Looking down, moving up
An interdisciplinary approach to the consequences of the current language
situation that has developed as a result of the elite status of the English
language in India
Manouk Bakermans (3978834) - English language and culture
Dorien Huijser (4174259) - Cognitive and neurobiological psychology
Mare Purkins (3997588) - Philosophy
April 2016
Looking down, moving up
An interdisciplinary approach to the consequences of the current language
situation that has developed as a result of the elite status of the English
language in India
Manouk Bakermans, Dorien Huijser and Mare Purkins
April 2016
University of Utrecht
Capstone project Liberal arts and Sciences
Supervisor: M.M. van Goch
Disciplinary advisor English language and culture: Dr. Allison Kirk
Disciplinary advisor psychology: Dr. Caroline Junge
Disciplinary advisor political philosophy: Dr. Jos Philips
Cover artwork by: Ana Daoud
Contents
Interdisciplinary introduction
p. 1
Chapter 1: The English language and culture perspective
p. 7
By Manouk Bakermans
Disciplinary advisor: Dr. Allison Kirk
Chapter 2: The cognitive psychology perspective
p. 15
By Dorien Huijser
Disciplinary advisor: Dr. Caroline Junge
Chapter 3: The political philosophy perspective
p. 25
By Mare Purkins
Disciplinary advisor: Dr. Jos Philips
Chapter 4: A more comprehensive understanding
p. 35
References
p. 45
Interdisciplinary introduction
In India, there are two opposing attitudes towards English: on the one hand, it is embraced
and used for progress, yet others despise it and see it as a cuckoo-language, pushing out local
Indian languages (Meganathan, 2011). Ever since the 1950s, when India became an
independent country after the British rule, a language debate has been going on. This debate
has been driving a wedge between different societal groups and different political parties into
those in favour of the use of English and those who would rather banish it from India
(Sonntag, 2000). This study focusses on the current language situation that is a result of the
elite status assigned to English in India. In this introduction, a quick overview of the current
language situation is provided.
English as a language of power
When the British first set foot in India, they used a vernacular form of English to trade with
the locals (Annamalai, 2004). There were other European traders active in India as well.
When the European countries started imperialising their trade colonies, the British conquered
the other European traders in India and came to rule the country. This is when English
became a power language: it went from just a language of commerce to the language of
commerce, administration, politics, law and education (Annamalai, 2004).
However, English obtained yet another function. The many different population
groups in India spoke a variety of languages, resulting in a complicated network of a total of
400-odd languages (Rao, 2008, p. 63). English was not spoken as a native language by any of
the Indian population groups, but could function as a lingua franca. Amongst other factors,
this caused English to develop into an omnipresent language that functioned as a means of
communication between the different population groups in India (Annamalai, 2004, pp. 153154).
When the British left India in the 1950s, the new government decided that English was
no longer fit to be the language of power. Instead, Hindi and several other regional languages
were appointed as national languages in which political business and other important matters
would be conducted; an order was given to translate the existing English documents into the
new languages of power (Annamalai, 2004).
However, English was not banished from the education system. It was even supported
by the three-language formula, an educational policy advocating the teaching of three
1
different languages (see below). In fact, the society’s preference for teaching English only
increased and is still increasing nowadays. This is one of the many ways in which the Indian
society shows its favour for the English language in comparison to Indian languages.
Currently, English is seen as a language of modernity and progress, whereas local
languages are linked to tradition and cultural values (Annamalai, 2004). This preference is not
irrational: English does provide a way of moving upwards in the Indian society (Agnihotri,
1997). The ability to use English does not only provide a better chance of being admitted to
higher education, it also provides a better job perspective (Azam, Chin, & Prakash, 2013). A
government report even stated the following: “In the current scenario, an understanding and
command over the English language is a most important determinant of access to higher
education, employment possibilities and social opportunities” (NKC, 2009, p. 13). Although
people who do not speak English may get a job, wages of men who speak a little English are
on average 13% higher and wages of men who speak fluent English are on average 34%
higher than the wages of men who do not speak English (Azam, Chin, & Prakash, 2013).
English thus used to be an elite language and is still seen as one, since it was spoken by only
higher societal classes, namely those of the (British) rulers. At the moment, the elite that is
central to this study, equals the 6% of the Indian society that speaks English and received
tertiary education (Annamalai, 2003).
English education
In India, the educational system consists two types of schools: private schools and
government schools. Private schools are independent of the government and generally charge
fees, in contrast to government schools (Muralidharan & Kremer, 2006). Since private
schools are market-driven, they are more likely to guarantee educational quality. Private
schools are not restricted by government guidelines and often choose to offer English as a
subject or provide English-medium education from early on (Meganathan, 2011; Mohanty,
Panda & Pal, 2010). On the other hand, government schools offer free education and are selfevidently bound by government restrictions.
One of these government restrictions is the three-language formula (TLF), established
in 1968. This policy recommends that all government schools teach up to three languages in
middle and high school (Hornberger & Vaish, 2009). The languages differ based on mother
tongue, regional language and the timeframe in which they are offered (the policy changed a
few times). The TLF of 1968 states that until grade 4 (age 9-10 years old) the teaching
through a local language only is recommended, usually the regional standard, but at least an
2
Indian language (Annamalai, 2003). From grade 5 onwards, teaching of a second language as
a subject, usually English or Hindi, becomes obligatory. From grade 8 onwards, yet another
language must be added, such as a modern Indian language or Sanskrit (Hornberger & Vaish,
2009). Because of India’s great variety of languages, the TLF is interpreted and implemented
differently in different states, leading to different combinations of the prescribed languages
(Annamalai, 2003; Mohanty et al., 2010). Government schools are allowed to decide on their
own medium of instruction and the use of English as a medium of instruction increased
immensely during the last few years (Meganathan, 2011). In 2011, more than 25 per cent of
all secondary schools in India claimed to offer English as a medium of instruction
(Meganathan, 2011). Additionally, most tertiary education uses English as medium of
instruction (Annamalai, 2003, p. 188).
Students’ attitudes towards English education
University students already expressed their preference for English in 1988 in a survey by
Aggarwal (1988). The results indicated that most students had a positive attitude towards
English, that they saw it as a prestige language, and that they had instrumental motivation for
studying it (Aggarwal, 1988). The survey also showed that the students would prefer a twolanguage formula over the existing three-language formula, whereby they would only be
taught in their mother tongue and English, and not in a third language, such as Hindi.
Sarangapani (2003) also found this dire wish to learn English amongst younger
students. Even in the small village of Kasimpur, primary government school pupils know that
they will be better off learning English:
According to children the successful man was one who had a regular paying job, and
could sit on a chair and read files; it involved no manual or traditional labour of any
kind. (According to one child: ‘farming is for those who have failed’.) You would
speak English, your name would be known to people and it would carry influence.
(Sarangapani, 2003, p. 412)
The children considered private, English-medium schools to be better than government
schools, one of the reasons being the quality of the English education (Sarangapani, 2003).
This indicates that even these young students were aware of the unequal access to English in
India.
3
Teaching quality
Sarangapani (2003) is not the only researcher who states that access to English is indeed
unequal (e.g., Rao, 2008, p. 67). In India, the definition of a teacher is “a person who teaches
in the classroom”, needing no teacher qualifications (NKC, 2009, p. 26). Therefore, when
children attend government schools, it is simply not guaranteed that they are taught well in
English, or in any subject for that matter.
Teachers in primary government schools are generally poor speakers of English
(Mohanty et al., 2010; Ramanathan, 1999; Annamalai, 2004) and usually lack training in
second language teaching methods (Annamalai, 2003; Mohanty et al., 2010). Most English
teaching practices in the early grades tend to rely heavily on grammar-translation methods,
i.e., the explicit learning of grammatical rules and their translation to the native language
(Rivers, 1981; Mohanty et al., 2010). Teachers deem translation necessary, because of
students’ otherwise low understanding and low interest in the subject matter (Mohanty et al.,
2010; Hornberger & Vaish, 2009). Teachers of English thus find that repetition and rote
memorization of grammatical rules are the only ways in which students have a chance of
passing exams and finishing school (Mohanty et al., 2010; Ramanathan, 1999). Additionally,
books and study guides used in early grades are often of poor quality and tend not to focus on
stimulating students’ interest and curiosity (Mohanty et al., 2010).
Besides there being no regulations for teachers, the current system of education also
does not provide a target level for each of the learned languages, nor is there an indication of
how long the languages should be taught and from what age (Aggarwal, 1988, pp. 290-291).
Consequently, in one school there may be six years of English education, whereas at other
schools there may only be one year. Adding this to the fact that the proficiency of the teachers
does not have to live up to any requirements, there is simply nothing that can be concluded
about a nationwide access to English.
The current study
Summarising, at the moment, there is no guarantee that students from all societal groups get
taught well in English, which deprives them of their opportunities to move upwards. The
current study therefore elaborates on the following research question: What are the
consequences of the current language situation that has developed as a result of the elite status
of English in India?
This research question will be approached from three different perspectives, i.e., in an
interdisciplinary way. Firstly, an interdisciplinary approach is deemed necessary because the
4
study’s focus is complex: the elite status of English has consequences for the whole of Indian
society as well as for its individual parts. Thus, it contains several components that can only
be researched by different disciplines (Repko, 2012, p. 85). Secondly, the current language
situation is a social problem, which asks for a holistic focus in order to fully grasp it and to
potentially provide a solution for it. Thirdly, not one discipline has been able to give a
complete, satisfactory answer to the research question. English linguists have tried to give an
all-embracing answer to the question of English in India, yet they all stayed within the
linguistic area of expertise. This limits the existing insights into the problem to the linguistic
area. However, there is more to language than a linguist is able to take into account, since
some aspects of language are closely related to human behaviour, sociology and psychology.
Linguistics can scratch the surface of these disciplines, but does not fully take them into
account, which disqualifies the discipline to fully answer the question without the help of
other disciplines (Repko, 2012, p. 86).
For the sake of arriving at a complete answer to the research question, all relevant
disciplines should be identified (Repko, 2012, p. 98). Disciplines that could be used to answer
the research question are: English language and culture, political philosophy, cognitive
psychology, anthropology, sociology, economy, politicology, management studies, conflict
studies, postcolonial studies and international studies. Unfortunately, the scope of this study
cannot and will not reach so far that it can include all possible disciplines. It will therefore be
limited to English language and culture, political philosophy and cognitive psychology.
English language and culture is an extensive discipline that has many subdivisions, one of
which looks at how language is a cultural and social entity. Political philosophy studies the
fundamental questions about the state, government, politics, liberty, justice, and the
enforcement of a legal code by authority. Cognitive psychology describes human behaviour
and cognition and sees human behaviour as the reflection of cognitive constructs that
individuals develop to bring order to their mental activity (Repko, 2012, pp. 103-104).
The English language and culture discipline will firstly provide an overview of general
societal positive and negative consequences of the language situation resulting from the elite
status of English in India. Next, the cognitive psychology discipline will elaborate on these
consequences by providing an analysis of the prerequisites of successful second language
learning. It thereby zooms in on teaching (mal)practices in India and their consequences for
learning English as a second language. Lastly, the discipline of political philosophy takes the
theory of multicultural liberalism as a societal ideal and applies this theory to India.
5
Therefore, the research question has been reformulated as three sub-questions; one for each
discipline:
1. English language and culture: What are the consequences of the current language
situation that has developed as a result of the elite status of English on a societal level?
2. Cognitive psychology: What are individual consequences of the language situation
resulting from the elite status of English for the acquisition of English in Indian
education?
3. Political philosophy: Does the elite status of the English language in India pose a
threat to the public ideal of multiculturalism as described by Will Kymlicka?
In the third part of the study, the findings of the three disciplines will be integrated to create
an answer to the main research question. During the integration process, the researchers will
look for common ground to form a more comprehensive understanding of the integrated
answer (Repko, 2012). Finally, by providing an all-embracing answer, a solution might be
found for the consequences of the current language situation that has developed as a result of
the elite status of English in India.
6
Chapter 1: The English language and culture perspective
What are the consequences of the current language situation that has developed as a result of
the elite status of English on a societal level?
Manouk Bakermans (3978834)
Positive consequences
There is no linguistic community of native English speakers in India, though there is a small
number of people with mixed Anglo-Indian heritage who have English as a native language
(Annamalai, 2004, p. 152). Sanskrit and Persian used to be other dominant languages, and the
Brahmins and Muslim elite controlled these. That is one of the reasons why not only speakers
of English but also minority language speakers are in favour of English in India: where other
languages have groups of native speakers who are born with the benefits of their prestige
language, the English language does not entail such a “natural” elite in India.
Consequently, knowledge of the English language provides an opportunity to gain
power for the people who have a low income and speak a minority language that in the
current system does not have a high status (Annamalai, 2004). Since there are almost no
native speakers to compete with, these people have an opportunity to be on the same foot with
people of higher classes who speak majority languages.
However, as stated in the interdisciplinary introduction, there is no equal access to
English education. The ability to vertically move up on the social ladder by learning English
is not realistic for everyone. In fact, the only difference between the elite groups of speakers
of Sanskrit and Persian and the elite group of speakers of English is nativism. Where the
Sanskrit and Persian speakers are born elite and are native speakers of this elite language, the
elite of English speakers acquire the language somewhere early in their life. In order to learn
English, one has to have good English education. Expensive private schools are more likely to
offer good English education than government schools (Sarangapani, 2003). Consequently,
the elite who are born rich are the elite who have the most access to English. Therefore, the
English elite is still native in a way. The children of the elite are born into it, yet there are
more steps and therefore more possible ways for the lower classes to join the elite.
In their research on English-medium education and social fracturing, Faust and Nagar
(2001) paraphrase a finding in a study by Kumar (1996): “dependence on an Indian language
has become a symbol of deprival under the circumstances created by the ascendance of
English in a neocolonial context” (Faust & Nagar, 2001, p. 2882). English is seen as a tool to
7
move up the social ladder and has increased in use so much that it has pushed out other
languages. To some speakers of Indian minority languages, this newfound dominance of
English is a good thing, since they see it as a release from dependence on another Indian
power language. In other words: even if there is no or little access to English education, the
English take-over of matters previously handled in Indian power languages is seen as a step
away from dependence on and suppression by Indian languages.
Tollefson (1991) argues that in order to gain equality in countries, no languages
should be picked. He states:
Human institutions may not yet be able to provide a social structure in which
everyone can live their lives using their own language(s), but we should not deceive
ourselves into thinking that second language acquisition guarantees equal economic
opportunity, political participation, and justice. Each time a society requires some
people to learn another language in order to carry out human activities necessary for
survival, an act of injustice has occurred that places those people at a disadvantage.
(p. 210)
This verdict, when applied to India, does not really embrace all features of India’s English
problem. Indeed, people have to learn English in many cases to get jobs or better wages, yet it
is still possible to live and earn a living without knowing English. The verdict also does not
apply to the Indian situation in the sense that it should be “some people” who have to learn a
second language, since in India it’s almost all people who have to actually learn English
because the Anglo-Indian population is so very small. For these reasons, English seems a
better option than other languages that could be picked.
However, according to Faust and Nagar (2001), people who are unable to speak
English are discriminated in society. Rao (2008) described other incidents of discrimination
occurring in India. This time, it was not against people who could not speak English but
against people who could not speak the standard language of a region or school. In his study,
Rao found that students of minority mother tongues were bullied by both teachers and
students alike in school. This bullying did not only occur when these minority language
students spoke their own native language, but also when they attempted to speak the regional
or majority language (Rao, 2008). One way of preventing these reasons for bullying to exist is
to make English the medium of education so that no one speaks his/her first language and can
8
be discriminated for doing so. That way, everyone is on the same foot and no one can be
bullied for the language he or she speaks in school.
Negative consequences
As was evident in the previous section, some speakers of minority languages support the use
and education of English because they see it as a way to prevent speakers of Hindi or
dominant regional Indian languages from dominating them. However, any “majority”
language can be “the culprits of extinction of minority languages in any given society” (Rao,
2008, p. 67). Therefore, supporting the increase of power of English over another dominant
language does not provide a solution. A tribal or similar minority language will not be saved
from extinction by pushing forward English as the language of power. Maybe it makes the
minority groups feel less dominated because there is no group of native speakers, yet there
will still be an elite and a dominant language: the pressure on the minority language will not
go away.
In fact, it can be stated that English is a “cuckoo-language”, pushing out minority
languages (Annamalai, 2004). Speakers of minority languages in India see English as a model
language. English has a script whereas some minority languages do not have that. There is a
broad range of documents and literature available in English, whereas the Indian languages
that do have script do not usually have such a broad variety of scripted documents
(Annamalai, 2004). The speakers want their language to catch up with English and take it as
an example (Annamalai, 2004). During the catching up of their languages, English remains in
an exemplary position, yet more and more literature and documents will be created.
Consequently, their languages will keep lagging behind. This is another aspect of the cuckoo
function of English.
Rao (2008) describes another negative consequence of the current way of educating
English. He states that it is very important for a child to become proficient and be supported
in the mother tongue (Rao, 2008, p. 68). If a child’s mother tongue is not fully developed and
supported in education, this results in several problems both in education and in life itself
(Rao, 2008, p. 68). A way of preventing these problems from happening is to keep education
at a young age in the mother tongue and then slowly move towards English. That way, there
is a sufficient development of the mother tongue, which ensures that the memories will not be
disturbed; yet the benefits of English are present.
As has been stated in the interdisciplinary introduction, almost all of the tertiary
education uses English as medium of instruction (Annamalai, 2003, p. 188). Consequently,
9
Indian children who are good at one or more subjects but not at English are likely to be
deprived of tertiary education (Annamalai, 2003, p. 188). In a country such as the
Netherlands, where English is also a prominent language in tertiary education, tertiary
education in Dutch is still possible. Therefore, it is possible for someone who is very good at
maths but not at English to attend a university. In India, it can be stated that this is almost
impossible: a student has to know English in order to study at a university or a similar
educational institution.
The desire of Indian parents to have English-medium education for their children is
mostly based on their wish for their children to perform well in life and be successful in
international affairs. However, if these parents indeed put their children into English-medium
schools, it is possible that their initial level of English is not high enough (Annamalai, 2003,
p. 188). Consequently, the understanding of the subjects will decrease immensely
(Annamalai, 2003, p. 188). This will make tertiary education and sufficient knowledge an
even more unreachable goal.
For the students who were born in middle and high classes, this English-medium
education is more likely to be fruitful. The parents have enough money to get them to
expensive private schools that do provide sufficient English education (Annamalai, 2003, p.
188-9). Additionally, these families often have members going back one or several
generations who have learned English as well (Annamalai, 2003, p. 188). Consequently, their
use and practice of English will be supported and improved in their home situation. Since
their initial level of English is higher than that of students from lower classes, they do not
suffer from loss of understanding of the subjects because these are taught in English
(Annamalai, 2003, p.189). The popular English-medium secondary and tertiary education is
therefore very positive for the middle and high classes in India, but it does not serve the lower
classes.
However, it must also be mentioned that in Aggarwal’s empirical research on the
three-language formula, most of the middle-class university students indicated that they were
almost never exposed to English outside of school (Aggarwal, 1988). Therefore, it should be
stated that students can also join the university without being exposed to English outside of
school. Good English education before entering university then seems to be the most
important requirement.
The enforcement of the power of English does not only take place in India. There is a
demand for Indian speakers of English caused by international trade (Annamalai, 2004). In
order to trade with an Indian company, a foreign company must communicate with it. English
10
already enjoys a globally dominant position for these kinds of communication. In his review
on Crystal’s book English as a global language (1997), Sussex describes this as follows:
“The extent of its [English] quantitative and qualitative domination of international
geopolitics, science, commerce, communications, technology, politics, and consumer culture
is evident in journals like English Today, World Englishes, and English World-Wide” (Sussex,
1999, p. 121). In other words, English is typically the used language for international trade.
Therefore, the self-sustaining spiral is reinforced even more: people from middle and high
classes who are able to afford good English education do not only have more chances in
further education and finding a job, but also in being involved in international trade,
increasing their wealth even more.
In his study on nativization of English in India, Annamalai states that English stands
for modernity and progress and that regional languages stand for tradition and cultural values.
Therefore, the economic value of English has gone up and that of the native languages has
gone down (Annamalai, 2004). This explains the desire of the Indian society to learn English
even more. It also increases the upward power spiral of English.
In their study on English-medium education, Faust and Nagar (2001) find the
following: “Alienation occurs between family and students that specialise in a subject for
which they are required to speak English very well” (Faust & Nagar, 2001, p. 2881). To really
become part of the English-speaking elite, students also have to adopt the modern values that
accompany it, making this gap between them and the family bigger. Therefore, loss of culture
is another negative consequence of the current way English is dealt with in India.
As has already been mentioned in the previous section, in India, people who do not
speak English are discriminated against at times (Rao, 2008; Faust & Nagar, 2001). Faust and
Nagar quote a few personal stories of people being discriminated against because they did not
speak English or did not speak it well enough and then state the following:
The above testimonies point out, in subtle but forceful ways, the symbolic and
material power that comes from English-medium education, and the manner in which
those who do not speak English experience social marginalisation and
disenfranchisement. (Faust & Nagar, 2001, p. 2880)
In other words, the way English is idealised and regarded as a superior language has negative
consequences for those who do not speak it. However, there is evidence that this
discrimination from speakers of dominant languages against speakers of minority languages
11
would happen regardless of English (Faust & Nagar, 2001; Rao, 2008). Nonetheless, where it
used to be native Indian languages that took up that position, English has taken it up now and
caused the same variety of negative consequences, as a native Indian language would have
done previously.
Disciplinary conclusion
The current language situation that has occurred as a result of the elite status of English has
many downsides, as can be concluded from the sections above. The few positive
consequences can actually all be explained by English providing an alternative for other
dominant languages in India. The only difference between English as a power language and
Indian elite majority languages as a power language is that English does not have a group of
native speakers who are born elite. Therefore, it is questionable whether the English
alternative actually offers any benefits to the lower classes. This is especially true since the
access to English can be linked to another form of being elite: possession of money. Money is
an important determinant in whether or not a child learns English sufficiently to use it to its
potential.
This study has mostly focussed on the positive and negative consequences of English
on Indian society. Currently, the globalising world tends to take up English as a global
language of communication in many areas (Sussex, 1999). In order for India to be part of this
globalising world, it can be stated that knowledge of English is required. However, the way
the language seems more of a product now that can be afforded by middle and high classes
only is preventing other classes from joining the globalisation and benefitting from it.
The way English is dealt with right now is unfair to people of lower classes who want
to learn English and often are taught a little English, but are unable to master it the same way
the middle and higher classes can. However, since there is no native elite, there lies a
possibility in this idolisation of English. If education improves, English might prove to be a
language that does indeed enable vertical social mobility. Maybe, the situation just asks for
better English education. In the 2009 state report it is likewise stated: “But there are a very
large number of people who simply do not have the resources for such investment [in private
English education]. The outcome is exclusion. We believe that inclusion is possible through
public provision” (NKC, 2009, p. 27).
12
Disciplinary solution
The writers of NKC state report asked several professionals who are involved in English
education whether or not they thought it would be possible to provide good English education
for everyone throughout the whole country: “The Commission engaged in informal
consultations on this subject with a wide range of people in government, academia, media and
industry. […] There was unanimity that this can and should be done” (NKC, 2009, p. 27). So
if the Indian society is so keen on learning English sufficiently, if it benefits the whole society
and if professionals agree that it is possible, maybe the best solution is indeed to improve
English education in India and make the quality of it equal for all societal groups.
The increasing demand for and use of English does not only happen in India, it
happens in other countries and continents as well, for example in Europe. The process is part
of a globalising world and not necessarily only India’s problem, other countries have to deal
with a similar scenario. There is a whole body of literature on the problem of English pushing
out other languages. Debates exist about whether or not it is actually a problem and whether
or not it should be stopped. Further research could apply these debates to the current language
situation in India.
13
14
Chapter 2: The cognitive psychology perspective
What are individual consequences of the current language situation in India for the
acquisition of English in Indian education?
Dorien Huijser (4174259)
At an individual level, the language situation, that the elite status of English in India has
created, brings about many social and educational issues. Because the English language and
culture section discusses the effect of the current language situation on social relations, the
cognitive psychology perspective, as described here, attempts to answer the question: What
are individual consequences of the language situation resulting from the elite status of English
for the acquisition of English in Indian education? As described in the interdisciplinary
introduction, the majority of the Indian people are highly motivated to learn English. Yet, it is
rarely learned as a first language. Therefore, I focus on how a second language (from here on:
L2) is to be learned and what is the case in contemporary Indian education. Firstly, I
summarise the problematic Indian educational practices discussed in the interdisciplinary
introduction. Then, I go on to discuss factors determining attainment levels in learning an L2
and apply these to the Indian educational situation. Lastly, I shortly discuss possible positive
consequences of ultimate attainment in an L2, after which I summarise my findings in the
conclusion.
Problematic practices in Indian education
The current situation in Indian education poses some problems regarding the teaching of
English. Schools differ in when they start offering English and how; in the proficiency of their
teachers, and whether or not teachers are skilled in language teaching. When English is taught
as a subject, the aim is only to learn English. When it is, however, used as a medium of
instruction, it has two goals: to reach proficiency in English on the one hand, and to learn the
content matter of the relevant subject on the other hand.
In many private (costly) Indian schools, English is used as the medium of instruction
from very early on (Mohanty, Panda & Pal, 2010). Usually, middle- or upper-class teachers
work here, who are at least somewhat proficient English speakers and are skilled at teaching
classes (Annamalai, 2004). In contrast, in many government schools, which are free to attend,
teachers are often not trained in language teaching and are not proficient speakers of English
(Ramanathan, 1999; Annamalai, 2004). Originally, according to the Three Language Formula
15
(see interdisciplinary introduction), English is introduced as a subject from Grade 4 or 5
onwards (9-10 years old). However, an increasing number of government schools are
nowadays offering education with English as the medium of instruction (Annamalai, 2003).
The use of grammar-translation methods and the presence of tribal children in the
classroom pose other problems. Firstly, grammar-translation methods are often used in
government schools where English is taught as a subject (Mohanty et al., 2010). As I will
argue, this method is problematic in that it does not stimulate communicative competence,
which is an important aspect of becoming a proficient speaker of an L2. Secondly, tribal
children have an indigenous language as their native language (from here on: L1) and thus
learn English as a third language: they first have to learn the vernacular used in school before
they are able to turn to English (Mohanty et al., 2010). Therefore, an early start with English,
as in English-medium government schools, is for these children not deemed effective in
reaching proficiency in either of the languages.
The second language acquisition process
In order to gain a deeper insight into the individual consequences of the current situation of
English teaching in India, I now turn to some principles that determine the level of attainment
in an L2 and examine to what extent they are obeyed by the educational situation of English
teaching in India.
The critical period hypothesis
A critical period is a biologically predetermined period in time in which a species is most
keen to learn a certain skill, and after which it is deemed impossible to acquire that skill.
Many researchers consider it a given that a critical period exists for L1 acquisition (see for
example Lenneberg, Chomsky & Marx, 1967; Newport & Supalla, 1987), although others
consider it a sensitive, rather than a critical, period. The evidence for such a period in L2
acquisition is, however, less clear. Johnson and Newport (1989) were some of the first to
show that late L2 learners perform less well on a grammaticality judgment task than early
learners, all of the participants being US immigrants:
Subjects who arrived in the United States before the age of seven reached native
performance on the test. For arrivals after that age, there was a linear decline in
performance up through puberty. Subjects who arrived in the United States after
16
puberty performed on the average much more poorly than those who arrived early.
(Johnson & Newport, 1989, p. 90).
These results suggest that that there is a period for L2 acquisition, and it is sensitive rather
than critical. Also, some aspects of language show a different age limit or do not show an
effect of a critical period at all. Vocabulary, for example, seems quite resistant to age effects
(Hummel, 2014). Finally, researchers disagree on the timing of the cut-off point after which it
is considered more difficult to learn an L2. Johnson and Newport (1989) supposed a cut-off at
the age of twenty. Birdsong and Molis (2001), replicating Johnson and Newport (1989), found
that an age of sixteen fitted their data best. DeKeyser (2000) suggests that the cut-off must be
somewhere between six and seventeen years old. Before this age, he argues, children use
implicit learning mechanisms in L1 and L2 learning. After that age, the implicit induction
ability is lost and learners are assigned to using explicit mechanisms.
It must be noted that very few studies on the critical period hypothesis distinguish
between L2 and foreign language learning: many studies focus on immigrants, who are
immersed in the linguistic context of native speakers of the country they migrated to. In India,
there are very few native speakers of English, and therefore, attainment levels will probably
not exactly mirror the levels cited in these studies. Nevertheless, the sensitive period is still
deemed relevant in pointing out the age after which the ability to learn a different language
besides the L1 declines.
The evidence supporting a sensitive period can be used as a justification for offering
an L2 in early grades, like English in many private Indian schools. Attainment levels are
however not significantly higher in five year olds than in nine year olds (Johnson & Newport,
1989; Birdsong & Molis, 2001). This suggests that in India’s case, age is not a significant
factor determining proficiency in English, since English is offered at age nine or ten years old
at the latest. Rather, the learning mechanisms used and the factors described below seem to
play a more important role in the case of English in India.
Input factors
Input quantity
Self-evidently, for one to learn the characteristics of a to be learned language, exposure to the
target language is necessary (e.g., Ellis, 2002). The importance of the amount of input (i.e.,
quantity) is often shown by effects of length of residence on language competence measures
(e.g., Johnson & Newport, 1989; Bongaerts, Van Summeren, Planken, & Schils, 1997): the
17
longer immigrants have stayed in a country, the more input they have received and the higher
their proficiency level is in the language spoken in that country. Frequency effects in
language acquisition occur when more frequent words are learned more quickly. They also
support the idea that input is necessary for the learner to generalise among input (Hummel,
2014). This is in line with DeKeyser’s (2000) suggestion that young learners use implicit
induction mechanisms to learn an L2, thus needing a sufficient amount of input.
Thus, more linguistic input should in practice lead to more linguistic knowledge.
Huttenlocher, Haight, Bryk, Seltzer and Lyons (1991) indeed found that children who
received more linguistic input from their parents developed a greater vocabulary in their L1
than children who receive much less input. Weizman and Snow (2001) found that differences
in the quantity of input of five year olds were related to differences in vocabulary density of
these children. Although these studies refer to L1 acquisition, it is possible that they account
for L2 acquisition as well.
Input quality
Linguistic input needs a certain quality for a language learner to get a grasp of the language’s
syntactic structure, morphology and intonation patterns, among others. The Weizman and
Snow (2001) study showed that vocabulary performance of five year olds was linked to the
residential use of sophisticated words and the frequency of helpful interactions during
conversations. Moreover, outcomes in their study were related to socioeconomic status (SES):
higher educated mothers used more sophisticated English words than lower educated mothers.
Consequently, mothers’ SES was related to higher vocabulary scores among their children
(Weizman & Snow, 2001).
Concerning syntactic development, children who receive more syntactically complex
input from their parents master those syntactic structures better (Huttenlocher, Vasilyeva,
Cymerman & Levine, 2002). More importantly, greater syntactic growth was found in classes
where the teacher’s speech was more syntactically complex (Huttenlocher et al., 2002).
Morgan, Meier and Newport (1987) found that cues marking the phrase structure of
sentences, such as prosody, function words and morphology, determined whether
undergraduates would learn the syntax of a finite grammar language successfully. They
concluded that these cues facilitate syntactic learning and at least some cue to word groupings
is necessary to learn the syntax of a new language.
Young L2 learners are still quite sensitive to the aforementioned morphosyntactic cues
(DeKeyser, 2000). Non-native L2 users are, however, known to often omit or misuse
18
inflectional morphemes that mark the phrase structure of sentences (Clahsen, Felser,
Neubauer, Sao & Silva, 2010). This suggests that when an L2 teacher does not master the L2
well, he might not give the learner enough input to learn the language’s syntax completely.
Thus, a certain proficiency level in English is necessary for teachers to be able to provide
input of sufficient quality (see Richards, 2010).
From these perspectives, there are two implications for Indian education. Firstly,
children of the English-speaking elite have a greater chance to acquire English sufficiently
than their vernacular-speaking compatriots, because of the higher SES and higher English
proficiency of their parents. Secondly, because government school teachers are generally
quite poor speakers of English (Ramanathan, 1999; Annamalai, 2004), they do not serve as an
ideal linguistic example for their students. It therefore becomes difficult to create a sufficient
learning context for government school students, in contrast to private school students, who
receive input from teachers who generally speak English well (Annamalai, 2004).
The role of teachers
The role of teachers is of crucial importance for learning an L2, especially when it is not
spoken at home. Teachers are assumed to be familiar with the target language and can
therefore steer the language acquisition process in the appropriate direction. Here, I will
discuss feedback on form and content and the importance of interaction in language learning.
Feedback
A major distinction of feedback is in explicit and implicit feedback, which can be on
linguistic form as well as on content. Explicit feedback is the pointing out of an incorrect
utterance and correcting that utterance. With implicit feedback, the teacher does not explicitly
tell the student which part of the utterance is incorrect, often aiming at provoking a correction
by the student himself (Lyster & Saito, 2010). Recasts, implicit reformulations of all or part of
the student’s utterance (Lyster & Saito, 2010, p. 279), can be either explicit or implicit,
depending on the context. A problem with recasts as feedback on linguistic form might
however be that “learners might not be able to determine whether negative feedback is a
model of the correct version or a different way of saying the same thing.” (Mackey, 1999, p.
561). Prompts, such as elicitation, metalinguistic cues, clarification requests and repetition,
are a type of implicit feedback on form (Lyster & Saito, 2010). As opposed to explicit
feedback, they do provide opportunities for students to correct their own mistakes. As
explained below, these opportunities can play an important role in learning to master an L2.
19
The importance of interaction
The interaction hypothesis (Long, 1983), states that interactional modification is necessary to
make input comprehensible to promote language acquisition, a statement confirmed by many
studies (e.g., Loschky, 1994). Making speech comprehensible can be done by linguistic and
conversational modifications, but also by negotiation for meaning – i.e., interactions aimed at
achieving mutual understanding – and negative feedback – i.e., drawing attention to incorrect
utterances (Lyster & Saito, 2010).
Mackey (1999) suggests that learners need to have opportunities for output during
interactions, echoing the comprehensible output hypothesis (Swain, 1985). This hypothesis
states that having to communicate in the target language contributes to language learning: by
producing output, learners are forced to pay attention to the means of expression needed to
successfully convey the message. This hypothesis is backed up by the generation effect in
memory, in which retrieval and production of information cause the strengthening of
connections in memory, thereby increasing learning (Baddeley, Eysenck & Anderson, 2015;
see Lyster & Saito, 2010 for more evidence). The comprehensible output hypothesis predicts
that active participation in interaction should improve language acquisition, which is what
Mackey (1999) found: only groups that actively participated in the interaction showed
increases in developmental stages of question formulation. These groups also produced more
high level structures than those who only observed the interaction or did not negotiate during
the interaction.
These results suggest that the grammar-translation method currently used in Indian
government classrooms where English is taught as a subject, might not be the ideal teaching
approach, since it only explicitly emphasises linguistic form and memorization of
grammatical rules (Hummel, 2014; Mohanty et al., 2010). Additionally, explicit teaching
methods at an early age seem ineffective, because younger children rely on implicit, rather
than explicit, learning mechanisms when learning an L2 (DeKeyser, 2000). This does not
necessarily indicate that the complete educational system in India is to be transformed.
Rather, teachers can be told to stimulate interactions in English, in order to increase oral
fluency. Additionally, providing relevant, implicit feedback on students’ language production
is recommended in order to evoke attention to gaps in their L2 competence. When teachers
are not able to do so because of their own difficulties with English, this can have negative
consequences for the language learning trajectory of the students.
Negotiation for meaning is an interaction between teacher and students or between
students, aimed at achieving mutual understanding. Because of the dual aim of English20
medium education, namely acquiring English as well as learning subject material, negotiation
for meaning is highly likely to be used there. English-medium education often occurs in
private schools, where teachers are well trained and are good English speakers. However, in
primary government schools using English-medium education, teaching and teacher quality is
generally lower (Mohanty et al., 2010).
There are two important implications in this context. Firstly, when starting Englishmedium education at an early age, a student without any knowledge of English could miss a
lot of subject matter important to pass the class if he or she does not master English well
enough. Consequently, the student will not only lag behind in English, but in all of the other
subjects in school as well. This can cause higher drop-out rates and thus fewer economic
opportunities. Secondly, to compensate for this lack of understanding of English, many
teachers in primary, English-medium government schools focus more on the content than on
linguistic form, in contrast to schools where English is taught as a subject (Mohanty et al.,
2010). Consequently, learning English takes a backseat to learning the subject matter,
affecting students’ attainment levels of English. Either way, in order to prevent dropping out
of school, both students and teachers prefer moving up to higher classes over learning English
(Annamalai, 2003). It seems that a combination of focus on form as well as on meaning are
both of importance in the English-medium government classroom: for achieving English
proficiency as well as for gaining knowledge of the subject matter.
The role and status of the L1
In second language acquisition (SLA), the L1 plays an important role in determining the ease
of acquisition of the L2. Contrastive analysis is often used to determine similarities and
differences between L1 and L2, whereby the L1 can interfere with L2 learning (Hummel,
2014, p. 61). Positive transfer occurs when languages are typologically similar, e.g., when
their morphosyntax is similar or when their vocabularies show many cognates (Hummel,
2014). English is an Indo-European language, whereas many Indian languages belong to
different language families (Pattanayak, 1998). Consequently, the L1 of Indian students often
differs so much from the L2 that positive transfer is unlikely to occur.
Similarly, the interdependence hypothesis states that the proficiencies in L1 and L2
are interdependent (Cummins, 1979): “The competence reached in a given language X is
dependent on the competence reached in language Y” (Huguet, Vila & Llurda, 2000, p. 315).
Many studies indeed confirmed that this is accurate (e.g. Cummins, 1991; Huguet et al., 2000;
Ramirez, 1992). Ramirez (1992) found that transitioning gradually from instruction through
21
the L1 to through the L2 (i.e., a late-exit transitional program) seemed to help learners of
English in their L2 development more than when students were taught more or less
exclusively in English. Altogether, studies suggest that a firm basis in L1 is very much
facilitative for SLA:
Allowing students to make explicit reference to their L1 may lead to an increased
awareness of relationships between meanings and forms across languages. In addition,
in minority-language contexts, acknowledging the L1 of students may be an important
part of validating their personal experience and linguistic heritage.” (Hummel, 2014, p.
127).
These findings implicate that starting early in L2 teaching is not necessarily better: a firm
basis in the L1 needs to be established first, not only because of linguistic reasons, but also
because of social ones. Dual language instruction is an educational program oriented towards
reaching proficiency in both languages. Studies show that such programs lead to superior
results in English proficiency when it is learned as an L2 (Lindholm-Leary, 2001, cited in:
Hummel, 2014) as opposed to immersion programs, where the L1 is not used anymore.
Especially for tribal children, who come to the primary school mostly unfamiliar with the
vernacular of the region, a gradual transition to the vernacular firstly and to English secondly
would be highly beneficial compared to the current situation, where there is no support
whatsoever for their L1.
Positive effects of second language learning
Mastery of the L2 on a sufficient level and active usage of both languages bring some
cognitive advantages, for example on intelligence measures (Peal & Lambert, 1962),
measures of executive control (Bialystok, 2011; Barac & Bialystok, 2012; Bialystok, Poarch,
Luo & Craik, 2014) and perspective taking (Greenberg, Bellana & Bialystok, 2013). Overall,
bilinguals, irrespective of what kind (e.g., simultaneous or successive) seem to show more
mental flexibility and fewer interference effects, as opposed to monolinguals. How much gain
there is depends on several factors, such as age of learning the L2, degree of usage of the L2
and proficiency in the L2. Advantages usually become noticeable most often in adulthood
(Bialystok et al., 2014) and depend on the degree of bilingualism: fully bilingual children
performed better on a metalinguistic task than partially bilingual children in Grade 1
(Bialystok, 1988). Also, earlier bilinguals were better at suppressing incongruent trials in an
22
inhibition task, suggesting they experience greater advantages in cognitive control than later
bilinguals or monolinguals (Luk, De Sa & Bialystok, 2011). On linguistic measures, such as
vocabulary scores, the results are less clear-cut: the nature of the advantage depended on the
relation between the L1 and L2 and subjects’ schooling experiences (Barac & Bialystok,
2012).
Early bilingualism thus seems to result in more cognitive advantages than late
bilingualism. To experience these advantages, however, both languages must be used actively
and there must be sufficient, qualitative input in order to reach a satisfactory proficiency level.
Input quality and active usage, therefore, take precedence over age of acquisition in achieving
satisfactory attainment levels. Thus, students in private schools using English as the medium
of instruction can benefit from these cognitive advantages, because English there is offered
from early on and these schools generally offer sufficient quality, English-only, input. For
government schools offering English as a subject, bilingualism can be seen as an ideal rather
than reality, because there is only marginal, low quality input by teachers and everyday usage
of English is not stimulated. Moreover, in English-medium government schools, the effect of
teaching English from early on is also negligible, because English utterances are often still
translated because of low understanding and English is not actively used here either (Mohanty
et al., 2010).
Disciplinary conclusion
The elite status of English in India makes for the desire of learning English early. Although
the main objective of this early start is to achieve English proficiency, many prerequisites of
ultimate attainment in English as a second language are not yet met. I have argued that age,
input quality and quantity, teacher feedback, interaction and language support are all
important factors in determining attainment levels in a second language. The current situation
is one where people with more money can afford higher quality education and therefore have
a greater chance of reaching a sufficient level of proficiency in English. People who cannot
afford private education are left with low quality input, teachers and teaching methods,
making the goal of proficiency more into an ideal than into reality. Generally, unequal
educational chances, as seen in costly private versus free government education, result in
unequal linguistic competences that have their effects on a higher level, e.g., in economic
opportunities. Thus, providing education for language teachers both in terms of their English
proficiency as well as their teaching methods should help lift educational quality in primary
government schools. Moreover, especially in government schools, the focus should be on
23
offering support for students’ native languages, making for a gradual transition towards
English. Offering equal educational chances this way seems a fruitful starting point for
achieving equal attainment outcomes.
24
Chapter 3: The political philosophy perspective
Does the elite status of the English language in India pose a threat to the public ideal of
multiculturalism as described by Will Kymlicka?
Mare Purkins (3997588)
Disciplinary introduction
In the following part of this interdisciplinary research project, the focus will be on the societal
aspect of the elite status of the English language in India. The problem will be addressed from
a philosophical point of view. Specifically, the elite status of the English language will be
tested against the public ideal of liberal multiculturalism as described by Will Kymlicka.
When one’s language is being marginalised, for example, because it is associated with
a lower socioeconomic status, therefore becoming less desirable compared to another
language, people are motivated to learn a second language that gives them a better chance at a
higher socioeconomic status. In India, this language is English, which is primarily spoken by
the elite of society. Learning English is often accompanied by getting accepted by the elite
and adapting to their cultural standards. Because individuals are motivated to move up the
socioeconomic scale, they are willing to leave their vernacular background behind and dive
into the culture associated with the elite language. The loss of cultural background that is
accompanied by this process is seen as problematic by Kymlicka’s liberal multiculturalism.
According to Kymlicka, cultural background is important for individuals because it
enables individual autonomy. Culture provides people with a range of options which they can
choose from to live the life they wish to live and functions as a background from which they
can exercise their autonomy. Also, culture is valuable for an individual’s self-respect. If the
culture a person is part of is being marginalised, this will affect the way he or she perceives
him or herself in a negative way. The culture a person is originally part of is something that is
not easily set aside, and giving it up for another culture comes with great difficulties.
Therefore, individual’s original cultural backgrounds are worth protecting (Kymlicka, 1989;
1995). These notions outline Kymlicka’s basic ideas, which will be elaborated on further.
As seen in the interdisciplinary introduction, Indians increasingly prefer Englishmedium education to indian-medium education. Whereas local languages are linked to
tradition and cultural values. English is seen as the language of modernity and progress
(Annamalai, 2004). Indians are stimulated to learn English by, for example, the better job
perspectives it provides, higher wages (Azam, Chin, & Parkash, 2013) and an overall gain in
25
socioeconomic status (Agnihotri, 1997). Seeing English as a prestige language also motivates
students to learn it (Aggarwal, 1988). It is clear that English is associated with moving up the
social ladder, but the focus in this part of the study will not be on the power or status that
learning the English language provides, although they do play an important role in individual
motivation to learn English. The analysis presented here will thus focus on the individual
perspective of how these advantages motivate people to give up on their vernacular
backgrounds, and why this is problematic.
The central question that will be asked in this part of the study is: Does the elite status
of the English language in India pose a threat to the ideal of multiculturalism as described by
Will Kymlicka? It will become clear that, according to this ideal of liberal multiculturalism,
the elite status of the English language causes a loss of cultural background and therefore
restrains the autonomy of individuals. The case of the elite status of the English language in
India is an interesting one because, as shown by the previous disciplinary parts, the elite status
of English has both advantages and disadvantages. By analysing the situation in India
according to the ideal of Kymlicka, an attempt is made to gain more insight into the dynamics
of the problem and possible solutions for the disadvantages that accompany English as an
elite language.
How the educational system maintains the elite status of English
First of all, it is important to make clear what is meant when mentioning the ‘the English
elite’. The English elite refers to the elite of Indian society who continue their education
beyond secondary school through the English-medium. They make up 6% of the population
but have a large amount of power and wealth, disproportionate to their number. The decision
makers in the government and opinion makers in society are drawn from this elite class. They
view and profile English as the most suitable medium for the government and in education.
English, on the one hand, is seen as an ethically neutral second language of the Indian people
because it does not favour any linguistic group. But because English is the language of the
elite, it is not class neutral (Annamalai, 2003, p. 179). The Indian government plays an
important role in maintaining the elite status of the English language. As will be shown, the
educational system is an important factor in this process.
The elite status of the English language in India is expressed in two ways. First of all,
it is the language used by the elite of society and the Indian government. In the colonial
period, it became the language of power in India, and it still is nowadays. A second way in
which the elite status of English is expressed is the fact that the English language is associated
26
by the Indians with prestige and seen as a key to a higher socioeconomic status. This
intrinsically motivates the Indians to get English education (Aggarwal, 1988).
The current educational system contributes to the elite status of the English language.
It keeps the elite status of the English language in place by enhancing the value of the excolonial language. This value is determined by the complex interrelationships between types
of schools, the power and domination of elite group due to their ability to speak English, and
the conviction that students will have higher chances of social and economic success by being
educated in English (Dua, 1993, p. 302). English medium-education is seen as a ticket to
‘vertical mobility’ or ‘upward mobility’, the entrance to a higher socioeconomic class, in
Indian society (Faust & Nagar, 200, p. 2880). This is desirable in a country like India where
class divisions are historically and culturally very strict. The best English-medium schools in
India are privately owned, and because of the demand for these schools, the costs are
increasing rapidly. This process is reinforced because the quality of government schools
keeps on going down (Kumar 1996). English-medium school fees are high and some require
costly “donations” in order for students to be accepted. Because of these costs involved,
English-medium education is often just within or just out of reach for the (lower) middle class
Indians. It therefore it requires sacrifices (Faust & Nagar, 2001, p. 2880).
The educational system in India, with on the one hand the English-medium for the
select few and on the other hand the Indian-medium schools for the majority, maintains social
inequality and creates tension. This forms a sharp contrast with claims made by the Indian
government that schooling is a means of levelling the social differences in society
(Annamalai, 2003, p. 190). As a result, the social inequality of the Indian society is turned
into a specifically educational inequality. Because the rate of expansion of scientific and
technical education in English, the language has become unchallengeable in its position and
almost impossible to replace by one of the national languages, Hindi, or any other Indian
language (Dua, 1993, p. 302).
The English-speaking elite contributes to the elite status of the English language.
Compared with other elites in the Indian society, they are fairly large in number, well
organised and have various professional associations through which they have resisted the
move towards changing the English-medium of instruction at the university level. They have
also resisted from switching from English to the national language, Hindi, as the central and
regional official languages, claiming that it would adversely affect politico-geographic
integration, the all-Indian character of the administrative services, and the development of
science and technology. This has helped the English elite maintain their power and control
27
over the non-elite (Dua, 1993, p. 304). It has also strengthened the overall hold of the English
language. The elite, who make up most of the government positions, stand to gain more than
they lose in keeping the English language in its present place (Dua, 1993, p. 299). In general,
the arguments for supporting English-medium education are widespread in India, even among
the non-elite. This is partly due to the social power of the English-elite that claim that the
overall Indian society benefits from the use of English (Annamalai, 2003). This in spite of the
actual applicability it has to the Indian society at large. In fact, for the non-English speaking
majority of society, the use of English is a disadvantage. It could be said that the non-elite is
manipulated by the dominant elite group to legitimise the use of English in order to sustain
their power and control. The arguments for using English are accepted as valid by the elite
group based on the existing usage and practical use it has for them (Dua, 1993).
The educational system and the elite status of the English language are used by the
English elite to retain their control on society. The English speaking ruling class has defined
knowledge and skills that they argue are needed to sustain a vast centralised bureaucracy, a
capital intensive, urban-based industrial economy and a huge, technological modern military
establishment which are imparted through English in the higher levels of education. They
expect these skills and knowledge to percolate down to schools and beyond through the
Indian languages. This process is similar to the colonial government’s policy of downward
filtration, which helped the English elite to maintain their control over society. Because the
input of the English elite is considered essential for nation building, the people who control
knowledge available in English come to control the Indian society (Annamalai, 2003, p. 183).
The importance of cultural background in Kymlicka’s liberal multiculturalism
One of the most important theories of multicultural liberalism is the one advocated by Will
Kymlicka. A principal question that Kymlicka asks is what the rights of minority groups or
cultures are. He states that minority groups have the right to special protection, because they
are in a disadvantage compared to the majority. Majority cultures could be accompanied by a
dominant language, as culture and language often go hand in hand (Kymlicka, 1995). A
majority language is often used in education, the government and other public areas. This
gives the minority culture a disadvantage compared to the majority. The inequality between
the minority and the majority groups is unchosen and also dependent on luck. Therefore, this
theory is sometimes referred to by critics as “luck egalitarianism” (Anderson, 1999; Scheffler,
2003).
28
More specifically, Kymlicka argues that a person’s culture enables him or her to
realise individual autonomy, and thereby personal freedom (Kymlicka, 1989; Kymlicka,
1995). This autonomy - the exercise of freedom - is valuable for every individual. This makes
him a universalist in the value of autonomy. According to Kymlicka, the differences between
groups in a culture pose an important challenge to democracies, because democracies as
constructs are dependent on a unified, shared national identity (Kymlicka, 1995). Kymlicka
understands a nation as a “historical community, more or less institutionally complete,
occupying a given territory or homeland sharing a distinct language and culture” (Kymlicka,
1995, p 11). A societal culture is an intergenerational community, on a territory or homeland,
sharing a distinct language and history. It is a culture concentrated on a territory, centred on a
shared language and a wide range of social institutions in both public and private life
(Kymlicka, 2007). However, a societal culture is also a pluralistic concept. It could be
composed of different religions and various classes. This pluralism is balanced out by a
certain amount of linguistic and institutional cohesion, mostly created by state policies
(Ashgate, 2012).
A societal culture plays an important role in exercising individual freedom. Feeling at
home in a cultural background provides individuals with identity and the ability to make
valuable life choices. In other words, the societal culture of a nation provides the background
that individuals need to exercise their autonomy and sustain their self-respect. For this reason,
Kymlicka calls the societal culture the “context of choice” (Kymlicka, 1989). It gives
individuals a full range of human activities to choose from, including social, educational,
religious, recreational and economic activities, encompassing both public and private spheres
(Kymlicka, 1995). What people actually identify with is a concrete expression of their context
of choice, or at least an important part of it. One of the most fundamental assumptions that
Kymlicka has is that the ability to make important autonomous life choices is a requirement
for individual autonomy and that individual autonomy expresses itself in the ability to make
these important life choices. (Kymlicka, 1997). In a situation where a person’s inherited
culture is threatened by social exclusion or extinction, his or her capacity to make meaningful
life choices can be undermined (Kymlicka, 1989). This clearly shows that Kymlicka’s theory
seems to acknowledge the existence of structural inequalities that are often seen in present
liberal states (Ashgate, 2012).
29
Protection of the societal culture by the Indian government
If multiculturalism is applied as a public ideal, it needs political form that enables diversity
but at the same time keeps these different groups engaged with each other. This political form
has to balance between liberating, but also, inevitably, constraining factors to protect the
different identities in a multicultural society. More specifically, in Kymlicka’s case, the
liberal society protects its society’s culture as the background context of its individuals to
exercise their autonomous agency (Ashgate, 2012). The ideal of liberal multiculturalism is
important, because it recognises the fact that a state can be composed of different minority
cultures and that cultural differences can create friction between these cultures. Kymlicka
acknowledges these differences, but he puts the focus on the strength of similarities between
people’s backgrounds, namely the societal culture. The liberal state not only has the
obligation to protect individuals but also to protect cultural groups as a whole because, as
shown in the previous section, individual autonomy can only exist within a context of choice.
The context of choice is in turn made possible by the societal cultures with their practices and
institutions (Kymlicka, 1995). To protect the individual autonomy of their citizens,
governments have to protect these practices and institutions of the communities these citizens
belong to (Kymlicka, 1997).
As we have seen, cultures enable the freedom of individuals. Often minority cultures
are at a disadvantage in comparison to the majority culture by means of being enabled to
exercise their cultural practices freely. Because the state needs to ensure individual autonomy
as the most important value (Kymlicka, 1995, p. 26), the liberal state should support external
protections to minority cultures and reject internal restrictions (Kymlicka, 1995, p. 37).
Supporting external protection entails ensuring that the minority culture is treated equally at
the intergroup level. Rejecting internal restrictions entail ensuring that basic liberties and
freedom of individuals at the intra-group level are also secured (Kymlicka, 1995, pp. 35-36).
It is a difficult task to decide how much of a culture should be protected. Trying to
keep a culture as original and untouched as possible is obviously a strange and practically
unachievable idea. Cultures have to adapt to an ever-changing world. As Kymlicka puts it:
“culture is made through change; it is not defined by an essence which exists apart from
change, a noumenon hidden behind the altering configurations of phenomena” (Kymlicka,
2000, p. 179). Supporting minority cultures therefore equals acknowledging the fact that they
are dynamic. Cultures are always in flux: it is not possible to regard them separately from
their original background.
30
How the elite status initiates a loss of cultural background
English-medium education is seen as a form of cultural capital that brings higher economic
and cultural status. As more Indian middle class youth attend English-medium education, they
increasingly experience changes in attitude, lifestyle, mannerisms, and aspirations. At a
personal level, the students of English-medium schools experience the discursive divide and
loss of sociality - the degree to which individuals associate in social groups and society - as an
distancing from the vernacular space of their family and neighbourhood. This alienation is
described by these students from non English-speaking backgrounds as a loss of voice and
self-expression. An interview conducted with a 25-year old Indian woman illustrates this very
strikingly. She describes the way she felt while attending an English-medium school, and the
contrast of giving up parts of her background in order to climb the social ladder (Faust &
Nagar, 2001):
[F]or me [that school] was a prison, nothing could provide a more shocking contrast to
my home and familial relationships, my neighbourhood, the kids I played with, and
the people who I was attached to. As soon as I started going there, I lost my voice. I
had to translate my feelings and experiences in order to communicate, and I could not
do that…Going to that school at the age of nine meant loss of self-expression for me.
Yet, ironically, when I grew up, it gave me choices that I could have never dreamed of
had I not been educated in that school (p. 2880-2881).
The students of vernacular backgrounds take this loss of self-expression and cultural
background for granted as an inevitable cost for upward mobility to gain a higher
socioeconomic status. They feel forced to give up their cultural values because English is
associated with the anticipated benefits of the higher socioeconomic status (Faust & Nagar,
2001).
As shown above, according to Kymlicka, this loss of cultural background poses a
serious threat to autonomy. The loss of the societal culture of students attending Englishmedium schools from vernacular backgrounds makes it hard for them to establish an identity
and the ability to make meaningful life choices. By being estranged from their original
background, they lose the structure they need to exercise their autonomy and sustain their
self-respect. In other words: these students lose their context of choice. The connection with
their inherited culture is threatened and with this their capacity to make meaningful life
choices is undermined (Kymlicka, 1989; Kymlicka, 1995). As Faust and Nagar (2001) put it:
31
“while English medium education may provide a bridge across the class divide, one must
often discard one’s inherited cultural baggage to cross it successfully.” (p. 2881).
This loss of cultural background by English-medium students from vernacular
backgrounds is accompanied by the adoption of a new set of cultural values, as the ability to
speak English is not the only prerequisite of becoming part of the English elite. As the
students get alienated from their vernacular backgrounds, they increasingly come to identify
themselves with the culture of the English speakers (Faust & Nagar, 2001, p. 2881). This new
set of cultural values includes English reading, Western music, and even going to expensive
restaurants. With this new set of values, students from vernacular backgrounds have to give
up their old habits that, for them, are intimately connected to their familial and neighbourhood
environment.
In short, the English-medium school is associated with a space of modernity and the
home and neighbourhood with the space of tradition (Faust & Nagar, 2001). This process
could be seen as adopting a new societal culture, or just a shift in the details of the societal
culture, as this is a pluralistic concept. The new culture the students identify with could
provide them with a new and different context of choice, from which they could express their
autonomy. However, research has shown that the process of loss of attachment to the
vernacular background and the accompanied loss of identity is kept in place by social divide it
creates between generations (Faust & Nagar, 2001, p. 2880-2881). Thus, adopting a new
language and its accompanying culture at a later stage in life cannot fully replace one’s
original societal cultural heritage.
The elite status of the English language influences the cultural background negatively
in two ways, that are closely connected with each other. The educational system contributes to
the loss of cohesion in the overall Indian societal culture by enhancing the cultural divides
between generations and classes. This polarisation reinforces the elite status of the English
language and keeps it in place as the Indians keep on seeing English as the main tool of
gaining a higher socioeconomic status. Because they are intrinsically motivated to move up in
society, they take the second negative consequence, the loss of individual attachment with
their own original culture, for granted. This loss of cultural background is, as we have seen in
the previous sections, problematic. It constrains the autonomy and freedom of these
individuals.
After this analysis of the current language situation in India, two indications for
solutions can be formulated for the negative consequences of the elite status of English in
India. Firstly, protection of the local cultures and their languages is needed to ensure a context
32
of choice. Secondly, a solution could be to let the Indian people feel more at home in the
English language by preventing them from giving up their their cultural background in order
to learn English. The most benefitting solution would be to ensure that Indians from all social
classes have access to high-quality English education. Therefore, the opportunities individuals
have in life would not be determined by their socioeconomic background. Additionally, they
would not have to give up their cultural background because it is not necessary anymore to
become part of an English elite to gain access to high quality English education. Because all
Indians will have access to this education, they will feel more at home with English, and
hopefully, it will become a part of the overall Indian culture.
Disciplinary discussion
As we have seen in the previous sections, Kymlicka’s main focus is on the importance of
cultural background in providing individuals with the options to make meaningful life
choices. This is a convincing emphasis, as Faust and Nagar show the importance of one's
cultural background and its connection to identity.. But what might play an equally or even
more important role in determining the choice options of individuals is their socioeconomic
background. In this study class differences are linked to the problem of the elite status of the
English language because the desire for vertical mobility plays an important motivational role
for English-medium students in leaving behind (parts of) their vernacular background.
Therefore, this desire partly contributes to the loss of cultural background that
Kymlicka finds so problematic. But, without a doubt, class differences also play a much more
direct role in the problems that accompany the elite status of English. For example, the
economic capital of parents determines if they can afford high quality English-medium
education for their children. With being educated in English, they have more options to
choose from. They can attend more universities, are applicable for more jobs and are
generally more respected. This gives them more individual freedom. Kymlicka would have
made his theory of liberal multiculturalism even more applicable and accurate if he would
have recognised and included this importance of class differences.
Disciplinary conclusion
The elite status of the English language in India poses a threat to the ideal of multiculturalism
by Kymlicka in two ways. Firstly, the educational system poses a threat to the Indian societal
culture by enhancing the cultural divides between generations and classes. Secondly, the
educational system causes a loss of individual attachment with individual’s societal culture,
33
because adopting the modern values and cultural habits of the English elite is a requirement to
learn English. Providing all Indians with high-quality English education would be an ideal
solution, but the applicability of this would have to be researched further.
34
Chapter 4: A more comprehensive understanding
What are the consequences of the current language situation that has developed as a result of
the elite status of English in India?
In this third part, we attempt to integrate the insights of all three disciplines into an allembracing answer to the research question: What are the consequences of the current
language situation that has developed as a result of the elite status of English in India? In
order to create a coherent answer to the research question, we first identify the assumptions
and research methods of the disciplines that can explain potential conflicting insights
(‘Identifying disciplinary assumptions and methods’). Next, we shortly summarise the
conclusions offered in the disciplinary perspectives (‘Disciplinary perspectives on the
research problem’). Afterwards, we summarise the insights that form a common ground and
that are relevant in answering the research question (‘Discovering common ground’). In order
to create more common ground, we then identify conflicting insights and attempt to explain
them (‘Creating common ground’). Finally, we can integrate the disciplinary insights into a
more comprehensive understanding, also providing an interdisciplinary solution to the
research question.
Identifying disciplinary assumptions and methods
The discipline of English language and culture (ELC) studies the phenomena of language and
culture and the interaction between these two. It is assumed that language and culture are two
concepts that interact and influence each other all the time. Rao (2008) phrases another
general assumption: “Language is a statement of relationships among thoughts and
expressions of a human being” (Rao, 2008, p. 64). Another assumption is that language
education influences how and if languages are used in a society. Relevant research methods
are: case studies, government documents, surveys and logical reasoning. In this study, the
discipline has a descriptive and explanatory role: it contributes to the description of the
problematic situation in India and explains how it has come to exist and what consequences
there are.
The discipline of cognitive psychology (CP) studies individual behaviour and the
workings of the mind. It thereby assumes that “group behaviour can be reduced to individuals
and their interactions and [that] humans organize their mental life through psychological
constructs” (Repko, 2012, p. 123). Thus, CP assumes that studying effects of education on an
35
individual level has implications for society as a whole. To study human mind and behaviour,
psychology uses the epistemology of positivism: it uses methods based on the natural
sciences, such as experiments and correlational research, but also observation, longitudinal
research and, at times, case studies. The CP insight in this study mainly has an explanatory
and analysing role. It tests to what extent educational practices fulfil prerequisites of a
satisfying attainment level in English. Therefore, it explains why certain aspects of Indian
education have negative consequences.
Political philosophy (PP) draws its assumptions from both philosophy and the political
sciences. In this research project, the political assumptions are mostly sociological and the
political philosophical assumptions are based on political liberalism. The central assumption
of political liberalism is that freedom is of importance for every individual, and that this
freedom needs to be protected by the liberal government. Sociology states that our
perceptions of social reality are filtered through a web of assumptions, cultural influences,
and value-laden vocabularies, that individual human behaviour is socially constructed, with
rationality and autonomy playing modest roles at best; groups, institutions, and especially
society have an existence independent of the individuals in them. People, they assume, are
motivated primarily by the desire for social status (Repko, 2012, p. 123; Alvesson, 2002, pp.
2-3).
Disciplinary perspectives on the research problem
In ELC, perspectives on the rights and wrongs of the current educational system in India are
elaborated on, as well as the social and power relations amongst the different social groups
and speakers of majority and minority languages in this multi-linguistic country. Some
schools offer English-medium education instead of Indian-medium education. The people
who receive good English-medium education form a 6%-elite of the society, which is now
one of the many elite groups in India. English has therefore become a tool for vertical
mobility with a high market value. The learning of English however tends to create a gap
between material progress and cultural roots.
CP offers perspectives on the learning of a second language: when and how is a
second language to be learned best? Factors that play an important role in second language
acquisition are the amount and quality of input, classroom interaction, relevant feedback and
support for one’s native language. It seems that in government schools, especially quantity
and quality of input are lacking, and teaching methods do not emphasise everyday usage of
English. Because in private schools, these problems are, at least not entirely, present, the
36
proficiency of students attending private schools have a greater chance to be proficient in
English. Private and government schools are thus predicted to create an intellectual gap
between those who can and cannot afford good quality English education.
The concepts that play an important role in PP are largely drawn from cultural
liberalism. Most importantly, the individual values freedom. This freedom is enabled by
autonomy in a context of choice. The context of choice is the societal culture, a pluralistic
concept of a culture on a shared territory with a wide range of social institutions. An
important sociological concept is vertical mobility. This is how movement through
socioeconomic classes is described and plays a motivational role in explaining people's
behaviour. The positive feedback system of power and language is an important concept as it
plays an important role in maintaining the elite status of the English language.
Discovering common ground
Terms that form part of a common ground between disciplines are: minority, education and
elite. In this study, minority is defined as groups of people who speak a minority language in
India, e.g., people who do not have English, Hindi, or the official regional language as their
mother tongue. By education, we mean primary, secondary and tertiary education which is
aimed at educating individuals, either in their mother tongue, the regional language or in
English. CP, however, mostly focusses on primary education. By elite, all disciplines mean
the English speaking 6% of the Indian population (Annamalai, 2003, p. 178). However, ELC
sometimes explicitly refers to other elites, e.g., the native elites of Sanskrit and Persian or the
rich elite.
Other common ground can be discovered when carefully comparing the disciplinary
insights. The relevant common disciplinary insights are laid out here.
The positive feedback system of language (and power)
All disciplines agree on the fact that the elite status of English is maintained by a positive
feedback system. According to political PP, the English speaking elite exercises control over
the Indian society, through a process similar to the colonial government's policy of downward
filtration. Control over the English language gives them control over Indian society
(Annamalai, 2003). This has helped the English-speaking elite to maintain their power and
control over the non-elite majority and gives them practical advantages. Even though the use
of English is a disadvantage to the majority of the Indians, they accept the arguments of the
37
English-speaking elite because of their status. It is even said that the Indian majority is
manipulated by the English speaking elite (Dua, 1993).
ELC found that almost all tertiary education is English-medium (Annamalai, 2003, p.
188). Besides that, people who do not speak English have less chance of finding a job or get
paid less (Azam, Chin, & Prakash, 2013). As CP has laid out, good English education is an
important requirement for learning English. It is however not guaranteed in the government
schools (Rao, 2008; NKC, 2009; Aggarwal, 1988): teachers are not proficient speakers of
English and are not trained in teaching methods. Also, English is often translated, because
students do not understand what is being said. Thus, there is no active usage of English, an
important prerequisite for gaining proficiency in a second language. According to ELC, if
people do not get sufficient English education in their primary and secondary schools,
chances are very low that they will be able to go to tertiary education, which bars the road to
vertical mobility on the social ladder. Therefore, they will not become elite and their children
will face the same, mostly financial limitations, sustaining the situation. On the other hand,
the richer elite is able to afford expensive private education that often provides better English
education, opening the possibility to attend tertiary education and get better-paid jobs.
Earning higher wages means that the children of these students can do the same as their
parents, sustaining the situation once again. The current system thus serves the elite group of
the English-speaking middle/upper class (Annamalai, 2003).
The relation between socioeconomic status and the learning of English
Both CP and ELC state that high SES families have a greater chance of gaining proficiency in
English than low SES families. According to CP, higher educated language examples, such as
mothers and teachers, use more infrequent English words and more complex syntactic
structures in their speech than lower educated mothers or teachers. This provides high SES
children with a better linguistic example, resulting in higher English proficiency. ELC
discovered that for students from middle and high classes, English-medium education would
probably be fruitful. Their parents have enough money to get them to attend expensive private
schools that do provide sufficient English education (Annamalai, 2003, pp. 188-9).
Additionally, these families often have members going back several generations who have
learned English as well (Annamalai, 2003, p. 188). Consequently, their use and practice of
English will be supported and improved in their home situation.
38
The connection between cultural background, identity and language
All three disciplines recognise the existence of a connection between cultural background and
identity and language. PP found that with English-medium education come changes in
attitude, lifestyle, mannerisms, and aspirations. Indian students from vernacular backgrounds
experience a loss of their original cultural heritage and are forced to participate in a more
modern and western lifestyle. Learning English therefore inevitably means giving up parts of
one’s original cultural background. This loss of cultural background cannot be adequately
replaced by this new culture (Faust & Nagar). This process initiates a loss of individuality,
because cultural background is necessary for autonomy as it provides an individual with the
options to make meaningful life choices.
According to ELC, to really become part of the English-speaking elite, students also
have to adopt the modern values that accompany it, creating a gap between them and their
family. Alienation occurs between family and students that specialise in a subject for which
they are required to speak English very well (Faust & Nagar, 2001, p. 2881). Besides that, in
earlier stages of life, the mother tongue plays a more important role as a supporting factor for
memory building. If a child’s mother tongue is not fully developed and supported in
education, this results in several problems in a child’s development (Rao, 2008, p. 68). CP
also states that, especially for minority languages, it is important for a child’s language
development to support its native language. Making references to the native language helps
develop awareness of parallels and differences between languages. Supporting the native
language therefore not only helps children to get a grasp of their native language, but it also
helps validate their linguistic heritage and supports second language learning (Hummel,
2014).
The importance of adequate teaching
It has been shown by both ELC and CP that the way English is taught is important. ELC
showed that in India, the definition of a teacher is “a person who teaches in the classroom”
(NKC, 2009, p. 26). Besides there being no regulations for teachers, the three-language
formula also does not provide a target level for each of the learned languages, nor is there an
indication of how long the languages should be taught and at what age (Aggarwal, 1988, pp.
290-291). Children who speak up in the classroom, but speak a language different from the
region’s dominant language or have a different accent when they speak English, do not only
get bullied by their fellow students, but also by their teachers (Rao, 2008). This discourages
39
these students from speaking up more in class, preventing their English education to improve
by class practice.
CP emphasises the importance of speaking up, by stating that active interaction plays a
crucial role in reaching oral competence in a second language. When students are forced to
produce their own output, they are pointed towards gaps in their language abilities. Also, the
proficiency level of the teacher plays an important role in determining attainment success for
students. When an L2 teacher does not master the L2 well, he might not give the learner
enough material to learn all aspects of the language sufficiently. The teaching materials used
are also not up to standards and lack concrete application outside the classroom. According to
CP, because of the great tendency to only translate the relevant material to English (Mohanty
et al., 2010), students receive only marginal input in English. Also, books are of low quality
and do not involve interests of the students (Mohanty et al., 2010). ELC states that this is
because English used to be viewed as a library language: a language that was only used in
books and by scholars but not as a language of communication (Meganathan, 2011, p. 3).
Besides that, English is rarely used outside the classroom (Aggarwal, 1988), which does not
help becoming proficient in English either, according to CP.
The switch from English to another medium is almost impossible
According to both PP and ELC, the chances of switching from English to an Indian medium,
like Hindi, are low, because that will create too many practical and political problems. PP
states that with the wide expansion of English in the fields of science and technical education,
the position of the ex-colonial language has become unchallengeable and almost impossible to
be replaced by any other language (Dua, 1993). According to ELC, other languages see
English as a “model” because so much academic knowledge is available through English.
Besides that, many government documents and national areas of importance are still
conducted in English. All of these documents would have to be translated if another language
is to be used successfully. The knowledge of English also provides opportunities to conduct
international business, which is also seen as a major advantage.
Creating common ground: identifying conflicts
Besides already existing common ground, more can be created by identifying conflicting
insights and attempting to unite these insights.
40
The opportunities created by the English language
A first conflict can be found in the view on the opportunities of different societal groups. The
PP discipline claims that only people who can afford to be educated can become fluent
speakers of English and therefore, only they can take advantage of the possibilities that being
able to speak English enables (Faust & Nagar, 2001). The ELC discipline, in contrast, takes a
more optimistic perspective in this regard. It argues that English gives lower societal classes
the opportunity to be equal to people of medium and high societal classes; it prevents a group
of native speakers of a specific language from getting the power. Now, instead of having
native-speaker elites only, there is a variety of elites, one of which could be available to
everyone. However, at this moment, there is no equal opportunity to become elite since there
is no equal access to good English education (Rao, 2008).
This conflict could be the result of the assumption on PP’s part that becoming elite is
not possible when someone is not born into it. This is not entirely the case in India, since a
native elite is different from a second language elite. Additionally, ELC has a more practical
approach to the situation than PP. PP looks at it from further away and judges it to be unfair,
because there is an elite, whereas ELC acknowledges that the situation is not ideal but sees an
opportunity for people from lower classes to become elite.
The manipulation of minorities
A second conflict again occurs between the insights of PP and ELC. PP states that the English
elite manipulates the non-English majority to legitimise the use of English in order to
maintain their power and control (Dua, 1993, p. 296). Contrastingly, ELC argues that
minority language speakers support the elite status of English in order to protect themselves
against other major Indian languages (Faust & Nagar, 2001).
This conflict again seems to originate from a difference in point of view. Where PP
appears to have a top-down view on the situation, ELC looks at it from a bottom-up point of
view. The top-down view allows to see the manipulation happening at the top, which is
impossible to see from the bottom-up point of view. ELC also only used a case study
involving some speakers of minority languages, which might explain that they were
unawarely manipulated, thus giving it the positive point of view copied in the ELC part.
Integrating insights: a more comprehensive understanding
A look at the common ground provides a better understanding of the consequences of the
current language situation that is a result of the elite status of English in India. The situation
41
can be seen as a self-sustaining system from the points of view of all of the involved
disciplines. Because they speak English, the 6% English speaking elite are able to get better
jobs and higher wages. Therefore, they can afford better education for themselves and their
children, helping them to get a better knowledge of English. This again provides them with
better jobs and better wages. Besides that, the English-speaking elite make up the majority of
the government. Keeping the system in place gives the elite a certain amount of control and
power over the lower societal groups. Additionally, the elite is kept in place by international
relations. The benefits of international relations are almost exclusively available for speakers
of English. Therefore, these speakers are rewarded from outside of India for speaking English.
This gives them a more beneficial position in the Indian elite, allowing them to stay there. In
contrast, lower societal groups are at a disadvantage. They cannot afford to go to expensive
private schools that provide qualitative English education: free government schools do not
guarantee a high qualitative level of English education. Therefore, they are excluded from
becoming part of the English-speaking elite.
Thus, the current situation is one where there exists a gap between the Englishspeaking elite and vernacular-speaking Indians: intellectually, because of the different
capacities to use English; educationally, because of the quality differences between
government and private schools’ English teaching; culturally, because of the divide between
cultural background of vernacular-speaking Indians and the progressiveness that the English
language postulates; politically, because of the power that the English-speaking elite exerts on
the lower societal groups; and economically, because of the (international) financial gains the
speakers of English benefit from and which are inaccessible to the speakers of vernaculars
only.
In order to minimise this all-embracing gap, the elite status of the English language
intrinsically motivates people to learn it. Because people are strongly motivated to gain a
higher socioeconomic status, they are willing to partly give up their vernacular cultural
background to become part of the modern progressive culture that is associated with the
English language. This is harmful for individual autonomy. Additionally, cases in which
vernacular languages are being marginalised on primary schools can be harmful for children’s
development, proficiency in their mother tongue and for the learning of English.
Interdisciplinary solution
An ideal solution for these negative consequences of the current language situation in India
would be to provide sufficient quality of English education for all societal groups. This way,
42
the gap between the government and private schools might be minimised, creating equal
opportunities for all societal groups. A most important requirement for this educational
improvement is that the mother tongue is supported sufficiently as well. That way, there is no
need to abandon Indian cultural values in favour of acquiring English.
Interdisciplinary discussion
India is a large country with an enormous population. Therefore, it seems impossible to
present one coherent representation of the country as a whole. This study is limited by the
existing literature on the Indian situation, which inevitably leaves out important details of the
language situation in the whole of India and all of its parts. For example, the study used a
source that analyses the language politics in the north of India, but also more general sources
about the language politics in the whole of India. These sources were in line with each other,
but it is not certain that every region has the same policy.
A possible inaccurate representation could have been the result of the use of out-dated
sources, because there are simply not enough sources to be consulted for a full, completely
dated representation of India in its entirety. Besides that, the situation is constantly changing,
which means that it is difficult to give an accurate representation of the current timeframe. For
example, the three-language formula has changed so many times that it is likely to have
changed again since the last study written on it. Since that is very difficult to find out, we
sketched a broader image of the three-language formula that is assu,ed to account for all
situations.
Lastly, the solution brought forward by this study may prove hard to implement. As
has been said, India is a big country with many differences between regions. A nationwide
improvement of education would require a lot of money and a strong national policy. Further
research would benefit from disciplines that provide insights into policy making and
implementation. Besides that, the disciplines that were mentioned in the interdisciplinary
introduction (anthropology, sociology, economy, politicology, management studies, conflict
studies, postcolonial studies and international studies) could provide an even more
comprehensive understanding of the problem and could help judge what solutions would
work best.
43
44
References
Aggarwal, K. S. (1988). English and India's three‐ language formula: An empirical
perspective. World Englishes, 7(3), 289-298.
Alvesson, M. (2002). Postmodernism and social research. Philadelphia: Open University
Press.
Anderson, E. (1999). What is the Point of Equality? Ethics, 109, 287–337.
Annamalai, E. (2003). Medium of power: The question of English in education in India. In
J.W. Tollefson & A.B. Tsui (Eds.), Medium of instruction policies–Which agenda?
Whose agenda (pp. 177-194). Mahwah, New Jersey: Routledge
Annamalai, E. (2004). Nativization of English in India and its effect on multilingualism.
Journal of Language and Politics, 3(1), 151-162.
Ashgate Research Companion to Multiculturalism (2012). Farnham, GB: Ashgate.
Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com.
Azam, M., Chin, A., & Prakash, N. (2013). The returns to English-language skills in India.
Economic Development and Cultural Change, 61(2), 335-367. doi:10.1086/668277.
Baddeley, A., Eysenck, M.W. & Anderson, M.C. (2015). Memory (2nd edition). London/New
York: Psychology Press.
Barac, R., & Bialystok, E. (2012). Bilingual effects on cognitive and linguistic development:
Role of language, cultural background, and education. Child development, 83(2), 413422.
Bialystok, E. (1988). Levels of bilingualism and levels of linguistic awareness.
Developmental psychology, 24(4), 560-567.
Bialystok, E. (2011). Reshaping the mind: the benefits of bilingualism. Canadian Journal of
Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 65(4),
229-235.
Bialystok, E., Poarch, G., Luo, L., & Craik, F. I. (2014). Effects of bilingualism and aging on
executive function and working memory. Psychology and aging, 29(3), 696-705.
Birdsong, D., & Molis, M. (2001). On the evidence for maturational constraints in secondlanguage acquisition. Journal of Memory and language, 44(2), 235-249.
Bongaerts, T., Van Summeren, C., Planken, B., & Schils, E. (1997). Age and ultimate
attainment in the pronunciation of a foreign language. Studies in second language
acquisition, 19(04), 447-465.
Clahsen, H., Felser, C., Neubauer, K., Sato, M., & Silva, R. (2010). Morphological structure
in native and nonnative language processing. Language Learning, 60(1), 21-43.
45
Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual
children. Review of educational research, 49(2), 222-251.
Cummins, J. (1991). Interdependence of first-and second-language proficiency in bilingual
children. In E. Bialystok (Eds.), Language processing in bilingual children (pp.70-89).
United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
David, C. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language
acquisition. Studies in second language acquisition, 22(04), 499-533.
Dua, H. R. (1993). The national language and the ex-colonial language as rivals: the case
of India. International Political Science Review, 14, 293-308.
Ellis, N. C. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing. Studies in second
language acquisition, 24(02), 143-188.
Faust, D., & Nagar, R. (2001). Politics of development in postcolonial India: Englishmedium education and social fracturing. Economic and Political Weekly, 36(30),
2878-2883.
Greenberg, A., Bellana, B., & Bialystok, E. (2013). Perspective-taking ability in bilingual
children: Extending advantages in executive control to spatial reasoning. Cognitive
development, 28(1), 41-50.
Hornberger, N., & Vaish, V. (2009). Multilingual language policy and school linguistic
practice: globalization and English‐ language teaching in India, Singapore and South
Africa. Compare, 39(3), 305-320.
Huguet, A., Vila, I., & Llurda, E. (2000). Minority language education in unbalanced
bilingual situations: a case for the Linguistic Interdependence Hypothesis. Journal of
Psycholinguistic Research, 29(3), 313-333.
Hummel, K.M. (2014). Introducing Second Language Acquisition: Perspectives and
Practices. United Kingdom: Wiley Blackwell.
Huttenlocher, J., Haight, W., Bryk, A., Seltzer, M., & Lyons, T. (1991). Early vocabulary
growth: Relation to language input and gender. Developmental psychology, 27(2),
236-248.
Huttenlocher, J., Vasilyeva, M., Cymerman, E., & Levine, S. (2002). Language input and
child syntax. Cognitive psychology, 45(3), 337-374.
46
Johnson, J. S., & Newport, E. L. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning:
The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language.
Cognitive psychology, 21(1), 60-99.
Kumar, K. (1996). Learning from conflict. New Delhi: Orient Longman.
Kymlicka, W. (1989). Liberalism, Community, and Culture. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Kymlicka, W. (1995). Multicultural Citizenship: a liberal theory of minority rights. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Kymlicka, W. (1997). Do we need a liberal theory of minority rights?: Reply to Carens,
Young, Parekh and Forst. Constellations, 4, 72-87.
Kymlicka, W. (2007). The new debate on minority rights (and postscript), in A. S. Laden
and D. Owen (Eds.), Multiculturalism and Political Theory (pp. 25-59). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Lenneberg, E. H., Chomsky, N., & Marx, O. (1967). Biological foundations of language.
New York: Wiley.
Long, M. H. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of
comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 126-141.
Loschky, L. (1994). Comprehensible input and second language acquisition. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 16(03), 303-323.
Luk, G., & Bialystok, E. (2013). Bilingualism is not a categorical variable: Interaction
between language proficiency and usage. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(5),
605-621.
Luk, G., De Sa, E. R. I. C., & Bialystok, E. (2011). Is there a relation between onset age of
bilingualism and enhancement of cognitive control? Bilingualism: Language and
Cognition, 14(04), 588-595.
Lyster, R. & Saito, K. (2010). Interactional feedback as instructional input: A synthesis of
classroom SLA research. Language, Interaction and Acquisition/Language,
Interaction et Acquisition, 1(2), 276-297.
Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction, and second language development. Studies in second
language acquisition, 21(04), 557-587.
Meganathan, R. (2011). Language policy in education and the role of English in India:
From library language to language of empowerment. In H. Coleman (Ed.), Dreams
and Realities: Developing Countries and the English Language (4). Retrieved from
http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED530679
47
Mohanty, A., Panda, M., & Pal, R. (2010). Language policy in education and classroom
practices in India. In Kate Menken & Ofelia García (Eds), Negotiating language
policies in schools: Educators as policymakers (pp.211-231). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Morgan, J. L., Meier, R. P., & Newport, E. L. (1987). Structural packaging in the input to
language learning: Contributions of prosodic and morphological marking of phrases to
the acquisition of language. Cognitive psychology, 19(4), 498-550.
Muralidharan, K., & Kremer, M. (2006). Public and private schools in rural India. Harvard
University, Department of Economics, Cambridge, MA.
Newport, E., & Supalla, T. (1987). A critical period effect in the acquisition of a primary
language. Science.
Norman, W. J., & Kymlicka, W. (2000). Citizenship in Diverse Societies. Oxford: OUP
Oxford
NKC Report 2006 (2007). Retrieved from
http://www.kshec.kerala.gov.in/images/docs/NKC%20Report%20to%20the%20Natio
n%202006.pdf
NKC Report 2006 - 2009 (2009). Retrieved from:
http://www.aicteindia.org/downloads/kc.pdf
Pattanayak, D. P. (1998). The language heritage of India. In D. Balasubramanian & N. Appaji
Rao (Eds.), The Indian human heritage (pp.95-99). India: Universities Press.
Peal, E., & Lambert, W. E. (1962). The relation of bilingualism to intelligence. Psychological
Monographs: general and applied, 76(27), 1-23.
Ramanathan, V. (1999). “English Is Here to Stay”: A Critical Look at Institutional and
Educational Practices in India. Tesol Quarterly, 33(2), 211-231.
Ramanathan, V. (2005). Ambiguities about English: Ideologies and critical practice in
vernacular-medium college classrooms in Gujarat, India. Journal of Language,
Identity, and Education, 4(1), 45-65. doi:10.1207/s15327701jlie0401_3
Rao, S. S. (2008). India's language debates and education of linguistic minorities.
Economic and Political Weekly, 43(36), 63-69. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40277928
Richards, J. C. (2010). Competence and performance in language teaching. RELC journal,
41(2), 101-122.
Rivers, W.M. (1981). Teaching Foreign Language Skills (2nd edition). Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
48
Sarangapani, P. M. (2003). Childhood and schooling in an Indian village. Childhood, 10(4),
403-418.
Scheffler, S. (2003). What is Egalitarianism? Philosophy and Public Affairs 31, 5–39.
Sonntag, S. K. (2000). Ideology and policy in the politics of the English language in North
India. In T. Ricento (Ed.), Ideology, Politics, and Language Policies: Focus on
English (133-150). Philadelphia: John Benjamins North America.
Sussex, R. (1999, March). Reviewed Work: English as a Global Language by David
Crystal. Language in society 28(1), 120-124.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and
comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in
second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Tollefson, J. W. (1991). Planning language, planning inequality. Singapore: Longman
Singapore Publishers (Pte) Ltd.
Weizman, Z. O., & Snow, C. E. (2001). Lexical output as related to children's vocabulary
acquisition: Effects of sophisticated exposure and support for meaning. Developmental
psychology, 37(2), 265-279.
49