Provincialisng English

I joined VSKU Bellary three months ago. There were a few assumptions that I carried to the classroom: one, the students don t ha!e the "asic #nowledge of $nglish% two, the students will find it difficult to comprehend some of the concepts of &errida, Barthes, Saussure, 'i(ous and Showalter. Then, where do I stand !is)*) !is the students. I too learn $nglish as a second language. I too feel jittery and confused with regard to the use of +rticle e!en today. The teacher of $nglish is e(pected to "e fluent in $nglish. I had some happy surprises waiting for me in the classroom. The students had enough ,uestions and clarifications and opinions on the so called stalwarts - the hard nuts ) of Structuralism, .oststructuralism and /eminism. I shared it with a few friends of mine. They o"ser!ed that these theories are part of the life e(periences of the students. So, the students can grasp the concepts without much difficulty. The title, 0.ro!incialising $nglish resonates &ipesh 'ha#ra"arty s Provincializing Europe. &ipesh ,uestions the !alidity of $urope as the normati!e principle of modernity to assess non)$uropean cultures. 1e asserts that ideas of modernity were the products of a historical time. $ngland is a pro!ince among the pro!inces. 2et, it has glorified its achie!ements and is uniformed or semi)informed a"out the culture and achie!ements of 3on)$urope. 4n the contrary, &ipesh o"ser!es, $urope has considered its ideas and culture to "e glo"ally !alid or uni!ersal. Therefore, 5. . . to 0pro!inciali6e $urope was precisely to find how and in what sense $uropean ideas that were uni!ersal were also, at one and the same time drawn from !ery particular intellectual and historical traditions that could not claim any uni!ersal !alidity. It was to as# a ,uestion a"out how thought was related to place. 'an thought transcend places of their origin78 9 In the same way, the standard language used "y the $uropean scholars is ade,uate to understand its reality whereas it lac#s the conceptual clarity to e(plain the non)$uropean realities. The categories such as rationality and uni!ersalism e(clude the typical non)$uropean categories of thought that are ade,uate to understand the realities of non)$urope. There is an urgency to reassess the process of unilateral application of standard
9

&ipesh 'ha#ra"arty, Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference , .rinceton Uni!ersity .ress, :;;<, p.(iii.

language especially in the conte(t of glo"ali6ation that crosses the "oundaries of nation. The time and space specific issues cannot "e ade,uately theori6ed from the standard language that had the origin in $urope at a particular historical juncture. $nglish recei!ed its popularity "ecause of the colonies reiterating the connection "etween economic domination and the spread of a language. + glance at the history of $nglish language e(poses its hum"le "eginnings and how economic supremacy due to coloni6ation and industriali6ation has necessitated its spread especially in the nineteenth century. Terry $agleton has elucidated it in his essay, 0The =ise of $nglish . 1ence, language cannot "e studied without reference to the processes of history of a gi!en region. +ccording to the recent estimates there are more spea#ers of $nglish outside of $ngland. +s teachers of $nglish, we get "ogged down "y the pedagogical issue of impro!ing the competency in $nglish. +t a practical le!el, the students are engaged inside the classroom for ;> hours a wee# that too within the system of mass education. +s someone o"ser!ed, 0we are faced with the crisis of ,uantity . +t the same time, one need not feel pessimistic. The so called dullards in the classroom from a mofussil college return as alumni "rimming with confidence, fluent in $nglish "ecause of the e(posure on a corporate corridor. ?et us not ma#e tall claims with regard to language competency and feel dejected that our students don t come up to the e(pectations set "y the curriculum. +t times, I do thin# whether we are ma#ing a mountain out of a mole hill. 'ertain attitudinal changes, pro"a"ly, are the need of the hour. In Ku!empu s Malegalalli Madumagalu, @utthi elopes with his "elo!ed who suddenly feels terrified "y the roar of a tiger in the forest at the dead of the night. @utthi remar#s calmly that it was not so. + tiny human "eing trains the giant elephant. +n illiterate "utler spea#s $nglish after ser!ing some years in an $nglish)spea#ing household. The Kannadigas who migrate to the neigh"ouring states in search of jo"s pic# up the local languages ,uic#ly. They are polyglots. Students are e(posed to a !ariety of $nglishes - mo"ile, /.A, mo!ie, cric#et and so on - including the new spellings impro!ised "y the world of msgs. These e(amples are neither the cele"rations of the postmodern plurality nor are they the underestimation of the se!eral efforts of educationists to impro!ise inno!ati!e techni,ues to teach $nglish. Instead, these illustrations show that people ac,uire language s#ills when e(posed to a particular language community.

/urther, the processes of glo"ali6ation ha!e transformed $nglish into a @lo""ish language. The so called nati!e spea#ers of $nglish can no more claim it as their 0mother tongue . 3eil Kinnoc#, in his preface to English Next "y &a!id @raddol, finds a danger to the monoglots of $nglish in the changing circumstances where glo"al corporations prefer to hire polyglots. $ngland was earning upto B 9; "illion from $nglish language and other education related e(ports around :;;C. Kinnoc# anticipates a loss not only in foreign e(change "ut also in terms of 0cultural and ci!il contacts . In other words, glo"ali6ation has helped further the process of pro!incialising $nglish in the sense that it no more can claim to spread 0King s or Dueen s $nglish. $!ery country and region can "oast its own dialect.