
Reframing the language question
In this context, India's New Education Policy (NEP), 2020 is a bold step towards much-needed modernisation in the education sector. Yet, in its implementation, especially of the three-language formula, it reveals signs of the very breakdown Huntington warned of. The policy promises that no language will be imposed, but in practice, this assurance falters amid infrastructure gaps, uneven capacity, and socio-political fault lines. For many, the multilingualism offered feels less like inclusion and more like pressure.
Much of the national conversation has centred on the idea of language 'imposition'. But this framing reflects only one side of the debate: the question. To move forward, we must reframe the question itself, from 'What language should be imposed?' to 'How can language be used to empower?' That shift, from political to governance, opens space for solutions that affirm identity, foster equity, and strengthen learning.
Choice without capacity?
The real test of any policy lies not in its prose but in its practice. Across States, reports continue to highlight teacher shortages for third-language instruction. A news report found that 'underfunding and a lack of qualified teachers plague the system', forcing schools to hire part-time or retired instructors to teach languages such as Sanskrit and Hindi. In Maharashtra, some schools reportedly assigned untrained teachers, or none at all.
But the issue cannot be reduced to an administrative hiccup. In tribal and rural hinterlands, it increasingly feels like a policy devoid of participation. For instance, in Odisha and West Bengal, Santhali-speaking students are expected to study in Bengali or Hindi without any transition support. In the absence of trained teachers, schools fall back on patchwork solutions, hiring retirees, rotating unqualified staff, or offering no support at all. Add English and their native tongue to the mix, and students face what educationist calls a 'four-language burden'.
The NEP's written assurance of 'choice' often breaks down in practice, particularly in under-resourced schools. If there is no Santhali teacher available, can Santhali truly be considered a choice?
The consequences of this are as political as they are pedagogical. When a new language is introduced alongside two others, the space for a child's own language inevitably shrinks. And when that language is absent, or barely acknowledged, in the classroom, education begins to feel like erasure. This is reflected in tribal student learning outcomes and dropout rates.
Voice before vocabulary
Much of the policy defence of the NEP, 2020 rests on the cognitive benefits of multilingualism. But language is not just a pedagogical tool; it is the first marker of identity, the anchor of one's emotional and cultural world. When education unfolds in a language alien to a child's lived experience, the classroom becomes not a place of discovery, but a site of anxiety.
Global research reinforces this reality. UNESCO notes that children taught in their first language perform better academically, stay in school longer, and are more likely to engage actively in class. But beyond its measurable outcomes, mother-tongue instruction carries an essential normative weight. It affirms the learner's sense of self. It tells a tribal or rural child: your voice matters; it belongs here. In Odisha's tribal districts, a Multilingual Education (MLE) programme introduced instruction in Santhali, Kui, and other local languages before transitioning students to Odia and English. The results were both empirical and emotional, where attendance improved, confidence surged, and parents became more actively involved. A subsequent NCERT evaluation found that the programme had a significant impact on student's achievement in both language and mathematics. Children in MLE schools outperformed their peers in non-MLE schools across oral, written, and overall assessments.
India is not alone in grappling with the challenge of multilingual education. Other democracies, too, have experimented with different models. Indonesia, one of Asia's most linguistically diverse nations, mandates 'Bahasa Indonesia' as the language of instruction, though it is the mother tongue of less than 10% of its population. This top-down approach has meant that most children begin schooling in a language they barely understand, resulting in persistently low learning outcomes. In response, a joint initiative by the Indonesian and Australian governments piloted a transitional bilingual education model that integrated students' first languages into early instruction. The results were telling — students became more engaged, classroom participation improved, and teachers observed a visible boost in confidence. Early findings from the pilot affirm a larger truth that language-based empowerment cannot be imposed from above; it must be built from below, through systems that listen, adapt, and co-create with communities themselves.
Participation, not prescription
Much of the resistance to the three-language policy, particularly in States such as Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, does not reflect opposition to any language, but unease with centralised, top-down mandates. As the Supreme Court rightly affirmed, even mother-tongue instruction must respect the individual's right to choose. The fault line, then, is not language, but the fear of control. Here are four interlocking strategies that shift us from a framework of 'imposition' to one of 'empowerment' through participation.
First, States and districts should form language committees composed of teachers, parents, linguists, and local leaders. These bodies can tailor the three-language mix to their region's context. A tribal-majority school, for instance, might adopt a tribal language, the regional State language, and Hindi or English, not by fiat, but by choice.
Second, NEP rightly recommends beginning education in a child's home language, especially in foundational years. Pilot programmes such as Odisha's MLE demonstrate that early literacy in a familiar language builds stronger bridges to regional and global tongues. These programmes should be scaled with care, guided by local success stories.
Third, multilingual education cannot succeed without multilingual educators. Governments must invest in recruiting and training instructors for both widely spoken Indian languages and vulnerable tribal tongues. Local graduates should be incentivised to teach their own languages.
Last, prioritise depth over number. Introducing a third language prematurely risks shallow learning in all. Schools must be empowered to delay or pace third-language introduction based on readiness, as NEP itself allows. Optional advanced studies can offer motivated students further enrichment without overwhelming others.
Each of these steps reframes multilingual education as a negotiated project, not a bureaucratic edict. Contemporary modernisation often cuts short the process in the rush for outcomes. But language policy demands time and deliberation. As Huntington argued, institutional legitimacy must match societal changes. A multilingual India is not a paradox; it is a democratic path forward. When language policy listens before it instructs, it ceases to divide and begins to unite.
Abhishek Sharma is a researcher and candidate at the Department of Political Science, University of Delhi; views are personal

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Indian Express
3 hours ago
- Indian Express
Amid debate over syllabus change, DU's History dept head quits, cites medical reasons
Amid debates over syllabus changes in Delhi University's (DU) History Department, its head, Professor Shalini Shah, has resigned citing medical reasons. This comes days before the new academic session is set to begin at DU and before the university steps into its fourth-year for the first time under the National Education Policy (NEP), 2020. The university on Tuesday announced that the Dean of Faculty of Social Sciences, Professor Sanjoy Roy, will take over the History department's charge for two months starting July 22. Speaking to The Indian Express on Wednesday, Shah said, 'I am unwell. I resigned on medical grounds.' The History Department has been navigating contentious syllabus negotiations as well as allegations of procedural violations in PhD admissions over the past few months. The friction over syllabus changes has deepened in the wake of DU's shift to the FYUP (Four-Year Undergraduate Programme) under NEP. History faculty members have alleged that the syllabus reforms required for the new structure were met with resistance at higher levels, and that courses approved at the departmental level were frequently delayed, altered, or blocked when they reached academic and executive councils. In March, The Indian Express had reported that Vice-Chancellor Yogesh Singh was opposed to the inclusion of Manusmriti and Tuzuk-i-Baburi (Baburnama) in the revised History (Honours) syllabus (undergraduate). Manusmriti was dropped from the syllabus. A senior faculty member in the department said, 'It has become difficult to clear courses and modifications. Many long-standing papers, taught by the faculty for decades, were either modified or not cleared at all for teaching. Often, there was no meaningful discussion about these in the statutory bodies.' Shah, however, said her concerns were personal. 'I was advised to get some tests done even before this whole thing started. As HOD, I had no time, so I had no choice but to resign to take care of myself,' she said. Concern over the resignation has been compounded by DU's decision to assign charge of the department to the Dean (Social Sciences), rather than the next senior-most professor in the History department. 'They should have given the responsibility, even if temporarily, to the next seniormost faculty member within the department,' said a professor. 'This is a rare case… It sends a message that the administration is not willing to trust or empower the department's own leadership.' V-C Yogesh Singh, however, said the resignation was not related to the syllabus revamp. 'There was no issue or any pressure… or anything related to the syllabus revamp. We, in fact, tried to convince Professor Shah to stay on until October so that she could take a call in a more stabilised environment once the new session began. But she cited health reasons and requested that she be allowed to step down.' On why the department's charge was given to the Dean (Social Sciences), Singh acknowledged that the move was 'unusual'. He, however, added, 'There was a paucity of time. Since the head resigned immediately, we needed some time to figure out who to appoint. Giving the charge to the dean seemed like the best move. If it had been given to a faculty member on a temporary basis, it could have hurt the member's emotions if he or she is not chosen as the permanent head later. Since it is easier to transfer the charge from the dean to another faculty member, I had suggested that the Dean of Social Sciences take over for the time being.' 'An effort will definitely be made to appoint a permanent HOD in the next two months,' Dean Sanjoy Roy said.


Hindustan Times
5 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Hatred for Modi is being projected onto Hindi': Pawan Kalyan on language controversy
Andhra Pradesh deputy chief minister and actor Pawan Kalyan on Wednesday addressed the ongoing language controversy and the debate around the 'imposition of Hindi.' Responding to allegations that the Centre is forcing Hindi across states, Kalyan said the current discourse reflects how resentment against the BJP and Prime Minister Narendra Modi is being redirected toward the Hindi language. Stating that English has become his language of thought, the Janasena founder expressed sadness that he could not find the same in Hindi or Kannada or Marathi.(@APDeputyCMO) Speaking to India Today, Kalyan stressed that no language should be forced on anyone, underlining his commitment to unity. 'No language should be imposed on anybody. I stand for national integrity,' he said. He criticised the anti-Hindi stance taken by some political leaders in Telangana, calling it politically motivated. 'It's surprising. I think this is more about the hatred towards BJP or Modiji, and that hatred is being transferred onto Hindi. That's how I see it,' he stated. His comments come amid ongoing tensions in states like Maharashtra and Karnataka, where heated debates have erupted over the use of Hindi and its role as a medium of instruction in schools and colleges. Kalyan, explaining his own experience with the language, noted its practical importance. 'We are surrounded by Hindi-speaking states. Hindi is a necessity for me,' he said. He also criticised how political entities manipulate the issue for their own advantage. 'Sometimes parties or people spark negativity,' he said, suggesting that the language issue is often politicised rather than driven by genuine cultural concerns. Reflecting on his own schooling, he recalled how Hindi was once just a regular part of the curriculum. 'When I was in school, Hindi was just a second language for all of us. I am able to read and write it today because I learned it then,' he noted. Pointing to the diverse linguistic identity of Telugu-speaking regions, he added, 'I don't know why suddenly it became such a big issue, even in Andhra Pradesh which shares borders with Chhattisgarh, Odisha and Karnataka. Telangana itself has a mixed culture — Urdu and Telugu coexist. Instead of saying 'hospital,' people say 'dawakhana'. What's wrong with that?' 'Like English, Hindi has become a practical necessity' Pawan Kalyan argued that Hindi, much like English, has become a practical necessity in today's world. 'No one taught me English by force. It became a necessity. Today we're speaking in English not because we love it, but because it has become essential. Similarly, Hindi is also necessary today,' he explained. Responding to criticism of inconsistency in his stance, Kalyan drew from his personal and professional background, citing his multilingual experience. 'I grew up in Chennai. I love Tamil. I learned it out of interest and necessity — not because anyone forced me. I do the same when I visit Karnataka or Maharashtra. I try to speak Kannada or Marathi. That is the approach we need. A multilingual perspective is important for national linguistic integration,' he said. When asked if he would maintain the same stand in Tamil Nadu, where opposition to Hindi is more pronounced, Kalyan said he already had. 'I have said this before and I will say it again. I love Hindi and respect it — it was my second language in school. Language should be for better communication and integration, not for division,' he said. Referring to Tamil poet Subramania Bharati, he highlighted the poet's example of embracing cultural and linguistic unity: 'Bharati grew up in Kashi. His attire resembled a Sikh turban. He embraced integration in thought, language and attire. There are great people in Tamil Nadu who welcome Hindi.' Kalyan cautioned that forcing any language would only backfire. 'Even a child resists when the mother forces something. You have to create awareness about why learning Hindi is important, not impose it. If you speak to people rationally and logically, you'll get results,' he noted. Earlier, speaking to PTI, Kalyan said, 'Majority of the people think they want to be multilinguistic (multilingual). Let us give them a fair chance and a fair opportunity,' in an interview with PTI Videos. He also shared his personal reflection on language and thought, expressing concern that Hindi and other Indian languages had not become his primary languages for thinking. 'My mother tongue is not Hindi. My mother tongue is not English. Sometimes I feel sad that my thinking language has become English or Telugu. Telugu is a natural way to think, but I could adopt English as a thinking language,' he said. Backing the need for multilingualism in a globalised society, Kalyan added, 'There is nothing wrong in a world where we are interacting with multiculturalism as multilingual skills are needed.' He also urged political leaders to consider the needs of future generations when it comes to language. 'Oncoming generations' must be taken into account, he said, suggesting space should be made for multilingual approaches.


The Hindu
6 hours ago
- The Hindu
Linguistic hatred will harm Maharashtra, affect investments: Governor C.P. Radhakrishnan
Amid the ongoing controversy over the Marathi language, Maharashtra Governor C.P. Radhakrishnan advised staying away from spreading 'linguistic hatred', as it would affect the industry and investments in the State. While speaking at the coffee table book launch on Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, Mr. Radhakrishnan on Tuesday (July 22, 2025) said, 'Can I speak in Marathi immediately after being slapped. Such hatred, in the long run, will harm the State.' Mr. Radhakrishnan narrated an incident reflecting on the linguistic hatred and said, 'When I was an MP in Tamil Nadu, I saw a group beating up another over not speaking Tamil. On inquiring, I learnt that the victim was a north Indian and miscreants wanted him to speak Tamil. Mr. Radhkrishnan, reflecting on his own struggle with Hindi, suggested to learn multiple languages while being 'proud of our own'. Minister Girish Mahajan also reiterated his sentiments and said, 'We should be proud of the Marathi language, but to enforce on others, especially violently, is not right.' He also highlighted the Maharashtrians, including those who travel outside Maharashtra. So, we need to have mutual respect across linguistic lines. Meanwhile, Shiv Sena (UBT) MLA Aaditya Thackeray responded to the governor's remarks, saying, no need to make political comments as there is no linguistic hatred in the State.