CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 1.1 The Changing Vitality of Malays and the Malay Language in Singapore The Malays are the indigenous people of Singapore. They form part of the 300 million Malay speakers in the Malay Archipelago, where Singapore remains in the heart of this massive network of the Malay world. Singapore was part of the Malay mainland (Malaya) during the British occupation. This changed when Malaya gained independence from the British in 1957 and the formation of Malaysia in 1963. However, Singapore was not part of independent Malaya. Singapore received its independence from the British in 1959 and later joined Malaysia in 1963, but was subsequently removed from Malaysia in 1965 because of political differences. During this time, the Malays in Singapore were experiencing a volatile period of changing fortunes in terms of status. They finally succumbed to a minority status in post- separation Singapore. Prior to separation, Malays and the Malay language received the most favoured treatment with good socio-economic prospects. Malay was raised to be the most important language in the civil service. A pass in Malay was compulsory for all teachers and civil service employees. The requirement for Malay language examination led to the expansion of night classes and urgent recruitment of teachers or instructors to teach the Chinese and Indians in Singapore. The Malay landscape was enhanced with more television and radio programmes in Malay and the issuant of more government documents in Malay (Afendras and Kuo, 1980; Gopinathan, S., Ho, W. K., Pakir, A., and Vanithamani, S., 1994; Platt, 1982). The People’s Action Party (PAP) government raised the status of Malay to the most significant function for Singaporeans when Dr. 1 Goh Keng Swee, finance Minister of the first Lee Kuan Yew government, announced this special position of the Malay language in PAP’s language policy during a rally, where he said “in the future society we hope to bring about, the barriers between groups will have disappeared. People will no longer live in groups isolated from each other. There will be free communication through a common language – Malay” (The Straits Times [Singapore], 4th June 1959, c.f. De Souza, 1980, p. 209). This further strengthened Malay’s position as the epitome of the golden age of Malay epistolary in Southeast Asia during the 1950’s. Separation cost the Malays and the Malay language dearly. Malays were placed into a new ethnolinguistic environment when the Singapore government immediately dissolved its pro-Malay policy and initiatives when it was part of Malaysia. From 1965, English was made the first and official language of Singapore in every aspect of life, making other vernacular languages viz. Malay, Mandarin and Tamil, as second language. Malay was however accorded the national language status of Singapore, reflecting both the historical and geographical position of Singapore, but performing a role that was more ceremonial than functional1. This move has important repercussions on the vitality of Malays in Singapore in the years that followed. The post independence era witnessed the closing down of Malay, Tamil, and Chinese medium schools in Singapore because parents were inclined to send their children to English-medium schools for a more secure future2. The Chinese-medium schools were placed under the Special Assistance Plan3 (SAP) in 1979 reflecting a reversal of government policies to that of a pro-Chinese policy especially in the area of Chinese heritage and education. Today there are more than 26 Chinese SAP schools in Singapore, with a strong Chinese environment, but none for the Malays and Indians. The moves towards linguistic homogenization of the Chinese population began in 1979 2 with the introduction of the ‘Speak Mandarin campaign’, which was directed at shifting the Chinese community language repertoire from non-standard dialects to Mandarin (Gopinathan, 1994). The Chinese community continued to receive direct governmental support and assurance in terms of their language. Singapore’s second Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong (Goh, 1991), reiterated this support through his commitment to make the effort to keep Chinese language alive as part of Singapore society through making the Chinese a tightly knit community with a distinct culture, a shared past and a common destiny for the future where Mandarin is the primary language. The Malays, however, have to rely more on communal leadership. They have one Malay Minister who is in-charge of Muslim Affairs to look into their issues and to develop their language. Nevertheless, Malays issues are not treated as national or mainstream ones but have to be resolved by the Malays. Hence, Malays who are in need of direct government intervention continue to face both economic and incessant social problems (Lim and Ong, 2012), a legacy the British left behind for the Malays (Ismail Kassim, 1974; Lily Zubaidah Rahim, 2009; Wan Hussein Zoohri, 1990). They also lost their enclaves through urban renewal programmes, resettlement and quotas in housing estates. This led to the gradual devolution of Malay linguistic landscape through the constructions and renaming of new roads, buildings, and schools with new names, mostly in Chinese and English. As a result, ghettoization was unheard of amongst the second and following generations of Malays who generally used English to fully participate in the mainstream economy and culture, and at the same time maintaining alongside varying levels of minority language and culture. This is in spite of Lee Kuan Yew’s announcement few days after Singapore separation from Malaysia where he assured the Malays that “there will be built-in provisions to ensure that any elected government must continue the policy of the PAP government to 3 continue to raise the economic and educational level of Malays as embodied in Article 152 of the Constitution” (The Straits Times, 13 August 1965, c.f. Ismail Kassim, 1974, p. 46) and the retention of Malay rights and that Malay continues to be the National Language. However, future developments begin to cast doubts on the assurance because Malays’ incessant socio-economic problems and educational setbacks. Singapore government’s philosophy on integration may have contributed to the relinquishing of Malay ethnolinguistic presence in Singapore. This was spelt out when Lee Kuan Yew, in his first National Day speech in 1966, mentioned that it was not impossible for Singaporeans to integrate with common values, attitudes, outlook, language and ultimately a common culture. However, as it turns out, this aspiration does not favour minorities and especially the Malay communities and their language. Instead, it could have worked against them because “the nationalist myths that societies are (or can be) homogenous culturally, linguistically, and ethnically have led to the overt or covert suppression of cultural and linguistic difference, and sometimes the ‘cleansing’ of ethnic differences (including genocide)” (Gibbons and Ramirez, 2004, p. 1). The “overt or covert suppression” could well explain why the Singapore government is suspicious of the Malay community, which is by and large Muslim4. The lack of Malays appointed to important positions further relegates the Malay community into social and political disparity with other races in the republic. Such situation makes it more challenging for the Malays, especially with Singapore’s forward thrust as a cosmopolitan city through opening its doors widely to foreign talent and immigrants in the new millennium. This has reshaped the socio-structure of the Singapore population where the Malay community continues to lag behind other races and foreigners in economic and educational niches. Malays continue to be a minority race because of the government’s firm stance on maintaining the existing ratio of the Malay population. 4 After 22 years, Lee Kuan Yew finally admitted that it was impossible to homogenise the nation because he observed that since independence, the Malays have continued to lag behind the Chinese and Indians, especially in the education sector. Lee termed it as “hard facts of life” (Fong, 1988). However, it could also be termed as the government’s lack of success “to raise the economic and educational level of Malays as embodied in the Article 152 of the Constitution”. Lee Kuan Yew’s statement has more long term consequences if it is conceived as the government’s perception on the cultural deficit thesis surrounding the Malays where there is nothing to be done or could be done to help the Malays on the government’s part. Hence, it is important to monitor the sociological developments of the Malays on such development, which may ultimately impact their language. This bleak trend has also witnessed the diminishing of Malay chauvinist5 leaders and activists in every Malay front. The trend of appointing Malay Members of Parliament (MP) from Malay organizations, Malay teachers, and editors of Malay newspapers has lapsed. Instead, the new line-up of Malay MPs is scouted from professionals in the fields of academia, business, administration, legal, and medicine where there are not many Malays. Even the appointment of heads of Malay pillar organizations such as Mendaki, Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS), and Malay Heritage Centre are given to professionals in the area of administration, education, engineering, and even the police force. Basically, almost all of the new government appointees are new to the Malay community prior to them holding the Malay leadership position, as they are not Malay activists but are experts or professionals in their own field, which is part of mainstream affiliation or senior government officials. This may give rise to the issue of their affiliation, empathy, and sympathy towards the Malay community and the Malay language. 5 The change in sociolinguistic landscape also witnessed the mass departure of Malay language teachers from the education service in early 2000. These teachers were pre- independence era Malay-medium teachers who retired from service.