CHAPTER SIX

CONCLUSION

CONTENTS

1. Introduction
2. Summary of Chapter One
3. Findings of Chapter Two
4. Findings of Chapter Three
5. Findings of Chapter Four
6. Findings of Chapter Five
7. Major Findings of the Research
8. Suggestions
9. Conclusion
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

241
 CHAPTER SIX

CONCLUSION

1. INTRODUCTION:

Understanding of Language and its impact differs from person to person and also from time to
time. For a linguist, a language is an object to be analysed and studied from a broader
perspective. Thus, Language as an object is to be analysed, pulled apart, understood
historically, and ‘deconstructed’ in its social effect. Language, as means, is a tool to
communicate to formulate thoughts as effectively as possible. Language has been a debatable
issue for most people, especially in a multicultural society like India.

Nevertheless, the Language gets filled with emotion when viewed as an object. Language as
an object of emotion is also a surrogate of nationalism, identity and icon making up our
world. Language is not merely a means of expression for many but also a ‘political force’. It
is a pawn in the tug of domestic politics for a few.

The issues raised in this study are that language is viewed both as an object and a means of
communication surrounded by identity and larger political issues. Predominantly Language
Politics is examined as a conflict resolution through compromise and consensus to attain and
retain power regarding the languages used in Multicultural India. Language Politics is also
examined through the various types of language conflicts like a choice of a dialect, choice of
a language, medium of instruction, medium of communication, and medium of
administration. Language Politics is being addressed in this study as a language Conflict
arising because of linking and delinking identities, ethnicities, attitudes, and use, disuse, and
misuse of language in different domains. Therefore, this study is explained under two heads:
Conflicts arising from the general aspects of the language and conflicts arising from the social
aspects of the language.

While analysing Language Politics from the social aspects of language, the power of language
in the nation’s unity and integrity and the Reorganisation of the States on a linguistic basis is
quite visible. Therefore, an effort is made to analyse Language Politics arising from the
various social aspects of language like language and the socialisation process in a
monolingual society versus multilingual society, National Language versus State language,
Local Language versus Language of wider communication, conflict arising from the use,

242
disuse, and misuse of languages, and conflicts arising from the Social Aspects of the
Languages like dialects, scripts, styles, and Standardisation.

The present study is not merely a historical dig into Language Politics in India or an analysis
of the political power of the language situation today but also the linguistic impact of the past
on the present. Hence the study entailed not just a glance into the history books but a perusal
of reports of various commissions and committees, Parliamentary debates, questions and
answers in the parliament, reports of various linguistic surveys, various parliamentary and
State legislations and ordinances, constitutional debates and Constitutional provisions and
various apex court judgements. Finding and understanding the connotations and nuances of
these resources was not easy. Much of this data is taken from the government website
archives. In addition, this study has used newspaper reports and articles to study the impact of
Language Politics today. Again, gathering the resources was not an easy task.

2. SUMMARY OF CHAPTER ONE:

Chapter one explained the concept of Language Politics in India and provided a direction for
the study by problematisation of issues involved in Language Politics. The first chapter gave a
brief understanding of Language with its various definitions. The purpose of the research
followed: “Background of the study”, where the researcher attempted to explain how
Language and politics are related and how Language and aspects of Language are initiators of
politics and lead to the polymerisation of politics. The chapter also mentioned the research on
the various aspects of Language that were politicised, followed by the justification of how the
present research differs from previous studies. The justification is followed by the Theoretical
Frameworks, namely the Identity and Identity Formation Theory and Multiculturalism Theory
chosen by the researcher to analyse the Language Politics in India for the confinement and
making the issue relevant. The chapter also attempted to clarify the concept of Language
Politics in detail and its various aspects. Finally, the Literature Review synthesises primary
and secondary sources related to Language Politics.

The research had the following objectives:

1. To describe the role of Language in integrating multilingual India amidst all diversities.

2. To delineate the role of languages soon after Independence in the formation of linguistic
states and to discover whether Language still plays a role in carving out a new state while
raising a cry for a new state and when it comes to disputes between the states.

243
3. To portray the processes and circumstances that led to recognising languages under various
categories.

4. To explore the type and extent of the relationship between Language and region in forming
an identity for attaining and retaining power.

5. To assess the relationship between mother tongue, caste, dialect, and script and
their interconnectedness in establishing Identity and otherness, as well as to investigate the
causes of the conflict between languages, Language and dialect, Language and scripts,
Language, and language Standardisation, as manifested in Language Movements in
multicultural India.

6. To examine the role played by the State through its legislations, policies, and programs in
the present status of Language Politics.

The research was conducted on the following hypotheses:

1. Despite having the ability to be divisive, Language has been playing an essential role in the
Integration of the multilingual, multicultural, diverse Indian nation.

2. The linguistic reorganisation of the states was politically inevitable though newly
independent India had to resolve other important and urgent problems.

3. Language, region, and caste are interrelated in creating an identity leading to the
emergence of identity politics in multicultural India.

4. In multicultural India, Language Politics continues through language conflicts, language

movements, language policies, and educational policies.

This study was mainly based on library research. The primary sources such as Parliamentary
Committee Reports, Census Reports, various Union Government legislations, various State
Government Legislations, Linguistic Surveys conducted by the British Government in India
before Independence, Educational Policies of the Union Governments, Supreme Court
Judgements, the Constitution of India, UNESCO Report on Endangered Human rights
conventions, Languages, and International Human Rights are extensively used. This study has
also taken data from E-Resource, especially from governmental websites and governmental
records.

244
The Secondary Sources used for this research are the documentary analysis and
comprehensive overview of the existing fundamentals of Language, Linguistics,
Sociolinguistics, Articles of analysis on various Language Policies, Committee Reports,
Supreme Court Judgements, and Judiciary. To this aim, local and foreign publications,
articles, journals, news items and speeches on the Supreme Court and its activities are
included as sources of information. In addition, the researcher has accessed information from
E-Resource like Infilibnet, NGOs’ websites and the UNESCO website, which is
acknowledged.

3. FINDINGS OF CHAPTER TWO:

The second chapter on ‘Language and National Integration’ scrutinised the strengths and
weaknesses of a language in the nation’s Integration as India is multilingual, unlike the
unilingual nation-states of Europe. Since Language was an object of emotion due to its power
to create an identity, the role of Language in the Integration of India was analysed in Chapter
Two, and the findings were as follows:

3.1. National Integration is not just geographical Integration; it is an integration of hearts and
minds that entails the emotional Integration of Indians without any distinction, including
Language. National Integration transcends caste, class, gender, religion, region and Language
borders and stands for ‘Indian’. When National Integration is viewed as a feeling of unity
towards the country for the pursuit of harmony for serving the nation’s development and
security, it becomes visible even amidst various Language Movements like the Sikh Regiment
serving the Indian Army and their role in the Indo-Pak war in 1965 when Punjab Suba
movement was going on. However, Language, the Identity and identity formation component,
has the capacity for Integration and disintegration. Being a force of Identity, it can test
national unity.

3.2. The power of languages in the Integration of India could be seen in the adaptation of
Sanskrit Grammar and translation of Sanskrit Classics by the majority of Indian languages.
Before the arrival of the British, the Sanskrit had supplied a basis for cultural unity and
intellectual intercourse. The Sannyasis who travelled through the country experienced no
difficulties debating highly controversial subjects among themselves and the country’s elite.
Similarly, the integrating power of the Persian Language could be seen in the adaptation of
Persian terminology in the legal system.

245
3.3. Conversely, English has integrated India through its use in administration and education,
despite having the ‘foreign’ language tag. The oft-repeated phrase that there was no National
unity or Integration among the people of India before the advent of the British could not be
justified. The protagonists of this view believe that the British’s modern communication and
English Language in the provinces brought about a feeling of oneness among the country’s
people. Nevertheless, this argument did not stand the test of knowledge because various rulers
united India much before the arrival of the British through their administrative languages like
Sanskrit or Persian. Moreover, Indian unity was more profound, beyond geographical
isolation, political suzerainty and linguistic unity. Indian unity transcended the innumerable
diversities of blood, colour, language, dress, manners and sect. The British controlled power
through the English Language in various provinces in India for 200 years, and English
continued its power even after Independence as one of the Official Languages due to its
global nature and Indianisation capacity. Being the administrative, link, and global Language,
English has the real power of Integration.

3.4. Meanwhile, linguistic parochialism has become visible through protests and
demonstrations, but they are not powerful enough to garner secessionist power. On the
contrary, regional linguistic movements have crystallised regional languages and aided local
Integration. With the arrival of the British, the English language united Indians to a certain
extent. Furthermore, the self-conscious people from different parts of our country combined
to release Indians into the struggle for freedom for one India as part of the modern world.
Therefore, the importance of English cannot and should not be minimised regardless of
whether Hindi or another language is designated as India’s link language because English is a
language of world importance. It is a window to the world.

3.5. Regarding national Integration and unity, linguistic and factional interests should be
secondary. While giving prominence to the national interest, regional linguistic interests may
need to be sacrificed. Nevertheless, that should not be done at the cost of the threat of
Identity. Sometimes, a need also may arise to curb the Linguistic consciousness to a certain
extent, for example, in the case of the Standardisation of a language. Standardising most
languages is tough as many people speak their dialects over broad regions. However, for the
sake of Integration, it may be required to curb the dialectic consciousness even though it is
ideal to respect the Identity of various dialects as it enriches the Language. It was only when a
language was given its due Identity as Mother Tongue, Regional Language, Official
Language and National Language that it worked as an instrument of Integration. Thus, the

246
demand for Andhra Pradesh, the Dravidian movement in Tamil Nandu, and the Subha
movement of Punjab were demands for Identity, not disintegration, were pacified.

3.6. Identity threat faced by the minority language groups whereby the fear of losing their
cultural Identity made them suspicious of the action of the dominant community, which
increased the emotional gap between them and led to further alienation. It became an apparent
threat to National Integration which was clear from the opposition faced by the Hindi in the
Constituent Assembly when Hindi was to be made the medium of communication between
different states. The resolution was passed favouring Hindi by a majority of a single vote. The
opposition was due to the fear that Hindi speaking States’ people and Hindi-speaking states
would become dominant, and the regional languages would also be neglected, which was
clear from the Dravidian movement in Tamil Nadu, Konkani movement in Goa, Suba
movement in Punjab, Mizo movement in Mizoram, Naga movement in Nagaland etc.

3.7. Language and National Integration were directly connected with Federalism. Even the
State Reorganisation Committee knew the relationship between the two. Realising that the
fortifying of the Centre was essential for successfully channelising the powers contributing to
national Integration, the States Reorganization Commission accepted it as the need of the
hour, remembering the presence of solid linguistic and cultural powers inside the country.
Only Linguistic homogeneity appeared as a solitary premise for reorganising the states, for it
mirrored well-defined linguistic and cultural regions in the country. However, while
reorganising the states on a linguistic basis to strengthen national Integration, the States
Reorganization Commission emphasised the Centre’s preponderance in strengthening the
Union. State Reorganisation Committee and Sarkaria Commission considered the rise of
subnational powers as a hindrance to the Integration of the country, as they initiated their
movements based on Language, religion or ethnicity and then mixed with it issues of
economic backwardness that resulted in the rise of linguistic chauvinism, rearrangement of
the boundaries of the States on the linguistic basis resulting in fissiparous tendencies.

3.8. The majority of the secessionist movements in the states of Assam, Punjab, and the
North-Eastern States of Nagaland and Manipur, which were considered a threat to National
Integration, could be pacified because they were given complete autonomy within the overall
framework of national unity and when their uneven economic development, severe
unemployment and relative backwardness was assured to be removed. However, the political
elites’ linguistic Identity used to attain power blurred the vision of National Integration in
Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Punjab, Assam, Mizoram, etc., where regional parties still have
247
a hold. Indian Integration was based on ‘unity in diversity. Any attempt to bring unity through
administrative coercion that violated or disrespected a particular identity became an irritant
for National Integration. For example, the Language Movement in the mid-sixties in the
South, particularly in Tamil Nadu, was against excluding English and the continuation of
Hindi alone as the Official Language.

3.9. India primarily achieved political Integration as people accepted its administrative
network and abided by its law and Constitution. However, emotional Integration is an
ongoing process because many language groups continue to ask for separate states, namely,
Tulu Nādu, Chotanagpur, Gorkhaland, etc., and their inclusion in the Eighth Schedule of the
Constitution, which was an attempt at Identity assertion. Nevertheless, Language as a force of
Integration had become possible because of the equal importance given to the different
regional languages for the well-being and progress of the nation towards the attainment of
secularism, common citizenship, equality of rights, and opportunities for a unified judicial
system.

4. FINDINGS OF CHAPTER THREE:

In Chapter Three, the researcher examined the role of languages in the Reorganisation of
Indian states after Independence and its antecedents in pre-independent India to understand
the profundity of the power of Language, sometimes interspersed with other factors. Some of
the essential findings of this chapter were:

4.1. Governments, political parties, and linguistic elites planted the seeds for the Linguistic
Reorganisation of States in pre- and post-independent India, even while the nation faced
security and stability issues. Language Elites exploited Language to provoke emotions for
political purposes, such as the British Government’s splitting of Bengal in 1905 and the
Reorganisation of the Bengal Presidency as a unilingual province in 1912. The All-India
Congress Committee of the Indian National Congress founded the Andhra Provincial
Congress Committee from Telugu-speaking Madras Presidency provinces in 1917. In 1921,
Congress modified its Constitution and reorganised its geographical branches by Language.

4.2. Though the Reorganisation of the states was not an urgent and important issue to be
solved, and though the Reorganisation of states could have been done based on factors other
than Language, Language was the initiating and most influential factor; otherwise, the
Linguistic Provinces Commission could not have been set up in 1948, and when the
Commission’s Report was not favouring the Linguistic Reorganisation of the states, JVP
248
Committee could not have been appointed in the same year to study the issue. When the JVP
Committee sounded a note of caution contrary to the linguistic rule, in 1953, due to political
pressure, Andhra Pradesh was carved out for the Telugu speakers as the first State to be
formed on the linguistic basis, which became the precedent for the future shows the power of
linguistic identity politics.

4.3. The linguistic Reorganisation of states had shown that Indian Federalism was a living
organism based on the flexible and rigid nature of the Constitution. Even when there were
secessionist tendencies from the regional language groups, Constitution was rigid enough to
hold together the disintegrating forces and flexible enough to grant them a linguistic state
recognising the rights of a majority linguistic group and protecting the rights of minority
linguistic groups. Linguistic Reorganisation done through the Seventh Amendment to the
Indian Constitution manifested the flexibility of the young Constitution.

4.4. Though the Linguistic Reorganisation of the States Solved the Majoritarion Language
Politics, it laid the foundation for minority Language Politics through Minority Rights,
Minority Protection and Reservation for Minorities. When in 1956, states were carved based
on majority languages, minority languages emerged. Minority means a language with fewer
speakers and does not enjoy official status. The minority language came to be defined as the
Language of the minority community, which has numerically less than half of the population
in the local area. Interestingly, a language with an official status spoken by fewer people did
not become a minority language.

4.5. Even though the linguistic rearrangement of the states through the reallocation of
territories brought about a union of people communicating in the same Language together, not
a single state in the Indian Republic emerged monolingual though it decreased the linguistic
minorities.

4.6. Though states were formed on a linguistic basis, the principles used were not strictly
linguistic, like: ‘One language, one State’ or ‘Non-linguistic State’. Even the Dhar
Commission had suggested not to form States principally on a linguistic basis alone but on
geographical contiguity, economic independence and simplicity of organisation. States were
formed on a linguistic basis because of political expediency. Moreover, Language
camouflaged with religion in the creation of Punjab, racial and cultural distinctiveness in the
creation of the tribal states of North-East, Caste in opposing the establishment of Andhra by
the Tamil and Telugu-speaking Brahmans in Madras and Economic and social backwardness

249
were predominant. For example, though it seemed that Punjab and Haryana were organised
on a linguistic basis, there were communal undercurrents. On the other hand, Meghalaya,
Nagaland, and Mizoram were organised on an ethnic basis. Nagaland was the first State given
the political concession to be reorganised after 1956 on a non-linguistic basis.

4.7. The Reorganisation of States is a lengthy process that started at the beginning of the 20th
century and seemed to have not ended because new states are created, and states are also
devoid of their status, as in the case of Jammu and Kashmir. For instance, the State of Jammu
and Kashmir was downgraded into the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh
by enacting the Bill Jammu Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, in Rajya Sabha on 5 August
2019. Moreover, the Linguistic Reorganisation of states seems to have lost its lustre but not
the Reorganisation of states because the criteria for the Reorganisation of the states is no
longer linguistically noticeable as in the case of recently created states of Telangana,
Uttarakhand, Jharkhand and Chattisgarh indicating that Language as power is debilitating.
The creation of Telangana, a part of the first linguistically established State – Andhra Pradesh
– was bifurcated because of the movements initiated for social and economic development.
On the other hand, the vociferous demand for a tribal state of Jharkhand achieved its
statehood, but the Chhota-Nagpur because it received little outside support and appeared to be
moribund for the time being.

5. FINDINGS OF CHAPTER FOUR:

In chapter four, after briefly explaining the importance of classification, the researcher gives a
world view of classifications of languages and scripts in general and then, in detail, narrates
the various available classifications of Indian languages. Then, the researcher has highlighted
the linguistic profile of our country from various standpoints, especially the Languages of
India According to the Census Report and Languages of India According to the Indian
Constitution, which is followed by the repercussions of Classifications, Policies and
Programmes on Languages. The various findings of this chapter are:

5.1. It was difficult to enumerate the number of languages in India. However, various
classifications of Indian languages give different pictures of Indian languages. Moreover,
several languages vary in classifications because of the Agent and the Purpose of
classification. Though Grierson’s Linguistic Survey of India was a significant development
and culmination of the colonial project of classification and standardisations of the Indian
languages, it was non-exhaustive and non-accurate. Moreover, it included the Languages of

250
British India: India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Burma. On the other hand, the People’s
Linguistic Survey of India was an exhaustive survey that provided a detailed view of India’s
living languages and their cultural and social practices to bridge and strengthen the gap
between various languages and arrest the extinction of linguistic, cultural, and biological
diversity.

5.2. Hindi is the Official Language of India and English is the Associate Official language.
India does not have a national language. However, all the 22 languages recognised by the
Indian Constitution are national languages which honour all these languages on equal footing,
and the imposition of any one language over the other is against the wishes of the
Constitution. Of the 28 States, only 15 are linguistically consistent with their names.

5.3. Recognition of the languages in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution seemed to be the
farsighted thinking of the Fathers of the Constitution, but the time flexibility to include more
languages on the List was also a perennial problem. Initially, there were only 14 languages,
but now 22 are on the List, and 45 await their inclusion. Out of the 99 non-Scheduled
languages, 85 languages have more than 25,000 speakers or more than Sanskrit speakers
(24,821) according to the 2011 Census, and it is the Additional Official Language of
Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand which shows the favouritism accorded to a minority
language probably because it is considered a sacred language! Moreover, Sanskrit is
recognised as a Scheduled Language.

5.4. According to the 2011 Census Report, the number of Scheduled languages was 22, and
the number of non-Scheduled languages was 99. A language was Non-Scheduled when it had
more than 10000 speakers. Since it was prestige and recognition of Identity, the non-
Scheduled languages are constantly vying to be included in the Eighth Schedule.

5.5. In India, one State can have more than one Official Language called Additional Official
Language. So, for example, Andhra Pradesh has two official languages- Telugu and Urdu;
Bengal has Bengali and Bodo; Jharkhand has Hindi and 15 other languages; Sikkim has four
Official Languages and eight additional Official Languages. English is the official Language
of four states and one union territory- Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya Nagaland, Sikkim and
Chandigarh. Hindi is the Official Language of Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Haryana, Jharkhand,
Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, Utter Pradesh and Uttarakhand.

5.6. Government is the primary Agent of Language Politics through administrative measures
like linguistic census, surveys, criteria and classifications: For example, the criterion set was
251
unclear in declaring India’s Classical Language. As a result, Odiya had to fight for its status.
Though Pali meets all these criteria prescribed to determine its eligibility as a classical
language, it has not been accorded classical Language, perhaps because it did not have
political clout like other languages. Nevertheless, National Education Policy 2020 considers it
one of India’s classical languages. Similarly, states could declare their Official Languages
even if they are not in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution, owing to which Kokborok
(Tripura), Khasi and Garo (Meghalaya) and Mizo (Mizoram) decorate the status of ‘Official
Language of State.’ Through its policy decisions, the Government can make a language non-
existent. For example, according to the 2011 census, out of the 1369 mother tongues, 22 are
recognised as Scheduled, and 99 as non-scheduled. In addition, through its decision, the
Government has shown that all those languages with less than 10000 speakers are not worth
counting, and their Identity does into the matter. As a result, according to Devy, there are 600
potentially Endangered Languages in India. India’s People’s Linguistic Survey classifies an
additional 197 dialects as Endangered. Over the recent fifty years.

5.7. The Government’s Rationalisation policy is also responsible for language death.
According to the Census Department’s report, there were 6661 raw mother tongue returns in
2001. These raw returns were scrutinised to check whether they were natural languages or
designations provided by the respondents. The rationalisation reduced the number of mother
tongues from 6661 to 1635, by which 26 languages were assigned to the category ‘Others’.
The 1635 mother tongues were further analysed under the existing linguistic information, and
only mother tongues with more than 10000 speakers were considered appropriate languages
for the presentation in the 2001 Census Report. As a result, only 122 languages could appear
on the List. It means 22 languages included in the Eight Schedule and 100 languages with
more than 10000 speakers. In other words, out of the 1661 total raw return mother tongues,
1539 languages were relegated to ‘others’. The number of speakers included in the ‘other’
category was 17 62,388.

5.8. Language agitations or movements to include a language in the Eighth Schedule or to

designate a language as Classical are Movements against the dominance of other languages,
not to preserve language purity. The Maithili Movement, for example, was for a Maithili
linguistic identity. However, the movement fizzled out when the Maithili Language was
regarded as independent, not Hindi's dialect. In addition, calls for membership in the Eight
Schedule or Classical classification for a language are not simply for purity but for
acknowledgement and statement of its uniqueness. For example, Tamils revolted when Tamil
Nadu science textbooks used many Sanskrit terminology. They desired their mother tongue in
252
schools, music, and worship. Thus, it is more than just a campaign for language purity; it also
expresses wrath, powerlessness, and dread towards Hindi and identity recognition.

6. FINDINGS OF CHAPTER FIVE:

In Chapter Five, titled ‘Languages Today’, the researcher examined Mother Tongue,
Language Policies and Language Movements in India. The first part of the chapter dealt with
the problems in the definition of mother tongue, mother tongue and identity formation,
mother tongue and Language identity in a multilingual country and mother tongue and
language death.

In the second part of the chapter, Language Planning and Policies of the Union and state
governments are explained and scrutinised. Policies analysed include Official, Scheduled and
Classical languages and various education policies, including National Education Policy
2020. Finally, in the third part of the chapter, various language movements in post-
Independent India were discussed: Sindh Movement, Anti-English Movement, Tribal
Languages Movement, Anti-Hindi Movement, Gokak Agitation, Hindi -Urdu controversy,
Suba Movement, Konkani Movement. Some of the essential findings of this chapter were the
following:

6.1. Mother Tongue is an elusive concept. Its varied perceptions include native, original,
home, and Language obtained without formal learning. The Census Department of India
displays non-unanimity regarding the definition of the mother tongue.

6.2. Since it is difficult to interpret, test, and explain the concept of the Mother Tongue and
the number of Mother Tongues in India, Planners of Language shun any discussion. The fear
of engaging in discussion has led to the endangerment and death of languages for which
Governments cannot avoid their responsibility regarding the lack of policies.

6.3. Like religion, ethnicity, and gender, Language is also an essential component of Identity.
Identity formation and loss can happen through the use or non-use of Language. Identity
formation and identity assertion in Language can be seen in aspects of Languages like Mother
Tongue, Script, Dialect, and Nation-states. Moreover, a Dialect of a language also can be a
source of identity assertion. Example: Various dialects of Hindi, like Bhojpuri, Maithili,
Rajasthani, and Pahadi, had asserted their right to separate identities. Therefore, the role of
Language and its components in identity politics is enormous.

253
6.4. Various aspects of Language, like scripts and dialects, can be a source of identity
stimulation. For example, India has 193 languages, 1652 mother tongues and ten major
writing systems. These aspects can create a micro-identity, macro-Identity, or primary or pan-
Indian Identity. For example, Assamese provides a micro identity if the Nagari script provides
a macro identity. On the other hand, Sanskrit acted as the cultural gold standard of Identity for
the vast majority of the country by providing a common vocabulary, syntactic structure,
semantic field, themes, modes, and aesthetic perceptions with macro-Identity.

6.5. Language and script create an identity, but sometimes even Language and script also
identified with a religion reinforce the Identity. For example, Urdu with Perso-Arabic script is
identified with Islam, as Sanskrit and Nagari scripts are identified with Hinduism. The
Bengali language is identified with the Brahmos, and the Pali language is identified with
Buddhism. Konkani, written in Roman script, is identified with Christians, and Konkani,
written in Devanagari, is identified with Hindus in Goa.

6.6. In India, one person may enjoy multiple linguistic identities. In addition, primary
identities are linked with higher-level identities, which are valid even for languages. For
example, a resident of Dakshin Kannada may have an identity of his mother tongue, state
language and national Language.

6.7. By labelling a language as a dialect, minor Language, and secondary Language,

Governments can cause identity annihilation. Moreover, the Government’s Reductionist
Policy-assimilating a language group with less than 10000 speakers- is the cause of the loss of
language identity and revolt by the minority language speakers. While laudable from the
‘national’ and administrative point of view, the so-called ‘assimilationist goal’ is a device to
swallow the small fish, leading to the loss of identities for many languages.

6.8. Sociolinguists have identified language shift as the major cause of language death.
Causes of language shift can be personal or administrative. Personal causes of language shift
are obtaining a job, the type of educational system, the influence of the media, or the nature of
the political pressures and Language policies. Administrative causes of Language Shift are
language planning and strategies. If a language is lost, the culture, history, tradition, heritage,
and continuity world- view of that Language are lost. In addition, with the death of a
language, the Identity - individual, communal, and global is lost. Therefore, language death
should be prevented.

254
6.9. Framers of the Constitution had a formidable challenge in settling official language
issues. The Eighth Schedule was neither based on the ideology of Fundamental Rights nor the
principle of equality of opportunity. Instead, it was an arrangement to differentiate between
the majority and minority languages.

6.10. Constituent Assembly was primarily interested in safeguarding one Indian Identity and
its unity, rising above diversity and micro identities. Language identity was not their concern,
but linguistic right was granted to preserve their Identity to establish and administer their
educational institutions.

6.11. Governments use the educational system to develop a national identity through a
dominant language, especially in multilingual countries. For example, the country’s Tri-
lingual Educational Policy compels the students to study dominant languages like Hindi and
English, often sacrificing the study of the mother tongue. This imposition of dominant
languages has left millions of people speaking minority mother tongues and dialects illiterate
in their mother tongue.

6.12. Languages have the power to form communities, societies, and nations and break
them. Therefore, various language movements in India were perceived as movements for
recognising their Identity, rights, and being and becoming.

6.13. A Mother tongue status is negated to a language for various reasons like political
interests, considerable ambivalence regarding the autonomy of the Language, confusion
inherent in the definition of mother tongue, and the dominant unitary philosophy of the
nation.

6.14. In a multilingual country, many languages are acquired through socialisation

seamlessly by participating in the communicative world where the ‘other’ is respected for
‘being different.’ Especially in the twilight zones of states’ borders. In a multilingual country,
the question of inclusion and exclusion or ‘we’ and the ‘other’ is a matter of attitudes from the
perspective of dominant monolingualism.

6.15. In a multilingual country, when one Language dominates, the other languages are
constantly under threat. For instance, when English asserts, Hindi is threatened; when Hindi
asserts, Kannada is threatened; and Kannada asserts Konkani or Tulu or Kodava is threatened.

6.16. A constant call for National Integration exerts tension on minor and minority
languages. It forces the minority and various powerless groups to assimilate with the
255
dominant. National integrationists assert that the ‘mainstream’ is synonymous with the
dominant language or culture.

6.17. Usually, politically and economically deprived classes are constantly threatened by
losing their Language and culture. Thus, though 19,88,350 people speak Kurukh/Oraon, it is
not recognised in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution but Sanskrit, spoken by only
24,821speakers, is.

6.18. Minorities and majorities vastly differ in their attitude towards maintaining linguistic
or cultural identities. For example, in multilingual countries, minorities have an Integration
attitude, whereas the majority have segregation.

6.19. In a multilingual country, Language may cause damage to society. Being related to
Identity and culture, it can quickly stir people, divide and isolate one group from others, and
cause language movements, language riots, and demand for linguistic states

6.20. Colonial languages have created an elitism, stopping the development of the local and
regional languages, blocking the free flow of communication, and leading to cultural
impoverishment by making them believe that local languages are of limited intellect and are
not helpful for cognitive development leading to the disenfranchisement and marginalisation
of native languages.

6.21. Major or minor languages had lived in coexistence without assimilating into India for
thousands of years. However, with their attitude of superiority and inferiority, the colonial
languages threatened to assimilate smaller, weaker, and unequal languages, which created an
imbalance in various languages’ relationships. From the situation where language
maintenance was a rule, they moved to a position where language loss became a rule.

6.22. The Selective language standardisation and modernisation followed by the various
governments have given rise to dominant indigenous languages, which begin to oppress the
more minor languages, a kind of internal colonisation.

6.23. In dominant monolingual countries, language boundaries are sharper as minor

language identities are reinforced because of heightened consciousness, whereas in
multilingual countries, language boundaries merge seamlessly without a break in
communication.

256
6.24. Language policy refers to the various tactics of power that operate at multiple levels in
language planning. The issue of power plays a vital role while determining language policy.
In India, language legitimisation, either through officialisation or through naming, is a
language policy whereby the Census’s Reports of India have sometimes denied the rights to
some mother tongues through their definitions.

6.25. The language policy of the governments can be spelt out in the following areas:
Declaration of official languages, Declaration of Scheduled languages, Policy regarding the
Minority languages, Education policies of the Government, New Education Policy, and
National Education policy.

6.26. There has not been a consistent Education Policy till 1968, and whatever policies
followed were not consistent regarding the use of languages in education. Education Policy
1968 reaffirmed the Three Language Formula. All policies favoured the mother tongue in
education at the primary stage. The fundamental intention behind the ‘The Three language
Formula’ had been national unity and easy intra-state, inter-state, and international
communication. The accomplishment of this objective required adherence to the formula by
the Centre, States, and Union territory governments. However, the policy implementation is
uneven and has yet to achieve its desired results since some states have adopted the Two
Language Formula and others Four Language Formula.

6.27. The complex multilingual nature of our states, emotional and political passions
attached to the Language, rigidity for specific modification in the Three-Language Formula
and disrespect for the spirit of the formula is responsible for its universal non-implementation
of the formula.

6.28. The blatant policy violation is seen in the enthusiasm for making English the medium
of instruction right from the playschool stage. As a result, the mother tongue or first Language
is relegated to oblivion even in remote villages. Moreover, the mad rush for English medium
instruction with an illusion of higher status mobility and possible economic advancement
raises a concern about whether it would result in making not only minority languages
endangered but also reducing the regional and official languages into minority languages.
This fear is clearly expressed by National Language Policy 2020.

6.29. Education being a subject in the Concurrent List, the Centre can only make policy, but
its implementation depends on the States. Therefore, States, which have their political

257
priorities, modify the formula for their political connivance making it either the two languages
formula or the four languages formula.

6.30. Hindi-speaking states have diluted the formula by teaching Sanskrit instead of one of
the modern Indian languages, and some Boards of Education teach French, Spanish or
German without providing them with Hindi or any regional language.

6.31. The formula fails to differentiate between mother tongues and regional languages,
prompting minorities whose mother tongue is not a regional language to pursue minority
identity. In addition, students whose native Language is not the Official or Regional
Language are required to master four languages and three or four scripts.

6.32. There are no concrete and stable definitions for a language, dialect or mother tongue
in a multilingual country like India. Therefore, government officials or Census Departments
determine the status of a language/dialect/mother tongue whose overt or covert motives can
decide the fate of a language.

6.33. As there were no strict criteria to enlist languages in Eighth Scheduled Languages or
Classical languages, it becomes evident that Language per se was not the only reason for
recognising a language.

6.34. Though the Constitution guarantees protection to the minority languages and makes
policies to provide mother tongue education, implementation of these policies varies.

6.35. With all good intentions, the Three-Language Formula has strengthened the National-
level languages in education planning, either implicitly or explicitly, thus legitimising some
minority languages and upholding the nation’s rich diversity.

6.36. Though the Constitution tries to protect the rights of linguistic minorities, there is a
dichotomy between its policy and practice, whereby its practice of Officialisation, Labelling,
and Reductionism minimises minority languages.

6.37. Some states have treated Language as a political weapon to fight the Union
Government rather than treating it as a tool for free access to knowledge and a larger world,
especially by opposing Hindi, which has resulted in making millions of students handicapped
in competing for jobs which is a clear indication that politicians gained mileage at the expense
of the millions of students.

258
6.38. Various language movements or agitations in the country make it obvious the non-
existence of a clear Language Policy. Moreover, language movements clarify that the non-
recognition of linguistic diversity often leads to disintegration tendencies and not recognition.
On the contrary, recognition of linguistic diversity stimulated identity assertion movements.

6.39. The grassroot multilingualism in this country militates against the concept of a
monolithic language state. Thus, a monolithic language state is a myth. Despite the linguistic
rearrangement of States, each State reflects the same multilingualism reflected in the country.
All states of India have a significant variety of multilingual populations, as proved by the
Census Report of India.

6.40. Language not only connects but also successfully separates individuals. It produces
both sentiments of identification and separation. Therefore, Language was utilised to further
group interests wherever conflicting demands for limited resources exist.

6.41. Globalisation has stolen children’s childhood in developing countries by acclaiming

English as the only global Language, denying their mother tongues, and neglecting their
regional languages. Early English education cultivates otherness in our schools

6.42. Additionally, it must be emphasised that anti-Hindi and anti-English campaigns have
damaged the country’s backbone and affected the most vulnerable segments of society.
Consequently, while the rich can acquire Hindi and English, the disadvantaged are doomed to
mediocrity.

6.43. Language movements are social movements that demand a policy or administrative
change to recognise a language or script or dialect for redrawing a boundary, against the
imposition of a language, addition or deletion of a language in education, administration and
assertion of Identity. Language movements also have far-reaching consequences on the
country’s social, economic, political, psychological, and administrative scenarios.

6.44. All linguistic movements are for recognition of their Identity and rights. The majority
of the movements had economic, cultural and communal undertones. For example, if the
Dravidian movement had economic and cultural undertones, north-eastern movements had
ethnic undertones, and Sindhi, Urdu, Hindi and Subha movements had communal undertones.

259
7. MAJOR FINDINGS OF THE RESEARCH:

7.1. Language can unite and divide. Despite having the ability to be divisive, language has
been playing an essential role in the integration of the multilingual, multicultural,
diverse Indian nation. Though it may seem that Language was the cause of potential
disintegration in the 1960s, through language movements and demands for the linguistic
reorganization of states, it was the Language that had been the cause of Integration in India.
Sanskrit had united India through its grammar, Persian through its vocabulary and English
during the British rule as an administrative language to a certain extent and presently through
its power as an occupational and global language. Gandhiji used Hindustani to integrate India
during Freedom Movement.

Even today, the English language is playing an integrating role owing to its global nature and
the changing work patterns like work-from-home and hybrid mode. In the globalised
Information and technology-savvy-internet world, the language that can offer job
opportunities survives. It is undeniable that presently the Language that can provide job
opportunities to the optimum is English. Therefore, English’s power as a global language and
the power to provide job opportunities is accepted even by Government in National
Educational Policy.

However, it cannot be denied that due to modern technology, today’s occupational patterns,
especially online and computer-savvy jobs, are also minimizing the role of Language in
business and occupational communication, as symbolic computer language makes languages
vulnerable. Nevertheless, language with technology is uniting the country and the world.

7.2. Linguistic Reorganisation of the states was politically inevitable though newly
independent India had to resolve many important and urgent problems like the Kashmir issue,
Indo-Pak Border issue, settlement of refugees, economic development of the country etc. The
political inevitability of the linguistic reorganisation had its roots in the promises made by
Indian National Congress in pre-independent linguistic provinces. The creation of Andhra as a
new linguistic state resulting from Potti Sriramulu’s fast unto death propelled new demands
for other linguistic states. The appointment of the JVP Committee in 1948, when the
recommendations of the State Reorganisation Committee were not in favour of establishing
the linguistic states and when the recommendations of the JVP were for postponing the
reorganisation of the states on a linguistic basis, the States were organised on linguistic basis
shows the inevitability of the linguistic reorganization of Indian States. However, the states

260
reorganised after 1956 - Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Chhattisgarh, Goa, Gujarat, Haryana,
Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Punjab, Sikkim,
Telangana, Tripura, and Uttarakhand - were carved out of the existing states gradually due to
other political exigencies and not solely due to linguistic demands is an indication of the
decline of linguistic lustre in the creation of the states.

7.3. Language, region and caste are interrelated in creating an identity. All language
movements were an attempt to alert the governments to recognise their identities officially.
Reorganisation of states on the linguistic basis or recognition of languages in the Eighth
Schedule or as a State Official or Additional Official Language is nothing but the cry for
official recognition of the Identity of a particular linguistic group. The inter-relative power of
religion, region and language in creating an identity is visible in the reorganisation of Punjab
and Himachal Pradesh. The relationship between religion, language and ethnicity is evident in
the creation of North-eastern states. The interrelationship between language and ethnicity or
race is evident in the Dravidian language movements. The interrelated identity formation
happened at a micro or regional level intending to attain political power. As a result, many
regional political parties like DMK, Akali Dal, Asom Gana Parishad, Bodoland Peoples Front
etc., have emerged. These micro identities were never an attempt for the cessation from the
union but a demand for the recognition of their micro-identity within the macro identity called
Indian identity. Therefore, in multicultural India, identity politics has brought about the
linguistic cohesiveness of states and has strengthened the Federal structure of our country.
Language Politics in India has strengthened the Republic’s Federal structure and manifested
the Constitution’s supremacy. Hence, no unit ventured for secession despite umpteen
language movements, clashes, bundhs, dharanas, fasts, and protests. On the contrary, once the
demand for units was met, they remained more integrated with the Union.
7.4. Language Politics continues through language conflicts, language movements, language
policies and educational policies in multicultural India. Many language movements soon after
Independence expressed the political potentiality of language. These movements were
linguistic externally but political in spirit internally. Many a time, language was just an excuse
to score political goals. They were movements to recognise their cultural and linguistic
identity in a multicultural environment. The agitation for identity recognition started when
there was a threat of annihilation or vulnerability to their existence. At the same time, the
movements were an attempt to attain political power that cannot be denied and can be
ascertained by the rising of Dravidian and regional political parties.

261
Today language policies and educational policies are a source of Language Politics though
they have not manifested in a big way like language movements and agitations. When,
through a language or educational policy, a government tries to impose a dominant language -
be it regional or national, be it Kannada or Hindi- the minority languages, to safeguard their
identity, resort to politics. For example, when the Karnataka government imposed instructions
in Kannada medium as compulsory in schools, the Supreme Court gave the right of deciding
the language of instruction to parents of wards. Similarly, the Home Ministry's proposal to
make Hindi the medium of instruction in IITs in the Hindi region and the Local language in
non-Hindi regions has been met with protest. Therefore, language and educational policies are
the sources of language politics.

7.5. Language politics in India is the creation of Governments, Language Elites and Political
parties. It is a creation of the State. Language as Language is apolitical or politically neutral.
However, when Language was used as a tool by language Elites, Political parties and the
State in the case of Integration, States Reorganisation and granting of constitutional status to a
language, it became muddled in politics. Therefore, Language Politics survives despite
National Integration because language Elites and political parties create it.

7.6. Language politics has upheld our country’s multilingual and multicultural spirit. It has
retained and celebrated the multilingual spirit visible in the Eighth Schedule of the
Constitution. The celebration of multilingualism can be seen in our educational policies,
particularly National Education Policy 2020.

8. SUGGESTIONS:

8.1. Need for a Comprehensive Language Policy:

Though India is a multilingual country with ancient Classical and popular languages with a
corpus of world-class literature, India does not have a comprehensive language policy.
Whatever Language policies we have regarding the Official Languages and Policy of Three
Languages are derived from the Constitution and Educational Policies of the Government and
not from a comprehensive language policy. The existing language policies speak about the
Official, Associate-Official, Scheduled, State Official and Classical languages. However,
hundreds of languages do not fall under these categories. For instance, existing policies are
silent about Non-Scheduled, Minority, Vulnerable and Dying languages. Moreover, existing
language policies do not speak about Language Revival, Language Planning. Hence there is a
need for a comprehensive all-inclusive language policy for the country.
262
8.2. Equal Status to all Languages:

Today, the languages of India are divided into National Official languages, State official
languages, Associate Official Languages, Scheduled languages, Non-Scheduled languages,
Classical languages etc. Inclusion of a language in some of these categories is considered
prestigious, whereas non-inclusion is considered non-recognition of the Identity of that
particular language group. Hence Non-recognised language groups under the leadership of
Language Elites and political aegis press to recognise their language identity, which results in
language conflict. Therefore, there is a need to recognise all languages as equal, ending all
types of language politics.

8.3. Scientific Rational Criteria for the Declaration of a Language

Language Politics has often erupted because of the lack of rational scientific criteria. For
instance, there are no rules to declare a language as “Scheduled”. As a result, in 1948, we had
14 languages on the Scheduled Languages List. Later they became 18, and now we have 22
languages. There are 38 languages in the pipeline waiting for the ‘Scheduled’ Language
Status. Neither are there rules to define Associate State Language. As a result, when Urdu was
declared the Associate State Language by Utter Pradesh, Hindi Sammelan filed a Writ
Petition in the Court.

Moreover, the power of deciding a language as a State or Associate Language is vested in the
State Governments, which use its power for its political momentum leading to uncalled-for
political precedents. Therefore, even though the criteria are clear to declare a language as
‘Classical’, it is violated in the case of Pali by not raising that status. Therefore, there is an
immediate need for rational scientific criteria for declaring languages to raise them to their
deserving statuses.

8.4. Treatment of Languages as Social Capital and not a Social Burden:

Language is a medium and component of culture. Governments should avoid treating them as
economic burdens and political nuisances rather than social capital. When languages are
considered possessions of rich and unique culture and heritage, they will recognise their
Identity and prevent death.

263
8.5. Cessation of Language as a Political Weapon:

Language is apolitical and must be treated accordingly. Language is a means of

communication, and its purpose should be restricted to the same. When Language is used as a
pawn to achieve religious, political, casteist, and racial objectives, one who suffers most is
Language and those who speak it. The Language and political Elites have benefitted from
language movements, but the common speakers of that Language have suffered. For instance,
by ‘Angrezi Hataao,’ many youths may lose employment opportunities at the international
level. By ‘Hindi Hataao’, many may be deprived of jobs at the national level. Therefore,
Language should be avoided as a political tool.

8.6. Language Should be Used as a Tool of Economic Development:

Instead of considering many languages as burdens in multilingual countries, they should be

treated as economic development tools. If UNESCO can spend money to prevent the death of
languages globally and generate employment, every country can. If Israel has revived the
Hebrew language, every Government can. The Government must use languages for economic
development through its farsighted Language Policies and planning.

9. CONCLUSION:

It is confirmed based on this study that different groups have formed their Identity based on
Language. When language is used to define ‘who we are, it attains identity-construction
power. When this identity is loaded with emotions and ideology, it gets reinforced. Linguistic
Identity is recognised by the Constitution, labelling it as either a minority, majority or official
Language. The linguistic majority who could garner political clout could form their State on a
linguistic basis. However, linguistic minorities were given the Constitutional Rights to
establish and administer their own educational and cultural institutions and learn in their
mother tongue. The linguistically majoritarian group could meet their demands because of the
right to protest tactics and agitations. All these agitations and movements were not for
secession but for recognising their micro-Identity within the macro-Identity called ‘Indian’.
Indians can best define themselves as a multi-source civilisation, drawing its cultural
impulses, traditions and practices from various heredities of Dravidians and Aryans, who
developed great Dravidian and Sanskrit languages. Moreover, those who came later for
conquest or trade brought their languages, and all have mingled and contributed to this
civilisation called ‘Indians’, our macro or Identity.

264