Language Planning and the British Empire: Comparing Pakistan, Malaysia and Kenya
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Current Issues in Language Planning ISSN: 1466-4208 (Print) 1747-7506 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rclp20 Language Planning and the British Empire: Comparing Pakistan, Malaysia and Kenya Richard Powell To cite this article: Richard Powell (2002) Language Planning and the British Empire: Comparing Pakistan, Malaysia and Kenya, Current Issues in Language Planning, 3:3, 205-279, DOI: 10.1080/14664200208668041 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14664200208668041 Published online: 26 Mar 2010. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 305 View related articles Citing articles: 6 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rclp20 Download by: [University of Pennsylvania] Date: 02 December 2015, At: 15:06 Language Planning and the British Empire: Comparing Pakistan, Malaysia and Kenya1 Richard Powell College of Economics, Nihon University, Misaki-cho 1-3-2, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-8360 Japan Thispaper seeks to provide historicalcontext for discussions of languageplanning in postcolonialsocieties by focusing on policieswhich haveinfluenced language in three formerBritish colonies. If wemeasure between the convenient markers of John Cabot’s Newfoundland expeditionof 1497and the1997 return of Hong Kong toChinesesover- eignty,the British Empire spanned 500years, 2 and atitsgreatest extent in the1920s covereda fifthof theworld’ s landsurface. Together with the economic and military emergenceof theUnited States in the20th century, British colonialism 3 is widely regardedas themain reason for the global roleplayed by English today. 4 It is also an indispensableelement of debatesabout imperialismin generaland linguisticimperi- alism in particular. Aims and Scope Todiscusspostcolonial language planning itisnecessary to delve intopolicies which hada directinfluence onlanguage during colonisation.My mainaims in thispaper areto review the historyof language policies in three areasof the Brit- ishEmpire –the forerunners ofmodernPakistan, Malaysia and Kenya –andto attemptto evaluate the influence of Britain’s colonialpolicies oncurrent language planning, 5 use andperception in these formercolonies. I alsowant to considerto what extent itis useful oreven possible toisolateBritish colonialism asa distinctfactor in the globalisationof English. Ihaveincluded economic, politicaland demographic summaries since Ifeel these areashave had almost as much influence on language as educational and administrative policies. Byfocusing onthree countriesI havetried to strike a balancebetween detailed monographsand a broadsweep ofthe whole empire. In the courseof examining Britisheconomic, military and political encroachments into Northern India, Malayaand East Africa, I havealso made reference towhat are now Bangladesh, Downloaded by [University of Pennsylvania] at 15:06 02 December 2015 Singapore andTanzania, and above all to India, whose governance had a seminal effect on the empire. Idon’t claimthat the historiesof Pakistan,Malaysia and Kenya yield deeper insightinto colonial and postcolonial language planning thanthose of anyother formerBritish colony, but their storiesare fascinating, and they were notchosen arbitrarily.Each country had a long Britishpresence andachieved anegotiated but by nomeans non-violent 6 independence in the twodecades after the Second WorldWar, in contrastto the moreheavily European-settled territorieswhich gained self-government earlyin the lastcentury, orsmaller outposts that retainedtheir dependent statuslonger. Moreover, down to the Second World 1466-4208/02/03 0205-75 $20.00/0 ©2002 R. Powell CURRENT ISSUES IN LANGUAGE PLANNING Vol.3, No.3, 2002 205 Language Planning in Former British Colonies 206 Current Issues in Language Planning WarBritishterritories bordering the Indian Oceanwere subject torelatively little American influence, in contrast to those around the Atlantic and Pacific. While being intensely multilingual, allthree haveundergone aconsiderable degree oflinguisticrationalisation since decolonisation,based around English andone nationallanguage thatalso carries regional weight. Eachis an active arenaof discussionabout the roleof otherlocally used languages,whose combined nativespeakers constitute large majorities in Kenya andPakistan and alarge andinfluential minorityin Malaysia.Another point in commonis Islam – amajorreligion in Kenya, the majorityfaith in Malaysia,and the cornerstoneof Pakistan.Possessing long-standing links withall three nationallanguages, Islam often providesa counterweightto the culturalimperatives of the colonial language. All these similaritiesshould not be overplayed,however, since the economicdisparity between Malaysiaand the othertwo hasa crucialbearing on their respective language planning choices. The historicalscope is from the late18th century tothe late20th century –that is,from the ‘secondempire’ carved out after the lossof the Americancolonies, downto the ‘secondcolonial occupation’ following the Second WorldWar, and onintothe decadesof decolonisation, a processwhich could be saidto be contin- uing today. Approach and Methods Ihaveapproached this topic from the perspective ofeconomicand political historyrather than linguistics. By thisI meanthat while Iacceptthat language hasa capacityto shape socialaction as well asbe shapedby it,I ammostinter- estedhere in the roleof language asa function andconsequence ofsocioeco- nomicand political imperatives. I see moreevidence ofeconomics and politics delimiting language choicethan of language choicedetermining economicand political options. Asfor colonialism and itsresponses, despite holding reservationsabout theo- rieswhich explain awayimperialism as alaterstage in the development ofcapi- talism,I dosee economicinterests, underpinned by militarypower, as paramount.The Orientalistintellectual curiosityof the 18thcentury, the civil- ising andevangelising rhetoricof the 19th,and the socialimperialist theories of the 20thmay have been genuinely expressed andreceived in manyquarters of Britainand the empire, but they were rarelyallowed to pull againstthe economic Downloaded by [University of Pennsylvania] at 15:06 02 December 2015 reins ofthe metropolitanelite. Onthe otherside, nationalism undoubtedly included richand varied cultures of resistanceto raciallybased oppression, but asthe historiesof the three politiesin questionshow, it evolved in wayswhich were useful tothe mosteconomically viable elites while accommodatingthe key longer-term interests of the colonial power. Although someuse hasbeen madeof legal enactments,official publications, pressreports and personal interviews, there hasnot been timeor spacefor much primaryenquiry. Mostof thispaper restson ajuxtapositionof reportedlinguistic andeducational data with historical and political commentaries. Moreover, asidefrom a littlematerial in Malayand a handful ofwritingin languagesbear- ing their owncolonial baggage, suchas French andJapanese, allthe sourcesare inEnglish. While thisessentially reflects mypersonallimitations it is also an iron- Language Planning in Former British Colonies 207 icalreflection ofthe currentdominance of the imperial language parexcellence onallsides of the globallanguage planning debate.One moreshortcoming is that alotof the historycited here waswritten in orderto analysethe outlookof the colonisersrather than the colonised.It would be enriched by the responsesof those with access to different languages and different viewpoints. Outline The following eight sectionsproceed roughly froma colonialto apostcolonial perspective. The paper startswith the economic,cultural and social background ofthe colonisers.The general focusis on the colonisersas agentsof change and the colonisedas recipients, mediatorsand opponents, although I alsoargue that the colonialdynamic was multidirectional. I havebegun witha leading para- digm fromeconomic history which sees ‘gentlemanly capitalism’– the interests ofasmallbut hegemonic classof English financiers– asthe maindriving force behind Britishempire-buil ding almostuntil itslast days. I then lookat the intellectual culture of thisclass and the socialmechanisms through which its influence wasdisseminated throughout the complexstructures of colonial administration.My view isthat there waslittle systematised, central planning behind Britishcolonialism, and yet there were strikingsimilarities across far-flung administrationsbecause of the commonsocioeconomic outlook of the colonialclass, which emphasisedcommercial over industrial interests, local overcentral funding, andselective collaborationwith traditional elites over wholescale innovation. In the following section,economic and political motives for colonial interven- tionin Indo-Pakistan,Malaya and Kenya areoutlined, and the thirdsection deals in somedetail with colonial administrative and educational practices that had directbearing onlanguage use. Ihavetried to show that the tendency wasto restrictrather than promote English, althoughthis divide-and-rule strategywas notapplied dogmaticallybut accordingto localcommercial and security needs, thusallowing support for regional linguae francaesuch as Hindustani,Malay and Kiswahili where these were considered useful tools of colonialism. The fourthsection continues the discussionthrough decolonisation into the postcolonialera, arguing thatit was only when the possibilityof losingthe empire lookedreal that British bureaucrats and politicians and their colonised alliescontemplated systematic