Language. Learning. Nationalism

LANGUAGE benefits from itself as it is called by many creative names — greatest invention and legacy of the human race; road map of a culture and the key to the world; dress of thought bringing the mind on a parade; the most massive and inclusive art humanity knows; the blood of the soul; the armory of the human mind which contains the trophies of its past and the weapons of its future conquests, among others. Language shapes the way we think and without it we lose a whole dimension of understanding, and to learn another language is to possess a second soul. It is a means of getting an idea from the brain without needing surgery.

Language helps in shaping our thoughts, culture and human connections. Language has the power to express ideas, shape identities, and bridge the gaps between people. Language, in a constructivist perspective, is a social construct that translates to reality.

August is a monthlong celebration of the Filipino language. The theme of this year’s celebration is: “Filipino at mga Katutubong Wika: Wika ng Kapayapaan, Seguridad, at Inklusibong Pagpapatupad ng Katarungang Panlipunan.” (Filipino and Indigenous Language: Language of Peace, Security and Social Justice). Recognition of the diverse dialects fosters unity towards an inclusive society for peace.

There are two areas of concern that language needs to be explored — in the area of teaching and learning, and in the context of nationalism.

Mother tongue-based multilingual education

In the K to 12 curriculum, the mother tongue-based multilingual education (MTB-MLE) is the language of instruction for the Kinder to Grade 3. MTB-MLE remains to be the most effective foundation for children’s learning; after all, the mother tongue is the language of thinking. Once the young learners master that capacity to think, the rest of learning opportunities follow and the infinite learning potential is unleashed.

Any opposition and opinions against the use of MTB-MLE need to wrestle with empirical research evidence conducted in the Philippines and all over the world.

Students with a high level of proficiency in the mother tongue perform well in mathematics (Perez and Alieto). This study lends proof that mother-tongue (MT) as a medium of instruction, contrary to beliefs overrating English and devaluing mother tongues, is a plausible choice as language of instruction. The study found that when the children are taught in a language known to them, they can make sense of the concepts discussed in the classroom.

A quasi-experimental study indicated that children who are taught using their mother tongue have higher mental flexibility, processing power and spontaneity, and higher self-esteem and academic achievement (Santiago and Dagdag). Learners feel more comfortable in asking and answering questions, sharing thoughts, and doing things on their own; and MTB-MLE learners foster higher critical thinking skills and control of their learning. The purpose of using MT in school should be to facilitate the communication of ideas sensitive to the prevailing cultures of the learners.

In South Africa, mother-tongue subtitling improves comprehension (Mahlasela). In Lithuania, a study demonstrated that all learners need a support of MT in English classes, but the amount of the native language needed depends on students’ proficiency in English (Mykolas). In China, a study found that taking advantage of what students have already known conceptually, strategically and linguistically allows a cumulative development and intellectual continuity in language development (An E. He). In Nigeria, a study concluded that using a MT in an early childhood classroom was effective in fostering children’s learning abilities (Awopetu). The major finding of this research is that the students in the experimental group (where the medium of communication and instructions was mostly MT) performed better than their counterparts who communicated mostly in English. The use of MT reinforced pupils’ motivation and made them feel more comfortable and confident.

Language and nationalism

A nation is simply an “imagined community” (Anderson, 1983) whose existence is often imagined through language, thus the role of language in imagining and creating nationhood. In forming solidarity to create such nationhood, language is important. Language has the capacity for generating imagined communities, building in effect particular solidarity.

Every self-respecting nation has to have a language (Viko), not just a medium of communication, a “vernacular ” or a “dialect,” but a fully developed language. Anything less marks it as underdeveloped.

Language is the soul of nationalism (‘Je Bhasha Amar Áapon) as nationalism and language are both dynamic notions depending on time and place in history. The “soil-right,” “birth-right,” and “language-right” do not lead to the perception of nationalism, neither is it the awakening of a nation to awareness by virtue of one incident. Rather, it is the benign everyday construction of a sense of national identity through the inconspicuous symbols of language-dependent fairy tales, folklore, arts and crafts, the countryside, the regional differences, and yes, even the etiquettes that invent and reinvent a nation.

The national ideal demands that there be a single linguistic code by means of which communication can take place. There can be a discrepancy between national language (the language spoken in everyday lives), and official language (the language for communicating at the national level, which has more symbolic characteristics as an emblem of a community than an official language). Official nationalism originates from above, while popular nationalism originates from below — from the ground.

In India, where about 845 languages are spoken, English functions as an official language at a national level. This is also true in Malta, where, even after its independence from Britain in 1964, English is still used as the official language. Japan is a rare nation in the sense that it calls its own language kokugo (national language), not nihongo (Japanese). It is widely believed that there is no difference between national language and official language in Japan.

The Philippines is a linguistically diverse country with 134 languages, including Filipino Sign Language. Bekimon, the gay lingo, and GenZ language are also informally emerging. Filipino and English are the official languages of communication and instruction (Article XIV Section 7, Philippine Constitution). The variety and diversity is our uniqueness, the fabric of our national identity, and one of the foundations of nationalism. It is time we celebrate inclusion and preserve the variation. Luckily, our culturally conscious communities are already in that mode. The goal is not only to have one language, but to have one’s own language (Vikor).

Language is alive when it is used, and its minority status is no impediment to its survival, if there are enough speakers to use and promote it (Anne-Marie O’Connell). It does not mean that emerging languages are devoid of concerns of identity, but identity is not something that is fixed once and for all, as it feeds interculturality and transculturality.

Language is the structure, the means, the process, and the outcome of the ever-transforming society we, as social beings, co-create. Happy celebration of the linguistic and cultural self-consciousness not only as Filipinos but also as global citizens who, through language, are forging solidarity, celebrating diversity, and sharing humanity.