16. P.
Madhu:
Except
by politics no language can be presented in its purity. Destabilizing
it's unity is a welcome 'minority politics'. Speaking in terms of
'minority politics' is genuinely radical than what lobbies of various
identity positions market.....
The
enunciative pressures upon the making (variating) languages is worth
problematized than associating them with purity of languages or their
associative good or badness.
15. P.
K. Sasidharan:
An
activism for the recovery of Pali language seems to convey many
things. It embodies a cultural politics that emerges from the
awareness on historical wars of oppression and marginalization fought
by means of language. Primarily, it has to seek an explanation
on why certain people are made forgetful of the tongue in which their
ancestors were negotiating with natural and cultural environments for
survival of them, including the progenies to come. The present day
Kerala had been a region where the tongue Tamil was prevailed for a
long time in the history of human civilization. That means, Keralites
were too Tamilians as the people of the present Tamil Nadu.
Unfortunately, Keralites consider Tamilians are different or rather
culturally inferior. If we go further in the history of the
sub-continent, we might be able to see a same model of cultural
metamorphosis happened to the Dravidian India that is known now in
hearsay only. If Pali and Prakrit were popular tongues, what
caused their demise? Asking such questions of cultural and historical
justice cannot be branded as identity fanaticism.
14. P.
Madhu:
1.assuming
languages to be pure monads & positioning them as oppressed and
oppressor is problematic
2.conspitatory claims of someone deliberately making forgetful of somebody else's ancestry does not go well with the understanding of the discursive production of language.
3.languages are flows in response to ethologically triggered necessities. No language can remain statically true to its ancestry- because ethological conditions and enunciative necessities don't remain same.
2.conspitatory claims of someone deliberately making forgetful of somebody else's ancestry does not go well with the understanding of the discursive production of language.
3.languages are flows in response to ethologically triggered necessities. No language can remain statically true to its ancestry- because ethological conditions and enunciative necessities don't remain same.
About
activism: engineering action against other with claims of justice - I
think can't be authentic activism.
13. P.
K. Sasidharan:
Question
of purity of language may not be the present concern. Why do we go
after some dead languages and scripts? Why do we struggle to decipher
the Indus script? Why the Pali and Prakrit are considered to so
valuable? How the recovery Hebru became liberative? There are many
factors and conditions which made the demise of languages. Some may
be natural and evolutionary. Others may be created or
pressurized. There is a socializing process going on whereby
some tongues are made silent and some others are being made louder.
How could we think of such situations are encouraging?
Activism
seems to spring from the space of some common cause that are to be
achieved. It may happen in such a way keeping both justice and
cruelty in view. In this scheme, the activism for the recovery
of Pali has to be placed in the former side. Pali cannot be the sake
of Pali alone
12. P.
Madhu:
Do
you presuppose some conspirators villains work behind the screen
consistently for Millenniums to deliberately sabotage goodness of
good languages? It is wonderful to study languages and the
enunciative struggles or context making, breaking, diminishing
or enhancing them - but a conspiratory presuppositions muddled with
current concerns of identity claims spoil the brat. That linearises
and flattens history to unjustifiable ideological claims that are
methodologically vacuous.
11. P.
K. Sasidharan:
The
concerns conveyed by the above questions are to be addressed.
Conspiracy may not be the apt term to characterize the forces working
to the creation of such situation. Interests of social and
cultural domination are apparently there. They may be in force
through economic and political structures.
10. P.
Madhu:
Problematizing
milieus constituting enunciative practices culminating in languages
and their signifiers and thereby hierarchising the social world
unjustly can be the orientation. That will problematize processes
instead playing a identitarian blame games and provocations.
9. P.
K.Sasidharan:
Of
course, assertions of cultural rights need not be yet another
instance of perpetrating violation or injustice. It may be self
defeating. Such provocations might be leading to misdirect the
target. We can very image a situation that the region of Kerala soon
witnessing the demise of the Malayalam language and script. Can the
possibility of it becoming another linguistic grave yard of the
Malayalam be considered as natural and evolutionary? Who will
be the beneficiaries and losers of such a situation?
