Talking about that spoken word

By S. Francis Perera

A character in one of Oscar Wild's plays takes umbrage over the fact that an author friend of his has 'damaged' his reputation in his published works. How can that be, the author asks, when the friend is not so much as mentioned in anyone of the books. Therein lies the offence - not to have been mentioned in them, the caviller says, is the offence. The speech-teacher too has a grouse but, thank goodness it is not one of a frivolous nature. Her's is that she - or rather her role - is misunderstood if not malignant.

Now that speech-training is considered a sine qua non by an enlightened public, it is well to lay bare the services rendered to further the study of English. But before one proceeds further it is imperative that we arrive at an acceptable definition of a speech-teacher. Like other professions her's too is the happy hunting-ground of the unspeakable frauds. And, sad to say, it is these frauds who crow the loudest and rule the roost. They are neither academically qualified nor professionally trained; the only certificates they possess being bogus ones. They are loud-mouthed, and their cacophany is meant to impress the gullible. They plagiarize their betters, which they do with breathtaking impudence.

Speech-training is both an art and a science, and it being more than "a mere profession" the practitioner is drawn to it, as it were, from a call on high. Speech is an integral feature of language, and before the teacher specializes in this branch she is supposed to acquire a thorough grounding of all aspects of language. Therefore focussing attention on speech she by no means ignores the other language skills.

A section of the general public, it seems, judges speech-training from the gimmicks of the highly vocal fraudulent elements. This is to commit an offence on the bona-fide speech-teacher. Fraud is not confined to any single profession. It was only the other day that the Health Ministry announced that legislation is to be introduced to mete out deterrent punishment to quacks who exploit an incredulous public to gain their mercenary ends. It is thus seen that fraudulence is the bane of nearly all professions. Despite adverse circumstances the speech instructress spares no pains to help her wards to reach the goal of success. Consciously or otherwise she has adopted the utilitarian principle laid down by the philosopher Jeremy Bentham to attain her goal: the highest performance of the maximum number.

The question is being rightly asked: Why are there so many institutions for the teaching of speech? I make bold to state that it is the faulty methods adopted to teach English at the primary and secondary school levels that have made the services of the speech- teacher indispensable. For the proper study of English or for any other language for that matter - it is imperative that the pupil be instructed in the four basic skills of reading, writing, listening and speech. But what is the prevailing situation? While attention is being paid to the first three the last is partially or totally neglected. And pray why? Because it is the policy laid down by the panjandrums at the Education Ministry. Governments come and go, but the pestiferous elements survive. It is the policy maker and not the teacher who is to be blamed. The teacher, after all, is a pliant tool in the hands of the mandarins responsible for laying down policy.

The policy-maker has but one aim: to give the child the bare minimum of instruction in English, so as to enable him when he reaches the post-primary and undergraduate stages, to read books published in English on subjects relevant to the course he has chosen. Thus training in vocal expression be it - articulation, enunciation or inflection is a superfluity excluded from the school curriculum. It is a luxury not to be savoured by the general run of school going children. Inevitably it becomes the prerogative of well-to-do parents.

It needs to be reiterated that the teacher at the secondary school - the orthodox teacher - faithful to departmental instructions teaches English in a lop-sided manner. Speech is barely touched upon. The reason is that she has to conform to procrustean rules. The void that is thus left has to be filled. In other words the failure to include speech-training has caused a hiatus, and the speech-instructress has been called to the rescue. She is a complement to the orthodox teacher, for she rounds off what the other leaves half- done.

To presume that the speech-teacher's work is confined to the teaching of articulation is to dwell in the valley of the shadow of ignorance. She renders manifold services which tax her energies to the utmost. Apart from teaching articulation she has to give her pupils a grounding in organ-training. Nature never meant the so-called vocal organs to vocalize; the tongue, the palate, the epiglottis and the other organs concern themselves with man's physical well being.

Man is in possession of a personality which abhors the quiescent state. It is dynamic and seeks incessant expression - mainly in speech and occasionally in writing. Spontaneously expressed speech may be incoherent - even guttural - and the services of a good teacher are needed to help children produce speech which has finish and finesse. As a flower expresses its floral nature in blooming, a dew drop is aquatic nature in glittering. Man expresses his complex nature in speech. Writing is a product of civilization, and written expression appeared at a later stage in human progress.

If as Lord Bacon said knowledge is power, the present age must possess a superabundance of it. Knowledge in all branches of learning is increasing at a bewildering rate. The Niagara like flow of information is threatening to overwhelm human society. All these stores of knowledge and information should help man to elevate himself to a higher stage of progress. But what is the real state of affairs? Most of it is embalmed and entombed in research papers and in tomes, and is not easily to be deciphered by the common run of humanity. It is only those trained in speech - clear and intelligible speech - who can convey it all to the people to be put into practical use. Language, Professor Dewey said, is the tool of tools.

Speech, it was stated above helps to disseminate friendly relations among men. Man, down the ages, has ever been the worst enemy of his kind. And in this 20th Century man has reached the lowest depths in his inhumanity to man. Preying on their own kind has never been the practice of what we sanctimoniously call the lower animals. All right thinking men are of the opinion that the time is ripe to realize the brotherhood of man. And language, we venture to state, is one of the chief means to reach this noble end. Men must learn to talk, and talk with their fellowmen in clear, unambiguous and unequivocal language. (Our diplomatic service will be all the better if following a course in speech training is made compulsory to those aspiring to join it.) Here is where the speech teacher comes in. She, more than any other has a duty to train children to speak in a manner that will shatter the Jericho Walls of prejudice, hatred and intolerance.

The spoken word rightly uttered has a potency hardly to be equalled by anything else. The pen which is mightier than the sword, has only the human tongue for a rival. It is to those with 'the tongues of angels' that the masses turn to for leadership. Demosthenes with his immortal Phillipics held tyranny at bay, Cicero with his lilting eloquence stirred the conscience of the Roman Senators, and Abraham Lincoln with his down to earth speech shattered the chains of the slaves. It will be said that Hitler with his torrential eloquence led the Germans, like the Gaderine swine, to their doom. So he did. But then he was a semi-literate, unsteady mass hypnotist who used his powers for evil ends. He had all the vices and none of the virtues of the self-made man.

It is my contention that the speech-teacher's services will continue to be needed till speech is given its rightful place in the school curriculum. The faulty teaching of English, which excludes speech has assured a place for speech-training outside of the school. Speech-training (as is done in many private institutions) is a necessary evil. If and when speech is given due recognition in the school curriculum, speech training, like the state as envisioned by Karl Marx, will wither away

More Plus * A cup of tea and a book...

Return to the Plus Contents