T., & Gal, S. (2000). Language ideology ျမန္မာ့ပညာေရးသမိုင္း သင္႐ိုးၫႊန္းတမ္းက႑. June 2020. and linguistic differentiation. In P. V. Kroskrity Peterson, D. A. (2017). On Kuki-Chin subgrouping. 36. Chin languages approved for school curricu- (Ed.), Regimes of language: Ideologies, polities, In Picus Sizhi Ding and Jamin Pelkey (Eds.), lum. (2020, February 5). Khonumthung News. and identities (pp. 35–84). School of American Sociohistorical linguistics in Southeast Asia: ______Research Press. New horizons for Tibeto-Burman studies in Kheng, N. (2017). A phonological description of the honor of David Bradley (pp. 189–210). Brill. REFERENCES Mkuui variety of Daai Chin. [Master’s thesis, Sadan, M. (2013) Being and becoming Kachin: His- Bareigts, A. (1981). Les Lautu: contribution à l’étude Payap University] tories beyond the state in the borderworlds of de l’organisation sociale d’une ethnie chin de Kio, S. N. (2014), Cauk, Ca Chuahnak Kong He Burma. British Academy and Oxford Univer- Haute-Birmanie. Paris: Centre National de la Pehtlai. In On Literature and Publication of sity Press. Recherche Scientifique, SELAF. Books, in Chin Association for Christian Com- Sakhong, L. (2003). In search of Chin identity. NIAS Bennison, J.J. (1933). Census of India 1931, volume xi: munication Magazine. Press. Burma, Rangoon Office of the Supdt., Govern- Kosonen, K. (2017). Language of instruction in Sakhong, L. (2003) The Origin of the Chin. In K. ment Printing and Stationery, Burma. Southeast Asia. UNESCO Background paper Robin (Ed.), Chin: History, culture and identity, Bhatia, L. (2010), Education and society in a chang- for the 2017/8 Global education monitoring Dominant Publishers. ing Mizoram: The practice of pedagogy. Rout- report. Document: ED/GEMR/MRT/2017/ Sakhong, L. (2007) Christianity and Chin identity. In ledge. P1/18. M. Gravers (Ed.), Exploring ethnic diversity in Bradley, D. (2015). Burmic languages in Myanmar. Lane, P., Costa, J., & Korne, H. D. (2018). Standard- Burma (pp. 200–226). NIAS Press. In K. VanBik (Ed.) Continuum of the richness of izing minority languages: Competing ideologies Salem-Gervais, N., & Metro, R. (2012). A textbook languages and dialects in Myanmar. Chin Hu- of authority and authenticity in the global pe- case of nation-building: The evolution of his- man Rights Organization, Yangon. riphery. Routledge. tory curricula in Myanmar. Journal of Burma Bradley, D. (2018). Languages. In A. Simpson, N. Lehman, F.K. (1963). The structure of Chin society. A Studies. 16(1), 27–78. Farrelly & I. Holliday (Eds.), Routledge hand- tribal people of Burma, adapted to a non-west- Salem-Gervais, N. (2018). Teaching ethnic lan- book of contemporary Myanmar (pp. 117–125). ern civilization. University of Illinois Press. guages, cultures and histories in government Routledge. Malone, S., & Paraide, P. (2011). Mother tongue- schools today: Great opportunities, giant Callahan, M. (2003). Language policy in modern based bilingual education in Papua New pitfalls? In Oxford Tea Circle Oxford, https:// Burma. In M. Brown & S. Ganguly (Eds.), Guinea. International Review of Education, 57, teacircleoxford.com/2018/10/01/teach- Fighting words: Language policy and ethnic re- 705–720. ing-ethnic-languages-cultures-and-histories- lations in Asia (pp. 143–176). MIT Press. Mandelbrot, B. (1982). The fractal geometry of na- in-government-schools-today-great-opportu- Delancey, S., Krishna, B., Konnerth, L., & Amos, ture. W. H. Freeman and Co. nities-giant-pitfalls-part-i/. T. (2015). Tibeto-Burman languages of the Mang, P. Z. (2018). The politics of religious conver- Salem-Gervais, N., & Raynaud M. (2019). Promis- Indo-Myanmar borderland. 31st South Asian sion among the ethnic Chin in Burma. Studies ing developments and daunting challenges Languages Analysis Roundtable, 14 May 2015. in World Christianity, 24(3), 188–211. in using ethnic minority languages in for- Dutcher, N. (2001). Expanding educational opportu- McAuliffe, E. (2017). Caste and the quest for racial mal education. In Oxford Tea Circle, https:// nity in linguistically diverse societies. Center for hierarchy in British Burma: An analysis of cen- teacircleoxford.com/2019/09/23/promis- Applied Linguistics, Washington, DC. sus classifications from 1872–1931. [Master’s ing-developments-and-daunting-challeng- 1. Ethnic Nationalities Affairs Center. (2018). thesis, University of Washington] es-in-using-ethnic-minority-languages-in-for-

mal-education- part-i/. Salem-Gervais, N., & Raynaud, M. (2020). Teach- ing ethnic minority languages in government schools and developing the local curriculum. Elements of decentralization in language-in-education-policy. Konrad-Adenauer Stiftung, Myanmar. Available at: https://www.kas.de/ en/web/myanmar/laenderberichte/detail/-/ content/teaching-ethnic-minority-languages-in-government-schools-and-developing-the-local-curriculum. Scott, J. C. (2009). The art of not being governed: An anarchist history of upland Southeast Asia, Yale University Press.

Shalom (Nyein) Foundation. (2011). ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ မူလတန္းအဆင့္ တိုင္းရင္းသားလူမ် ိဳးစု ကေလးငယ္မ်ားအား ပညာသင္ၾကားရာတြင္ အသုံးျပဳေသာ ဘာသာစကားႏွင့္ ပတ္သက္ေသာ ပညာေရးမူဝါဒ စာတမ္း. Skutnabb-Kangas, T., and Dunbar, R. (2010). Indig- enous children’s education as linguistic geno- cide and a crime against humanity? A global view. Gáldu ̌C ála. Journal of Indigenous Peo- ple’s Rights. No. 1, 10–126. “Outside of the MoE system, Lai language is also used South, A. and Lall M. (2016) Schooling and conflict: in theological higher education studies, increasingly Ethnic education and mother tongue-based taught as a subject and used as “classroom language” teaching in Myanmar. The Asia Foundation. Taylor, R. (2006). Do States make Nations? The pol- in urban private schools, while many groups continue to itics of identity in Myanmar revisited. South hold yearly summer school programs. Other non-state East Asia Research, 13(3), 261–286. actors, such as the Bawinu Foundation, also promote the Tinker, H. (1967). The Union of Burma: A study of use of local languages in education, and media in Chin the first years of independence. Oxford Univer- sity Press. languages are active, notably in the form of magazines, Trudell, B., & Young, C. (2016). Good answers to although language diversity does constitute one of the tough questions in mother tongue-based mul- main challenges they are facing.” tilingual education, SIL International. Tupas, R., & Sercombe, P. (2014). Language, education and nation-building in Southeast Asia: An introduction. In P. Sercombe and R. Tupas (Eds.), Language, Education and Nation-Build- ing Assimilation and Shift in Southeast Asia (pp. 1–21). Palgrave MacMillan. Vanbik, K. (2009). Proto-Kuki-Chin: A reconstructed ancestor of the Kuki-Chin languages. University of California. Van Schendel W. (2002). Geographies of knowing, geographies of ignorance: jumping scale in Southeast Asia. Environment and Planning, Society, and Space. 20(6), 647–68. Vumson. (1986). Zo History: With an introduction to Zo culture, economy, religion and their status as an ethnic minority in India, Burma, and Bangladesh. Self-Published. ______

140 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 Parami Journal of Education • ISSN 2709-2895 30 OCTOBER 2020 • VOL 1 ISSUE 1 141