Part three of Madhubashini Ratnayake's series on the problems of teaching English in Sri Lanka

The cutting power of English language

In 1984, he raised the implications of the term "Kaduva" (Sword) used by Sri Lankans to describe the English language and explored the social, cultural, political, economic reasons for the use of the term. It could be seen that these issues still engaged him in 1999, when in the Ludowyk lecture, he explored the implications of English in the task of post-colonial reconstruction and our failure as a nation to meet the challenge successfully. It is almost impossible here to speak of Professor Kandiah's ideas without simplifying them in some way. But the purpose of this article is to provide some of his ideas as background for, Minoli Samarakkody's presentation at the SLELTA conference on "Language acquisition and motivation: a linguistic and social psychological study". 

There is a comment that needs to be made at this point of this series. As much as there was a need to warn ourselves of the danger of being too complacent about the state of English language teaching/learning in Sri Lanka, there is also a need to recognize the good work that is being done in this field and the tremendous attempts by various individuals to contribute towards its upliftment. At the SLELTA conference itself, teachers from all over the country were making significant presentations about the issues that concerned them; the British Council had brought in experts in language teaching to give lectures/demonstrations to the teachers here, exemplifying the hands-on approach it has taken towards improving English language teaching in this country. The overall impression that all those involved in the conference gave was one which showed a dedication towards one goal - developing the teaching of English in Sri Lanka. If the issues raised in this series will in anyway undermine the dedication and commitment shown by all those concerned, it will indeed be a pity. What is needed is to see that issues like these are also a reality; an awareness of them will aid in individual - and as Professor Kandiah terms it, heroic - efforts to find answers to the dilemmas that we as teachers of English, face. 

A reason that many English language teaching courses are unsuccessful could be, in Professor Kandiah's opinion, because what is given in language teaching classrooms, even under the best conditions, is a "restricted code" of language - a code that leaves the ambiguities and the empowering potential of the language outside the learner of English as a second language and moulds him/her to occupy subordinate positions in society. "The privileged arenas of decision-making and power" he says in his Ludowyk lecture, "depend crucially on the use of "elaborated codes" which draw on the potential of the language in far-reaching ways which allow the kind of abstract thought and argumentation without which such activities cannot be carried out." But it is a utilitarian language that is asked for and given, and according to him, there is a historical reason for this. 

As he says in his 1984 article, in the early era of independence, with the swabhasha concept and the nationalistic sentiments and all that, English could be thought of (or projected by the national bourgeoisie), safely, only as a utilitarian second language "assisting the other languages, at the points at which they were inadequate or lacking, in the task of development. But this was not in fact the way in which English functioned in Sri Lanka, or continues to function. It functioned, rather, as a major instrument of the dominant power groups; through the control it enabled them to exercise at the higher levels over the major spheres of activity, it gave them control of the nation, which they were thus enabled to run largely in their own interests. As would be expected, therefore, whatever concessions may have been made to the native languages in the country at large, the position of English was jealously guarded at these higher levels."

Stressing the importance that language had to play in this exercise of maintaining power, Professor Kandiah goes on to say, "It was the English language that had raised these people to their positions of power, and it was the English language that, by separating them as a social class from the rest of the people of the country, ensured that they would remain in these positions to the exclusion of the latter."

And the crucial difference between the English that was given to the people, and indeed, is still given to the majority, is this : "The point is that since English functioned as something very different from a utilitarian secondary language at these levels, as, in fact, a badge of privilege, the ordinary people, to whom English could at best be nothing more than just a utilitarian secondary language, found themselves, ipso facto, shut out of these levels," he says. 

And students of English as a second language instinctively know this, and it is this knowledge, leading to a lack of motivation, that might account for the failures in English language teaching in Sri Lanka. Professor Kandiah was talking about the failure of a particular English language teaching programme in his "Kaduva" article, but what he said seems to hold good to English language programmes in general : "the most likely reason why virtually all of the students who depend on the English teaching programme for whatever knowledge of English they might acquire fail to learn the language is that they are not motivated to do so. And the reasons why they lack this motivation are socio-economic-political."

He goes on to say that, "It is not that they are unaware that the English language brings opportunities for advancement and so on; they can hardly fail to be less than acutely aware of it. But they are equally acutely aware, whether intuitively or otherwise, that these opportunities are not for them; that given the harsh realities of the inegalitarian society in which they live and the nature of its power structure, the avenues for advancement that the English language is purported to open up remain firmly closed to them and to others in their class. "

Professor Kandiah's post-graduate student, Minoli Samarakkody of the University of Colombo, presented a paper at the SLELTA conference, which explored the reasons why many learners fail to proceed beyond the basics of the English language, despite years of learning it and all the overt positive attitudes towards it. "Sri Lankans have a great ambiguity towards acquiring English," she says. "There are hugely complex and ambiguous issues involved in this process."

Her postgraduate research has yielded data that show that the "Kaduva" syndrome - English as a sword that cuts down people - that was believed to have gone out of Sri Lankan society after its predominance in the 70's and 80's, and English "came clean" when its value was recognized as an aid to development - is still implicit. Her interviews of adult learners of English as a second language show that though overtly, almost all of them expressed a desire to learn the language, and had positive attitudes towards it, the answers to some of her questions brought out instinctive defensive attitudes towards their use of their native tongue in situations in which they failed to use the second language. 

"Classroom teaching/methodology has to accept the fact that socio-linguistic areas must be taken into consideration," said Minoli Samarakkody at the end of her presentation. And it is exactly for that reason that disturbing issues need to be highlighted - for the more we consider the complexities of the language teaching attempt, the nearer we will be to achieving some kind of answer to this crucial issue.

Next week: Finding answers

More Plus

Return to Plus Contents