A Tale of Two Tongues, But One Truth

9 mai 2025 16:47

L’auteur partage une vision sociolinguistique – plus que nécéssaire ! – sur la situation de deux langues dans l’île…

In a small island nation like Mauritius, where sugar, sun and surnames often weave tales of survival, the debate over language use in official contexts transcends mere semantics; it resembles a sociolinguistic ballet rich with historical resonance, power dynamics, and questions of identity. The current public discourse, Bhojpuri versus Mauritian Creole, centers not on which language is superior but on what each signifies. It is not a boxing match; instead, it is a mismatched dance.

Bhojpuri: The Echo of Ancestral Silence

Bhojpuri, introduced by Indian indentured laborers in the 19th century, became a vital thread of connection amid the disruptions of colonial rule. Although its literary tradition in Mauritius is predominantly oral, Bhojpuri continues to hold significant symbolic value, particularly among Hindus of Bihari descent. For them, Bhojpuri transcends being merely a language; it embodies the enduring essence of a lost village, evoking a mother’s lullaby that was never recorded in textbooks.

Mauritian Creole: The People’s Tongue

Mauritian Creole is a vibrant linguistic mosaic, an evolving blend shaped by centuries of cultural interaction. While it is fundamentally rooted in French, it is enriched with African rhythms, Malagasy influences, Bhojpuri tenacity, Oriental languages sway, and English nuances. This language is more than just a simplified version of French; it embodies the island’s history at our fingertips, where every borrowed word carries a knowing smile, and each idiom is adorned with well-traveled sandals.

Efforts to introduce Mauritian Creole in Parliament seek to democratize public discourse and make the legislative process more accessible to the average Mauritian. This movement emphasizes functionality over heritage, positioning the language as one of immediacy and practicality rather than as a vehicle for origin stories.

Two Languages, Two Functions

Here lies a fundamental misunderstanding: Bhojpuri and Mauritian Creole are being asked to play the same game, yet they have been trained for different sports. Bhojpuri is a heritage language, a repository of memory and communal identity. In contrast, Mauritian Creole is a vehicular language designed to establish connections across Mauritius’s diverse landscape.

According to sociolinguist Joshua Fishman’s theory of diglossia and language domains, languages fulfill distinct roles in various aspects of life (Fishman, 1967). For instance, one does not pray in the same language used for playing football. Therefore, advocating for Bhojpuri in cultural or ceremonial contexts and promoting Mauritian Creole in public and political arenas is not contradictory but complementary.

Identity, Politics, and the Dangerous Oversimplification

The debate intensifies when language is weaponized in the context of identity politics. A segment of the Bhojpuri-supporting community asserts that the neglect of Bhojpuri amounts to “Bhojpuri bashing,” which they believe extends to “Hindu bashing.” However, this conflation can be misleading; it resembles confusing a map with the actual territory.

Sociologists like Pierre Bourdieu have long argued that language transcends mere communication and serves as symbolic capital (Bourdieu, 1991). When Bhojpuri is excluded from official discourse, one feels that one’s history is deemed too “provincial” for Parliament to consider.

Conversely, the inclusion of Mauritian

Creole in parliamentary proceedings is based on the principles of access and efficiency rather than ethnic favoritism. Dr Vinesh Hookoomsing articulated that “language is a tool of liberation and empowerment when it reflects the linguistic reality of its people” (Hookoomsing, Language Planning in Mauritius, 2003). If Mauritian Creole is the majority language, why not legislate on it?

No Villain, Just Vocabulary

The current tension should not be viewed as a zero-sum game. Supporting Mauritian Creole in Parliament does not mean erasing Bhojpuri, just as celebrating Bhojpuri does not undermine Mauritian Creole. We must resist the urge to turn a linguistic discussion into a religious or ethnic conflict. This situation is not about choosing one over the other but embracing both.

A Polyphonic Island

Mauritius is not merely a monologue but a rich tapestry of voices. In this archipelago, each language contributes a unique note. Bhojpuri resonates with roots, resilience, and rituals, while Mauritian Creole conveys notions of connection, everyday life, and administrative clarity. Their aims and functions are different, so before we hastily draw conclusions and voice our grievances from our respective platforms, let us take a moment to reflect: what are the functions, contexts and objectives at play?

A sociolinguist would affirm the validity of both languages. A politician might unwillingly accept that either is strategically advantageous. However, a citizen might express a simple truth: we are weary of being spoken about and wish to be engaged in a language that resonates with us. If that necessitates a shift in tongues occasionally, that is just Mauritius being Mauritius.

References

Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Fishman, J. A. (1967). Bilingualism with and without Diglossia; Diglossia with and without Bilingualism. Journal of Social Issues.

Hookoomsing, V. (2003). Language Planning in Mauritius: An Analysis of Competing Ideologies. In Language and Education in Mauritius: Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives.

PAR CHETAN GUKHOOL

Vous pouvez retrouver ses écrits ici : https://chetangukhool21.medium.com/a-tale-of-two-tongues-but-one-truth-bf03ddca7e8b.