Of Maltese language and literature

An interesting debate currently under way in the Maltese language sector of our local press begs for some peripheral nudge. Interesting indeed! From a number of angles: What is being said? Who is saying it? Who is not participating?

In such an open debate - a self-examination of a nation's conscience, if you like - confined, as this significant though minuscule nation is by its natural geological formation, to only a few hundred square kilometres, where privacy assumes different dimensions, this can only make for a healthy catharsis.

But geographical confinement is no longer the handicap so acutely felt once. The IT revolution has seen to that, as well as increased travel between countries, so that Mr Writer in New York knows almost precisely what Ms Artist in Peking is up to, within the hour! But yes, the tyranny of distance remains - on different dimensions.

So what is being said and who is or is not participating in the current language/literary debate, has finally filtered through as far as the Antipodes. And thus, regrettably perhaps for some, language manipulation no longer remains the monopoly of the few in the right places.

No matter what the pontificators say and do, language is here to stay. Be it in whatever form. But in our case of Maltese, not to the extent of suffocating artistic ingenuity - be that in literature, journalese, legal jargon or whatever. Creativity must be allowed to roam free! Absolutely! Free to act the fool even, as well as to effuse the genius within!

Flexibility! Pragmatism! Indeed let us consider, with the greatest care and sensitivity, what methods other languages have adopted. But let us not get bogged down in legalistic enforcements, academic bravura, egotistical sycophancies.

English was once one of the smaller languages of the globe. Can you imagine that today? With its world dominance? How did this come about?

We, as a nation, harbour no such high aspirations. But there is much we can learn from the story of English, with all its intricate rules and theories. Ultimately, who makes English anyway? Where is English leading to? And where has it come from? In other words, who makes and breaks language?

Everyone who uses Maltese as his vulgate contributes, to a measured degree, to Maltese language development. At grass roots level, where the soul of a nation remains closest to nature, we reap the benefits of that unique contact point with the most basic and even primitive of human interaction.

As one progresses up the social ladder, new dimensions are reached. In the transitional process, certain levels of language are relegated to the subconscious. But these first language contacts remain throughout our lives the foundations upon which all else is built.

In the upper echelons of the societal scale we tend to specialise. At these levels the scientist, the philosopher, the writer, the artist, the politician, etc - all these veer off into their own worlds, where language assumes vastly differing fields and levels of meaning and relevance. In between these two extremes, lies the majority of the populace, languishing in a limbo of linguistic uncertainty.

And the language of each group and sub-group, each to differing degress, impinges upon the others and language continues to evolve, out of the sheer wonder of this unique means of human communication.

It should be obvious to one and all that, placing superfluous constraints upon such a dynamic phenomenon, can only serve to stifle and eventually eradicate a unique cultural code, in our case exclusive to this one nation. Kill this code and what we will end up with is a sterile cloning, bereft of its intensely rich genome.

In plain English, each of us has his role. We must be vigilant to not allow our enthusiasm dictate how language ought to be used. The creative writer especially must be allowed to roam free, even at the risk of ridicule. Language itself will take care of any aberrations unacceptable to societal mores.