Viewing the Roles of Language in Colonialism and the Spread of Culture

Of all the factors which societies must overcome to begin a mutually beneficial relationship, one of the most frequently studied and analyzed is the use of language and the language barrier cultures have between one another. Language itself is a major element which separates cultures '" on the surface the question of how cultures can exchange information when they lack a common communicative medium is apparent but the issue runs much deeper than a lack of understanding. Both Chinua Achebe in his novel Things Fall Apart and Ngugi wa Thiong'o in his essay "Decolonising the Mind '" The Politics of Language in African Literature" explore and offer different interpretations of how language separates cultures and as a result does not allow for a mutual exchange of information between the cultures.
In Things Fall Apart, Achebe presents through the eyes of the subaltern the detrimental effect colonization and missionaries have on the traditional way of life of a fictionalized Nigerian village, showing how the differences between the two cultures can stem from their lack of a common language. The most direct example of language being presented as a barrier between the two cultures can be seen in the story Obierike tells an exiled Okonkwo of the first white man to come in contact with a neighboring village. The white man rode into the village on an "iron horse" (which we find out later was a bicycle) to seemingly ask for directions to another place named Mbaino: "...he repeated over and over again a word that resembled Mbaino. Perhaps he had been going to Mbaino and had lost his way" (Chinua, 139). The white man only knew the language of his own culture, a different language than what the rest of the tribe spoke: "He said something, only they did not understand him,' said Obierika. 'He seemed to speak through his nose" (Chinua, 139). As a result of this communicative misunderstanding, and at the ruling of the village's Oracle, the white man is killed by the villagers which at a later time provokes a violent retaliation resulting in the death of most of the villages from (we can assume) friends of the white man. Not only did the language barrier actually result in the demise of most of the villagers, but both parties had something unique to offer the other from their culture if they could only communicate; the white man's "iron horse" represents the technological advancements of his culture over time which could have been introduced to the villagers and the villagers could have shared with the white man their culture's knowledge of the land as shown by Obierikia's friend thinking he was just asking for directions to Mbaino. It is arguable that the white men came to Nigeria in the first place with hostile intentions like exploitation (as explained by the Oracle: "[The Oracle] said that other white men were on their way. They were locusts... and that first man was their harbinger sent to explore the terrain" [Chinua, 138), since there's clearly a history of the exploitation of Africa throughout history, but later on when the missionaries present their views of religion they mention that they will "bring many iron horses when we have settled down among [the villagers]" (Chinua, 145). An exchange and growth between the two cultures was more than possible, but the language barrier between the two unfortunately forced their relationship off to a violent start.
Ngugi argues a much different role of language when cultures as a whole meet in "Decolonizing the Mind," stating that the evolution of a language itself represents the entire culture: "communication between human beings is also the basis and process of evolving culture" (Ngugi, 14). He continues by explaining just how culture emerges from the birth of a language: "In doing similar kinds of things and actions over and over again under similar circumstances, similar even in their mutability, certain patterns, moves, rhythms, habits, attitudes, experiences and knowledge emerge... Over a time this becomes a way of life distinguishable from other ways of life. They develop a distinctive culture and history" (Ngugi, 14). Ngugi then is arguing that it is the society's language itself which is the basis of culture existing; the mannerisms, quirks, or whatever other societal characteristics which develop into a standard in a society all join together to form a culture, yet all of these factors could not have been uniquely fit into a society if they were not based on a unique language. By language being so deeply ingrained in the creation of culture Ngugi seems to imply that the initial clash between cultures does not stem from having different communicative media to exchange information with, but rather that the misunderstanding of another society's language means the misunderstanding of the culture as a whole.
This idea creates a sort of learning paradox '" how can two cultures fully learn from or about the other if they are not deeply ingrained in the others language? If one culture learns the others language, is that sufficient enough as a communicative medium for there to be a mutual beneficial relationship between the two cultures or should both cultures have knowledge of both languages? Which culture should be the first to learn the others? While neither text explicitly offers a solution to these issues, both offer examples of how hegemony perpetuates these problems and becomes overbearing by beginning to erase the culture of another. Things Fall Apart portrays aggressive missionaries whose sole purpose in learning the native language of the Igbo is to convert them to Christianity, not only creating a situation with an oppressor / oppressed but forcing the subaltern to accept cultural ideals while remaining ignorant to those of the oppressed (the missionaries condemn the gods of the villagers: "Your gods are not alive and cannot do you any harm... they are pieces of wood and stone" [Chinua, 146], and as a result the villagers laugh and ignore the ideals of the missionaries). "Decolonizing the Mind" presents a similar perspective when Ngugi describes having to learn English in his school, discouraging the use of his native language GÄ©kuyu and the results which followed: "Literary education was now determined by the dominant language while also reinforcing that dominance... thus language and literature were taking us further and further from ourselves to other selves, from our world to other worlds" (Ngugi, 12). Ngugi stresses that through forcing children to use only English that they are being raised in a culture that is not theirs, since English is not their native language. Both of the situations presented by Ngugi and Achebe here highlight how quickly one's culture can deteriorate when the other becomes overbearing; when a language or culture is forced upon the other society, there lacks a willingness to learn on part of the hegemonic power which is one of the ultimate faults in fostering a communicative medium with the intention of learning. Both situations also show that when two cultures are not well versed in each others languages, there cannot exist a respect for of understanding of the other.
Both the problem of the language barrier and the isolation of a culture by allowing for one language to dominate certainly have equal weight in the complication between societies initially clashing upon first meeting. For there to be a mutual beneficial exchange between cultures, it would seem that both societies need to either learn each others language by having an equal communicative medium and both must equally promote the learning of each others ideals (resulting in the truest sense of learning the others culture by going off of Ngugi's definition of culture, this would appear to be the most beneficial and all around the most respectful option), or one needs to learn the others language and not become overbearing as a result (the problem of hegemony). In either situation both cultures must have a willingness to learn from the other without having intentions of exploitation or oppression, and there must be a common goal of cooperation between the two societies.
Ngugi states that "language, any language, has a dual character: it is both a means of communication and a carrier of culture" (13); despite how well Ngugi argues the validity of this statement societies simply cannot learn from each other if one does not unfortunately first "give in" and learn the language of the other. It just seems impossible for two societies to build a mutual beneficial relationship rooted in the culture of the other if they do not have an equal communicative medium to share their knowledge. Achebe has shown us how negative a situation can become if two societies try to present their own culture without having the same medium to present it in; there is such a high chance of misunderstanding, confusion and fear instilling in one of the societies, which we have seen can lead to needlessly violent tragedy. Sure some nuances of the culture will be lost when it is described in a language different from its own , but there is just too much room for error if each culture is presented in its own language without an equal understanding.