Pesky Linguists and Language Planning in the Caribbean

Generally speaking, the average person does not understand exactly what a linguist does. Certainly in Jamaica where I grew up, and in the wider Caribbean region to a large extent, confusion abounds as it relates to the work of a linguist. Some think we specialise in the teaching of many (European!) languages or serve as some kind of special police force for the enforcing of proper punctuation and grammar. Our most unflattering label though would be something along the lines of “those pesky academics who are hell bent on promoting those substandard Creole languages.” Unflattering indeed. So generally speaking, the average person does not see the linguist as doing anything useful, let alone being an activist. But it was in fact activism which brought together some of the most prolific linguists in the Caribbean for the first ever “International Conference on Language Policy in the Creole Speaking Caribbean”, January 13 -14th, at the University of the West Indies, Monai.

When tourists think about the Caribbean, they think about white sand beaches, scrumptious spicy food, great music and world class hospitality. Not necessarily rich linguistic heritage. And even when people do recognise this diverse linguistic heritage, they hardly ever think of it as under threat. Indeed, quite a number of these languages come under threat from two main forces (i) the natural attrition of native speakers (without any accompanying interest by the new generation to preserve the language) and (ii) a complex network of socio-political discrimination and public indifference on the matterii. Linguists who lobby for language rights are interested in addressing both of these forces, with a special emphasis on the latter – that of discrimination.

The Caribbean is an interesting milieu of multiethnic and multilinguistic heritage which was largely borne out of a very long history of colonial legacies. For the most part, this intricate mosaic of different nationalities, ethnicities, races, cultures and sub-cultures get along quite well. Nevertheless, it is all too easy to find someone in the Caribbean who has suffered some form of discrimination. Discrimination on the grounds of ethnicity, race, religion, gender and political affiliation, while unconstitutional in all Caribbean jurisdictions, does in fact occur from time to time. There is not much mention, however, of discrimination on the grounds of language.

What exactly is linguistic discrimination? Well, imagine that you are calling a potential landlord to inquire about the availability of an apartment which you noticed was vacant. You place the call, tell the landlord about your occupation, family composition and level of income and the unfortunate response is that the apartment is already gone. A friend of yours calls back a few hours afterwards, same family make-up and same income but with a different accent and voila! The apartment is now ready for him to move in. Don’t believe it happens? Well Prof. John Baugh of Washington University in St. Louis has documented the issue of linguistic discrimination in the USA and a public service announcement inspired by his research can be seen hereiii. But how does this relate to the Caribbean?

As I have pointed out above, the Caribbean is an area which can be characterised by its rich linguistic diversity. While there is a tendency to label some Caribbean territories as simply “English-speaking”, “French-speaking”, “Spanish-speaking” or “Dutch-speaking” this only acknowledges one facet of this linguistic diversity. It ignores the fact that almost all Caribbean territories have a Creole language such as the English Creoles “Patwa” in Jamaica and “Creolese” in Guyana and some have an indigenous/aboriginal language such as Lokono, an Amerindian Language spoken by the indigenous people of Suriname and Garifuna spoken by the indigenous inhabitants of Belize. As it turns out, in most of these Caribbean territories it is the European languages which have prestige and command respect. The other languages, which in some cases have the numerical majority in these territories, are seen as having low prestige, unstructured and uncultured, and generally have little or no intrinsic value. What makes this situation distressing is that the same attitudes towards a particular language are usually extended to the speakers of the same language. When this happens, it’s now a human rights problem.

It was with this concern in mind that linguists from all over the world with a common interest in language rights in the Caribbean decided to gather on the campus of the UWI, Mona in January. The purpose of the gathering was to create and critique a Draft Charter on Language Rights for the Creole-Speaking Caribbean. And not just linguist. This time around we managed to get input from legal minds, heads of state, educators and, most importantly, the general public.Academics are often criticised for their eagerness to forge ahead with idealized plans without so much as even a memo to the general public. Well, I think we managed to steer clear of that mistake with this conference. The questions, criticisms and recommendations coming from the large contingent of non-linguists in attendance served as a counter-weight to any hyper-idealized plans we linguists might have been tempted to implement.

The format of the conference had one significant addition to the usual modus operandi of academic conferences. While there were panels, presenters, and question and answer segments the main focus of the conference was for participants to work towards one common goal. Our aim ultimately was to critically scrutinise and make the necessary adjustments to a charter of rights for the speakers of Caribbean creoles. The charter focused on four main areas:

1.  Public Administration: The general focus in this area was to outline the rights offered to the territorial languagesiv in the Caribbean as it relates to the legal and soci-economic sphere

2.  Education in Schools: This section detailed how the territorial languages of the Caribbean should be handled with respect to public formal education

3.  Education out of Schools: The specific aim here was to highlight the freedom of accessibility given to members of all language communities in the various Caribbean territories to learn the history and evolution of their languages outside of public education

4.  Culture: The final area dealt with the right for all language communities to use their languages in all forms of cultural expression as they see fit

While there was heated debate about whether particular sections of the charter were practical, or even legally sound for that matter, there was general consensus among all those present that such a charter was needed. And the reason behind it is simple. It is unacceptable that a law- abiding tax-paying member of the electorate in a Caribbean territory should be denied certain fundamental rights on the grounds of language. It would spark widespread outrage if the government of a territory discriminated against members of said territory on the grounds of their race, gender or religion and language should be no different. One’s language is as intricately linked to one’s identity as is their ethnicity, cultural heritage and overall worldview. When you discriminate against a person’s language, you discriminate against the very element which makes

that person human.

But is it practical? Can governments across the Caribbean be assured that as soon as the charter is accepted that members of various language communities will not turn out in legion to file lawsuits for linguistic discrimination? Participants at the conference had this same apprehension in mind. It was determined that as a precursor to accepting the charter each territory which intends to be a signatory should undertake research. The research findings, which would be guided by a local committee set up to handle the task, would do two things. It would firstly determine to what extent the particular Caribbean territory was already in violation of the charter. Secondly, it would determine the kinds of steps which would be needed for the territory to rectify these breaches and the potential time frame to accomplish this. All this would be done BEFORE the charter would be accepted. As much as language advocates would love to see such a charter accepted, it serves no one if at the moment of implementation a jurisdiction becomes bogged down by claims of discrimination. The last thing needed is a bureaucratic nightmare triggered by the first serious attempt at a regional language policy.

It stands to reason then that it would be better to hold off on implementing the charter until all the necessary research is done to determine the best and most efficient manner of moving forward. This is of course no barrier to accepting the charter in principle and pledging to carry out the task of implementation once the research is completed. And this is precisely what the participants at the conference did in a symbolic signing of the charter at the end of the conference. Even members of the public who had been invited to attend the public forum on the final day registered their support for the initiative and offered their signatures. The research will indeed precede full implementation, but an opportunity delayed is an opportunity denied. Those of us who are familiar with Caribbean-style activism know all too well of great ideas which never somehow managed to leave the ideational realm. The energy and enthusiasm of the participants at the International Conference on Language Policy in the Creole Speaking Caribbean makes me hopeful that the charter on language rights will not be one such idea.

It is important at this point to dispel a misconception which might be brewing in the minds of those who still look at linguists with a “side-eye”. What is the “hidden agenda” of these academics? The most common theory I have come across is that us Caribbean linguists are secretly advocating a kind of radical “Creole revolution” which will ultimately overthrow the established European languages in the region. This will permanently severe the language bridge which extends from the Caribbean to the rest of the world and ostensibly plunge the region into a kind of post-apocalyptic regime where linguists rule. The humanity! Needless to say, nothing could be further from the truth. The charter on language rights is meant to give equal treatment to all territorial languages within a particular Caribbean region. This obviously means the European languages as well. It was never the intention to overtake and replace English with Jamaican Creole in Jamaica, Dutch with Papiamentu in Curacao or French with Kweyol in St. Lucia. On the contrary – the charter is meant to recognise and preserve the linguistic diversity of the Caribbean region. But for this to be a reality a large part of that linguistic diversity will have to be put on equal footing with the historically established European languages. Linguists believe that legislation may be an important step in accomplishing this.

Legislation is important, but the final frontier in addressing language issues in the Caribbean region has always been attitudes. If legislation is not complemented with a change in attitudes towards language, then any kind of meaningful transformation of the linguistic situation is impossible. To be sure, attitudes towards language in the Caribbean have been slowly improving in the last few decadesv. Creoles and indigenous languages from the region have gradually extended their influence beyond the boundaries of entertainment and have seeped into new domains such as education, the media, the legal context and even religion. This gradual change in attitudes has even prompted some Caribbean territories to establish language planning agencies, units or committees to improve the prestige of low status languages much to the chagrin of those who would rather preserve the status quo. Indeed, the road towards linguistic equality in the Caribbean is filled with twists and turns and is hardly ever paved well enough for smooth sailing. But yet still those of us who think such an ideal can become a reality still press on.

Looking ahead it is clear that the journey has just now started for those of us who gathered at that conference in January. We all left feeling a great sense of accomplishment but at the same time were fully aware of the kind of hefty task which lies ahead if we are ever to achieve full implementation of the charter on language rights. Any exercise in language planning is also normally an exercise in changing perspectives and world views. But, as one conference participant admitted, she is not a professional linguist, but she just “loves language”. This is where it has to start: a genuine love for and appreciation of the quintessential human characteristic – language. I love languages too, and that is why I work to preserve them.

Acknowledgement:

I would firstly like to acknowledge the Dean’s office in the Faculty of Liberal Arts and Professional Studies, York University, for providing me with the funding for attending this conference. I would also like to thank Denise Banks of the Jamaican Language Unit, University of the West Indies, Mona for providing the pictures used in this article.

-Clive Forrester 

i  The conference website can still be viewed  here.

ii A video clip of some of the dying languages of the Caribbean and the linguistic diversity in the regionncan be viewed  here.

iii Additionally, Baugh has discussed the issue of linguistic profiling extensively along with the Ebonics debate in

“Beyond Ebonics: Linguistic Pride and Racial Prejudice” 2000, Oxford University Press.

iv The term “territorial language” as outlined in Article 1 of the charter, refers to (a) Creoles, (b) Indigenous languages, (c) European languages designated in the territories as official languages and (d) Any other language

which may be designated or determined by national consensus.

v  The Jamaican Language Unit at the University of the West Indies, Mona carried out a Language Attitude Survey in

Jamaica in 2005. The main aim of the survey was to gauge the current attitudes of Jamaicans to the language

situation. An explanation of the sampling and results and be accessed  here.

The Conference on Language Policy in the Creole Speaking Caribbean was a success!!

On the 13^th of January 2011, the University of the West Indies opened its gates to heads of state, government ministers, distinguished linguistics, other dignitaries and interested persons, for a most momentous inaugural event. The International Conference on Language Policy in the Creole Speaking Caribbean hosted by the International Centre for Caribbean Language Research (ICCLR) and the Jamaican Language Unit (JLU), was conducted over 2 days (13^th and 14^th of January 2011) with the primary objective to produce a Charter of Language Rights document that would protect indigenous and Creole speakers across the region.

Day 1 of the conference commenced with an opening ceremony. The welcome and opening remarks were given by Dr. Karen Carpenter and Professor Hubert Devonish, the principal figures of the ICCLR/ JLU. This was followed by presentations from His Excellency Sir Patrick Allen (the Governor General of Jamaica), His Excellency Sir Colville Young (the Governor General of Belize), Her Excellency, Dame Pearlette Louisy (Governor General of St. Lucia), Vice Chancellor of the UWI, Drs. Linda Richardson and Dr. Marta Dijkhoff. Each presenter engaged the listening audience with personal expectations of the conference and the particular language rights challenges being experienced in their own homeland. These presentations set the tone for the overall proceedings.

The second half of day 1 and the first half of day 2 saw the conference attendees breaking into working groups, charged with the task of developing the draft of the Charter pre-prepared by the ICCLR working group. Specifically, each group was asked to grapple with and thoroughly elucidate the myriad factors preventing the indigenous languages of the region from having the same status as the regional states’ official languages. In its pre-preparation, the ICCLR working group had broken down the issues into 3 broad categories, with beginning workings under each. Hence conference attendees were assigned to a work group according to their area of interest or expertise. The 3 broad areas that were looked on by the working groups are:

1)       Public Administration, Official Bodies & Socio-Economic Sphere

2)       Education:

a.       In-School

b.       Out-of-School

3)       Culture

The final session of the conference was open to the public and an executive summary of the Charter of Language Rights worked on over the 2 day period, was presented. A question and answer segment followed the presentation, which allowed for further queries or recommendations on how the charter’s content could be improved in order to be presented to Governments. At the end of that process, the conference attendees and interested members of the public were invited to affix their signatures to a petition sheet endorsing the Charter and its mandate.

The inaugural Conference on Language Policy in the Creole-speaking Caribbean was certainly fruitful; both for those who attended and for the organisers. The conference achieved its objectives and with this accomplishment, the ICCLR along with the partnerships formed before and during the conference, are now working to have this most crucial document tabled in the houses of parliaments throughout the region.

 

Here is a list of some of the persons who were in attendance:

v  His Excellency Sir Patrick Allen (the Governor General of Jamaica)

v  His Excellency, Sir Colville Young (the Governor General of Belize)

v  Her Excellency, Dame Pearlette Louisy (Governor General of St. Lucia)

v  Hon. Dr. Jacqui Quinn-Leonardo (Minister of Education, Sports, Youth & Gender Affairs, Antigua & Barbuda)

v  Professor Oswald Harding (President of the Senate in the House of Parliament, Jamaica)

v  Professor Nigel E. Harris (Vice Chancellor of the University of the West Indies)

v  Prof. Lawrence Carrington (Vice Chancellor of the University of Guyana)

v  Prof. Hazel Simmons-McDonald (Principal of the UWI Open Campus)

v  Dr. Rebecca Tortello (Ministry of Education, Jamaica)

v  Mrs. Mala Morton-Gittens (Ministry of Education, Trinidad & Tobago)

v  Dr. Marta Dijkhoff (Former Minister of Education, Netherlands Antilles)

v  Drs. Linda Richardson (Former Minister of Education, Netherlands Antilles)

And many other distinguished guests!

To see excerpts of the conference, please go to the following links:

1)       http://tv.mona.uwi.edu/#id=659 , conference footage link

2)       http://tv.mona.uwi.edu/#id=660, conference footage link

For further information on the current activities of the ICCLR and to get a copy of the Charter on Language Rights please go to our website:

www.caribbeanlanguagepolicy.com

TAAK*PALÉ*PAPIA: Granting Constitutional Language Rights

TAAK*PALÉ*PAPIA: Granting Constitutional Language Rights: "The following is the second in a series that continues the on-going debate about using patois as a basis for teaching English. Language ..."

Granting Constitutional Language Rights

The following is the second in a series that continues the on-going debate about using patois as a basis for teaching English.

Language Rights to Whom?

Hubert Devonish

THE WORLD has over 5,000 languages. Does it mean that if someone enters a Government office and finds no one able to render service in Urdu or Wapishiana, that the state would have violated the rights to freedom from discrimination on grounds of language? Language rights have to be limited by considerations of practicality. In many situations around the world, this is done by what we could call the 10 per cent principle. If a language is spoken by at least 10 per cent of the population of a country, a region or community, this is often considered a sufficient condition to require that special language provisions be made for its speakers.

The practicality issue could be covered by a proviso in the Charter that 'Public authorities and essential entities shall be held not to have abrogated, abridged or infringed the right to freedom from discrimination on the ground of language as in the proposed 3-(2) (j) or 'the right to fair and humane treatment', 13-(2)(i) as this relates to language use, if they have taken adequate steps to provide an equal level and quality of service to the individual in all 'languages in general use.'

The phrase 'languages in general use' could be defined as 'languages which are known to and used in everyday life by at least 10 per cent of the population.' In Jamaica, the only language other than English that falls into this category is Jamaican/Jamaican Creole/Patwa. Its language structure establishes it as a language distinct from English. This has been recognised by the New York State Board of Education as it organises itself more effectively to teach English and in English to the tens of thousands of immigrant Jamaican children who attend public schools in that state. If this distinctness is recognised and there is a commitment to avoiding discrimination on grounds of language, public bodies in Jamaica would have provide their services in just two languages, English and Jamaican.

Another practicality issue involves the ability of all public bodies covered by the Charter to, at one fell swoop, implement non-discriminatory practices. Given the lack of resources to do this, the implementation of the provision of the Charter relating to language discrimination could be introduced on a phased basis over a period of eight years. Every year an additional number of public bodies could be required to comply. Parliament could make the inclusion of 'freedom from discrimination on grounds of language' in the proposed Charter of Rights subject to certain conditions.

Under What Conditions?

One condition could be that access to this right becomes activated on a phased basis over eight years based on a timetable. Another could be that Parliament be satisfied that (a) there is a standard writing system in place for Jamaican (b) that a handbook of standard administrative terminology and a Jamaican language use guide to public servants has been produced and (c) that the administrative arrangements are in place to ensure the implementation and monitoring of language rights in Jamaica. A third condition could be that Parliament would approve a timetable for compliance presented to it by a designated public offender such as the Public Defender.

Why, one might ask, do we need a timetable for compliance? The answer is that it would be difficult to immediately put in place all the resources needed to train public officers who deal with the public. Producing wordlists with Jamaican equivalents of English technical and administrative terminology cannot be done for the dozens of public bodies all at the same time. The phasing might start with the Jamaica equivalents of English technical and administrative terminology cannot be done for the dozens of public bodies at the same time. The phasing might start with the Jamaica Information Service in the first year, the Registrar General's Department in the second, the Inland Revenue Department in the third, Ministry of Health in the fourth, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security in the third, Ministry of Health in the fourth, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security in the fifth. The widening experience and knowledge of how to proceed would allow for an acceleration of the process in the final three years, with several entities becoming integrated into the new non-discriminatory programme of public communication in each of the last three years.

But why do we then not just wait until all arrangements are in place before inserting language rights into the Charter? This could be answered by another question, 'Do we wish to wait until it is administratively convenient in order to take steps to end the denial of a particular set of rights?' Including these rights right from the start would concentrate the collective minds of the state most wonderfully, producing both a timetable which had to be met and perhaps greater than normal sense of urgency.

What Role for the Public Defender?

It would help if there were some public official who would have an oversight role in ensuring that the right to equal levels of service in Jamaica is respected. However, there is no need to create new, and ultimately expensive, public official positions to implement language rights. The Office of the Public Defender already exists, with a legally enshrined role as the guardian of individual rights. The widening of rights protected in the constitution to include language would logically also widen the scope of this office. 

It is to the Public Defender, therefore, that the responsibility for being the watchdog for language rights could be devolved. This officer would have the responsibility firstly to establish exactly the quality and standard of service in Jamaican that could be considered equivalent to that offered in English. The second task would be to consult with each public authority and essential entity covered by the Charter to establish a timetable for the phasing in of services provided to the public in Jamaican. The third task would be to develop and implement an annual monitoring process for the services provided in Jamaica by public authorities and essential entities. The fourth would be to investigate any suspected violation of the right to freedom from discrimination on grounds of language on the part of those public bodies covered by the Charter.

The Public Defender would have the power to make recommendations to any authority or entity found in violation and, where necessary, seek remedy in a court of law. However, the actual work of facilitating and promoting the efficient and effective use of Jamaican by public bodies in their dealings with the public would be carried out, on behalf of the Public Defender, by a Language Planning Agency.

And the Jamaican Language Unit?

The Jamaican Language Unit (JLU) is set up within the Dept of Language, Linguistics and Philosophy of UWI, Mona. It bases its work on (i) the academic and research material on Jamaican already in existence and (ii) the range of existing expertise in the area of linguistics, much of it available through the University of the West Indies and accessible at little or no additional cost to the taxpayer.

The role of the JLU and language planning agencies as diverse as the Academic Française in France, the Hebrew Language Academy in Israel, etc., is to produce technical vocabulary for the new functions which a language may have to perform from time to time. In a situation where the agencies of government and state are constrained to provide services in the Jamaican language as well as English, the JLU would develop lists of technical words and phrases for Jamaican. These would express non-traditional administrative and technical concepts with accuracy and elegance.

The JLU would be able to recommend that public servants, when speaking to monolingual speakers of Jamaican, use approved Jamaican equivalents for certain well established administrative terms in English. A Jamaican phrase such as "wan kapi we sain an stamp", literally 'a copy that is signed and stamped' might be proposed as the appropriate translation equivalent for 'a signed and stamped' might be proposed as the appropriate translation equivalent for 'a signed certified copy'. Similarly, di die i ron out, literally 'the day it runs out', could be proposed for the phrase 'expiry date', and di die i gi out’, literally 'the day was it given out' for 'date of issue.'

The JLU, in preparation for this, is formally and popularising the Cassidy system as an official standard writing system for Jamaican. It is also already developing specialised Jamaican terminology needed for official public communications. It is, in addition, able to help train public servants who need to use Jamaican in their dealings with the public, to read the writing system and use the technical terminology developed by the agency. It has the capacity, as well, to provide the technical advice which an overseeing officer such as the Public Defender would need in carrying out his advisory, supervisory and monitoring roles in the area of language rights.

Hubert Devonish

Professor of Linguistics & Coordinator

The Jamaican Language Unit

The University of the West Indies

Mona Campus.

Why Freedom from Language Discrimination in the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms?

The following is part one of a series that opens up the on-going debate on the issue of whether people who do not speak English experience discrimination in Jamaica, and if so, what should the law and constitution do about it.

Hubert Devonish

The Case for Banning Language Discrimination in the Charter

The Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act 2011, was passed by the Senate of Jamaica on 1st April, 2011. This Charter is about to become law without any specific provision for freedom from discrimination on the ground of languge. This is against the background of a society which in which two languages are used, English and Jamaican (Creole, Patwa, etc.). The former is the official language, but one in which all, except the educated minority, have limited competence in. The latter is the native language of the vast majority of the population and is used with facility by all sectors of the population. The official language, English, is the only language the institutions of government and state are required to use in the provision of services to the Jamaican public. We have a clear case of discrimination on the ground of language so why was the freedom from language discrimination not included in the Charter?

The Joint Parliamentary Committee in 2001, when confronted with arguments such as these, made the following decision: ‘…. the establishment of an agency of the type mentioned by Professor Devonish [now set us as the Jamaican Language Unit at UWI] would be a pre-requisite to any constitutional guarantee of protection from discrimination on the ground of language and that that agency should be set up. Such an institution would assist in educating and enlightening people on the issue of discrimination on the ground of language so that, eventually, a guarantee of protection from such discrimination would find its place in the Constitution. The Committee is, therefore, strongly of the view that Parliament should encourage the Department of Language, Linguistics and Philosophy of the University of the West Indies to pursue the work mentioned by Professor Devonish and to report appropriately as it progresses’ (Report of Joint Select Committee 2002, p. 29). 

Human Rights, Yes. But Language Rights?

Is discrimination on the ground of language a violation of individual rights? And does it rank with other grounds for discrimination such as race, gender or religious belief? The many international treaties and charters which the Jamaican Government has signed, give a clear answer. For example, the United Nations Charter, Chapter 1, Article 1.4, states that one of the goals of that organisation is "To achieve international co-operation in ... promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction to race, sex, language or religion". Equality irrespective of the language one speaks is here ranked alongside one’s gender, race and religion.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms which took over 20 years to make its way through Parliament and which was passed by the Senate of Jamaica on 1st April, 2011. This is intended to replace Chapter III of the Jamaican Constitution, The draft states in 13)2 that "Parliament shall pass no law and no public authority or any essential entity shall take any action which abrogates, abridges or infringes -- (j) the right to freedom from discrimination on the ground of - (i) being male or female;; (ii) race, place of origin, social class, colour, religion or political opinions". It goes on to say in 24.(3), "In this section the expression "discriminatory" means affording different treatment to different persons attributable wholly or mainly to their respective descriptions by race, place of origin, political opinions, colour or creed whereby persons of one such description are subjected to disabilities or restrictions to which persons of another such description are not made subject or are accorded privileges or advantages which are not accorded to persons of another such description."

The Charter protects the citizen from being discriminated against by public authorities and essential entities on grounds of gender, race, place of origin, social class, colour, religion and political opinions. The protections, however, makes no reference to language. Why? This reflects a general attitude across the entire society that everybody in Jamaica in fact understands English even if they cannot speak it well. Even those who are most negatively affected often accept their discrimination meekly, as an act of God punishing them for speaking ‘badly’.

Are there Jamaicans who do not Understand English?

Some years ago, a student at UWI, Denise Smalling, decided to research the extent to which Jamaicans indeed understood English. She ran a test in which she played four news items from a regular news broadcast to 30 beginning students in a literacy class run by JAMAL. At the end of each news item, each informant was asked, orally, questions which tested understanding of the news item. The item was played over again any time an informant was unsure or felt the need for clarification. The questions tested understanding in areas affected by knowledge of the meanings of words and syntax. The JAMAL informants, on average, answered accurately only 50.2 per cent of the time. This would show a shortfall in understanding of 49.8 per cent. This figure had to be adjusted to take account of the weaknesses in the test itself, identified through the responses of a control group who had a good command of English. Even so, the final figure shows a shortfall in understanding of 43 per cent amongst her JAMAL informants. 

These results, though based on language use in radio news, can be applied to the use of spoken English in any of the public services provided by Government agencies. Is it fair that some citizens should end up being able to benefit from 43 per cent less of the services provided by Government because of their poor command of English? Isn't this a clear case of discrimination and violation of individual rights? In this context, is freedom from discrimination by state bodies on the ground of language not a relevant right, one worthy of protection in the Charter of Rights in the Jamaican constitution? 

Why not Make Sure Everybody can Speak English?

Freedom from discrimination on the ground of language would not affect the role of English as the official language of Jamaica. There is, in addition, clear national consensus that English is important for contact with the outside world and for access to international sources of knowledge, information, science and technology. Everyone in Jamaica should learn English. The public is rightly concerned to ensure that English is learnt. This leads to the periodic outbreak of heated debate in the press about the most effective way to teach English in schools.

The fact is that anyone who lives in Jamaica and cannot use English is at a severe disadvantage. Such persons are denied access to the flood of knowledge, information and entertainment which comes to us from overseas through the medium of English. English is also a vital means of communication within Jamaican society itself. It is the medium through which most public and formal communications takes place. Debates in Parliament, prime time television and radio news broadcasts, the issuing of hurricane warnings from the Meteorological Office, and so on, all employ mainly English. All of the agencies of the state providing services t the public do so in English. They make little or no provision for persons with limited knowledge of English. Thus, if you wish to access services of the public health system, the passport office, tax offices, the legal system or the Ministry of Agriculture, and you don't have an effective command of English, you have a serious handicap, 'yu kaana daak'.

Those who are currently in the school system have to develop effective control of English if they are going to have the power to communicate and be communicated with, which comes from knowing English. English should, therefore, not only be taught in schools in Jamaica but it should be taught using the most effective means available to us. However, language learning and language teaching are very complex activities. Language teaching research done the world over and within the Caribbean, as well as public discussion about English language teaching options in Jamaica, suggest that there are no quick fixes. Improvements in the teaching and learning of English will take time.

But while the Grass in Growing ... 

By focusing on the issue of teaching English in schools, we express an understandable anxiety for the welfare of our children, the workforce of tomorrow. What, however, about the often overlooked adults, those who are currently producing and who make up the workforce of today? Many such persons have, through no fault of their own, moved through or past the education system without developing an adequate knowledge of English. In a national Language Competence Survey of Jamaica carried out on 1000 Jamaicans of both genders, all classes, levels of education, and across a variety of places of origin, 36.5% failed to demonstrate the competence in English required to explain a preference for one object over another. They, however, were able to express themselves fluently on this issue in Jamaican.

It is to these people that language rights are important. Too often, such persons find that the services of public bodies are provided to them in a language with which they are not familiar, English, and no other. To add insult to injury, such persons, in the course of trying to understand and make themselves understood, are often made to feel stupid by others because of their lack of control of English. The research work of Kadian Walters supports this by establishing that such people receive lower quality information from officers designated to interact with the public and are made to feel embarrassed in the course of their interaction with public officers. In over 100 interactions respectively in English and Jamaican, 76% of the cases where the caller felt disrespected involved calls using Jamaican. The benefits of improvements in English language teaching in scools cannot be made retroactive to people who are already adults.

So, even as we take steps to fix the education system and improve the teaching of English, there will continue to be hundreds of thousands of citizens of Jamaica who have long left school or never been to school, and who lack effective control of English. These people, many in the 50s, 60s and 70s, are not likely to learn much more English than they already know. they will, however, continue to suffer because of their lack of control of English. While the grass is growing, the proverbial horses, in very large numbers, are starving.

Do we accept that hundreds of thousands of our fellow citizens should pay for public service through their tax dollars and yet have problems accessing those services because of the language in which those services are provided? Are such persons not entitled to the same level of services from government offices and other public bodies, to which they contribute by way of taxation, as are persons fortunate enough to speak, read, write and understand English? Do all members of the public have the right to the same level of courteous service from public bodies, irrespective of their language? Ought language discrimination not to be treated in the same way as discrimination on grounds of gender, race, colour or creed?

But don’t Public Servants ‘Help Out’?

Of course, as you read this, your mind flashes to the last time you were n the tax office or the passport office, and you saw some public servant manfully trying to explain to someone the process which had to be followed. Surely the problem is being handled by well thinking officials who help the public by using language members of the public can understand? Again, however, let us look at some research on this question recently done by Hilma Linton and Cameleta Ffrench in six financial institutions in the Half Way Tree area of St. Andrew.

A researcher visited each institution in the Half Way Tree area of St. Andrew. A researcher visited each institution and speaking to the customer service personnel in Jamaican (Creole)/Patois, asked for information on how to open an account with the institution. In four of the six cases, the overall pattern was for the customer service personnel to be indifferent, unfriendly and sometimes directly rude. The investigator had to ask several questions in order to get the information needed. Four days later, the same researcher, dressed in exactly the same way, entered the same institutions making the same inquiry, but this time using English. The responses were polite and helpful. Information that had not been asked for was given voluntarily, inclusive of detailed directions to the relevant section of the institution to which the customer was being sent.

On the positive side, in two of the cases, the same helpful and friendly service was accorded the researcher when she spoke in Jamaican and when she spoke in English. This tells us that if there is the will, staff providing services to the public can be selected and/or trained to provide bilingual services to the public in a non-discriminatory manner.

The unsatisfactory behaviour of the four other persons dealt with in this study makes it clear that the issue of ensuring fair treatment to the public cannot be left to whims of the individual officer who deals with a member of the public. Even though this piece of research was directed at private enterprises in the main, there is no doubt that the same pattern of language use exists in the public sector which is the focus of our discussion. 

How can the Charter of Rights Promote Language Rights?

One way to promote language rights for persons who do not know English is to ensure that public agencies provide service to members of the public in a language they can understand. This means providing the same quality of service in Jamaican as is provided in English. One way to make this happen is to insert into the constitution a provision guaranteeing freedom from discrimination on grounds of language. This would allow citizens some redress if they felt that they could not receive from public bodies, in a language in which they are competent, information to which they are entitled.

It was with this in mind that I have made representations to the Joint Select Committee of the Houses of Parliament set up to consider a bill in the form of a Draft Charter of Rights which would become part of the Jamaican Constitution. In a presentation made on 31st May, 2001, I addressed 13-(2) of the Draft Charter of Rights which currently states that 'Parliament shall pass no law and no public authority or any essential entity shall take any action which abrogates, abridges or infringes... (j) the right to freedom of discrimination on grounds of (i) gender, (ii) race, place of origin, social class, colour, religion or political opinions' was incomplete. I proposed the addition here of '(iii) language'.

If Parliament accepts this proposal, it would be granting the right to freedom from discrimination on the ground of language on the same basis as freedom from discrimination on grounds of gender, place of origin, social class, colour, religion or political opinions. Parliament would be prevented by the constitution from passing any law, and any public authority or essential entity taking any action which 'abrogates, abridges or infringes' the right to freedom from discrimination on grounds of language.

The Charter defines discriminatory in 1, 24-(8) as, '...affording different treatment of different persons attributable wholly or mainly to their respective descriptions by gender, race, place or origin, social class, political opinions, colour or religion...' Language would have to be added to this list. Our suggested modifications to the Draft Charter would serve to add to an already existing provision, in 13-(2).(i), which blocks Parliament, public authorities and essential entities from taking action which interferes with '... the right to fair and humane treatment by any public authority...' This would guarantee not just the right to receive, from a public body, service in a language in which the citizen is competent, but ensure that this is provided in a courteous and respectful manner.

Hubert Devonish

Professor of Linguistics & Coordinator

The Jamaican Language Unit

The University of the West Indies

Mona Campus.

The Price of Language Discrimination in Jamaica

What is Language Discrimination?
In the Bible, in the book of Judges (Chapter 12, verses 5-6), we have the account of the victorious Gileadites who, as the Ephraimites fled in the night, caught them. When the Ephraimites tried to hide their identity, the men of Gilead, ‘ … then said they unto him, Say now Shib'boleth: and he said Sib'boleth: for he could not frame to pronounce it right. Then they took him, and slew him at the passages of Jordan: and there fell at that time of the E'phra-imites forty and two thousand’. The Ephra-imites spoke a language variety in which did not have the ‘sh’ sound and so, when asked to pronounce ‘Shibboleth’, their ‘Sibboleth’ pronunciation gave them away. Forty two thousand, according to the biblical account, suffered death as a result of this difference in language. This was language discrimination in its most extreme form.

In modern Jamaica, what is the price of not being able to speak the language of those who control our society? There is a price to pay if you live in Jamaica, speak Jamaican (Patwa) and do not speak or understand very well the language of official business, English. You can avoid conducting any official business, to your own detriment. Otherwise, you can, at some inconvenience to yourself, have someone who speaks English conduct business on your behalf. Failing this, you can endure the scorn, insult and injury heaped on those who dare to use, for official business, the Jamaican language, deemed by social consensus, unfit for this purpose. Whichever choice is made, such a citizen is at a disadvantage. They are at a severe disadvantage when compared to those citizens who do speak English. This unequal treatment constitutes linguistic discrimination.

A Language Discrimination Experiment
As part of ongoing research on language discrimination in Jamaica, Kadian Walters, a PhD student in Linguistics at UWI, carried out a series of experiments involving Customer Service Representatives in Jamaica. The research design involved a series of telephone interactions using two languages (Jamaican/Jamaican Creole/Patwa and English) to communicate with Service Representatives of Public Agencies across Jamaica. A total of Sixteen (16) public agencies were involved in the study.

Two callers, a female and a male, used English on one occasion and JC on another, while interacting with pre-selected Service Representatives via the telephone. They requested information about the particular service offered by the agency among other agency specific information.

• What are your opening hours / wa taim unu uopm?

• May I have the directions please / yu kyan gi mi di direkshan pliiz?

• A specific question is asked about that particular agency and its services

At the end of each interaction, callers had to document their own subjective reactions.

The Results
With over 100 calls made, the results brought both good and bad news. The good news was that both callers reported that, in the majority of cases, they received favourable treatment regardless of their use of Jamaican or English. However, about 20% of these calls were rated negatively by the two callers. Of these, 76% were when the calls were made using the Jamaican language. Language discrimination is alive and well in Jamaica.

The Emotional Price of Discrimination
So how did the callers feel about the treatment they received when calling in Jamaican? Let us take a look at the callers’ comments. The female caller stated, in relation to how she was sometimes treated when she spoke Jamaican:

“In the majority of cases when calling as a Jamaican language speaker I was very timid and unconfident because of my uncertainty and expectations of how the Service Representatives would respond to me based on my choice of language…’

“Some Service Representatives … were very mean and ridiculed me openly. I remember one woman shouting at me when I asked for directions and she went as far as putting me on speaker so that other workers could hear “the dunce talk”.

‘This ridicule that I faced sometimes tempted me to resort to the only power that they would respect - my use of English’.

The male caller, when phoning in Jamaican, had this to say about his experience:
“In Jamaican the exact same representative (as the one who had, on another occasion provided polite service when spoken to in English) began getting rude and interrogative; its as if their function switched from being a representative to a person charged with discrediting, interrogating and dismissing a caller.”
If this was the depth of hurt experienced by persons who were only pretending not to be able to speak English, imagine the feelings of someone for whom this was, in fact, a daily reality. Each day these people have to do official business, in our hospitals, banks, government offices, airports, at the emotional level, they die a thousand deaths. This they experience from the tongues of others who feel that those who speak no English in Jamaica have forfeited their right to citizenship, and their right to be treated politely, fairly and equally by public officers, bodies and institutions.

Hubert Devonish

Professor of Linguistics & Coordinator

The Jamaican Language Unit

The University of the West Indies

Mona Campus.

Click here to see the edited Monday, April 18, 2011, Jamaican Observer version.

What about freedom from language discrimination?

In the Gleaner of 30^th March, 2011, under the caption ‘Charter of Rights – “A Recipe for Discrimination”’, we read, ‘…, last Friday Opposition Senator A.J. Nicholson reminded the Senate of a commitment given by the Parliament to the university, to pursue the work which could ascertain the feasibility of providing protection from discrimination on the ground of language.’ No opportunity, in the end, was provided for a report to be given. The Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act 2011, was passed by the Senate of Jamaica on 1^st April, 2011. This Charter is about to become law without any specific provision for freedom from discrimination on the ground of language. This is against the background of a society which in which two languages are used, English and Jamaican (Creole, Patwa, etc.). The former is the official language, but one in which all, except the educated minority, have limited competence in. The latter is the native language of the vast majority of the population and is used with facility by all sectors of the population. The official language, English, is the only language the institutions of government and state are required to use in the provision of services to the Jamaican public. We have a clear case of discrimination on the ground of language so why was the freedom from language discrimination not included in the Charter?

The Joint Parliamentary Committee in 2001, when confronted with arguments such as these, made the following decision: ‘…. the establishment of an agency of the type mentioned by Professor Devonish [now set us as the Jamaican Language Unit at UWI] would be a pre-requisite to any constitutional guarantee of protection from discrimination on the ground of language and that that agency should be set up. Such an institution would assist in educating and enlightening people on the issue of discrimination on the ground of language so that, eventually, a guarantee of protection from such discrimination would find its place in the Constitution. The Committee is, therefore, strongly of the view that Parliament should encourage the Department of Language, Linguistics and Philosophy of the University of the West Indies to pursue the work mentioned by Professor Devonish and to report appropriately as it progresses (Report of Joint Select Committee 2002, p. 29). Should Parliament have enacted the Charter without receiving a report from Hubert Devonish, on behalf of the Jamaican Language Unit which was set up at the request of Parliament? And what, had it delayed to receive a report, would this report have contained?

Report on the Work of the Jamaican Language Unit/Unit for Caribbean Language Research (UWI, Mona)

Mandate

The Jamaican Language Unit (JLU) was established in 2002 as a Unit within the Dept. of Language, Linguistics and Philosophy, in response to a request from the Joint Select Committee of Parliament on the Charter of Rights (Constitutional Amendment) Bill. The Unit was to be set up to create conditions which would allow Parliament to include 'freedom from discrimination on the ground of language' as one of the rights protected by the Charter. To support such a right, it was recommended that a language planning agency be set up to deal with issues such as:

• a standard writing system for Jamaican,

• changing public attitudes to the Jamaican Language to make them more favourable to the use of the Jamaican Language in formal public communication.

The tasks listed above were, once achieved, would create the conditions which would allow the Jamaican Language to be used as a medium for conducting communications with members of the public who had limited proficiency in English but who were native speakers of the Jamaican Language. The way would then be open to include the 'freedom from discrimination on the ground of language' with the Charter of Rights'.

The Writing System for the Jamaican Language

A standard writing system, that developed by Cassidy (1961) was already in existence at the time the JLU was set up. The JLU set about modifying it slightly to resolve some minor problems with it. This has become known as the Cassidy-JLU writing system. The JLU has proceeded to educate the public on how to use it. The main vehicle for this public education drive was the development of a handbook on how to write the Jamaican Language, 'Writing Jamaican the Jamaican Way' which was launched in June, 2009. Several hundred copies of this work are now in circulation.

Between 2002 and the present, some 500 hundred graduates of UWI, who did the course, L38J - Structure and Usage of Jamaican Creole, have been produced who are literate in the Cassidy-JLU writing system as a result of formal instruction provided in this course.

In 2004, a Seminar on Writing the Jamaican Language was held at UWI at which 150 teachers from primary schools across Jamaica were introduced to the writing system.

Between 2004-2008, the Bilingual Education Project (BEP) was introduced, with the blessing and support of the Ministry of Education, into 4 schools in the Corporate Area. This involved the formal instruction of children in both Jamaican and English, orally and in writing, as well as the teaching and exercise of literacy in both languages. Teachers were trained to deliver formally in both languages, Language Arts, Science, Mathematics and Social Studies textbooks translated into Jamaican, and the programme successfully implemented over four years.

Public Attitudes to Language

The Language Attitude Survey of Jamaica (2005) was carried out involving 1,000 informants across Jamaica, controlled for age, gender, and region of origin. The sample included a spread of people from across the social, educational and economic groupings within the country. The following were the findings:

• The majority (79.5%) off Jamaicans recognise Jamaican (Patwa) as a Language.
  
• The majority (68.5%) of Jamaicans think that Jamaican (Patwa) should be made an official language alongside English.

• The majority (71.1% ) consider that schools in which English and Jamaican are used side by side as mediums of instruction and of literacy.
  

• The majority of Jamaicans thought that the Prime Minister or Minister of finance would communicate better with the public if their speeches in Parliament
  
  

Language Competence

The Language Competence Survey of Jamaica (2006) carried out by the JLU as a follow up to the Language Attitude Survey of 2005, shows that 36.5% of the population surveyed showed no demonstrable ability to produce English.

The Bilingual Education Project (2004-2008)

This was a Ministry of Education approved project to implement, from Grades 1-4, an education project which was intended to use both Jamaican and English fully, as mediums of instruction, mediums for literacy and as subjects to be taught via Language Arts. This involves, a) redesigning instruction to support bilingualism with Jamaican and SJE enjoying equal status in grades I – 4, b) providing learning – teaching materials in both languages, c) training teachers in the specialist area of Jamaican language instruction. The students engaged in the project completed that project when they left Grade 4 in 2008. They did GSAT in 2010 and are now in Grade 7 in High Schools. They are fully literate in Jamaican and English, in the case of the former exercising their literacy in the Cassidy-JLU writing system, the same one being popularised by the JLU.

The Diploma in Public Service Interpreting (DPSI) in Legal Contexts

Jamaicans in Jamaica and overseas often suffer by being treated by the legal system as speakers of English. There have been many cases of injustice as a result of this. The way forward is simultaneously raise the awareness of Jamaicans that they are entitled to the services of an interpreter if they do not have a sufficiently high level of competence in English and to ensure that they have properly trained and qualified interpreters to assist them.

The Institute of Linguists (IOL) is an international examining body certifying interpreters in a range of contexts, including those involving the Law. In 2010, in collaboration with the Jamaican Language Unit, the IOL has examined a group of Jamaicans engaged in a programme to train them as interpreters in legal contexts, involving interpretation from English to Jamaican and Jamaican to English. The first set of examinations were held in June, 2010 and it is expected that the first batch of internationally certified interpreters in legal contexts will complete their certification in November, 2011.

The Charter on Language Policy and Language Rights in the Creole-speaking Caribbean

The International Conference on Language Policy and Language Rights in the Creole-speaking Caribbean was held in Kingston on 13th - 14th January, 2011. This conference, attended by the Governors-General of Belize and St. Lucia, by the Minister of Education of Antigua, and by representatives from at 10 Caribbean countries, including those under Dutch and French administration, agreed on a Charter of Language Policy and Language Rights in the Creole-speaking Caribbean. This spells out the rights which speakers of languages in the Caribbean, in particular Creole and indigenous languages, can and should expect in relation to their respective states. There is great stress on the requirement that the state not discriminate against its citizens on the ground of language and of the right of every citizen who is a speaker of a territorial language, to receive service from the agencies of the state in the language in which the citizen is most comfortable.

Summary

The above is a summary of the report which would have been made to Parliament. The actions briefly summarised here make a compelling case for the inclusion of the freedom from discrimination on the ground of language within the Charter of Rights to the Jamaican population. Much work has been done and inevitably the work is still progressing as it will for a very long time. However, we at the Jamaican Language Unit (JLU) feel that sufficient ground has been covered to allay the fears of Parliament that the freedom from discrimination on the ground of language would create unacceptable levels of burden on the state. We strongly urge, since the Charter has already been passed, that there be an amendment to the Charter that would grant freedom from discrimination on the ground of language.

Hubert Devonish

Professor of Linguistics & Coordinator

The Jamaican Language Unit

The University of the West Indies

Mona Campus.

Click here to see part 1 of the edited Tuesday April 12, 2011 version.
Click here to see part 2 of the edited Wednesday April 13, 2011 continuation.