Monday, September 20, 2010
MISC1
As a country colonized by the British, We are bound to learn English. Anywhere we go, we find people talking in English. But, it has become a sort of class division in India, now a days. A person, who doesn't know English is considered as an ignorant country fellow. My point here is stop stereotyping people based on his/her familiarity with a language. A person might have more knowledge compared to you, but he might not be able to speak a well-known language. Languages might come and go (2000 years back Greek was a widely spoken language. Someday, another language might replace English). It is the knowledge and the character of a person that really matters. It's elementary, my dear Watson!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
and it will take another 2000 years for English to perish. But we won't be there to see the day. Live the moment!(?)
ReplyDeleteanduin
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, but knowledge is more important than familiarity with a particular language.I will respect a man with more knowledge than an eloquent English speaker.
It is not a recent thing. Alexander Campbell in _The Heart of India_ says that in the 1950s, he could tell the rank of Indian government officials by their English accents: the ones with the "Oxford accent" occupied the highest posts, and the ones with the "Scot accent" occupied rest of the posts. (Therefore, to be a government officer in the 1950s, you had to be a "missionary school educated" person, and to have a high rank in the government you had to be "England returned". And obviously, you had to speak a properly accented English.)
ReplyDeleteI recommend reading T.H.o.I. (available at archive.org).
If you are hiring, you look for a person who can communicate well with others.How good you have to be, depends on the position.If you have to be technically good you concentrate less on communication skills whereas it is different with a manager.In the above case, you mentioned, I think, they assumed that a person who has good English speaking skills(or accent) is capable of managing and understanding things better.But a person with Scot accent might have done a better job.I think its a wrong assumption unless the job requires good communication skills, badly, rather than knowledge.
ReplyDeleteGiven that the vast majority of people in India didn't know English, I can't see how speaking a properly accented English would have been essential in the business of governing. It is much more reasonable to assume that only these people rose to the top because of a "class division in India".
ReplyDeleteI don't agree that a "technically good" person has to care less for "communication".
Yes, I agree with you on the first point you made.
ReplyDeleteIdeally "technically good" person should be able to communicate well, too.In the practical world, it is a completely different scenario.