Interviewer: Asghar Zare‑Kanomi, 27 February 2012 – Issue 2341, Etemad Daily
 |
| Geneva Smitherman, Michigan State professor emerita of English |
Only in the year 2000 did humanity finally decide to safeguard its greatest collective heritage—one that, over recent centuries, was plundered by the agents of genocide and racism. 21 February was declared International Mother Language Day, a date for honoring one of God’s finest gifts. A mere twelve years have passed since that milestone at the United Nations, yet in this time hundreds of books and thousands of articles on linguistic rights and the mother tongue have appeared—none of them, alas, translated into the languages of Iran.
International Mother Language Day speaks above all to countries with wide linguistic diversity—diversity that, as Geneva Smitherman notes, is natural, human heritage and social capital. This interview offers a brief reminder that preserving Iranian‑Islamic heritage is not just about stone inscriptions and manuscripts; it is equally about safeguarding the living heritage of every mother tongue spoken in Iran—Persian, Turkish, Kurdish, Arabic, Baluchi, and more.
Geneva Smitherman is a linguist and specialist in language policy in the post‑colonial era. Beyond her extensive scholarship, she has led many projects to preserve mother tongues in various African countries. In this exclusive conversation she explains the importance of mother‑tongue education, criticizes language‑standardizing policies, and warns:
“If you forbid and criminalize the teaching of a language, you ultimately eliminate that language. In destroying the language, you destroy the culture of its speakers and, in the end, erase the people themselves. They may not physically vanish, but they cease to be who they are, becoming others who belong to another language and culture—they no longer truly exist.”
She stresses that legislation mandating multilingual language policies is essential to prevent such destruction, citing South Africa’s policy of recognizing eleven official languages as a positive model.
Why should we value the mother tongue? What is linguistic diversity, fundamentally?
Linguistic diversity is a natural fact of human life. The core issue is to recognize, understand, and respect this diversity as part of the world’s natural order. The spotlight falls on the mother tongue because it is the first language a newborn hears while nursing—hence the label “mother tongue.” It is the language we acquire in the earliest stage of life; it shapes our identity and carries our culture into the future.
Many linguists insist on mother‑tongue instruction. Why?
Teaching children in their mother tongue is crucial because it is the only language they fully comprehend. Research worldwide shows that the most effective way to teach concepts and skills is through children’s native language; what they learn this way accompanies them throughout life.
Communication relies heavily on language. Where does the mother tongue fit?
Mother‑tongue instruction is entirely natural and necessary—and exceedingly valuable for human communication. Of course, we also need a common language to interact with those outside our speech community. Yet emotions, feelings, ideas, and values are best conveyed through one’s mother tongue; sometimes it is the only tool that can do so.
Last week I attended the funeral of Whitney Houston, the great African‑American singer. Her family insisted on a Homegoing ceremony—a concept absent in mainstream American English. In African‑American culture it means the deceased hasn’t died but has returned home to meet God. Such meaning is accessible only within that cultural‑linguistic frame; English alone cannot express it.
Humans are thinking beings. How important is the mother tongue to thought?
Language lets us communicate complex ideas, even about impossibilities that have never—and may never—occur. Language enabled humanity’s great advances, forever distinguishing us from other species as ashraf‑e‑makhlouqat (the noblest of creatures). Centuries ago Descartes said, “I think, therefore I am.” In the twentieth century we realized it is language that underpins our humanity. I would rephrase Descartes: “I speak, therefore I am.”
How does the mother tongue relate to identity?
It is the sole language through which people gain their social and psychological identity, connecting them to familial and cultural roots.
Many are denied mother‑tongue education. What personal costs—especially emotional—do they face?
The mother tongue is the first input a child hears; some linguists even class infants’ babble as part of it. Theoretically, any language acquired from birth is a mother tongue. But where do race, ethnicity, and birthplace fit in?
Imagine an African‑heritage infant separated from her mother and raised by a white American family, acquiring white American English. Theoretically her mother tongue is that variety of English—but her skin signals she is not white. She speaks like a white American yet is visibly Black, creating a contradiction that can have emotional consequences, perhaps affecting her capacity for love. The reverse can hold for a white child in a Black linguistic environment. Such contradictions bring stress: the child may be mocked or excluded. To find romantic acceptance in the dominant group, the Black individual may gradually align her identity with the white milieu—difficult, yet not impossible. Many have found love across divisions of language, religion, and race.
Some states pursue linguistic uniformity. How do such policies violate rights and erase languages?
Under dominance or colonialism, the rulers’ language gains higher status and dominates political, social, administrative, and educational spheres. It becomes the language of books, schools, universities, official documents, newspapers, music, film—the “sacred” tongue imbued with “lofty human values.” This outlook entrenches structural inequalities—what the linguist Robert Phillipson calls linguistic imperialism.
Racists and extreme nationalists have long tried to suppress minority languages. How can we prevent this?
Governmental and educational policies enforce the dominant language and criminalize others. As I said, banning a language eliminates it, along with its culture, and eventually its people’s very being.
Mandating multilingualism by law is vital to prevent such elimination. South Africa exemplifies this: after apartheid, it legally recognized eleven official languages—English, Afrikaans, and nine indigenous languages—whereas during apartheid only the first two were official.
Who violates mother‑tongue rights—and how criminal is it? Can offenders be prosecuted?
Blocking mother‑tongue education can deprive thousands of children of literacy and essential skills, leaving them unprepared for 21st‑century demands and trapped in poverty and inequality. Yes, this is a crime.
A progressive democratic society enacts laws to prevent such slaughter of children’s potential. In the United States, the 1972 Equal Educational Opportunities Act requires schools to provide equal chances regardless of race, color, sex, nationality, or language. Under that law parents in the famous “Black English” court case sued the Ann Arbor school district (1977‑79). I worked with the children’s attorneys, assembling linguists and teachers to testify. The court compelled the school to treat Black students with respect instead of assuming they were inferior.
Many mother tongues are endangered. What must be done to protect and promote them? What roles do states and intellectuals play? How can the Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights be implemented?
There is both hope and possibility. Every effort must be made to preserve lesser‑known and sparsely used languages. We should record speakers before they pass away and extinguish this human heritage. Language is a vital part of human history.
Awareness campaigns can highlight the value of multilingualism and of those who are bilingual or multilingual. Media and public forums should stress that speaking multiple languages is commendable. TV programs, billboards, films, and articles should celebrate linguistic diversity. Parents, concerned citizens, intellectuals, academics—and above all policy‑makers—must unite to legislate for multilingual societies.
Some claim that mother‑tongue education threatens national security. Does it?
The idea that ethnic groups speaking or learning in their own languages endanger national security is absurd. Linguistic diversity is an asset, not a liability—a chance, not a threat. It is a natural part of human life. Our goal should be to ensure that all ethnic communities within a country can speak, write, and learn in their own languages.
Original Interview (in Persian):
“Mother Tongue Shapes Human Identity” – An exclusive interview with Prof. Geneva Smitherman
Published in Etemad Daily, 27 February 2012
https://www.magiran.com/article/2457438