People's Linguistic Survey of India

People's Linguistic Survey of India
Name	People's Linguistic Survey of India
Formation	2010
Founder	Ganesh Devy
Type	Non-governmental project
Purpose	Language documentation
Headquarters	India
Leader name	Ganesh Devy

People's Linguistic Survey of India is a grassroots linguistic documentation project initiated to inventory, describe, and preserve the linguistic diversity of the Indian subcontinent. Founded in 2010 and led by Ganesh Devy, it brought together scholars, activists, and institutions to survey languages, dialects, and oral traditions across states and regions. The project coupled fieldwork with publication, producing multi-volume reporting that engaged with policy debates involving language rights, cultural heritage, and minority recognition.

History and Background

The initiative emerged amid debates involving Ganesh Devy, National Translation Mission, Sahitya Akademi, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Kerala. Early collaborators included scholars linked to Jawaharlal Nehru University, University of Hyderabad, Delhi University, Banaras Hindu University, and Calcutta University. Field teams worked in territories historically associated with treaties and events such as the Indian independence movement, Partition of India, States Reorganisation Act, 1956, and the Nehru–Nizam negotiations. Funding and logistical support involved partnerships with civil society groups like People's Archive of Rural India, Bhasha Research and Publication Centre, Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, Calcutta, and local bodies in districts like Kollam, Guwahati, Cachar, Kohima, and Leh.

Objectives and Scope

The project set out objectives resonant with campaigns led by figures such as Amartya Sen, Arunachal Pradesh Chief Minister, Pratap Chandra Chunder, and institutions including Ministry of Culture (India), Central Institute of Indian Languages, and National Museum Institute. Goals included creating inventories comparable to efforts like Ethnologue, UNESCO Atlas of the World's Languages in Danger, and initiatives tied to International Mother Language Day. The scope covered language varieties across regions administered by states like Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Odisha, Assam, Nagaland, and Manipur, as well as territories such as Puducherry and Lakshadweep.

Methodology and Data Collection

Field protocols drew on methodological precedents set by scholars at School of Oriental and African Studies, Linguistic Survey of India, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, and projects associated with Franz Boas-influenced archives. Teams used participant observation in locales like Varanasi, Kolkata, Mumbai, Chennai, and Bengaluru; they recorded oral narratives referencing poets such as Kabir, Mirabai, Tulsidas, Bulleh Shah, and materials related to festivals like Durga Puja, Pongal, and Bihu. Data collection involved lexical elicitation, grammatical description, and sociolinguistic profiling with informants connected to communities such as Santals, Gonds, Khasi, Mishing, Ao Naga, Konyak, Kumaoni, Garhwali, Mundari, Ho, Odia, Bodo, Meitei, and Khandeshi speakers. Comparative frameworks referenced corpora compiled by Archives and Research Centre for Ethnomusicology, Sahapedia, and academics affiliated with Harvard University, Oxford University, University of Chicago, Stanford University, and Columbia University.

Findings and Publications

Publications included multi-volume state-wise reports, field notebooks, and edited volumes that catalogued languages, dialect continuums, and endangered speech forms. Outputs were situated alongside works such as William Jones's philological writings, Sir George Grierson's surveys, and modern compendia like The Oxford India Anthology. The project documented contact phenomena involving languages associated with communities linked to historical personalities and movements such as Tipu Sultan, Mahatma Gandhi, Subhas Chandra Bose, Bhagat Singh, Rani Lakshmibai, and sites like Kashi Vishwanath Temple and Charminar where multilingual repertoires converge. Volumes highlighted endangered categories comparable to listings by UNESCO, and referenced pedagogical initiatives tied to institutions like Central Board of Secondary Education and State Council of Educational Research and Training, Kerala for mother-tongue instruction.

Impact and Reception

The project influenced discourse among policy actors including Ministry of Home Affairs (India), National Commission for Minorities, Reserve Bank of India cultural notes, and state language commissions in Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Himachal Pradesh, and Sikkim. Academic reception involved citations by researchers at IIT Madras, IISc Bangalore, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Centre for Policy Research, Institute of Development Studies, Kolkata, and international centers like University of Cambridge and University of British Columbia. Cultural organizations such as Indian Council for Cultural Relations, Prasar Bharati, All India Radio, and Doordarshan engaged with the findings for programming. Awards and recognition intersected with honors named for Padma Shri, Sahitya Akademi Award, Jnanpith Award, and fellowships from Ford Foundation and Tata Trusts.

Criticisms and Controversies

Critiques emerged from commentators citing comparative cases like the controversies around Linguistic Survey of India and debates involving figures such as Palash Ghosh and Romila Thapar regarding methodology and representation. Critics referenced disputes over classification similar to disagreements in works by George van Driem and David Crystal, contestations involving census categories used since Census of India, 2011, and tensions with language movements such as those in Belgaum, Bodoland Territorial Region, and Gorkhaland activism. Scholarly debates touched on issues raised in forums at Indian History Congress, Linguistic Society of India, and international bodies like International Congress of Linguists about standardization, script politics involving Devanagari, Bengali script, Perso-Arabic script, and field ethics discussed at venues including American Anthropological Association and Association for Linguistic Typology.

Category:Linguistics