In Memory of American Sociologist Gail Omvedt: Language evolved and was designed as a mode of creating and interpreting thought, not as a device for communication-Dr.Suryaraju Mattimalla

 

 In Memory of American Sociologist Gail Omvedt: Language evolved and was designed as a mode of creating and interpreting thought, not as a device for communication-Dr.Suryaraju Mattimalla

It is a general assumption that language is created for communication between people across the globe. It is a deep-rooted assumption about any language. But what is the design of the language and why should anyone learn it?

We've been told, seen, interacted with, and studied that millions of white westerners have learned south Asian vernacular languages like Sanskrit, Hindi, Marathi, Telugu, Tamil, Kannada, and so on to communicate with the Indian or South Asian community and learn yoga, meditation, spirituality, culture, tradition, religion, and so on.

The Hindus of Kashi or Varanasi, Santhi Niketan, or any Indian university, are evidence of these foreigners busy learning, speaking, or writing Indian ideology to transform themselves from the material to the spiritual world. Primarily, they argue right from the colonial rule or national movement till today that they learn South Asian languages to learn culture, tradition, and way of life so that they can easily communicate with the Indian, Nepali, or Sri Lankan community without any hassles.

They made us believe that the mode of learning any vernacular language is to communicate with local communities to go peacefully by behaving, speaking, or writing according to their socio-religious-cultural norms. But is it the design of any vernacular or English language to communicate with local communities? Does it transform oneself into another self? What is the impact of learning any vernacular language on the learner?

I observed that every foreigner who learned Indian languages also learned to practice the caste system, untouchability, social norms, purity, and impurities through their learned language. Their communicative language between them and local social elites forced them to practice vertically caste hierarchies, untouchability, racism, purity, and impurity through their learned communicative languages without debating or re-thinking whether the language they learn is a communicative language or an oppressive language against human beings. Happily, every westerner, including scholars like Charles Wilkins, Friedrich Max Müller, William Jones, James Prinsep, William Marsden, etc., has learned, read, wrote, practiced, and glorified the brutal Indian way of life or ideology.

Charles Wilkins glorified the Bhagavad Gita, while Friedrich Max Müller, William Jones, James Prinsep, and William Marsden, glorified the Vedas. Charles Wilkins even said that "The Brahmins esteem this work to contain all the grand mysteries of their religion, and so careful are they to conceal it from the knowledge of those of a different persuasion and even the vulgar of their own, that the translator might have fought in vain for assistance."

This is not the purpose of learning any vernacular language, and this is not the design of any language to learn. Communication is not the purpose of learning any language. Professor Noam Chomsky said. He says this is designed for creating and interpreting thoughts to learn for any human being to be liberated from oppression.This is the purpose of any language to learn instead of a communicative language.

Untouchability, the caste system, racism, persecution, and genocide have existed in South Asian society for over 6000 years. Any language aims to liberate us at an individual level, through which family and community liberation take place. Unfortunately, from Charles Wilkins to Friedrich Max Müller, William Jones, James Prinsep, and William Marsden, their western followers have not only failed to liberate themselves from persecution but have instead perpetuated an inhuman caste system, untouchability, and racism through their Indian or South Asian vernacular languages.

Asian languages are agents of age-old genocidal persecutions such as the brutal caste system, untouchability, racism, etc. However, western thinkers, philosophers, writers, and activists are happy to learn South Asian languages to superimpose genocidal persecution ideologies through their communicative languages.

Historically, Bhagavad Gita or Vedas or any Indian Hindu religious texts have 6000 years of history of caste-based and untouchability-based and race-based genocide against untouchable caste human beings but how did such heinous Hindu religious atrocities against untouchable castes become beautiful, spiritual, or the greatest work on the planet by Bhagavad Gita or Charles Wilkins , while Friedrich Max Müller, William Jones, James Prinsep, and William Marsden, or their contemporary western followers, gloried in notorious Hindu Vedas?

How come such genocidal religious scriptures became so beautiful to the western community? Tens of thousands of westerners have married the Hindu community and converted to the Hindu religion and seriously practiced the Hindu way of life. There have been so-called western elites in this list converting to Hinduism to practice its purity and impurities against a human beings.

I have seen millions of westerners or western elites or celebrities become fans of Indian ideology except one white American theorist, leading western thinker Gail Omvedt who learned Indian languages to liberate untouchables from Indian vernacular languages, cultures, traditions, religions, ideologies, and way of life. The eminent Professor Gail Omvedt even married a dark-skinned untouchable to liberate untouchables from the clutches of the Hindu religion.

The eminent Professor Gail Omvedt practically married a dark-skinned untouchable and worked with untouchables and lived among untouchables throughout her life and died among untouchables in India. This is the purpose of learning any South Asian or Arabic language to liberate any victims or most vulnerable sections of its society but unfortunately, every westerner can’t be an intellectual or theorist or scholar, or versatile writer like Gail Omvedt.

That is why Gail Omvedt is living in the heart of 250 million untouchables, unlike Charles Wilkins, Friedrich Max Müller, William Jones, James Prinsep, William Marsden, etc., who were living in the notorious, conservative, Janus-faced, black-skin, and white-masked mainstream newspapers and archives. 

Dr.Suryaraju Mattimalla