THE term ‘hybridity’ has been gaining currency fast in several academic disciplines, including cultural studies and post-colonial discourse. Another term popularised in the late 1990s is ‘glocalisation’ — a combination of globalisation and localisation. The international fast-food chains’ practice of amending their menus according to local tastes is often mentioned as an example of ‘glocalisation’.
The impact of globalisation on languages and cultures has been a subject of research all over the world. Similarly, hybridity and the English language’s linguistic and cultural hegemony too have come under study. “But it is lamentable that in Urdu we do not have a single research-based book on globalisation,” writes Dr Nasir Abbas Nayyar in his new book Aalamgeeriyet aur Urdu aur deegar mazameen (Globalisation and Urdu and other essays). The first article included in the book discusses the touchy issue of Urdu’s future in an increasingly globalising world. This has inevitably led the discussion to the negative impact of globalisation and hybridity. Hybridity’s effects are most perceptible on culture and language. In the last few decades, Urdu, just like many other languages, has become a victim of that hybridity as globalisation is dramatically eating away cultures and languages.
Hybrid Urdu, often dubbed as ‘Urdish’ or ‘Engdu’, is an ugly mixture of Urdu and English. It mostly uses English words, except for verbs that have to be Urdu. Whipped up by globalisation, this hybrid version of Urdu is most likely to be heard on FM radio broadcasts, in glitzy offices, swanky shopping centres and certain TV transmissions such as celebrity interviews or cooking programmes. Hybrid Urdu reeks of superiority complex and class consciousness.
Hybridity is a threat to most of world’s cultural and linguistic diversity. In this book Dr Nayyar says that according to a survey, the world’s present population, of about seven billion souls, uses about 7,000 “known living languages”. As per a UNESCO estimate, he adds, only four percent of the world population speaks 96 percent of these languages and most of these 7,000 languages face an imminent death as, on average, every fortnight one of these languages becomes extinct. It is estimated that by the turn of the century only a few hundred of world languages would survive. Among the most spoken languages of the world are Chinese, Spanish, Urdu/Hindi and English, says Dr Nayyar, but the question is: will Urdu be able to survive the challenges faced in the so-called global village?
Dr Nayyar thinks that despite many challenges Urdu’s future is not as bleak as some of African languages’ future is. As Urdu is the language of the local mainstream media and used to some extent on internet as well and serves as Pakistan’s lingua franca, it can survive and it will. But he is concerned that while Urdu is not truly an academic language and lacks sources on many branches of modern knowledge, English has not only become, in effect, the lingua franca of the world, but it is also the language of the world economics, academics, and culture. His concern is not totally baseless. As an effect of the globalisation, English is sometimes seen as a sign of linguistic imperialism. In his scholarly article on the issue of languages and globalisation, Robert Philipson of Copenhagen Business School has expressed English’s domination in the European Union in rather harsh terms. The article titled ‘The new linguistic imperial order: English as an EU lingua franca or lingua frankensteinia’ sheds light on some issues related to linguistic nationalism (www.serwis.wsjo.pl).
The other article included in the book that raises another aspect of Urdu is on Urdu in India. The article begins with some facts and from those facts he has concluded that Urdu is a minority language in India. When linguistic nationalism and “Hindi nationalism”, as Dr Nasir has put it, gathered momentum especially in India’s southern states, “Urdu had to go into exile”. He says that “though India has produced some great writers, poets and researchers of Urdu and a large number of books are being published from India, it is a bitter fact that Urdu is not part of school education or official or business correspondence there”. Dr Nayyar concludes that “presently, Indian intellectuals have two kinds of discourses as far as Urdu is concerned: Urdu can play a role in establishing Muslim identity and create a unity among Indian Muslims. This is exploited by politicians to shore up support in general elections. The second discourse says that Urdu is a secular language and it should be identified with culture not religion. Many Indian intellectuals feel that describing Urdu in cultural terms can bridge the gap between Hindus and Muslims”.
The book, published by Sang-i-Meel Publications, Lahore, includes many other interesting articles that cover a variety of topics such as Urdu criticism in the 21st century, post-9/11 world and Manto, post-colonial background of Intizar Hussain’s short stories, Asad Muhammad Khan’s short stories and a brief review of one of the short stories of Razia Faseeh Ahmed.
Dr Nasir Abbas Nayyar teaches Urdu at Punjab University Oriental College and is one of those few researchers and critics of Urdu who write on issues related to post-colonialism, post-modernism and globalisation.
Published in Dawn, October 12th, 2015
On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play
Dear visitor, the comments section is undergoing an overhaul and will return soon.