Comments on: The Roots of English Language Hegemony http://nakedhistorian.com/the-roots-of-english-language-hegemony/ Naked History Wed, 19 Nov 2008 03:53:49 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 By: naketav http://nakedhistorian.com/the-roots-of-english-language-hegemony/#comment-63 naketav Wed, 03 Sep 2008 17:08:27 +0000 http://nakedhistorian.com/the-roots-of-english-language-hegemony/#comment-63 Calling Macaulay "Sir" was a mistake, although, from what I can see he was actually a Baron? Not completely sure on this one...I understand that the question Macaulay's Minute was supposed to be answering was that of whether subsidized education in India should follow the "orientalist" path of teaching Sanskrit language and literature vs. teaching Indians English language and Western literature. However, in order to make his argument for Western learning he goes much farther in his criticisms of Orientalist education. His argument is not so much that the state of education in India was inadequate because it taught myths and ancient science and astronomy, while ignoring the modern world, but that teaching in or of any Indic language or Arabic is completely and utterly useless. Arabic is actually in question as being subsidized for instruction. Macaulay states that there were 77 Arabic students subsidized by public money to be instructed in the madrassas. Thus throughout his entire Minute "Arabic and Sanscrit" constantly appear together. "I have no knowledge of either Sanscrit or Arabic.--But I have done what I could to forma correct estimate of their value. I have read translations of the most celebrated Arabic and Sanscrit works. I have conversed both here and at home with men distinguished by their proficiency in the EAstern tongues. I am quite ready to take the Oriental learning at the valuation of the Orientalists themselves. I have never found one among them who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and ARabia. The intrinsic superiority of the Western literature is, indeed, fully admitted by those members of the Committee who support the Oriental plan of education." --from Macaulay's Minute Sure English has been helpful to India as universal language for the upper classes. However, doesn't Macaulay's Minute reek of an attitude of superiority which infected British administration and led to quite a number of poor administrative decisions and bad effects on various colonized populations? English has thus risen to world dominance on the crest of this wave of prejudice which is ready to come crashing down at any moment... Calling Macaulay “Sir” was a mistake, although, from what I can see he was actually a Baron? Not completely sure on this one…I understand that the question Macaulay’s Minute was supposed to be answering was that of whether subsidized education in India should follow the “orientalist” path of teaching Sanskrit language and literature vs. teaching Indians English language and Western literature. However, in order to make his argument for Western learning he goes much farther in his criticisms of Orientalist education. His argument is not so much that the state of education in India was inadequate because it taught myths and ancient science and astronomy, while ignoring the modern world, but that teaching in or of any Indic language or Arabic is completely and utterly useless. Arabic is actually in question as being subsidized for instruction. Macaulay states that there were 77 Arabic students subsidized by public money to be instructed in the madrassas. Thus throughout his entire Minute “Arabic and Sanscrit” constantly appear together.

“I have no knowledge of either Sanscrit or Arabic.–But I have done what I could to forma correct estimate of their value. I have read translations of the most celebrated Arabic and Sanscrit works. I have conversed both here and at home with men distinguished by their proficiency in the EAstern tongues. I am quite ready to take the Oriental learning at the valuation of the Orientalists themselves. I have never found one among them who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and ARabia. The intrinsic superiority of the Western literature is, indeed, fully admitted by those members of the Committee who support the Oriental plan of education.”
–from Macaulay’s Minute

Sure English has been helpful to India as universal language for the upper classes. However, doesn’t Macaulay’s Minute reek of an attitude of superiority which infected British administration and led to quite a number of poor administrative decisions and bad effects on various colonized populations? English has thus risen to world dominance on the crest of this wave of prejudice which is ready to come crashing down at any moment…

]]> By: Oz Childs http://nakedhistorian.com/the-roots-of-english-language-hegemony/#comment-62 Oz Childs Tue, 17 Jun 2008 04:28:32 +0000 http://nakedhistorian.com/the-roots-of-english-language-hegemony/#comment-62 Macaulay was not a "Sir" and was never knighted (though he was made a Lord before he died). And his Minute on Indian Education had nothing to do with instruction in Arabic. The Muslims had their madrassas, which were not subsidized. They taught Arabic and of course the Koran. Macaulay never denied that Arabic was a language with current value and a past literature. But the question of Arabic instruction was not under consideration. What was at issue were the subsidies to schools that taught the Sanskrit language and literature. Macaulay did not deny that the ancient language had some literary value. But it was ludicrous, he felt, to teach myths and ancient science and astronomy, while ignoring the modern world. Macaulay and his allies argued that students refused to study Sanskrit without being paid to do so, while they were actually paying to learn English. They felt that the money used for subsidizing what we might call "Oriental Studies" should be used to provide instruction in English. Since India was (and still is) a multilingual state, the provision of a universal language has been a great boon to India, even more so because English has become the universal second language in our own era. Macaulay was not a “Sir” and was never knighted (though he was made a Lord before he died). And his Minute on Indian Education had nothing to do with instruction in Arabic. The Muslims had their madrassas, which were not subsidized. They taught Arabic and of course the Koran. Macaulay never denied that Arabic was a language with current value and a past literature.

But the question of Arabic instruction was not under consideration. What was at issue were the subsidies to schools that taught the Sanskrit language and literature. Macaulay did not deny that the ancient language had some literary value. But it was ludicrous, he felt, to teach myths and ancient science and astronomy, while ignoring the modern world.

Macaulay and his allies argued that students refused to study Sanskrit without being paid to do so, while they were actually paying to learn English. They felt that the money used for subsidizing what we might call “Oriental Studies” should be used to provide instruction in English. Since India was (and still is) a multilingual state, the provision of a universal language has been a great boon to India, even more so because English has become the universal second language in our own era.

]]>