
It is quite common in Kashmir not to teach the mother tongue, Kashmiri, to children. The reasons for this neglect are complex, as the issue transcends language and reflects a broader cultural disownment. Kashmiris often fail to embrace what originates within their own cultural heritage. This includes not just the language but also other cultural symbols. While adopting, mimicking, or adapting to external influences is not inherently harmful, such actions should not come at the expense of abandoning cultural prototypes that define identity.
For instance, recent attempts to revive the Pheran (a traditional loose-fitting dress worn during winter) through media campaigns in urban Kashmir have distorted its essence. In the name of modernity, the Pheran has been reshaped into something unrecognisable and impractical, losing its authentic Kashmiri identity. Yet, even this flawed revival effort contrasts sharply with the neglect of the Kashmiri language, for which no equivalent movement or advocacy has been observed. The collective disregard for the language cannot simply be attributed to modernism, as true modernism does not necessitate the disavowal of one’s linguistic roots. Modernism does not equate a language with backwardness or irrelevance; rather, it thrives on preserving diversity and embracing traditions alongside progress.
The normalisation of this disregard for Kashmiri has become an alarming cultural pattern. Worse still, this neglect is compounded by the deliberate replacement of the mother tongue with other languages, particularly Urdu and English. No language can replicate the depth, diversity, and emotional connection of a mother tongue unless it is itself the mother tongue. The vast majority of Kashmiris do not have Urdu or English as their native language, and it is both unnatural and detrimental to impose these languages as substitutes for Kashmiri. Such a practice not only undermines the richness of the mother tongue but also weakens the foundation of cultural identity and self-expression for future generations.
Since human imagination is vast and boundlessly diverse, language becomes its primary expression. Through language, we articulate the complexities of the world around us, transforming abstract ideas into tangible forms through words. Words serve as the building blocks of this symbolic world, representing an elaborate system of signification. However, the relationship between words and the world they signify is neither predetermined nor fixed. Over time, the usage of a word shapes its distinct identity within a language, an identity that is inherently fluid and multifaceted. Words do not possess singular meanings; their meanings are shaped by cultural contexts and associations, which vary across situations and communities.
The cultural and contextual associations tied to a word or language are central to its usage. This intricate interplay was theorized in the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, which posits that language shapes thought and perception, influencing how individuals form culturally specific cognitive patterns. A single word can take on different meanings depending on the situation, the speaker’s tone, or even the expression on the face. The signified meaning of a word, therefore, remains elusive and dynamic. This diversity in language cannot be adequately conveyed to children in a language that is not their mother tongue. The richness and subtle nuances of language require an intuitive cultural familiarity that is deeply rooted in one’s native linguistic framework.
In Kashmir, where most parents lack a comprehensive understanding of the complex nuances of Urdu or English, it becomes nearly impossible for them to pass these subtleties onto their children. English, which has become a cultural fetish for many, does not come naturally to Kashmiri speakers in the same way it does to a native of London. Similarly, Urdu, despite its regional significance, is not native to Kashmiris in the same way it is to a person from Islamabad. Teaching these languages to children at the expense of their mother tongue poses a grave risk to cultural continuity and linguistic heritage. It is a disservice to future generations, as it deprives them of the emotional depth, cognitive richness, and cultural authenticity that only their mother tongue can provide. Without this foundation, children are left with a fragmented connection to their identity, unable to fully grasp the symbolic and cultural world encoded within their native language.
Language, as Lévi-Strauss argues, possesses a subconscious structure that is deeply embedded within myth, kinship, and cultural values. He famously writes, “Language is a form of human reason, which has its internal logic of which man knows nothing.” This internal logic reflects the subtle interplay between linguistic elements and cultural contexts. It shapes how individuals understand and navigate their world, serving as a repository of shared knowledge, values, and experiences.
This unique internal logic exists in its most original and authentic form within a speaker’s mother tongue. It encapsulates not just the mechanics of communication but also the cultural essence that binds individuals to their community. A mother tongue carries the weight of ancestral knowledge, local myths, and collective identity, creating a bridge between the individual and their cultural heritage. It is through this intimate connection that language becomes a living entity, evolving in response to cultural shifts while retaining its core structure.
In contrast, second or foreign languages, however proficiently learned, cannot replicate this depth of connection. They remain external tools rather than intrinsic parts of the speaker’s cognitive and cultural framework. This underscores the irreplaceable role of the mother tongue in preserving the originality and complexity of language as both a cognitive and cultural phenomenon.
In a mother tongue, we effortlessly acquire a vast repository of words, often without consciously striving to learn them. This natural acquisition is deeply intuitive, as the mother tongue seamlessly integrates with our daily lives and experiences. Along with this vast vocabulary, we also develop unique cultural associations with words, imbuing them with meanings that resonate with our memory, traditions, and shared community values. In contrast, learning a target language is a deliberate and conscious process. Unlike the mother tongue, it does not automatically align with our innate perceptions of the world. Translating thoughts and experiences into a target language often feels constrained, as it lacks the intuitive cultural resonance and depth of the mother tongue. Consequently, the repository of words in a target language remains limited, and the meanings of these words may not carry the same semantic richness they hold for native speakers. This creates a linguistic gap, making it challenging to fully express one’s thoughts or engage with the cultural nuances of the target language. Ludwig Wittgenstein aptly encapsulates this experience in Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (1922), stating, “The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.”
The vast repository of words in a language, along with an awareness of their semantic context, is crucial for meaningful communication. Unfortunately, most Kashmiri parents remain largely unaware of the inherent cultural richness and nuanced repository of words in English and Urdu. Despite this lack of understanding, they continue to prioritize these languages, often teaching them to their children as if they were mother tongues. This practice is deeply problematic. The mother tongue is more than just a medium of communication. English and Urdu, while undeniably rich and significant in their own contexts, lack the organic cultural connection that Kashmiri parents can provide to their children. Even after years of formal schooling, many Kashmiris struggle to grasp the connotative and nuanced meanings embedded within these languages. Without an intuitive cultural grounding, understanding the deeper layers of English or Urdu remains an uphill task.
In this scenario, teaching English or Urdu as a substitute for the mother tongue not only undermines the cultural identity of the child but also amounts to a grave disservice. It deprives the child of the ability to connect deeply with the surroundings while simultaneously alienating them from the true richness of the adopted language. In essence, this practice risks creating a linguistic and cultural void, leaving future generations detached from both their roots and the deeper semantic intricacies of the languages they are taught to adopt. Such a loss, given its profound implications, can indeed be seen as a cultural and intellectual sin.
Another critical aspect of this linguistic shift is that when Kashmiri parents communicate with their children in English or Urdu, they often fail to realize that they do not possess complete command of these languages. What they express is frequently a raw, literal translation of their thoughts, which are fundamentally shaped in Kashmiri. This process of translation inevitably results in the loss of tonal, cultural, and emotional nuances that cannot be recovered in the target language. For instance, Kashmiri words like shoosha (beloved), gobra (dear one), or gaasha (light) carry an innate tonal and semantic sweetness that is deeply intertwined with Kashmiri culture and sensibility. Translating these words into English or Urdu fails to capture their emotional depth and the cultural resonance they evoke in a native listener. Similarly, culturally loaded words like vohow (vohow is typically shouted as an expression of anger or frustration, often wishing misfortune or ill-will upon someone, especially during heated situations and conflicts with neighbours) are so intrinsic to Kashmiri culture that teaching them in a target language risks misrepresenting their true significance.
Conversely, English words like serendipity, facepalm, or saudade, or German words like schadenfreude and weltschmerz, are deeply rooted in their respective cultural and linguistic contexts. Their meanings, associations, and emotional impact are nearly impossible to translate fully into Kashmiri or any other language without losing some of their essence. This inherent difficulty in translation is what Umberto Eco famously described as the “art of failure,” emphasizing that translation can never completely bridge the gap between two languages and cultures because the two are inextricably linked.
The true grace and diversity of a language lie in the mother tongue. Edward Sapir aptly notes that “the ‘real world’ is to a large extent unconsciously built up on the language habits of the group,” highlighting how our perceptions of reality are shaped by the linguistic frameworks of our native tongue. His contemporary, Benjamin Lee Whorf, reinforces this idea, stating, “We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages.” These observations underscore that a mother tongue is not just a mode of communication but a foundational lens through which we understand and engage with the world. Teaching children in a language other than their mother tongue disrupts this natural alignment.
The Whorfian Hypothesis also underscores the relationship between language and thought, asserting that language shapes our perception and cognition. Losing one’s mother tongue, therefore, equates to losing a unique perspective on the world. Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory (1934) reinforces this, emphasizing that the mother tongue is the first medium through which children develop higher mental functions. It serves as a fundamental tool for communication, thought, and learning. The erosion of this primary linguistic medium could lead to what Antonio Gramsci describes in his theory of Hegemony as the loss of knowledge systems. Gramsci argues that preserving the mother tongue is a vital strategy for resisting cultural domination and maintaining the intellectual autonomy of marginalized communities.
Further, Carl Rogers’ Humanistic Theory and Basil Bernstein’s Language Code Theory also highlight the irreplaceable role of the mother tongue in human development. Rogers posits that learning in the mother tongue fosters stronger emotional bonds with caregivers and educators, creating a secure and nurturing environment that promotes psychological well-being and personal growth. Bernstein, on the other hand, underscores the importance of the mother tongue’s “elaborated code,” which allows for nuanced emotional and interpersonal communication within families and communities. This linguistic richness is crucial for fostering empathy, understanding, and social cohesion.
On the other hand, proficiency in the mother tongue significantly enhances the ability to learn and master target languages. A strong foundation in Kashmiri, with its inherent structural logic and extensive verbal repository, equips its speakers to grasp the complexities of other languages more effectively. The unconscious mastery of one’s native linguistic system facilitates the cognitive processes necessary for acquiring additional languages, making the learning process smoother and more intuitive. Cummins’ Interdependence Hypothesis (1979) supports this idea, highlighting that proficiency in the first language (L1) forms a critical foundation for acquiring a second language (L2). According to this hypothesis, cognitive and linguistic skills developed in the mother tongue are not confined to that language alone; they are transferable across languages. This means that skills like critical thinking, problem-solving, and semantic understanding learned in the mother tongue can directly contribute to better bilingual or multilingual competence.
In essence, a strong command of Kashmiri not only preserves cultural identity but also serves as a cognitive bridge to understanding other linguistic systems. The structural and semantic awareness developed through the mother tongue fosters adaptability and a deeper comprehension of the syntax, grammar, and vocabulary of target languages. Thus, teaching children in their mother tongue does not isolate them linguistically; instead, it prepares them for a broader and more nuanced engagement with the linguistic diversity of the world.
English, in addition to being used as a marker of modernity, has significantly influenced people’s sense of identity and modes of expression in the politically and socially unstable region of Kashmir. It has come to symbolise progress and sophistication, while the Kashmiri language, by contrast, has become a symbol of dispossession, inferiority, and cultural stagnation in the collective consciousness. This perception has led to a rapid decline in the use and demand for the Kashmiri language. Tragically, the speakers experience discomfort and even embarrassment when communicating in Kashmiri, further alienating themselves and their children from their linguistic heritage.
Adil A. Kak, a Professor of Linguistics at Kashmir University, provides a poignant analysis of this phenomenon. He writes, “The patronisation and allocation of prestigious domains to these non-native languages consequently led to a decrease in the prestige of Kashmiri, and Kashmiri has played and is still playing second fiddle, if not third fiddle, to whatever held or is holding sway. Presently, in Kashmir, English holds the most prestigious position followed by Urdu, and the last slot is allotted to Kashmiri. This also has, to a great extent, altered the mindset of the average Kashmiri, and his socio-psychological profile also indicates a leaning towards English.”
This shift in linguistic preference and the resulting socio-psychological transformation are not merely changes in communication practices but a profound cultural rupture. Over time, this trend risks creating a fragmented community—one where traditional systems of knowledge, cultural cohesion, and a shared worldview are irrevocably lost.
Ultimately, the most alarming aspect of this crisis is not simply that we are forsaking a rich and vibrant mother tongue but that we are replacing it with languages that were never ours to begin with. These non-native languages can never replicate the organic bond between thought, culture, and language that the mother tongue naturally provides. By teaching our children languages that are alien to our heritage, we risk severing them from their roots and denying them the full richness of their cultural inheritance. This disconnection is not just a linguistic loss but a cultural and existential one, with consequences that could echo across generations.
Ghulam Mohammad Khan was born and raised in Sonawari (Bandipora); an outlying town located on the wide shores of the beautiful Wullar Lake. Ghulam Mohammad believes that literature is the most original and enduring repository of human memory. He loves the inherent intricacies of language and the endless possibilities of meaning. In his writing, he mainly focuses on mini-narratives, local practices and small-scale events that could otherwise be lost forever to the oblivion of untold histories. Ghulam Mohammad considers his hometown, faith, and family to be the most important things to him. He writes for a few local magazines and newspapers. His short story collection titled The Cankered Rose is his first major forthcoming work.
References
Bernstein, Basil. Class, Codes, and Control: Theoretical Studies towards a Sociology of Language. Routledge, 1971.
Cummins, Jim. Bilingualism and Special Education: Issues in Assessment and Pedagogy. Multilingual Matters, 1984.
Eco, Umberto. The Name of the Rose. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1983.
Gramsci, Antonio. Selections from the Prison Notebooks. International Publishers, 1971.
Kak, Aadil Ahmad. “Globalisation of English and its Reflection on Kashmiri.” South Asian Review, Vol. XV, No. I, January 2005.
Levi-Strauss, Claude. The Structural Study of Myth. Journal of American Folklore, 1955.
Rogers, Carl. On Becoming a Person: A Therapist’s View of Psychotherapy. Houghton Mifflin, 1961.
Sapir, Edward. Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech. Harcourt, Brace, 1921.
Vygotsky, Lev. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press, 1978.
Whorf, Benjamin Lee. Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings. MIT Press, 1956.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Routledge, 1922.