LINGUISTIC TERRORISM

.. "E-

Linguistic Terrorism
An Interruption into the Kamtapuri Language Movement

Debaprasad Bandyopadhyay

Department of Political Science RABINDRA BHARATI UNIVERSITY Kolkala

Linguistic Terrorism:
An Interruption into the Kamtapuri Language Movement by Debaprasad Bandyopadhyay

To The Martyrs of Linguistic Terrorism "cQ<ii ~ ~q ~ ~ ... " Bangla in former East Pakistan and Kachar, Konkani, B isnupri ya Man i[Juri..... & Numerous English Medium School-going children in W.B.

Cover: Shyarnal [ana

Price: Rs, 40

Published by the Registrar, Rabindra Bharati University: 56A, B. 1'. Road, Kolkata 700 050 and printed by the same at Service Printers, 55/64 Kalicharan Ghosh Road, Kolkata 700 050

INDEX Acknow ledgement 1. A Secret Guide to Exquisite Murder of Linguistic IMAGI-nation 2. Delimiting or Enlarging Bangia 3. Demanding "Language" : Kamtapuri 4. The Endnote From An Ambivalent Fieldworker
5. Billography (i)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The following work is a result of the field-investigation done under Indian Statistical Institute-sponsored project on "Glottopolitics of linguistic subalternity in India". 1 am indebted to Prof. S.B. Rao, former Director, I.S.L and Prof. K.B. Sinha, Director, 1.S 1. for permitting me to execute such work in different parts of India including the North-East (which is also a politico-admin istrat ive con struct), 1 am inspired by the trust bestowed upon me by Prof. Subhankar Chakraborty, v.c., Rabindrabharati University, for such venture to publish this monograph from the Department of Political Science, Rabindrabharati University. I also want to thank Prof. Dilip Chatterji, Dean of Studies, Rabindrabharati University, for giving me the opportunity to present my findings on this burning issue in a seminar organized the Department of Political Science, R.B.U. and I am also grateful to him for his enthusiasm in publishing this monograph. I am also indebted to Prof. Atis Dasgupta for his kind help and suggestions not as the then Professor-in-Charge of the Social Science Division, 1.S.1. but also as an academic guide to this project. I also thank Dr. Amitav Choudhry, Head, Linguistic Research Unit, 1.S.1. for his kind help in executing this project. I am grateful to Prof. B. Ramakrishna Reddy, my teacher, who introduced me to field linguistics and language Planning in Indian context and Prof. Pabitra Sarkar whose suggestions on politics of language planning greatly helped me. Prof. D.P. Pattanayak advised me, from time to time, in the last ten years, regarding language planning issues suitable for Indian context. Prof. B. N. Patnaik, Prof. Panchanan Mohanty enlightened me regarding Oriya Language Movement and its different shades. Prof. Nirmal Das also suggested me, providing information, regarding Kamtapuri Language Movement. I thank all of them

18
29

51 57

(ii)

for their kind help. In executing the fieldwork, I shall never forget the help rendered by Kingshuk Ghosh, a civil service officer, posted in Maynaguri and Phalakata, Without his help, it would not have been possible for me to collect all the documents presented here .. Sibansu Mukhopadhyay and Anuradha De helped me at the time of the preparation of this monograph. Dr. Satarupa Datta Majumdar translated some of the Rajbansi documents. They all are my colleagues in the Linguistic Research Unit, lSI. Thanks are also due to Sri Shyamal Jana and Sobhan Tarafdar for their sustaining support in my academic work. This monograph is also a result of what I have learnt and am learning from Prof. Goutam Bhadra, Prof. Probal Dasgupta and Prof. Uday Narayan Singh. I am always stimulated by their constant encouragement in pursuing theoretical work. However, it is redundant to say that "usual disclaimers apply". I am solely responsible for any error or mistakes in this monograph.
2 October, 200t Linguistic Research Unit Indian Statistical Institute Kolkata

Chapter-I
A SECRET GUIDE TO THE EXQUISITE MURDER OF LINGUISTIC IMAGI-nation 1.0 INTRODUCTION There is a language, which is within me as my genetic endowment. There is another arbitrary and conventional language that is outside me and that outside symbolic order determines my essential subjectivity through different social organizations: my family, my school, my office, my state .... The aim of this work is to decipher that social product, the symbolic order that I have possessed by birth, though it is outside me and not outside me in my constructed imagi-NATION. In this monograph, I am primarily concerned with the outside language, a module, depending on which my nation state is imagined. Obviously I am taking cue from Benedict Anderson's demonstration (1983) that nations are imagined into being in the Asia, Africa, Latin America depending on certain modular forms like race, language, religion etc. within the ambit of Print Capitalist de-sign supplied by the West Europe, Russia and the Americas. It is no wonder that Rabindranath refused to translate the term "nation" in his Bangla writings, as there was no concept of such nation and nationalism in "our country" before the advent of the Raj. Rabindranath was, thus, not a part of the game played by the satellite elite or bhadralok or mediator of our country as a mimic man (sexism intended) of our perceived Europe, who are mortgaging their imagination to give birth to the synthetic space of mimic equality or mimicry of overdetennination (Choudhuri et. al., 2000), i.e., they tried to be equal with the white space, but not quite. The colonial mimicry began at the moment of the birth of nation.

DEBAPRASAD BANDYOPADHYAY

2 I Linguistic

Terrorism

MUI'd-c;' (IF Linguistic

IMAGI-nwion

I :I

This colonial imagi-NATTON or otherwise mimicry from the part of third world nationalist elite needs different sorts of designs supplied from the white space to fulfil their nation-building project. The immediate questions, which are haunting the elite inhabitants of the mimic nation, arc: A. Who, 00 the basis of certain homogenous modular form, are within "our" nation, and who are the "outsider"? This question triggers the inclusion-exclusion factor of the nation. B. Are the 'insiders' homogenous complex? If not, try to homogenise them by standardising, appropriating, codifying, grammaticalizing one variety (religious or linguistic) for the sake of nation state. Here comes the question of standardization and grammaticaliiation of chosen module. Inside "others" should be considered under such standard grammatical/ shastric module. C. Is such standard grammatical! shastric module a classic') Searching classical heritage entails enumerated and imagined fantastic genealogy, history and a tribute to the predecessors, by whom the private property of the module is transmitted to the inheritors, the present inhabitants of the nation. In this monograph, I shall try to understand the imported design that de-sign-ates the imagi-nation of "our" communities after the colonial encounter keeping in mind these initial questions. Our concentration will be on one modular form: language. The mechanism of the concern for the newly introduced linguistic identity of building up a linguistic nation state called "Bengal'; was shaped and appropriated in the British Raj is our First point of concentration and will be discussed in the Chapter-2 in reference to question A and B. We now, in this chapter look into the problem of heterogeneity of language-variations and its management in the epistemology called '''L! nguistics". That, in turn, will reveal some lacuna within such epistemological pur-

suit that is also guided by the nation-statist programme. This revelation will be further elaborated in a case study on the "Kamtapuri language Movement" (Chapter-3). Chapter-4 will be on the brief comment on the methodological problems arising out of this type of representation. Before going to these issues, let us first look into the linguistic STATE of affairs in the Indian geopolitics before the advent of Nation Statist imagi-NATlON.
1.1 PLURILINGUALTSM OF INDIAN SELVES

Before the advent of colonial state in India, language had never been considered as a module to construct nation state. Frankly speaking, this statement is redundant, as there was no such concept of nation state prevalent in the Indian geo-politics: language-identity was not a pre-determining factor for enumerating state boundary. Instead what we have found in this territory was the identity determined by pantha or marga (path or.ways of living). No one bothered about their identity as citizen of the state determined by some modules. As our primary concern is language, we are now trying to understand something called "pluril ingualisrn" that does not match with either "monolingual ism" or even "multilingualism". Pluri lingualism is a unique network of many languages, where "ideal" plurilingual speaker-hearer speak and hear many languages without loosing one's "own" language without being bothered about the inscribed language-identity and communication depends on the horizontal mutual aid expect in cases of caste-hierarchy. Pattanayak observed that in India, "If one draws a straight line between Kashmir and Kanyakurnari and marks, say, every five .or ten miles, then one will find that there is no break in communication in any two consecutive points of scale." (1981: 144). The communication disrupts, only when the gaps are larger. But the problem is managed, as apart from the uninterrupted in-group communication, Indian plurilingualisrn innovates unique Language for Wider Communication (LWC) for out-group interaction, Some of these languages are Pidgins like

4 I Linguistic Terrorism Nagarnese, Sadari, Halabi etc, and some are regionally marked like Asarniya, Tamil, Oriya, Kannada,

Murder 8F Linguistic

{MAGI-nation. ! 5

1.2 PLURILINGUALISM AFFECTED Whatever may be our imaginative effort to feminize the "tongue" in our own way, it will be ended in vein as the term "Mother Tongue" (henceforth MT), since the term was first used, had never meant the vernacular, but rather Its contrary. The term was used by Catholic monks to de-sign-ate a particular language they used, instead of Latin, when they are "speaking from the pul pit" (Illich in Pattranayak, 1981 :24). IIIich (Ibid) aptly pointed out that the word "MT was introduced into Sanskrit in the eighteenth century as a translation from English". Matrbhasa (/mattribhaSai or ImattrubhaSaI) or Mother Tongue is a case of translation which is now in oblivion as we have equated it with our mother-cult. Thus MT is a derivative technical term, born out of translation. Following Chatterjee's (1986) phrase, we may say that it is also altered. The mother-cult in Indian bhakti- period had also an impact on this translation. Not only in the case of "tongue", in the imagined construction of Indian Nation State, the metaphor of "mother" was also deployed. In the extremely masculine story of "iumndemutb" by Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay, this metaphor played a crucial role. In this novel by Bankirnchandra, there is no question of metaphoric displacement of Kali, the mother to the newly emerging Nation State. It is, in fact, equated. Even in the song "Vandemlitaram" (National song, according to the independent Indian Constitution), this equation is vivid enough. That is, from the "holy mother of the Church" this term was introduced and we inherited it from the Christianity as a part of our colonial legacy, thanks to the effort made by foreign missionaries in the transitional period of switching over from 18th C. Mercantile Capitalism to 19th C. Industrial Capitalism. After the introduction of Industrial Capitalism in 1813, British Government decided to carry 011 administrative jobs in vernacular (J 837) by replacing the language of the then administration: Pharsi. This is the beginning of the solidification of different

out-group languages Marathi etc. and some other are languages of diffusion belt (Gujarati, Malayalam, Bangia, Punjabi, Telugu etc. (Srivastava, 1983) .Due to this type of convergence of languages, there is, as Khubchandan i (1997) along with Sudipto kaviraj (cited in Chatterjee, 1993) and Partha Chatterj i (1993) pointed out, many indeterminacy and fuzziness in national state-boundaries thanks to the "synergy' of mutuality of understanding. We found this spontaneous plurilingualism in India as Pandit (cited by Singh, 1991) gave an example of a Gujarati Businessman (spice-merchant) who speaks in Kacchi; but uses a dialect of Marathi in course of shopping to converse with the vegsellers who have migrated from the Kolaba region (Mumbai); seldom reads newspaper in English; he goes to see Hindi films with his family; to converse with the Suburban Railway AngloIndian Employees, he switches over to Bazar Hindusthani or in a typical mixed Hindi; last of all he uses Konkani , Gujarati and Marathi for his own business purpose(Pandit, 1977, cited by Singh, 1991 :302) . Singh (ibid) also mentioned the speech habit of a Rajput in medieval India, who speaks Harauti in his domestic environment; educates himself in Sanskrit for religious purposes; he switches over to Brajabhakha for writing poetry and went through Philosophy in Ptekrt. The question is whether these cases of polyglotism are unique or are keeping pace with the ethos of Indian pI urilingualisrn as proposed by the Indian sociol inguists, In any Sanskrit drama, it is found that uninterrupted communication is also possible in spite of plurality of languages within the play. Audience of the Sanskrit play enjoyed it despite there are at least five languages used by the characters. The point is that without understanding this plurality, it is very difficult to execute language planning policy following the monolingual path taken by Indian administration (though they have the trilingual formula, the main emphasis is on the monolingualism) under the supervision of imported nation statist programme.

6 I Linguistic

Terrorism

MauA

or

Linguistic

IMAGI-nutir!ll

I7

"nation states" (?) under the umbrella of one Nation State "India" in a modular form of languages in the name of newly introduced term "mother tongue". Thus the enumerated solidification of different linguistic nation states began in India ignoring the fuzzy boundaries and high level of linguistic convergence due to the pJurilingual ethos among divergent communities (Khubchandani, 1997). The anatorno-bio political intervention into the inner domain of Indian fluid plurilingualism thus began with the help of disciplinary technology of Demography, Population Studies and Comparative Philology. 1.3.0 DIFFERENT SPACES OF COMMUNICATION

SPACE-Ill: DOMAIN-I: National Capitalist space, that homogenizes India for the sake of common market and in this way it is subscribing the SPACE-II. SPACE-III: DOMAIN-IT: This space is occupied industrial multinational society (a la Daniel Bell), by the Postthat negates

Fordian standardized Production and TayJorian Division of Labour and liquidates capital. This at a time preserves plurality in a cyber-spatial hyper-reality overtly and extreme covert centralization. This phenomenon may be summarized . in globalization" or "glocalization", as "localization

SPACE- II encourages extreme centralization by sponsoring one language formula and linguistic cannibalism. S PAC E-IIIDOMAIN-II, on the other hand, encouraging "local" flavour along with encroaching into the "local" language and thus, ereating a mixed code. These three heterotropic spaces create many problems and one of the problem is encouraging Euro-centric monolinsualism by SPACE-ll and SPACE-III, DOMAIN-I by completely~defeating the rationality of SPACE-I. And the SPACE-III. DOMAINII is cashing such situation by deploying hyper-real simulated decentral ization. In the post-industrial society, all these spaces are under the control of cyberspace (SPACE-Ill, MAIN-II). Under the cyberspace, changing their codes, 1.3.1 SPACE-II: CAL POLICIES Quite contrary INDIAN all these three spaces three DOare ex-

However, not al1 the spaces are plurilingual. Spontaneous plurilingualisrn is found in the grass root label of communication. whereas the state administration introduces monolingual state subscribed by the "national" capital. However, in the context of Post-industrial society, international capital returns to the "inner domain" of plurilingualisrn, but that return marks the simulated decentralization in a hyper-real space with covert centralized control. Let us try to understand (he different spaces tion as existed within the geo-political boundary of communicaof independent

India. However, one must keep in mind, that these spaces are enumerated for pragmatic reason, as there are spaces that are overlapping and fuzzy. SPACE-I: The "inner domain" of India: this is a decentralized space that is hierarchically below, with the characteristics of horizontal lay-network. fuzzy SPACE-II: ministration) mutual Here aid and grass-root the concept

ADMINISTRATION of Indian

AND POLITIit is part

or

plurilingualism

and reis

to the ethos technology

plurilingualisrn,

solidified

state boundary

of the legacy of the Nehruvian aged science,

elitist India-project,

which envisin the name of

and indeterminable. This space (Sovereign and Autonomous State Adshows the nation statist homogenization-process

and total centralization

modernization that the westernized nize English to combat traditional traditional elite of North

middle class began to patroelite. On the other hand, the and also supporting a

by either following Nehuruvian India-Project or Hindu Project of constructing Bharat. Here linguistic boundary is enumerated and constructed carefully deploying different anatorno-bio-political disciplinary technology.

India supported

form of highly Sanskritized Hindi for the sake of larzer commu. . b mcarion and as a part of' Anti-Urdu and Anti-Muslim project and to sustain their Bharata-project. Hi'ldu revivalists like

8 I Unguis tic Terrorism Jansangh as well as the whole Sangh Parivar supported this plea. Gandhi and Socialist like Lohia, Rahul Sankrityayan encouraged indigenous Hindusthani and contradicted English and Sanskritized Hindi as those elitist languages debar mass from the participation in the decision making body. (Sonntag, 1997). Thus there are three positions regarding language-choice for the newly developed nation-state after independence. I shall rephrase this position by deploying technical vocabulary of Linguistics. Linguistics, though theoretically uninterested in the relative strength of one language over another from the strict core-linguistic point of view as it believes in the potential equality of all the languages also noticed the hierarchical position of High (H) over Low (L) code in the hierarchical society. According to the language choice one H or L code is selected to meet certain purpose of the society. Nehru's choice was obviously HI Foreign and Hindutvavadis' choice was HI archaic. On the other hand, Gandhi-Lohia's choice was LI Contemporary or indigenous. (Sonntag, ibid) The problem arises out of this state of affairs, when the praLl indigenous group does not stick to their Linguistic Human Right and opt for H/Foreign or Hlarchaic to be in the process of upward mobilization or Sanskritization. That is, as linguists termed it, "sunflower syndrome": we are, like sunflowers, instead of looking at each other, we are looking at the supposed sun or a language of prestige and technical power to accelerate our status. It is just like a suicidal process of desiring to be a member of nuclear club. The mediators, as language managers, who are following Nehruvian paradigm, in the newly introduced imagined "nation state", which is subscribing the slogan "Go Global with English", envisage "mother-tongue to other-tongue" switch overphenomena. This switch over, if at all occurs, is from mother's breast to feeding bottle, a packaged commodity for our nutrition (Ill ich in Pattanayak, 1981). Thus, by encouraging a costly affair, language-managers are propagating the learning of High/ Foreign instead of maintaining the shadow play of plurilnigual

MUlde!

of

Linguistic

IMAGI-nation

ethos. The Engl ish language Industry along with its technology needs separate know-how to be adopted by our parents. The know-how is as simple as the preparation of baby food manufactured by multinationals like Nestle. As English is not in OUf natural environment, parents of new-born should start speaking in English and always must switch to Star Movies, BEe World or any other foreign channels 31'ldin this way they must create an artificial English environment (read simulated conditioning camp or in Orwell's term, "joycamp") for their suitable boys or' girls. They can also hire surrogated parents that are available in lieu of money in Kolkata for parents' interview in English Medium Schools. Subsequently, the Mother Tongue, in the days of multinational economy, is now reinterpreted as Mummy's tongue as the role model of traditional mother has changed in these days of angJicised mother. Thus mummy's tongue or mother's tongue whatever it may be, it is an epistemologically amalgamated (Bandyopadhyay, 1996) notion that is widely in vague in our day to day discourse. Take for an mstance the pronouncement of Lalla Prasad Yadav. A peculiar dialectic of collaboration and non-collaboration (with the dominant ideology) from the part of the dalits, arose when in 1989, Mulayum Singh Yadav began "aNreji HOTaw" (banish English) movement, and in 1991, Lallo Prasad Yadav propagated "aNrej i le aW"(introduce English) Movement. The desire of Lalla Yadav triggers Formal Elaboration of Social Hierarchy (FESH). Lallo's logic was expressed in a rhetoric, "Hindi is our mother, but English is a beautiful prostitute." (Cited in Sonntag, 1997) Though officially, Hindi is Lallos Mother Tongue, it is not his Mother Tongue in true sense of the term as under the Hindiumbrella, there are almost 52 (including "Hindi", 1991 census) full-fledged languages who have lost their identities as separate languages ( Lalla Yadav is a speaker of one such "lost" language). However the imagery of English as a prostitute, apart from its sexist interpretation as well as gender bias, opens up a strategy of manipulating English for the purpose of FESH- (For-

10 / Linguistic

Terrorism

MUitfr::i

"r

Linguistic IMAGI-l1ation I 11

mal Elaboration of Social Hierarchy, Dasgupta, 1993)-ification. The Dalit as being a party in the Eurocentric decision-making body, they need a commodity, a prostitute and at a time they preserve their constructed and strategic "inner domain" as it is incarnated in Lallo's imagery of alleged rusticity. Therefore, it is not a question of deleting mother tongue, but of preserving mother and the other simultaneously. This order of things clearly shows the 'breast to bottle' switchover phenomenon. It is not surprising that Dasgupta (l993) named English as "Auntie tongue" which handles the professional role of female tutor :i· inducing English in the mind of her nieces and nephews. Industrialization produces many things; one of them is language-object that has been turned into a language-commodity by the virtue of Language-industry that is subsequently perceived as a Mother Tongue-industry. In these different linguistic exchanges one may call (or, following Dasgupta, 1993) it discourse reception, consequences may be summarized as follows: 1. There is mutual and spontaneous exchange of plurilinguistic units among different spaces: donor-receptor roleplaying is often reversed and inter-changeable. H+-~L 2. The SPACE-II and SPACE-III, domain-I are trying to be archaic, but cannot Ignore the pressure from the SPACE-I and SPACE-III, DOMAIN-II. From SPACE-I, remnants of indigenous administrative terms are borrowed without being translated and from the foreign space, terms are borrowed as calques.
R->L

of market-society. By enlarging this gap between state-controlled machinery and the world of business, electronic capitalism would enjoy its autonomy, Compare the Hindi language in which the Zee or Sony (i.e., private channels) transmit their messages with the Sanskritized or archaic Hindi transmitted by the statecontrolled Doordarshan. The differences are so obvious that hardly any linguistic knowledge is necessary to distinguish it. Amalgamation of such local or peripheral languages with the central language by the SPACE-III, DOMAIN-II may be confused with the Bakhtinian notion of heteroglossia or Polyphony. Ad-makers arc over-conscious about the subalterns' characteristics (in fact, their electronic database helped them in this regard). So, the ads are in festive mood (remember Ramee's "festive" ad); the situations are unpredictable; indeterminacy is inherent in the sequences. Is it not a carnival like situation? The obvious answer is, of course, "no". The cyberspace created by the SPACE-III, DOMAIN-II is a hyper-real space, a simulation of SPACE-I. That is, it is a pastiche of SPACE-I. The obvious result is the genesis of, what Deluze and Guattari (1977), called as "Electric Language", which is deployed in the cyber-reality, The end result is obviously, "linguistic cyber-colonization", Lastly, let us summarize the discourse-reception in different spaces:
STATUS DIRECTIONS OF DISCOURSE RECEPTION H<-,L FEATURES

3. SPACE-III, DOMAIN-II, on the other hand, creates overt cyber-decentralization that at a time encourages code mixing as well as code-maintenance of the local group. (H~->L) All these entails that the future Language of Electronic Speed Capitalism will he a globally mixed language, that will at a time preserve global, sub-global and local phenomenon in the domain of Business. However in the domain of administration and judiciary, a single stilled computerized variety is/will be used and thus those domains will be devoid from the mixed mass culture

SPACE-I SPACE-IJ SPACE-Ill. DOMAIN-I

L H H

PLURALITY ARCHAISM Cm.LOQUIAL, /v10NOLlNGUAL TRACES OF CODE· MIXING SIMULATED CYBERPLURALITY

H..... L
H...... L

SPACE-Ill.

llOMAIN-[]

(!-I-'Ll

12 I Linguistic

Terrorism

A/naiCI

"r

Linguistic

IMAG/-nation

I !3

H= High, L= Low -1-+ Directions of Discourse Reception ( )= Hyper real zone

1.4 THE DE-SIGN OF THE COLONIAL

LINGUISTIC

STATE

Keeping in mi nd the three questions posed in the section1.0, let us try to understand the grand de-sign of linguistic nation state in abstract form. One or two things must be noted before such demonstration:
(a)

(b)

(c)

We.are her~ talking about Externalized Language (ELarbitrary signs endowed with social values), and not about Internalized Language, which is universal genetic endowment of every human being. For pragmatic reason, we are assigning "essence" to some categories presented in notational forms. In fact, the essential construction of any EL (such as Bangla or English) cannot escape the trap of metaphysical totalitv that subscribes politico-administrative construction of language. Alphabetic notations are used here deliberately to avoid t~e value-loaded terms like dialect. However, the nonons are important rather than notations.

larities with P with their ancient Foreign P or FP. This is the beginning or genealogical fantasy (ef. Question-C) instigated by nation statist programme. S. Y switches over to Industrial capitalism. Print Capitalist notion of "Nation State" is gifted to Xvland. 6. ·Then Y tries to define the boundary of the land. X can be extended or can be squeezed. Y adopts a policy of inclusion-exclusion to "positively" define and enumerate X land. Who is X, and who is non-X? (cf. question A) 7. Y has chosen Mv as an "authentic", "Pure" representation of P. (if Mv is not "pure" in the gaze of Y, it is to be authenticated and approximated by appropriation and cod ificati 011.) 8. in fact, the area where MY is spoken, it is the main industrial centre. Nv, Sv, Wv, Ev are peripheralized. (Note the notational change from Mv to MY). That is, values related to extra/non-linguistic Socia-economic "Condition are superimposed OIl the selection of MY, which is now valued as "Standard" language, the terror of which "other" vs are supposed to follow. (cf, question B) Cf.- The term "standard" was taken from the vocabulary of industrial society, where the concept of prototypical "standard tool" is used. (Bandyopadhyay, 1997) 9. Instigated by the print capitalist imagination of communities and language jealousy (born out of inferiority complex, as there is superior-inferior language hierarchy), Wv revolts against this metaphysical totality of MV Some of the Wv-speakers, mainly mediators, are not happy with the status "dialect" or "defeated language". They want to withdraw themselves from the MY-affiliation. This is withdrawal syndrome that is based on the notion of copyright of imagined E-language. 1D. Dissenters are granted the status of "language" by the administration and arc excluded from the X-land. And if not granted as "language", revolution or willing subjection continues ....

Now, let us move to our demonstration: 1. Suppose, there is an ideal land called X. There are five linguist variations (v) existed in this X-land. viz. NV,Sv,Wv,Ev and Mv. . 2. All t~le.five vs are supposed to be derived from "single" prestigious ancient language P. (This presupposition depends on the metaphysical conjecture cf "origin"! "source") 3. In one historical juncture, X was occupied by a Foreran Y (say its language is FY). ,., 4. Foreign Y, a mercantile Capitalist enterprise, finds simi-

14 I Linguistic

Terrorism

MniUb of Linguistic fMAGI-nation

I 15

II.

Then MY was grammaticalized. Sv, Nv, Ev were supposed to learn MV from violent tutor who fragmented the MV-standard with prescriptive rules. It is internal linguistic colonization, where MV is centre-language and Sv, Nv, Ev are marginalized periphery-languages with value-loaded signs like "dialect", "folk endowed language",

17.

either committing linguistic suicide or victims of linguistic genocide. Though we may know the fact as Walsh or Kapil Dev do not need to know rules of Aerodynamics to swing the ball, so also no one needs to know fragmented of grammar via prescriptive grammar bottle or a packaged commodity. rules and norms book, a feeding

"patois" etc. The result of such internal linguistic colonization/terrorization is internal linguistic genocide. 12. Some rules are taken in toto from Pvcorpus; some were from Y or FP. Thus, grammar book has become a constitution of epistemologically amalgamated rules, by which violent internal linguistic colonization/ genocide is possible. (cf. Question C) 13. However, MY is too "local" as per Y's FV. Inhabitants 'international' of X-land are eager to know something is obviously V-language or FV. 14. In this case, there should which

All the seventeen points highlight the complex network of violent "Nationt-building in a modular- form of language. My point is that though MY is MT to "original" MV speakers, it is not MT to "other" vs. Secondly, even to the MV speakers, the text book language is not also an MT, rather it is a construction of different historical processes, which is also reflected in the discursive formations of Grammar book. Thirdly, in case of "other" vs excluding Sv, Nv, Wv, Ev, this constructed MT is a farthest thing to be adopted compulsorily with the help of a professional teacher. In this situation, all these defeated variations do not look at each other, in stead they look vertically to Y or MY, the supposed sun, the centre. Such concentration on the sun MY as a centre from the part of "other" vs is called Sunflower Syndrome (vs are here sunflowers. cf. Singh. 1987) or this may also be called as Linguistic Imperialism. Empire MV (or even FY) deprives Dialects) languages). One of the greatest problems arising out of this situation is regarding education. Speakers of vs are bound to acquire V by means of a packaged commodity called grammar or they will be ridiculed. In case of internal colony, tongue education, speakers of v learns colony speakers in the name of mother V and in case of external V or FV as a colony vs either internally (e.g. (e.g. Standard Language vs. or externally International language
vs, native

also be a tutor to teach FY. Thus

tutor has become an auntie (Dasgupta, 1993) and external linguistic colonization! genocide begins. 15. The peripherialized vs are given some exonyms according to the "free will" of Y and satellite native Y-ized (civilized) elite (mimic man), such as, apart from 'dialect', there are 'folk language', 'tribal language', 'patois', 'cockney' etc. The language-object to dominant gaze. 16. is evaluated according

Sv, Nv, Cv, Wv do not have their choice of MT. They have to learn two "other" tongues, viz. MV (that is perceived as a " MY") and Y-tongue. Though MY is in their immediate environment and though they could acquire MY following the plurilingual ethos, MY is alienated by the introduction of Grammar book by the tutor.

(a)

(b)

In case of Y,. which is introduced as second language in the school (Ideological State Apparatus) order by the official literacy campaigners, "other" peripheralized vs also learned this Foreign Y via packaged tools. Other vs are

of v need to learn one Foreign

means of adopting prestigious education. What is missing in all these cases, is linguistic human right as proposed by UNO. Thus following Dasgupta (1989 : 117), we here found a captive language situation which evolves within the supposed nation statist

16 f Linguistir Terrorism

Murda

fJF Linguistic

UvlAGf-natioll

I 17

Speech Community ill relation to V-v situation. Standard language internally colonize other vs 01' the same lanzuazc or language family.
L· ~

1.4.1

FROM BREAST GRAMMAR

TO

BOTTLE

TERROR

OF

Hernachandra's grammar IS also known as "hcma.sabdanusiIsfHla"): the post-rules of words (.5iJbda=word; ClIlII == post; .5;:Jsanam == rul ing). Thus Sahd<1/Ju.<;iIsanam as vyakara~Ja or grammar rules the language as well as rules the

In describing 'West to Orient' project of Columbus, Ilich (in Pattanayak, 1981) mentioned an overlooked name, EI io Anton io de Nebrija (J 5th C, contemporary to Columbus) who offered Queen Isabella a "tool" to colonize the language spoken by her own subjects. In fact, Nebrija wanted (0 replace the people a speech by implementing the grammar of Queen's lingua. What Dasgupta (1989) mentioned as internal colonization, began with this attempt to grammatize Queen's tongue in a Grammar book, "Grarnmatica de la Castellana" (1492), the first in any European tongue. And thus begun, according to Illich(ibid), the conquest by means of this engineered tool, "Grammar book", chemicallv synthesized weapon to suppress "untutored barbaric" speech in home and abroad. In this way the external colonization began. Nebrija himself spoke about the marriage of empire and language (i.e. sword as MT and grammar book). So MT (Standard language) from then on, needs tutors. Nebrija argued for standardizing a living language for the benefit of the newly invented Printing Press. Consequently the Official Ideology of "literacy" came into light. Here is a switch over from people's vernacular to grammarians' language (Queen's language), or from vernacular learning to MT education. By this monopoly of the violent Grammarians' language, compulsory education could be implemented in the public schools through a homogenous language of power. And in this way the "captive speakers" (Dasgupta 1989) of "other" "dialects" (they are, III fact, defeated languages) were born. It is also to be noted that in India, grammatical treatises were often called as sabdanusasanam (Patanjali began his mahtibha$ya with the expression "atha sabdJnu<Jsanam",

..,1

captive speakers of "other" defeated languages by prescribing do's and 'don't's of standardized language. The co-incidence of simultaneous occurrences of Columbus' colonization project and Nebrija's Grammar project entails the same process of violent terror of terrnin~tiondismissal of "other'''s body as well as language. It is estimated currently that. " ... there may have been about 80 million native Americans in Latin American when Columbus 'discovered' the continent-as we say-and about 12 to 15 million more north of the Reo Grand~. By 1650, about 95 percent of the population of Latin America had been wiped out, and by the time the continental borders of the United States had been established.isome 200, 000 were left of the indigenous population." (Chomsky, in Peck, 1987: 12 J -22). Chomsky naturally condemned this incident of mass genocide and displacement of population as monstrous and branded Columbus as "mass murderer". Do we not also condemn language-murderer Nebrija, the initiator of "weapon"grammar book-project, (the new paradigm of linguacide), that killed the indigenous languages of Latin America? Is not Nibrija, the language manager and the grand designer of linguistic genocide, a language terrorist? The problem is that though terrorism is embedded in our epistemology and its subsequent dividing practices (e.g., language-dialect dichotomy), indoctrinated by the ideological state apparatuses, any discontent against such secessionist doctrines is stamped as an act of terror. In fact, civilized MAN is seeing HIS own face in the mirror, when HE faces the same mimic act of tenor (e.g., the "legitimate"[!] demand for linguistic statehood) from the other. Keeping in mind all these STATE of affairs, we shall graduallv enter into the domain of Karntapur. Before that, let us move to "the colonial introduction of nation statist construct: Bangia.

Delimiting

or Enlarging

Bangia 1'19

Chapter-Z DELIMI,TING
,2,.OINTRO
In this chapter, we will look into the solidification of Bangia as a linguistic state in reference to question- A. Taking cue from the Chapter- 1, one of Bengal.

decision

of namingwas,

at that time, yet to be taken

and was

OR ENLARGING

BA,NGL,A

the name Subal: Bangia was first found in Ain i Akbari, and then Portuguese sailors used
suspended for the time being. In fact t.o refer "Bangala' this area. as "Bengala". as referred: here Roy (] 993:,] 08) noticed that

1S not

synonymous

with

the

may look into the evolution

of geopolitical

area in

After that we will try to know the incident

of exclu-

sion of Oriya and Asamiya

from Bangla, This demonstration,

decision and economic language-dialect

turn, win show how the socio-political

factors are getting far more importance than that of linguistic

consideration chotomy. for determining so-called di-

"Bangla". What we referred today as geopolitical area of Bangia in those days signified only a part of today's Bengal. Actuany~ today's Bengal's "geopolitics is a result of colony's project. And this project is subscribed by,' writing Iinear histories with cause and effect chronology. ' When, as per the perception of the colonizers from: 17th C. onwards "Bangla'' or Bengal was constructed. there was a need (a) to define redefine the li mits or boundary of supposed MT, (b) as well as to select/accept/codify (standardize) according to the need of centralized C. industrial cap ita 1iSHI; (grarnmaticalize) economy (C) to single introduced tongue by "the 19th spread I ad verti se I teach

2.. . THE ,BIRTH OF BANG,LA 1

Bengal as a unified and well-defined territory hardly existed before the colonization by the Raj. There were some independent janapadas (provinces) in the 6th 17th C. Bengal. Gouda and Vamga are only two of the many provinces (viz., Pundra, Radha, Sumha, Bajra, Tamralipti, Sa/natal etc.) located iff the eastern zone. At that time there was no attempt to use a cover term to refer to the supposed political boundary until the ki ng Sasarnka .(606-7 .A.D.) integrated some of these janpadas under the name Gouda. In the Harah inscription (middle of the "6th C.A.D.) there
was an attempt to integrate all these janapadas under one um-

that constructed

guage) with the ·hdp of a tool grammar

(standard lanof standard colloquial

Bangia.
Before

language

were made to grammatical ize and solidifv a like Banght in the 19th century with prescriptive: ru~les attempts

and regulations
its territory.

of a selected variety MV~ itwas found that the central 1vlV tried to define the boundary with a motive to. extend
Along

brella: Gouda. And even after Sasarnka, other kings like the Pals and Sens loved to refer themselves as '~goudjdhipatj" or "goudesvar" (King or God of Gouda) though they enjoyed the kingship of all the janpadas as Gouda had a special presti ge due to the efforts of Sasamka, Long after this, Ramnrnohan Roy wrote Goudiy» Vyakara~la (Grammar of the Gouda Language .. , 1833) in Bangia. Curiously enough, in English, the same book
"vas -written as "The Bengalee Grammar i1!1 Eng] ish Language' (l 826). What was the reason behind these two marnes? The

with the establishment of the Raj and its consequent E8C. Mercantile and~9C. Industrial Capitalism in Bengal, the perception of "'MTn (which is also a derivative term altered in the context of Hindu Motherhood} had been changed with the confrontation of other-tongue (English). Another language, the Brahmins tongue (i .e. Sanskritized Archaic code, Sadhu bhasa) was found to break apart the adulterous relation between Mother-tongue and Other tongue as the glorified herit'-'

age of Sanskrit

recurs through

the medium

of guru's (high caste

preceptor) tongue visa a vis c'OnDars (low caste) tongue as these guru selectively restricted to occur with cOnDal and any
attempt for cohabitation of these two is condemned as a fallacy: gurucOndaJi

doS.

20 I Linguistic Terrorism In the following section of this monograph, the need-filling motive to manage language is described in the context of colonial rule in connection with the geopol itical boundary of the Bangia with reference to its neighbouring languages/so called "dialects'{v), viz", Oriya and Asarniya, both of which were derived from the Eastern Magadhan or Eastern variety of IndoAryan speeches. The main attention will be on the discursive formation of some intellectuals on the issue of inclusion the language and history and exclusion of language boundary. To clo so we need to understand through their eftgtlt, development

Delimiting or EII!cllgillg

Bangl« / 21

1991: 305) that these ignored linguistic areas are movement prone and the possibility of insurgency is high. We need to understand the motives and attitudes of the people to identify their languages (the pre ssure from below), the government policy, different reports of Educational tongue education (the pressure from managers' role as mediator Commission above) and on mother a lanzuaze
b

in this context

to make out the over-

....... '

all picture of any demand for linguistic state. All the movements based on the demand of linguistic states :basicillly as well as apparently le.id to an action oriented programme centralization" of not only language but also nomic: condition, MT-education and development cultures following the nation statist paradigm. related to "derelated to ecoof indigenous

management

since their incep-

tion in 1837. In this year, there was a decision by the then British Government on replacing Pharsi by the vernacular tongues of all provinces for administrative purpose. At the same time, instigated by this decision, the demand for a self-determined language policy was heard from different parts of the country because the bread and butter of the speaker of any language depended on this policy of linguistic state. One could participate in the decision making body of the government, if and only if the administrative his/her MT. work as well as schooling were to be done in

All the linguistic movements in India lead to the demand for autonomy in different spheres and were linked with-anti-imperialistic nationalist movement. In this way, there is a demand for Autonomous and Pure tool indigenous grammar (free from adulteration) of a well-defined and pure language which is selected centrally as a standard language. Therefore language-managers of a given community did two things: a) they, as a member of imagined community, defined the language boundary (i.e. selection of standard and extension of the standard language from centre to periphery) and b) managed that language with the help of a tool called grammar. In the next section, I would try to show the Rengalee intellectuals' perspective 011 the issue of autonomv ~ of two Ian b 0' zuazes vi z . Oriya and Asamiya, lowing exposition two neighbouring shows a -classical languages of Bangia. Folcentre-periphery relation,

2.2 LINGUISTIC STATES

After more than hundred and

fifty years of this switch over to

linguistic states as a part of its states were not built in a day

MT, independent India developed federal objectives. But linguistic

and that is also not an end to the story. Movements are still going on against or for the imposition of greater linguistic identity. As only 18 languages are included in the eighth schedule of the Indian Constitution, there is discontent among the speakers of many "other" Indian languages, who feel deprived Cor this exclusion from the national language team. Apart from there are several languages which are not acknowledged possible Mission reason) by the Sahitya or the electronic media. this, (for

where Bengal as a centre, wanted to subsume the periphery as its own self in course of standardizing and extending the geography of Bangia. The situation shows dialectic of hegemonic which creates internal colonization, and thus captive inclusion, Janauages

Academy, National Literacy It has been observed (Singh,

and a feeling of nationalism to combat external colonization as well. These cases in the colonial period and at the time of the birth of a new nation state may help us 'to apprehend the post-colonial withdrawal syndrome from the other defeated varieties.

22 I Linguistic

Terrorism.

Delimilillg or Enlarging even predicted that if there were a scope of natural

Bang/a

/ 2::1

2.3.1 A CASE

AGAINST ASAMIYA AND ORIYA

selection

in

An anonymous writer once wrote in Bharati, a Bangia journal (Sravaria, 1305 Bangabda: July-August, 1898 A.D.), which was edited by Rabindranath. This anonymous writer was Rabindranath himself because this article was later on published in Rabindranaths author's

~ndia, there would be no possibility of Bangia's defeat as BangIa 1S the fittest language to survive by defeating others (note that the Darwinian analogy is deployed to the E-Ianguage-objcct). The Author also criticized Brown's analysis of Asarniya as Brown showed Asamiya as a separate language. Another magazine above anonymous writer wrote
1Il

SObdotOrto as bliasabicched.

Whatever

the

the issue of the same 1898) supporting: argument, though the he

name may be the main emphasis

was on homogeneity

tBharati, A.n.'ill, 1305. October

anonymous author'.'{

and mutual intelligibility of Bangia with Oriya and Asamiya. The author argued that Oriya and Asamiya do not differ from BangIa in the same way as the Bangla of Chattagram differs with standard Bangia of Kolkata, i.e. the mutual intelligibility among Bangla, Oriya and Asamiya is more than that of Chattagrarn "dialect" of Bangia in question of degree of mutual intelligibility. He also emphasised that the degree of differences between Dhaka dialect and Birbhum dialect could be compared with the differences between Asarniya and Oriya. The author also mentioned that though there are differences in dialects, the welfare of the country is only possible through the spread of homogeneous written language. The author exemplified it with an analogy taken from England and its neighbouring territories. Be said that though the languages of Ireland and Welsh differ from the English and they are not at all dialects they adopt English, which, in turn, strengthens of English, still the British Em-

mentioned

pointed out some linguistic mistakes of that author. This second anonymous writer here referred to an Asarniya stigma that described intention of Bengalees as to consider themselves as second governing nation of Assam. But the author questioned this very position by suggesting Asamiya people to follow the footsteps of Bangia as it would develop the language, c., whereas the autonomy of Asarniya would be stepping backwards by hundred years.

2.3.2 ASAMIYA'S RESPONSE

But native Oriyas and Asamiyas thought it otherwise. Let us consider first the case of Asarniya. Laksminath Bezbarua, the famous Asamiya writer and son-in-law of Rabindranarh, vehen:ently opposed this cohesive position, which gave the impression of linguistic imperialism and also opposed this hegemonic role of Bengalee in Punya (Asvin-kartik, J 305 Bangabda, October-November 1898). Bezbarua claimed that the question of "dialect"I"language" status of Asamiya was determined lonz before and he challenged the legacy of that anonymous author ~f 'Bhasa~icched'. According to Bezbarua, the author's inexpenence, which was evident in the text, was due to Brown's Grammar and sonic stray speeches on Oriya by the same author. Bezbarua, language, in support of his hypothesis of Asarniya as a separate cited evidences from Grierson and some other gram-

pire. In this way Oriya and Asamiya should adopt one language to break the linguistic barrier and to establish a united territory. But, the author lamented, this was not the reality of the then state of affairs as the British adopted the defensive "divide and rule" vis a vis homogenization, The artificially stimulated "local" languages by separating strategy of British Raj Oriya and

Asamiya from Bangia. The author is nationalistic in his position and proposed a centralized education policy through the medium of Bangia. His main intention was to oppose the secessionist policy of the British rule. So, he also argued that BangIa language would be reciprocally benefited if Orissa adopt Bangia as a language of reading and writing. and Assam The author

marians of Asamiya. He also opposed the notion that the British were responsible for the divisive policy by citing the instance of George Campbell, who introduced Bangia as a medium of in-

24 I Linguistic Terrorism struction in five districts of Assam (1873). Bezburua commented in his autobiography. "Due to the foreign ruler's fallacious de-cision, BangIa was taught in stead of Asarniya in Assam's schools. Asamiya's own tongue was then in the dustbin, and foreign tongue Bangla captured the place of mother by replacing breast to feeding bottle." (Note that this ex pression ["breast to bottle'i-switch over J was also used by Illich, 1981) There was an all-out movement against this decision. With the help of American Missionaries, Asamiya mediators successfully altered the decision of imposing BangIa as a medium of instruction. Bezbarua showed his -rratitude to those American Missionaries as he said that Asarniya is indebted to those missionaries, as Bangia is indebted to Carey, Marshman and others. Next, he treated the question of genealogy ..Though, according to him, Asamiya and Bangia has been derived from Sanskrit, there are an ample number of linguistic instances which differences between these two. He also emphasized show the the long and Bcngalee educated persons

Defimitillg

or ElliOigilig

BOllg/a I 25

living in Assam

But Anandararn

Dhekhial Phukan, with the help of some American Missionaries of Sibsagar inverted the situation and Asamiya was recognized
and acknowledged as official language of Assam by their sole efforts. The responsibility of this decision was not however that of the Englishman in te IIectua Is. but those of educated Bengalce and Asamiya

2.3.3 OHIYA'S RESPONSE

In case of Oriya, a Bengalee school teacher Kanti Chandra Bhattacharya who played a crucial role as he designated Oriya as a dialect of Bangia in the context of late 19th C. He followed the foot-steps of Rajendralal Mitra who first proposed this hypothesrs. Bhattacharya utilized the educational situation in the 19th cen tury' s Ori ssa as there was a lack of On ya tex tbooks for the purpose of mother-tongue education. The Sa-nskrit pandits also refused to write or read in Oriya. The Oriya students of English medium schools used a mixed variety of Benglish (Bangla= the Oriya tion. This proposal English) language and hated Oriya. The guardians of students also did no! encourage mother-tongue educalinguistic attitude shows sunflower syndrome. So any from "planning from below" gets a setback in this

legacy of Asarniya literature, which proves the demand of Asamiya's autonomous existence and also focuses the future project of independent Asamiya literature. Lastly, Bezbarua alleged Bangia as khicuri (hotchpotch) or mixed language. This type of blaming and maligning each other ultimately shows the demand people. for linguistic ' autonomy from the part of the Asarniya

context as below suggests to follow a language of prestige following the path of upward mobilization. Phakirmohan Senapati who bad tried to resist this tried to enhance mcther-tonzue edu. 1:> cation by writing and printing books in Oriya and described vividly these states of affairs in his autobiography, Th is Government autobiography School tells the Oriya story of Kantichandra with a miniBhattacharya who was appointed to teach in Balasore (Bales war, Orissa)

Bezbarua again wrote another article (Punya, Pousa-Magha, 1305 Bangabda, December-January, 1898) in reaction to the article by aforementioned anonymous writer. The name of the articles was "Asamiya and BangJa are not similar", where he questioned tongue?" Asamiya "Is it criminal He also people argued to try to develop that Bengal in BangIa one's own motherthose those always favoured

and Sanskrit

who were writing

and ignored

Asarniyas who were trying to develop their mother tongue. But this polemic did not consider the real state of affairs. Joggoram as an Asamiya-speaker himself was responsible for assigning BangIa as the medium of instruction for educational institutions of Assam. He was accompanied by some Asamiyas

mum knowledge of Oriya. So Bhattacharya faced problems in teaching Oriya. As a result he discarded Oriya by promoting his own mother tongue Bangia. He wrote a booklet "Oriya is not a different Language" to show the similarities of BangIa and Oriya. As the then Head master sent this booklet to the inspector of schools, the imperative of teaching Bangia and Sanskrit come

26 I Linguistic Terrorism

Delimiting or Enlarging Bangia I 27 2.4 BENGALEE'"S ATT1TUDE What is important here is the hegemonic role of Bengalees ]]1 case of both Asamiya and Oriya, The Iinguistic aspiration of Bengalees for their own language did not stimulate the feeling to consider the status of other languages; instead they had tried to incorporate those languages. Bengalees sHU have the stigma of considering people 'Of those languages inferior to them. This superiority complex. gives birth to some cultural stereotypes as Bengalees are habituated to call the -Asamiyas as "aSanli"'
j

from the. office of the inspector. This was due to the greater number of Benaalee teachers in different Oriva schools. ~ But another Bengalec, Gourishankar Roy thought otherwise. He wrote and publi shed many articles ~rJ favour of Oriya in different issue of .,.Utkal Dipika", Senaputi abo wrote some articles to' resist this type of internal li ngui stic imperialism in the pages of ·~.b~l1esvar .~JJnbG1d bJljikii" Under the leadership of Madhusudan Das, the demand of autonOITIOUS slate of Orissa was raised ina mass-meeting at Katak (Cuttak) on 10 May, ] 895. This polemic over t.he linguistic status of Oriya gave birth to two separate groups ..bhaSa bilop andolon Group (Pro-Languageelimination Group) mainly hacked by Bengalees to do away with (bilop or deletion/elernination) Oriya (a case of Linguistic genocide and bhaSa SOlontro andol/In Group (Pro-Autonomous Language Movement Group), which had tried to maintain the autonomy of Oriya language. Some people perceived it as movements but these are just two groups: one was trying to implement Bangla and the other was not allowing that to happen. The main. allegation from the part of svatantra group was against the Bengalees who, for the sake of' their greter scope: of employment in Orissa and for selling Bangla books in Orissa market promoted Bangla instead of Oriya, As an outcome of this movement, svatantra activists put forward an appl ication en·dorsed by 5.00 signatories at the Collectorate Office of the district (1901). .. At: that time" the collectorwas language ... nalyst a John Beams. He supported this cause and even 'wrote a book 1" favour of Oriya. With the help of John Beams and Ravenshaw, the then Commissioner of Orissa the svatantra group won the language-battle by wiping- off Bangia from each and every school in Orissa. Madhusudan Das, one of the 'svatantra' activist, propounded "Utkal Union Confercnce"'(1903) for the sake of the inclusion of Utkal Sabha, Ganjam- Vizag agency, Midnapur, Chotanagpur and Sambalpur district, to Orissa. Lastly the Oriya linguistic area got the status of statehood in ]905.,
.
.

Cconvict')

the

Oriyas

as

"uke" ~

Punjabis

as

'i

"balvldhakopi'Ycauliflower) and Rajbansis as "bahe" (a term of address in Rajbansis deployed by non-Rajbansis in pejorative sense). Even today Bengalees are less knowledgeable about the other languages spoken in West Bengal, On e eminent political leader of West Bengal recognized Santali Ianguage as Alciki (Basu, S. 1989: 98). This shows the height of ignorance .regard-

ing the awareness of neighbouring languages as Alciki is a name of the Santali script not of a language invented by Raghunath
Murrnu,' The. above description mainly concentrated on the pol icy proposed by Rabindranath regarding the status of Asarniya. There are some problems with Rabindranath's intention to Include. Asamiya and. Oriya as dialects of Bangla because Rabindranath

was one of the few people who opposed Euro-centric concept of Nationalism and Centralized politics through his numerous essays and novels. (For the. elaborate account of Rabindranath's dissents and reservations regarding Nationalism, see Nandy, 1994) it is a type of ';'loss of self" (Nandy, ~983) which leads to hegemonic inclusion of other variations. It was also due to the backlash of British Governmental policy, of "divide and rule".
1. But, it is not a fault of that. political leader as pointed out by Basu (ibidjas that

I found, in course of my field work in different parts of Santal Paraganas

Santali-speakers

themselves were saying that they were learning "alciki lan-

guage" in the tutorials outside their schoots.s

2tl / l.inguistic

Terrorism

One can see the epistemological break in his discursive [orma-. tion, when he is talking about dialectic of British Governmental Policy which tried to divide (for the sake of defence) and tried to homoge-nize for the sake of market (for detailed discussion on this issue see Bandyopadhyay, 1998). To negate this dichotomy, Rabindranath adopted dialectic of unification and decentralization. His decentralized pol icy triggers the establ ishrncnt of "SOdeSi SOmaj" as self-independent unit where the main emphasis was on mother tongue education, language which I think, triggers planning policy. the development of pluralistic

Chapter-3 DEMANDING

"LANGUAGE": KAMTAPURI

3.0 TRAVELLING TOWARDS "KAMTAPUR"

When I was travelling in the train in my way tn Maynaguri, I was going through a novel, "tistaparer brittauro" (The story of the Tista-bank, 1988) by Debesh Roy for the better understanding of my "object" of study. The objectification of" my "subject" began at this point that would lead to the <ubjectification di scipl ine, "Li nguistics") and subjection of my. subjects' (my body

through the presupposed academic (anatomo-bio-political) tools I supposed to deploy on my subjects' essential Kamtapuri-body, Roy, in his novel, explicitly described the otherness of Rajbansi-people and he also depicted how the old privileged land owners (like Gayanath or Panchanan Mallik) are cashing on the economically deprived position of downtrodden Rajbanshis by initiating a movement in the name of autonomous "Northland" (Uttarakhand) or by demandi ng Kamtapuri state. Before the introduction of Land Reform Movement by the Left Front Government, the 'tebhaga' movement (llJ43) and the

nakshalbari
consciousness

movement in the 70s gave rise to certain political in the North Bengal which resulted to the insecuanxiety among landowners and thus the defor con-

rity of the land owners. Along with this, the law for laud reform gave rise to severe

mallei for separate

Uttarakhand carne into existence

structing a separate and independent Bengal. That is, the "real" problem ., behind which the old privileged

space for the North (uttar) of North Bengal is a mask, or rich peasants are

land owners

trying to regain their mastery that was partially lost due to the partial success of Land Reform Movement (as only 6-7% of the total agricultural land were allotted to the peasants
LI nder

the

30 I Linguistic Terrorism Land Reform Movement) initiated by the Left Front Government 1977 onwards. This masked "real" problem is the real problematic that I had faced when I was field working in this region.

Demanding

"Language"

.- Kamtapurl I 3 I

History or Physiology and you have Anthropology." This is peculiar othering for the sake of subservience. Another thins I also noted that when many of us are striving for such S.c. oar S.T. +identity to catch hold of some opportunities, fusing to accept such identity. The poet said, "Despite have separate as a dialect Ethnologue language. Unfortunately, our language they are reAnd we

3.1 FIRST ENCOUNTER WITH A RAJBANSI POET

Incidentally, (nation), at the time of travelling in the train, I met a

that, still we are Kstriyas.

Rajbansi poet, who initiated

Hindu-identity and trying

me in the problems
to strip off scheduled

of Rajbansi ..jati for their identity tribe

is stamped

who, from the days of the Raj, are fighting

of Asamiya or Bangia (People of India Project or reflect similar ambivalence in deciding Rajbansi's depending on our community's existence nation-state. As we are Jiving in these language has coercively in a two

imposed by the British Government. mess in the census in 1921, when faced problem Rajbansis. with the ascription Rajbansis However

He said that there was a the British demographers identity to the self-iden-

Master Language) specific linguistic states, the dominant

of Koch-tribe

selved us. You are

refused that exonymous

tity as they were and are still proud of their royal heritage. The Rajbansi Kings reigned over the Kamtapur-kingdorn from 1510 to 1773 as independent kings and from 1773 to 1949 as a taxpayer to the Raj. Keeping in mind such 440 years royal heritage, they are now maintaining their K;;·atriya-identity under the Hindu-religion. Painfully the poet discussed the history of census of 1891, 1901, 1911 and 1921-in all these years there was a polemic over their triba1 or non-tribal identity of Rajbansis that dispute even went to the Privy Council in 1891. He said, "Who are we'? Are we not Ksetriyes with 440 years of Royal Heritage? Why So why should we be called we be categorized as Coch-tribe?" as S.T. or S.C.? should

responsible for such internal colonization as you are cashing our diasporic (7) existence in the two states. We are against ~such inclusion of our community . Asamiya-Ianguage," to either Koch-tribe 'or Banzla/ ~ . of

I said, "Will you please tell me regarding language and linguistic state?" He smiled our language. poems." one or two:

your demand

gently: "I want to recite some poems written in You will understand our sentiments from these many Rajbansi poems. Here I am citing

Then he recited

I said, keeping in mind the anatomo-biopolitics of census as elaborated by Foucault, that I myself do not believe in such imposition of identity from the rulers' the "scientific administrative construction" epistemolof "Homo ogy. I only acknowledge

maWer buli dudher moton dekhaYO SOgay bhabia, kuHili HoYa kawa Sajile dibe khedaYa .... ma W harakO kOY Ina ,Iiria paricaY jar !lay jarua kOY uake.
-Kedarnath Sinha

Sapiens". In spite of that, how could we be allowed to talk about something "other" by naming them as "tribe"? (Bandyopadhyay, 1995) I do not understand why should we deploy "Physical Anthropology" instead of Physiology or "Cultural Anthropology" instead of simple History In fact, it is Whitman's or Sociology epistemology forthis category, "tribe"? that declares "We have

"The mother tongue is like mother's milk. If you, being a cuckoo, are dressed as a crow, you will be rusticated. A being without a mother is called mother-less child, and the being who has no identity, is called as bustard."

32 / Linguistic

Terrorism

Demanding

"IBII/-:'Uilg('''

Kunuupur!

I 33

"phlla \;Ii re dOSra bho S« ja Y pura? ni Hamar (lSU. HOlak tot« dubi JOW MalrihhaSa Harare r;eli Dukri katulibe bhaSa uddhar korir bade Hamata kori pOn. kamtapuri Hamar bha.Sa
I!lOIi

When I got into the Maynaguri Station and was xcarching I'm rickshaws, first thing T found was the colored picture of Bir Cilha Roy, the Karrupuris national hero, in the hawkers' corner for sale. It was published by Kamtapur People's Party who tried to frame their nation state's de-sign by projecting their glorious past with the semiotic help of such emblem. My fieldwork began with this document.
3,2 MEETING A RICH PEASANT LANDLES~ FARMER

geyse aji kaRi nibar bade Hama SOga Y juddhat Sa]i ... " - Kedarnatn Sinha
Haray "Shun off second language that does not [uljil! our hope, 110r you sink ill the water. Elevate our mother tongue as if it will lost, our mind will cry ... For rescuing our language, we arc taking oath. Kamtapuri is our language, which is lost today. 7() regain

WITH A HELP

OF

it, let us prepare for the battle." Last of all, he said with grief that this destitution due to exploitation and insult in every sphere of life- economic, social, cultural, linguistic, gave birth to severe identity crisis of Rajbansis, The crisis led them to excavate their historical episodes in front of the whole society in order to prove their rich cultural heritage which was once in existence and that which has been sent to oblivion by the politics that played a foul role during the formation of the linguistic nation state after independence. As a result they claim their language 'Kamrapuri", which has a rich literary heritage and therefore cannot be reduced to the status of a dialect. I understood the sentiment of being ignored as well as an embedded inferiority complex arising out of language jealousy against the standard colloquial Bangla. The Rajbansi poet was in a perplexed position due to his community's diasporic existence, though they live in a geographically contiguous area of AssamBengal-Biha and Bangladesh-Bhutan-Nepal borders. I was trying to understand the condition of economically deprived NorthBengal from the days of the Raj.

When T, at first, went to a remote village of Maynaguri under Jalpaiguri district of West Bengal in search of the demand of a separate linguistic nation state under the banner "Kamtapuri", 1 met several persons concerned with the demand of their linguistic state. However, at a first glance, it was very difficult for me to distinguish them from the Coch-culture as they have adopted the dress code, architecture, domestic utensils etc. as a part of their culture (this observation is also confirmed by Roy's novel). The mainstream Hindus ignored their Hindu-identity inspite of their earnest belonging-ness to the Hindu-community. They rolled back unconsciously to the convention of their immediate other (Koch) which they do not subscribe as their part. There 1 met one bhaWaYa-singer, Roybarman who helped me a lot in my fieldwork. He took me to the house of a Iotdar. He is an adhlar working under that jotdar and an excellent singer of BhaWaYa (branded by us as "folksong", cf. Bandyopadhyay, 2000) songs. In fact, he sang this type of songs with his stringinstrument called ssrinde. On the way to the ex -jotdar's wooden house, he told me that he performed in the function organized Kamtapur Sahitya Parisat which is devoted to the cause of Kamtapur. What's that? What is Kamiapur? Is it not under West Bengal? Do YOLl not speak Bangia? I asked him these questions fully knowing the connotation of Kamtapur as I had gathered information from different print sources. But I was following the rules of fieldwork. I was a field-worker, working as a watchdog

34 I Linguistic Terrorism

Demanding

"Language ,. : Kamtapuri I 35

of government-sponsored project. I I had to gather knowledge of the subjects (whom I objectify) with my anatomo-bio-political tools and to help Government to decide the welfare of their subjects. Roybarrnan, though he sang for the cause of Kamtapur Sahitya Sabha (Kamtapur Literary Organization), frankly admitted that he had a little or no knowledge about the demand for separate state. He admitted his ignorance with shame. And his shyness was increased, when I asked him, "Why don't you speak at all? What is your problem')" Surprisingly, he was silent for sometimes and answered my question after much instigation that as my language is "good", and his language is "bad" and "inferior", it troubled him to speak explicitly with me: "Your language is developed and I speak incorrectly." (Italicized word was in English). Then we reached our destination and welcomed by the octogenarian exiotdar and his family in a dark wooden house as there was no electricity. The family of that octogenarian jotdar, Mallik offered me pan (beetle leaf), Supuri (beetle nut) and CUll (lime). This convention of welcoming the guests with pan is common practice in the most part of the North-East and it is not found in the South Bengal in which I myself belong.

1. 1 am reiterating here the question the context of Students' Revolution "W hy Sociologists?". ism creates ologist is put to work. He argued, One studies a mass of contradictions;

raised by Daniel Cohn-Bendict in in Paris in a pamphlet entitled

0

"Th e practice juvenile

forgan

izing cap italcase a socianother racprob-

and each particular delinquency,

ism, a th ird slums,

Each seeks an explanation

of his (sic) partial

lemand elaborates a 'tbeory' proposing solutions to the limited conflict he (sic) is studying. Thus, while serving as a 'watchdog' our sociologist will at the same time make his (sic) contribution to the mosaic of sociological 'theories'." : (cited in Dews, 1987: 172). For more details, see the next chapter.

Mallik then opened his file. He was surrounded by print capitalist products: books, leaflets, and magazines, which were devoted for thc cause of Kamtapun. He lamented for the land he had lost for the "Operation Barga" initiated by the Left Front Government after J 977. He stated that there was no antagon iSill between jotdur and adhiyar before Nakshal Movement and the introduction of Land ceiling. Master and Servants used to live happily without any bitterness. It was only the Operation burg» that made the divide. I did not comment on this issue instead I asked my host, Mallik, a veteran leader of Kamtapur Gana Parisat, regarding the logistics of separate statehood of Karntapur, What he stated after my queries, was an excellent example of genealogical fantasy with withdrawal syndrome. He, as a representative of Kamtapur People's Party, withdrawing his community's loyalty towards Bangia or Asamiya language and its subsequent linguistic nation states. However, in this withdrawal syndrome, the key symptoms of nation statist imagination still persisted with the traces of Sanskritic heritage. He started with his community'S History. He, as a Rajbansi, opined that when Parsuram the second started killing the Ksatriyas, at that time those Ksatriyas who escaped, came and started their habitation in these northern regions. He claimed by showing me a leaflet that they were the generation of those Ksatriyas and they are Hindus. When Kalapahar destroyed the Kamaksya temple of the Hindus in J 563, it was King Naranarayan, the then Rajbansi king of Kochbihar rebuilt it and sacrificed 1SO human beings: "This proves our Hindu set of mind and we worship Jalpesvar Siva, the shrine of which was built by the king Naranarayana", He claimed that Government of India also declared them as Hindus and it was to escape the inclusion of Coochbihar to Pakistan. He then switched over from Puran to History though to him (and also to me) the demarcation line in between these two was fuzzy. Once the whole of north "Bengal" region was within the Kamtapur kingdom. The name of this region was Pragjyotispur

Demandiu);

'·I.,lIlIg/II/g.!'''

Kumtupuri

/ 37

_as attested by the Vedic scriptures (?). Rajbansi King Niludhvaj established Kanitapur Nagar in J 440. He also remembered Maharaja Viswasingha (1496-1553/5), the renowned king of the region (1522- 1552/55, Sen, 1935/93: 1070), who himself was born by the blessings of god Siv«. Therefore, his family was known as Sivsbemsn or the family of Siva. He had two sons, Kumar Sukladhvaja Maladhvaja (Mallik were also without Naranarayana (later known as Cila/Cilha Roy) and Kumar did .not mention the dates and some leaflets dates) who later came to be known as (1555-87), defeated the Ahorn ki ng

parts of Bengal especially Kolkata. The Kolkata b;I~t:(1 scholars without knowing the heritage of the Rajbansis properly, neglected LIS with a concept this Rajbansi community

of 'less cultured'
111

pejorative

people sense without

YOL!,

to mean knowing its

orizinal meaninu often usc the term 'bal-Ie '. This we think is a b ' .:::'" mockery and in which we [eel real Iy insulted and downtrodden. This is a term of address in close and affectionate

circlr

ill our

or Malladeva

community." 1 felt guilt for my/our alienation and for usilli! such cxouym (instead of their endo/ctbnonym) for representing a community.

and captured Manipur, Tripura and Kachar and some parts of Gouda with the help of his brother Cilha Roy, who is, according to Mallik, supposed to be mentioned by Toyenby as a more powerful general than Napoleon and Sivaji and the profounder of guerilla warfare. At that time a British traveller, Ralf Fitch visited Kamtapur and praised this place. For 426 years Kamtapur was under the sovereignty details, see Sen, 1935/93: of the Siva-dynasty. (For Historical 1069-76). Mallik questioned, "Who

Even I felt shame for constructing

we had practiced dominant secessionism and standard

a totality of Bangla, in which by dividing language varictit;s as marginalized

'dialects'

11on-standard

guided by capital ist nation statist programme. Mallik continued, "You sec what Prof. Pabitra Sark ar states in the preface of the book 'A step to Karntabihari language' by Dharmanarayan Barma, "Although Shri Dharma Narayan Barrna has described his subject as a 'language'. I do not think it can be assigned that status yet and must be regarded as a dialect marginally located between Bengali, Assarnese and other peripheral languages." Prof. Nirmal Das, in his 'Kamtapuri bhaSar andolon : oYtiHaSik baxtobOta' maintains that 'karntapuri' is only a regional variation of the Bangia language! We, all the K-P.P members, are vehemently protesting against this in our publication entitled "Karntapuri bhaSa andolon 0 tar oYtiHaSik gurutto". Sunil Pradhan categorically criticized Prof. Das in his article" SadhinOtar pOncaS bOchorc kucbihar" in 'RayOak' (p. 86 debi puja SONkha B.S. 1404). Scholars from Kolkata proper express their dominant attitude by stating that 'Kamtapuri' is nothing but a dialect language How such status was in existence of 'diabefore lect' is determined? 'Rajbansi'

else except this dynasty did reign over such long period?" At the moment of such narration, Mallik's eyes were illuminated with the rays of his community's glorious past.

I then asked him regarding

language is called Kamtapuri

his choice of the term, "Why this

instead of Rajbansi? You know

that all the scholars preferred the name Rajbansi. The language which is spoken in the districts of Malda, Dinajpur, Jalpaiguri, Coachbehar and in some parts of Darjeelmg, Goalpara of Assam, Nepal, Dhubri, Kokrajhar and Rangpur of Bangladesh has been traced as 'Rajbansi' by Grierson (1903). Chattcrjcct 1926) though mentions the name dialect ; Rajbansi, and thereby

he traced it by the name

Grierson he admitted (1903) called the distinct

'Kamrupi'; a so-called
this as 'Rajbansi'

dialect of Bangia,

position of this dialect from Bangla and Asamiya language." Mallik was angry, "All of you -all the Kolkata-based scholars designated our language as dialect. We are insulted and has been made a matter of ridicule for using our own language which is considered to be uncultured by the people of different

the formation of BangIa. The language was in practice in the court of the kinae of Coachbehar in the name of 'Rajbansi' or

'Karntabihari'. Not only it was present in the spoken form, it was present in the written form as well. Much has been discussed as regards whether Kamtapuri is the dialect of Bangia or

38 / Linguistic

Terrorism

Demanding

"Language"

: Kamtapuri / 39

Bangla is the dialect of Karntapuri in the different issues of the ?aily 'Uttarbanga sambad". "In fact", claimed Mallik, "Rajbansi
IS

not a dialect I understood st~tist

of Bangla, but Bangla is a dialect of Rajbansi I" that he was withdrawing his affiliation from the possessi ve metaphysical totality called "Bangia" totality of the metaphysical

because the Bangia language did not receive its shape till then. We claim that the only existing language in the North-Eastern region was KamtaJi. Mallik then quoted again from Barrna's book, 'A Step to Kamtabihari written in (swargadeva) language': 1555-A.D. represents "The to letter the of Maharaja Ahom of Bengali then naturally, generated Banna from king Naranarayan Chukhampha And if as of

nation

by reversing

the role. My possession

calle~ "~ang!a", for that moment, was at stake as periphery was questiorung the logic of homogenized possession of sornethinz called Bangia (-ness) over different statist varieties. However his key symptoms of nation construction persisted as his dis-

well the Kamtapuri

language. confusion the that,

this be taken as the first specimen held by the Calcutta that Bengali prose language." Naranarayan University, literature (1991:3) that scholars

prose literature, womb

arises "It is

?Uf he~itage
1I1

course is guided by the same paradigm which "we" also maintain to preserve our "Bengalee" nationality. We maintained that their started with caryi.1padas wri.tten by few siddhac<Tryas secret language without considering whether the

Kamtapuri
Maharaja

also stated

also very astonishing

of Asam demand

this letter of

to be the first visible

sign of Asamiya

called themselves as "Bengalee". Is it not a case of "overgeneralizanon" to consider a small corpus as the predecessor of any nationally constructed language . 0 Asamiya, Nepali or languages' like Maithili, are attesting our past on the basis of today's struction and are retrospectively assigning guided by the genealogical fantasy. Without genealogicalfantasy, we feel like bustardsu~h and such heritage pnvate property, which like Banala Oriya b· " Kurrnali? All of us nation statist conour foreFATHER this construction of and a state without

siddhacaryas

prose hterature. This awakens very naturally our contention where Kamtapuri will go then? An organized kingdom without any linguistic medium! Or did it do its function with a 'lingua franca' of so-called scholar's imagination? Of course not, Evidently it stands that when there was complete darkness in the south, Kamtapur glew with its own unparalleled radiance of culture and ideal. administration." (1991 :4) A fragment of metaphysical totality called Bangla was also infested by the genealogical fantasy as constructed by our scholars by assigning few instances of old writings as the predecessor of the whole imagi-NATION without considering the politico-administrative of the present whole.

is an illegitimate state. As I have my I have, as a legitimate child, inherited

from my foreFATHERS, so also I possess language as my private property, inherited from the distant but "positively" attested past. Could we really/positively establish such relation with the h~:p of disciplinary technologies crtmg few affinities? like Philological genealogy by

Mallik had also a tendency to trace a relationship of the language with Sanskrit to prove his community's Hindu-origin. Dharrnanarayan Barrna's book 'A step to Kamtabihari language', though claimed to be a work of structural linguistics, immensely depended on the Sanskrit model. He also traces the retention of a vocalic sound double "li" of Sanskrit in Karnatabihari as a prolonged and profound sound (ibid: 9) which is not retained in Asamiya or BangIa. I did not question such "un-scientific" claims made by Mallik as I was trying to understand the process of nation-construction in the discourse of Mallik. (Sarkar aptly said regarding Barma's Grammar book, "The straitjackets of

We had claimed that our (means Bangia's) foreFATHER was caryapada. Mallik also claimed that the origin of their language was also from the padas of caryil. He quoted Prof. Nirmal Das who mentioned some verb and case suffixes of Rajbansi. Das showed that such use was present in the old Bangia literature csryiipeds. Mallik said that the language which Das called as Old Bangla is nothing but the Kamta language or Karntapuri

4()

I Linguistic Terrorism

{)Ui/,,·m/ill.t:

"Language"

. Kumtapuri

I 41

traditional grammar have been applied without any doubt and hesitation."[Letter from Pabitra Sarkar printed in Barrna, 1991]) Mallik showed me Hiratan Das ' article in 'rnonillara phoni' that also claimed the Sanskritic heritage of their language. This epistemological recurrance of Sanskrit shows "our" general and popu lar tendency to identify "ourxel vcs' as the nearer kith of Sans] rit, the. emblem of our heritage. A part from such tendency towards Sanskritization, there is also an inclination towards English. The name of the magazine, published by Kamtapuri activists, is the "Voice of Karntapur" and the name of their grammar bcok is in Englishl l ' ln fact, tfiey are using the same coin, which we have used so far for constructing our nation statist history. But, they are doing it differently. They are doing it as "other of other", We, the Bengalees, arc the "other" of European all pervading self. We are the mimic man. On the other hand, they are representing themselves by imitating this immediate other, thus they are other of other, aspiring to be the "self" of internal "other". yYhat is striking to me in this movement is that though they are apparently against the existing arrangement of the state, they are not against the state as their voice is captured, appropriated, approximated and codified by the programmed language of nationstate. The developmental de-sign they follow is ultimately a product of West Europe and America that we have inherited in building our state. This subscription to state and print capitalist model of nation is then a case of mimicry of overdeterrnination. Then I repeat my first question, "Why should you call it Kamtapuri instead of Rajbansi?" He replied promptly, quoting Shri Upendra Nath Barman , Ex M.P "As It was/is the mother tongue of Muslims, Rajbanshis, Kayasthas, Brahmins, Khens and other people of old Kamtapuri kingdom. About 120 lakhs of people speak this language who are not all Rajbansis, we prefer to call it Karntapuri. Roy Sahib, Thakur Panchanan Barma, M.A., B.L., the great initiator of the Rajbansis and other downtrodden people of North Eastern India, called it Kamta-Bihari language in his book'History of

Kamta- Bihari Literature'

t Una r Bauga Sahityo Sammclan , 3rd

annual Convention held at Gouripur - 13 J 7 B.S.). Burma also mentioned Dr. Sahidulla's opinion stated in the preface of "ancolik hhaSar obhidhan" that such a racial nomenclature like 'Raj bans i' is not apt. Keepi ng into considerutio n. all these his-

torical, geographical, and linguistic viewpoints we prefer to call the language as Karntapuri or Kamta-Bihari language. A.K.S.U. (All Kamtapur Students' Union) also pointed out that as this' was Karntapur kingdom, the language will be called Kamrapuri." Mall ik concluded, "As it was the court language of Rajbansi kings of Kamtapur and it also served the Koch kingdom and this was also more developed in the hands of Rajbansi kings, we prefer the name 'Kamtapuri' to cover non-Rajbansis and as want to neglect none." I do not know whether numerous other language groups and co 111 mun ities of th is area would s u bscri be su c h subs u mpti on under such umbrella. But, who cares? In the Gorkhaland, no one bothers about Lepcha and Bhutia, in the proposed Kamtapur, . who would be bothered abou: Mech, Rava, Santals or Lepchas? Mediators in the land of Kamtapur are raising their maneuvered voice and searching for their allies by showing their glorious past. Mallik lastly declared, in that dark evening of March 1999, that the Rajbansis are scattered in three different stales and it would not be difficult for them to congregate weapons from foreign sources to right Bengalee colonialism.
3.3 ADVOCATE LEGITlMAZED THE DEMAND

That threatened me. Being terrorized I escaped from that place and searched for another informant. In the very next day, I met one Rajbansi Advocate, Roy. He, as a member of Kamtapur People's Party (KPP), introduced me with the legalities of their demand. He started with the formation or Hitasadhani as the movement for the recognition of 'Raj bansi' or 'Karntapuri' language in North Bengal can be traced back with the formation of 'Hitasadhani' (1948). In this year, the accession of this royal state of Coachbehar was to be considered within independent

42 I Linguistic

Terrorism

Demanding

"Language'

." Kamtapuri

I 4:1

India and a controversy arose as to which stateAssam or West Benaal it would be included. This controversy led to the formal:> tion of 'Hitasadhani'. According to 'Hitasadhani', as Coachbehar is more related with Assamculturally as well as linguistically, it should be considered within the state of Assam or it might maintain its autonomy. Though Jawaharlal Nehru, the then prime minister, assured the then king that Coachbehar would never be- joined with West Bengal (cf. Patel's correspondences: 1945-50 ·(Vol. 8: 413, cited in Nikhil Roy, 1999 :9), in II 1949 Coachbehar bhaSa was dec lared as one of the districts In this regard, andoJon September

Roy then showed me the map of proposed Karntapur Stare. The people of Jalpaiguri, Maynaguri, Dhupguri, Kumargrarn, Darjeeling, Siliguri, Tufangunj of Coachbehar, Denhata are directly involved with K.P.P. for the formation of Kamtapur state. Though MaIda was not included under the kingdom of

Karntapur,
claims

for the sake of convenience in the formation of state, were made for its inclusion. Moreover although a good population of Assam resides (the in Kokrajhar, part of the

amount of Rajbansi
Bongaigaon Bcdoland), although region

Dhubri and
proposed State. Again, Hi 11 Council,

of West Bengal. book 'Kamtapuri

Rev quoted

from Nikhil gurutto'

these are not claimed part of Darjeeling

under Karntapur

Roy's (ibid:

has been under Gorkha of Darjeeiing

0 tar oytiHasik

9), where it is stated that Coachbehar was illegally handed over to the government of West Bengal without taking any consent of the people, though, at the same time, the case of J unagarh was considered democratically. This incident was not accepted by the Rajbansis in good spirit. Roy showed me the Patel's letter of "acceptance of transfer" of this territory to Sri Naujappa, the then Chief Commissioner of Coochbihar (ef. Patel's correspondences: J 945-50,VoI.7: 553, cited in Roy, N, 1999: 10). Here Patel sought co-operation from the people of Coochbihar in building up Indian state: "I hope therefore, that the people of Coach Bihar will work with single mindedness and devotion to duty as a united team for their own betterment and to achieve their due place in the political and administrative set up of India." (emphases added, note the frequent use of "single" and its r~l~ted words in the context of fragmented "Indian" plurality. This IS a persuasive voice from the monolithic state that sought "devotion to duty as a united team" as a ritual to build single India) Roy commented with severe despair, "It is matter of regret, that despite this act of treachery from the part of Indian Government, we participated in the Indian democracy. But, what is the result of that participation? We are still living in chilled penury. The developmental long time, though flood." projects like Tista Barrage is deferred for the it was inaugurated. We are still suffering from

K.P.P. wants the incorporation state of Karntapur,

under the proposed

He concluded with the citation from the International Covenant Act and the Draft Universal declaration on indigenous Right enous According to the Draft Universal Rights (EI CN.4 Sub. 211988/25), Declaration on Indigpeople should have

9. The right to develop and promote their own languages, including an own literary language, and to use them for administrative, judicial. cultural, and other purposes. J{). The right to all forms of education, including 10 have access to education ill their own languages, and to establish, structure, conduct and control their own educational systems and institutions
Art ic Ie 27 of the Intern ati anal Covenant cal Rights (1966) declares:
0n

Ci v iI an d Pol iti-

"In those States ill which ethnic, religious, or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, ill community with the other members of their group, to enJo}~their OH''Il culture, to profess and practice their own religion, or to use their own language." (For detailed discussion, please see Phi IIipson, 1992 :93-8)

3.4 STUDENT'S VOICE

Then I met a female student of AKSU notions of students' revolutions of China preoccupied and France. with the I wanted

44 I Linguistic Terrorism to hear the same voice from them. However, I found, quite contrary to my romantic preoccupation, that they were only concerned with their immediate problem: language. They were least bothered about the existing paradigm of education and they did not follow any great "ideological" stance related to social engineering. Though, subscribed ruling they definitely maintained class and state only. an ideology that

Demanding

"Language"

: Kamtapuri / 45

stand the semiotics of their concern, "Who is this vulture? VIe, the Kolkatans?" She did not answer my question; instead she emphasized again the language issue, as she knew that I am a linguist. S he said, "The struggle for separate state was sometimes felt to be less appealing to the mass due to the ignorance regarding the history and culture of 'Kamtapur' kingdom. But the issue tongue for the demand to catch of the recognition generation. of their mother very was found hold of the mass sentiments

She said, "As a student we suffered most due to the imposition of Kolkata- BangIa. We having being felt the insult in the social life due to our mother tongue and being unable to use our mother tongue in the field of education and other social communication, demand are motivated for the movement of the language. which will upheld our Moreover the influfor the recognition

easily especially

for the younger

As a result, for the

purpose of mass unification, the language issue was incorporated along with their dernarrds and a, joint venture has been planned for the movement. This will be evident and from the demands made by A.K.S.U. from one leaflet:

K.P.P." She read those demands

in the 8th schedule

ence of the movements for language recoznition also trizaered b b~ the sentiments of the general people. 'All Kamtapur Students' Union (A.K.S.U.) Bengal university, that was formed in the premise of the North was the first who put forth the issue of rec-

1, Incorporation

of 'Kamtapuri ' language

ognition of Kamtapuri language. Though, we have kept in our mind that our predecessors also appealed to the Committee for Linguistic demanded However, State Formation for a separate

of the Indian constitution. 2. Kamtapuri should be made the medium if instruction from primary to university education and publication of the necessary books for the purpose. 3. Enlisting and publishing the historical events of Karntapur the curricumass me-

state in 1955. We also

Rupees 10 crore for the upliftment of our language. government did not pay any heed to our demand. In

sequentially based on their importance lum accordingly.

and framing culture through

the year '98 and '99, we conducted meeting of 'Karntapuri Sahitya Parisat'. We are trying Our best to uplift the culture of Kamtapur through local songs, dances and other activities. The first phase of the Kamtapuri movement was not marked by the language issue. But later on,

4. The publicity
dia.

of the Kamtapuri of the holiday of Bhawaia,

S.
Barma 6.

Declaration and father Preservation

on the birth day of their great Roy saheb Thakur Abbas-ud-din. Roy. of Karntapuri lanPanchanan regiA separate

hero Cilha Ray, a social reformer ment should be opened

K.P.P. joined

hands

with us bestate can with

cause it has been realized be made more powerful

that the demand

for separate

in the name of Cilha

if the language

issue is attached

and all round development

the r~.~vement. We are regularly conducting exhibitions and sale of different papers and magazines in our language. A monthly magazine 'Voice of Karntapur' is published for the spread party's objective and ethos of the movement." of the

guage for which government should take immediate steps. 7. Establishment of university in the name of Thakur Panchanan Barma in Coachbehar, because there are 7 universities in south Bengal but only one in north Bengal. 8. Conservation of the historical places and archaeological evidences of Karntapur by the Government. 9. Reservation of 70% of the seats for the Kamtapuri in the

She showed me the magazine. There was a picture of vulture that was penetrating the North Bengal with its beak. The vulture's feet were upon the South Bengal. I asked her, to under-

46 I Linguistic

Tenor/sill

Demanding and the north Bengal university jobs. language thought in the radio and and -culture degeneration. meetings SaHitto were held poriSat' and in 1999 of medical college. 'uttarancOl bhaSa alocOna

.'Language " : Kamtapuri I 47 (A Seminar on the

North

Bengal

University

SObha'

l O. Establishment college.
11. 80% reservation

of agricultural in government

and engineering

Language(s) of Northland). About 300 renowned people participated in this meeting. Among them the distinguished guests were-Dr. S.N. Barman( Principal , E.R.L.C. Bhubaneswar) , Sukhabilash Barman (LA.S.), Arun Chandra Choudhury (writer), Dr. Puma Narayan Sinha(ex-l'vLLA.), Bhakt, Dr. Prof: Ramendra Barma Nath

12_ Broadcasti ng of news in Kamta televisions, three times a day. ] 3. To reveal the rich heritage, Kamtapuri and to safe guard

Adhikari, Dr. Dwijen

and future of Kamtapuri the formation the research

Dharmanarayan Decision

(teacher).

As a result of the decision

was taken regarding language.

the past, present, was also taken for It was also

it from cultural

She informed (March)

me that, apart from these, by 'karntapuri

of an association on Kamtapuri

that wi II take into consideration and culture.

in 1998 (1 J th to 13th April) in JaJpaiguri

at Kumargrarnduar bhaSa

language

where the mothers were requested personally to talk to their children in Kamtapuri language. She said that the mothers are the "real" tutors who could cultivate the mother tongue from the very beginning. She cited the concern for "mothers" from the discourses Panchanan of the father of Barma (1866-1936) Kamtapuri and even natioJ~ Roysaheb from Panchanan

decided that for the time being, the name of the language would be 'Rajbansi (Kamtapuri),. The association came to be known as 'North Eastern Foundation for Social Science and Research' under the supervision of Dr. Girindranath Roy (Department of English, N.B.U.) as its Director. The topic of the research like 'language' will be decided by Dr. Dwijen Bhakt , 'Folklore' under Rarnendranath Adhikari , 'History' under Anandagopal Ghosh and 'Anthropology' under Dr. Rahim MondoI. It has been also decided that any controversy regarding language issue will be handled by the foundation and not by any individual. Thus, it is a case of colonial sub-otage or colotage, by which a small colony is creating a possibility of subversion but that subversive colotage is also subservient to the power of the western model of nation state.

Mallik, a rich peasant who was involved with the cause of Karntapur from the days of Kamtapur Ganaparisat. People also placed "their opinion and discussions were held in favour of Kamtapuri language. ormation movement I just remembered our Kolkata-based refin the 19 C. was also circled around the

cause of woman. I also understood that it was the same de-sign of welfare statist developmental planning without any innovative or new imagination. She wanted to overemphasize this language issue again. She was going to give me a list of their allies. She told me that there is also a group of renowned of the Kamtapuri language people without who are working keeping in favour with direct contact

3.5 NOW A KPP ACTIVIST SPEAKS

"You know that we are disturbed by the Bhatias, the rmgrated people who are coming here from the plain land to disturb our peaceful living without any knowledge of wealth accumulation. They taught us the rules of wealth accumulation." Debbarman was angry with "they"-the bhaTia.~. Who are these "they"? Debbarenan answered me, "They are the Bengalees, coming froen South Bengal, Bangladesh. They are coming even before from independence. They are also Marwaris. AI! these foreign-

K.P.P. or A.K.S.U. They are the renowned and established people and some are the relations of the royal family of Baikunthapur, The name of Haripada Roy, Naren Das.: Sukhabilash Barman, Prof. Girijasankar Roy are worth mentioning. Most remarkable event of this group which took place in Jalpaiguri on 25th and 26th of December '98 was a seminar on

48 I Linguistic Terrorism

Demanding

"Language"

: Kamtapuri I 49

ers are destroying our land, forest and every thing. You know that in Kcochbihar, the growth rate is too high after 1971, due to this migration of bho'Iias'l Our irrigation system is poor. They are utilizing this opportunity by illegally buying our agricultural land for tea gardens in lieu of scanty money. We are becoming laborers of those tea gardens. We have nothing left for our own for these bha'Iias. So, we must have our own party for our own cause." Debbarman then told me the history of the parties that were formed for the cause of Kamtapuri. He narrated, "At the time of independence, the only party that was operating was the 'Praja Socialist Party'. In 5 Jul y 1969 Uttarakhnd Party was formed and they contested in the loksObha elections. But due to the gaining of the power of other political parties of the bhaTias and due to the lack of constructive effort, the popularity of the Uttarakhand was reduced in course of time. Later on due to some confrontation regarding a railway bandh incident, the party split up and gave rise to 'Kamtapuri Ganaparisat Party'. 'Kamtapuri People's Party' (K.P.P.) came into existence during late- 90's. KPP is giving rise to mass consciousness through bandh, ..agitation, and meeting. We are trying to establish the history of Kamtapur by dramatizing the story of 'bir Cilia', KP.P. sends candidates at different centres in the loksabha and bidhansabha election. Apart from this, in the '98 loksabha election, K.P.P. came in terms with J.A.K.S. Uharkhandi Adibasi Kalyan Samiti) for strengthening our solidarity for the same cause. Apart from this in 1998, we called for strike on 1611' July throughout north Bengal. We also sent our demand to the then Prime Minister Mr. I. K. Gujral through fax. Many people are now supporting us. The active participation has come from the Ra_jbansi schoolteachers, unemployed youths, the government servants of lower rank, and others who are engaged in miscellaneous jobs. Even BJP is now supporting us. They make us remember that we are also Hindus."

3.6 BACK TO KOLKATA: A RULING LEFTFRONT MEMBER SPEAKS Dasgupta first scrutinized my documentation (:he first d.ra~t-that 1 have prepared) and then he started commenting on this issue: "In your commentary, there is a visible inclination towards the cause of separate Kamtapur state. You must concentrate 011 the commissioned reports. You may find that there is a deep-rooted conspiracy to destabilize the peace of our country by some foreign agenc:es that are trying to disturb our developmental pr~gr7l!11mes.It is, in fact, a ~art of imperialist pr.og;~'mme that 1S penetrating into our domain to hamper our unity. I replied, "You are propagating a conspiracy theory: I have little doubt about that. SPACE-III, DOMAIN-II is operatmg here to globalize the remote land in the guise of localization. Howev~, if you consider the formation of 'linguistic state' as the first premise, do you not think that the demands for Kamtapur, Gorkhaland or lharkhand are justified?" He said, "Remember that the Communist Party introduced the national consciousness in the minds of Nepali in the DarjeeJing long ago, nor the Nepali-conscioLlsne:s d~d arise at all. We acted as a vanguard for the cause of rrunonty gr?~lpS since 1946. Comrade Jyoti Basu as a leader of the opposition said in the assembly in as early as December 1955 that we want justice, we ought to provide autonomy to the Nepalls. of Darjeeling. He also added that Nepalese should run the.lr administration in their own language and in this way then' culture would flourish. (Vide, Government of W. B_, 1986) We have explicitly spelt out our position in our publication. (Please see

i:

Karat, 1973)." "However", I said, "publicly, you are treating these problems as a threat to nationalism and you are branding it as secessionism. That seems albeit surprising to me." Dasgupta answered, "As a part of parliamentary den:ocrac?', we have some constraints. We have to play some populist p~lltics to achieve long term goals. If we insist on the refudahzatlOn

50 / Linguistic Terrorism of land is the cause behind the Karntapuri Movement, it would be difficult for us to convince the mass regarding the foreign threat. We found nothing wrong with the term "secessionism", as we are not for the nation statist politics that itself depends on secessionism, but our main point is to eradicate class-difference through class struggle, though you, as a praxis-Jess post-modern, may object local feudalism are popularly as according through paraphrasing to you "class" is an essential cat4.0 PROLOGUE egory. But, in praxis, we have to deal with global capitalism such surrogate all these categories. as a threat to
OUf

Chapter-s

THE ENDNOTE FROM AN AMBIVALENT FIELDWORKER

and In fact, we
nation,

though we are always sympathetic with M'l-education. The problem is that Kamtapuri is not a separate MT at all. We condemn this movement devoted to the cause of old feudal This much I know or do not know about Kamtapuri. lords."

ami cay Sawlvltal tar bhaSay bolbe ras'Iropunje ami cay moHul phu'Tbe So Wkhi1l0tar golappunje. "I demand Santals shall speak their language ill the United Nations/] demand madhuca indica will blossom ill the luxurious garden of roses."
Though I was overwhelmed by the content of this recently composed (1997) Bang1a lyric as it foregrounds the plea for Linguistic Human Right of a marginalized group, it is not a new experience to me: Duddu Sah, a follower 19C. poet-singer, composed the following .., period in BangJa: of Lalan Shah and a song at the colonial

*mOhommOder jOnmo jodi Hato aieSe bellester kon bhaSa Hoto balta eSc matribhiiSa teje Sobay *arb; bhaSa Sikhlere bhaY tate bhay phOyda to nay ObaSeSe "lfMohommod had been born here, what language of hell would he speak? There is no benefit, if one learns Arabic by shunning off one's mothertongue."
The composition highlights the arbitrariness of externalized the newly language in an eloquent matter. It also emphasizes introduced concept of linguistic human right.

However, the difference between Suman's song and this haul's song lies in the fact that Suman's song is electron icall y transmitted by magnetic tape and the later one transmitted orally,

52 I Linguistic

Terrorism

The Endnote From An Ambivalent

Fieldworker I 53

However, there is a difference between Suman's song and Duddu Shah's song. Even more, Suman's song is sponsored by the multinational cassette company and a cigarette company. Lastly, the demand for speaking Il1 Santali in the UNO legitimizes the statecontrolled language-use that entails the proliferation of capitalincentive linguistic industry (Illich in Pattanayak, 1981) Very few people consider this sponsorship as a paradox of new Bangia agit-prop pop songs as the marginalized protesting voices who themselves might not 'like' this autonomy of small groups in the context of bourgeois society developed in the 17th century. However in the present -context of post-industrializedsociety, each every demand of subalterns are legalized. Thus the 'otherness' is at a time as well as paradoxically selved and preserved. That is, there is hegemonic control as well as satisfaction of desire of subalterns in the form legitimized 'rights', once unimagined by the old sovereign, In fact, no buffer zone that is beyond the gaze of Panopticon remains. In the every space, in the every domain the presence of omnipotence market-sponsored state is felt. Even the counterzone of public action is within the grasp of state as state now offers us each and every "right" that was once totally unimaginablefor the past sovereign! Foucault (1988: 145) remarked, " ... and beyond all the oppressions and "al ienations", the "right" to rediscover what one is and all that one can be, this "right" .... was the political response to all these new procedures of power which did not derive, either from traditional right of sovereignty." The word "Revolution" is now either a commodity available in the market by producing credit card or it is sanctioned by the-state. The haunting question, now, in the midst of extreme persecutory paranoia, whose agent am I? For whom ani I working for??? The state, the market and my action against both these two is within the de-sign of enlightened epistemology, which is a political response to the public action that creates legitimacy crisis of state as opposed to traditional right of sovereignty.

4.1 RESPONDING SOME UNRESOLVED QUESTIONS Some people asked me regarding my unusual representation of Kamtapuri Language Movement. Here I will try to answer such questions and allegation. Why do you write it in such a peculiar journalistic manner, which is rather unusual ill academics? This strategy of writing is taken from mainly recent feminist and psychoanalytic writing and it is not an unusual type. You may find this type of subjective writing in different social science journals. Generally, objectivity is pretended in old scientific writing by deployment of passive YO ice, but none could avoid the I-ness embedded in even so-called non-self-reflexive writing strategy. In your fieldwork, an embedded guilt feeling with ambivalence is noticed. Why are you so shy for your data-collection? Here I was partly motivated by the Students' Revolution of 1968 in Paris. (See fn. 1 in Chapter-S). I do not want to be a watchdog and at a time I had to work for state and the resistance in Karntapur is also a pro-state movement. It does not challenge the legitimacy of state as it is generally thought to be. A mediator's movement was faced by an ambivalent fieldworker with a sense of guilt. Let me elaborate the motto of ]968 revolution. In the context of students' revolution in Paris, " ... rebellion was directed not only against the antiquated hierarchical structure of university and teaching practices of university, but also against the content of what it is taught: there was a pervasive awareness amongst the protesters that, as students of psychology, sociology, political science, they were being trained for menial tasks of information-gathering and social control." (Dews, 1987: 172). It is no wonder that the power-knowledge nexus was the focal point of discussion after such revolution. The legitimacy of different Human Sciences were at stake as those subjects objectify human beings by subjectifying them. In spite of this knowledge, I could not avoid the trap of mechanical reduction of informant to an essential signifier in course of interviewing them. As all

54 ! Linguistic Terrorism

The Endnote From

All

Ambivalent

Fieldworker I 55

the cases of "will to know" lead to "will to power", I was ambivalent and had a sense of guilt.
Why do vou not provide us with some structural interpretation of language? If you call differentiate languages structurally deploying quantitative linguistic technique, it would he helpful as well as important of Kamtapuri. techniques; guistic factors. instead [or us to determine language/dialect to deploy
011

Foucault and Derrida (J 998)

It is \loy difficult to understand your text written ill inadequate Indian English. Can you summarize your position?

status those

You, as a linguist,

have failed

you were concentrating

some extra-lin-

Structural interpretation of language does not help in this regard. If you find, by deploying quantitative linguistic technique, especially D-square test, that Cantonese and Mandarin or Kolkata Bangia and Silheti are two distinct languages as their mutual intelligibility is too low, you will be surprised to discover that they are mere "dialects" of Chinese and Bangla respectively as per politico-administrative adjustment. On the other hand, Norwegian and Danish, quantitatively speaking, are, in terms of mutual intelligibility, too close to each other, but they arc two distinct languages. There is something "extra or non-linguistic" factor behind such politico-administrative determination of language-dialect status. Therefore, I, following Phillipson (1992), questioned the status of such "colonialist cultural mythology" like "tribe" or "dialect" (Phillipson, 1992:38-46). You may be surprised to find that a worker of. Statistical Institute is denying to deploy Statistics here, in stead he is questioning the anatomo-bio-political state-statistics nexus following Foucault.'
Then, which school, do you follow do you collect your "theory"? in this regard? From where

1. Language-dialect dichotomy is a nation statist political constructi 011. 2. The genealogy of language is a nation statist fantasy guided by the dominance of 'culture of writing' and the notion "writing means civilization". 3. Any demand for linguistic state in India shows no subversion as it subscribes the basic premise of linguistic state formation and follows the nation statist paradigm. It denies the terror of dominant language and the dominant elite self-reflexively brand thi s so called "subversion" as a linguistic terrorism. In fact, civilized terrorist sees HIS own violent face in the mirror of such so called subversion at the moment of branding it as terrorist. It is, to the civilized, a reverse mimicry. 4: The problem is more complicated by the Space-III, Dornain-Z's encroachment in the context of Electronic Capitalism. This problem came here as a hint only without any elaboration,
Lastly, what do you suggest, ning? regarding our language plan-

I am not doing sociolinguistics without any knowledge of sociology as it is practised and advocated by many to preserve the so-called "autonomy" of linguistics. I do not subscribe such obscure enterprise as it is not committed to our social reality. My inspiration came from the challenge to enlightenment-epistemology, which has been flourished, in the last 30 years. The serious reader of this text may notice the invisible presence of

The problem is that any language of choice is treated as a part of investment in the global society as envisaged by Space-III, Domain-2. No one thinks of it as entitlementlinguistic entitlement as opposed to investment. We are trying to put our language in the capital-investment zones by demanding its administrative status, curriculum status and media status. In case of entitlement, on the other hand, the shadow economics is operating without being bothered about GDP or GNP, which is found in the Spacer. (See Illich in Pattanayak, 198 J). I think, no predetermined planning is the best planning for the plurilingual society. In course of discussing Rabindranath's language

S6 / Linguistic Terrorism planning, T elaborated (1998) the nature of such decentralized language planning without any drain of language. POSTSCRIPT Lastly, I want to cite one oft-quoted question first raised Anderson's by Chatterjee (1993:5) in course demonstration of nation statist "If nationalism imagined community from of arguing imagination: certain against

BlBLIOGRAPHY Anderson, B.l983. imagined Communities: Reflections Oil the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso. Bandyopadhyay, Debaprasad.199S. Folklore and Folklatiguage: Myth. or Realiry". West Bengal: Kalyani University. ________ 1 996"Standardization: Myth Of Reality" Indian Journal of AppliedLinguislics.Vol_XXn,N o.2(pp. 73-78)_ ______ - 1997. "Towards a Praxis of Anti-Grammar", Philosophy and Social Action. Delhi. VoL XXIII:l.(pp."33-42) _______ .1998. "Rabindranath as a Language Planner." PILC Journal of Dravidian Studies. VIII: 1 (pp.89-96) ______ 1999, "Electronic Capitalism".Frontier.31 :25 (pp.48) _______ 1999."Localization in Globalization" Frontier. 32. May 2- 8, 1999(pp.12-15) _________ . 2000. "Folksong and Classical Song: The Discursive Formation of Dividing Practice." PILe Journal ofDravidian Studies. 10:1. _______ ~2000. "Linguistic Cyher-rnultilingualism." Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics . XXVI: 2 (pp.1 J 7-130) ________ . 200 I. "Cyber-colonization't.Shimla Institute of Advanced Studics.tforthcoming). Barma, D.N.1991. A Step to Kamta Bihari Language. Jalpaiguri: Minati Barma. Barrna, J., Barman, B.B.(ed.) 1996. rajbaNsi kobita SONkOlon. Kolkata: Anima Prakasani. Basu, S. 1995. ancolik andolon. Kolkata: Aparna Book Distributors. Baudrillard, J. 1975. Simulations (Tr. Foss, P., Bcitchrnan, P.1983) New York: Semiotext(e), 1983. Bezharua, LN. 1975. AnWF jibonsriMti. (Tr. Thakur, A.) New Delhi: Sahitya Akademy. Chatterjee, P. 1993. The Nation and its fragments. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Choudhuri, A, Das, D, Chakrabarti, A. 2000. Margin of Margin: Profile of all unrepentant postcolonial collaborator. Kolkata: Anustup, Dasgupta, P. 1989. Projective Syntax. Pune: Deccan Collage. Dasgupta, P 1993. The other ness of English. Delhi: Sage. Deleuze.G,. Gllattari,F.1977. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Shizophrenia. Tr. P. Hurley et al. New York: Random House. Derrlda, J. 1998. Monolingualism. of the Other: or The Prothesis oj

in the rest of the world have to choose their 'modular' forms alread-y

made available to them by Europe and the Americas, what do they have lef: to imagine? ... " (=mphasis added) Sen, A. (1996: 17-18, fn. 13) commented on this question,
(//1

"The conceptual forms of 'the nation as

imagined commu-

nity', which Anderson persues, may not have much to commend it (I personally think that if does-but Ih is is a different issue), but the fear that its western origin would leave !IS without a model that is our 'own' is a somewhat peculiar concern." I do not think that Chatterjee's concern is "peculiar" as it is evident from the model of Kamtpur that the model is de-signed on the basis of symbolic order of western monolingual nation state. In fact, Chatterjee's question (" ... w hat do they have left to imag-

ine? ...") inaugurates

the question of "rem/ajinder" (in Lacanian sense of the term) in the context of colonial subjectivity, which is,

though destroyed by the imagined symbolic order, constructing its "real(-ity)" as rem(a)inder through a negation of Nationalism (Gandhi, Rabindranath) and by introducing anekfinta (theory of many perspectives) plurality (Krishnachandra Bhattacharya and Kalidas Buddhadeb in Statistics Bhattacharya in Philosophy; Abu Sayed Ayub,

Basu and Sudhindranath

and natural sciences.

Dutra in Bangia literary critiand J.B.S. Haldane anekantaAll of them deployed

cism and translation

theory; PC. Mahalanabis

theory in their respective fields). The rem(a)inder is the possibility of bridging snekiint« and plurilingual planning. However, that

is a different
monist

story to be written to combat terrorism in every sphere of life.

all pervading

and

58 I Linguistic Terrorism Origin. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. Dews, P. 1987. Logics of Disintegration. London: Verso. Foucault, M. 1988. The History oj Sexuality' An Introduction. Vol. I. New York: Vintage Book. Karat, P. 1973. Language and Nationality Politics ill India. Delhi: Orient Longman. Khubchandani, L.M.1997.Revisuolizing Boundaries: A Plurilin-gual Ethos New Delhi: Sage Publication. MalL:k, P. 1995. kEno kamtapur? Jalpaiguri: Kamta Sahitya Academy. Nandy,A.1994. The Illeguimacy of Nationalism. Delhi: Oxford U niversity Press. . Pauanayak, D.P.1981 .. Multiliguallsm and Mother-Tongue Education. ( With a Forward by Ivan Il1ich) D1hi: Oxford University Press. Peck, J. ed.1987. The Chomsky Reader. New York: Pantheon Books. Phillipson, R.1992. Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ray, P.S. 1968."Language Standardization" in Fishman J. (Ed.) The sociology of language; (pp.754-65) Paris: The Hague, Mouton. Roy, D. 1988. tistaparer brittanto, Kol kala: De's Publishing. Roy, N. 1993. haNgalir itiHaS (adip Orba], Kolkata.Dc's Publishing. Roy, Nikbil. 1999. Kamtapuri bhoSa andolon 0 tar oYtiHaSik gurutio. Jalpaiguri: Kamta Publication. Sen, A. 1996. Our Culture, Their Culture. Kolkata: Nandan, W.B. Film Centre. Sen; D. 1935/91 bril-l Ot bONgo, Vol. ll. Kolkata: De's Publishing. Senapati, P.M. 1977 attoMcorit.(Tr. Shukla, M.) New Delhi: Sahitya Akademy. Singh, K.S., Morioharan, S.1997, Language and Scripts. People of India, National Series Vol. IX. Kolkata: Oxford University Press. Singh, U.N J 987 "On Some issues in Indian Multilingualism" in Singh, U.N. and Srivastava, R.R ed. Perspectives in Language Planning(pp. 153--l65) Kolkata: Mithila Darsan, Singh, U.N. 1990. "bol-lubaconik bhaSa-porikOlpona". Pluralistic Language Planning. (in Bangle) Iijnasa Vol. Xl, No.S. (pp. 302-317), Kolkata. Sonntag, S.K.1997. "The Politics of Linguistic Subaltemity in Nor111 India." Conference organised by South Asian Language Association, J.N.U., Delhi. Srivastava, R.N.19R3. The Communication Role of "Out-Group" Languagcs of India. Indian Journal of Linguistics. Vol.X. (pp.89-98) Thakur, R. 1961. rabindra rOcOIwholi. Vol. XlV. Government of W.B.

Debaprasad Bandyopadhyay (b.1965), a doctorate in Linguistics, is a member of the faculty in the Linguistics Research Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata. He has more than hundred publications to his credit and has participated in about 60 national and international seminars. His areas of interest are computational linguistics,. computational verb-lexicon, comparative philology, folklore and folk-language, glottopolitics of linguistic subalternity etc. His recent research works are on navyanyava and the linguistic structure of DNA Codons.

l'