Vernacular Languages in an English-Dominant Education System: Mauritian Creole, Bhojpuri and the Politics of Ethnicity in Multilingual Mauritius

5 Vernacular languages in an English-dominant education system: Mauritian Creole, Bhojpuri and the politics of ethnicity in multilingual Mauritius Tejshree Auckle Introduction UNESCO’s 2009 world report on cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue makes a strong case for the implementation of mother-tongue-based multilingual education (MTB MLE) programmes which allow for the co-existence of both local vernacular languages and other socially prestigious tongues such as English (UNESCO 2009). The success of these MTB MLE programmes hinges, as it suggests, quite significantly, upon deliberate governmental intervention at the levels of language policy and planning. For instance, though the report bemoans the efforts of most multilingual nations which have set up their own MTB MLE programmes as being, at best, half- hearted, it also celebrates the tentative steps taken by countries such as Cambodia and Zambia which have formally introduced a few minority languages as media of instruction at lower primary level (UNESCO 2009). Such forms of overt language planning are believed to be instrumental to the maintenance or even, possibly, the revitalisation of minority and/or endangered languages (Schiffman 1995). However, as Shohamy (2006) highlights, many communities rely on covert language policies which make no explicit reference to language in any legal or administrative document. Instead, they draw quasi- exclusively from inferences derived from other forms of constitutional provisos. This dichotomy between covert and overt language policy and planning will be at the heart of this chapter as it seeks to explore the challenges faced by post-colonial Mauritius in implementing its own MTB MLE programme through the introduction of the vernacular languages of Mauritian Creole (MC) and Mauritian Bhojpuri (MB) as optional subjects at primary level. Indeed, despite its optimistic report to UNESCO’s International Bureau of Education in 2011 (UNESCO 2011) regarding the concurrent teaching of MC, MB and English, given the absence of an overt language policy governing the Mauritian educational system, decisions taken by the Ministry of Education and its stakeholders operate in what is essentially a legal and constitutional vacuum. H. Coleman (ed.). 2017. Multilingualisms and Development. London: British Council. ISBN 978-0-86355-840-5 11th Language & Development Conference 79 Indeed, following its independence from the United Kingdom in 1968, postcolonial Mauritius has maintained its commitment to an English-medium education system, paying scant consideration to the vernacular languages of MC and MB. Consequently, the introduction of MC and MB at primary level in 2011 was initially greeted with cautious optimism. However, as the country’s latest contribution to UNESCO’s World Data on Education (UNESCO 2011) reveals, official provision for the inclusion of these two subjects in the weekly timetable of primary school students is yet to be made. While the highest Weekly Time Allocated (WTA) of 500 hours is dedicated to the teaching of English, at the moment, despite the Government’s purported aim to promote multilingualism in both the vernacular languages and English (MECHR 2009), in practice, this does not seem to be the case. In keeping with the above, this chapter provides an insight into the key factors which contribute to the minoritisation of MC and MB within an education system which seeks to be supportive of the tenets of MTB MLE. Its aims, therefore, are three-fold: • Firstly, it will examine the way(s) in which covert language policy and planning construct English as a valuable social, cultural and linguistic resource. • Secondly, it will elaborate upon existing ethnic politics which serve to further undermine the position of vernacular languages vis-à-vis English. • Thirdly, it will examine the ways in which such ethno-political issues impact negatively upon attempts made by the local Ministry of Education to put forward an overall language policy for Mauritius. Using the reports penned by officials from the Mauritian Ministry of Education as its empirical base, the following sections will attempt to provide as comprehensive a picture as possible of the covert language policies that currently exist in Mauritius and will subsequently correlate the observations drawn from these with the prevalent ethnic dynamics on the island of Mauritius. Finally, this chapter will view this correlation between ethnicity and covert language policy and planning as contributing to the emergence of English as a key player on the Mauritian linguistic stage. Covert language policy and planning in Mauritius: An historical perspective Known for its temperate tropical climate and picturesque beaches, Mauritius often claims the international limelight as an idyllic and highly sought-after tourist destination. Along with its dependencies of Rodrigues and Agaléga, the island is also reputed for its relative political stability as well as for the purportedly harmonious co-existence of a multi-ethnic and multilingual populace (Selvon 2012). In actual fact, behind the picture-perfect postcard image of Mauritius as an oasis of peace and tranquillity lies a far more complex – and, arguably, fractured – reality. Indeed, despite being marketed to tourists as a multilingual haven, it is only the Mauritius metropole which, due to its three successive waves of colonisation, offers a true picture of cultural and linguistic métissage (Eriksen 1994). In contrast, due to vastly different patterns of human settlement, the people of Rodrigues and Agaléga can trace their origins to the former slaves who were transferred to these islands by the colonial powers in control of Mauritius (Selvon 2012). In truth, the Mauritian 80 MULTILINGUALISMS AND DEVELOPMENT ‘mongrel’ culture (Eriksen 1999, 14) owes its social, cultural and linguistic hybridity to historical serendipity rather than to meticulous planning. Discovered by Arab and Portuguese sailors in the early 16th century, the first human settlement of Mauritius was carried out by the Dutch who, in deference to the Dutch Prince Maurits van Nassau, bestowed the name Mauritius upon the island (Correia 2003). Following the departure of the Dutch, in the 18th century, the island was taken over by the French who, during their century-long rule over the island, introduced French as the language of the judiciary and colonial administration (Miles 2000). In addition, in contrast to their Dutch predecessors, who had opted against creating a long-term European settlement on the island, the French transformed Mauritius into a thriving sugar-producing plantation economy (Kalla 1984). The metamorphosis of Mauritius into an administrative and an economic success is attributed both to iconic Governors such as Mahé de Labourdonnais and to the successive convoys of slaves that were brought from: Mozambique and elsewhere in East Africa (40-45 per cent) and from Madagascar (30-35 per cent). … Small numbers of slaves were transported to the island from Seychelles, Cape Verde, Rio de Janeiro, and West Africa. … Benin has also been suggested as a source of Mauritian slaves. (Miles 1999, 213) One of the direct consequences of such a rich diversity in slave origin was the genesis of a French-based MC which is currently spoken by over 90 per cent of the Mauritian population (Statistics Mauritius 2011a). The year 1810 marked a turning point in the linguistic history of Mauritius. Vanquished by the British, the French had to abandon all political claims to the island. However, they refused to relinquish their cultural and linguistic sovereignty over the country. Indeed, though unusual in the history of colonial conquest, the terms of the 1810 Act of Capitulation which marked the transfer of political sovereignty from French to British colonial powers, guaranteed the supremacy of French. Commenting upon the linguistic conundrum that was the British colonial era in Mauritius, Miles (2000, 217) elaborates: The 1814 Treaty of Paris reinforced this understanding. Implicitly, the French language was preserved. Mauritius thus continued to be a French and French Creole speaking society under the relatively unintrusive umbrella of British sovereignty. The one significant exception to Anglo-Saxon aloofness was the judiciary. In 1845 it was decreed that English would become the language of the higher courts. One immediate consequence of a British-style judiciary was the abolition of the slave trade and eventually of the institution of slavery itself. This decision proved to be quite unpopular amongst the Mauritian Plantocracy who were dependent upon slave labour in their day-to-day operations (Allen 1999). In an attempt to assuage the worries of the former slave owners, the British colonial powers set up an apprenticeship system that would encourage the former slaves to continue working for their erstwhile masters. They would, instead, be known as ‘apprentice labourers’ and would be paid a nominal fee in exchange for their services. The majority of the 11th Language & Development Conference 81 freed slaves opted out of the apprenticeship system, resulting in a shortage of labour which was addressed through the large-scale import of Indian indentured labourers from India (Allen 1999). Consequently, Mauritian society underwent a dramatic demographic and, above all, linguistic change. With the arrival of Indian indentured labourers, Mauritius made the transition from a trilingual (French, MC and English) speech community to one which was resolutely multilingual.

Load more