Professor Phuntsog* advances a forceful argument addressing the CCP’s systemic threat to the survival of the Tibetan language in its homeland. He calls for the formation of a coalition among Tibetan-speaking areas in India to mobilize support for the inclusion of Tibetan in the Eighth Schedule of the Indian Constitution. This constitutional recognition would elevate the language’s official standing and serve as a global example of how a displaced language can sustain vitality, adapt to new contexts, and flourish within a democratic and pluralistic framework.
The illegal occupation of Tibet by Communist China in the 1950s marked a historic turning point, leading to the marginalization of the Tibetan language in two starkly different political, cultural, and social contexts, each with distinct consequences. On one side, it faces suppression under the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) repressive policies in Tibet. On the other hand, it flourishes in exile, supported by India’s inclusive language policies. If Thomi Sambhota, the 7th-century scholar who established the orthography and standardized the script, were alive today, he would be heartbroken to witness the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) relentless imposition of oppressive linguistic policies, disregarding the will of the Tibetan people who have spoken their language for thousands of years.
In occupied Tibet, the Tibetan people face severe state-sanctioned threats to their traditional religion, education, culture, and language. This is despite Article 4 of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), which ostensibly guarantees all nationalities the freedom “to use and develop their own spoken and written languages.” Scholars frequently highlight China’s dismal record of suppressing minority languages, including Uyghur, Mongolian, and Kazakh.
Under President Xi Jinping, the CCP has intensified its assault on Tibetan identity. State-run boarding schools have been imposed, where millions of Tibetan children are forced to learn only Chinese, severing their connection to their mother tongue and isolating them from their families, resulting in severe psychological and emotional trauma for both parents and children. Private schools offering Tibetan-language instruction have been forcibly shut down, despite the protests of students and staff. Monasteries face harsh restrictions on novice monk enrollment and their ability to teach the Tibetan language. Thus, monasteries, once the custodians of Tibetan language and culture, face severe restrictions on their activities. Most devastatingly, Tibetan children across the region have been denied access to mother-tongue instruction in schools. These actions have uprooted Tibetan children from their homeland, language, and cultural heritage.
The Chinese government’s denial of mother-tongue education for Tibetans and other minorities, such as Uyghurs, Mongolians, and Kazakhs, follows a systematic three-step playbook: glorification, stigmatization, and rationalization (May, 2009; Skutnabb-Kangas, 2000). The dominant language is glorified as a symbol of progress, modernity, and national unity. Meanwhile, the minority language is stigmatized as backward, anti-progress, and anti-science. Finally, the relationship between the dominant and minority languages is rationalized by portraying the former as “civilizing” and “helping” the latter. The CCP claims that promoting Mandarin helps integrate minority groups into the broader Chinese society, masking its true intent of cultural erasure and assimilation.
Few nations have implemented such repressive and draconian practices against their occupied populations. It is no exaggeration to say that linguistic genocide is occurring on the “Roof of the World” in plain sight. However, the international community has not held the CCP accountable for this egregious crime. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), ratified by China in 1992, explicitly states that “a child belonging to a minority shall not be denied the right to use his or her own language.” Signatory nations must hold the CCP accountable for its blatant disregard of international law and ensure that Tibetan children have access to their heritage language, which has been spoken and preserved for thousands of years.
What began as a physical occupation has evolved into a far more insidious form of control: the systematic subjugation of the Tibetan people’s inner identity. Early colonial appeasement policies in Tibet have given way to increasingly coercive, blatant, and culturally insensitive laws. Thinking and writing about the grim state of the Tibetan language is profoundly painful, akin to witnessing the slow demise of a death-row prisoner by lethal injection.
A Contrast in Exile: The Tibetan Language as a Resource
The mistreatment of the Tibetan language in its homeland starkly contrasts with how it is nurtured and valued in exile, thanks to India’s inclusive language policies. India, known for its linguistic diversity, recognizes 22 national languages under the Eighth Schedule of its Constitution, including Hindi and Nepali. Article 344(1) and Article 351 of the Indian Constitution ensure that these languages receive government support for development.
According to the 2001 Census of India, the number of Tibetan mother-tongue speakers increased by 22.85% between 1991 and 2001. The census also noted that speakers of the Tibeto-Burmese language family, to which Tibetan belongs, constituted 1% of India’s population, with languages like Bodo and Manipuri witnessing significant growth. In Mizoram, where the majority of the population speaks Lushei/Mizo (another Tibeto-Burmese language), mother-tongue education has flourished.
India’s Three-Language Formula (TLF) is built on the belief that a strong foundation in one’s mother tongue is essential for developing proficiency in additional languages and other academic subjects. While implementing such a policy across a linguistically diverse nation may seem daunting, its success demonstrates the power of inclusivity. Tibetan schools under the Tibetan Government in Exile have significantly benefited from this approach, further revitalizing the language in exile. The return of the Tibetan language to its ancestral land in India has been a source of hope and resilience. Tibetan schools have thrived under India’s policies, and the language is now part of the country’s vibrant linguistic mosaic.
A Call to Action: Mobilizing for the Tibetan Language
In social linguistics, the status, corpus, and acquisition model of Cooper (1989) is a well-known language planning framework. Without undermining corpus and acquisition, the status elevation has been highlighted here as it has a direct and significant impact on the other two aspects. To ensure the survival and growth of the Tibetan language, it is imperative to establish a consortium of Tibetan-speaking regions with clear mandates for status, corpus, and acquisition planning. This consortium should focus on elevating the language’s status in educational, social, political, and cultural contexts, with the ultimate goal of its inclusion in the Eighth Schedule of the Indian Constitution. Such recognition would mark a significant milestone, enabling national-level planning and ensuring the language’s sustained continuity, regardless of the Diaspora’s future. By including Tibetan in the Eighth Schedule, India can showcase to the world that a displaced language can survive, adapt, and flourish in a welcoming environment.
Similarly, there must be a focus on producing literature with international appeal, akin to the global impact of Rabindranath Tagore’s Gitanjali. Accessible and engaging books, magazines, and journals must be developed as part of a comprehensive corpus planning strategy.
Furthermore, an annual literary award should be established to honor outstanding works under the guidance of a panel of scholars and academicians.
The more the Tibetan language is repressed in its homeland, the more determined Tibetans become—both within Tibet and in exile—to preserve and promote it. Oftentimes, repressive policies provide the impetus for the coalescence of creative energies in the production of popular and academic literary genres. It is within local contexts in Tibet and in exile that language use is experienced, and it is in response to these experiences that perceived problems in corpus and status planning are effectively addressed. The importance of the local community as a site for language revitalization and sustenance cannot be ignored, as the interplay between micro and macro levels is crucial to ensuring success in language planning and implementation (Liddicoat & Baldauf, 2008).
Finally, Tibetan monasteries have always been the most prolific guardians of the Tibetan language. As Buddhism’s sphere of influence grows, interest in the Tibetan language is bound to increase. The monastic community is urged to play an active role in connecting and coordinating different stakeholders to explore creative avenues for status, corpus, and acquisition planning, so that the Tibetan language, which is the vessel for all precious teachings of the Buddha, not only survives but thrives to benefit humanity and quench their thirst for spirituality.
References
- Cooper, R. L. (1989). Language planning and social change. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
- Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs. (2011). Growth of non-scheduled languages—1971,1991 and 2001. Retrieved May 25, 2015, from http://www.censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/Census_Data_Online/Language/Statement8.aspx(open in a new window)
- Liddicoat, A. J., & Baldauf, R. B. (2008). Language planning in local contexts: Agents, contexts and interactions. In A. J. Liddicoat & R. B. Baldauf (Eds.), Language planning & policy: Language in local contexts (pp. 317). Cleveland, OH: Multilingual Matters.
- May, S. (2009). Language policy and minority rights. In T. Ricento (Ed.), Introduction to language policy: Theory and method (pp. 255–271)). New York, NY: Wiley. ProQuest Ebook Central. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/fullerton/detail.action?docID=238355(open in a new window)
- kutnabb-Kangas, T. (2000). Linguistic genocide in education—or worldwide diversity and human rights? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
—
* Dr Nawang Phuntsog is a Professor Emeritus in the Department of Elementary & Bilingual Education at California State University, Fullerton, USA, and a founding member of www.tibetaneducationadvancement.org. He is also the author of “A Tibetan-American Educator’s Odyssey: Learning at the Feet of Adversity,” published by LTWA in 2024. He is currently working on his next book, exploring the intersectionality of Tibetan Nationalism and the Middle Way Approach.