Education cannot be thought of without consideration of the language. The countries in which the language of their people is adopted from elementary to post-graduate levels, it is automatically developed and enriched. But with the British rule a colonial country like India faces a very unfavourable condition. The medium of instruction, administration, public relations, everything becomes problematic. Earlier Sanskrit was the language of the masses. There are many regional languages, but hardly ever the conditions were favourable for their development. They are inevitable in the day to day life but never got a respectful place under the British rule. Learning in one's mother tongue is a natural process but in India the whole system became an un-natural one. The nationalistic education conceived by Chiplunkar and others had the underlying principle of giving the mother tongue, its due place and respect. Obviously Tilak has written at length about this problem in his articles on nationalistic education. At times his comment is very sharp. In a speech in 1908 on Nationalistic education he says,
"English is a very strange language. One cannot master it fast. It is not easy. Just because it is the language of the rulers, we have to learn it; it is but a burden for us. We stand to lose because the medium of instruction is not Marathi. Why do we need to speak for two hours in English? Is there even one British officer who can speak Marathi? But hundreds of us speak English. We have wasted years on learning English. If the knowledge I got was given in Marathi, all that I have learnt for 52 years could have been mastered at 25 or 30. We waste the valuable years in learning English. Educating a nation through a foreign language is subjugating it. Therefore the knowledge must be imparted in the vernacular. This will save students' life."
In another lecture delivered in 1908 on this topic Tilak says, "Now a days education is nothing but the ability to speak and write English. But knowing the language is not gaining knowledge. Nowhere else do we find this compulsion of learning thoroughly a foreign language. Forced to learn through a foreign language, what could be learnt in a period of 7 to 8 years takes 20 to 25 years. We cannot do away with learning English altogether; but we do not have to be proficient in that language because it is the key to knowledge. Under the Muslim rule we had to learn the Persian language, but it was not burdensome."
In 1891, Tilak had written two articles entitled `English language and vernacular language'. He stressed that the language of the ruling Britishers that is gaining importance in administration and education was once underdeveloped. Learning French was a matter of prestige in England; but only when the Britishers rejected this foreign language and gave importance to their own language and when it was practised in all the walks of life did English become a developed and enriched language. Therefore the native Indians should realise that for their language to prosper, self-respect is what is needed. It is possible to make available the knowledge into the native languages through translations. English has become the language of knowledge only because the knowledge in other European languages was translated into English. Thus realising this secret of its prosperity we too can enrich our own languages. Instead, the educated amongst us are happy to use English and are neglecting their own language. This indifference of the educated is what is hampering the progress of indigenous languages like Marathi. In his speech in 1906 at the Mumbai Marathi Granthasangrahalaya Tilak had raised some points for the development of the Marathi language. He said, "The prosperity of the Marathi community and the growth of the Marathi language are interdependent. Your language will develop only if you yearn sincerely for it. Superficial remedies will be of no use. The undue importance to English is harmful for the growth of Marathi. In earlier times Sanskrit Pundits too were against Marathi, but the saints contributed to the progress of Marathi language. The pundits opposing Marathi used to converse in Sanskrit. But the educated of today are subjugating themselves to English and feel proud to use it everywhere. Even the talks on their religion are in English. This will definitely not make Marathi prosper, on the contrary, people will start to dislike it. A child reared by the maid does not care about his mother." Similarly the educated who always turn to English have a contempt for Marathi. This attitude must be changed first. It is not enough that Marathi becomes the language of knowledge; it should also be the language of communication. There is a progress on this front.
On various occasions Tilak has talked about many matters like the education policy of the government, the state of the universities, the low level of knowledge imparted to the students, the attitude of the educated and the government towards the vernacular languages etc. to criticize the selfish educated and the government. As the vernacular languages had no place in the university curriculum, they could not prosper and people started neglecting them. It is not enough to include these languages to study certain books written in those languages; at least some subjects must be taught through them. Then alone the vernacular languages will prosper. Only literary books do not bring about the progress of a language. Only when Science, administration, judiciary and markets uphold the use of a language does it progress. English is not rich only with Shakespeare and Milton, but because it embraces all the fields of life, it has gained its popularity. But the universities here do not intend to act for the cause of the indigenous languages. Their education does not encourage research and scholarly pursuits. What all the universities are doing is only to supply obedient servants for the smooth functioning of the administration. The universities today have become labour suppliers. One more reason for the inferior quality of knowledge is the third or fourth rate professors that are sent from Britain. They have limited knowledge and do not like to teach. In these circumstances it is but inevitable that selfish graduates are churned out. As the number of graduates is increasing more than the jobs available, the government has adopted the strategy of making the examination increasingly difficult and reducing the number of universities. Thus Tilak has heavily criticized the education system with appropriate examples and has substantiated his argument. But he has not blamed the government alone; the narrow minded and enslaved educated are equally targeted.
In 1904 Tilak wrote an article titled `The prosperity of Marathi language'. In the beginning he has exposed the ignorant prejudice of a British officer named Birdwood regarding the Marathi language. This Mr. Birdwood was of the opinion that "Marathi has become impure because of the Marathi newspapers". On the contrary, Marathi has become very forceful thanks to journalists from the days of Balshastri Jambhekar to Gopal Ganesh Agarkar, insisted Tilak. However he expressed his concern over the contraction of the sphere of its expansion in India. He pleads that the Marathi people, inspiring from the Bengali, Hindi and Gujarati communities, should create a central institution for the protection and development of Marathi.
In his article titled `Series of text books for schools' Tilak has attracted attention on an important issue. Tilak has heavily criticized the fact that these books are being prepared by the MacMillan Company in England instead of the local writers. The real danger as he saw was the inculcation of `loyalty to the British' instead of national pride. The British have already weakened the peoples of India by taking away their weapons, now they want to see to it that the children become mentally feeble too. Even the private institutions do not protest in this regard because the education department has gained control over them by sanctioning grant-in-aid.
In 1906 Tilak wrote three articles titled `The growth of Maharashtrian Language'. Few days before writing these articles was established the `Maharashtra Sahitya Parishad' a central, representative institution. The first article deals with the birth of Marathi Language, the period of 1000-1200 years of its existence, the dangers faced in the form of Muslim regime, the role of devotion - professing saints in adopting Marathi as the language of expression and there-by protecting and perpetuating the language. He expresses his gratitude towards the saints who helped the widespread of Marathi. The second article recognizes the role of Shivaji and the Maratha Kingdom in the rise of prestige of the Marathi Language. He stresses the fact that a language prospers with its rulers. The Maratha Kingdom was instrumental for the spread of Marathi in the North upto Atak and in the south upto Tanjore. Other regions attached prestige to the ability to understand or speak Marathi only because it was the language of the rulers.
Marathi lost its importance with the British rule. That is the root cause of its decline. Now people do not feel strongly about their religion nor are they anxious to uplift their language. Having accepted the dominance of the English language, the knowledge in Marathi has become restricted. Translating from English will help only upto a certain limit. Only when our writers will start expressing themselves with a zest for their country and language, will the Maharashtrian language grow in quality.
The then Education Ministry had appointed a committee to prepare textbooks in Marathi. This committee had given some suggestions about the graphemics Marathi (i.e. devnagri). Tilak was against the idea of this committee being allowed to interfere in graphemics and wrote an editorial to express his opposition. If the system recognized by the education department is rejected the situation will be chaotic. In fact, it is the task of the grammarians to state their opinions, there should be a good discussion at length and then alone could be decided what to include and what to reject. And people will accept whatever is reasonable.
The main objection Tilak has raised is quite different. That is why title of his article reads `Murder of our alphabet'. The committee, while preparing the new textbooks, had suggested that initiation to the alphabet should not be done in the traditional order of `k' `kh' `g', `gh', but `g' `m', `bh', `n' instead. Tilak is strongly against this suggestion. This will be but showing deep ignorance about a system recognized to be `scientific' since the last three thousand years. He quotes Prof. McDonel regarding the Sanskrit alphabet (which is also the alphabet of Marathi).
Tilak questions the authority of the committee to suggest changes in alphabets and its order certified to be scientific even by western scholars. He has appealed to the public to send written protests if such erroneous decision is imposed.
(However, it should be noted that Tilak's objections are based on a misunderstanding. The committee had not suggested any changes in the order of the alphabet; it had only suggested that the graphemes with similar strokes be clubbed together while introducing those letters of alphabet. Tilak never mentioned that the order of our alphabet is phonetically very good but not from the graphemics point of view. That is why he has conveniently misrepresented the committee. Perhaps he disapproved of the appointment of such a committee in the first place.)
In 1904 Tilak had written four editorials on this topic. In those days there was a controversy among researchers. Three pundits called Mr. Sane, Godbole and Hatwalne had written `Marathi bhashechi lekhan paddhati' to suggest some changes in the prevailing rules. The conformists had highly objected to these reforms. They were even scorned at as three Munis. Tilak kept from using any abusive language but launched a serious discussion about the academic and theoretical aspects of the problem of orthographic reforms of the Marathi language. Mr. Sane was part of the Books Committee formed to suggest such reforms. Objecting to such an intervention of the government was also one of reasons why Tilak wrote four editorials on this subject. According to Tilak more than grammarians, the final decision lies in the hands of people who use the language. Many forms considered incorrect by the grammarians are found to be in use. The Sanskrit lovers want Marathi to follow the Sanskrit ways of expression, some Marathi lovers insist that rules of Marathi should be according to Marathi alone. Some give importance to the pronunciation, some find it fit to consider the etymology and common practice.
Tilak observes that the Marathi diction is not uniform. It varies from place to place. It is not always possible to write according to the pronunciation. English has contradictions and irregularities par excellence in the spoken and written language. Even in Marathi the /a/ sounds in ghara, matha, natha is not alike. The first is what is termed as `udatt' or well-articulated and the second `unudatt' or not well-articulated. But there is no specific symbol to distinguish between the two. Paahaa, Raahaa have their forms in practice as pahaa, rahaa, that is the /a/ sounds here is once not-well-articulated and once well-articulated. The concept of long and short sounds also changes from language to language. In short it is easier said than done to write exactly the way you speak. The grammarians are the rulers of the language, but with limited powers. The final powers must be with the people who practice it.
Marathi is not yet a fully developed language but it is growing. It is not perfect like Sanskrit. Therefore some liberty has to be accorded in its orthography. It is not possible to make, once and for all, all the rules governing this language. It will be obstinate to say that no changes in the orthography are required. But it is not for the government to take any steps. Only expert Marathi scholars should do it. For this a representative institution should be founded. The problem of long and short vowels in Marathi is a complex one. Therefore we have to act with conscious discrimination and not stick to any lop-sided view. Same is the case with consonant ending words. The nasalisation symbols when not in practice should be omitted, but removing all the nasal symbols without discrimination will be wrong. If etymologically a nasal symbol is justified, we can keep it, otherwise not Marathi is a growing language and therefore we should bear in mind that all its rules cannot be determined for eternity.