By M. K. Gandhi
It is to be hoped that
Dr. Mehta's labour of love will receive the serious attention of
English-educated India. The following pages were written by him for the Vedanta
Kesari of Madras and are now printed in their present form for
circulation throughout India. The question of vernaculars as media of
instruction is of national importance; neglect of the vernaculars means
national suicide. One hears many protagonists of the English language being
continued as the medium of instruction pointing to the fact that
English-educated Indians are the sole custodians of public and patriotic work.
It would be monstrous if it were not so. For the only education given in this
country is through the English language. The fact, however, is that the results
are not all proportionate to the time we give to our education. We have not
reacted on the masses. But I must not anticipate Dr. Mehta. He is in earnest.
He writes feelingly. He has examined the pros and cons and collected a mass of
evidence in support of his arguments. The latest pronouncement on the subject
is that of the Viceroy. Whilst His Excellency is unable to offer a solution, he
is keenly alive to the necessity of imparting instruction in our schools
through the vernaculars. The Jews of Middle and Eastern Europe, who are
scattered in all parts of the world, finding it necessary to have a common
tongue for mutual intercourse, have raised Yiddish to the status of a language,
and have succeeded in translating into Yiddish the best books to be found in
the world's literature. Even they could not satisfy the soul's yearning through
the many foreign tongues of which they are masters; nor did the learned
few among them wish to tax the masses of the Jewish population with having to
learn a foreign language before they could realise their dignity. So they have
enriched what was at one time looked upon as a mere jargon—but what the Jewish
children learnt from their mothers—by taking special pains to translate into it
the best thought of the world. This is a truly marvellous work. It has been
done during the present generation, and Webster's Dictionary defines it as a
polyglot jargon used for inter-communication by Jews from different nations.
But a Jew of Middle and
Eastern Europe would feel insulted if his mother tongue were now so described.
If these Jewish scholars have succeeded, within a generation, in giving their
masses a language of which they may feel proud, surely it should be an easy
task for us to supply the needs of our own vernaculars which are cultured languages.
South Africa teaches us the same lesson. There was a duel there between the
Taal, a corrupt form of Dutch, and English. The Boer mothers and the Boer
fathers were determined that they would not let their children, with whom they
in their infancy talked in the Taal, be weighed down with having to receive
instruction through English. The case for English here was a strong one. It had
able pleaders for it. But English had to yield before Boer patriotism. It may
be observed that they rejected even the High Dutch. The school masters,
therefore, who are accustomed to speak the published Dutch of Europe, are
compelled to teach the easier Taal. And literature of an excellent character is
at the present moment growing up in South Africa in the Taal, which was only a
few years ago, the common medium of speech between simple but brave rustics. If
we have lost faith in our vernaculars, it is a sign of want of faith in
ourselves; it is the surest sign of decay. And no scheme of self-government,
however benevolently or generously it may be bestowed upon us, will ever make
us a self-governing nation, if we have no respect for the languages our
mothers speak.
Note and Reference : Introduction to Dr. Mehta's "Self-Government Series".