Language Debate Resumed

In this post I shall try to cast some light on aspects of the Maori language debate. I want to highlight areas where Maori language is being weaponised against the English language and against the wider culture.

Further on in this post you will find some criticisms where I might be classified as a separatist. I would wear that label only at the point where I would support a separation of the languages. I do not have any issues with Maori language advocates wanting to revitalise the Maori language. My problem is with the revitalisation methods being used such as a wholesale intrusion into the English language. There are dangers of eventually reducing the New Zealand style of English language to the level of an inferior hybrid. The point might be reached where the New Zealand style English language itself would require revitalisation to be rid of Maori influences.    

A recent Stuff article (19^th Sept Stuff Link) detailed the Maori language plans of Government ministries and departments. Each entity has been required by Government to submit a plan for the normalisation of the Maori language within its organisation.    

The Stuff article opens with the following:

Three years ago, the much vaunted Maihi Karauna, the Crown’s Strategy for Māori Language Revitalisation was launched. Cabinet instructed all of its government departments and agencies to develop plans to boost the normalisation of te reo Maori through their services.

Plans to be vetted by the Maori Language Commission will presumably be given a pass or fail mark. Is the Maori Language Commission sitting in judgement on the English language also? The article provides a series of comparisons discussing how well or otherwise ministries have performed in meeting the strategy deadlines and requirements. A point to be made in passing here is that we do not have a New Zealand English Language Commission

The Maori language strategy was launched in Feb 2019 (Press Release Link) by Nanaia Mahuta. There is also a link to “The Crown’s Strategy for Māori Language Revitalisation” (Link: TPK Strategy Scroll down to PDFs, English or Maori). It does not take much reading between the lines to figure out that it aligns with the much criticised He Puapua report.

The real genesis of the strategy however and legislative authority is the Maori Language Act of 2016. The bi-partisan vote at the time was near unanimous. Probably National and Labour had no idea of what direction revitalisation would take. Tellingly that vote did not gain the support of New Zealand First. The bill allows for the Maori version of the bill to take precedence over the English version if there are conflicting interpretations.

The strategy target is one million basic Maori language speakers by 2040 – a date which by the way is the overall target of He Puapua. Obviously He Puapua and other influences are quietly progressing on multiple fronts despite the soothing assurances of the authors and the current government.

This side of the language issue to an extent went under my radar and maybe a few other radars. Mainstream media has of late not given the issue a great deal of space – except for some older articles in the NZ Herald plus the Stuff article linked above.

That is sufficient for an introductory background.

The strategy papers reveal a not so well disguised exercise in social and linguistic engineering. Should we be concerned about the direction of the Maori language revitalisation effort? Yes, if all of its strategic goals were to be achieved. Not so much if it was to be contained within Maori culture alone. The Treaty said Maori should retain their treasures. Language is indeed a treasure to Maori culture and to be polite I would simply say they should retain it.

As already mentioned I do not have any problems with Maori culture taking pride in its language and wanting to sustain and redevelop the language. But not at the expense of invading, distorting, corrupting and invalidating the English language. The English language is itself a valued treasure to English language speakers and writers. Points which many Maori academics and other fellow travellers do not seem to or want to accept.  

Aims and objectives of the language strategy have covered a lot of ground. There is a certain rigid coherence and precision to the whole enterprise. The timetable and framework extends from 2019 to 2023, running out to a considerable number of pages including a detailed monitoring and evaluation project. What happens if the general public does not buy in to the strategy? My advice is not to buy in. What if the public service slows down the strategy? My belief is that full community buy-in is a pipe dream.   

To give a flavour of what is proposed the following are examples of what I feel best demonstrate Maori language plans. Decide for yourself what the overall picture amounts to.

·       I want to sit down at any restaurant in Aotearoa and order my meal in te reo Māori.

                            Nanaia Mahuta – Foreword, Strategy Paper.

Comment: That is dream world stuff but indicative of what in the long term Maori language advocates might come to expect.

·       The first audacious goal seeks to establish te reo Māori as a key part of national identity in the national psyche.

                            Strategy Paper- Goals.

Comment: The wider culture will be expected to absorb many dated and antiquated aspects of Maori culture. The wider culture includes of course all other languages and cultures which have their own place in the New Zealand identity but do not have specialised legislative support. Many of those cultures have well founded claims to be seen as significant contributors to the New Zealand identity. Are those cultures, including English language culture, to be submerged and side-lined?

Maori language and culture has been weaponised on numerous fronts – as in teaching Maori martial arts in the schools. If that isn’t weaponising, what is? To young minds do we really need ongoing reinforcement and glorification of the warrior culture? Not only is Maori language weaponised but the English language is being weaponised against itself. Note the word “psyche” - generally defined as mind, soul and spirit. Saturation is therefore the goal.       

·       In order for the Crown to recognise the value of the Māori language, and to deliver quality services to Māori communities, it needs to ensure the public sector can ‘speak’ the language itself. By doing so, it will have both a direct and indirect impact on language revitalisation. The public sector employs 403,000 people, about 18 percent of the country’s total workforce.

Strategy Paper, Clause 57.58.

 

Comment: “… for the Crown to recognise the value of the Maori language…” I have problems with this requirement. Nowhere in the literature have I found any convincing arguments mapping out social or economic advantages for the widespread use of Maori language. The public sector is a soft and convenient target with no escape from the political masters.

 

·       The Crown will promote te reo Māori at a national and international level. It will develop policy that creates the right incentives for third parties and the private sector to embrace te reo Māori. Its agencies will work to provide more accessible services in te reo Māori. The Crown will continue to improve the supply of services that are vital to the revitalisation of te reo Māori, including education, broadcasting and online content that can support the initiatives of whānau, hapū, iwi and communities.   

Strategy Paper, Clause 63

 

Comment: Which other services suffer while resources are duplicated and applied to the needs of Maori language? Of what diplomatic or economic use is Maori language in an international setting? Can New Zealand negotiate its trade agreements in the Maori language?

 

Those are just some of the points which have caught my eye. A fair question is why am I with many others having difficulties with the current direction of Maori language initiatives? The following I hope can answer part of that question.

 

I cannot support a full scale assault on the New Zealand culture emanating from a minority of the population. Think in terms of the language strategy. Then the He Puapua report, which is really the blueprint for an absorption of more and more power into Maori tribal hands. We have the matter of a Maori Health Authority which the health economy, in resource terms, cannot afford. Then we have the Three Waters project now seen as a power grab of the worst kind. The news media is fawning all over Maori culture and has recently been gifted millions to continue the process.  

 

Repeating myself here – I do not have any issues with Maori culture wanting to revitalise its language. My point is the language can be revitalised easily enough within Maori culture without  Maori language expertise becoming a requirement for the entire population. The strategy paper makes no secret of a desire to spread the Maori language far and wide, in many areas compulsorily. In other words Maori advocates are seeking to lead, dominate and indeed discipline the English speaking New Zealand culture. That becomes via Maori culture a tyranny by the minority. The New Zealand culture as a whole is fully capable of leading and providing for itself without being directed by Maori.

 

A major point is that the Maori language remains an oral and story-telling language which does not in any way translate easily. Therein is its greatest weakness – story telling. The Maori language is said to have approximately 20,000 words in its dictionary. The estimate for the English language is some hundreds of thousands. The Oxford dictionary has over 170,000 words. Taking randomised Maori words and titles into the English language, where adequate words and definitions are existent, and have been for generations, is in linguistic terms an utterly pointless exercise.

 

There is a place for Maori story telling. The issue is where and how should that story telling be placed. Maori language would be better placed if it was retired from mainstream culture and returned to academia and to the marae. The Maori culture and language could then be taught as simple history lessons, without compulsory language lessons, through the normal school curriculums. The wider culture at the same time could rid itself of a racially divisive influence.

 

The strategy paper’s emphasis is totally on the oral tradition of Maori language. There is minimal reference to the written Maori word. Could we ask where are the great works of Maori literature? Works which have standing in Maori culture and might be worthy of wider translations. Throughout the strategy paper there are approximately 59 references in a Maori context to either “speak”, “speaking”, “speaker” or “speakers”, averaging to more than one reference per page. Could the strategy, unwittingly, succeed in creating a semi-literate support base? That is, speakers and no writers. Question: What number of fluent Maori speakers are in New Zealand today? And, how many of those are able to produce the written word in Maori? I have no current ambitions to be included in that number.   

 

Post Script

I have mentioned the Maori Health Authority and Three Waters projects. I see these projects as a pernicious and backdoor method of handing over control of significant parts of the economy to Maori tribal interests. It has been said that Maori interests will be given some type of veto power in health matters – wait and see. Unsure of how they might be allowed to perform with regard to the water setup, if it happens. Health is said to represent 9.34% of NZ’s GDP. Agriculture, totally dependent on water, represents 12% of GDP. Hydro generates about 58% of NZ’s electricity. A better economic mind than I have could no doubt add more examples.

 

Question: In all round social and economic terms should the average urban Maori family have any more rights, privileges and interests than the average urban non-Maori family (European, Pasifika, Asian, Indian, South African, Afghani, Somali, Jewish, Islamic……)? Memo, more than 70% of Maori are now urbanised and have the same access to health services as all other urbanised demographics.   

 

Water, to use a slang term is the biggy. The entire economy runs on water. The planned water authorities are said to have been arranged on the basis of Maori tribal boundaries. Again if it happens Maori could have considerable input and influence here. Much has been made of the fact of 67 or so local body authorities and how unwieldy that structure is, may be true in certain respects. So how about 103 Maori tribal entities? Say no more. (Wikipedia Link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_iwi)

 

Was water available in your house this morning and do you know if the local Maori tribe had anything to do with it? And will future availability be improved in any way with input from the local Maori tribe?

 

11^th October 2021