The Power of Language

Words to Overcome Ethnic Conflict

There is an inherent relationship between man and nature and between man and culture. Geographic differences, different political ideologies, geopolitical environment and the impact of natural and global economic conditions have had a profound impact on human behaviors. It is widely accepted that the influence of culture also had a decisive impact on history. Intelligence, communication, support, sharing, unity, oneness, and peace among people are things that can lead to the development of any country. Culture has a decisive influence on the progress of human society. The most important factor is the language that can be identified as the carrier of a culture. Language can be identified as one of the essential vehicles in the journey towards development. What makes this even more special is that a country like ours where people of all ethnicities live together, language is the shortest way to build brotherhood. In the formal process of understanding of each other the emergence of language decisively is inevitable.

THE CATAMARAN: Sri Lanka is a multi-ethnic and multi-religious country. How do you see the language having such a profound effect on the ties and conflicts between different ethnic groups?

With the attacks by an extremist group on Easter Sunday, the power to extinguish the flames or to spread the fire is dependent on our use of language. When some were trying to extinguish the fire by pouring water, others were adding fuel to the fire with hate speech. One of the key points of understanding from this background is that language possesses a great power to unite or divide. When hundreds of Catholics died due to the attacks in churches, many feared that the community, including their relatives, would be outraged and go on the rampage against Muslims. Nevertheless, Rev. Cardinal made several statements to the nation, leaving no room for such vengeance taking place. He used only wise language and religious teachings for this purpose.

THE CATAMARAN: How does the usage of language differ from the context in which it is used or the context?

Language has largely been used in the history of our country as a strategic tool for widening the divide that alienates communities rather than bridging the divide and bringing people close to each other. To make this clearer, it is important to understand Ludwig Wittgenstein’s concept of “language as a game” in Philosophical Investigations. The meaning of words in a language varies from context to context. Wittgenstein explains that the ability to change the meaning of language in context can be recognized as a game. For example, when we say “this knife is good” we have to understand the context. If this statement is made by a housewife, the knife is good for cutting vegetables or for some other purpose in the kitchen. But when a murderer says it, a different meaning emerges. Therefore, it is clear that we must understand the meaning of this in the real context.

THE CATAMARAN: You say the language is like a knife with two sides. Does it mean that slight omission or addition of words has the potential to cause harm or disrespect?

There have been many instances in the history of Sri Lanka where one group of people used language to trample another group and spread supremacist views. Words such as ‘Hambaya’, ‘Para-Demala’, ‘Like Tamil taking salary’ and ‘Thambiya’ are a few examples. Babbler in English means a species of bird. The name is derived as such because they often cry out together. These birds are called “Damilachcha” in Sinhala. How did these words that are insulting to another community get into our everyday lexicon? Also, words like Beravaya and Rhodie are used to attack targeting people of certain caste. Words like these can console or irritate. It is sad to see a widespread usage of such words that give rise to the growing nature of the ethnic crisis.

THE CATAMARAN: Don’t you think that not only the majority community but other communities are also using this type of language?

The language used by Mr. Amirthalingam, who was the Leader of the Opposition in the country from 1977 to 1983, and his wife was against their sister (Sinhala) community. Similarly, the founder of the National Liberation Front, Mr. K.M.P. Rajaratne (Deputy Minister of Information and Broadcasting, 1956-1959) was a fiery anti-Tamil critic. It is not particular to one community, there were such people among all communities. This situation has been present here since the early 20th Century. We could see that the use of this kind of language has been directed against a sister communities living in the country rather than against the British colonizers. This colonization should have been the matter most concerning to us. But rather than chasing the aggressing aliens away, some collaborated with the aggressors and used language against a communities to distance them. This is hard to dismiss. From the 1950s onwards this situation gradually escalated and led to a serious war.

THE CATAMARAN: Is this a uniquely Sri Lankan status quo, or can examples be provided from other countries around the world of similar situation?

Large scale conflicts have taken place in different parts of the world in regard to the usage of languages. The best example of this is Germany. Hitler sought to make a profound change by using language to stabilize the German “blood” alone. We witnessed the devastation it caused through World War II. Language violence is not second to any other violence. Language and religion are the most dangerous weapons that can provoke people.

THE CATAMARAN: One of the major differences between man and animal is that man uses language. But in some cases, the language is used to achieve something that is not constructive. Is this common?

We should use language to show humanistic qualities. In other words, language should be used in a manner where humans can make a point to another human being. It is widely accepted that higher linguistic practices such as justice, equality and reasonability in its true sense will free man from brutality.

Kashmir, Myanmar, Israel and Palestine all have examples of language conflicts. Language should be a uniting factor, not a divisive one. The fate of being ethnic without language is much more tragic. Humans should think about the survival of their species. If one nation claims the ownership of the entire world, that would be disastrous. We are experiencing that situation today. If we were to think deeply about homosapienism it is all about the behavioral qualities of human beings. Language should be used for the common promotion of all mankind and not for the benefit of one ethnic group such as Sinhala, Muslim or Tamil.