From Creole to Standard: Shakespeare, Language, and Literature in a Postcolonial Context. (Cross Cultures)

From Creole to Standard

C

ross ultures

Readings in the Post / Colonial Literatures in English

107 Series Editors

Gordon Collier (Giessen)

†Hena Maes–Jelinek (Liège)

Geoffrey Davis (Aachen)

From Creole to Standard Shakespeare, Language, and Literature in a Postcolonial Context

Roshni Mooneeram Preface by Jonathan Hope

Amsterdam - New York, NY 2009

Cover image: Anjali Pyndiah Cover design: Pier Post The paper on which this book is printed meets the requirements of “ISO 9706:1994, Information and documentation - Paper for documents - Requirements for permanence”. ISBN: 978-90-420-2623-0 E-Book ISBN: 978-90-420-2624-7 © Editions Rodopi B.V., Amsterdam – New York, NY 2009 Printed in The Netherlands

To Nir, Hamish, and Josha

Table of Contents

Preface Acknowledgements

ix xi

Introduction: Postcolonial Creolistics, an Interdisciplinary Approach to Mauritian Creole

1

1: The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

27

2: The Theatre of Protest:

Overturning the Linguistic Superstructure 3: Virahsawmy’s Later Plays: Metalinguistic and Feminist Discourses

71 105

4: Iconoclastic Translation: Rewriting

Shakespeare’s The Tempest in a Postcolonial Context

131

5: Identity-Forming Translations:

Hamlet and Much Ado about Nothing

161

6: The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

195

Conclusion: From Creole to Standard via Shakespeare

223

Works Cited

231

Preface

P

building machines which seek to replicate, for instants too brief to be comprehended, the conditions that first allowed matter to flash into being. Linguists are luckier: we can observe the birth of languages in the process of creolization. This is a book about the development of one specific language, Mauritian Creole (MC ) – or Morisien as it may one day be called. The early chapters cover the sociolinguistic situation and the history of the language – and they give a fascinating account of the unique history of Mauritius and its language. But the book goes beyond creolization, to look at subsequent attempts to fashion MC into a standard written language, focusing on the role of literary texts in this process. Creolization is a natural linguistic process: given the right circumstances, it will occur without any conscious intervention. Standardization is different, apparently requiring the artificiality of the written medium, and perhaps also conscious effort on the part of language users. Its effects are paradoxical: on the one hand, a reduction in variation, and a fixing of forms; on the other an elaboration of styles and an increase in the possible registers of a language. This book identifies literary language as the prime area in which the conflicting demands of standardization (to reduce and to multiply) can be met, since literature can encompass wide variations in register, but also label items as standard and non-standard. The core of the book for me is the encounter between Shakespeare and the MC writer Dev Virahsawmy, whose work includes numerous translations and adaptations of Shakespeare’s plays. Virahsawmy is a language activist who recognizes that there is linguistic as well as literary capital in Shakespeare’s work. In 1564, when Shakespeare was born, English was not the language of education, or of serious theological and scientific deHYSICISTS SPEND BILLIONS

x

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

bate in England. Although it had pretty much replaced French as the language of government and law, in other fields it still existed in a subordinate relationship to Latin. Compared to the continental vernaculars – especially Italian, French, and Spanish – English lacked a literature, even a borrowed one provided by translations of the classics. Serious writers doubted that it could ever be used for profound thought or debate, since it so obviously lacked the refinements of other languages. The second half of the sixteenth century saw an outpouring of literature and translation, a huge expansion of the English vocabulary by borrowing and internal derivation, and the elaboration of various written registers. But this did not happen ‘naturally’ or by accident: writers, intellectuals, and educators consciously debated the status of English, and discussed what needed to be done. Translators quite explicitly saw their role as enriching the language with booty from other cultures. Commentators debated the most appropriate way in which to add new words to English: borrowing evoked fears of miscegenation in some, and the response was a sometimes amusing, but always doomed, flight into an artificial linguistic purity. The parallels between the situation of MC and English at this stage of its development are not hard to find: Virahsawmy’s adaptations and translations into MC echo the role Shakespeare’s ‘originals’ had for English, and Mooneeram shows how other writers have followed Virahsawmy in using literary forms to enrich MC . As a native speaker of MC , who subsequently studied English literature at Leeds University’s School of English (long known for its emphasis on postcolonial literature and language-based approaches to literature) and took her PhD in the French Department there, Roshni Mooneeram is perhaps uniquely qualified to describe and analyse the linguistic and literary context of MC . Roshni’s book brings together many branches of linguistic and literary study: language planning, sociolinguistics, standardization and creolization within linguistics; postcolonial literature, Shakespeare, and stylistics within literature. The book is also a substantial and significant account of MC literature to date. It should be clear that this study is ambitious in its range – and I hope that it will be read by students and scholars from many areas of specialization. I am sure that they, like me, will find their horizons widened by it. JONATHAN HOPE Reader in Literary Linguistics, Strathclyde University

Acknowledgements

I

W O U L D L I K E T O T H A N K Marie–Anne Hintze, Professor Loreto Todd, Dr Jonathan Hope, Professor Martin Banham and Dev Virahsawmy, inspiring mentors and friends from whom I have learned enormously. I am also grateful to the School of English at the B C U Birmingham and to the AHRC for granting me research leave in 2005– 2006 to allow me to complete this book.

I would also like to thank the School of English at the University of Nottingham for financial support. Due thanks also to Sage Publications for allowing me to reproduce, in revised form, some of the material from my article “Language Politics in Dev Virahsawmy’s Postcolonial Rewriting of The Tempest,” Journal of Commonwealth Literature 46 (2006): 67–81, in Chapter 4 of this book; to Aracne for the use of some of the analysis of Prins Hamlet from “Negotiating Shakespeare’s Hypercanonicity in Creole: Ideological and Practical Considerations,” in Translating Voices, Translating Regions, ed. Nigel Armstrong & Federico Federici (Rome: Aracne, 2006): 323–41, in Chapter 5; and to the journal Language and Literature for material from “The Contribution of Creative Writing to the Standardization of Mauritian Creole,” Language and Literature 16.3 (2007): 245–61, in Chapter 6.

Introduction Postcolonial Creolistics An Interdisciplinary Approach to Mauritian Creole

I

C

REOLE LANGUAGES,

which often have a social history of colonization, remain among the most stigmatized of the world’s languages. Part of this stigma is the result of prevalent nineteenth-century views on Creoles which were shaped by the same racism that characterized slavery. This congruence, identified by Degraff in his remarkable essay “Linguist’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Creole Exceptionalism,” between colonial creolistics and colonial race theories in relation to Caribbean creoles, still dictates to a large extent the fate of many other pidgins and creoles: Slavery and race theories at the colonial inception of Creole studies would have made it impossible – or “unthinkable” – to consider Caribbean Creole languages on a genealogical or structural par with European languages. After all, Creoles were by and large perceived as languages created by slaves. In order to justify slavery, the Africans had to be equated to “lesser” human beings belonging to a separate and inferior species, and it was inconceivable that these lesser humans could speak full-fledged human languages.1 1

Michel Degraff, “Linguists’ Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Creole Exceptionalism,” Language in Society 34 (2005): 547.

2

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

The hegemonic discourse on creole languages by both outsiders and the speakers themselves remain one of the most obstinate obstacles to any successful attempt at their standardization. Non-linguistic claims that creole languages are a ‘handicap’ for their speakers have undermined the role that creoles could play in the education and socio-economic development of creolophone countries. Aimé Césaire from Martinique and Jean– Georges Prosper from Mauritius, both prolific writers using the medium of French, provide revealingly concomitant justifications for their rejection of Martinican creole and Mauritian creole for literary purposes: [We] would not have been able to write in Creole. […] I don’t even know if this is conceivable […]. One aspect of Martinique’s cultural backwardness is the [expressive] level of its Creole language, […] which is very low […]. The Creole language has remained […] in a stage of immediacy, unable to express abstract ideas.2 As for me, I rebel against this sanctioning of patois. I can only see an attempt at a levelling down. A levelling down towards the vulgar! Since patois have no social usefulness whatsoever […]. Finally, it cannot be denied that patois gives way to crudeness and even to obscenity.3

A Whorfian element permeates both statements on the primitive state of the respective creole languages. They both reinstate the view that creoles, having originated in slavery and being interpreted as the slaves’ inadequate imitations of their masters’ language, are, owing to some inherent deficiency in relation to French, expressively inadequate, as are their 2

“Interview with Aimé Césaire by Jacqueline Leiner,” Tropiques 1 (1978), v–xxiv, quoted in Michel Degraff, “Linguists’ Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Creole Exceptionalism,” 542. 3 “Pour ma part, je m’insurge contre cette consécration du patois-créole. Je n’y vois qu’une tentative de nivellement par le bas. Par le vulgaire! Car les patois ne sont d’aucune utilité sociale [...] Enfin, il faut admettre que le patois cède le plus volontiers à la grossièreté et même à l’indécence”; Jean–Georges Prosper, “Le patois-créole, le bilinguisme et Robert Edward–Hart, traducteur,” Le Mauricien (27 November 1967): 3. While Césaire’s works have canonical status across postcolonial studies, those of Prosper are less known. They include: Histoire de la littérature mauricienne de langue française (Moka: Éditions de l’Océan Indien, 1978, 1994); L’île Maurice: Ancienne Isle de France, Fille de la Révolution (1989); Anthologie de la littérature mauricienne d’expression française (Moka: Mahatma Gandhi Institute, 2000).

½¾

Introduction

3

speakers. Moreover, Calvet’s concept of “superstructure linguistique” (linguistic superstructure), which refers to the linguistic manifestation of neocolonial structures and elitism, can also be witnessed here.4 Both intellectuals’ sociolinguistic views seem to fit into the process by which the colonial system and supporting linguistic superstructure has been internalized by the colonized to the extent of being reproduced by the latter. In Césaire’s statement, Martinican creole, like the society itself, is devoid of history, a concept that he explains as the processes of cultivation and refinement that other languages have experienced in the course of centuries. There is a sense that nothing cultural which these Creole islands produce, through their own complex histories, could be authentic or legitimate. Creole languages, it is true, generally lack the bulk of historiographic documentation devoted to European and other established literary languages. However, to make a statement such as Césaire’s is to deny both the history and the conditions of slavery that saw the birth of Martinican creole, as that of various creole languages, and the agency of its speakers in elaborating the language over two centuries. Descendants of slaves had created a new language and had reinvented traditions and customs, thereby already achieving an identity not prescribed by the colonizer. Indeed, in their dismissal of creoles as literary languages, Césaire and Prosper fail to acknowledge the appearance of a Martinican and Mauritian literature in creole which goes far back in colonial times, mainly in oral literature, in the wide range of folktales, songs, proverbs, riddles, often constructed in opposition to the dominant, colonial culture. The present study, by documenting the history and processes of the standardization of Mauritian creole, aims at redressing the colonial asymmetry and at questioning the eurocentric assimilation identified above in Césaire’s and Prosper’s stance. In the context of the bicentenary of the abolition of the slave trade in 2007, tracing the development of Mauritian creole to the status of an established literary language benefitting from international recognition foregrounds the subjective experience of slavery. Indeed, precisely because the negative associations of slavery and its painful memory have inhibited any objective handling of the language situation in most postcolonial creolophone countries, bringing academic atten4

Louis–Jean Calvet, Linguistique et colonialisme: Petit traité de glottophagie (Paris: Payot, 1974): 132.

4

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

tion to the successful journey of Mauritian creole enables some of the sociolinguistic aspects of the legacy of slavery to be reclaimed as empowering. Within this overriding framework, further contexts are detailed below.

Summary My book draws academic attention to the standardization of Mauritian creole (henceforth as M C ) while highlighting the uniqueness of this case of language-planning in terms of its pace, processes and contemporaneity. I investigate a crucial period in the postcolonial history of the standardization of M C (between 1968, the year of Mauritian independence, and 2004) when, in the light of the state’s laissez-faire policy regarding language-planning, efforts to standardize MC resided to a large extent in the hands of individuals and non-governmental organizations. It is, in fact, the valorization of MC by non-official agents of standardization and, in particular, creative writers that was to create a propitious sociolinguistic climate which would, in turn, pre-empt the state intervention in language policy in 2004.5 The standardization of MC , I argue, cannot be considered separately from its rapid and successful development as a literary language. With a view to testing the hypothesis that creative writing is playing a major role in the standardization of MC , by encouraging its incursion into new domains and by developing a written form for a language which is essentially oral, I assess the impact of literature on the codification, elaboration and status of the language.6 To this purpose, I carry out a stylistic analysis of a selection of postcolonial oeuvres focusing illustratively on the works of Dev Virahsawmy, who explicitly sets his literary and translation career within the framework of a possible standardization of MC . With over forty published pieces of creative writing and translation works which benefit from both local and international recognition, Virahsawmy ranks alongside the major figures in contemporary African drama. I investigate critically the extent to which he acts as a

5

See Chapter 1, Part 1. It is, sadly, not within the remit of this book to examine the forms of orature in Mauritian Creole. 6

½¾

Introduction

5

“one-man cultural movement”7 in the promotion of the national language, examining, in particular, his deliberate use of adaptations and translations of Shakespeare as a tool of linguistic legitimization and elaboration. By integrating the role of literature and the postcolonial context of Mauritius into current debates on language standardization, this book aims mainly to broaden knowledge in the academic field of language-planning and multilingualism.

Research Contexts MC makes a unique case study on several fronts. Since much of the lin-

guistic interest in pidgin and creole languages lies in their linguistic structure or in their genesis, most of the research in this area has concentrated on the spoken language. Indeed, Suzanne Romaine and Mark Sebba identify a dearth of scholarship on pidgins and creoles as written languages.8 There is, of course, nothing intrinsic in creole languages to make them less suitable for the written or official medium, as illustrated by the official and written status of French creole in Haiti and Tok Pisin in Papua New Guinea. However, precisely because creole languages typically face a negative image in the light of which they struggle to assert themselves as distinctive languages, documentation on those few creoles which have been or are being standardized is the more crucial for Pidgins and Creoles studies. It is, to a large extent, the recognition of MC as a literary language both within and outside of Mauritius that has established its status as the de facto national language.9 As a contrast to Beach-la-Mar, for example, which, despite being the de jure national language of Vanuatu, receives 7 Thomas Hylland Eriksen, Common Denominators: Ethnicity, Nation-Building and Compromise in Mauritius (Oxford: Berg, 1998): 21. 8 Suzanne Romaine, Language, Education and Development: Urban and Rural Tok Pisin in Papua New Guinea (Oxford: Clarendon, 1992); Mark Sebba, Contact Languages: Pidgins and Creoles (London: Macmillan, 1997). 9 Recently the Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 20 (2005) has given some visibility to creole literatures in different contexts, and George Lang’s Entwisted Tongues: Comparative Creole Literatures (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2000) provides an historically informed and comparative study of several creole literatures. Neither scholarly work, however, mentions the outstanding rise of Mauritian creole to the status of a literary language.

6

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

little recognition in its written form,10 independence in Mauritius saw the emergence of a politically and linguistically aware group of creative writers who choose to write in the creole vernacular. While the scholarship on the symbiotic links between literary development and language standardization has focused on long established Western European languages,11 the role of literature in the process of language standardization in an African or creole context has been scarcely documented. By providing valuable information on the synthesis among Virahsawmy’s linguistic, dramatic, and translation work in terms of language engineering, this book aims to fill a gap in the scholarship both on language-planning in a postcolonial context and on the role of key African writers in this process. The documentation of the development of MC into a standard language also generates that sense of history coveted by Césaire. By investigating the standardization of MC against the larger picture of postcolonial political and socio-economic transformation, this book aims to further more integrative research on pidgins and creoles. More specifically, creole studies have for long remained distant, if not divergent, from the interests of creole speakers. Degraff, quoting Gramsci, makes a cogent case for “Postcolonial Creolistics” which would aim at an organic alliance with its objects of study: [While] elaborating a form of thought superior to ‘common sense’ and coherent on a scientific plane, [organic scholarship] never forgets to remain in contact with the ‘simple’ [i.e., the non-‘intellectual’ strata of society] and indeed finds in this contact the source of the problems it sets out to study and to resolve.[...] If [the philosophy of praxis] affirms the need for contact between intellectuals and simple it is not in order to restrict scientific activity, but precisely in order to construct an intellectual–moral bloc which can make politically possible the intellectual progress of the mass and not only of small intellectual groups.12 10

See Tony Crowley, Beach-la-Mar to Bislama: The Emergence of a National Language in Vanuatu (Oxford: Oxford U P , 1990). 11 The Emergence of National Languages, ed. Max Baeumer & Aldo Scaglione (Ravenna: Longo Editore, 1984); Sylvia Adamson, “Literary Language,” in The Cambridge History of the English Language, vol. 3: 1476–1776, ed. Roger Lass (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 1998): 539–653. 12 Degraff, “Linguists’ Most Dangerous Myth,” 535, quoting from Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, ed. & tr. Quintin Hoare & Geoffrey Nowell–Smith (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1971): 330, 332.

½¾

Introduction

7

This study takes its cue partly from Degraff’s inspiring call for a shift from armchair creolistics to a more engaged form of creolistics which would be integrated in a meaningful way into the life of the community of people who speak it. In investigating the changing functions of MC in Mauritius as a written language, this book also evaluates a postcolonial movement towards validating the citizenship and rights of creole speakers who constitute the majority of the Mauritian population. This case study of MC aims to bring new perspectives to the field of language-planning and language policy. Joshua Fishman observes that the field of language-planning and language policy will only fulfil its potential if the aggregation of the particular, through a critical mass of casestudy knowledge, is made to contribute to a more informed view of the general.13 This call for more empirical work is also extended by Sue Wright.14 The main benefit of focusing on a small country is that its localism can offer scope for moving beyond academic generalizations towards a level of specificity sufficient to advance studies of language-planning. By investigating the impact of the translation of Shakespeare on the linguistic and literary evolution of a regional language, this book expands the field of Shakespeare in a postcolonial context. It also facilitates comparison with translation in other nations emerging from imperial domination. Moreover, my treatment of postcolonial literature in MC as a ‘living lab’, where creative forces are shaping a standard written form for the vernacular, also presses postcolonial studies to engage with literary linguistics, an area which it is only just beginning to embrace.15 Because the history of postcolonial literature in MC is compressed within fewer than forty years, this relatively new literary language is an excellent testing-ground for the study of language-change, the more so as literature in MC is inherently meta-literary. Lang describes the act of writing in a creole as “inherently self-conscious and deliberately constructive of meanings previously non-existent, therefore to some extent reflective of the construction of meaning itself.”16 The implications of this meta-literariness will be considered at a later stage. 13

Fishman, “Introduction” to M O S T : Journal on Multicultural Societies 4.2 (2002). Sue Wright, Language Policy and Language Planning (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2004): 251. 15 See Robert Fraser, Lifting the Sentence: A Poetics of Postcolonial Fiction (Manchester: Manchester U P , 2000). 16 Lang, Entwisted Tongues: Comparative Creole Literatures, 17. 14

8

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Methodology The linguistic analysis of key literary texts is used illustratively to test the hypothesis that creative writing encourages the standardization of the Mauritian vernacular. Theatre, being the most successful literary form in which, in fact, MC has, to a large extent, displaced English and French, is the main object of investigation. Moreover, a linguistic analysis focused on the dramatic works of Virahsawmy, who is a conscientious and deliberate neologizer, is a potentially productive method in answering my main research question. Although the emphasis is on drama, in order to illustrate a sense of diachronic development I touch briefly on the latest and most prestigious literary genre to be experimented with through the medium of MC , the novel (Chapter 6). I further generate an historical perspective across two stages of Mauritian postcolonial literary history from the first militant outburst of literature in MC (1970s–1980s) to the selfconscious efforts on the part of writers to standardize the language (1990s onwards). Taking into account the changing underpinnings behind the linguistic engineering of MC contextualizes the rapid developments in the corpus planning (which defines and illustrates rules for linguistic usage primarily in the written medium).17 While a diachronic approach sets the later and more standardized literary works in contrast to the linguistic diversity often present in the earlier literature, a synchronic comparison helps to evaluate the degree of consensus in systematized language uses. Taking into account the main linguistic transformations required in the development of a written form of language, I define the chief areas of investigation as: orthography; register development; and lexical and syntactic elaboration. I examine the developments in the orthographies used with a view to determining the degree of consensus on the potential standard orthography to be used. Register analysis is another key method I use to explore the validity of the proposal I advance. I investigate the diverse means of lexical elaboration (from internal creativity to various borrowing strategies) and syntactic expansion (increasing uses of subordination, nominalization and passivization, which are usually associated with written language) engendered by the forging of new literary registers. In the analysis of Virahsawmy’s adaptations and translations of Shakespeare, an

17

Corpus and status planning are described in greater detail in section I I I of this Introduction.

½¾

Introduction

9

expanded version of polysystems theory,18 which allows me to take into account the postcolonial sociolinguistic specificities of Mauritius and Virahsawmy’s conspicuous role as language engineer, provides a useful interdisciplinary framework for studying the impact of translation on language standardization. Finally, I investigate the links between literary translation and original creative works in bringing a sense of authority to MC and extending its stylistic range. While my approach to MC is one of ‘micro’-linguistics – i.e. it focuses on the changes being brought to the linguistic features of M C , mainly in terms of lexicon and syntax – it is also rooted in a framework of the ‘macro’-sociology of language.19 My interdisciplinary approach aims to be theoretically informed and sensitive to empirical detail. While I assess the contribution of creative writing to both the corpus and the status planning of MC (which raises the profile of the language), I bear in mind the fact that these two aspects of standardization work hand in hand. I also evaluate the enhanced attitudes towards MC by examining the changing rhetoric on the vernacular, in the local press and in academic books, in the light of the rapidly expanding body of literary texts. This evaluation facilitates the examination of the potential of creative writing to act as a powerful means of status planning.

Plan In Chapter 1, the sociolinguistic and literary context in which MC has been evolving is introduced and the contribution of writers is situated in relation to the other agents of standardization. This chapter also introduces Virahsawmy in terms of his political, linguistic and literary contribution to MC . Chapter 2 considers the impact of the early theatre of protest through three plays by the main playwrights, Virahsawmy, Henri Favory, and Azize Asgarally. Chapter 3 focuses on the second stage in the standardization of MC by analysing Virahsawmy’s later plays. Chapters 4 and 5 concentrate on his adaptations and translations of Shakespeare. Chapter 6 investigates key prose works in MC by three influential writers, Virahsawmy, Sedley Assonne, and Lindsey Collen. The Conclusion draws together and summarizes the main findings. 18 19

Itamar Even–Zohar, “Polysystem Studies,” Poetics Today 11.1 (1990): 9–26. Richard A. Hudson, Sociolinguistics (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 1996): 4.

10

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

II The Sociolinguistic Paradox20 While the State of Mauritius is described in the Constitution as comprising the islands of Mauritius (the main island), Rodrigues, Tromelin, Cargados Carajos and the Chagos Archipelago, including Diego Garcia, only the island of Mauritius will be the object of this study, and will from now on simply be referred to as Mauritius. Mauritius has a complex multilingual sociolinguistic make-up, with at least fifteen recognized spoken languages of different importance and propagation, including English, French, MC , Bhojpuri, Hindi, Marathi, Telegu, Tamil, Gujarati, Urdu, and Chinese (see Chapter 1, Part I for more details). A brief outline of the population history of Mauritius helps to contextualize the complexity of the sociolinguistic situation. Permanent settlement in Mauritius started in 1721 when settlers and slaves from Bourbon (now La Réunion) marked the beginning of French colonization. At the onset of French colonization (1721), a pidgin derived from French and originating in the colonial society in Bourbon was brought to Mauritius. For the purposes of agricultural development, a larger number of slaves were brought from Madagascar, East Africa and West Africa as well as a small number of free workers and slaves from the south of India. During the Napoleonic wars, the British, eager to prove their sovereignty in the Indian Ocean in relation to France, captured the island, renaming it Mauritius. The Treaty of 1810, which guaranteed the inhabitants right to maintain their religion, laws and customs, meant, however, that important institutions such as the Roman Catholic Church, the French civil code, French language and culture were given official sanction. Despite over a hundred and fifty years of British colonization from 1810 to 1968, Chaudenson notes, there was but a ‘theoretical’ British presence on the island.21 Not only was anglophone immigration almost non-existent but the few English families who did settle in Mauritius were soon integrated culturally and linguistically into the Franco-Mauritian community. The abolition of the slave trade in 1835, however, was marked by large-scale immigration 20

See Daniel Baggioni & Didier de Robillard, Île Maurice: Une francophonie paradoxale (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1990). 21 Robert Chaudenson, Textes Créoles Anciens (La Réunion et Île Maurice): Comparaison et essai d’analyse (Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 1981): 246.

½¾

Introduction

11

of workers from different parts of India (almost half a million) and by that of a much smaller contingent of workers from China, both of which brought drastic changes to the demographic composition of Mauritius. The 1968 Constitution divides Mauritian society, with a population of over a million, into four broad communities: the Hindus, representing a majority (52%): the General Population (29%); the Muslims (16%); and the Sino-Mauritians (3%). This broad ethnic/religious pigeonholing offers only a simplistic view of a highly complex demographic situation. The most interesting is the residual group, the General Population, classed as a community on the basis of a mixture of religious, linguistic and ethnographic factors and bringing together a wide grouping of communities: the Franco-Mauritians, the Creoles,22 and the ‘gens de couleur’. The term Franco-Mauritians refers to a white elite (mainly descendants of French settlers) who represent 2% of the whole population. In Mauritius, the word ‘Creole’ refers to individuals of African or Malagasy origin – descendants of former slaves, who represent an important minority (20%). The ‘gens de couleur’ are of mixed black and white race. Since independence (1968), major socio-economic and political changes have taken place which have, in turn, brought changes to the ethnic division of economic and political power. Economically, from the 1980s, Mauritius made a significant leap from an agricultural economy to becoming an N I C (Newly Industrialized Country). Once the backbone of the economy, the sugar industry has given way to more dynamic and lucrative sectors of the Mauritian economy: industry, tourism, offshore financial services and IT services. The Export Processing Zone (E P Z ), founded in 1971, became the largest source of employment by the late 1980s and the most important earner of foreign exchange in the 1990s. The fast economic growth has led to a near-eradication of unemployment and has, moreover, encouraged women to join the labour market; indeed, more than 70% of workers in the E P Z are women.23 Furthermore, the democratization of education since 1947 has made it possible for an increasing number of Mauritians of various ethnic and geographical backgrounds to receive higher education abroad as well as locally. Although

22

The word ‘Creole’ has both linguistic and ethnic reference in Mauritius. Despite this major socio-cultural change, however, Mauritius remains a patriarchal society. 23

12

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

the Franco-Mauritians maintained their positions as ‘sugar-barons,’24 social mobility has been witnessed among other communities. From the end of the nineteenth century, the Indian majority progressed in economic and social terms and, since 1957, have largely dominated the political scene. One particular ethnic group which remains economically marginalized, however, is the Afro-Mauritian contingency. Social mobility has not been accompanied by further urbanization, although, in urban areas, a new trend has been emerging. Town-dwellers live increasingly in neighbourhoods appropriate to their class and an emerging urban solidarity based on occupation and education often prevails over strictly ethnic loyalties. Although socio-economic and political changes have, to a large extent, helped undermine the colonial social distribution in postcolonial Mauritius, a colonial linguistic policy has continued to perpetuate the exclusion of a large section of the population. Even when Mauritius became a Republic (1992), the Constitution did not change the exclusive status of the colonial languages, English and French, but merely specified their official status, leaving intact the linguistic superstructure, as demonstrated below. The persistent colonial discourse on language relies on two main principles: the colonized have everything to gain from learning the colonial languages, which will introduce them to civilization; and the vernacular would not be capable of expressing modern, scientific concepts, or of functioning as the language of instruction and culture. Mauritius is one of the few countries in the world to be simultaneously a member of the francophonie community and of the New Commonwealth. English is the de-jure official language of parliament, jurisdiction and administration, and the official language of instruction in education at primary, secondary and tertiary levels. French occupies a semi-official status; it is mentioned in the Constitution as acceptable in parliament and in formal circumstances. However, while Mauritius stands officially at the crossroads of the francophone and anglophone worlds, it is, above all, creolophone. The precise origins of MC have been the subject of lively debate between Robert Chaudenson and Philip Baker. Chaudenson maintains that 25 MC was an offshoot of the French lexifier creole from Réunion. Baker 24

Eriksen, Common Denominators, 13. Robert Chaudenson, Le lexique du parler créole de La Réunion (Paris: Champion, 1974). 25

½¾

Introduction

13

and Chris Corne, conversely, argue that MC was a case of abrupt creolization with substratist influences from various African, Malagasy and Indian languages, and that the contribution of Réunionnais creole was not substantial. They reject Chaudenson’s hypothesis of MC as an approximation of an approximation of dialect-influenced seventeenth-century spoken French.26 Megan Vaughan’s succinct and insightful disengagement of a political agenda from this long-winded and vitriolic debate on genesis is useful: “To put it at its simplest, the linguists’ debate is a debate about who made the language – the slaves or their masters, the Africans or the French.”27 It is, however, possible to situate the reconfiguration of African and European cultural and linguistic practices beyond these frameworks. George Lang argues that although African languages and cultures were crucial elements of the total synthesis produced during creolization, creoles were integral elements of acculturation towards neither European nor African norms, but, rather, towards the newly formed values of Creole societies themselves.28 Creole genesis can thus be seen as a cultural as well as linguistic example of self-generating autonomy drawing on various sources at several levels. Indeed, as will be illustrated in the chapters that follow, MC , like all languages, whether they are classed as creoles or not,29 is not a monolithic object with a single origin but draws on various African, Indian, and Chinese languages. While M C , like other creoles, has been the product of a multilingual contact situation, it must, now that it has stabilized, be acknowledged as an autonomous system with its own pathway of development. I take Mark Sebba’s view: While the emergence of a Creole can in one sense be seen as the end point of a process which starts with language contact and ends with language birth, it can also be seen as the beginning of a new process,

26 Philip Baker & Chris Corne, Isle de France Creole: Affinities and Origins (Ann Arbor M I : Karoma, 1982). 27 Megan Vaughan, Creating the Creole Island: Slavery in Eighteenth-Century Mauritius (Durham N C & London: Duke U P , 2005): 206. 28 Lang, Entwisted Tongues, 101. 29 This distinction is itself problematic. See Salikoko Mufwene, The Ecology of Language Evolution (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 2001), and Degraff, “Linguists’ Most Dangerous Myth.”

14

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

in which the Creole is a newcomer in an existing cocktail of languages in contact.30

Indeed, various factors have contributed to the autonomous development of MC in relation to both French and the creole of La Réunion, which bears much closer lexical and syntactic links to French. Despite disagreements in relation to creole genesis, most linguists share the reflection that the latter represents an extraordinary feat in human mental history. The successful history of MC as a literary language and the ramifications thereof are no less impressive. In the 1970s, Baker could already observe that MC enjoyed “a curious status as a kind of ‘unofficial’ national language.”31 Other linguists such as Stein, Baggioni, and Robillard predicted the extension of the use of MC alongside French and English.32 Today, as will be illustrated in greater detail in Chapter 1, MC is the mother tongue of an overwhelming majority across ethnic groups and class and has been expanding, despite the prejudice to which it has been subjected both by the State and by individuals. While MC is the language usually used at home by more than 70% of the population, according to the last Population Census (2000),33 French is spoken by only 3.5% and English, the official language, by a mere 0.3%. Used increasingly in new domains, including politics, advertising, literization, literature, and religion, MC is regarded as the de facto national language. A distinction needs to be made here between a national language and an official language. The official status of a language implies that it will be used for formal (higher) education, for the purposes of government, administration, law, and international communication. In Mauritius, the two official languages, English and French, fulfil important roles which cannot be easily replaced. On the other hand, a national language takes on a number of equally crucial roles in the process of nation-building and in fulfilling both communicative and symbolic functions. Although the national language might be restricted to internal communication, it has a utilitarian role as the main medium of communication allowing the nation to func-

30

Sebba, Contact Languages, 203. Philip Baker, Kreol: A Description of Mauritian Creole (London: Hurst, 1972): 17. 32 Peter Stein, Connaissance et emploi des langues à l’Île Maurice (Kreolische Bibliothek; Hamburg: Helmut Buske , 1982), Baggioni & Robillard, Île Maurice. 33 http://ncb.intnet.mu/cso.htm 31

½¾

Introduction

15

tion efficiently through literization, and for the circulation of important information. A national language also fulfils integrative and expressive needs, encouraging cohesion and thereby allowing the nation to develop a shared culture. To know and to speak the national language is a clear sign of belonging to the nation. With reference to multi-ethnic and multilingual societies, in particular, the national language is promoted as that aspect of a national culture which helps to unify a diverse society. Postcolonial Mauritius did not follow the Indian or those African models of postcolonial language-planning which were to recognize and reinforce officially both the functional and the symbolic value of vernacular languages. Moreover, unlike Haiti, where Haitian creole is recognized as one of the official languages and, closer to Mauritius, the Seychelles, where the role and status of Seychellois creole have been acknowledged since the proclamation of the latter as official language in 1981, there have been no successful efforts on the part of the Mauritian State to implement any linguistic policy which would respond better to the postcolonial situation. Although we will come back to a revised concept of language policy and planning towards the end of this introduction, traditionally, language policy is seen as involving deliberately interventionist forms of planning implemented by Governments through a series of public actions including laws, ministerial decisions, codes of practice, and instructions to schools which demonstrate what the State stands for in relation to the needs of its citizens. In Mauritius, the lack of linguistic policy in relation to MC has demonstrated that the State has stood for non-intervention in relation to the growing importance of MC and the linguistic and sociolinguistic needs of the majority of citizens. The following section identifies the most pertinent linguistically related consequence of this non-interventionist stance.

Language and Socio-Economic Exclusion According to official figures, the national rate of literacy is 85% (Population Census 2000). Dev Virahsawmy, however, contests the validity of these figures, on the basis that they only indicate minimal competence. The Census abides by the United Nations requirement that literate persons should be able to both read and write a simple statement in their everyday life with understanding. Virahsawmy argues that the official figures do not correlate with the percentage of the population which is “functionally

16

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

literate”: i.e. which has the level of skill in reading and writing that allows them to read newspapers, fill in forms, understand instructions. Defining minimal competence as the ability to recognize certain lexemes and to ‘draw’ words, he goes as far as to suggest that the official definition of literacy is a conspiracy against the emancipation of the masses.34 His own research revealed that, in fact, only 20 % of the population is functionally literate in the official languages. These figures are based on the percentage of students who pass their ‘O’ Level and ‘A’ Level examinations. In 2003, out of approximately 90,000 students aged between 16 and 19, only 11,000 had passed the Secondary School Certificate (O Levels) and 5,400 had passed the Higher School Certificate (A Levels), which means that fewer than 20% of these students have the level of literacy endorsed by Virahsawmy. While Virahsawmy’s analysis of literacy-rates in Mauritius is less than generous, it is nonetheless a fact that, according to the last Population Census, 43% of the students who started primary school failed the Certificate of Primary Education at the end of 7 years of schooling. To achieve a higher rate of literacy, he has, for over forty years now, been calling for a change of language policy in favour of the instrumentalization of MC . The disjunction between languages of instruction and the ‘illegitimate’ language of daily use has also been commented on harshly by Playgroup35 and Ledikasyon pu travayer (LPT ).36 The latter are both non-governmental organizations whose perseverance in the promotion of MC is motivated by the goal of a more democratic distribution of educational opportunities and, therefore, wealth in Mauritius. The alarming rate of illiteracy at this early stage of education results, according to them, from the inability to master one, let alone two, languages, neither of which is the mother tongue of these children at the age of five. They often invoke recommendations from international bodies such as U N E S C O which emphasize that the use of the mother tongue as initial medium of instruction promotes a more precise and confident use of the language in a wider 34

See Dev Virahsawmy’s Testaman enn Metchiss (Rose-Hill: Bukié Banané, 1999). The Federation of Pre-School Playgroups was founded in 1975 to bring together a dozen playgroups and community centres. It is run on a democratic basis and has the principal aim of education. They advocate the generalized use and official acceptance of M C and also Bhojpuri, with emphasis on M C , however, given its predominance. 36 L P T , the biggest publishing company for literary and non-literary texts in M C , will be discussed in further detail in Chapter 1. 35

½¾

Introduction

17

area of communication and should precede the introduction of a foreign language: It is through the mother tongue that every human being first learns to formulate and express his ideas about himself, and about the world in which he lives. (U N E S C O , 1968: 690) On educational grounds we recommend that the use of the mother tongue be extended to as late a stage as possible. In particular, pupils should begin their schooling through the medium of the mother tongue, because they understand it best and because to begin their school life in their mother tongue will make the break between home and school as small as possible. (U N E S C O , 1968: 691)37

Since English and French fulfil the greatest range of formal functions and are the languages of communicative efficiency, social mobility and economic progress, the successful acquisition of these languages remains the ideal and foremost goal in the educational system. In a context where lack of competence in the official language remains a barrier to education, employment, and economic well-being for an important section of the population, lack of functional literacy in English, coupled with the fact that MC remains unstandardized and unequipped to function fully as a national language, constitutes a double linguistic handicap, causing the alienation of a large number of individuals from important spheres of life. Illiteracy results in the inability to contribute towards and benefit from the recent and rapid economic development of the island. The Étude pluridisciplinaire sur l’exclusion à Maurice (Interdisciplinary Study on Exclusion in Mauritius)38 has revealed clearly the link between linguistic policy and exclusion:

37

Quoted from Laura Hills, “Literacy in the Vernacular: A Case Study Based on the Post-Colonial History of Mauritius, with Particular Reference to Mauritian Creole” (doctoral dissertation, University of St Andrews, 2000): 18. 38 “Les politiques coloniales françaises et anglaises ont créé à Maurice un champ d’exclusion à double entente: exclusion des langues non-européennes et exclusion des locuteurs de ces langues de certains secteurs de la vie quotidienne”; Étude pluridisciplinaire sur l’exclusion à Maurice, ed. Issa Asgarally (Réduit: Government Printer, 1997): 87.

18

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

French and British colonial policies have created in Mauritius a double zone of exclusion: the exclusion of non-European languages and the exclusion of the speakers of these languages from some sectors of everyday life.

Moreover, the significant gap between the rates of illiteracy in urban and rural areas, where it is more than double (2000 Population Census), suggests the serious marginalization of the latter. In the light of these figures, it is not surprising that all the areas identified by the Interdisciplinary Study on Exclusion in Mauritius as centres of exclusion were rural or urban outskirts. Focusing on four geographically and thematically highly deprived areas of Mauritius, “pockets of poverty” which are often seen by the urban dweller as ghettos, the report also uncovered high levels of socio-economic poverty, alcoholism, serious absenteeism from work, and petty crime. The problem of exclusion is exacerbated by its association with the Creole community, the most economically and socially disadvantaged ethnic group of the country.39 The above report, which also revealed that the majority of the population inhabiting the deprived areas are of Creole origin, preceded rather ominously the national riots by members of this community. In February 1999, triggered off by the suspicious death of a Creole singer in custody, a latent but deep-rooted social discontent known as the malaise créole40 spilled over for three days and nights into a national social upheaval. Damage caused to public and private properties estimated at several million rupees and the awareness of the fragility of the social fabric provoked reflections and actions among various groups. The Government initiated a series of reforms to better the physical and social environment of the most deprived areas inhabited by the Creoles. More significantly, there emerged a new Creole consciousness promoting the recognition and specificity of the creole language and identity. It was in this context that a group of Catholic priests and Virahsawmy proposed a new orthography for the provision of literacy in the vernacular, fore39

See Benjamin Moutou, Les chrétiens de l’Île Maurice (Port-Louis: Best Graphics,

1996), and Eriksen, Common Denominators. 40 On 1 February 1993, the anniversary date of the abolition of slavery, a Catholic

priest, Roger Cerveaux, spoke openly of the ‘malaise créole’, the collectively felt and long contained frustration and resentment of the socially and culturally marginalized section of the Creole community against the State and the Church.

½¾

19

Introduction

grounding the recognition of a direct link between language policy, illiteracy and exclusion, or, in Pierre Bourdieu’s terms, between linguistic capital and cultural and economic capital. According to the advocates of MC , the latter has a crucial role to play in helping solve some of the literacy and linguistically related socio-economic problems. The argument used repeatedly that making MC a national language would isolate Mauritius in the global community is fraught and clearly based on non-linguistic premisses rather than a socio-economic rationale. In fact, providing literacy skills to the optimum number of Mauritians, initially in M C , would only integrate Mauritius further into modernization and allow it to participate better in the global community,41 as will be further demonstrated in Chapter 1. Virahsawmy maintains that, with the current low literacy rate, “Mauritius will never unlock the manacles of poverty, let alone smash neo-colonial fetters.”42 The non-interventionist official policy, by ignoring until very recently the potential contribution of MC to the global development of Mauritius, has resulted in a considerable waste of human resources.43 The next section explores language-planning more specifically through the process of standardization.

III Standardization Standardization requires language-planning at both status and corpus levels to produce a standard language where there had previously been dialects.44 Status planning involves not only the official recognition of the language but also more general interventions defining the status and the functions attributed to the language in relation to other languages or vari41

See Virahsawmy’s extensive comments on literacy and global economy at http: //pages.intnet.mu/develog 42 Virahsawmy, “Back to School,” L’Express (14 September 2004): 7. 43 See James Tollefson’s discussion of language planning and inequality in wider contexts in Tollefson, Planning Language, Planning Inequality: Language Policy in the Community (London: Longman, 1991). 44 The distinction between these two aspects of language planning is, however, not always clear, since the elaboration of an orthography, for example, can be seen to be an exercise of corpus and status planning as it affects both the forms and the prestige of the language. See Chapter 1, Part I for more details.

20

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

eties. On the other hand, corpus planning is aimed at developing the linguistic resources of the language and establishing shared linguistic norms to ensure “the minimum of misunderstanding and the maximum of efficiency.”45 The most-cited model of standardization remains Einar Haugen’s classic (1966) four-step model.46 Haugen identifies, first of all, the social process of selection of a particular variety as the one to be developed into the standard. The next step, codification, involves the fixing of the selected variety so that there is both consensus on what is correct and motivation to learn and use the correct form. The typical products of codification are a prescriptive orthography, grammar, and dictionary, which determine the ‘right’ from the ‘wrong’ use of language. According to Haugen, however, the above remain mere paper exercises if they are not backed by two further developments. Elaboration involves the use of the selected and codified variety in all functions associated with government and writing. Elaboration of function goes hand in hand with elaboration of form, which bears on the corpus of the variety selected, transforming it from an oral to a written language to enable it to perform new functions. Finally, acceptance ensures the life of the language when the selected variety is ultimately adopted by even a small but influential section of the population. Whereas elaboration and codification are processes bearing upon the linguistic corpus of the variety, selection and acceptance are social processes, affecting its role and status in society. A standard language, in sum, is a language whose norms have been codified or regulated through dictionaries and grammatical descriptions, which functions fully and efficiently as a written medium, and whose autonomy from other languages has been guaranteed. Although, within the context of the existence and development of spoken languages over millennia, the process of standardization is “quite abnormal” and of “unusual character,”47 the social prestige associated with standard languages is consequential. Standardization, however, rarely materializes along the neat lines of Haugen’s original model, since it often occurs without the backing of an official linguistic policy. Examples of individual influences on language 45

James & Lesley Milroy, Authority in Language: Investigating Standard English (London: Routledge, 1999): 23. 46 Einar Haugen, Language Conflict and Language Planning (Cambridge M A : Harvard U P , 1966). 47 Hudson, Sociolinguistics, 32–33.

½¾

Introduction

21

are Vaugelas and his support of “le bon usage” in relation to French in Remarques sur la Langue Française (1647) and Dr Johnson, whose dictionary and grammar of the English language (1755), of a highly authoritarian nature, gave England its substitutes for an academy. Besides, Haugen refers mostly to European languages and the standardizing processes they went through over many centuries. The situation of MC has different specifications, as described above and further in Chapter 1. Bernard Spolsky’s development of the theory of language policy – based on three principal components: language practices; language ideology or beliefs; and language management or planning – is particularly useful to the Mauritian case study. Language policy, he maintains, is about choice: It may be the choice regularly made by an individual, or a socially defined group of individuals, or a body with authority over a defined group of individuals. It may be discovered in the linguistic behaviour (linguistic practices) of the individual or group. It may also be discovered in the ideology or beliefs about the language of the individual or group. Finally, it may be made explicit in the formal language management or planning decisions of an authorized body.48

His broadened view of language policy means that it is situated in the wider political, economic, cultural, and ideological contexts that make up human society. A description of language policy which is not restricted to the authority of the state is particularly enabling in the case of Mauritius, where language practices, beliefs, and management are not necessarily congruent and where each of the three levels of choice outlined by Spolsky may lead to a different language policy. Until 2004, since any effort of language promotion and development relied entirely on the linguistic intervention of the civil society rather than the political society, language policy has been taking place at the level of the individual or the group. These acts of linguistic intervention which operate without the backing of the State can also be considered within an alternative framework of language-planning, ‘aménagement linguistique’ as developed by Didier de Robillard.49 ‘Aménagement linguistique’ distinguishes itself from older 48

Bernard Spolsky, Language Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 2004): 217. Didier de Robillard, “Le processus d’accession à l’écriture: Étude de la dimension sociolinguistique à travers le cas du créole mauricien,” in Les créoles français entre 49

22

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

models of language-planning, which nearly always involved linguistic and sociolinguistic changes planned by organizations established for such purposes. Although ‘aménagement linguistique’ is concerned, like languageplanning, with functional efficiency – with equipping and enabling the vernacular to fulfil all the linguistic, communicative, expressive, and integrative needs of a community, at least for internal purposes – it is perceived in a less authoritarian light. Changes are not imposed from above but are achieved in support of existing favourable sociolinguistic trends and are the result of a consensus between ‘aménageurs’ and language users. Equally relevant to the context of MC is the integration of this discipline within the broader project of social re-arrangement, in particular the elimination of ethno-linguistic inequalities and the promotion of cultural pluralism. In other words, ‘aménagement’ also functions as a marker of group identity. Because ‘aménagement linguistique’ encompasses all forms of linguistic intervention, including the more modest contribution of the civil society and individual writers, it is particularly relevant to the discussion of MC . While both colonial and postcolonial governments have done very little to promote MC , various agents and factors have been leading towards its ‘aménagement’, including: the postcolonial movement started by writers and militants, mostly from the Mouvement Militant Mauricien (M M M ),50 a socialist political party; LPT , which played an important role in establishing MC as an independent language and enhancing its status in socio-cultural terms; the increasing communicative value of MC ; more recently, the functional role of MC within the Church; and printing technology and its standardizing consequences. Although the aforementioned institutions and groups of individuals play a significant role in the legitimization and promotion of MC to varying degrees, it is not within the scope of this book to assess their contribution in detail. While bearing in mind the fact that the standardization of MC is part of a complex social movement, my main argument remains that creative writers are playing an

l’oral et l’écrit, ed. Ralph Ludwig (Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 1989): 81–107. See also Robillard, “L’aménagement linguistique: Une gestion des conflits de langues?” in Langues, économie et développement, ed. Robert Chaudenson & Didier de Robillard (Montmagny: Marquis, 1989): 81–113. 50 A left-wing political party founded in 1969 under the leadership of Paul Bérenger, the M M M was the most active group of young militants in the 1970s and 1980s.

½¾

Introduction

23

important role in the development of a literary norm which could lead to the emergence of a written standard form for MC .

The Role of Creative Writing as ‘aménagement linguistique’ Writing is often the ultimate proof of the legitimacy of a language.51 In comparative histories of Western European vernacular languages, it is widely acknowledged that literary figures have played an important role in the process of language standardization.52 Adamson, in particular, refers to the codifying of language and the canonizing of literature as not merely simultaneous but symbiotic processes. Indeed, creative writing in poetry, drama and the novel can be an indispensable and powerful instrument in standardizing a language. Scaglione illustrates his point with the example of Italian, which was to be based not on political, military, diplomatic, or social criteria but “on an exclusively cultural, indeed specifically literary foundation.”53 In fact, he claims that Italian as a national language “can be said to have been to a considerable extent the almost single-handed creation of one man, Dante Alighieri.”54 Equally, the figure of Shakespeare is central to the ideologies of both the English nation and the English language. In terms of corpus, creative writing plays a crucial role of selection and normalization through which a particular variety of language imposes itself as the most prestigious. Creative writing also leads to the intellectualization55 of the language by forcing it to communicate in fields unfamiliar to it as an oral form. In Haugen’s term, this is an example of elaboration of function, a process which inevitably leads to elaboration in terms of form through creativeness, transformation and deviation. Literature, in other words, is not only a lexical repertory but mod51

James & Lesley Milroy, Authority in Language. Adamson, “Literary Language,” in The Cambridge History of the English Language, vol. 3, 539–653. 53 Baeumer & Scaglione, The Emergence of National Languages, 18. 54 The Emergence of National Languages, 13. 55 Bohůslav Havránek from the Linguistic School of Prague describes intellectualization as the adoption of a language in fields where complex and abstract concepts have to be expressed, a process which reinforces the intellectual aspect of the language; “Appendice I I I : Emploi et culture de la langue standard” (1932), in La Norme Linguistique, ed. Edith Bédard & Jacques Maurais (Quebec & Paris: Conseil de la language française, 1983): 815–33. 52

24

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

ernizes and extends the lexicon. Moreover, literature has the important role of rooting a language in use, illustrating and validating linguistic norms and/or habits. Likewise, the Linguistic School of Prague’s ‘culture de la langue’, an earlier model of ‘aménagement linguistique’, maintains that the creative writer can make a contribution to the development of a language which does not lie within the scope of the linguist.56 Creative writing enhances the prestige of the language by providing it with the added register of a literary language, thus functioning as a factor in status ‘aménagement’. Moreover, since writing becomes an instrument of reference and since it is in relation to the written norm that language users come to view all variation, the development of a literary norm opens up the possibility of seeing linguistic variation in terms of a hierarchy of stylistic registers and codes. The prestige associated with written registers thus results in a ‘feedback’ from writing into speech by bringing irreversible changes to the speakers’ view and use of oral language.57 Literature can, therefore, serve as both a symbolic and a linguistic model for attracting the interest and loyalty of the intended readers and can be seen to be an indispensable and powerful instrument in standardizing a language. Furthermore, since a literary canon usually exemplifies what critics have selected as the best examples of the language, literary works are often the source of citations in dictionaries and thus provide legitimacy for a standard language. Indeed, creative writing as a prestigious institution furthers the acceptance of previously stigmatized forms of language and, therefore, has important implications for influencing language attitudes towards creoles. In relation to creoles, Mark Sebba reinforces the point that the potential linguistic development of Creoles relies on both the ideological and the practical role of influential writers: It is most likely to happen if writers using the Pidgin or Creole themselves gain enough authority and status to define a standard language in their own terms – some Shakespeares, Dantes and Luthers are needed! This is possible but rare in history and it can only happen if

56

See Bohůslav Havránek, “Emploi et culture de la langue standard,” in La Norme Linguistique. 57 Halliday, Spoken and Written Language, 45.

½¾

25

Introduction writers actually use the pidgin or Creole for ‘high’ functions such as literature.58

Among the handful of Mauritian writers who believe that MC has the potential to fulfil the same functions as any of the ‘developed’ languages if only it is given the respect and resources that this demands, one author stands out. Dev Virahsawmy, writer/‘aménageur’, has since the 1960s set himself the task of developing MC into the instrument of an integral development for Mauritius. Describing himself as an organic intellectual in the Gramscian sense and seeing his work as less that of a contemplative thinker than of an organizer who actively participates in social life by unifying theory and practice, he seeks to establish a dialectical relation between the orientation of his work and social reality.59 His work, as will be illustrated in the following chapters, can be situated within a framework of postcolonial creolistics as defined by Degraff.

½¾

58

Sebba, Contact Languages: Pidgins and Creoles, 240. Dev Virahsawmy, “La Poésie Mauricienne d’expression créole (C M ) et la ‘culture de la langue’,” in Formes-sens / identités, ed. Daniel Baggioni & Carpanin Marimoutou (Université de La Réunion, 1989). 59

1

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

T

H I S C H A P T E R H A S T H R E E A I M S , all of which are intended to contextualize the stylistic analysis of postcolonial literature in MC in the subsequent chapters. Part I provides an overview of the status and functions of MC in relation to the other languages in use in Mauritius, to facilitate an understanding of how the social relations of Mauritius have influenced the evolution of MC in terms of status and corpus. Part II focuses on the emergence and development of a literature in MC across the three genres of poetry, drama and the novel as an important factor of ‘aménagement’. Part III examines the main linguistic transformations required in the development of a written form of language and outlines the stylistic tools and areas of investigation for the analysis of literature in MC .

I The Sociolinguistic Context Status and Function of Languages MC became the mother tongue for the descendants of African slaves under French occupation and, after the abolition of slavery in the nineteenth century, a lingua franca between the latter and the Indian and Chinese immigrants. Even when British rule imposed English as the official language in 1810, making it compulsory in all judiciary and public matters, the established use of French and that of the lingua franca M C was

28

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

not displaced. The lack of effort to anglicize the island was a determining factor in the evolution of MC . Moreover, despite the role of Bhojpuri, which was introduced from Northeast India (Bihar, provenience of the majority of indentured Indians) as a lingua franca among Indians, the latter were strongly encouraged to rapidly acquire MC , since it enabled communication with the other ethnic groups on the island. The same phenomenon applied to the Chinese immigrants. MC was thus used increasingly throughout the colonial period and acquired a supra-ethnic role long before independence. The next section situates the functions of MC in relation to the other languages in use in contemporary Mauritius. The presence of English in Mauritius as the official language is the result of British administration from 1810 to 1968. English remains firmly established in education as the compulsory medium of education with ‘O’ Level and ‘A’ Level certificates awarded by the Cambridge External Examinations Board, and in law and administration. While English is not actually spoken by any group as a mother tongue, it is, to a large extent, this very neutral status that keeps its position unchallenged as official language in this pluricultural society, as in several continental-African countries. The increasing international prestige of English as the most important world language, that of trade, development, technology, including information technology, also works in its favour. It is, as pointed out in the Introduction, the language usually spoken at home by a mere 0.3% of the population (Population Census 2000). French is the medium of oral and written communication in a large number of formal situations. The 1968 Constitution of Mauritius asserts that French is acceptable in parliamentary debates, conferring upon it a semi-official status. The two main dailies, Le Mauricien and L’Express, are still mostly in French, although L’Express also publishes a few articles in English. Moreover, historically, the Roman Catholic Church, the main Christian church in Mauritius, has also played an important part in the survival and promotion of French through Roman Catholic-aided schools and colleges where French is predominant. However, while religious instruction and church services are generally held in French, the Catholic Church has had to acknowledge the relative inaccessibility of the latter and often makes use of MC in sermons. An intensification of French media coverage on a national basis (for example, R F O –Réunion and Canal Plus, available on digital television) is leading to an increasing and widespread knowledge of French. While, originally, French served as a socio-ethnic

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

29

symbol for a dominant white minority, it is becoming increasingly a supra-ethnic language, the inherited tongue of the emerging well-off urban class, which includes Indo-Mauritians, Sino-Mauritians, and a Creole bourgeoisie. It is, however, the language usually spoken at home by only 3.5% of the population (Population Census 2000). Hindi and Urdu are taught in primary schools as Oriental languages and are supported by religious practices. Spoken by a minority, they nevertheless function as sociolinguistic identity-tags.1 Although Tamil, Telegu, Marathi, and Gujarati are still spoken by some elderly people, they are quickly losing ground as instruments of verbal communication. Arabic is the ancestral language of no-one, but carries strong religious and cultural value as the language of the Qur’an. Hakka and Cantonese are spoken by a minority of Sino-Mauritians, although Mandarin, as the official language of the Republic of China, has higher prestige and is taught in some primary and secondary schools. All of the above, however, are assuming with increasing difficulty the symbolic role of ancestral cultural identities. Of the languages acknowledged by the Constitution, those not standardized are Bhojpuri and MC , which are, incidentally, also the most important vernaculars in terms of numbers of speakers. Between them, MC and Bhojpuri are the languages currently used by 81.7% of the total population (Population Census 2000). Not only is the status of Bhojpuri, considered inferior to Hindi, comparable to that of MC in relation to French, but its position is also being increasingly threatened by that of MC as a relatively more useful and prestigious language. In terms of their legal status, both Bhojpuri and MC are tolerated languages. M C : The National Language Since independence, MC has benefitted from increasing demographic status in terms of the numerical strength of its speakers and the ratio of L1 users to the total population. The 2000 census figures confirm the trend,

already noted by Peter Stein, of a shift from a multilingualism dominated by Oriental languages to one where the formal learning of European lan-

1

Hindustani, with which Hindi and Urdu are often confused, is the term that refers to the oral form of both Hindi and Urdu and applies to the language of Indian or Pakistani musical feature films which have important coverage on national television, Indian television channels and at the cinema in Mauritius.

30

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

guages, usually associated with urban areas, takes over.2 M C , however, remains the common denominator among all bilingual possibilities. A comparison between the data on ancestral languages3 in previous censuses and those of the 1990 and 2000 Censuses reveals that French has lost ground as ancestral language, from 7.1% in 1952 to 3.3% in 1990 to 1.8% in 2000. Although this can be explained partly by the emigration of a significant number of Franco-Mauritians to South Africa and Australia at independence, it is also a result of the progressive acceptance of MC , which permits more speakers to re-establish historical truth by officially acknowledging the latter. Moreover, in the 2000 Census 36.8% of the population claimed MC as their sole ancestral language. The figure rises to 47.2% if one takes into account the combinations of MC and other languages designated as ancestral languages. Since the Creole ethnic group represent only 20% of the population, a significant percentage of individuals from other ethnic groups must have designated MC as their ancestral language. These figures further highlight the growing acknowledgement of MC as supra-ethnic national language and foreground the major disparity between the language policy laid down in the constitution and actual social practice. Since the early eighteenth century, MC and French have been in a diglossic relation. Diglossia is described by Charles Ferguson as the linguistic situation of a community where two or more varieties of the same language are of unequal status, with a H(igh) and a L(ow) variety.4 A stable diglossia seems to coincide with the colonial order when a European language, the H(igh) variety, is used in official and political fields and when the language of lower prestige, the L(ow) variety, is left to casual everyday conversation and popular songs intended for light entertainment, a situation which initiates and perpetuates prejudice against the L(ow) language. Since independence, however, MC has been emerging from its previously diglossic position to French. Nowadays, since there does not seem to be any situation where the use of MC is wholly excluded and since there are numerous situations where M C is practically 2

Peter Stein, “Problèmes liés à un parler créole dans une société multilingue: Le cas de l’Île Maurice,” in Languages in Contact, ed. Jurgen M. Meisel (Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 1977): 187–206. 3 That is to say, the language of forefathers and a potential indicator of ethnicity, especially in the past. 4 Charles Ferguson, “Diglossia,” Word 15 (1959): 325–40.

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

31

the only language in use, Mauritius can be said to be in a position of postdiglossia. Changes in the demographic and economic systems have led to changes in the values assigned to language varieties in Mauritius. MC has not only benefitted from the growing political and cultural strengths of the speakers of that language and their influence but from the willingness of an elite to use this language in both private and formal communication. Moreover, MC has conquered new domains in the public sphere through its growing presence in advertising and health leaflets and its increased use in such crucial areas as literization, literature, religion, and a full news bulletin on national television. The habitus of MC , which governs language behaviour as well as judgments about the value of languages, has changed drastically over the past two decades, building up the cultural and social capital of MC . As discussed in the Introduction, Spolsky mentions three main levels on which language policy takes place. The most realistic answer to the question of which is the real language policy resides, according to him, in language practices, in what people do rather than in what they think they should do or what someone else wants them to do.5 The local press often acknowledges the discrepancy between language policy on an unofficial level and on an official one: “In the case of Mauritius, what is surprising is the absence of a national language […]. Or rather the non-recognition of Creole as national language.”6 As demonstrated through the Census figures in this chapter, language policy on the individual speaker’s level in Mauritius clearly indicates the unofficial status and functioning of MC as national language. While the diglossic asymmetry between MC and French has been more seriously challenged in Mauritius than in the French D O M -T O M s (Départements d’Outre-Mer, Territoires d’Outre-Mer, which include La Réunion, Guadeloupe, and Martinique), the lingering effects of diglossia have perpetuated language myths surrounding MC which may partly explain the state’s laissez-faire policy. Some of the bases for the prejudice against MC were noted in the Introduction through reference to Jean– Georges Prosper. Camille de Rauville, also a staunch opponent of any 5

Spolsky, Language Policy, 218. “Dans le cas de Maurice, le plus étonnant est l’absence d’une langue nationale (...). Ou plutôt la non–reconnaissance du créole comme langue nationale”; Week-End (19 April 1998): 15. 6

32

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

promotion of MC , published a Lexique des mauricianismes à éviter: Des barbarismes et des solécismes les plus fréquents à l’Île Maurice7 (Lexicon of Mauritianisms to be Avoided: On the Most Frequent Barbarisms and Solecisms in Mauritius), accompanied by frequent newspaper articles supporting his arguments against MC and its contaminating influence on French. In the light of de Rauville’s book and Prosper’s later publication, Histoire de la Littérature Mauricienne d’expression française, the connection between francophiles and anti-MC prejudice is further illustrated. Indeed, it may be argued that their own economic and symbolic power rest on the appropriation of the language and knowledge of the dominant group. Mark Sebba goes so far as to suggest that in Creole-speaking communities a particular sociolinguistic status quo may be deliberately maintained in order to safeguard the interests of that elite: This [the status quo] may be due to power being held by an elite who can comfortably use the official standard or lexifier language. They may have a vested interest in keeping the majority uninformed and controlling their access to national institutions.8

Almost forty years after independence, prejudice against MC still lingers in more subtle, maybe, but equally powerful ways even among those intellectuals who are favourably inclined towards MC . The differences in the range of roles that languages play in diglossia often lead to the view that a language which does not fulfil a wide range of functions lacks the linguistic resources to do so. Although, as will be demonstrated in Part II, literature has helped to debunk the exclusive association of MC with colloquial usage, there is some doubt about its syntactic and lexical ability to conceptualize the increasingly complex socio-cultural reality of Mauritius. This attitude, which incidentally often prevailed in relation to European vernacular languages before they were standardized, permeates Jacques Lee’s Creole Phrase Book and Dictionary: Not only will you find this colourful pidgin French great fun, but also fascinating, if at times a little crazy, but above all it is simple. […]

7

Camille de Rauville, Lexique des mauricianismes à éviter: Des barbarismes et des solécismes les plus fréquents à l’Île Maurice (Port–Louis: Livre Mauricien, 1967). 8 Sebba, Contact Languages, 237.

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

33

You simply cannot make any mistake when speaking Mauritian Creole – the language has no grammatical or other rules; no verbs to learn or conjugate, no syntax or orthography. Is this the perfect language for the lazy linguist?9

In addition to perpetuating the condescending colonial view of creole languages through epithets such as “colourful,” “crazy,” “simple,” his statement that MC has no grammar indicates a further distorted view of what constitutes a language. A language without any grammar, as reinforced by Bauer, is indeed a contradiction in terms.10 Lee confuses the issue of codified grammatical, lexical and orthographic rules associated with standard written languages with the unformalized rules that govern all languages, whether they have been subject to standardization or not. This quotation from Lee illustrates the fact that a great deal of creole-related scholarship is not so much a body of knowledge about creole structures as it is essentially a hegemonic body of discourse in the sense given by Foucault.

Language Planning Phase 1: A Nationalistic Début Two phases can be identified in the promotion of MC . The first took place in the early ferment of independence when a nationalist choice of language served as a focus for mobilization. Vinesh Hookoomsing acknowledges Virahsawmy’s role as a trailblazer: Combining the drive of nationalism, the insights of Linguistics and the power of rhetoric, Dev Virahsawmy was the first to set the agenda for the recognition, development and standardization of M C L [Mauritian Creole Language].11

Whereas Virahsawmy’s literary contribution will be considered at the end of this chapter, his extraliterary work will help here to contextualize the

9

Jacques Lee, Mauritius: Its Creole Language; The Ultimate Creole Phrase Book and Dictionary (London: Nautilus, 1999): back cover. 10 Winifred Bauer, “Some Languages have no Grammar,” in Language Myths, ed. Laurie Bauer & Peter Trudgill (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1998): 84. 11 Vinesh Hookoomsing, A Harmonized Writing System for the Mauritian Creole Language: Grafi-Larmoni (Réduit: University of Mauritius, 2004): 5.

34

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

sparking-off of an important politico-cultural movement which would lead to a greater recognition of MC . Inspired by his MA thesis “Towards a Re-Evaluation of Mauritian Creole,”12 Virahsawmy wrote a series of radical articles in the Mauritian daily L’Express (April 1967–April 1968). He claimed that MC could fulfil the subjective role of national cohesion and bring further cultural and political liberation: “We Mauritians have something in common. It is a very useful tool for the creation of a nation. It can release the feelings of loyalty, self-respect and complete participation. It is the creole which we speak.”13 Virahsawmy’s insistence on referring to MC as “Morisiê” sought to invalidate the association between the language and the Creole ethnic group and to include everyone on the basis of nationality rather than ethnicity, furthering the point that Mauritius had a national language to fall back on in the challenging task of nation-building. “Morisiê” also reinforced MC as sufficiently distinct from the creole languages of the neighbouring islands, Réunion and Seychelles. In the absence of a mythical precolonial past and ethnic unity to draw on, Mauritian nationalism relied partly on M C for self-justification. On the eve of independence, despite the staunch opposition to MC , Virahsawmy’s articles (1967) played a groundbreaking role in attacking some of the colonial myths attached to MC and initiated the transformation of the image of MC from language of the oppressed to revalorized vernacular by demonstrating that it was a language in its own right with a distinct system of pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary. Other militants rallied around Virahsawmy, capitalizing on the potential of MC as a means of representing and promoting national unity as well as a liberating medium of expression.14 This pro-MC movement reached a peak in the late 1970s and was closely linked to the M M M . From its inception in 1969, the M M M used MC in its political meetings and press conferences. Moreover, the fact that its leader, Paul Bérenger, an educated and privileged Franco-Mauritian, used M C rather than French brought further symbolic capital to the language. Whereas the Labour Party which took over at independence 12

Dev Virahsawmy, “Towards a Re-Evaluation of Mauritian Creole” (diploma, Applied Linguistics, University of Edinburgh, 1967). 13 Dev Virahsawmy, “Insularity and All That,” L’Express (5 October 1967). 14 Vinesh Hookoomsing, “Langue créole, littérature nationale et mauricianisme populaire,” in Anthologie de la Nouvelle Poésie Créole, ed. Lambert–Félix Prudent (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1984): 381.

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

35

saw independence as an aim in itself, for the MMM decolonization would be an ongoing process involving the difficult elaboration of a new social order. In this light, the M M M asserted itself against the predominance of colonial languages and culture; during its brief period in power (1982), the party implemented, impromptu, a revolutionary national language policy promoting MC as the main language of communication. The changes in language policy, however, which included the introduction of the main evening news in MC and the replacement of the national anthem in English with a version in MC , caused uproar, for a number of reasons. The National Seminar on the Language Issue held in 1982 and designed to be the first step in implementing a language policy which would recognize and promote MC , revealed conflicting opinions only too clearly.15 Ambiguities surrounding the variety of MC to be selected (rural/urban, acrolectal/basilectal) remained unresolved.16 The very first process which Haugen refers to in his standardization model, selection, was not even reached. The M M M did not seek to find a consensus about the implementation of the new and drastic policies. The dialogue between policy-makers and language users, the acceptance factor of their planning, was wholly neglected. Changes in relation to the status of MC were unaccompanied by any consideration for, let alone any expertise in, the process of elaboration, an element of corpus development that is crucial to effective language policy. The M M M also failed to consider languageplanning within the fuller social context, which requires the coordinated attention of political, educational, economic and linguistic authorities. Because they did not take into account the existing network of social communication and the multilingual composition of Mauritius, their promotion of MC was seen as a perilous displacement of other languages. Besides, the association of M C with the Creole ethnic group and the 15 National Seminar on the Language Issue in Mauritius, October 4–11 1982 Proceedings, ed. H. Unmole (Réduit: University of Mauritius, 1984). 16 In a post-creole situation, there emerges a continuum of varieties. Of these, the term ‘basilectal’, as used by most linguists, refers to the variety of Creole that is the furthest away from the lexifying source, while the ‘acrolectal’ is at the other end of a continuum, with the ‘mesolectal’ in the middle. The acrolectal, also associated with an urban educated middle class, benefits from the highest prestige and can thus be seen as the most likely variety to be selected for standardization. See David DeCamp, “Towards a Generative Analysis of a Post-Creole Speech Continuum,” in Pidginization and Creolization, ed. Dell Hymes (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 1971): 349–70.

36

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

working class further complicated the matter. The impact of the M M M ’s radical and ad hoc change of linguistic policy was so disruptive that it not only led to the dissolution of the Government but also ensured that no subsequent government dared. until 2004, to upset the complex sensibilities surrounding these linguistic issues by re-opening the debate. The ideology of nationalism clearly did not convince the majority to accept MC as an official language. In fact, this language programme, geared towards linguistic homogeneity and based on the process of achieving a single language for a single people in a single state, was seen as inherently repressive. There are, in fact, comparatively few cases where language management in the sense of a top-down policy has produced its intended results. Indeed, Sue Wright argues that “there is a growing conviction that the very concept of language policy making and planning has become unacceptable.”17 As a contrast to the MMM ’s language-planning efforts, the subsequent approach detailed below would attempt to accommodate the tensions arising between the centripetal efforts of nation-building and the centrifugal pressures of autonomy movements.

Phase 2: Towards a Pragmatic ‘Aménagement’ of MC Rather than leave MC to continue to evolve naturally, scholarly activists in postcolonial Mauritius, as in several countries seeking to exit from the rule of previous empires, have laboured to codify, standardize, and disseminate the national language. This intervention, which is geared towards redressing language-related inequalities, is integrated into the wider postcolonial project of social re-arrangement. Indeed, in a campaign for more fairly defined language-rights alongside other cultural, social or political rights, several individuals and small groups have attempted to modify language policy by influencing the practices and beliefs of other members in order to influence the larger political unit (the nation-state). One of the key pragmatic considerations is the empowerment of MC monolinguals through literacy, which would lead to social access and material advancement. The roles which MC is being called upon to fulfil have changed since the 1980s and are now shifting from a symbol of nationalism exploited by the left towards an emphasis on the commu-

17

Sue Wright, Language Policy and Language Planning (Basingstoke: Palgrave,

2004): 96.

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

37

nicative use of the national language in relation to concerns with progress, education and modernity. The renewed movement to promote MC , guided by the requirements of economic development and well-being, does not involve a displacement of English and French but relies on a redefinition of the roles of the three main languages in use in an attempt at maximizing the benefits of the existing multilingualism. There is an increasing awareness that there is space in Mauritius for several languages to serve democratic and economic goals and that the power of individual languages can be exploited as potential rather than domination. Both Virahsawmy and L P T have revised their anticolonial language stance and now show a greater acknowledgment of the roles played by English and French, particularly that of English as a lingua franca, in an increasingly postnational system.18 L P T , Virahsawmy and the Catholic Church support an M C /English bilingual solution whereby the group language provides for early literacy, access to information, socialization and identity, and whereby the language of wider diffusion, here English, allows access to higher education, international networks and geographical mobility. New directions in language policy on the individual and institutional level in Mauritius reveal that the supremacy of the nation-state as a form of political organization is being balanced off against supranational, international and transnational institutions. Indeed, this approach, which sees multilingual diversity as an asset upon which development must build, rather than as an impediment, is akin to ‘aménagement’.

The Increased Instrumentalization of M C L P T has been for long the only organization promoting literacy in MC for adults. Besides members of the public, every year several groups of illiterate workers are sent by parastatal19 and private companies for literacy classes in MC to enable them to read instructions from manuals translated, mostly from English, into MC . Whereas, in the past, literacy skills had not been a necessity for manual workers and technicians, the introduction of new and more efficient technology requires the use of information technology and, therefore, literacy even for blue-collar jobs. L P T is also the main publisher of texts in MC . From the mid-1970s, 18 19

L P T ’s annual Colloquium on M C is held in both M C and English. That is, owned jointly by the Government and private parties.

38

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

L P T emerged as the main organization actively involved in the standardization of MC , establishing and disseminating their own orthography through literacy classes in MC and publishing, and organizing annual national creative-writing competitions in MC and conferences on the lan-

guage.20 The Catholic Church has since 1999 invested in MC literacy as one of its priorities. Since 2004 it has, on an experimental basis, set up schooling through the medium of MC for those students who fail their end-ofprimary-school examinations more than once. The Church uses an orthographic system which was devised as a teamed effort with Virahsawmy. In addition to its role in literacy and education, the Church has also promoted the use of MC in the religious field. The liturgy, translated into MC from French, just as it was once translated from Latin into French, is being used on an experimental basis. Since the language of religion is traditionally seen to be the highest and most conservative in terms of register, the implemenation of MC within and by the religious institution can be seen as groundbreaking in the history of the national language. Since this linguistic legitimization of MC is relatively new, its impact on the ‘aménagement’ remains to be assessed. MC is also instrumental across other religions practised in Mauritius. An important source of prestige for the standard language comes from its use by national elites, particularly writers. It was suggested in the Introduction that creative writing can be a means of language-planning, both by providing a language with the social imprimatur associated with standard languages and by developing the linguistic features of the language. While this issue will be considered in detail in Part II, the following subsection demonstrates how the increasing functional roles of MC have been accompanied by developments in terms of corpus.

Codification Virahsawmy’s political convictions in relation to the promotion of MC were also backed by linguistic accomplishments. The first proposals for an orthography for MC were made by him in 1967 and were based on a 20

Laura Hills, in “Literacy in the Vernacular,” which focuses on the relation between literization and standardization, argues that L P T ’s approach to literacy, standardization and the promotion of M C provides the best basis for the establishment of M C as a standard language.

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

39

phonemic principle. There has since independence been an ongoing debate about orthographic conventions for MC , mainly between the prophonemicists, who propose a system based on maximal deviance from French, and those arguing for a basis in etymology (as championed by the press, in particular). Sebba provides a useful contrastive insight into the phonemic and etymological approaches: The phonemic approach involves treating the pidgin or creole as a language in its own rights, without any historical connections to any other, and producing a spelling system which has one, and only one, symbol per phoneme of that language. […] The etymological orthography treats the pidgin or creole as a dialect of the lexifier, and uses the conventional spelling of the lexifier for words which identifiably originate from the same lexifier. Other words are spelt using the conventions of the lexifier, with modifications if necessary.21

In relation to MC , an orthography based purely on etymological principles is acceptable neither on practical nor on ideological grounds. It would perpetuate the widespread conception of MC as an inferior version of French, thereby reinforcing the diglossic relations and potentially acting as a pedagogical hindrance both to those who are not literate in French and to those learning French.22 The alternative, a strictly phonetic transcription, is, however, no more desirable. The aim of phonetics is to make a permanent and unambiguous record of what goes on in our speech, an aim which is distinct from that of a writing system. At the first, politically charged, stage of the promotion of MC , Virahsawmy saw the purpose of his orthography of maximal deviance as that of creating the visual and psychological awareness of MC ’s autonomy from French.23 His experiment was, however, severely criticized for inaccessibility. His heavy use of diacritics (circumflex accent) to represent nasal 21

Sebba, Contact Languages: Pidgins and Creoles, 244. Mervyn Alleyne observes that, in Martinique and Guadeloupe, those who reinforce the autonomy and separateness of creole from French have had more success than those who see creole only in terms of a transition to French in areas of literacy and literature; “Problems of Standardization of Creole Languages,” in Language and the Social Construction of Identity in Creole Situations, ed. Marcyliena Morgan (Berkeley: U of California, Center for Afro-American Studies, 1994): 15. 23 Dev Virahsawmy, “La Sacro-Sainte Graphie,” L’Express Supplément (3 March 1988). 22

40

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

sounds was seen as visually alien to those accustomed to French and English orthographic conventions. The following example is accompanied by a French and English translation of words with diacritics: Biro ên prizô politik. Laport agos amen dâ ban selil; laport adrwat lâtre prêsipal. (Li, 1977, Act 1) une prison … dans … l’entrée principale a prison … in … main entrance.

In contrast, LPT adopted a phonological orthographic model replacing the diacritics by the use of ‘n’ as phoneme as well as ‘nasalisateur’. In ambiguous positions it is doubled to distinguish the phoneme from the diacritic. Their orthographic conventions are in line with both their militant stance and their publishing activities, which dictates a preoccupation with practical aspects such as the compatibility of their orthography with publishing technology, including standard keyboards. Their orthography benefits from a considerable amount of diffusion through both literization and publication: Dan lespas de trwa minit, zis kan premye tipti lalimyer lizur finn kumans aparet, omilye enn bruyar, sa ti sime […].24 Dans l’espace de deux ou trois minutes, juste quand la première petite lumière du jour fait son apparition, au milieu de ce brouillard, cette petite rue […] In the space of two or three minutes, just when the first tiny ray of daylight appears, in the middle of that mist, this little street […]

L P T has maintained the same orthographic system since its creation in the 1980s, although there may be minor changes in the future if they agree

to an alignment with the state-sanctioned orthography ‘Grafi Larmoni’. Virahsawmy, on the other hand, has revised his orthographic system several times since 1967. In 1985, he revisited his “grafi aksan sirkonfleks” (circumflex orthography) with the intention of reinforcing the image of MC as the vehicle of a plural national culture. In acknowledgement of the presence of words of non-French etymology in MC such as English 24

Lindsey Collen, Misyon Garson (Rose-Hill: L P T , 1996): 192.

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

41

and Bhojpuri, he introduced /ch/ [ʧ] and /j/ [ʤ] as distinct from /t/ and /d/ to reflect pronunciation in “maja karo” (have fun) and “chokra” (boy) in his poem “Balad Komet Halley”, for example (Nwar, Nwar, Nwar do Mama, 1986). In the same poem, ‘ch’ and ‘j’ are also used for French words in order to reflect pronunciation: Komet Halley kuma’n balié Jir mwa do ta, ki to eté? Sak fwa to bat ên chi karé Parchi kot nu, ki to truvé? dire … petit … parti Say … little … around

In 1988, over twenty years after setting up his orthography of maximal deviance from French, Virahsawmy sought to build bridges between M C and English and French. Indeed, Virahsawmy’s third system (1988) reveals a preoccupation with raising the level of literacy by encouraging an easier transition to the learning of French and English.25 The following innovations reflect his search for a balance between emblematic and utilitarian considerations: the reduced use of diacritics; the introduction of n/nn nasalization conventions, of the graphemes /ou/ [T] from French and of elements of redundancy such as the doubling of ‘s’ in final position. Mo peï li pa ziss enn tapi karo kann, Ziss kristal fangouren ek parfen tamaren; (“Mo peï,” “La sacro-sainte graphie”) juste un … fangourin just a … cane syrup

In 1990, Virahsawmy also replaced /j/ and /ch/ with /dj/ and /tch/ respectively, aspects that have been criticized as cumbersome: Li paret bien satchisfé. Li pé djibout djivan enn gran konsol (Toufann, 1991, I.vii) satisfait … debout devant satisfied … stands in front of 25

Virahsawmy, “La Sacro-Sainte Graphie.”

42

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Virahsawmy’s rationale in his own words is, however, revealing of both the acrimonious sociolinguistic climate in which he operates as promoter of MC and his own agenda of curbing the etymological influence of French on MC : To understand my tactical decisions, remember that one of my constant preoccupations is to protect Morisien from the franco / francophone / francophile stranglehold. Francophile ‘scholars’ wanted to present our language as a mere excrescence of French and presented it as a regional variation of Bourbonnais pidgin. I argued with them that even if M C is considered as the twin of Bourbonnais, our language underwent a new process of pidginization under the influences of English and Indian languages and the phonemes represented by ‘tch’ and ‘dj’ are clear evidence. Initially I used ‘ch’ and ‘j’ but the francophones / francophiles complained that I was causing a lot of confusion, as ‘ch’ and ‘j’ are used in French in such words as ‘chanter’ and ‘jour’. I argued that ‘ch’ and ‘j’ are handy for such words as ‘chacha’, ‘jalsa’ etc., but they argued that I was confusing phonemes with allophones. Their position was political and not scientific. This is when I opted for ‘tch’ and ‘dj’. It was my answer to their dogmatism; but to tell the truth, I was dogmatic, too, to a certain extent.26

The zealotry surrounding the debates over orthography, and those over the genesis of MC as seen earlier, stems from political issues, those of identity. The questions of who made the language keeps raising its head. Virahsawmy has, since 1999, given up his third orthographic system to adopt the one he helped devise together with the Catholic Church. Given the Church’s use of MC for the purposes of literization, the priority has been a simple and economic orthography which does not require the use of diacritics. The proposed system, inspired from the previous writing systems as well as those used currently in the media, assumes an intermediate position whereby the orthography is phonemic but uses some of the conventions of French to represent sounds that are common to both languages: LAMOUR SOUFI

Ekout moi, mo bieneme! Moi ki realite reel,

26

Personal communication, September 2002.

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

43

Momem sant, Momem sirkonferans, (Kantik, 2001) LAMOUR SOUFI

Écoute moi, ma/mon bien-aimé/e Moi, qui suis la réalité réelle, Moi, je suis le centre, je suis la circonférence SUFI LOVE

Listen to me, beloved I who am the real reality I am the centre, I am the circumference.

Virahsawmy justified his collaboration with the Church by emphasizing the need for a national consensus, and for a shifting sociolinguistic context where MC has gained enough ground and autonomy from French since independence so as not to be threatened by the latter. His collaboration, however, was seen as suspicious by a Hindu majority and other groups, including LPT , which has a policy of inclusiveness and has staunchly dissociated itself from any religious or ethnic affiliations. Virahsawmy’s association of MC with the Church sits uneasily with his ‘national’ project and threatens one of the main strengths of MC as well as his previous efforts to dissociate the language from any particular ethnic group. Mention must also be made of a previous orthography proposed by Baker and Hookoomsing (elaborated in 1979, although only published in their dictionary in 1987). Known as “lortograf-linité,” it was intended to transcribe both MC and Bhojpuri and aimed at winning over the IndoMauritians to the cause of promoting MC . This system, which would include lexemes of non-French origin, was an attempt at marking the contribution of other languages, particularly Indian ones, to the development of MC . The use of this orthography was, however, not implemented outside their dictionary. The evolution of the history of orthographies in Mauritius follows a parallel movement to the transition from the first phase in the promotion of MC , which focused on its symbolic function, to the second phase, which is guided by pragmatic concerns. Now that the issue of orthography has been considerably desensitized, there seems to be a growing awareness that the practical considerations of a consensus outweigh the symbolic ones of perpetually safeguarding the identity of MC as separate from French. By bearing in mind the compatibility of orthographic con-

44

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

ventions with standard publishing technology, the promoters of MC are working within the framework of ‘aménagement’ as described by Robillard. Details of the more recent State intervention in language policy and orthography will be provided in due course. Dictionaries, as seen in the Introduction, have functioned as important tools of codification in relation to well-documented cases of language standardization. Similarly, with regard to creoles, the ‘aménagement’ of the lexicon must, for Hazaël–Massieux, rest upon an inventory of already existing lexical resources.27 For MC , such inventories are under way with the two main dictionaries Diksyoner Kreol-Angle (1985) by L P T and Diksyoner Kreol Morisyen/Dictionary of Mauritian Creole/Dictionnaire du Créole Mauricien (1987) by Philip Baker and Vinesh Hookoomsing.28 The two dictionaries set themselves significantly different aims. L P T clearly assert their political and militant goals. The creation of “a written form for MC ”29 is seen in the light of an instrument of revolutionary class combat. Despite its militant bias, the LPT dictionary has pragmatic concerns, as it has a wider readership in mind, which includes those who have acquired literacy skills through their organization. The LPT dictionary does not include an historical or etymological dimension and does not claim to be scientific, although some details are given about the method of data-collection employed. Data was acquired from native speakers in terms of their respective competence in a particular lexical field. Content as well as function words are included along with some idiomatic expressions, and the grammatical class to which every entry belongs is specified. There are no quotations from literary sources and there is no indication of the stylistic value or register differentiation of the lexical items entered. The Baker–Hookoomsing dictionary, on the other hand, insists on its scientific nature. Both authors hold a doctorate in creole linguistics.30 27

Marie–Christine Hazaël–Massieux, Écrire en créole: Oralité et écriture aux Antilles (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1993): 196. 28 Ledikasyon Pu Travayer, Diksyoner Kreol–Angle (Port–Louis: L P T , 1985); Philip Baker & Vinesh Hookoomsing, Morisyen–English–Français: Dictionnaire du créole mauricien (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1986). 29 “langaz kreol ekri.” 30 Philip Baker, “The Contribution of Non-Francophone Immigrants to the Lexicon of Mauritian Creole” (doctoral dissertation, University of London, 1982); Vinesh Hookoomsing, “L’emploi de la Langue Créole dans le contexte multilingue et multiculturel de l’Île Maurice: Une étude de son importance en tant que langue commune et des im-

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

45

Their dictionary includes explicit information on the theoretical principles used, as well as on the practical side of the elaboration of their dictionary, and a bibliography. Illustrative examples for words in current usage are rarely provided, although there is a focus on the etymological roots of words. Both content and function words are included, although there is no mention of any stylistic details other than for ‘obsolete’ lexical items, for which references from early MC texts are provided, and those items used mainly by a particularly ethnic group. Their main aim, as stated in the introduction, is the gathering of the maximum number of MC words currently in use, with the purpose of contributing to the national linguistic and cultural heritage. However, the omission of two important lexical fields, that of flora and fauna, and, more importantly, that of work, trade, craft and the agro-industry (including the sugar and fishing industries), may represent a bias towards the language of an urban middle class.31 Nevertheless, it is an important work of reference which provides both English and French equivalents for MC lexemes. Even though the codification of the language in a dictionary may have little immediate effect on the consciousness of the average speaker, it still holds psychological significance. Other dictionaries focus on translation from English or French into MC and have a different agenda. Goswami Seetohul, a retired primary-school inspector who works independently of the organizations dedicated to the promotion of MC , is the author of a Dictionnaire français–créole mauricien (1997), where he uses etymological orthographic conventions, and the English–Creole Dictionary (1997), a short, thirty-four page dictionary aimed at the English-speaking tourist.32 Also aimed at tourists and intended to facilitate the learning of a restricted MC corpus, Jacques Lee’s

plications sociolinguistiques de son élaboration en mauricien” (doctoral dissertation, Université Laval, Quebec, 1987). 31 Robert Chaudenson comments harshly on the Baker–Hookoomsing dictionary in his comparative study of the latter and the L P T dictionary. He deplores the incompatibility of the Baker–Hookoomsing orthography with English and French keyboards, the bias represented in their systematic exclusion of important lexical fields, the lack of precision and rigour in the methodology. Créoles et enseignment du français: Français, créolization, créoles et français marginaux: Problèmes d’apprentissage, d’enseignement des langues et d’aménagement linguistique dans les espaces créolophones (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1989). 32 The author includes no prefatorial information on his intended readership.

46

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Mauritius: Its Creole Language, mentioned earlier, contains general information about Mauritius and MC , translations of a few MC words and idioms, and, finally, a restricted English–Creole dictionary. The spelling employed is deliberately close to French. From the 1970s, numerous works of lexical and grammatical description of MC including those of Baker, Corne, Chaudenson, Robillard, Adone, and Véronique have been published.33 Baker’s book Kreol: A Description of Mauritian Kreol is a landmark in the history of the codification of MC in postcolonial times.34 The previous comprehensive description of MC goes back to Baissac’s Étude sur le patois créole mauricien.35 Of distinct linguistic interest is Virahsawmy’s Testaman enn Metchiss (1999), which includes the first linguistic description of MC written in MC , illustrating the development of an academic linguistic register for MC . Virahsawmy resorts to borrowing, adaptation and coinage to create grammatical terms of description. While some of these neologisms rely on French – such as “non konkré” (nom concret ‘concrete noun’), “non abstré” (nom abstrait ‘abstract noun’), “non prop” (nom propre ‘proper noun’), with phonological adaptation – others rely on English: “kloz” (clause, Fr. proposition principale), “literesi” (literacy, ‘alphabetization’), “adverbial” (complement circonstenciel de). He also coins “blok-nominal”, “blok-verbal” (syntagme nominal ‘noun phrase’; syntagme verbal ‘verb phrase’). These metalinguistic terms are then implemented in his twelve chapters on literacy in MC , Aprann Lir ek Ekrir Morisien on his website: http://pages.intnet.mu/develog/ and targeted at both teachers and students. In his essays on the standardization of Mauritian, he develops specialized registers produced for academia, such as expository and argumentative prose. This brief overview already reveals Virahsawmy’s role as a conscientious neologizer, combining practical and theoretical interest in enriching the vocabulary of MC as a linguist. Virahsawmy was also the first to start his own publishing house, ‘Bukie Banane’ (1977).36 Given the absence of a market for literature in MC , there had hitherto been no publishers willing to invest in a non33

See Works Cited. Philip Baker, Kreol: A Description of Mauritian Kreol (London: C. Hurst, 1972). 35 Charles Baissac, Étude sur le patois créole mauricien (Nancy, 1880). 36 The spelling changes in compliance with Virahsawmy’s later orthographies: ‘Bukié Banané’ (1980), ‘Boukié Banané’ (1988), and ‘Boukie Banane’ (1999). 34

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

47

lucrative endeavour. Virahsawmy provided young poets with a means of publication and, through consciousness-raising activities concerning the potential of MC , created a market for these writings, albeit a modest one. Publication using a coherent orthography was a codifying feature, which consolidated the early poetry as a new but serious literary practice. The 37 M M M S P , the party founded by Virahsawmy after he broke away from the M M M (1973), also published works of poetry in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Today, publishing in MC is covered mainly by L P T , whose activities include the publication of teaching materials, political and literary texts in MC . More recently, the introduction of technologies such as desktop publishing have made printing relatively cheap and accessible, acting as a catalyst which speeds up standardization. After publishing several titles through LPT in the 1990s, Virahsawmy has gone back to publishing through Boukie Banane. In August 2001, he decided to publish all new literary texts online.38 His perseverance in publishing reflects motives which are related to his commitments as ‘aménageur’. Since creative writing, for Virahsawmy, is situated within the framework of the standardization of MC , publication is a necessary if unprofitable enterprise.39 Various smaller publishers have published texts in MC , and recently the firm Immedia has published several anthologies which include literature in English and French as well as MC . The above instances of ‘aménagement’ have taken place in relation to the new roles which M C has been called upon to fulfil. Since, as suggested by several language planning theorists, top-down policy only succeeds when bottom-up patterns of behaviour are (or can be brought to be) in accord with it, the sociolinguistic climate seems to be right in Mauritius for the implementation of a language policy to support the vernacular. The fact that the ideological underpinnings for the new patterns of language use are obvious enables a greater chance of success for language engineer37

The M M M S P (Mouvement Militant Mauricien Socialiste Progressiste) was a splinter-group opposed to the mainstream M M M led by Paul Bérenger as a result of Virahsawmy’s opposition to the latter’s “neo-communalism,” a term which in Mauritius refers to discrimination based on the communities identified in the Constitution. 38 http://pages.intnet.mu/develog 39 Virahsawmy claims that if he does not take his own efforts into account, he breaks even. Jane Wilkinson, “Interview with Dev Virahsawmy and Michael Walling,” in African Theatre, Playwrights and Politics, ed. Martin Banham, James Gibbs & Femi Osofisan (Oxford: James Currey, 2001): 110–11.

48

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

ing. It is unsurprising, and timely, that language planning at the level of the state should take place at this stage.

Phase 3: State Intervention For the first time since 1982, the State has acknowledged that there is clearly an urgent need for the standardization and implementation of M C in formal education. In March 2004, the Ministry of Education and Scientific Research entrusted the University of Mauritius and the Mauritius Institute of Education with the task of proposing a writing system for MC with a view to implementing it in the early years of formal education. While MC has been used orally in the classroom for decades, the introduction of MC as a written language is a radical step. The objective of the Ministry of Education is to teach MC as a written language and as the first medium for literacy and possibly that of other core subjects such as numeracy. The latter initiative debunks the school system as the most powerful tool of the domination of MC , both actual and symbolic. In being granted an educational function, MC will automatically gain status from it as well as under further corpus development. This elaboration of function in the school curriculum will be necessarily followed by an elaboration of form that goes beyond orthographic conventions. The preparation of pedagogical material, grammars, and dictionaries, textbooks for the learners, and guides, handbooks, and training programmes for the teachers will entail the borrowing and coining of new pedagogical terminology. Furthermore, the implementation of MC in education is likely to be followed by its increased use in higher domains such as administration and the media. The state’s official sanctioning of a standard spelling thus marks an historical development in the standardization of MC . As suggested by its name, ‘Grafi Larmoni’ presents itself as a harmonized rather than a uniformized orthography, venturing to bring further consensus in relation to the different systems in use. The team of linguists and pedagogues present the new orthography as experimental, one that will evolve with time and practice, rather than as definitive. Most of the consonants and vowels are generally shared by the other orthographies. A fair degree of flexibility is allowed in the proposals of either /di/ or /j/ for [dY], x/xs for [ks], y/i for [j]. /ou/ is proposed instead of /u/ for the sound [u]. The n/nn system of nasalization popularized by LPT is retained with some flexibility in the use of in/en for [ẽ]. The symbol /w/ for the sound [w] is privileged despite the fact that it seems particularly estranging to

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

49

the reader accustomed to French orthography. In matters of punctuation, it is recommended that this be based on English, by virtue of its status as world lingua franca. It will, however, be several years before the impact of the government’s decision to commission and implement a harmonized standard orthography can be gauged. The proposal to introduce MC into the education system, which respects the fundamental right of the child to learn and be taught in his/her first language, is potentially the most rewarding and challenging education reform in Mauritius. This form of ‘aménagement’, seen in terms of adjustments and support to both the symbolic and the communicative spread of MC , is more likely to be successful than the imposition of the previous top-down language policy.

II The Literary Scene Before defining the corpus of literature in MC , this section sets the background to the literary scene by situating the postcolonial emergence of literature in MC in relation to the colonial literary use of MC . An overview of the impact of literature in MC is undertaken, starting with poetry before moving to the most popular genre, theatre, and, finally, considering the novel, the last genre to be experimented with. Attention is focused on the main writers seeking to effect an ‘aménagement’ of MC through the act of writing, and the role and influence of the author Dev Virahsawmy, in particular, is considered in the emergence and development of this postcolonial literature. This overview also highlights the main socio-political trends which have motivated this abundant literature over the last forty years. In contemporary Mauritius, the literary scene is shared by four languages, French, English, Hindi, and MC . Vicram Ramharai distinguishes three stages in the development of a Mauritian literature between 1800 and 1990.40 In the first stage, from 1800 to the Second World War, the medium of written expression was mainly French, in relation to which the amount of literature written in MC was insignificant. In the second stage, 40

Vicram Ramharai, La Littérature Mauricienne d’expression créole: Essai d’analyse socio-culturelle (Port–Louis: Éditions Les Mascareignes, 1990).

50

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

the period between the end of the Second World War and independence (1968), Indo-Mauritians writers turned to English as an alternative medium of literary expression.41 Ramharai describes this linguistic choice as an ideological one linked to their problematic social and political status.42 This period was dominated by creative writing in French, English, and Hindi. In the third stage (postcolonial times), French remains the language of a considerable amount of postcolonial literature published in both Mauritius and France every year by Mauritian authors of various ethnic backgrounds.43 Although English publications are sponsored by the British Council, the market for literature in English is minimal compared to the dissemination of popular culture in French, while Hindi is the medium of an even more restricted amount of literature.44 This third stage has, to a large extent, been dominated by literature in MC . In the following, I provide an overview of the main writers and their works across the three main genres of poetry, drama and the novel. The emphasis here is on poetry, partly because drama and the novel are examined in greater detail in subsequent chapters, but also because it is in his academic writing on poetry and in his poems that Virahsawmy reflects on his role as writer/ ‘aménageur’.

Poetry in MC In the first two stages (1822–1968) of Mauritian literature, Ramharai notes only ten recognized published works in MC , all written by and for the Franco-Mauritians. Amongst these publications, nineteenth-century poetry in MC , which relied mainly on a French poetic model and the bur41

For an overview of creative writing in English, see Nandini Bhautoo–Dewnarain, “Mauritian writing in English: A survey,” Wasafiri 3 (1999): 21–24. 42 They were seen as an invading community by the Afro-Mauritians and replaced the slaves to the French. For the Indo-Mauritian group, the acquisition and use of English as a literary medium provided a means of revalorizing their image both in society and in Mauritian literature, which, through novels previously written in French such as Ameenah by Clément Charoux (Port–Louis, 1935) and Poupée de chair by Arthur Martial (Port–Louis, 1933), had depicted their values and culture as primitive and strange. 43 See Jean–Georges Prosper, Histoire de la littérature mauricienne de langue française and also Anthologie de la littérature mauricienne d’expression française. 44 Hindi has been used particularly successfully by Abhimanyu Unnuth, whose bestknown novel, Lal Pasina, has been translated into French by Isabelle Jarry and Kessen Budhoo as Sueurs de sang (Paris: Stock, 2001).

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

51

lesque, was particularly popular. François Chrestien’s Les Essais d’un bobre africain, for example, was first published in 1820, and re-edited in 1831, when it sold twice as many copies as the first edition. Equally important was Baissac’s Folklore de l’Île Maurice,45 a collection of oral folktales in MC . Virahsawmy dismisses colonial poetry, which had the function of amusement for a francophone elite comfortably conscious of its own cultural and linguistic superiority, as being counter to the spirit of ‘aménagement’: Creole has been used by some to belittle others, and ridicule the language. I regret that the History of Creole literature for some Historians is made to start with François Chréstien or Baissac. These people never took the language seriously.46

Virahsawmy’s first individual literary efforts snowballed into an important cultural movement after independence47 when numerous collections of poems were written and published by young poets of African and Indian origin, eager to explore the double novelty of rewriting themselves as subject through the medium of their mother tongue. Writing poetry in MC was itself an intrinsically political act. In this second stage, poetry is characterized by heavy emphasis on social criticism and didacticism. Virahsawmy, in the preface to his collection of philosophical poems, Les Lapo Kabri Gazuyé (1980), refers to the poets who write in MC as “militants culturels,” a term which includes creative writers, musicians and actors whose art is fundamentally anti-imperialist and who strive to contribute to national liberation and the promotion of socialism via the medium of language and culture. 1977, one year after the ban on press censorship imposed in 1971 was lifted, saw the publication of four literary works in MC by the M M M S P : Virahsawmy’s play Li, his first two collections of poems, Disik Sale and Lafime dan Lizie (which, written in

45

Charles Baissac, Le folk-lore de l’Île Maurice (1888; Paris: Maisonneuve & Larose, 1967). 46 Danièle Tranquille, “Interview with Dev Virahsawmy” (2001): http://pages.intnet .mu/develog 47 Appendix 1 gives a list of Virahsawmy’s poetic works of that time.

52

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

prison 1971–72,48 had been seen as subversive), and another collection of poems by Bam Cuttayen, a militant young sega writer and singer, Nuvo Lizur, which deals mainly with the suffering of women and the proletariat. Dan Callikan, in his preface to Nuvo Lizur, comments on the publication of these works as revolutionary in the history of Mauritian literature: The publication of these three texts is a crucial event: Creole asserts itself with radiance as a means of expression with the potential to encompass all spheres of human activity. The publication of these texts marks a decisive progress in the history of Mauritian integration.49

One of the first attempts at promoting MC under pressure of creating a national language, this poetic movement proved that MC could be used successfully in the domain of literature and culture. However, merely to use M C as a medium of written communication did not guarantee access to a wider public, especially given the high rates of unemployment and illiteracy. The potential market for literature in MC was limited to militants already dedicated to the cause and familiar with Virahsawmy’s orthography of maximal deviance, and to other intellectuals who possessed the competence to deal with a new linguistic code. In a context in which the oral tradition was more powerful than print culture, the diffusion of poetic texts via the audiocassette provided a successful ‘middle way’. Individual poems were set to popular music and circulated in the form of the ‘sega angaze’ (protest song), mostly by cultural groups such as Grup Soley Ruz. Virahsawmy’s long poem Trip Seré Lagorz Amaré (1980) was published and sold together with the recording of his reading on audiocassette, to enable readers/listeners to match sounds to the visual signs of the orthography. Zozo Mayok (1981), his collection of reworked traditional and new songs for children, was also circulated successfully in this manner. Further, many of the poems from Les Lapo Kabri 48

Virahsawmy and other militants who had paralysed the country through a series of strikes (1971) were imprisoned during the subsequent State of Emergency under the Labour Government. 49 “La publication de ces trois textes est un évènement capital: le Kreol s’affirme de façon lumineuse comme moyen d’expression pouvant embrasser toutes les sphères de l’activité humaine. La publication de ces textes marque un progrès décisif dans l’histoire de l’intégration mauricienne.” In Bam Cuttayen, Nuvo Lizur (Rose-Hill: M M M S P , 1977)

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

53

Gazuyé were put to music by the Réunionnais band Ziskakan, reaching an audience beyond Mauritius itself. The emergence of poetry and songs in MC which triggered off the creative potential of literature in MC was seen as “the most striking cultural event since independence.”50 Equally, Ramharai notes that those who still refused to acknowledge the creative and poetic value of MC were denying the beginning of a new era in Mauritian literature.51 In much of the early poetry, however, the message took precedence over aesthetic concerns and the language used was reduced to militant clichés. Some of the very titles are indicative of this trend, including Vimal Ramdharrysing’s Gu Margoz (1979) (The Taste of Bitter Gourd), which is a figure of speech for hard times. Hookoomsing and Ramharai observe, however, that Virahsawmy stands out from other militant poets by virtue of his conscious effort to forge and develop a poetic diction.52 In the preface to Les Lapo Kabri Gazuyé (1980), Virahsawmy himself acknowledged that despite the fact that most “militants culturels” were in agreement on the ideological orientation of their work, there were important divergences in terms of style and form. From this point onwards, he adopted the discipline of “Vingt fois sur le métier remettez votre ouvrage,”53 as he strove to go beyond inspirational spontaneity to focus instead on the linguistic transformation of ordinary language. The shift from the function of MC as militant instrument and communicative tool to that of a literary language which requires linguistic elaboration marks a third stage in the history of poetry in MC . Virahsawmy repeatedly makes transparent his linguistic and artistic preoccupations, particularly in his article on poetry, “La Poésie Mauricienne d’expression créole (CM ) et la ‘culture de la langue’” (Mauritian Poetry in MC and Language Standardization), where he defines himself as an “écrivain fondateur de langue de literature” (writer/founder of the 50 “le fait culturel le plus marquant depuis l’indépendance”; Hookoomsing, “Langue créole, littérature nationale et mauricianisme populaire,” 377. 51 Ramharai, La Littérature Mauricienne d’expression créole, 58. 52 Hookoomsing, “Langue créole, littérature nationale et mauricianisme populaire,” 392; Ramharai, La Littérature Mauricienne d’expression créole, 56, 80. 53 From Boileau’s L’Art Poétique I.v (1674): 172–74. Vingt fois sur le métier remettez votre ouvrage: Polissez le sans cesse et le repolissez; Ajoutez quelques fois et souvent effacez.

54

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

language of literature).54 He grounds his commitment to creative writing within the framework of the conscious development of a potential standard form for MC . To support his own role, Virahsawmy refers to various examples of authors who have, in his view, contributed to the codification of national languages: Chaucer, Martin Luther, and Du Bellay in relation to English, German, and French respectively. Many of these links are, of course, controversial. The concept of Luther, for example, as creator of a common German language does not have its source in linguistics but is more of a legend born of German nationalism.55 By capitalizing on the role of writers imbued in the discourses of nationalism and privileging the impact of the writings and personalities of Dante and Luther, however, Virahsawmy clearly draws attention to his own status. Virahsawmy further draws on the links between literature and ‘aménagement’ by arguing that creative writing can lead to the development and illustration of registers of various degrees of formality, thus debunking the prejudiced view of MC as a one-register language. In this stylistic continuum, what Virahsawmy refers to as a “sipralek” (supralect), or the highest and most prestigious register, has the potential to serve as model for a standard. Moreover, given the potential of poetry to de-automatize – to distance itself from ordinary lexical and syntactic structures and rejuvenate language – this literary genre becomes, for him, the privileged instrument of such a linguistic transformation. Similarly, in the poem Parol ki Shelley Tchi Djir,56 Virahsawmy acknowledges his debt to Shelley, sharing the latter’s belief in the role of the poet as an “artchizan langaz” (craftsman of language). The poet is seen as the ‘carver’ who carries out a process of elaboration on ordinary language, mainly through lexical creativity, to create a literary form which can, in turn, influence normative public expression.57 In the latter endeavour, Virahsawmy is particularly concerned with poetic form. Writing poetry in MC within well-established literary norms is a means of creating further links between the new literature and those 54 Dev Virahsawmy, “La Poésie Mauricienne d’expression créole (C M ) et la ‘culture de la langue’,” 78. 55 Max Baeumer, “Luther and the Rise of the German Literary Language: A Critical Reassessment,” in The Emergence of National Languages, ed. Baeumer & Scaglione, 95–117. 56 Kaysé Ba? Larivièr Tanié pé Nwayé (Rose-Hill: Bukié Banané, 1997). 57 Virahsawmy, “La Poésie Mauricienne d’expression créole (C M ) et la ‘culture de la langue’,” 78.

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

55

written in languages which have been established for centuries. This initiative aims at legitimizing his literary and linguistic work, hence is situated within the framework of the standardization process. Believing that imposing formal poetic rules releases the creative potential of language, Virahsawmy often writes within the confines of classic forms such as the sonnet. He observes, however, that the styles and forms of poetry in M C can only be the result of “un grand métissage” (a great miscegenation).58 While he has a sound knowledge of classical European poetic forms including the mock-epic, the ode, the ballad and, particularly, the sonnet, and often employs them rigorously, he nevertheless departs from them or mixes them with other forms for stylistic reasons. Lil Far (1987), a sonnet-sequence, Thanatoss lor Baz (1997), a long poem in non-standard form, and Lalimièr (1997), a religious poem in five stanzas – all display linguistic features that have undergone a significant degree of elaboration away from ordinary language, including the development of a specialized vocabulary, the generation of compounds and coinings through affixation, and alternative grammatical structures. Corpus planning in Virahsawmy’s later poetry is achieved through lexical and syntactic creativity, while the various poetic genres experimented with enhance the status of M C , dismantling a linguistic and cultural diglossia within which MC could only exist in a L(ow) position in relation to French.

Theatre in MC Virahsawmy has again played a key role in the emergence and development of this genre, starting a tradition of a theatre of protest with the first postcolonial play. Li, written in 1972, as a direct reaction to the political oppression of the time, constitutes a young militant’s demand for political change. The protagonist, Li, a political activist, defending the interests of the proletariat and considered dangerous by the government, is imprisoned and murdered in a police cell. Virahsawmy’s first play was designed to administer a psychological shock to a Mauritian public predisposed to dismiss or laugh with, as well as at, performances in M C .59 The next major success was Virahsawmy’s Zeneral Makbef (1981), the first postcolonial satire in MC , which, inspired by local politics, denounced both imperialist and internal oppression. A theatre of protest was also sustained 58 59

Virahsawmy, “La Poésie Mauricienne d’expression créole,” 78. Chapter 2 discusses Li in greater detail.

56

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

by the works of Azize Asgarally, also a member of the M M M and already well-known for several successful plays in English. Ratsitatane, written especially to mark the 150th anniversary of the abolition of slavery in Mauritius, is the first historical play in MC , tracing the Malagasy Prince Ratsitatane’s struggle against the British authorities before he is sentenced to death by hanging in Mauritius. Sharing a similar militant agenda, Henri Favory, a retired primary-school teacher, has written and staged numerous successful plays in MC . Tras (1983), which addresses local socio-economic realities in portraying the hopeless judicial struggle of a group of labourers against the injustices of a sugar estate, is his bestknown. Convinced that MC was the only language which could translate the experiences and cultures of Mauritius for the stage, Virahsawmy, Favory and Asgarally sought to establish a national culture by means of their dramatic works. Revolving around the radical questioning of colonial, historical, and neocolonial powers-that-be, their four plays are part of a theatre of protest which met with unprecedented success locally and also benefitted from international recognition (see Chapter 2). By 1983, with the developments in the theatre in MC , the historian André Decotter could suggest that a turning-point had been reached in Mauritian theatre.60 After nearly two and a half centuries of performing canonical French and English plays, by the mid-1980s theatre in MC had already established itself as a powerful dramatic expression which, furthermore, was dismissing the exclusive association of theatre with an English- and French-speaking elite. From the 1980s onwards, Virahsawmy moved away from a theatre of protest to address wide-ranging issues (as illustrated in Chapter 3) as well as translations of Shakespeare (see Chapters 4 and 5).

The Novel While poetry, especially when put to music in the 1970s, and theatre have been the privileged aural genres of literature in MC , the postcolonial novel or novella in MC emerged in a rather more sporadic and isolated fashion and, initially, did not meet with the same success as the genres just discussed. In the first stage, between independence and the late1980s, a handful of novels were written and occasionally published, but these remain more or less unknown to the general public. Quand Mon60

André Decotter, Le Plaza: Un Demi Siècle de Vie Théâtrale (Port–Louis: Précigraph, 1983).

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

57

tagne Prend Dife (1977), the first postcolonial novel in MC and the bestknown of this experimental period, was written by one of the few women to have published in MC , Renée Asgarally, who was also associated with the early M M M .61 The 1990s saw a renewed interest in the genre of the novel among such authors as Sedley Assonne, Lindsey Collen, and Dev Virahsawmy, who represent an influential intellectual elite capable of bringing further legitimacy to MC . Their political motivation in attempting the novel in MC is, moreover, accompanied, to varying degrees, with concerns about corpus ‘aménagement’. Assonne’s thriller Robis (1997), the diary of a psychopath, won the first prize for novels in a literary competition organized by LPT in 1996. Lindsey Collen was awarded the Commonwealth Prize for Africa in 1994 with The Rape of Sita 62 and in 2005 with Boy, the English translation of her novel in MC Misyon Garson (1996), which relates the rite of passage of a Mauritian adolescent. Virahsawmy’s novella Jericho (2000), a revisiting of the riots of February 1999 (mentioned in my Introduction), is his first attempt at literary prose in MC after thirty years of creative writing in other genres. This deliberate postponement was due to the technical difficulties involved in accommodating MC to this complex genre.63 The purpose of this section has been to place in perspective the emergence and impact of a postcolonial literature in MC , of which the literary texts mentioned are representative.64 If literature in MC took off from a strongly militant position, by the 1990s it had emerged from the now outdated ideological framework of the early years of independence and is being adapted to the changing realities of Mauritius. It remains shaped, to a large extent, by the preoccupations of Virahsawmy as writer/‘aménageur’ and organic intellectual. The first part of this chapter situated Virahsawmy’s role in the management of MC in relation to the other agents of standardization: linguists, creative writers, political activists, publishers, the Catholic Church, and, more recently, the State. In his threefold capacity as political activist, linguist and creative writer, Virahsawmy occupies a unique posi61

A handful of other novels include Depi Kan Ziska Kan (1980) by Sami Periacarpen, which was not published, and Jennifer, Ku Deta, Mad (1987) by Joe Seetohul. 62 The novel attracted all the more attention as it was banned in Mauritius and brought death threats to the author on the grounds that she had allegedly attempted to defile the image of the Goddess, Sita, the embodiment of purity in Hinduism. 63 Personal communication (September, 1999). 64 See Appendix 1 for a more comprehensive list of literary works in M C .

58

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

tion and has been repeatedly acknowledged as having prepared the ground for the standardization of MC . This process, far from relying solely on Virahsawmy’s writings, is developing in other fields, through other registers and idiolects. However, since the main preoccupation of this book is to investigate the links between creative writing and language standardization and since Virahsawmy remains the most prolific and influential writer using the medium of MC , the emphasis will be on his ideological, linguistic, and literary contribution. I also consider those writers who address the linguistic challenges of writing in M C and whose texts themselves become a laboratory where the transformation of the language into a literary medium is taking place. The following discussion sheds light on the complexity and consequences of engineering a written form of language, and is designed to further highlight writing as a standardizing factor.

III The Transition of MC From an Oral to a Written Language Marie–Christine Hazaël–Massieux identifies four stages in the complex, gradual and lengthy process that is the transition of languages from an oral to a written and standardized medium.65 The first stage is where the language only functions orally but where some degree of elaboration results in oral literature. Stage 2 refers to an oral language which can be “graphié” (transcribed) onto paper – a significant development, since graphicization is an important part of the process of instrumentalization, strongly influencing speakers’ view of the language, now transformed into a print language. The third marks a further development in which the language is elaborated into a written form which, through the establishment and codification of rules, eventually leads to standardization. In stage 4, the written language has become independent of the oral form and is an autonomous form of communication, which is the case with languages such as English and French, with centuries-long written traditions. An examination of the main differences between the contexts of oral and written language will highlight the key elements in the transition from an oral to a written medium. Oral language relies on a number of situ65

Marie–Christine Hazaël–Massieux, “La Littérature Créole entre l’Oral et l’Écrit,” in Les créoles français entre l’oral et l’écrit, 281.

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

59

ational factors to help convey meaning and intention; in other words, it is context-bound. It involves face-to-face interaction and a high reliance on prosody – rhythm, intonation, stress, and variation in voice tone, body language, and facial expression. It is also deeply marked by a context of social proximity in which the speaker and the listener share implicit references and knowledge, and monitor the flow of information. On the other hand, writing aims to cross the limits of time and space, to be context-free and comprehensible to all potential readers of the language.66 The development of a written form thus necessarily involves the development of a specific lexicon, considerable changes in the grammatical organization, as well as the adoption of orthographic, punctuation and word-boundary rules, or graphic syntax. According to Bohůslav Havránek from the Linguistic School of Prague, it is mainly the vocabulary of a literary language that differentiates the latter from everyday spoken language.67 Not only are lexical precision and specialization required in writing to make the implicit context of orality explicit but, with the increasing communication tasks, often in new domains, writing encourages an enlargement of the vocabulary, resulting in the coining of words and borrowings denoting logical abstractions. The transition from the oral to the written also requires additional grammaticalization. The context of orality allows for more spontaneous forms of communication and is marked by pauses and hesitations as well as repetition and other forms of semantic and rhetorical redundancy. As a consequence, oral texts contain fewer coherence factors and are thus hierarchically less structured. In the written mode, where more time and thought are available to both the writer and the reader, more complex and coherent programming is possible in the processing of the same information. Subordination, for example, which often involves a reorganization of the form and the order of the constituents, is a characteristic of written language, whereas in oral communication, coordination not only predominates but often takes place without any markers other than intonation. Another organizational difference is the fact that the spoken mode tends to be chronological whereas the technical potential for the written text, as a product, to refer back to itself allows it to subvert chronological order for 66

See esp. Spoken and Written Language: Exploring Orality and Literacy, ed. Deborah Tannen (Norwood N J : Ablex, 1982). 67 Havránek, “Emploi et culture de la langue standard,” 97.

60

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

various effects. Moreover, in contrast to the fragmented quality of oral communication, especially the stringing-together of units without connectives, writing has an integrated quality, inasmuch as more information can be packed into a sentence. Integrated language makes use of a variety of devices to incorporate additional elements, of which nominalization is the most characteristic. Nominalization allows a notion which is verbal to be used as a noun. Such an element then plays the role of a noun in the syntax and acts as one of the arguments of the main predication. Other devices such as the conjoining of verb phrases, adjective phrases or noun phrases, the chaining of prepositional phrases, and the embedding of whole clauses all lead to both syntactic complexity and lexical density. Lexical density means that written language displays a much higher ratio of lexical items to total running words.68 In the particular case of the development of a written form for a creole language, another crucial linguistic issue needs to be addressed: decreolization.

Writing in MC and Decreolization According to David DeCamp, one of the possibilities of change in the lifecycle of a creole language is decreolization, the process whereby speakers progressively alter the grammar of the basilect so that the output comes to resemble the output of the acrolectal grammar.69 English creoles are particularly vulnerable to decreolization. In Jamaica there is now an unbroken continuum between Standard English, Jamaican English, and Jamaican creole, running from the acrolect, through the mesolect, to the basilect. Decreolization, however, is not a sine qua non. Indeed, Mark Sebba argues that any model that takes a simple progression from creole to the lexifying standard as its basis is inadequate.70 More vehemently, Degraff, as suggested by his ironic subtitle, “Creoles as ‘linguistic dodos’ on their decreolization deathbed,” contests the model proposed by linguists such as Valdman that creole languages that are used alongside their lexifiers are doomed to dissolve in these major languages via the process 68

For more details on the transformative effects of writing, see both Walter J. Ong, Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word (London: Routledge, 1993), and Florian Coulmas & Konrad Ehlich, Writing in Focus (Berlin: Mouton, 1983). 69 David DeCamp, “Towards a Generative Analysis of a Post-Creole Speech Continuum,” 349. 70 Sebba, Contact Languages: Pidgins and Creoles, 233.

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

61

of decreolization.71 Denouncing the hegemonic discourse at the heart of the decreolization trope or “linguistic dodoism,” Degraff advises greater caution in addressing the development of creole languages and the dominant models in terms of which they have been described and explained. Unlike in Jamaica, where the higher the social and economic status of the speaker, the closer is his/her speech to Standard English, in the context of Mauritius, although both English and French exert a strong attraction for some creative writers, patriotic and democratic values have strongly pushed a growing number of writers towards M C . Moreover, Dany Adone argues that a necessary condition for decreolization is a continuum between the creole and the lexifying source.72 Although Derek Bickerton’s continuum theory73 may apply to La Réunion, various linguists have found no evidence of a continuum in Mauritius, where Adone notes, instead, the existence of two more or less distinct varieties, the urban and the rural.74 These varieties have relative stylistic value to each other, with the urban, associated as it is with modernity, education, and a knowledge of French, representing the norm while the rural is marginalized by the influence exerted on it by Bhojpuri and is seen as slightly obsolescent, since it retains features considered archaic by the urban speaker.75 Nevertheless, since the differences between these two varieties 71

Degraff, “Linguists’ Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Creole Exceptionalism,” 552. Cf. Albert Valdman, “Creolization: Elaboration in the Development of Creole French Dialects,” in Pidgin and Creole Linguistics (Bloomington & London: Indiana U P , 1977): 155–89. 72 Dany Adone, “Creolization and Language Change in Mauritian Creole,” in Creolization and Language Change, ed. Dany Adone & Ingo Plag (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, 1994). See also John Rickford, Dimensions of a Creole Continuum (Stanford C A : Stanford U P , 1987). 73 Derek Bickerton’s continuum theory states that there are no discrete boundaries between creole, the basilect, and the standard lexifying language, the acrolect, but that there is a continuous transition between them. 74 One explanation for these differences is the greater contact with Mauritian French and a more pronounced awareness of the sociolinguistic status of French in urban areas; Adone, “Creolization and Language Change in Mauritian Creole,” 27. 75 Baker emphasizes geographical variation by pointing out that archaic forms which have disappeared from the urban variant could be remnants of the rural variant; “On the Development of Certain Prepositional Forms in Mauritian and Other French Creoles,” in Matériaux pour l’étude des classes grammaticaux dans les langues créoles, ed. Daniel Véronique (Aix-en-Provence: Presse de l’Université d’Aix-en-Provence, 1996): 54.

62

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

of MC are restricted to lexical and phonological levels and do not extend to the syntactic level, Adone comes to the conclusion that, despite the pressure of French on MC , the latter is developing grammatically without moving closer to French.76 Whereas in La Réunion, the sociolinguistic situation and evolution of Réunionnais creole have eliminated a large number of basilectal structural traits, it is on the morphosyntactic level that MC distinguishes itself the most from French. However, in the intial stages of writing in MC , where the lexifying source which benefits from an established literary culture is an overwhelming potential model, decreolization remains a legitimate preoccupation. Paralleling the debate between a phonemically or etymologically based orthography, the debate about the standard literary variety to be used in creolophone countries often revolves around the basilectal and the acrolectal. In the case of Martinique and Guadeloupe, Jean Bernabé has taken a highly prescriptive approach in relation to the issue of decreolization.77 Seeing creative writing as an interventionist means of preventing a process of decreolization, he aims with other members of the G E R E C (Groupe d’études et de recherches de la créolophonie), to create what he terms a “créole nucléaire” or a “créole hyperbasilectal.”78 In this process of neo-creolization, borrowing from colonial languages is seen as contamination, and existing creole words considered too close to a French etymology are dismissed in favour of newly coined, more ‘creole-sounding’ neologisms as well as interdialectal borrowing from other French creoles of the Caribbean.79 The more ‘authentic’ creole, then, would be one of maximal deviance in relation to French, and a creole literariness is one that would exhibit this difference. Bernabé’s top-down language policy carries several caveats. His view of the monolingual creole speaker as the only repository of an uncontaminated creole supports a purist and constraining standard. Moreover, what Bernabé fails to acknowledge is the distinction between decreolization and evolution, which Chaudenson, conversely, sees as crucial.80 Besides, 76

Adone, “Creolization and Language Change in Mauritian Creole,” 40. Bernabé, Fondal-natal: Grammaire basilectale approchée des créoles guadeloupéen et martiniquais (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1986). 78 Bernabé, Fondal-natal, 15. 79 Bernabé also suggests borrowing from the Indian Ocean creoles. 80 Chaudenson, Textes créoles anciens, 253. 77

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

63

borrowing is an intrinsic part of the history of most languages and, in fact, a language which does not borrow from other languages is a dead one. Borrowing from French, therefore, does not necessarily entail decreolization. Bernabé’s philosophy of maximal deviance runs the risk of ghettoizing the language into the exclusive representation of an older and bygone world, and missing out on the representation of the modern, with the result of merely perpetuating the asymmetrical relation between languages in diglossia. Written texts in the context of an emerging literary language can be seen as the site on which the struggles between sociolinguistic forces are fought in the establishment of new codes. Indeed, in the tentative act of writing literature in and translating into MC , the author undertakes a commitment largely without precedent, assuming the didactic position of cultural spokesperson and generating literary innovation. In Mauritius, where an established M C literary model is still in the making, the author’s lexical and morphosyntactic choices will have an important impact on either the decreolization or the linguistic evolution of MC . In the context of the main line of enquiry of this study, it will be of interest to see what positions Virahsawmy and other authors take over a period of time in relation to the above debate. An outline of the contrast between the context of orality and that of writing has shed further light on Hazaël–Massieux’s useful distinction between the terms ‘écriture’, the transcription of everyday spoken language, and ‘littérature’, creative writing.81 An overview of the necessary linguistic transformations of the language that a written form requires has further explained the privileged position of the writer using MC in his/her contribution to the establishment of a literary form and norm. The special context of pioneering creative writing in M C further explains the ‘metaliterariness’ which Lang associates with it.82 Before assessing the contribution of key creative writers to the ‘aménagement’ of MC , the main stylistic areas of investigation shall be outlined.

Register and Lexis Traugott and Pratt emphasize the fact that language, far from being a single unified entity, is best seen as “a conglomeration of language vari81 82

Hazaël–Massieux, “La Littérature Créole entre l’Oral et l’Écrit,” 278. Lang, Entwisted Tongues.

64

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

eties which differ with respect to the regional, social, ethnic, sexual, generational and educational groupings within society.”83 Within this context, the presence of lexical options does not necessarily imply synonymy, since options are not random but are restricted according to context; in other words, they belong to different varieties. While these inter-speaker variations, determined by the user, are more specifically defined as social dialects, intra-speaker variation, on the other hand, is variation according to use, determined by the medium or channel of communication (i.e. speech or writing). This second type of variation can also be determined by the relationship between speakers and the context of the communication (i.e. the genre and the degree of formality), in which case, it is better known as stylistic variation or register.84 Whereas M C has in the past been restricted by non-linguistic forces to informal situations, the literary use of MC encourages, illustrates, and makes necessary the development of new registers. Indeed, Jean Ure and Jeffrey Ellis claim that the range of registers available to any particular language community reflects the experience of that community and corresponds to the range of situations of language use.85 An expansion of the functions of a language is necessarily accompanied by an expansion of the registers of a language. In fact, Lance Butler points out that it is by their range of styles, and not by their linguistic features, that ‘developed’ languages are recognized and distinguished from ‘undeveloped’ ones.86 The notion of variation and register in literature is, therefore, directly linked to issues of standardization. Since register analysis is often seen as the most appropriate description for written language,87 it is particularly relevant to MC as an emerging literary language. Moreover, register analysis provides a useful way of investigating a language where the existing codes 83

Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Mary Louise Pratt, Linguistics for Students of Literature (New York & London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1980): 12. 84 William R. O’Donnell & Loreto Todd, Variety in Contemporary English (London: Routledge, 1993): 26. 85 Jean Ure & Jeffrey Ellis, “Register in Descriptive Linguistics and Linguistic Sociology,” in Issues in Sociolinguistics, ed. Oscar Uribe–Villegas (The Hague: Mouton, 1977): 197. 86 Lance St John Butler, Registering the Difference: Reading Literature through Register (Manchester: Manchester U P , 1999). 87 Tony Bex, Variety in Written English: Texts in Society: Societies in Texts (London: Routledge, 1996): 87.

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

65

and registers have not been formally distinguished. The very fact of transposing MC into poetry, onto the stage and into the most popular contemporary literary form, the novel, is groundbreaking in itself and marks an important step in the ‘aménagement’ of M C . The following section demonstrates the link between lexicon and register and reveals why lexicon is the privileged area of stylistic investigation. In Hazaël–Massieux’s examination of the French creole of Guadeloupe, she redefines the issues surrounding the lexicon: The main problem is not one of missing vocabulary, but is first of all that of its analysis, its classification. One needs to draw out (indeed establish) the semantic structures of this vocabulary, classify the lexical fields that can be identified. This is a significant and interesting task that is partly a matter of aménagement linguistique but, above all, it is a matter of observation, a task which certainly needs to be undertaken, well before creating vocabulary to fill in the “gaps”, the existence of which has not been seriously proved.88

One of her main criticisms targeted at the authors of the Dictionnaire Créole Français (French Creole Dictionary) of Guadeloupe Creole89 is the absence of literary references, and, therefore, the failure to distinguish among various registers. The same phenomenon occurs in relation to MC dictionaries, where the examples provided are mostly concocted by the authors of the dictionaries themselves, except for references from nineteenth-century texts in the Baker–Hookoomsing dictionary. Hazaël–Massieux’s comments further support the arguments put forward in my Introduction for the potential of literature to create, illustrate, and validate linguistic norms, a process which contributes to standardization. The analysis of literature in MC will test whether authors highlight semantic specializations that are still latent in spoken MC by using equivalent terms in a systematized way in differentiated situations. 88

“Le principal problème n’est pas l’absence de vocabulaire, mais est d’abord son analyse, son classement. Il faut dégager (voire mettre en place) les structures sémantiques de ce vocabulaire, structurer les champs lexicaux que l’on peut délimiter. C’est là une tâche significative et intéressante qui relève sans doute partiellement de l’aménagement linguistique, mais d’abord avant tout de l’observation, et qu’il faut certainement entreprendre, bien avant de créer du vocabulaire, pour combler des “trous” dont on n’a pas sérieusement prouvé l’existence.” Hazaël–Massieux, Écrire en créole, 176. 89 Dictionnaire Créole–Français, Ludwig et al. (Paris: Maisonneuve & Larose, 1990).

66

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

An additional reason why the lexicon is seen as a privileged area of stylistic investigation is that the lexical resources of a language, being in large part the product of the social, cultural, economic, and technological structure within which the language’s speakers live, constitute a fertile area of transformation and expansion. Unlike the phonological and grammatical system of a language, which is made up of a limited number of closely organized elements, the vocabulary is an ‘open system’. It is thus far more fluid and mobile, allowing the introduction of new lexical and semantic items and dispensing with existing terms which are moribund or in disuse. Moreover, under the influence of outside languages, the lexicon is, again, that component of language which is the most easily and radically affected.90 The English lexicon from Old English to Modern English, for example, underwent massive expansion thanks to a high level of borrowing from various sources: Latin, French, Scandinavian. A language can either borrow a word from another while maintaining the features foreign to the borrowing language or it can adapt the item through phonological, grammatical and syntactic transformations. Adaptive strategies are not entirely sporadic, and speakers seem to follow particular methods of borrowing. In the case of MC , it will be interesting to see what patterns creative writers use to adapt their borrowings in order to make them adhere more closely to the structure of the language. Internal creativity is another means of lexical expansion and includes coining, reduplication and polysemy, the process by which lexemes take on more than one meaning. The latter process is symptomatic of a language in a more advanced stage of development and often results from the metaphoric use of language. Analysis will focus on how individual writers go beyond the existing boundaries of M C by borrowing and creating new words and metaphors. While my treatment aims at noting whether a certain word is recurring or rare, whether it is an archaism or a neologism or a borrowing, and at observing the formation of the word, it will also aim to classify words in terms of registers relating to specialized fields.

90

April McMahon, Understanding Language Change (Cambridge: Cambridge U P ,

1994): 207.

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

67

Cohesion: Syntactic and Lexical Halliday and Hasan, in Cohesion in English, argue that texts achieve their status as communicative events through the use of cohesive devices which have both a semantic and a grammatical function.91 Cohesion helps to guide the ways in which the units of a text are to be understood in relation to each other and also contributes to the impression of the individuality of a text as opposed to its being an arbitrary concatenation of distinct phrases and sentences. Halliday and Hasan’s concept of a tie, a single instance of cohesion, on whichever linguistic level, makes it possible to investigate both grammatical and lexical cohesion in various areas. Various types of questions can be investigated in this way – for example, concerning the difference between speech and writing, the relationship between cohesion and the organization of written texts into sentences and paragraphs, and the possible differences among genres and authors regarding the number and kinds of ties they typically employ.92

The Concept of Cohesion and, Especially, Cohesive Ties – Central to the Concerns of This Book Syntactic features which lead to cohesion include reference, ellipsis, substitution and conjunction, and affect not only phrases but also the combinations into which they enter. Stylistic analysis, therefore, does not have to limit itself to the sentence as the primary constitutive unit but can extend to the internal structure of a text. The concept of lexical cohesion enlarges considerably the range of linguistic features available for study, permitting, for example, insight into how each text continuously provides its own references. Cohesion also includes stylistic elements in terms of phonology, such as alliteration and parallelism. In fact, cohesion very often takes place on various levels simultaneously – a characteristic feature of literature. Because stylistics endeavours to discover not just what a text means but how it comes to mean what it does, it is a particularly useful means of investigating writing as a different medium of communication than speech. Traugott and Pratt take the concept of cohesion one step further by suggesting that linguistics can be used to construct a theory about the lan91

Michael Halliday & Ruqaiya Hasan, Cohesion in English (London: Longman,

1976). 92

Halliday & Hasan, Cohesion in English, 4.

68

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

guage of a text in the form of a “grammar of a text.”93 Instead of limiting an account of a text to observed regularities, generalizations can be made about the text’s phonological, syntactic, and semantic structure which allow the critic to make stylistic observations in an organized way about the most detailed facts of the language.94 Linked to the grammar of a text is the study of style as deviance, which is a reminder that the language of literature is not always entirely that of everyday usage. Studying the grammar of a deviant text may reveal its internal consistency and may indicate that what may be perfectly normal in one genre or for one author may be untypical in another.

Genre and Author’s Style Despite the considerable number of similarities, overlap and continua among genres, literature remains conventionalized in term of genres.95 Because of their specific aims and traditions, different genres have evolved individual methods of utilizing language. Butler, commenting on the difficulty of shifting register associations in relation to genre, claims that unless a text is a parody or pastiche, its register will always support genre and be so closely bound to it that the distinction between the two will only rarely need to be invoked.96 Not only does the genre serve to direct the reader towards the text in particular ways but it also determines, to a certain extent, the stylistic decisions of an author in relation to the linguistic characteristics of poetry, drama and the novel respectively. Although constrained to a certain extent by cultural determinants such as genre and subject-matter, linguistic choices are also determined by authorial preferences. Inasmuch as it is possible to say the same things in different ways, it can be deduced that the set of a writer’s preferred norms constitutes his style. Each author consistently favours certain of the structures available in the language over others. The analysis will look at the structural trends, verbal traits and lexical usage that characterize key authors, with a focus on Virahsawmy, and will also enquire into the reasons why the latter sets off in new linguistic directions at specific points in social history. 93

Traugott & Pratt, Linguistics for Students of Literature, 20. Linguistics for Students of Literature, 20. 95 O’Donnell & Todd, Variety in Contemporary English, 121. 96 Butler, Registering the Difference, 96. 94

½¾

The Sociolinguistic and Literary Contexts

69

Conclusion The double attraction of stylistics is that it offers potentially formal descriptions of the patterns of the language with a precise terminology which will facilitate textual analysis while taking into account an historical progression over the past thirty years, in terms of the impact of social change as well as individual authors’ various ideological stances towards MC . My focus in the analysis of written texts in MC will be on the selection and ordering of various patterns constituting the style of individual texts, the intricate network of creating, privileging, excluding or marginalizing certain forms under the main headings of lexicon, syntax, and graphic syntax, while taking into account cohesive features. The stylistic analysis will also look at the language used by creative writers as a potential form of ‘aménagement’ in terms of the development and illustration of register possibilities.

½¾

2

The Theatre of Protest

Overturning the Linguistic Superstructure

I

of relatively young languages, it seems to be a recurring pattern that it is those forms of literature closest to the oral form, namely poetry and theatre, that emerge first. By the 1980s, as pointed out in the previous chapter, poetry in M C was already being circulated and the genre of theatre was soon to be established. Indeed, at this early stage in the history of postcolonial literature in MC theatrical performance, by bypassing the problematic issue of literacy identified in Chapter 1, had the potential to reach a wide audience. The first section of this chapter provides an overview of the emergence and development of a theatre of protest in MC in relation to corresponding historical and ideological developments. The second summarizes the main distinguishing linguistic characteristics of dramatic language which serve to introduce and contextualize the main part of this chapter, a stylistic analysis of three early plays in MC by three of the leading Mauritian playwrights, Dev Virahsawmy, Azize Asgarally, and Henri Favory. The overview and stylistic analysis of dramatic language will explore the main hypothesis that creative writers have an important role to play in the standardization of MC . N THE LITERARY HISTORY

I Theatre and the Status Planning of MC A brief outline of the theatrical scene in Mauritius before the advent of theatre in M C emphasizes the political and cultural impact of the post-

72

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

colonial theatre in MC . Theatrical activities in French started with the establishment of the first theatre building in 1754 and was targeted at a francophone social elite.1 Under British rule, a theatrical culture only developed in 1932 with the creation of the Mauritius Dramatic Club, performing Sheridan, Wilde, Shaw. and Shakespeare. Until independence, the stage, which remained heavily dominated by English and French dramatic culture, could be seen as one of the most obvious manifestations of the linguistic superstructure. In 1979, however, the limitations of theatre in English and French were already being recognized in the light of cultural changes since independence. The dramatic art festival in English and French organized by the Ministry of Youth was encountering less and less success precisely because it did not respond to the requirements of the majority.2 Inspired by the historical and ideological developments brought by political independence, several authors, following Virahsawmy’s example, openly sought in the 1980s to break away from a literature aimed exclusively at an educated elite. The decision of playwrights who were fluent in both English and French to write in MC had implications on several interrelated levels. Azize Asgarally’s rationale for his choice of MC as dramatic language resonates with anticolonial sentiment and suggests an increasing awareness of the links between linguistic and political liberation, “I therefore wrote Ratsitatane in creole, it was in 1982 or 1983, because at the time I felt the intense need to express a particular revolt and a particular engagement with my mother tongue.”3 In putting MC on an equal footing with the two colonial languages, they inevitably positioned themselves in opposition to those who continued to write exclusively in English and French. Asgarally’s further socio-cultural and political reasons for writing in MC , summarized below by Ramharai, also reveal the parcours of MC in terms of both status and corpus by the early 1980s: (1) creole is no longer a ‘taboo’ language in 1980; (2) it has literary prestige; 1 Antoine Chelin, Le théâtre à l’Île Maurice: Son origine et son développement (Port–Louis: Société de l’histoire de l’île Maurice, 1954): 12. 2 Gaston Valayden, “Le festival de théâtre en créole: Événement culturel de l’année,” Weekend (29 July 1979): 13. 3 “J’écris donc Ratsitatane en créole, c’était en 1982 ou 1983, parce qu’à l’époque je ressens le besoin profond d’exprimer une certaine révolte et un certain engagement dans ma langue maternelle” (L’Express, 18 February 2001).

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

73

(3) it is now a written language; (4) it facilitates the access of Mauritian literature to social groups other than the middle classes.4 The first three points mentioned by Ramharai suggest strongly that Virahsawmy’s series of press articles in 1967–68 about the sociolinguistic value of MC as national language and the early literature in MC , mainly poetry, was attracting the linguistic loyalty of an increasing number of writers. Ramharai notes Mariamen’s Kan Fwet Sâz Lamé (When the Whip Changes Hand) (1980), V. Golam’s Kanser (Cancer) (1981), and G. Seetohul’s Lakoz ban Zis (The Cause of the Just) (1982).5 The latter playwrights, however, in reproducing the manifesto of the M M M , failed to engage their audience. Virahsawmy, Favory, and Asgarally, on the other hand, compromised between militant intent and the necessary task of literary elaboration in their creation of a dramatic form, experimenting with the aesthetic and linguistic potential of MC . Successful in this attempt, they became and, to a large extent, remain the most influential playwrights of the postcolonial period. Virahsawmy’s Li (1972), a one-act play, was a critical reminder of the strike of the ‘Union of Bus Industry Workers’ which had paralysed Mauritius on 12 August 1971 and which had led to his own imprisonment in 1971–72. Li revolves around a political prisoner deemed dangerous by the state and who is held in a detention room at a police station. The unnamed prisoner, referred to as ‘Li’ (the third-person pronoun in MC ), persists in a hunger strike while people outside the station, for whom he is a saviour, demonstrate for his release. The level of official corruption becomes increasingly obvious as Rawana, the Sergeant, who gets increasingly drunk while on duty, awaits a phone call for the unlawful murder of the prisoner which he believes will lead to his own promotion. After the prisoner’s assassination, the other characters await the repercussions as the crowds demand justice. Suspense and tension in the play are sustained 4

(1) le créole n’est plus une langue “tabou” en 1980; (2) il a une valeur littéraire; (3) il est maintenant une langue écrite; (4) il permet à la littérature mauricienne d’atteindre une couche de la population autre que la bourgeoisie. Ramharai, La Littérature Mauricienne d’expression créole, 100. 5 Ramharai, La Littérature Mauricienne d’expression créole, 59.

74

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

mainly by the actors’ movements on stage and by the absent presence of the protagonist, inspired by Waiting for Godot. The very position of Li as the first play in MC which was to launch the theatre of protest made it a crucial landmark in the sociolinguistic and literary history of Mauritius. Virahsawmy was to prove that, as a contrast to the existing tradition of burlesque sketches,6 serious, thought-provoking political dramatic literature could be written in MC . This new cultural role for MC was to be acknowledged by the media: “With Li, theatre in creole makes a remarkable breakthrough on the local cultural scene.”7 Moreover, Issa Asgarally in Littérature et Révolte highlights the impact of Li in breaking away from canonical colonial influences and initiating a popular theatre close to social and political realities.8 The valorization of previously ignored local material entailed a significant “democratization of culture.”9 In fact, the negative reactions which the play provoked from the state were to further foreground its political importance. In 1977, on the eve of the first performance, the play was banned by the national censorship board, a decision prompted by Virahsawmy’s revolutionary profile and message.10 The ban only brought the play into the limelight, foregrounding its position as a militant landmark. It was described as “a snub to blind repression”11 and featured in several articles in the Reunionese press in 1979. Furthermore, Carpanin Marimoutou, the Reunionese poet, critic, and academic, published a trilingual version of the play in MC , Réunionnais creole, and French during the ban.12 In 1981, Li was awarded first prize at the eleventh Concours de Radio-France International. Four years later, when 6 Hookoomsing points out that until the emergence of the protest theatre in M C , the stage had been restricted to brief comical sketches revolving around the burlesque. “Langue créole, littérature nationale et mauricianisme populaire,” 397. 7 Alain Gordon–Gentil, “Avec Li le théâtre en créole a fait une percée remarquable sur la scène culturelle locale”, “Rétrospective des Spectacles: Percée du Théâtre d’Expression Créole,” Weekend (26 December 1982): 19. 8 Issa Asgarally, Littérature et révolte (Mauritius: Le Flamboyant, 1985): 80. 9 Baz Kershaw, The Politics of Performance (London: Routledge, 1992): 10. 10 After independence the political regime, under Ramgoolam as Prime Minister, was close to repression in times of political unrest. 11 “un camouflet à la répression aveugle”; Pierre Benoît, “Li Couronnée à l’Etranger est toujours Interdite à Maurice” Weekend (4 October 1981): 8. 12 The trilingual version was published by “Les chemins de la liberté,” which specialized in the publication and diffusion of literature in Creole under the direction of Firmin Lacpatia.

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

75

the ban was lifted, Li was translated into English and published in a bilingual version as Li – The Prisoner of Conscience (1985). Zeneral Makbef (1981), performed for the stage repeatedly in Mauritius and abroad (1981, 1982, 1984, 1990), was to give both impetus and a different direction to the theatre of protest as “the first truly big piece of theatre in creole.”13 Interestingly enough, the idea of the play originated as a line-by-line translation of Macbeth. Faced by the linguistic challenges of translating into verse the bleakest Shakespearean tragedy, however, Virahsawmy postponed his initial plan, producing instead a political satire.14 The plot of Shakespeare’s Macbeth, which revolves around tyranny and the usurpation of power, parallels the representation of history in several of the postcolonial African countries near Mauritius. Indeed, Virahsawmy’s Makbef, who makes himself Emperor of a Republic, with a lust for power matched only by an unnaturally intense sexual appetite for both men and women, is a satirical reference to leaders such as Bokassa and Idi Amin Dada. Zeneral Makbef warns against two types of oppression facing postcolonial countries, the risk of becoming puppets in the hands of superpowers and of becoming victims of their own leaders. Virahsawmy’s play also takes its cue from the overthrow of tyranny by collective action which concludes Shakespeare’s play. From faithful servant of the murdered king to apparently naive servant of Makbef, Sooklall will then make his way into Lady Makbef’s bed and finally lead a revolutionary coup against Makbef himself. Politics grapple with humour, as do local issues with Shakespeare.15 The second author to be considered, Favory, has written and successfully staged numerous plays. Tras (1983) was selected to be performed at the World Theatre Festival of Nancy (1983). He writes exclusively in M C in order to reach the widest audience, irrespective of class background.16 13

“la première vraie grande pièce de théâtre en créole”; “La Mauritius Drama League Présente Zeneral Makbef,” Weekend (20 June 1982): 16. 14 From the 1990s onwards Virahsawmy would translate various Shakespearean plays into M C including Macbeth itself. See Chapter 5 for his translations of Hamlet and Much Ado about Nothing. 15 This opening up to a multicultural dialogue is a key element which further enhances the status of M C in other plays such as Toufann (1990). See Chapter 4. 16 Favory referred to numerous occasions where he assessed the reactions of young adults to the language used in drama. His main observation was that a theatre in English would be shunned, one in French would be only partially accessible, while a

76

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Described as an act of “returning history to its rightful owners,”17 it is the manifestation of an emerging postcolonial voice attempting to reclaim its history. The play takes place in a courtroom, where a sugar estate, referred to in MC as “tablisman,” a powerful institution which is still under the control of the Franco-Mauritians, is being sued by the manual workers who had been dismissed without payment or compensation. In this conflict, the exploitation of the proletariat is closely and clearly linked to a neocolonial form of exploitation, a continuation of plantation power relations by an economically powerful white hegemony, where generations of slaves have been succeeded by generations of yet more exploited workers. The sugar estate bribes its way into the support of the field supervisor, the police, and even that of the court. Amidst the gloom generated by the evocation of colonial and neocolonial forms of exploitation, the breath of fresh air in the play is the character of the jester–usher. From being a low profile character, he turns into the most subversive element in the play by constantly intervening, singing, and challenging the unfolding of events in court. While on the formal level the influence of Brecht can be felt in Favory’s transformation of the audience into a judge, which encourages their active participation, linguistically the play makes distinct and creative use of MC . The press highlighted the role of theatre in putting M C on a par with the colonial languages in use in Mauritius: a play which could leave its mark on the history of world theatre. (...) The language of the play is so precise, so creative, so authentic as to put the Kreol language amongst those in which the finest theatre has been produced.18

Reclaiming history more directly than Tras, Azize Asgarally’s Ratsitatane is until today regarded as “the first piece of theatre of historic nature.”19 In addition to Asgarally’s aforementioned sociolinguistic preoccupation in writing Ratsitatane (1983), his only play in MC , another aim was to allow theatre in M C is fully accessible and the most enjoyable for a local audience, cutting across all classes and ethnic groups. Personal communication, September 1997. 17 “rendre l’histoire à ses véritables propriétaires” , Le Mauricien (31 January 1983), Preface to Tras. 18 Week-End (30 January 1983), in Tras. 19 “la première pièce de théâtre à caractère historique”, “Ratsitatane au Plaza,” Weekend (29 January 1984): 18.

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

77

a rediscovery of Ratsitatane, the nephew of Radama, king of Madagascar, exiled to Mauritius in the nineteenth century on suspicion of conspiracy against the British authorities. In Mauritius, while on the run, Ratsitatane was betrayed, tracked down, and publicly executed. In the recounting of these historical events, Asgarally challenges the persisting popular colonial image of Ratsitatane as the savage who abducted a French woman, raped her, and drove her to suicide,20 portraying, instead, a shrewd and committed politician determined to set his country free of British colonial power. In line with this postcolonial rewriting of history, the play challenges colonial ideology, thus further rooting M C in an historical and philosophical context. Ratsitatane also benefitted from recognition abroad in 1984, when the play was translated into English and performed in Perth, Australia in the context of the International Festival of the Sea. Despite their common political agenda, however, there are important diverging aspects among the motivations of Virahsawmy, Favory, and Asgarally. The fact that Asgarally has not written another play in M C since Ratsitatane, despite the success it encountered, suggests that he had seen the writing of an historical play in MC as appropriate to the specific historical context it was written in, rather than as a turning-point in his literary career. Unlike him, both Virahsawmy and Favory have made sustained efforts to promote MC through literature. Favory, however, does not share Virahsawmy’s focus on plays as dramatic literature, concentrating instead on theatre as a social art which exists only through performance. 21 Tras is his only play to have been published. Favory’s efforts to promote MC are thus not situated within the establishment of a literary norm, as is the case with Virahsawmy. The ideologies that link as well as separate the three playwrights permeate their plays and will be further revealed through the stylistic analysis below. Although Li had a momentous impact on the history of theatre in M C , its influence on the standardization of MC is particularly prominent in terms of status planning, as already demonstrated. In this first play, Virahsawmy draws mostly from the existing linguistic features of MC . Sentences are linked mainly through coordination, although relativization is 20

The colonial version is from Lucien Brey’s account of the Malagasy prince in Voleur Mauricien, a literary journal which appeared in 1889. See Ramharai, La Littérature Mauricienne d’expression créole, 99. 21 Preface to Tras.

78

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

occasionally present. The play shows some evidence of corpus planning, mainly through the use of a systematized orthography and the indication of a few idiolects. The didactic function of the play, however, dominates over lexical and syntactic elaboration, so that there are few instances of innovation.22 Zeneral Makbef, on the other hand, marks a turning-point in Virahsawmy’s writing career. Shiva Sidaya highlights in the preface to Zeneral Makbef the growing awareness that while MC had served literature in the past, in this play literature was being employed to serve the cause of MC by giving it new literary dimensions. Virahsawmy’s own reflections on his changing priorities over the ten years separating the writing of his two main protest plays demonstrate a move from creative writing as ‘écriture’ to writing as ‘literature’ which involves further corpus planning: [Initially] my main aim was to encourage Mauritians to understand that Kreol is a language in its own right, that it has a role to play in the cultural and political development of the country. […] I find myself in a situation where creative writing has become the main focus of my interest. I’m now fully dedicating myself to this.23

My analysis therefore starts with Zeneral Makbef, after a synopsis of the language of drama. Beforehand, with a view to facilitating the analysis, some of the main linguistic features of dramatic language are identified.

½¾

22

For a more detailed analysis of Li, see Roshni Mooneeram, “Mauritius and La Réunion,” in A History of Theatre in Africa, ed. Martin Banham (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 2004): 405–29. 23 “[Au début] mon but principal était de faire comprendre aux Mauriciens que le Kréol est une langue à part entière, qu’elle a un rôle à jouer dans le développement culturel et politique du pays. […] je me vois dans une nouvelle situation où la création littéraire est devenue mon principal centre d’interêt. Je m’y donne actuellement à fond.” Virahsawmy, “Dix Ans d’Engagement Littéraire,” Weekend (13 July 1980): 11.

½¾

79

The Theatre of Protest

II Theatre and Corpus Planning Dramatic Language In comparison to poetry and prose, play-texts have received little attention from stylisticians. It is precisely the fact that drama is the literary genre which is most similar to naturally occurring conversation that makes it liable to be undervalued and explains this lack of interest.24 It is certainly true that in order for dramatic language to be effective in dialogues between characters or in monologues, it must reflect the syntactic patterns of speech. The language of drama, therefore, typically consists of a simplified lexicon, simple syntactic structures involving short sentences, with little subordination.25 Even the accidents and imperfections characteristic of ordinary conversation are often preserved in character-to-character interaction.26 However, dramatic language can only partly be calqued onto spoken language, since it is, in fact, a mixed mode. Since certain devices are necessary in the move from the context of orality to that of the stage, the originality of dramatic language lies in the fact that it is poised between the written and the spoken medium, reconciling, to a certain extent, two different conditions of elaboration and reception of messages.27 The doubled discourse structure – the fact that the conversations taking place on stage in apparently real time are meant for both the characters and the audience – means that dramatic conversations and the audience’s understanding of them are dependent on special stage conventions. On the one hand, dramatic language must remain close enough to spoken language to the point of imitating its ‘imperfections’ for reasons of stylistic appropriateness, given the situation of apparently spontaneous exchanges be24

Jonathan Culpeper, Mick Short & Peter Verdonk, “Introduction” to Exploring the Language of Drama: From Text to Context (London: Routledge, 1998): 3. 25 Joëlle Gardes–Tamine, La Stylistique (Paris: Armand Colin, 1992): 106–107. 26 Referred to by linguists as normal fluency, these characteristics include fillers, silent pauses, mispronunciations, unnecessary repetitions, grammatical structures which are abandoned part of the way through, attempts at taking conversational turns which are lost, competition among speakers to take the conversation off onto a topic of their choosing. 27 Pierre Larthomas, Le langage dramatique (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1993): 438.

80

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

tween characters. On the other hand, the crucial difference between everyday conversation and dramatic language is that the play is first written to be spoken. As a consequence, the reproduction of hesitations, interruptions, and rectifications of speech are deliberate and constitute elements of style designed for diverse effects. Moreover, dramatic language also distances itself from speech through its preoccupation with creating a concentration of effects which are not found in speech. Indeed, dramatic language also shares certain crucial aspects with written language in terms of cohesion and more intense organization. Therefore, while in the oral situation a long discourse can be semantically poor, in drama the style is necessarily more concise. Whereas the reader of a text can stop, refer back, or move straight to the end of a text, the spectator can only follow the dialogue as it proceeds on stage. The fact that the dramatist tries to put across the maximum of information with the minimum of words possible, while simultaneously focusing on the elements prone to provoke reactions from the audience and without at any moment losing their interest, results in a dramatic language which is extremely dense. Given the complex context of dramatic language, each word counts, or as Michael Toolan puts it, the “optimal appropriateness of lexis” is crucial.28 Therefore, the language of a play cannot be totally identified with speech, at which point it would lose its dramatic effect. While spoken registers are governed by the context of situation, those of a play are governed by the cultural context of theatre and require a degree of planning and autonomy in order to function efficiently. My stylistic commentary, which takes the plays in chronological order, is organized in terms of four linguistic levels: register variation and codeswitching; lexical innovation and borrowing; semantic expansion through metaphor; and structural innovations. Given the prominent manipulation of lexical resources in the language of drama, register will be analysed mostly in terms of lexicon rather than grammatical complexity, although grammatical features will also be considered where appropriate. At the level of the sentence, for example, grammatical relations in terms of simple/complex sentences, oral/written syntax, cohesion, and individual markers will be examined.

28

Michael Toolan, Language in Literature: An Introduction to Stylistics (London: Arnold, 1998): 139.

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

81

Register Variation and Code-Switching Zeneral Makbef The concept of register, as seen in Chapter 1, allows one to analyse how texts adjust themselves to readers in particular ways, and organize their information in ways appropriate to the medium.29 Language in drama, being constituted of speeches, is particularly revealing of the characters’ desire to express and communicate, so that notable effects are achieved through the appropriateness or inappropriateness of register. The notion of repertoire, which refers to all the forms used by a linguistic community in a socially meaningful way, allows one to consider all the linguistic codes available, even if these are from (an)other language(s). In multidialectal and multilingual communities, speakers often code-switch: i.e. within the same utterance they switch from one dialect or language to another as a means of register variation, since the dialects and languages which are in contact fulfil the same stylistic function as the different varieties of a language in a monolingual community.30 Moreover, according to codeswitching studies, the selection of linguistic codes available to members of a multilingual community is not free but is regulated by social constraints which are shared by all members of that community. Myers–Scotton, for example, sees code-switching as a means of indexing the nuances of social relationships through the exploitation of the socio-psychological associations of the languages employed.31 Given the particular sociolinguistic associations attached to French and English in relation to M C identified in Chapter 1, code-switching to these languages in the context of literature in MC can provide a further source of effective stylistic variation in terms of register. Code-switching is a strikingly prominent and evolving characteristic feature of Virahsawmy’s dramatic style. In Zeneral Makbef, the manipulation and development of registers provides thematic support and addresses issues of power. In the opening scene, after the assassination of the king, Sooklall, the servant, introduces himself: 29

Bex, Variety in Written English, 87. Claire Lefebvre, “Les notions de style,” in La Norme Linguistique, ed. Edith Bédard & Jacques Maurais (Quebec City & Paris: Conseil de la language française, 1983): 312. 31 Carol Myers–Scotton, Duelling Languages: Grammatical Structure in Codeswitching (Oxford: Clarendon, 1993): 1. 30

82

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

S O O K L A L L : Mwa mo serviter lwayal sa mazesté. (Li bes so latet, kumadir li pé fer lapriyer divâ ên tom) Que Dieu ramasse son âme! Me kuma sa mazesté fin kaykun zordi mo serviter lwayal misié prezidâ, Zeneral Makbef!

(Act I) S O O K L A L L : I am the loyal servant of his majesty. (He bows his head, as if in prayer in front of a tomb) Que Dieu ramasse son âme! But since his majesty has kicked the bucket today I am now the loyal servant to Mr President, General Makbef!

After identifying himself in MC , Sooklall switches to French – “Que Dieu ramasse son âme!” (God rest his soul!) – to pay a last homage to his king with a body language, as detailed by stage directions, that further supports an attitude of prayer and respect. His second sentence, however, with the use of the irreverent verb “kaykun” (kicked the bucket) instead of the neutral “mor” (died) combined with the impressive ease with which he switches identity from “serviter lwayal sa mazesté” to “serviter lwayal misié prezidâ, Zeneral Makbef” (His Majesty’s loyal servant > loyal servant of Mr President, General Makbef), signals the mock-respect behind his earlier use of French. Intra-speaker register variation in Sooklall reveals a two-faced individual, thus bringing out one of the major themes of Macbeth, the deceptiveness of appearances, which also permeates Zeneral Makbef in various linguistic ways. As opposed to an indiscriminate mixing of codes which could be the result of linguistic incompetence, code-switching in the play involves rhetorical skill which manipulates the social meanings of each code. Sooklall’s use of French to maintain an official façade and that of MC for his true scheming self is an example of metaphoric code-switching. His ability to switch codes controls his ability to switch roles.32 Indeed, Sooklall’s adjustment of linguistic behaviour is a crucial element in his political success. By contrast, other characters are seriously constrained by their mastery of only one particular code and their lack of access to the codes related to power, as illustrated by a nameless character, simply referred to as ‘an old man’: 32

Basil Bernstein, Class, Codes and Control, vol. 1: Theoretical Studies Towards a Sociology of Language (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1971): 128.

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

83

E N V I É B O N O M : Dir mwa babu, sa biro la koté? […]

Musé! Mo pitifi fin pasé so lekjamé. Aster moso travay mo pé rodé pu li napa. (Act II) A N O L D M A N : Tell me son, where is the office? […]

Sir! My daughter has passed her exams. Now I’m looking for a job for her but to no avail.

As an elderly country-dweller, he speaks a Bhojpuri-influenced MC which is indicated lexically by the familiar term of address, “babu” (son) to the policeman and, phonologically, through the variant “muse” for “misié” (Sir), for example. Syntactically, there is a marked use of the long 33 MC verb-forms on two occasions, “pasé” and “rode,” which further reinforce his rural and ethnic identity as Indo-Mauritian. The old man’s code is seen as restricted, given his inaccessibility to lexical items derivative of French and forming an integral part of an urban MC , as illustrated in the following exchange: P O L I S I É : Ki u bizê bonom? E N V I É B O N O M : Parer-perer so biro nô. P O L I S I É : Kozé u pa koné, ki manyer mo pu ed u?

(Act II) P O L I C E M A N : What do you want old man? O L D M A N : Parer-perer’s office. P O L I C E M A N : You can’t even talk properly, how can I possibly help

you out?

His deformation of “âperer” (emperor) leads to incomprehensibility and puts him in a vulnerable position in relation to urban dwellers. As a contrast to the Old Man’s linguistic behaviour, Zeneral Makbef’s power lies in his mastery of an elaborate repertory of registers, often drawn from several languages. In an attempt to establish a relation of informality with his servant, Sooklall, he asks the latter to address him in 33

If a verb is followed by a complement in M C , it usually loses its verb-final vowel. See Anand Syea, “The Short and Long Form of Verbs in Mauritian Creole: Functionalism versus Formalism,” Theoretical Linguistics 18 (1992): 61–97.

84

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

less formal terms, “Nu tuledé tizâfâ esklav, ‘fils-de-coolie’. Apel mwa Mak” (We are both grandchildren of slavery, “fils-de-coolie”. Call me Mak) (Act I). While his first phrase indicates a wish to be identified with Sooklall on the grounds of a common background of colonial oppression, the second epithet, a French term which brings with it the implications of colonialism (son of a coolie), is not only pejorative but signals an adherence to a register of dominance. Tras Although Favory does not make use of code-switching across languages to the same extent as Virahsawmy does, register variation within MC is nonetheless an important means of indicating relations among people in a play that takes place nearly entirely in the courtroom. Jonathan Culpeper points out that it is not surprising that the courtroom has provided the basis for so many plays and films, since it creates a space that provides a socially respectable and legitimate form of verbal aggression.34 In Tras, however, the courtroom is not a traditional one but one in which the theatre and the court are constantly negotiating and competing for their own space: Z O K E – W I S Y E : votroner, votroner

mo pa kone ki ariv mwa me depi sa dernye tan-la mo santi nu komsidire dan enn gran teat teat teat (Round 2) J E S T E R – U S H E R : your honour, your honour

I don’t know what’s happening to me these days I feel like we are in a big theatre theatre theatre

The inappropriateness of a jester’s presence in a court of law is matched by the inappropriateness of his language. The jester–usher’s register is characterized by vagueness through semantically poor lexical items “mo pa koné” (I don’t know), “komsidiré” (as if), and a lexical repetition typical of sing-song, “votroner, votroner” (your honour, your honour), “teat, teat, teat,” manifesting an informality which is antithetical to the terseness 34

Jonathan Culpeper, “(Im)politeness in Dramatic Discourse,” in Exploring the Language of Drama: From Text to Context, ed. Culpeper, Short & Verdonk, 86.

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

85

of a courtroom register. His linguistic behaviour defies the formal setting of the law court, where the social roles of participants typically override their personal relationships in determining the appropriate linguistic forms. In fact, it is through a subversive explosion of the registers appropriate to the courtroom that the jester–usher questions hegemonic assumptions. The judge is compelled to come to an agreement by which he and the jester–usher will respect each other’s role: i.e. the judge will represent the court; the jester–usher, the theatre. The jester–usher himself becomes a metaphor for theatre, highlighting the latter as a subversive space where the previously marginalized can reappropriate their right to self-expression. At points where we feel that the truth is being manipulated, the jester–usher overrules the judge’s words and intervenes aggressively to make his side of the story heard: “teat ras laparol” (the theatre snatches its right to speak) (Round 4). First of all, the ‘word’ has already been ‘snatched’ through the installing of MC as dramatic language in a context where drama had traditionally been associated with the colonial languages and, secondly, with the more specific use of MC as language of the court within the play, whereas in real life English would be used. Another marked feature in terms of register variation in Tras is the incongruous presence of ‘Madam Sere’, an MC jargon, where each syllable is repeated with an initial /g/ consonant: A V O K A - D E F A N S : votroner mogo nagapaga pugu longong Zisgistegemangan Dagapregre tugu tegemwagayazgaz kigi finnginn pregezangantege Angankurgur Zurgurdigi Ligi byingin klerger Pugu tugu segekigi truvguv klerger […]

(Round 7)

‘Madam Sere’, a register associated with children and young adolescents for cryptic and identification purposes, comes close to what Halliday describes as anti-language.35 Anti-language, an oppositional language with explicitly antagonistic socio-cultural meanings, is usually based on the same grammatical principles as ordinary language but uses a different 35

Michael Halliday, Language as Social Semiotic: A Discussion of Dominant Structures in Verse and Prose (London: Edward Arnold, 1978).

86

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

vocabulary restricted to certain areas, typically those that are central to the activities of a subculture, and that set it off most sharply from society.36 In Tras, the use of anti-language by a lawyer in a court situation where clarity and precision of language are important prerequisites, serves to confuse the client. Favory draws a parallel between English, particularly the English legal jargon which binds the professional class of lawyers and often excludes the client, and the use of ‘Madam Sere’. The latter, in fact, is used to parody the sociolinguistic situation where the defence would be made in English, regardless of whether it was understood by the client or not.37 The presence of ‘Madam Sere’ can therefore be seen as an example of code-switching employed to deconstruct the linguistic superstructure through parody. Ratsitatane While, in Tras, code-switching takes place within MC , in Ratsitatane, an historical play focusing on colonial rule, code-switching takes place between the colonial languages and MC . Asgarally’s sociolinguistic insight into the process of the ‘colonization of the mind’ is particularly striking.38 When the man-hunt for Ratsitatane is about to start, two freed slaves offer their help to the slave owners: 1 E R E S K L A V A F F R A N S I : Nou seron rekonnaissan et fiers dêtre à

vo kôté dan cett lutt que vou menez kontre le zesklav marron, se bandi, se kriminel ki veull tou détruirr ici pour ensuitt implanté leur kultur barbar. Donné nou de fuzis et nou montré digne de la konfiance que vou avé placé en nou. (I I I . i i ) F I R S T F R E E D S L A V E : We will be grateful and proud to be on

your side in your struggle against the run-away slaves, those bandits, those criminals who want to destroy everything to then implant their barbarous culture. Give us some guns and we will show ourselves worthy of the trust you have put in us. 36

Fowler, Literature as Social Discourse, 146–50. In 1989, the Supreme Court pronounced a judgment in favour of the plaintiff in the Kramutally case to request that the policemen who acted as witnesses to the prosecution should testify in M C for the sake of comprehension. 38 Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o, Decolonizing the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature (London: James Currey, 1986). 37

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

87

The fact that the slaves speak French (Asgarally’s orthography is misleadingly inconsistent) in a play where all the characters, including the French colonial authorities, are made to speak in M C is not a coincidence. Through this disconcerting use of language, especially in an historical context where MC would have been the lingua franca of the slave population in Mauritius,39 Asgarally creates an awareness of the psychic violence of an enslavement that convinced the victims of their own linguistic and cultural inferiority and inculcated in them the belief in, and desire to fight for the defence of, French language and culture. This anachronistic use of language points out sharply that the ultimate sign of success of the colonial enterprise lies in the indoctrination of its ideologies into those it has colonized. In this process, language is revealed as a support for a culture, so that the domination of a language over another constitutes the domination of one culture over another. By unveiling the ethnocentricity behind the colonial discourse on language and the persistence of the latter manifested in the contempt of the colonized for their own mother-tongue, Ratsitatane exposes precisely those colonial mechanisms of the linguistic superstructure that have created and consolidated the myths surrounding MC . Speaking French, in Fanon’s terms, means that one accepts or is coerced into accepting the collective consciousness of French, one that vilifies blackness.40 As a contrast to the language of the freed slaves, the captive slaves speak in a basilectal form among themselves, marked by the slang and pejorative connotations of the lexical choices they make: “ena enpé beizé la” (fuck), “sa makro Laizafy là” (that fucking pimp Laizafy), “kouillon” (dickhead), “bouré” (fuck off) (II.i). The difference in register between the language of the freed slaves and that of those in captivity is in line with Ratsitatane’s vision of colonization as having created two classes of slaves, the esklav noir (black slave) on the one hand, and, on the other, what he refers to as esklav aristo (aristocratic slave), who regard the captive slaves and their language with the same disdain as their master. Moreover, the above use of slang illustrates the esklav noir’s rejection of the 39 Ramharai claims that up to the period preceding the abolition of slavery in 1835, all the ethnic groups communicated in M C , including the French masters who had to speak in M C to make themselves understood by the slave population. La Littérature Mauricienne d’expression créole, 13. 40 Frantz Fanon, Black Skin, White Masks, tr. Charles L. Markmann (Peau noire, masques blancs, 1956, tr. 1967; New York: Grove, 1967).

88

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

dominant culture and denial of a state of linguistic and political submission implied by the efforts of the esklav aristo to use a more legitimate register of language. The marked register of the esklav noir is also crucial to the internal coherence of their group, creating and reinforcing exclusive bonds in antagonistic relation to the other groups. MC is, however, not restricted to slang or the vulgar but is used in formal situations such as in the royal court of Madagascar by the aristocracy. Prince Ratsitatane, for example, employs an eloquent MC to question the nature of freedom, reality, truth, the point of living in a world of binary values: R A T S I T A T A N E : La vérité! non, mo pa pretende conn la verité,

moins ancor la verité absoli. Mo pe esseye komprend selment, mo pe esseye komprend ki fer bisin ena esklave et maite, kifer ena victim et assassin, ki fer bisin ena mendiant et prince…. . (I.ii) R A T S I T A T A N E : The truth! No, I do not claim to know the truth,

even less the absolute truth. I am only trying to understand, I am trying to figure out why there should be slaves and masters, why there should be victims and murderers, why there should be beggars and princes … A A D R A A M A N T R A V A L O : […] La réalité ki to pe trouvé li na pa la realité absoli, li enn realité ki finn limité selon nou kapacité enn himain. En fe, li depasse nou perception, nou komprehension et nou pa kapav saizi so porté. (I.ii) A A D R A A M A N T R A V A L O : […] The reality which you see is not the absolute reality, it’s a reality which has been limited by our human capacity. In fact, it is beyond our perception, our understanding and we are unable to grasp its significance.

Through the characters’ use of both hypotactic and paratactic structures to voice existential thoughts, Ratsitatane illustrates some of the possibilities for developing a philosophical register in MC . In terms of both its sociolinguistic concerns and its linguistic practices, Ratsitatane undermines the perception of MC as a substandard patois. Asgarally, by looking into the linguistic and cultural manifestations of colonization, reveals the prejudice against MC as itself a form of enslave-

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

89

ment. His twofold examination of political and cultural colonization sheds further light on the implications of code-switching in a postcolonial, multicultural country and contextualizes the associations made between code-switching to French and linguistic insecurity in several of Virahsawmy’s works.

Lexical Innovation and Borrowing At this early stage in the history of literature in MC , borrowings from English, French and Bhojpuri are not a prominent feature of either Zeneral Makbef or Ratsitatane. Tras In the sociolinguistic context of Mauritius, where the judiciary is heavily dominated by English and French, writing a play which takes place almost entirely in a courtroom has further repercussions in terms of developing a legal register for MC . Since the Mauritian legal system is inspired by English and French law, it is not surprising that the vocabulary relating to the field of law in MC borrows lexical items directly from the two colonial languages. Favory seems confident in incorporating, in his writing, a specialized English legal terminology: “warrant” (warrant), “severenns alawenns” (severance allowance), “dismis kes” (dismiss case) (Round 1), and from a French one, “preavi” (notice), “indamnite” (compensation), “parzir” (perjury) (Round 1). In addition, Tras also includes MC items from a specialized lexical field relating to manual agricultural work. “Netwayaz ranble”, “balas sime” (Round 4), for example, are neither present in the Baker–Hookoomsing dictionary, in which case it is foreseeable, given the absence of lexical fields relating to agriculture, nor in the L P T dictionary, despite their working-class concerns. Tras is, therefore, a key example of literature functioning as a repertoire for a specialized vocabulary, excluded by the dictionaries but, nevertheless, relevant in the everyday language of an important group of agricultural workers. Moreover, the fact that Favory, who is of Creole origin, also makes use of words of Indian origin, further points to these words as well-attested lexical items of MC rather than as items exclusively associated with a rural-Bhojpuri sociolect. For example, the usher describes the “tablisman’s” fraudulous acts as “jadu” (magic) (Round 2). This source of lexical expansion is in line with the playwright’s efforts to create a national literature which

90

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

reflects a multicultural and multilingual environment. Moreover, the text also establishes a semantic nuance between the unmarked lexeme “mazik” and the Bhojpuri borrowing, which connotes a greater degree of mystique.

Semantic Expansion Through Metaphor Zeneral Makbef The transgression of politically and socially accepted values in Zeneral Makbef is punished by laughter and projected through creative metaphors. “Mak,” which Makbef asks Sooklall to call him by, is the abbreviation for “makro” (pimp) in MC . At one point, Makbef, being too busy indulging in sexual exploits, asks Sooklall in an innuendo to sleep with his wife. Sooklall agrees to “okip madam” (entertain madam) (Act 1). While LP T describes “okip” as ‘to look after, to attend’, here the context in which the verb is used brings its meaning closer to ‘to sort out’, with sexual connotations. Makbef complains that he “Pa kapav mâz mem kari tulezur,” literally, that he cannot eat the same dish everyday, extending sexual undertones to lexical items of the culinary field: Z E N E R A L M A K B E F : Pa kapav mâz mem kari tulezur S O O K L A L L : U olé mo arâz so kari? Z E N E R A L M A K B E F : Ki to olé dir? S O O K L A L L : Pa vin derâz u ler u pé gut lot kari.

(Act I) Z E N E R A L M A K B E F : One cannot eat the same curry everyday. S O O K L A L L : Do you want me to sort her out? Z E N E R A L M A K B E F : What do you mean? S O O K L A L L : So that no one disturbs you while you are tasting a different curry

The metaphoric use of “mâz kari,” “arâz so kari” (to fix her), and “gut lot kari” (taste a different dish) to refer to sexual promiscuity, which includes wife-swapping, foregrounds the intensely sexist ideology behind this gendered use of language,41 and thereby intensifies Makbef’s moral villainy. The second morpheme of Makbef’s name, “bef,” not only means ‘bull’ 41

More will be said on the relation between language use and gender in Virahsawmy’s later plays in Chapter 3.

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

91

but is also a metaphor for physical and mental lethargy. The connotations of Makbef’s name further highlight the treacherous gap between his status as political leader and the hideousness of his private characteristics. Metaphoric names also point out that the remedy for political problems does not lie in the hands of superpowers, “Rusputik” and “Yankidola.” The first example of word-play evokes the Russians through the first and last syllable as the characteristic ending of many Russian words, while “coup” is evoked through the middle syllable, close to the word ‘putsch’, borrowed from German into French. “Yankidola” is a reminder of the traditional war song entitled “Yankee Doodle Dandy.” It evokes also, more appropriately, the bargaining power of the American dollar (Yankee dollar) over a Third-World country. Speaking names, therefore, provide a compact way of putting across dense information. Tras “Tablisman”, a recurring word in Favory’s play, is one of the more obvious examples of MC words derived directly from French (in this case, établissement) but which have a different semantic weight from the contemporary French equivalent. “Tablisman” refers specifically to a sugar estate and is loaded with colonial politics. As the play develops, we are made increasingly aware of the power of this hegemony, which is referred to not so much as an institution but as a person. For example, mention is made of the “tablisman” being ill and going abroad for medical treatment. “Tablisman’s” presence, form, and shape is, however, made elusive by its repeated absences from court and through the constant reference to it as “tablisman laba,” in both dialogue and stage directions. The place adverb “laba” (over there) further marks it as an inaccessible but controlling presence. The title “tras,” used in various contexts by different characters, acquires multifarious associations and becomes a potent word. The date on which the “tablisman” had declared that the workers were allegedly on strike: i.e. the day that saw the origin of this long-drawn-out court-case, is referred to twice as “tras istorik” by the workers (Round 2, 4), an historical landmark. Shortly afterwards, however, the defence lawyer claims: A V O K A - D E F A N S : lekritir sa ki apel garanti ofisiel (…) lekritir sa ki apel prev lekritir sa ki apel tras

92

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

lekritir sa ki apel listwar. (Round 3) A V O K A - D E F A N S : writing is what we call official guarantee writing is what we call proof writing is what we call ‘tras’ writing is what we call history

He makes an exclusive association between writing and “tras” or proof and dismisses the worker’s oral version of events as illegitimate and ahistorical. This is backed by the usher’s poetic reflection on the ephemeral nature of spoken words through a simile in the first line: Parol anvole kuma lafime dan lezer Parol pena tras. (Round 4) Words fly off like smoke in the air Words leave no ‘tras’

The workers, nevertheless, reappropriate the word “tras”. P A L M E S : intel laba intel laba intel laba ala tras nu ti enn sel lakor tablisman inn kas nu but par but demanbre nu dispers nu kat kote ala tras M E M E G O Y E N N : tras lane 1968 R A F I K : tras lane lindepandans MEME GOYENN – PALMES – KAYDU – RAFIK – BAKANN:

1968 lindepandans midi pavyon kat kuler ruz ble zonn ver […] ver kuler karo kann zonn kuler nu riy zonn ble kuler nu lekor ki manz ku lor ku ruz kuler nu disan ala tras.

(Round 4)

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

93

P A L M E S : so and so there so and so there so and so there there’s tras we were in agreement tablisman has broken us down bit by bit dismembered us scattered us in four corners there’s tras M E M E G O Y E N N : tras of year 1968 R A F I K : tras of the year of independence MEME GOYENN – PALMES – KAYDU – RAFIK – BAKANN:

1968 independence at midday the flag of four colours, red, blue, yellow, green […] green the colour of sugar cane fields yellow the colour of disenchanted laughs blue the colour of our bodies which bears kick after kick red the colour of our blood there’s tras.

Favory exploits the polysemy of the word “tras” by using lexical parallelism, in terms of the repetition of the same word, in two different contexts to encourage the spectator/reader to make a connection between them. Meme Goyenn and Rafick thus establish a connection between the historical footprints left on their dismembered bodies by “tablisman,” and the legacy of previous workers’ blood at independence. This parallel indicates that independence brought no change to colonial structures and that while the high hopes had been fulfilled for some, they had been bitterly betrayed for others. The above is an example of Favory’s ability to communicate profound meanings through assumptions which are themselves not fully explicit and which require a hermeneutic effort from the audience/reader. Favory also uses metaphor to bridge the distance between the stage and the audience and provoke audience participation. In Round 6 of the play, subtitled “ler manze” (lunch-time), the actors share prawn crackers with the audience, now denied the complacent, passive role of a mere consumer and transformed into active participants. This also puts them in an uncomfortable position, since “manze” in this context also connotes the acceptance of bribes. During this round, the actors on stage will be “manze” both literally and metaphorically as the “tablisman” invites the prosecuting lawyer, the police, and the judge for a lavish meal which clearly acts as a bribe. By blurring the literal and metaphoric references of

94

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

words, Favory establishes blatantly transparent and often disturbing relationships between the fiction of the performance and the real world of the audience’s experience. Ratsitatane Asgarally does not make prominent use of metaphors in his play. One of the rare examples is the collocation esklav aristo. Ratsitatane insists on using this oxymoronic expression instead of the more semantically neutral esklav afransi (freedman) to highlight the schizophrenia that such a position represents. The term esklav aristo is reminiscent of Fanon’s treatise on the black man who, in an attempt to escape his association with blackness and its connotations, dons a white mask, here the mask of language.

Structural Choices and Innovations Zeneral Makbef Although the language of Zeneral Makbef is mostly characterized by a syntactic simplicity which is seen as characteristic of dramatic language, the playwright experiments with a formal register through Makbef’s public speeches. Makbef uses linguistic manipulation to give an altruistic gloss to an act of corruption: Z E N E R A L M A K B E F : Kuma lepep fin prâ puvwar atraver mwa,

legalmâ, kônstitisionelmâ, ziridikmâ, mo vin mâdater lepep. Dôk provizwarmâ ziska prosên eleksiô, kâ pei fin gagn stabilité, kâ lekonomi rekumans marsé, kâ matirité sivik popilasiô fin mir […] provizwarmâ sé mwa legater iniversel lepep. Fer met tu trezor rwayal âba mo lili. (Act I) G E N E R A L M A K B E F : Since the people have acceded to power through me, legally, constitutionally, juristically, I become the people’s representative. Therefore, provisionally until the next elections, when the country has gained stability, when the economy starts to function again, when the population’s civic maturity is ready […] provisionally it is I who am the people’s sole legatee. Get all the royal treasures to be deposited under my bed.

Makbef’s linguistic patterns of lexically dense language and highly cohesive complex sentences do not match the spontaneous ones of face-to-face interaction but, rather, those of a politician’s carefully planned language

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

95

of propaganda. In the first sentence, the excessive presence of adverbs ending in ‘-mâ’ indicates an elaborate code. These features are further highlighted by their position in the sentence, preceding and deferring the main clause, thereby serving to legitimize Makbef’s role as guardian of the people. The second sentence is structurally parallel to the first, with a similar main clause, rather lengthily deferred, this time, through a series of temporal clauses. Having earlier elaborated on the ‘legitimacy’ of his position as the people’s representative, he can now affirm: “sé mwa legater iniversel lepep” (it is I who am the people’s sole legatee), using the acrolectal copula verb form “sé” (Fr. c’est ‘it is’), as a focusing device to emphasize his position and title. Makbef also makes use of numerous formal cohesive devices associated with writing to help the progression of his argumentation, starting with “Kuma” (since) to expose the circumstances that have led to his position of power and “Donk” (therefore) in the second sentence to assert his decision. Virahsawmy’s linguistic features thus draw away from speech and illustrate a formal/written register. Political eloquence, however, is used by Makbef to obscure his real intention, which is finally revealed in the third sentence. The location he orders the royal treasures to be sent, “âba mo lili,” is a sharp contrast to the previous high rhetoric. The juxtaposition of clashing lexical fields, politics and the bedroom, signals the mixing of the public and private spheres and foregrounds his sexual obsession, which surfaces even in the most formal and public situations. To come back to the issue of registers, Makbef’s social power both relies on and is perpetuated through his command of a wide range of registers. A register approach to Zeneral Makbef illustrates how power-relations are at once created, represented, and sustained by the manipulation of several codes. The illustration of stylistic range suggests an ‘aménagement’ of both the status and corpus of MC . Further, the linguistic forms used by Virahsawmy support the satirical genre. Tras A distinctive feature of Favory’s play is the repeated use of archaisms. An example is the use of the preposition “lao” in “nu azut lao la enn garanti” (we add on top of that a guarantee) (Round I), a prepositional form used in Baissac.42 In current MC , however, there is a distinction between ‘lao’, a 42

One of the stories collected by Baissac, Le folk-lore de l’île Maurice (1888), for example, is entitled “Mort làhaut bourique.”

96

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

locative adverb (upstairs), and ‘lor’, a preposition (on). In this case, therefore, it would have been more appropriate to use ‘lor’. A further archaic feature is the coordinating conjunction “asam” in “le pleynan asam so gang la” (the plaintiff and his gang) (Round 1), instead of the unmarked conjunction ‘ek’ or ‘ar’. Whereas some of these archaisms, mainly grammatical words, could still be present in the speech of older and rural workers,43 the fact that they are present across all registers including those of the judge, lawyers, and “tablisman” itself suggests that they are not seen as exclusive characteristics of a particular sociolect. The pervasive presence of these archaisms is partly designed for comic effect, especially in the context of a court session, reducing the latter to ridicule. They also provide an economical linguistic means of showing the continuation of the colonial power politics that have ruled the world of the “tablisman” since slavery. Indeed, the strength of Tras relies on a range of stylistic devices including lexical and grammatical cohesion sustained throughout the play to reveal the persistence of a colonial hegemony over centuries. In addition, this valorizing of archaic terms highlights the function of literature as a repertoire of both old and new lexical terms, a function that is identified by Hazaël–Massieux as a crucial example of corpus ‘aménagement’ (See Chapter 1). A further striking stylistic feature of Favory’s dramatic language is the transformation of the deeper linguistic structure – for example, in Meme Goyenn’s complaint in court: M E M E G O Y E N N : sa 17-tan la mo pa ti la sa 17-tan la pa ti enan mwa sa 17-tan la mo pann trime sa 17-tan la mo pann swinte sa 17-tan la mo pann seyne sa 17-tan la mo pann plore sa 17-tan la mo pann lapriyer sa 17-tan la mo pann koler.

(Round 2) M E M E G O Y E N N : those 17 years was I not there

those 17 years did I not exist 43

Baker is inclined to think that the archaic term ‘asam’ may have very limited currency in some rural areas. “On the Development of Certain Prepositional Forms in Mauritian and Other French Creoles,” 54.

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

97

those 17 years did I not work my guts out those 17 years did I not sweat it out those 17 years did I not bleed those 17 years did I not cry those 17 years did I not prayer those 17 years did I not anger

In the last two lines, Favory uses two nouns “lapriyer” and “koler” as verbs, supported by full structural parallelism across all the previous lines which end in established MC verbs. Favory, further, moves words across grammatical classes with ease in “sindika ti prison” (Round 1), where “prison” is used as a verb instead of ‘al prison’ (go to prison), or in “Bakann fin lekol” (Bakann went to school) (Round 2), where the noun “lekol” is made to function as a verb, again through ellipsis. This could be viewed as a form of lexical development through multifunctionality. There are also instances where adverbs are used as nouns, as in “zot tatone rod en ayer ki pankor ekziste” (they fumble about looking for an elsewhere that does not yet exist), where the locative adverb “ayer” (elsewhere) is used as a noun preceded by the indefinite article. This unusual use of ‘ayer’, a foregrounding device, is, like the repeated use of archaic terms mentioned in the previous section and the above transformations, a deviation from everyday language, reminding us precisely that dramatic language is characterized by planning and elaboration which set it aside from spoken language. These deviations, certainly in the case of the archaic terms, are also perfectly consistent with the ‘grammar’ of the text. Favory makes use of a successful mixture of short, simple sentences and complex and longer ones, exposing complex arguments while remaining accessible to the audience.

Ratsitatane Asgarally exploits stylistic variation through the use of verbs and pronouns. Hastie, the special officer sent to Madagascar by Robert Farquhar, General Governor of Mauritius, employs a diplomatic language in trying to persuade Radama to send his nephew into exile: 1 H A S T I E : Mo pa tia konseil sa Majesté fer li estère la. Li tia

preferabb ki nou elimine li diskretement […]. Moi mo pensé ki tia bon ki nou less li en liberté.

98

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

2 H A S T I E : Si sa Majesté tia permett moi enn sigession… kitt foi sa ti

ava resoude tou problem. […] 3 H A S T I E : Lèrr la lespri sa Majesté pou trankil. Tou dangé enn

attenta konte la kouronn Malgass pou finn écarté…. Mo promett ou ki ou pa pou tann parle li ditout. (I.i) 1 H A S T I E : I would not advise His Majesty to do so at the moment. It

would be preferable that we eliminate him discretely […]. I think that it would be good to leave him free. 2 H A S T I E : If His Majesty would allow me to make a suggestion…

maybe that would resolve all the problems. […] 3 H A S T I E : Then his Majesty’s mind would be at rest. All danger of

an attack against the Malagasy crown would be avoided…. I swear you will not hear of him at all.

The verb form “tia” (would have), combining the past marker ‘ti’ and an abbreviated form of the future marker ‘ava’, would normally be used as a modal, but is here used aspectually, marking politeness. Hastie’s language also differentiates between the use of two future tense markers, “ava,” often an archaic term, and “pou.” While “pou” refers to a definite future, “ava” signals a degree of polite diplomacy, reflecting the character’s concern to avoid the impression of a patronizing attitude towards the king. In the third example, having already secured the king’s decision over the exile of Ratsitatane, he then uses the definite “pou” to highlight his confidence in guaranteeing the king’s security. Linguistic politeness in the first example involves the selection of linguistic forms which acknowledges relevant status differences and expresses the appropriate degree of social distance. Asgarally also illustrates the use of the passive form as part of King Radama’s high register: “sa nouvel la finn konfirme par mo service secret de renseignement” (this piece of news has been confirmed by my secret service) (I.i). On the other hand, deviation in terms of register can provoke a reaction of disorientation and surprise. While Hastie tiptoes in his linguistic behaviour when addressing the king of Madagascar, Ratsitatane’s lack of reverence towards the British officer, McDonaldson, is signalled through a change of pronoun. Ratsitatane initially addresses him with the personal pronoun “ou,” the equivalent of vous, indicating a relation of formality, distance, and respect, in his request for a gun:

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

99

R A T S I T A T A N E : Kouma mo fek dir ou in pe tristt san mo fizi…

(I I . i i i ) R A T S I T A T A N E : As I’ve just told you, I’m a little sad without my

gun

The moment Ratsitatane admits the real reasons for wanting a gun, he switches to the personal pronoun, “toi,” the pronoun of familiarity, signalling his uncontainable disgust and disrespect for the British officer: R A T S I T A T A N E : Pou la sass gro zibié kouma toi ek gro Baptiste.

(I I . i i i ) R A T S I T A T A N E : To hunt down big game like you and fat Baptiste.

A sudden change of pronoun of address in either direction marks a change of register in MC which reveals the change in the speaker’s attitude towards the interlocutor. It is not only grammatical rules that speakers have to internalize in order to achieve acceptable linguistic and sociolinguistic behaviour but also cultural and social roles as demonstrated in the contrast between a situation of linguistic politeness and deliberate impoliteness. The above examples illustrate clearly that competence in MC involves the manipulation of wide-ranging rules.

Graphic Syntax Zeneral Makbef The varying degree of attention devoted to graphic syntax is a consequence of the different intentions of the playwrights. In accordance with Virahsawmy’s scientific intentions of proving that MC was a legitimate language, his first orthography of maximal deviance, used in Zeneral Makbef, presents MC as an autonomous linguistic system. The political motivations behind the orthography, the use of MC as the linguistic norm of the play, marked off against the negative connotations of embedded French words, combine to establish the play as a firm statement and model of post-diglossia. In terms of establishing word boundaries, Virahsawmy is careful to respect the semantic and structural contours of MC . “La” and “le” (the), for example, do not function as articles as they would in French but are agglutinated to nouns as one lexeme, for example, “lepep”

100

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

(instead of le peuple ‘the people’) and “lekonomi” (instead of l’économie ‘the economy’). Moreover, his heavy use of punctuation in Zeneral Makbef to mark the length of various pauses and indicate the expressive value of clauses is an important aspect of ‘aménagement’ which facilitates the development of a written medium. Tras Unlike Virahsawmy, since Favory’s dramatic concerns lie in the creation of theatre in terms of performance rather than dramatic literature, the ‘aménagement’ of the graphic representation of MC is only secondary. Although he adopts consistent orthographic conventions (LPT), the absence of adequate punctuation to signal the important grammatical and phatic functions of intonation results in ambiguity, vagueness, and the imposition of undue effort upon the reader. In the following example, which is only the first third of a long speech, lineation performing a segmental function is the only element of punctuation: T A B L I S M A N : nu napa pe dimann zot renye kikseswa zisteman nu nek ape ofer zot sinserman posibilite regayn sakenn so ti plas travay zot trwa konper-la usi evidaman nu dezir ki zot konpran ki nek zot isi prezan zot antan ki enn mazorite 51 lao 54 zot ti andrwa fer swa napa zot trwa konper-la zot oka zot sozir rezet nou lof nu va konsanti anbos nouvo mindev natirelman […]

(Round 2) T A B L I S M A N : precisely we are not asking you to renounce anything

we are only offerring you sincerely the possibility of each of you getting your jobs back the three of you punters too obviously we would like you to understand that only those of you here present you as a majority of 51 out of 54 you had the right to choose not the three of you punters over there you

½¾

The Theatre of Protest

101

you in case you reject our offer we will consent to employing new workers naturally

Ratsitatane Having established his own orthographic rules in the preface, however, Asgarally does not respect them himself. The resulting high degree of inconsistency is confusing and requires a significant amount of ‘decoding’ effort from the reader. The same word is often spelt differently, moving from a phonetic spelling to a blatantly French one – for example, Asgarally writes “le jour” (I.ii), which in MC would be one word “lizour,” and therefore ignores the fact that the sounds [ø] [Y] and the preposition “le” do not exist in MC . The highly etymological orthography employed, which is paradoxical in relation to his assertive resistance to the supremacy of the colonial languages, and the lack of orthographic consistency indicate that Asgarally’s preoccupations as ‘aménageur’ do not extend to the graphic codification of MC .

Conclusion As demonstrated in this section with reference to the written press and academic writing, the three playwrights’ choice of MC as dramatic language filled a cultural gap and caused the disappearance of an elitist conception of the audience by displacing colonial-language theatre. Despite the persisting lack of official recognition, language planning in the cultural field was to be successful precisely because it fulfilled an important artistic role in relation to the majority of the population. Thanks to its success, theatre has helped to redefine the role of MC as the de facto national language and the symbol of a cross-ethnic national identity. Indeed, this emergence of MC as a linguistic and cultural voice helps to consolidate the foundations for a French–English–Creole co-lingualism. Concerned chiefly with the need to illustrate MC as a language of national identity, and, therefore, focusing on the subjective function of MC , the theatre of protest functioned mainly as a means of status ‘aménagement’. Nonetheless, the interactive exchanges between MC and the new environments into which it was being forced in the 1980s were bound to bring a degree of linguistic elaboration. Each of the plays analysed demonstrated that MC could function across several subgenres. While, with Virahsawmy, the stage became a satirical space, Favory sought to develop

102

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

a popular theatre that involves audience participation and Asgarally engaged in a rewriting of history. Given the wide-ranging functions which MC is called upon to perform in the plays analysed, the language is accordingly differentiated in terms of registers. Indeed, the playwrights foreground registers which might not have been thought possible in MC , the satirical, historical, philosophical, diplomatic, and judicial. It was also seen that code-switching between languages provides further stylistic differentiation in terms of register. An analysis of the grammar of codeswitching revealed that code choices represent a form of social behaviour that is both systematic and complex. Asgarally attacked precisely those colonial power relations, mentioned in the Introduction, that are at the root of the persisting low status of MC in relation to the colonial languages. Indeed, the plays do not merely provide a repertoire of various registers but also go further in illustrating the manipulation of various registers in terms of function, allowing the power-relations and cultural meanings of the texts to stand out more clearly. Given the nature of dramatic language, it is hardly likely to see in these early plays the high grammatical complexity of formal written prose. However, through the panoply of registers exploited, glimpses of formal, lexically dense registers are present, especially in Zeneral Makbef. Although Virahsawmy in Zeneral Makbef is more concerned with capturing MC as spoken by the people – which is in itself a productive endeavour, since the illustration of the stylistic range of MC is a means of corpus planning – the linguistic features of an emerging literary language are also present. Although neologisms are not a marked feature of this early theatre, the playwrights use various techniques to maximize the appropriateness and effectiveness of their choice of linguistic features. Virahsawmy makes interesting combinations of lexical resources and paralinguistic devices in his exploitation of metaphors appropriate to the satirical tone of Zeneral Makbef. Meaning and stylistic effect in MC , moreover, are revealed to be neither fixed nor stable but multiple instead. “Manze,” for example, is used for varied metaphoric effect by Virahsawmy and Favory, in relation to the different themes with which they deal. Another marked lexical feature of all the plays which is linked to standardization is the rooting and differentiation of lexical items in specific contexts, thus serving to classify the vocabulary and outline some of the semantic structures of the MC lexicon.

½¾

103

The Theatre of Protest

My analysis reveals that although Ratsitatane had important repercussions in terms of status, Zeneral Makbef and Tras exploit the linguistic possibilities of MC more fully. Virahsawmy further distinguishes himself on two main levels with implications for corpus and status planning. Given his linguistic background, consistency of orthographic conventions and the devising of punctuation rules are important issues of codification, which are not necessarily prioritized by Favory and, even less so, by Asgarally. Secondly, the first encounter of MC with Shakespeare which Virahsawmy initiated certainly enhanced the status of MC through its association with an established literary culture, marking the beginning of a long collaboration with the Bard. A decade later, leaving aside the use of Shakespeare as a springboard for the exploration of local politics, Virahsawmy’s rewriting of The Tempest would engage more assertively with the politics of Shakespeare in a postcolonial context. Chapters 4 and 5 explore the role of adaptations and translations of Shakespeare in the standardization in M C in greater detail. The next chapter focuses on Virahsawmy’s later plays. ½¾

3

Virahsawmy’s Later Plays Metalinguistic and Feminist Discourses

T

Virahsawmy’s contribution to the corpus ‘aménagement’ of M C through three key plays: Abs Lemanifik (1985), in which the playwright elaborates a metalinguistic discourse in MC , and two of his feminist plays, Mamzel Zann (1997) and Ti-Marie (2001), where he explores the link between language, gender, and ideology. HIS CHAPTER ASSESSES

I Abs Lemanifik: Metalinguistic Discourse By the time Virahsawmy wrote Abs Lemanifik (1985), MC had already proved repeatedly its potential as a literary language, as seen in the previous chapter. Although political preoccupations are present in Abs Lemanifik, they are reflected in the use of language as an instrument of power and exclusion. This development in Virahsawmy’s writing is also a manifestation of the historical developments in Mauritius from the political oppression of the Ramgoolam régime1 which had inspired Li to a political situation which allowed for a more measured management of conflicts over the ten years preceding Abs Lemanifik. The three-act play starts off with chaos among a crowd of people who, bored and desperate 1

Ramgoolam, also known as the ‘father of the Mauritian nation’, was one of the leading members of the Labour Party in Mauritius who negotiated for independence and served as the first Prime Minister.

106

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

to find some sense of direction in life, believe they are in need of a saviour. Among them is a poet, Zed who is ridiculed and whose guitar is symbolically snatched away. Abs, an extraterrestrial being with supernatural powers, proposes to be that saviour and establishes a new order with hierarchies of “Mini-Abs” and “Siper-Mini-Abs”. The rest of the play is an ongoing but unresolved struggle between Abs, who represents dictatorship, uniformity, and political sloganeering, and Zed, who represents emancipation, individualism, and poetic language.

Register Variation: Coining an Abs Lexicon One of the marked features of Abs Lemanifik is the abundance of neologisms. In “Manifika Abs” (I.ii), “lâpir manifika” (I.iii), the noun “manifika” has been derived from the adjective “manifik” (Fr. magnifique ‘magnificent’). It is then further transformed into an adjective via one of the possible transformations of noun to adjective through the suffix -al, as in “aspirasiô manifikal” (manifikal aspiration) II.i). We further have the noun “manifiksiô.” Although the lexical expansion that accompanies Abs’s entrance is semantically redundant, it is mainly through this lexis that we gradually become aware of the new world that is being created around Abs. In fact, Abs’s new language is designed to establish and reinforce his new regime. The latter point is clear in the transformation of the proper name “Abs” into a highly hierarchized political system, “yerarsi Abstocrasi” (II.i), and the “gran fami mini-Abs” (I.ii). Furthermore, in his attempt at rewriting history, Abs declares “Dâ pwê Abs, tu fin fini manifiké” (At the point Abs, everything has been manificated) (II.iv). In “manifike” there is also the grammatical transformation of an adjective into a verb used in the passive form. Having established himself as the origin of time, he then denies the existence of everything past by imposing “Absjour” (Absday) instead of “bonjour” (good morning), a further neologism with a brainwashing function. After Abs’s public speech on a campaign of “responsabilité, lwayoté, program anti-diformité” (responsibility, loyalty, anti-deformity programme), the hawkers present in the crowd employ a language of advertising marked by puns for quick attention-grabbing effects, such as “sorbé âtidiformité” (anti-deformity ice-cream). The owner of a “longvi” (binoculars) guarantees “vizibilité absolimâ parfé” (absolutely perfect visibility) (I.iii). The adoption of the new Abs lexicon not only indicates new marketing strategies but also indicates that it is through lexical choices

½¾

Virahsawmy’s Later Plays

107

that those who accept Abs’s new regime proclaim their adherence or, rather, assimilation. The social implication of the specialized lexicon adopted by the hawkers is, therefore, that of solidarity. The imposition of an Abs lexicon is, logically, accompanied by the suppression of other registers. The heteroglossia of various conflicting voices and registers, including terms of abuse, that opens the play is silenced and replaced by an Abs register. Lance Butler makes explicit links between registers and power by emphasizing that a struggle for power “results in ideologically conflicting registers, ideologically different systems of classifying and controlling the world.”2 By suppressing all other registers, therefore, Abs consolidates a linguistic superstructure, making his ideology and control absolute. The play underscores the point that lexical choices in MC , as in other languages, are not innocent but are ideologically determined. Zed, the poet, is the only one who is capable of a different and subversive form of linguistic creativity. He puns on Abs’s name in his declaration that “pa bizê vin Absé pu viv âsam” (we do not have to turn into abcesses in order to live together) (I.iv) and further describes the new régime as “absird” (absurd). While the rest of the characters use an increasingly predictable lexicon overloaded with Abs-words, Zed’s linguistic resourcefulness is described as “li kon zôglé ar mo” (he can juggle with words) (I.iv). The poet’s ability to exploit the poetics of the language, in marked contrast to the brainwashing slogans, provides a refreshingly different type of lexical innovativeness which asserts an oppositional stance towards the new regime.

Metaphoric Phonemes The struggle between Zed and Abs is itself a metaphor for other political and sociolinguistic conflicts. In order to purify people’s thoughts of the ‘negative element’ embodied by his enemy Zed, Abs decrees that the language should be amputated of its phoneme /z/, which should be replaced by /f/, /s/ or /v/. The /z/ phoneme becomes “en mikrob anti-konformis” (an anti-conformist microbe) (II.ii), a metaphor for the character Zed, who, as illustrated above in his linguistic behaviour, is himself a metaphor for individualism and creativity. The decision to eliminate this particular phoneme is, in itself, not innocent, since the /z/ phoneme in MC is often interpreted as an aspect of corrupt French for those who see the vernacular 2

Butler, Registering the Difference, 55.

108

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

as a deviation from French (for example, “zes” for geste, fuss). Erasing the second- and third-person plural and possessive pronoun “zot,” an ‘original’ feature of MC 3 and replacing it with “vot” (non-existent in MC but clearly derived from the French pronoun votre ‘your’), is a further hint that it is the integrity of MC that is under attack. As it entails the superimposition of the colonial languages on MC , Abs’s attempt at linguistic purification is increasingly analogous to a process of decreolization. Abs’s representative formulates instructions in a linguistic mish-mash of MC , English, and French: M I N I - A B S 14: Otomanikmâ! What do you think! Take down

everything comme ça la postérité pu rapel mo aksiô purificateur. Wi, take down tu. (II.iii) M I N I - A B S 14: Otomanifically! What do you think! Take down

everything so that posterity will remember my purifying act. Yes take down everything.

The dispossession of MC of one of its essential phonemes combined with the pedantic use of English and French phrases and the use of slogans only leads to a more chaotic language. Ironically, linguistic policing initiates a series of bawdy innuendoes, as illustrated in the following dialogue: F A M : E!... Eta aret fer to zes. M A R I : Zes, zes, zes! To pa gagn drwa dir “zes”, to bizê... to bizê

dir.... (II.ii) W I F E : Hey!... Stop making a fuss H U S B A N D : Fuss, fuss, fuss! You don’t have the right to say “fuss”,

you have... you have to say....

The audience/reader would immediately pick up on what the substitution of /z/ by /f/ would give: “fes” (arse). In fact, seeking sanction from this linguistic restriction, Zed would have allegedly referred to “nu Grâ Sef Abs, grâ fes absé” (our Great Chief Abs, great abcessed arse) (II.iii), where the order of the letters in the word “sef” is reversed to “fes”. The 3

“Zot” can replace the pronouns ‘vous’, ‘vos’, ‘ils / elles’, ‘leur’.

½¾

Virahsawmy’s Later Plays

109

scheme of linguistic and general purification has such disastrous consequences in terms of communication breakdown that it has to be abandoned. Eventually, Abs himself has to give in to the banned phoneme: M I N I - A B S 14: Ki u desiviô? A B S : Desiviô, desoviô...A to’lé dir desiziô! To pa kapav koz kuma tu

dimun No. 14? (II.iv) M I N I - A B S 14: What is your decivion? A B S : Decivion, decivion... Oh you mean decision! Can’t you talk like

everybody else, No. 14?

Abs Lemanifik depicts neocolonial repression and liberation as being channelled mainly through language. Towards the end, MC triumphantly asserts its integrity as the /z/ phoneme returns with a vengeance: M I N I - A B S 33: Mo nepli kôpran nâyé. Ti dir nu aret dernié let

alfabet. Sâ oken eksplikasiô, tu dimun fin rekumâs servi li. Ena mem ki met dé z kot ena ên sel. (III.v) M I N I - A B S 33: I don’t understand anything anymore. We were told

to stop using the last letter of the alphabet. Without any explanation everyone has started using it again. There are even some who use two z’s where there should be one.

Theatre allows Virahsawmy to present M C as a vibrant force, overflowing with weapons for its own defence. Transformed from a medium of communication to an autonomous force, having shaken off decreolizing influences from both French and English, and having reincorporated its vital repertoire of phonemes and registers, the real hero of the play is its linguistic medium.

Structural Innovations: Evidence of a Pseudo-Scientific Register When one of the aspiring characters, Papa, is promoted to Mini-Abs 4, he adopts a syntax which marks his language against the speech of other characters:

110

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

M I N I - A B S 4: [Pu kapav repon aspirasiô Manifikal [ban ki merité], [ban ki ena potâsiel vin Mini-abs plitar]], [to pa kwar [ki li ti pu ên bô desiziô, [pu pa blok sirkilasiô dâ yerarsi Abstocrasi]] , [ki nu travay ên stratezi global promosiô sosial [pu bar larut fristrasiô] [ek âmemtâ gagn sutiê ek lwayoté ban elemâ dinamik]]].4 M I N I - A B S 1: To pa kapav koz ên lâgaz pli sêp? ki to’lé? M I N I - A B S 4: Mo’lé dir [ki dâ sa prosesis trâsformasiô ban nominasiô ek bann apelasiô, nu ti kapav êzekté ên nuvo kôsep [ki pu dinamiz striktir respôsabilité [ ek âmemtâ permet…]]] M I N I - A B S 1: Aret to kozé Abstré! Ki to olé? M I N I - A B S 4: Pa ti kapav [kré ên post Mini-Abs junior pu mo fam?]

(II.i) M I N I - A B S 4: [In order to respond to the Manifikal aspiration [of

those who are deserving], [those who have the potential to become Mini-Abs later]], [do you not think [that it would be a good decision [that we do not impede movement in the Abstocrasi hierarchy]], [that we work on a global strategy of social promotion [so as not to encumber frustration] [and at the same time obtain the support and loyalty of the dynamic elements]]]. M I N I - A B S 1: Can you not speak in simpler language? What do you want? M I N I - A B S 4: I mean [that in this transformation process of nominations and designations, we could have injected a new concept [which would dynamize the structure of responsibility [and at the same time allow …]]] M I N I - A B S 1: Stop your Abstract talk. What do you want? M I N I - A B S 4: Couldn’t we create a junior Mini-Abs position for my wife?

Mini-Abs 4’s style in the first two utterances is heavily marked with features of written language: polysyllabic words, embedding of elements, length of sentence, lexical density. Whereas speech is usually organized in a temporal sequence, where the linking of clauses is characterized by parataxis: i.e. by juxtaposition rather than explicit coordination and subordination, Mini-Abs 4’s language is highly hypotactic, with subordination within subordination, a feature that is more likely to be present in writing rather than speech.5 His language is not simply of a formal but, 4 5

[ ] represents clause boundaries. Katie Wales, A Dictionary of Stylistics (London: Longman, 1995): 223.

½¾

111

Virahsawmy’s Later Plays

more specifically, of a written and pseudo-scientific register. He is careful to avoid the first-person personal pronoun and uses the dummy subject “li” (it) or the collective pronoun “nu” (we) instead, which gives his register an impersonal appearance and allows him to hide his ideological motivation. In the first utterance, the main clause is deferred and the subordinate clause, containing new information, is highlighted in its initial position as given information.6 This allows Mini-Abs 4 to foreground the new information: i.e. the fulfilment of his duties towards Abs as his main alleged preoccupation, and to downplay the personal nature of his request. The degree of grammatical complexity and lexical density, however, makes Mini-Abs 4’s language clearly inappropriate for the goal of effective communication in the oral context of reception, as his interlocutor has to ask him twice to repeat his intentions in simpler terms. While all the registers of a language are artificial, the artificiality of Mini-Abs 4’s deliberately obscure register is highlighted here thanks to its inappropriateness. In the preface to Abs, Daniel Baggioni underlines the important progression of MC from its theatrical début with Li in terms of the development of an MC literary expression. Indeed, with language itself at its centre, Abs Lemanifik (1985) is both a reflection of the redefinition of Virahsawmy’s dramatic preoccupations and a sign of confidence in a dramatic culture in MC . The play introduces lexical innovations corresponding to political organizations and illustrates and validates a range of registers.

II Mamzel Zann and Ti-Marie: Feminist Discourse Virahsawmy’s more recent feminist plays Mamzel Zann (1997) and TiMarie (2001) add to his repertoire of plays focusing on female protagonists, Dropadi (1982), Profeser Madli (1984) and Sir Toby (1998).7 As an organic intellectual, his concerns with sociocultural issues extend to the 6

As clauses are put together to form texts, there is a natural tendency for elements which are new to reappear in the following as given. Given information tends to come first, aiding understanding as it means that readers move from things they know about to things they do not. 7 See Appendix 1.

112

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

marginalization of women in Mauritius’ patriarchal system and throughout world history. At a time when important socio-economic changes have redefined the labour market in Mauritius and made financial independence increasingly possible for women, various institutions, including those of tradition and myth, still limit the emancipation of women. Virahsawmy is not only aware of this but also believes that a better civilization would be directed by women and based on qualities seen as feminine, such as caring and sharing, on the concept of ‘being’ as opposed to ‘having’. Although Virahsawmy admits that he does not have the key to when or how this socio-cultural change will be engineered,8 his literary writing on feminine conditions in Mauritius itself becomes a means of intervention. Mamzel Zann and Ti-Marie, however, stand out from Virahsawmy’s earlier feminist plays by virtue of the fact that his ideology and cultural concerns shape not only their content but also the linguistic choices he makes. Both plays are situated within a political agenda dedicated to creating awareness about the complex part that language plays in creating and sustaining gender divisions in society. The following analysis will examine how Virahsawmy not only illustrates MC as the location that supports male power and privilege but also proposes challenging alternatives which lead to lexical innovations and new registers. His belief in a better and new civilization based on love and freedom leads necessarily to innovations in terms of language. An enabling dialectic is played out among Virahsawmy’s various preoccupations as writer/‘aménageur’ and organic intellectual. As Ti-Marie is seen by the author as the sequel to Mamzel Zann, the analysis that follows the plot summaries considers both plays together. Mamzel Zann, a two-act futuristic play, is set at a time when intergalactic travel is the norm for many forms of intelligent life. An unnamed young woman (Tchifi) decides to travel to Earth, where a small colony has managed to survive the many man-made catastrophes. This colony is, however, divided between various colours of humans who live at the top of the mountain Petrousmok, and the ‘inferior’ mutants, the half-man, half-mongoose “zangouss,” who are restricted to living at the foot. There is constant tension between the two groups, who keep attacking each other. Zann, one of the inhabitants of Petrousmok, with the help of the extraterrestrial being who impersonates her, goes on a quest to unite the 8

Virahsawmy, Testaman enn Metchiss, 51.

½¾

Virahsawmy’s Later Plays

113

two communities. This quest is made successful by the strong participation of women and overspills into the overthrow of patriarchal rule. It is the symbolic figure of Begonia, a female “zangouss” with her baby, the image of motherhood, who leads the divided communities to reconciliation and into the next era. Not only is the heroine’s name and her quest a reminder of the story of Jeanne D’Arc but so is the date 3431, 2,000 years after the year when the latter was burned at the stake. Performed in Mauritius in 2001, Mamzel Zann was also partly inspired by the Mauritian author Malcolm de Chazal’s Petrusmok, written in French.9 Prosper comments that Petrusmok made an important literary contribution which allowed a rediscovery of Mauritius through the new dimensions of a proto-history and a poetic mythology.10 Chazal was in turn influenced by Baudelaire in his combination of metamorphosis, symbolism, and analogy. Virahsawmy’s play, by taking up the mythological aspect of Petrusmok, builds on the intertextuality within and beyond Mauritian literature. More than this: whereas, in past literary works, Virahsawmy had created links between French poets, playwrights, and authors,11 Mamzel Zann initiates his dialogue with Mauritian literature in French. By situating the story in an era of interplanetary travel and providing a feminist perspective, Virahsawmy necessarily resorts to lexical innovations relating to both science and gender. In Ti-Marie, myths from various cultures, particularly those of the Old and New Testaments and Hinduism, are revisited. The play, in nine scenes, is set in Jericho, which in Virahsawmy’s earlier novella, Jericho (2000),12 was a symbolic name for Mauritius. In this play, however, the reference is much wider. In the prologue, the author refers to the planet Jericho where “enn Gran Mazisien” (a great magician) triggered off the ‘Big Bang’ and experimented with animal and human life. Humans, however, out of arrogance, were getting ready to hang the Great Magician. The prologue concludes with the single line: “Sans ti’ena Ti-Marie” (luckily we had Ti-Marie), announcing a rewriting of the main events of

9

Malcolm de Chazal is a prestigious Mauritian author, many of whose publications have been awarded international prizes. Petrusmok (Port–Louis: La Table Ovale, 1951). 10 Prosper, Histoire de la Littérature Mauricienne de Langue Française, 210–11. 11 An example is Virahsawmy’s translation of Molière’s Tartuffe into Tartif Froder (Rose-Hill: Boukie Banane, 1999). 12 See Chapter 6.

114

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

the New Testament. The play opens with M–M Capricorn, a dressmaker who runs her own workshop. She is the mother of Ti-Marie, who, on the eve of her birthday on 24 December, is finding it difficult to cope with the fifteen-year absence of her father, Jeri Capricorn. The latter is on a secret mission to another planet, Carthage, to avert the colonizing ambitions of the planet Jalsa Douniya. A few hours before Ti-Marie’s birthday, the police force their way into the house, looking for Jeri Capricorn and his daughter. One of the girls who works with M–M Capricorn pretends she is Ti-Marie and is taken into a prison cell, where she is raped, tortured, and killed, while Ti-Marie is saved. Although Jeri cannot make it to the birthday party, he sends a young couple, Yoni and Linga, to sing to M–M Capricorn and Ti-Marie. Other guests include Coquille de Carthage, TiMarie’s fiancé, Siva, and Madam Ponspilat, whose high-flying husband has been arrested. Yoni and Linga bring a message to M–M Capricorn, who explains to Ti-Marie that she is the one who has been chosen to take upon herself the role of saviour to lead the world to new beginnings. At this turning-point, the guards outside M–M Capricorn’s house, Cain and Abel, have been replaced by Jacob and Esau, who have decided on reconciliation. At midnight, a bright light, shining over the house and witnessed only by a privileged few, announces a new era with Ti-Marie as prophet. The play ends with the revelation that the initials M–M stand for Marie– Madeleine.

Graphic Syntax In Mamzel Zann, Virahsawmy uses his third orthography, whereas in TiMarie, as in all his post-1999 texts, he uses the Church orthography. A striking orthographic feature in Ti-Marie is the etymological writing of proper nouns, starting with the phonologically redundant final ‘e’ in the title, “Ti-Marie.” While it could be argued that this feature has the benefit of differentiating the proper name “Marie” from the polysemic M C noun “mari” (husband, the greater, boss), it is not the exception. With regard to proper nouns, an etymological trend seems to be consolidated with further examples such as “Marie-Ange” and “Carthage,” where the phoneme /g/ is maintained rather than replaced by /z/, which is characteristic of MC lexemes imported from French. Moreover, M–M Capricorn corrects TiMarie when she pronounces the word Carthage according to the phonological rules of MC , insisting that [Y] should be used instead of [z] :

½¾

Virahsawmy’s Later Plays

115

T I - M A R I E : Rakont moi ki ti arive dan Kartaz. M – M : Carthage! C kapital, a, r, t, h, a, g, e. Carthage. T I - M A R I E : Dan nou lang li pa vinn Kartaz? M – M : Wi me nou kapav osi fer enn zefor pronons bann nom prop dan

respe kiltir lezot. (Scene 3) T I - M A R I E : Tell me what happened in Kartaz. M – M : Carthage!Capital letter C, a, r, t, h, a, g, e. Carthage. T I - M A R I E : Does it not become Kartaz in our language? M – M : Yes, but we can also make an effort to pronounce proper nouns

to show respect for others’ cultures.

M–M’s last comment allows Virahsawmy to commend the use of the etymological spelling and pronunciation of foreign proper nouns instead of phonological adaptation, as a sign of respect for the cultures they represent. This trend could be interpreted as a sign of confidence in MC , the typical phonological patterns of which are established enough so as not to have their integrity threatened by the inclusion of foreign phonemes.

Lexicon: Naming Strategies As is characteristic of Virahsawmy, names given to communities and individuals are both resourceful and revealing coinings. The lexical innovation “zangouss,” from “zom-mangouss” (zangouss), is an example of a portmanteau term coined to describe the mutants. “Mahalonganiss Blob,” the ruler of the dominant village of Petrousmok, has his name coined from the Bhojpuri adjective “Maha” (supreme) and the MC noun “longaniss” (witch-doctor), while “Blob” is borrowed from English to connote an indefinite, blurred entity. Blob’s agents are appropriately called “Tchotalonganiss,” where ‘tchota’ is the Bhojpuri adjective for ‘small’. The innovative use of the adjective “Maha” in MC compounds is a recurring and idiolectal feature of Virahsawmy’s creative writing and translation.13 He also coins the “San-non” (Nameless), the “Demi-non” (Half-Names), and the “Avek-non” (With-Names), representing, in ascending order, hierarchized groups of individuals in Petrousmok.

13

See “Mahaleroi” in his translation of Hamlet (Chapter 5) and “Mahafonksioner” in Jericho (Chapter 6).

116

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

The limelight which Ti-Marie as title and name of the main protagonist benefits from is part of the attempt to subvert the dominant discourses of patriarchy and religion in Mauritius and beyond. First of all, it allows a feminist rewriting of the myths surrounding the Virgin Mary and Mary Magdalene in the New Testament. Jeri Capricorn’s initials clearly indicate that he represents Jesus. Marie–Madeleine (Mary Magdalene) is Jeri’s wife, by whom she has a child, Ti-Marie. Virahsawmy invalidates the bipolar myth of the saint and the sinner by presenting Marie–Madeleine in the roles of both Jeri’s lover and Ti-Marie’s mother. In addition, the name Ti-Marie deconstructs the word ‘mari’, a potent word in the MC lexical repertoire. “Mari” is not only the noun for ‘husband’ but has also been extended to words which all denote male-related excess and power (the greater; boss). In the expression “zwenn so mari” (meet one’s match), for example, “mari” means ‘match’. “Mari” also functions as a superlative adverb (‘extremely’) and as an exclamation for ‘unbelievable’. “Mari” epitomizes a version of masculinity based on physical strength, general aggressiveness, and domination, and can thus be regarded as an example of the reproduction and reinforcement of patriarchal ideologies through daily spoken interaction. By reappropriating the word “mari,” Virahsawmy deconstructs its patriarchal association as ‘natural’ or exclusive, presenting, instead, alternative meanings. The agenda with which Ti-Marie is charged suggests a different image for the word, that of a feminist saviour, whose superhuman qualities reside neither in the power of the phallus nor in domination. To reinforce the possibility of a new Marie and to signal that his writing operates from both a local and a general perspective, Virahsawmy associates her with Shakti, a Sanskrit borrowing representing the omnipotent female cosmic energy in Hindu mythology. M–M explains to TiMarie that a new era is born under the sign of Shakti: M–M: Jeri panse ki pou amenn enn nouvo destin bizin ki nouvo lavi dirize par Shakti. Ziss lenerzi Shakti ki pou tegn lager, amenn developman veritab ek lape, anpes zanfan plore, anpes inosans pas kord. (Scene 4) M–M: Jeri believes that the emergence of a new destiny can only be presided over by Shakti. It is only the energy of Shakti which will put an end to war, bring real development and peace, stop children from crying, prevent the death of innocence.

½¾

Virahsawmy’s Later Plays

117

Virahsawmy, moreover, incorporates in Ti-Marie the prologue to and final part of his musical Dropadi (1982)14 in the form of a mask which Linga and Yoni conjure up at Ti-Marie’s birthday party. Whereas the Indian epic the Mahabharata is known for its male warriors, kings, and princes, Virahsawmy focuses on the female character of Dropadi as suggested by the title of the musical. The inclusion of Dropadi in Ti-Marie both reinforces the feminist slant of the latter play and reflects new possibilities of redressing the balance of power between the representation of men and women on a universal basis by drawing on various cultural sources. The chorus of Dropadi backs this up: Dropadi finn ne, Halelouya; Dropadi finn ne, Soubhaan Allah; Dropadi finn ne, Shanti, Shanti, Shanti. (Scene 6)

“Halelouya”, “Soubhaan Allah” and “Shanti,” used to welcome the birth of Dropadi, represent the acclaim of Christianity, Islam and Hinduism. Rewriting the past, in Virahsawmy’s case through a revisiting of myths, becomes, in the words of Suzanne Romaine, a means of reconceptualising the future.15

Patriarchal and Feminist Discourses In Mamzel Zann, discourses emphasizing meanings and values which assume the superiority of men predominate in the speech of male characters such as Foligrandèr, a “zangouss.” The following speech takes place after the “zangouss” women have held a meeting and decided on feminist action: F O L I G R A N D È R : Aaa Roderlelèr, mo frèr, mo lanfèr, mo partnèr!

Kifèr to pèr, to tchmid, to goss, to krentchif. Djir zot kimannyèr nou red, nou djam, nou defonss partou. Djir zot kimannyèr Begonia ek so 14 Dropadi has not yet been performed. This ongoing delay is due to Virahsawmy’s insistence on having the musical produced by a woman. The Mauritius Drama League, which has produced most of Virahsawmy’s plays, has a male director, Rajoo Ramanah. 15 Suzanne Romaine, Communicating Gender (Mahwah N J & Oxford: Laurence Erlbaum Associates, 1999): 148.

118

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

baba pou fini dan bwa; kimannyèr Lakasia, Fousia ek Fouzèr pou manz lapousièr; kimannyèr Zann pou tass dan karo kann … (II.vii) F O L I G R A N D È R : Aaa Roderlelèr, my brother, my hell, my partner!

Why are you scared, shy, awkward, worried. Tell them how we are hard, pumped up, how we rip everything apart. Tell them how Begonia and her baby will end up [dead] in the woods; how Lakasia, Fousia and Fouzèr will bite the dust; how Zann will be stuck in the sugar cane field…

His speech is governed by an obsession with the violent phallic pleasure illustrated in the verb clauses, “nou red, nou djam, nou defons partou” (we are hard, pumped up, we rip everything apart). The repetition of poetic internal rhyming echoes in ominous and distasteful terms Foligrandèr’s lack of an alternative means of displaying power: kimannyèr Begonia ek so baba pou fini dan bwa; kimannyèr Lakasia, Fousia ek Fouzèr pou manz lapousièr; kimannyèr Zann pou tass dan karo kann. (II.vii)

Virahsawmy provides an example of how language not only mirrors gender but is also one of the means by which it is enacted. Language plays a crucial part in structuring Foligrandèr’s perception of masculinity as hegemonic and femininity as passive, since women can only end up raped and dead. The fantasy of murdering women represents Foligrandèr’s wish for the ultimate negation of the autonomy of their feminist and militant voices, the wish to silence them. A further example which highlights both the heavy presence of a misogynistic register in the language used by men and its consequences is the collocation “bwat-madja.” This combination of “bwat” (box) and “madja” (fun), an MC word of Bhojpuri origin, reduces women to ‘sex-machines’. Speaking of women in a misogynistic

½¾

Virahsawmy’s Later Plays

119

way is equivalent to ‘doing’ something to them, the harm done arising from the creation of a hostile verbal environment.16 Patriarchal power also relies on male bonding, in the pronoun “nou” (us), clearly positioned against “zot” (them). Language is seen to be a site for the negotiation of the separateness between men and women. The contradiction, however, is “lanfèr” in the description “Roderlelèr, mo frèr, mo lanfèr, mo partner” (Roderlelèr, my brother, my hell, my partner), which, despite the encouraging and bonding efforts of Foligrandèr, suggests rivalry. This point is also illustrated in Ti-Marie in a conversation between two policemen and an onlooker: P O L I S I E 2: al souiv li, not tou seki li fer ek dir. Raport tou ar moi. P O L I S I E 1: Ar moi. P O L I S I E 2: Ar moi. P O L I S I E 1: Ar moi. P O L I S I E 2: Ar moi. P O L I S I E 1: Ar moi mo dir. P O L I S I E 2: Ar moi mo dir. P O L I S I E 1: Ar moi mo dir. P O L I S I E 2: Ar moi mo dir.

(Scene 3) P O L I C E M A N 2: follow him, note everything he says and does. Re-

port it all to me. P O L I C E M A N 1: To me. P O L I C E M A N 2: To me. P O L I C E M A N 1: To me. P O L I C E M A N 2: To me. P O L I C E M A N 1: I said to me. P O L I C E M A N 2: I said to me. P O L I C E M A N 1: I said to me. P O L I S I E 2: I said to me.

16

Suzanne Romaine, Communicating Gender, 3.

120

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

On the one hand, the policemen’s male bonding relies on the objectification and oppression of women; on the other, as figures of authority they see each other as rivals. Virahsawmy resorts to borrowings from French, “falokrasi” (phallocracie ‘male chauvinism’) and “vazinokrasi” (vaginocracie ‘female domination’) (II.v), for new terms that facilitate, in a formal register, a debate on gender politics and allow the characters to conceptualize and reflect on the type of society they live in. Zann proposes a new way of life based on “pran kont” (I.v), where the verb phrase “pran kont” (take care of) is used as a noun to represent the notion of ‘care’, for which a nominal equivalent in MC did not exist. “Pran kont” is a recurring concept in Virahsawmy’s works, first used in Testaman enn Metchiss in his thoughts about feminism, and repeated in Ti-Marie: “Olie ankouraz rivalite nou ti desid pou apiy lor partaz, lamour ek pran kont” (instead of encouraging rivalry we decided to push for sharing, love and care) (Scene 4). The repetition of the term across both plays represents a potential replacement of male–female relations of dominance and oppression, the rule of “kas, kanon ek labraget” (money, weapons, and the phallus) (Scene 8) with the feminine alternatives of sharing, caring, and “larezon maternel.” The latter neologism from Ti-Marie has been adapted from the English term ‘maternal thinking’. Interestingly enough, it is a man who comes up with the term in the play. M–M remembers Jeri’s words, “Jeri koir ki fam posed enn lintelizans spesial ki li apel larezon maternel” (Jeri believes that women possess a special intelligence which he calls maternal thinking) (Scene 2). The language of men is not shown to be homogeneous in the play. Moreover, the conversation between Jacob and Esau, who guard M– M’s house, contrasts with that of the two policemen. Instead of the rivalry displayed by the latter, Jacob and Esau ask themselves and each other questions in perpetual reassessment, on what Jennifer Coates would describe as a “collaborative floor,” a shared space usually associated with female friendship.17 1 E S A U : Matlo pa fatig to nam. To kone, ena de kalite dimoun. Ena 2 kouma toi ek moi. Nou, nou kouma enn bout diboi sek dan 3 larivier. Kouran ris nou, amenn nou kot li anvi. Apre ena kouma 4… kouma … kouma … bez sa!mo nepli rapel nanye. Ki mo ti pe dir?

17

Jennifer Coates, Women Talk (Oxford: Blackwell, 1996): 267.

½¾

Virahsawmy’s Later Plays

121

5 J A C O B : Larivier . 6 E S A U : Ah wi! Ena ki finn gagn mision pou sanz traze larivier, 7 sanz so profonder, sanz so direksion, sanz so destinasion. Jacob, 8 mo santi koumadir nou ringn finn fini. Apartir minoui. 9 Ki pou arive? To pa santi nanye? 10 J A C O B : Mo santi koumadir mo enn bef tonbe 11 E S A U : Nou tou bann bef tonbe dan lanpir Jalsa Douniya. 12 Kifer nou pa kapav kontrol nou destine? 13 J A C O B : Kikfoi nou ziss bann poind’reper pou ed lezot trouv zot

sime. (Scene 7) 1 E S A U : Mate, don’t torture your soul. You know there are two kinds of people. There are 2 those like you and I. We, we are like a dry bit of wood on 3 the river. The current pulls us, takes us along where it wants. Then there are those like 4 … like… like… shit! I can’t remember anything. What was I just saying? 5 J A C O B : The river. 6 E S A U : Oh yes! There are those whose mission is to change the

course of the river, 7 change its depth, change its direction, change its destination. Jacob, 8 I feel as though our rule is over. From midnight. 9 What will happen? Do you not feel anything? 10 J A C O B : I feel as if I’m a bull who’s collapsed. 11 E S A U : We are all collapsed bulls in the Jalsa Douniya Empire. 12 Why can’t we control our destiny? 13 J A C O B : Maybe we are mere landmarks to help others find their

way.

Characteristics of the “collaborative floor” can be found in overlapping speeches (lines 10–11), repetition, and a sense of intimacy through the questions they ask each other about how they ‘feel’ (lines 8–10). Language is used as a tool for exploring their world through the predominance of tentative questions asked, as they try out different discourses and positions in relation to the world, from passive victims in “enn bout diboi sek dan larivier” (a piece of dry wood on the river) and “enn bef tonbe” (a collapsed bull) to guiding lights in “bann poind’reper pou ed lezot trouv

122

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

zot sime” (landmarks to help others find their way). It is potentially a space where dominant discourses such as fate and religious myths can be challenged, as seen in Esau’s question, “Kifer nou pa kapav kontrol nou destine” (why can’t we control our destiny). Indeed, as they undergo a change in mentality, shedding the roles prescribed for them by Biblical myths, and choose forgiveness and sharing over jealousy and rivalry, Esau comes up with a new feminist term. Although neither Jacob nor Esau saw the bright light that illuminated the whole house exactly at midnight, Esau, nevertheless, far from attributing M–M’s report of extraordinary visions to drunkenness or madness, actually describes it as “konpran feminine” (female understanding) (Scene 9): J A C O B : (Ar Esau) To koir Madam la sou? E S A U : Non. J A C O B : Fou? E S A U : Non do ta! … Kiksoz bien drol finn arive. Sa mo sir. J A C O B : To sir? Kouma to sir? E S A U : Enn lot kalite konpran, konpran feminin. J A C O B : (To Esau) Do you think the lady is drunk? E S A U : No. J A C O B : Mad? E S A U : No, silly! … Something very strange has happened. That I’m sure of. J A C O B : You’re sure? How are you sure? E S A U : It’s a different kind of understanding, female logic.

Although Virahsawmy draws on a radical feminist discourse which claims that women provide a morally superior basis for society, masculinity and femininity are, nevertheless, not presented as absolute opposites but as mutually dependent, since the lexical innovations which indicate the new feminist awareness of an alternative way of life come from both female and male characters. Social and cultural change are made possible precisely because individuals like Ti-Marie, Jeri, and Esau resist and subvert dominant discourses and participate actively in the construction of meaning. A feminist agenda in terms of content has necessarily led to new possibilities for linguistic inventiveness in Virahsawmy’s two plays. Going beyond the play itself, the term “konpran feminin” has been further de-

½¾

Virahsawmy’s Later Plays

123

veloped and promulgated as a central concept, as it is also the title of the book in which Ti-Marie is published, along with six short stories in M C written by the author’s wife, Loga Virahsawmy, a journalist and writer. Virahsawmy’s perspective on language is not as mere reflection of reality but as “language-as-cause”18 – i.e. it shapes society and our perception of the world, a philosophy already touched on in Abs Lemanifik where the imposition of slogans by Abs was devised to constrain people. Similarly, in Mamzel Zann and Ti-Marie, language plays an active role in creating and sustaining gender divisions and oppression, as seen in the language of Foligrandèr, which perpetuates the myths of patriarchy. However, language can also alter reality rather than merely describe it. As a parallel to Abs Lemanifik, where liberation from colonial and neocolonial power was channelled through language, particularly through the poet Zed, in Mamzel Zann language also harbours the potential for remedying gender-related inequalities and oppression.

Register Distinctions In the prologue, Virahsawmy uses formal and acrolectal features to describe the futuristic science-fiction context in which the play is situated: 1. Nou lé 30 Mai 3431. 2. Dan enn selil iltra-modern (probableman dan enn pakbo-inter-

sideral), garni ar gadjet elektronik zenerasion Xtra, ena enn tchifi eternelman 19 an. 3. So boté kosmikman rar é dan so personalité ena enn djimansion ki ni langaz imen, ni langaz elektronik pa finn reysi dekrir ziska lèr. 4. Dan so selil ena tou konfor ki gagné dan tou lotel 5 zetwal atravèr Milki-Wé. 5. Enn sel djiferanss: so laport pena pwagné, pa kapav ouvèr depi andan. (Prologue) 1 We are the 30 May 3431. 2 In an ultra-modern cell (probably on an interstellar ship), equipped

with electronic gadgets of the generation Xtra, there is a girl eternally nineteen.

18

Romaine, Communicating Gender, 22.

124

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

3 Her beauty is cosmically rare and in her personality there is a dimension which neither human language nor electronic language has succeeded in describing until now. 4 In her cell there is every luxury available in any five-star hotel across the Milky Way. 5 Except for one difference: there is no handle on her door; it cannot be opened from inside.

One of the features marking formality is the specialized lexicon in the form of borrowings from either French or English: “selil iltra-modern” (cellule ultra-moderne ‘ultra-modern cell’), “pakbo-intersideral” (paquebot intersidéral ‘interstellar ship’), “kosmikman” (cosmiquement ‘cosmically’), “langaz elektronik” (langage electronique ‘electronic language’), “gadjet elektronik” (electronic gadget), “Milki-Wé” (Milky Way). Mamzel Zann makes a significant leap in terms of borrowings from technological lexis. Further examples of technical vocabulary relating to modern and futuristic technology include “enn gran lagèr simik-bakteriolozik” (une grande guerre chimique-bactériologique ‘a major chemical-bacterial war’) and “mitasion zenetchik” (mutation génétique ‘genetic mutation’). On the double appearances of Zann, the existing character and the impersonation of Zann by the extraterrestrial being, Ton Djonn comments: “Peyna okenn mazisien ki konn fèr kloning isi” (There is no magician here who knows how to undertake cloning) (I.iv). While “kloning” has recently been borrowed from English and is used in speech, its first appearance in a published literary text illustrates the lexical expansion of MC as it is used in increasingly specialized lexical fields. Another feature which contributes to the formality of the above extract is the terse syntax, which departs from that of face-to-face interaction. In the following sentence, the main verb “ena” is deferred to the end of the sentence after considerable left-branching: (Dan enn selil iltra-modern (probableman dan enn pakbo-intersideral)), [garni ar gadjet elektronik zenerasion Xtra,] [ena enn tchifi [eternelman 19 an]].19 (Prologue)

19

( ) signals phrases.

½¾

Virahsawmy’s Later Plays

125

(In an ultra-modern cell (probably on an interstellar ship)), [equipped with electronic gadgets of the generation Xtra], [there is a girl [eternally nineteen]].

The lexical density of the sentence is also highlighted by the avoidance of grammatical words and verbs. In the first relative clause, introduced by the passive verb form “garni,” the relative pronoun ‘ki’ is left out. It could be argued that the first clause is a participial one which is, equally, associated more closely with written than oral syntax. The same pattern is repeated in the embedded clause [eternelman 19 an], where both the relative pronoun ‘ki’ (who) and the copula ‘ena’ (is) are omitted. Virahsawmy marks a contrast not only between the narrative prose of stage directions and dramatic dialogue but also between the spoken informal register of Tchifi, who is alone and thinking aloud to herself, and the formal register of the information provided by the computer, a new register for MC : T C H I F I : ‘kifèr mo gagn for lanvi retourn lor latèr? Pou enn sezour …

apré … 2000 an. Li ankor lamem sa? Pa drol si li’nn disparet. So bann abitan tchi telman kontan lagèr…E lerla polision. Pov planet! Nou get enn kou. [Li servi so kompioutèr. Enn lavwa sentetchik djir lenformasion la] “Galaxi: milki-wé; Sistem: Zetwal Kakaloulout; Planet: Latèr: preské steril; presion popilasion, polision ek enn gran lagèr simikbakteriolozik finn preské aneantchi bann diferan form lavi. Mé bann siantiss kosmik finn dekouver lekzistanss enn tchi-koloni reskapé ki viv lor enn tchi-lil, lor zepol enn montagn ki apel Petrousmok. Kot lipié montagn la ena enn tribi zom-mangouss (zangouss) – rezilta mitasion zenetchik. Ant imen ek zangouss ena enn lalit san mersi.” (Prologue) T C H I F I : Why do I yearn to return to earth? For one stay … after …

2,000 years. Is it still there? Wouldn’t be odd if it has disappeared. Its

inhabitants were so fond of war… And then there was the pollution. Poor planet! Let’s have a look. [She uses her computer. A synthetic voice reads out the information.] Galaxy: Milky Way; System: Shitty Star; Planet: Earth: almost sterile, population pressures, pollution and a great chemical-bacterial war have almost anihilated the different forms of life. But the cosmic scientists have discovered the existence of a small colony of survivors who live on a small island, on the shoulder of a mountain called Petrusmok. At the foot of the mountain lives a

126

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

tribe of man-mongoose (zangouss) – the result of genetic mutation. Between humans and the zangouss there is a merciless battle.

Both the lexical and syntactic patterns used by Tchifi contrast with the impersonal scientific register of the computer. While Tchifi uses short, emotive rhetorical questions and exclamations, the information provided by the computer consists mainly of dense declarative sentences and is characterized by a tendency towards nominalization in “np20(presion popilasion), np(polision) np(ek enn gran lagèr simik-bakteriolozik) vp(finn preské aneantchi) np(bann djiferan form lavi)” [np(population pressures), np(pollution) np(and a great chemical-bacterial war) vp(have almost annihilated) np(the different forms of life)], for example. The possessive form indicated by the word order and avoidance of the possessive preposition “so” in “rezilta mitasion zenetchik” (the result of genetic mutation) increases the lexical density.21 The prominence of scientific lexical items, a low incidence of grammatical words, and hypotactic constructions further indicate a formal register. The diglossic relation of MC to the colonial languages of Mauritius features in both plays. The fact that Virahsawmy reverts to code-switching repeatedly in almost all his plays suggests that it is still a resourceful device, particularly in the genre of drama. The difference in these two plays, however, is that instead of using code-switching for the purposes of characterization as well as for generating humour, Virahsawmy uses it to make direct sociolinguistic comments. In Mamzel Zann, Tchifi only codeswitches on one occasion: T C H I F I : We live and learn. E ki ariv mwa? Mo koz anglé? Zot tchi

bien fèr mwa mizèr! E! Mo tchi bien fann ar zot ’si. (Prologue) T C H I F I : We live and learn. Hey, what’s happening to me? I’m speak-

ing English? They really did make me miserable. Hey! I also gave them a mouthful.

20

np stands for noun phrase and vp for verb phrase. For a detailed discussion of the genitive form in M C , see Anand Syea, “The Development of Genitives in Mauritian Creole” (1994), in Creolization and Language Change, ed. Adone & Plag, 85–97. 21

½¾

Virahsawmy’s Later Plays

127

She, however, immediately corrects herself self-consciously on ideological grounds, pointing out that code-switching to English is often the result of linguistic and cultural coercion of a colonial nature. In Ti-Marie, while Virahsawmy commends the etymological spelling and pronunciation of foreign proper names, the same does not apply to common nouns. In fact, he comments harshly on the French/ MC codemixing of a group of individuals whom he identifies as the nouveauxriches. Referring to Madam Ponspilat, he writes in the stage directions: “Kouma boukou nouvo ris li koz enn langaz barok kot li melanz Kreol ek Franse dan enn farata mal belo” (like many nouveaux-riches she speaks an odd language where she mixes creole and French into a badly rolled out flat bread) (Scene 1). Virahsawmy further describes how Madam Ponspilat hypercorrects her spoken M C to the extent of automatically replacing all [z] and all [s] by [Y] and [R], a linguistic trait which she associates with the educated. Virahsawmy makes a further tongue-in-cheek comment in an aside even before we are introduced to the character: “Donk dan so ‘chalon’ [instead of “salon”] ena ‘chofa’ [instead of “sofa”] dernie model” (therefore in her ‘chalon’ there is a state-of-the-art ‘chofa’). There is a mounting sense that Virahsawmy not only writes literature in MC , but increasingly on M C , illustrating the potential of MC for metalinguistic discourse. Another example of code-switching is the policemen’s greeting of Coquille de Carthage, a sexy and elegant woman. They code-switch to English and French, revealing the intention to impress and the assumption that a distinguished-looking woman could only possibly speak French or English: P O L I S I E 1: May I help you? P O L I S I E 2: Puis-je vous aider? P O L I S I E 1: Your name please? P O L I S I E 2: Votre nom madame? M A D A M : Ki zot pe radote? P O L I S I E 1 & P O L I S I E 2: Ou konn nou lang? M A D A M : Bien sir mo konn koz Jerichon. Ou koir mo ti al lekol

anban ban? P O L I S I E 1 & P O L I S I E 2: Be pa montre dan lekol sa.

128

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

M A D A M : Parski zot bann aryere. Dan mo planet, nou aprann nou

lang, Carthageois. Anplis nou aprann Jerichon, Jalsa Douniyan pou nou kapav kominik ar nou bann voizin. (Scene 3) P O L I C E M A N 1: May I help you? [in English] P O L I C E M A N 2: May I help you? [in French] P O L I C E M A N 1: Your name please? [in English] P O L I C E M A N 2: Your name please Madam? [in French] M A D A M : What are you on about? [in M C ] P O L I C E M A N 1 & P O L I C E M A N 2: You know our language?

[from here on the dialogue is in M C ] M A D A M : Of course I do, do you think I used to play truant? P O L I C E M A N 1 & P O L I C E M A N 2: But it’s not taught at school. M A D A M : Because you are ignorant. On my planet, we learn our own

language Carthagian. In addition, we learn Jerichon, Jalsa Douniyan so that we can communicate with our neighbours.

The character Coquille de Carthage, who represents the wisdom of her ancient and successful civilization until invasion, here legitimizes the learning of MC . This exchange is an example of Virahsawmy’s use of theatre to propagate his views on the non-officialization of MC as backward as well as his belief that the introduction of MC into the educational system would be a democratic step forward.

Conclusion As Virahsawmy ventures into new domains and reaches out to a discerning readership and audience, his writing is characterized by a significant amount of lexical gap-filling. He also illustrates and distinguishes further registers than encountered in his previous writing: the impersonal scientific register of computers; a patriarchal one, and an emerging feminist one. Just as in 198022 Virahsawmy had claimed that it was important to involve all social classes in the political and cultural programme of language planning, he currently sees it as imperative to take into account a feminist voice in this project. Given the feminist slant of the last two plays 22

Preface to Les Lapo Kabri Gazuyé.

½¾

129

Virahsawmy’s Later Plays

considered, words relating to the construction of gender are particularly prominent. To represent a feminist experience, existing patriarchal discourses are revisited, a new vocabulary is necessarily borrowed, and collocations coined to make visible previously dismissed experiences. This corpus ‘aménagement’, in turn, enhances the status of MC by illustrating that it is capable of being the medium for debate on gender issues at various levels of formality. Virahsawmy, however, moves away from a simple cataloguing of differences between men and women to a more complex investigation into how individuals use linguistic resources to produce or negate, in certain circumstances, gender differentiation and identities. In these two plays, Virahsawmy’s main concerns as writer/ ‘aménageur’ and organic intellectual come together. A socio-cultural ‘aménagement’ is clearly situated within a linguistic ‘aménagement’ and vice versa. As Virahsawmy further illustrates the links between language and ideology and develops a philosophy of “language-as-cause,” MC is not represented as a language in need of ‘aménagement’ but as one that can, in turn, be the instrument of social ‘aménagement’. His philosophy of inclusion and democracy is reflected not only in terms of the content of his creative writing but in the very form, as he endeavours to develop and present MC as a vital means of empowerment for women. An analysis of the development of linguistic forms of M C through Virahsawmy’s later plays supports the hypothesis that writing enlarges the functional potential of a language. The next two chapters test this hypothesis further by investigating how the creative act of translating canonical literature into a relatively new literary language functions as a means of language planning.

½¾

4

Iconoclastic Translation Rewriting Shakespeare’s The Tempest in a Postcolonial Context

I

between Virahsawmy’s translations of Shakespeare and the standardization of MC , I follow the broad definition of translation provided by Lefevere, who uses the term ‘rewriting’ to cover both areas of what are commonly regarded as adaptations and translations.1 More specifically, I explore the role of adaptation and translation in shaping the literary canon in MC and leading to the latter’s linguistic enrichment. Before embarking on the analysis, I expound my methodological approach to Virahsawmy’s translation work and explore the main factors that make of literary translation a privileged tool of language planning, and of Shakespearean plays particularly apt, if contentious, source texts for translation into the national language. N INVESTIGATING THE LINKS

I Translating Shakespeare in a Postcolonial Context An Expanded Version of Polysystems Theory Itamar Even–Zohar’s concept of polysystems, introduced in the 1970s and reinforced in the 1990s continues, despite some methodological con-

1

André Lefevere, Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame (London: Routledge, 1992).

132

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

straints, to prove influential in literary translation studies.2 His theory is based on the hypothesis that it is more convenient to take all sorts of literary and semi-literary texts, including translated literature, as an aggregate of systems – a heterogeneous system of systems, or a polysystem. The main appeal of polysystems theory for my study is that it offers an approach to translation which is situated within larger systems of literary and cultural production. Indeed, Even–Zohar reclaimed translation from a marginal space to emphasize the fundamental part it has played in literary and cultural history: no observer of the history of any literature can avoid recognizing as an important fact the impact of translations and their role in the synchrony and diachrony of a certain literature.3

Polysystems theory encouraged the documentation of translation as having in the past played a crucial role in the construction of a new or revitalized national consciousness. Even–Zohar distinguishes three major historical moments when translated literature may acquire a prime position: (1) when a literary polysystem has not yet been crystallized and when translation fulfils the needs of a young literature to put into use its newly founded (or renewed) language for as many literary types as possible in order to make it functionable as a literary language and useful for its emerging public; (2) when a relatively established literature is either peripheral or weak, or both; (3) when there are turning-points or “literary vacuums” at historical moments so that established models are no longer tenable for a younger generation. The role of translation as central to the crystallization of national cultures has been reinforced more recently by Lawrence Venuti, who asserts that translation “wields enormous power in the construction of national identities” and “can play an important geopolitical role,” as it did in the emergence of European nations.4

2 See Itamar Even-Zohar, “The Position of Translated Literature Within the Literary Polysystem,” in Literature and Translation ed. James Holmes (Leuven: Acco, 1978), repr. in Poetics Today 11 (1990): 45–51. 3 Itamar Even–Zohar, “The Position of Translated Literature Within the Literary Polysystem.” 4 Lawrence Venuti, Rethinking Translation: Discourse, Subjectivity, Ideology (London: Routledge, 1992): 13.

½¾

Iconoclastic Translation

133

By encouraging the location of translated literature in an historical– relative, socio-cultural model, and foregrounding the subversive and radical aspects of translation, polysystems theory makes itself particularly conducive to studying translation in a postcolonial context.5 In my particular case study, such an approach reveals the links between broader social and political structures in Mauritius and the choice of MC as recipient literary language. It thereby provides a framework which locates Virahsawmy’s translations of canonical texts in MC within his own and the wider project of language planning. Mauritian literature in M C , as a young literature keen to expand rapidly into new domains and to fill any perceived literary vacuums, bears the imprint of the first and the last historical points mentioned by Even–Zohar. Furthermore, according to polysystems theory, the function of translation is to reinforce current genres and offer opportunities for stylistic extension. As long as the translated literature maintains a ‘primary’ function:6 i.e takes the initiative when it comes to creating new items and models in the literature and thus represents the principle of innovation, it participates actively in shaping the core of the polysystem. Even–Zohar argues, indeed, that the shock caused by the appearance of innovative elements in the existing system, not only in terms of form and style but also in the concepts and themes presented, is what causes a literature to evolve. An approach to translation studies that privileges the creative impact of translation is conducive to my main line of enquiry. Finally, polysystems theory also facilitates the study of the relationship between different kinds of text: ‘great’ literary works, popular literature, and translated texts. In the context of this study, a framework which 5

See, for example, Annie Brisset, A Sociocritique of Translation: Theatre and Alterity in Quebec, 1968–1988, tr. Rosalind Gill & Roger Gannon (Toronto: U of Toronto P, 1996); John Corbett, Written in the Language of the Scottish Nation (Clevedon: Multingual Matters, 1999) and Maria Tymoczko, Translation in a Postcolonial Context: Early Irish Literature in English Translation. (Manchester: St Jerome, 1999). 6 The various literary systems within the polysystem maintain hierarchical relationships, occupying ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ positions. While ‘primary’ activity is presumed to be innovative, ‘secondary’ activity conforms to established norms and codes and is therefore deemed to be derivative and conservative. Although his hierarchization has been the subject of much criticism, Even–Zohar’s polysystem theory still provides a viable framework for the study of translated literature. See Translation, Poetics and the Stage, ed. Romy Heylen (London: Routledge, 1993); Corbett, Written in the Language of the Scottish Nation).

134

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

allows the investigation of linguistic patterns across literary adaptations and translations of canonical texts into MC and original writing in MC is particularly enabling. It facilitates an evaluation of whether literary translation builds upon the language-planning effects of original creative works in MC (discussed in previous chapters) in bringing a sense of authority to MC literature and in extending its stylistic range. While the historical grounding that polysystem theory allows, its emphasis on the innovatory aspects of translation and its adaptability to a postcolonial context are applicable to this study, my case study also necessarily expands Even–Zohar’s framework. Whereas polysystem theory neglects extraliterary factors, I emphasize in the next section, and in congenial alignment with Lefevere, that the very rationale behind the choice of a particular text for translation is relevant,7 in particular when the choice of source text is Shakespeare and the context postcolonial. I also take into account how the ideological frameworks within which Virahsawmy operates, ranging from postcolonialism to language planning, inform his translation strategies. Another main limitation of polysystems theory is that it restricts itself to the literary function of translated works, whereas the hypothesis can be broadened to include innovation in linguistic terms. Moreover, whereas polysystems theory seems to suggest that literature develops autonomously according to its own rules, my case study privileges the translator’s self-conscious and visible role as manipulator in his works of translation/language engineering. Bearing in mind Hermans’ and Lefevere’s insistence on translation as an exercise in manipulation and an instance of the execution of power further enables the evaluation of what is gained in the translation of Shakespeare’s plays into 8 MC . Moreover, some attention to the translation norms which Virahsawmy develops will not only reveal how the import of cultural and linguistic items are regulated but will also suggest the directions in which the linguistic extension of MC are being taken. In my discussion of Virahsawmy’s translation strategies, the challenge of Holmes and Tymockzo to theoretical approaches to translation based on binary classifications (e.g., literal/free; domesticating/foreignizing; formal equivalence/dynamic equivalence; adequate/acceptable; fluent/resistant) is also useful in acknowledging both the complexities and the 7 8

Lefevere, Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. Theo Hermans, The Manipulation of Literature (London: Croom Helm, 1985).

½¾

Iconoclastic Translation

135

specificities of postcolonial translations of Shakespeare.9 Given the ideological pressures and linguistic constraints faced by Virahsawmy and his motivations for translation, Holmes’s concept of a translator’s map which is personalized and involves a specific hierarchy of objectives seems more productive. Instead of adopting a prescriptive line of enquiry into questions of faithfulness and translatability based on the dichotomies that dominate discussions of translation theory, I explore how models in the receiving language are accommodated, disrupted, and extended. Moving away from binary choices, I investigate the wider choices and decisions that Virahsawmy makes as a translator who is less interested in translation as a normative practice, which implies a mechanical transfer of translation units, than he is in its creative potential. Overall, my approach moves from the macro- to the micro-level: i.e. from the target culture to the translated texts and, finally, to the structure of those texts. After establishing preliminary norms that have to do with translation policy/poetics and choice of text, I explore textual linguistic norms. Although investigating translation has the potential to reveal valuable information about both the source text and the target language and culture, my analysis, in line with my main hypothesis, is necessarily target-oriented.

Literary Translation as a Privileged Form of Creativity In order to situate my analysis of Virahsawmy’s translations in the wider context of language planning, I consider first the postcolonial motivations behind his translation of canonical world texts and, more specifically, the rationale behind his choice of Shakespeare as source author. Historically, as emphasized by Even–Zohar, literary translation seems repeatedly to engender or reinforce various forms of creativity, ranging from national and other identity formations to literary and linguistic resourcefulness. Across Europe, a mounting sense of national identity pressed the major countries to develop their own vernaculars which could rival Latin. Indeed, the translation of the Bible into the vernaculars of western Europe, prompted by the Reformation, is a prime example of the issues of national and linguistic authority, legitimacy, and ultimately power that are involved in translation. In England, the spirit of national9

Holmes, Literature and Translation; Tymoczko, Translation in a Postcolonial Context.

136

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

ism in the aftermath of the country’s ascendancy in Europe manifested itself in the association by educators and writers of the English vernacular with national values and pride.10 To write and, very often, to translate from the classics into English became an overt symbol of patriotism. Translation from established languages, in particular from canonical texts, to relatively young literary languages has played and can still play a transformative role by both extending the linguistic resources of the target language and legitimizing the latter as a literary language. Indeed, many of Shakespeare’s works were themselves vernacular translations of classic texts. In fact, it can be argued that the very cultural strengths and making of Elizabethan dramatic texts depended on what today would be interpreted as plagiarism. Rui Carvalho Homem describes the dependence of that prolific period in English literary history on appropriations and rewritings of classical source texts as “a crucially productive aspect of the agon between classical and vernacular.”11 In this demeanour, new European nations disengaging themselves from the tenacious legacy of the Roman Empire and its language share some of the postcolonial sociolinguistic concerns of emerging nations in the twentieth century. This analogy is, however, limited and limiting. There are more politically specific reasons for why, in current postcolonial times, translation has become an almost irresistible endeavour to redress the asymmetry of relations between languages, cultures, and ultimately peoples. Whereas the importance of translation theory and practice for investigations of colonization has been insightfully discussed by Edward Said in particular,12 the case is less valid for investigations of decolonization. In colonial times, translation, which functioned mainly as a one-way flow from indigenous languages to European languages for the purposes of European consumption, was informed by a strategy of containment functioning as a tool of the colonizer. Moreover, translation itself became a metaphor for the colonial experience: i.e. the source or the original was seen to hold power while the colony, doomed to be a mere copy, was disempowered. In a postcolonial context, Niranjana insists, the problematic of translation 10

See Kevin Pask, The Emergence of the English Author (Cambridge: Cambridge

U P , 1996).. 11

Rui Carvalho Homem, “Introduction,” Translating Shakespeare in the TwentyFirst Century, ed. Homem & Ton Hoenselaaars (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2004): 6. 12 Edward W. Said, Orientalism (New York: Pantheon, 1978).

½¾

Iconoclastic Translation

137

becomes a significant site for raising questions of representation, power, and historicity.13 Since translation has at its heart the discursive practices which animate interactions between peoples and nations speaking different languages, in a postcolonial context the practice of translation becomes a political and cultural site of contestation, deconstructing colonial perceptions of cultural otherness and positing alternative views to the colonial translation process. Virahsawmy’s translations of Shakespeare into MC and his rewriting of The Tempest, in particular, certainly operates within this framework, inviting comparison with other postcolonial contexts. His own literary family tree is made possible by translation. The following extract from the first poem in Testaman enn Metchiss, entitled “Metchisss,” sheds light on the multifarious sources and styles that shape his literary writing: Dan Gita, Labib ek Koran Mo fin swazir mo nouritchir. Shakespeare, Molière, Dostoevsky, Byron, Camus, Salman Rushdie, Gershwin, Coltrane, Stravinsky, Lata, Beatles, Elvis, Ravi. Chazal, Chagall, Modigliani – Pa bliyé Marx, Mao, Gramsci – Finn ouvèr mo lizié, poli Mo vizion, reglé bann lakor, Rafinn mo sansibilité. In the Gita, the Bible, the Qur’an I have chosen my nourishment Shakespeare, Molière, Dostoevsky, Byron, Camus, Salman Rushdie, Gershwin, Coltrane, Stravinsky, Lata, the Beatles, Elvis, Ravi. Chazal, Chagall, Modigliani – Not to forget Marx, Mao, Gramsci – Have opened my eyes, polished My vision, attuned the chords, Refined my sensibility. 13

Tejaswini Niranjana, Siting Translation: History, Post-Structuralism, and the Postcolonial Context (Berkeley & Oxford: California U P , 1992): 1.

138

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Although Virahsawmy focuses his attention on Shakespearean plays, he has also translated works by Molière, Hugo, Prévert, the Grimm brothers, the Indian epic the Mahabharata, and Matthew Arnold. The translation of canonical world texts into the vernacular is not only aimed at introducing foreign texts to a Mauritian public but is, more significantly, part of his bridge-building exercise between source language/culture and target language/culture. He sees his translations as instruments of mediation and influence between national literatures, creating a two-way flow and more egalitarian relationship between world literatures benefitting from synchronicity and diachronicity and the nascent Mauritian literature. This attempt at rectifying historical asymmetries is both cultural and linguistic. Indeed, Virahsawmy clearly situates his translations/adaptations of canonical English and French texts into MC within a language-planning framework.14 He acknowledges that one of the main motivations behind his translation work is countering the persistent widespread belief, often generated by intellectuals, that great works of literature cannot be translated into MC . The following comments by Jean–Georges Prosper, although dated, express the myths which Virahsawmy seeks to debunk. After extolling the merits of Robert Edward Hart’s translations of Shakespeare into French, Prosper proclaimed: The creole-patois being a mere dialect could not claim to be a vehicle of culture. No, I cannot see how the most talented linguist could translate these [Shakespearean] verses into creole-patois.15

Viewed against this background, Virahsawmy’s endeavour to create a Mauritian Shakespearean dramatic canon in the local vernacular is thus not only a conscious strategy in building a national literature but also aims to defeat the argument that MC is too poor a language to express abstract ideas or to transcend a local reality. Moreover, Virahsawmy claims that this literary practice is aimed at redefining a diglossic situation into one of colingualism where the use of available cultural resources are maximized rather than excluded and where MC is recognized as a literary language, 14

Testaman enn metchiss, 34. Prosper, “Le patois-créole n’étant qu’un dialecte, ne saurait avoir de prétension à la culture. […] Non je ne vois pas comment le plus docte linguiste traduirait ces vers en patois-créole”; “Le patois-créole, le bilinguisme et Robert Edward–Hart, traducteur.” 15

½¾

Iconoclastic Translation

139

with a complementary position next to French and English. Zil Sezal (Julius Caesar), Trazedji Makbess (Macbeth), Prins Hamlet (Hamlet) have added the sub-genres of historical drama, tragedy, and revenge tragedy to the dramatic culture in M C , and have brought with them the prestige of classical tragedy. They have all been received favourably by the press.16 If Shakespeare in translation has become an integral part of many national literatures,17 constructing a national literature based partly on Shakespeare is not without controversy and certainly not clear of accusations of neocolonialism. I argue, however, that the contradiction between the desire for cultural identification with a world literary giant and the iconoclastic urge to establish instead a local voice need not be disabling. Virahsawmy’s translations are situated within a larger movement of cultural resistance, potentially allowing him to break free of the twofold cultural oppression of a colonial hegemonic and a restricted nationalist discourse. Although Virahsawmy does not work consciously alongside other postcolonial African writers such as Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o, his endeavour is situated within a similar political and cultural framework. The privileging of MC , a minor cultural language in a global context but the major language in a local context, is a matter of cultural empowerment. It is a means of decolonization and a means of resistance to the linguistic and cultural discourses of globalization. Nonetheless, his agenda departs from that of Ngũgĩ on both a political and a linguistic level. Instead of rejecting canonical texts, he transforms them into MC , absorbing them into the canon of Mauritian literature, recognizing the power of translation to shape his own political, linguistic, and literary context. His overt agenda of lan16

An article on Trazedji Makbess (Week-End, 9 August 1998: 12) described classical tragedy as “a genre which has definitely made it into the course of Mauritian theatre” (“un genre qui est définitivement entré dans le courant théâtral mauricien”); another commented on the expressive and fervent quality of the language which succeeded in re-creating the gloom and intensity of the Shakespearean tragedy (WeekEnd, 2 August 1998: 29). 17 Commenting on a European context, Shurbanov and Sokolova claim that “No European nation, old or young, can ignore Shakespeare, if it strives for self-legitimization”; “The Translatability of Shakespearean Texts into an Unrelated Language / Culture,” in Translating Shakespeare for the Twenty-First Century, ed. Homem & Hoenselaars, 95. See also Thomas Cartelli, Repositioning Shakespeare: National Formations, Postcolonial Appropriations (London: Routledge, 1999).

140

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

guage planning situates him along translators in other postcolonial countries using translations of Shakespeare into the local vernacular as a conscious strategy for building a national literature: Wale Ogunyemi in Nigeria, Thomas Decker in Sierra Leone, Simon Plaatje in South Africa, and Julius Nyerere in Tanzania. The latter is perhaps the best known as a political figure who also raised the status of Kiswahili and established its validity as a literary medium through his translations of Julius Caesar (Julius Kaizari, 1963) and The Merchant of Venice (Mabepari wa Venisi, 1969), both published by Oxford University Press.

Why Shakespeare? The focus on translations of Shakespeare in the Mauritian and wider African contexts as a means of legitimizing the vernacular deserves some attention. The complex web of ambiguous factors which explain the proliferation of postcolonial appropriations of Shakespeare, and of The Tempest in particular, has been the subject of prolific scholarship.18 Shakespeare as the embodiment of British imperial culture, Shakespeare as a site which is already culturally heterogeneous through constant reworkings in different ages, and his universal appeal as the most performed playwright in the world – all this builds up his mythic status, which, in a postcolonial context, often becomes a fertile space of contestation. In Virahsawmy’s case, his intention to “use Shakespeare to enhance my language” demonstrates that he explicitly manipulates Shakespeare’s hypercanonicity and its consequent influence on the image of the target language.19 The choice of Shakespeare allows him to transpose into a regional language an author who, in addition to enjoying universal status, plays a central role in the literary space of Mauritius. Shakespeare was not only particularly influential in the colonial history and education of Mauritius, as he was in other previous British colonies,20 but he continues to be a dominant figure in the secondary-school curriculum. 18

See, for example, Ania Loomba & Martin Orkin, Postcolonial Shakespeares (London: Routledge, 1999); Chantal Zabus, Tempests After Shakespeare (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2002); and “The Tempest” and Its Travels, ed. Peter Hulme & William Sherman (London: Reaktion, 2000). 19 Jane Wilkinson, “Interviews with Dev Virahsawmy and Michael Walling,” in African Theatre, Playwrights and Politics, ed. Martin Banham, James Gibbs & Femi Osofisan (Oxford: James Currey, 2001): 113. 20 See David Johnson’s Shakespeare and South Africa (Oxford: Clarendon, 1996).

½¾

Iconoclastic Translation

141

In the context of using Shakespeare for the purposes of language standardization, some of the parallels in sociolinguistic and literary linguistic trends between the English language in Elizabethan times and the developments in MC in postcolonial times also constitute useful cultural capital. MC is emerging from a previously diglossic situation and is also moving into new written domains prior to being amply codified. Moreover, in terms of literary linguistic developments, Elizabethan English underwent a radical shake-up, not least under Shakespeare’s pen, through bold experimentations in lexical and syntactic extension.21 Indeed, if a playfulness and extension of language were encouraged by cultural– historical circumstances in Elizabethan England, Shakespeare’s own ingenious and innovative stance left its stamp on the language. Through his very choice of source texts, therefore, Virahsawmy draws on parallels between the impact of Shakespeare’s writing on the English language and his own potential impact in relation to MC . It is, however, at once the parallels and the discrepancies between Shakespeare’s English and contemporary MC that make Virahsawmy’s translations a potentially powerful instrument of language planning. Not only are they languages which are not linguistically closely related but they are separated by time, geography, culture, and asymmetrical historical experience. One easily imagines cases of untranslatability, both linguistic, where there is no lexico-syntactic substitute, and cultural, where a relevant situational feature of the source-language text is absent in the target language. Apart from the worldwide admiration for Shakespeare’s linguistic manipulating and innovation, dominant rhetorical aspects of Elizabethan literature, in particular copiousness and wordplay, make grappling with the Bard a particularly challenging endeavour for the translator working with a relatively new linguistic medium. Copiousness, drawing considerably on synonyms or near-synonyms, often in doublets and triplets, functioned as a means of adding weight to the sentence. A whole range of verbal wordplay, including punning, was also de rigueur, functioning as an alternative form of verbal enrichment to the borrowing of foreign words. Indeed, the explosion of word-play in Elizabethan literature, a reaction to the relative 21 See, for example, Frank Kermode’s excellent Shakespeare’s Language (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 2000), Russ McDonald’s Shakespeare and the Arts of Language (Oxford: Oxford U P , 2001), and Terttu Nevalainen’s “Shakespeare’s New Words” (2001), in Reading Shakespeare’s Dramatic Language, ed. Sylvia Adamson et al. (Arden Shakespeare; London: Methuen, 2001): 237–55.

142

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

poverty of English, was, in the words of Norman Blake, “an element of showing off.”22 In addition to the challenge of translating metalanguage, there are formal considerations such as the iambic pentameter, a form that requires much linguistic control. The pentameter, however, also affords considerable stylistic potential by encouraging the condensation of complex ideas and enhancing memorability and aural pleasure. The place of rhetoric in Elizabethan drama and some of the formal constraints in translating dramatic poetry which already stimulated Shakespeare’s creativity are thus potentially assets prompting the translator to find new turns of phrases to express a Shakespearean diction. In fact, as a direct consequence of asymmetrical historical experience, translation from English into MC would require a strategy of compensation (often through linguistic resourcefulness and neologisms) to express, for example, the vocabulary of power and social distinction, and rhetorically rich language. The following analysis of three of Shakespeare’s plays, The Tempest, Hamlet, and Much Ado About Nothing, investigates the role of translation in extending the stylistic range of MC . Distinctions need to be drawn, however, within Virahsawmy’s different forms of engagement with Shakespeare. The Shakespearean canon is also present in stretches of other plays. Zeneral Makbef (as seen in Chapter 2), Sir Toby (1998), Ziliet ek so Romeo (2001), and Prezidan Otelo (2003) are original texts which have but little to do with the Shakespearean plays evoked. They exploit instead the Shakespearean resonances as re-usable material to build up the postcolonial national theatre, and will not be considered as translations. Annie Brisset’s distinction between iconoclastic and identity-forming translations in Quebec, where the vernacular joual as a target language is not a given, is a useful paradigm for distinguishing between two types of translations considered in this and the following chapter. Toufann, a parodic rewriting of The Tempest situated at the juncture between creation and translation proper, is what Brisset describes as an iconoclastic translation. Although it is a radical postcolonial rewriting, it nonetheless retains too much of the original to be considered a new work in its own right. By contrast, Prins Hamlet and Enn ta Senn dan Vid, translations of Hamlet and Much Ado about Nothing respectively, are part of a clearly identifiable set of plays that import the source works in their 22

Norman Blake, Shakespeare’s Language: An Introduction (London: Macmillan,

1983): 20.

½¾

143

Iconoclastic Translation

entirety (also Zil Sezar and Trazedi Makbes, translations of Julius Caesar and Macbeth). Brisset describes iconoclastic translation as having the ability to “change the relation of linguistic forces at the institutional and symbolic levels, by making it possible for the vernacular language to take the place of the referential language.”23 Prins Hamlet and Enn ta Senn dan Vid, which will be analysed in Chapter 5, can be said to be identity-forming translations which aim in particular at elevating a dialect to the status of a national language. While all of Virahsawmy’s translation works in MC are part of his effort in language planning, this distinction between two types of translation nonetheless explains why these works are spread across separate chapters and will later serve to sustain some of the differences in emphasis in the conduct of the analysis.

II Toufann Within the Shakespearean canon, The Tempest stands out for several reasons. One of his last plays, it holds proud first position in the 1623 Folio edition and is generally considered as one of his most accomplished works. Moreover, it adheres to the three unities of classical drama, thereby constituting a prime instance of neoclassical drama. More particularly, in relation to the target culture, The Tempest is imbued with an unequivocal colonial context and retains a powerful hold over the postcolonial imagination of the tempest-tossed island of Mauritius. The politics of language, location, and dislocation, the acutely uneven relations of power highlighting the civilizing mission of Englishness when it encounters the ‘Other’, the lure of subversion, and an obsession with commotion which is overtly reflected in the very title – all combine to make of the rewriting of this play a compelling and resolute postcolonial endeavour. Moreover, the fact that Creole cultures are born out of the reinvention of life after dislocation creates a further link to both the thematic of dislocation within The Tempest and its dramatic form. Indeed, theatre provides Virahsawmy with a privileged tool in enabling the simultaneous reenactment of history and the relocation at centre-stage of the postcolonial people of Mauritius.

23

Brisset, A Sociocritique of Translation, 164–65.

144

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

In Virahsawmy’s literary translation, the prevailing ideologies of The Tempest are inverted. The geographical space of Mauritius is located not on the margins but at the centre, and Caliban is no longer what the colonial self invented as the ‘savage’ but an intelligent and attractive young man, a ‘métis’ of mixed ancestry, the issue of a white pirate and a black slave. Being a brilliant technician, he is the only one capable of carrying on Prospero’s scientific work and will eventually reign as king and partner to Kordelia, Prospero’s daughter. In Virahsawmy’s version, the metatexts of postcolonialism and gender democracy subjugate the dominant discourses of the source text. In his rewriting of The Tempest, Virahsawmy certainly writes against Shakespeare, partly addressing Ngũgĩ’s concern that African students had been taught to see the world from Prospero’s perspective, but he also writes with the Bard. His rewriting is, after all, dedicated to Shakespeare himself. There is a playfully intertextual element to Toufann as key characters from various Shakespearean plays collide, including King Lear, Cordelia, and Iago. On a more serious note, Virahsawmy is concerned less with the historical wrongs of colonization than with the incomplete forms of decolonization and contemporary social constructions of injustice in Mauritius. Through Prospero, played by an Indo-Mauritian actor in performances in Mauritius, Virahsawmy engages critically with the fact that postcolonial Mauritius has bred its own neocolonial tyrant. Virahsawmy’s recuperation of the métis and his denunciation of a Prospero who believes in the rule of ‘pure blood’ are also in line with his philosophy of cultural miscegenation rather than ancestral roots.24 His philosophy of cultural creolization informs and extends in transnational and idiosyncratic ways the cultural theories and practices of Creole societies and wider postcolonial contexts. Toufann, however, denies itself closure, ending on a spiral at a point where Prospero’s old regime is clearly buried but where the subversion of the newborn order is already emerging. Toufann is a self-conscious political practice of rewriting where subversion in terms of content runs parallel to the overall view of colonial and vernacular languages. While all translations are to some degree or another forms of rewriting, Virahsawmy’s Toufann, a three-act play in prose, is a more extreme form 24

The title of his collection of poems and reflections, Testaman enn Metchiss, is suggestive of his self-perception and self-portrayal as culturally miscegenated.

½¾

Iconoclastic Translation

145

of rewriting that can be referred to as a “tradaptation,” a coinage by Michel Garneau25 to refer to the genre of flexible rewriting midway between translation and adaptation. While representationally foregrounding certain parts of the original, Toufann also follows its own trajectory. Given the licence that Virahsawmy allows himself as a rewriter in Toufann, he mostly violates the established patterns of the source text, choosing to adhere to some of them metonymically.26 Given the irreverent nature of Virahsawmy’s rewriting, much of which is antithetical to or independent of the source text, my analysis will not be based on a comparative study of source and target texts (as will be the case in Chapter 5) but will focus instead on key linguistic aspects of the target text. The following analysis concentrates on code-switching as a means of linguistic legitimization, lexical extension through borrowings and metaphors, and Prospero’s elaborate syntax. A back-translation provides an approximation of how the text has been rewritten.

Analysis Code-switching Given the formal associations attached to French and English in relation to MC in Mauritius, code-switching to the colonial languages has the potential to function as an effective stylistic device. In exploring Virahsawmy’s strategy of code-switching in Toufann, Mary Louise Pratt’s concept of contact zones is particularly useful. Toufann can be seen as a particularly buoyant space where disparate languages not only “meet, clash and grapple with each other, often in highly asymmetrical relations of domination and subordination”27 but as a contact zone where they also redefine one another. A powerful strategy of code-switching unravels the symbolic deployment of languages at key stages of the play. Witness Dammarro and Kaspalto’s use of code-switching: 25

Michel Garneau is a Quebec-born playright, poet, and translator whose translation of Macbeth in joual was produced with success in Quebec in 1978. 26 Tymoczko, in Translation in a Postcolonial Context, argues that translation can only ever be a metonymic process but in the case of Toufann this metonymy is overt. 27 Mary Louise Pratt, Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation (London: Routledge, 1992): 4.

146

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

D A M M A R R O : […] E Kasplato to manz enn dam? K A S P A L T O : Never! Whisky is all I take. Dammarro kifer tou di-

mounn pe rod enn sime sorti? (I.v)28 D A M M A R R O : […] Hey, Kaspalto, do you want a spliff? K A S P A L T O : Never! Whisky is all I take. Dammarro, why is every-

one trying to find a way out of here? K A S P A L T O : Non … Kas pa latet! Misie Yago ek Edmon bon di-

mounn sa … Nou fou zot lape, zot fou nou lape … (Li baye) E mam! Bonsoir otankevouzet (Li dormi). (I.v) K A S P A L T O : No …. Don’t worry! Mr Iago and Edmund are good

men .… If we leave them alone they’ll leave us alone … (He yawns) Hey, mate! Goodnight to all of you (He sleeps).

Kaspalto and Dammarro replace Trinculo and Stephano. The italianate name of the jester Trinculo is a case of nomen est omen, as Trinculo is extremely fond of drink. It is translated to ‘Kaspalto’, which in MC literally means to break free of one’s coat – by extension, so one can have a good drink. It is also the name of a cheap local wine associated with drunkards. ‘Dammarro’, from a popular Hindustani song, means to smoke a spliff. The recurring phrases or sentences of English or French are far from being indicative of a Mauritian/English bilingualism but would be recognized as parodic by a Mauritian audience. Having at his disposal an unlimited stock of whisky, a status symbol imported from the colonial centre, Dammarro establishes himself in a position of prestige by fleeing into a code to which he does not have full access. In response, Kaspalto also code-switches briefly to a few French words, “Bonswar otankévouzet.” “Otankévouzet” is a calque of “autant que vous êtes” from French onto an MC phonology as one word, but is semantically void. The orthography suggests that he aims to reproduce certain features of the language associated with another group but fails to reproduce them exactly. Kas28

Virahsawmy’s Toufann, Prins Hamlet and Enn ta Senn dan Vid do not include line numbers. References to quotes from these texts will be made only to acts and scenes.

½¾

Iconoclastic Translation

147

palto aspires to speak French, or at least a frenchified register of MC , buying into the belief that the language of the imperial centre is associated with an upgrading of the material. Seeing themselves as social and political marginals, Dammaro and Kaspalto, who are monolingual in MC , display their social aspiration by briefly adopting codes associated with those who represent the dominant culture. In other words, their codeswitching is an index of linguistic insecurity. The wielding of English and French as perceived languages of power suggests that the processes of identity-formation in postcolonial Mauritius are still dominated by the practices once ascribed to the colonial powers. The association, albeit ridiculed, between colonial languages and symbolic capital, is reinforced by the fact that politically powerful characters themselves speak in clichéd English phrases, especially in times of melodramatic crisis: Y A G O : Vot Mazeste! Abdike? L E R W A L I R : Wi, mo abdike. Power corrupts … Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Donn pouvoir lepep. Organiz eleksion.

(II.iii) I A G O : Your Majesty! Abdicate? K I N G L E A R : Yes, I abdicate. Power corrupts …. Absolute power

corrupts absolutely. Hand power over to the people. Organize elections. L E R O I L I R : Mo pa ankoler ditou. A Bondie, ayo si koumadir …

Prefer pa panse. P O L O N I O U S S : Bizin gard lespoir. Where there is a will there is a

way. (II.v) K I N G L E A R : I’m not angry at all. Oh God, if only …. Best not to

think. P O L O N I U S : You must keep your hopes up. Where there’s a will there’s a way.

The hackneyed English functions explicitly as cultural quotation where the form supersedes the content. Far from casting on Lir and Poloniouss an aura of the knowledgeable and powerful, however, their repeated use of clichés reveals instead a mental lethargy, an inability to express their

148

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

thoughts and feelings in more creative and expressive ways, and, consequently, the inability to work towards viable solutions. The use of clichés can be regarded as instances of a restricted code where Lir and Poloniouss refer to traditional phrases rather than draw upon their linguistic resources to verbalize individual responses befitting the specific situations they find themselves in. Despite their privileged position and their potential for establishing a model for the most elaborate speech, their code-switching to English, a H(igh) language, is not identified as a norm, but is revealed, rather, as a lack of confidence in their own voices, in ways not dissimilar to Dammarro’s and Kaspalto’s linguistic insecurity. The lapse into the master’s language when it becomes too taxing to formulate constructive solutions further highlights the parodic use of code-switching in the case of Dammarro and Kaspalto. Virahsawmy’s use of code-switching aims at dismantling institutionalized francophilia and anglophilia. Just as, on a macro-level, a theatre in M C has largely displaced a theatre in English and French, on a micro-level in Toufann code-switching has the potential to debunk the primacy of English and French as the languages of culture. Virahsawmy’s code-switching strategy reflects the successful and confident parcours of literature in MC from its negligible literary representation in works written in English and French (through code-switching) to code-switching to English and French in a literary work otherwise written entirely in MC . Moreover, while pidgins and creoles are often represented as the languages of relaxation and informality, and as having a cathartic function, here this role is allocated to English and French. Previously, the characters allocated speeches in MC in novels written in English and French are those who have had no formal education, or very often low-life types. Chantal Zabus refers to a similar situation in West African literature in English where pidgin is reserved for prostitutes, cityslickers, gangsters, and thugs: “Pidgin remains an ‘auxiliary’ language into which a character slides, slips, lapses, as in a fall from a higher register.”29 In Toufann, on the other hand, characters ‘fall’ from their own language, MC , here clearly the higher register, into English or French. Moreover, the characters who code-switch are in sharp contrast to socially 29

Chantal Zabus, The African Palimpsest: Indigenization of Language in the West African Europhone Novel (Cross / Cultures 4; Amsterdam & Atlanta G A : Rodopi, 1991, rev. ed. 2007): 76 (rev. ed. 83).

½¾

Iconoclastic Translation

149

well-adjusted, more prestigious protagonists of integrity such as Kalibann, who will not code-switch even in his most challenging moments. Virahsawmy’s Kalibann not only captures some of the eloquence already ascribed to him by Shakespeare but does so consistently in his own language. Code-switching clearly serves as a useful critical tool in the ‘othering’ of European languages within the literary and linguistic space of the play. Indeed, in a play written in a confident MC voice, carefully scattered snippets of English develop a Shakespearean flavour. Here is a further example of metaphoric code-switching when Aryel reassures Prospero that his orders have been carried out: P R O S P E R O : Aryel to’nn soupervaiz tou? To satchisfé? A R Y E L : Kapitenn, everything under control. When Prospero says so, it is done.

(I.ii). P R O S P E R O : Ariel, have you supervised everything? Are you satis-

fied? A R I E L : Captain, everything is under control. When Prospero says so, it is done.

Through this linguistic echo of Mark Antony’s words in Julius Caesar, a parallel is drawn between Aryel’s and Mark Antony’s development, from unassuming beginnings towards independence. Allusions to other Shakespearean texts are recurrent: D A M M A R R O : […] kifèr to’nn degizé? K A S P A L T O : Degizé! Ki to be rabase? My name is Yago.

(I.v) D A M M A R R O : […] Why are you dressed up like that, Kaspalto? K A S P A L T O : Dressed up! Bullshit, man! My name is Iago.

These examples of code-switching carefully establish, within the world of the play, the Shakespearean canon and the English language as exotic. This distancing strategy alleviates some of the anxiety surrounding the position of the Bard in a postcolonial context, in particular the controversial use of Shakespeare in the creation of a national literature and the

150

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

legitimization of a national language. By transforming Shakespeare into the exotic, Virahsawmy reverses the traffic of signification, overturning the strategy of containment which, Niranjana argues, colonial translation had produced. It also dispels the colonial and marginalizing associations of the exotic with a creole language and culture. Thus, code-switching in Toufann is not merely a register choice which sheds light on the characters, but is manipulated to baffle the myths and attitudes that the neo/ colonizer and the neo/colonized attach to their respective language as well as each other’s language. It is the values of the source culture and language that are subject to processes of defamiliarization, canon reformation, and ideological critique. By foregrounding the dynamic and relational characteristics of linguistic otherness, translation is used as an instrument for deconstructing cultural representations. The tensions highlighted by code-switching overflow, in Toufann, into the realm of the construction and deconstruction of the very concept of literariness. MC is not only the target language in a subversive rewriting of The Tempest but a space where the national language and English rewrite each other. Codeswitching in Toufann is thus of a multi-edged parodic nature. Virahsawmy exposes the idea of ‘superior’ or ‘inferior’ languages as imperial myths and defies, among other things, an imperialist monolingualism. The parodic use of language-switching also serves to undermine the assumption that in a postcolonial situation it is the colonial culture that imposes its conception of literariness. The carefully wrought framework within which code-switching is used is Virahsawmy’s own act of identity as a writer in actively reinforcing the autonomous literary status of MC . By rethinking Shakespeare in MC , Virahsawmy challenges persisting colonial hierarchies while simultaneously exploiting, in celebratory fashion, the potential of the linguistic, cultural, and biological hybridity already generated by colonial encounters and furthered by the process of translation. Toufann, in theme but especially in form as demonstrated through an analysis of code-switching, is part of Virahsawmy’s broader scheme of linguistic legitimization in which he exploits, through the medium of translation/adaptation, the potential of a dominant language to enable rather than disable a marginal language. Toufann is the radical transformation, if not the playful dismembering, of Shakespeare, by the scorned language of Caliban.

½¾

Iconoclastic Translation

151

Borrowings The title of Virahsawmy’s play, Toufann, is a Bhojpuri word for ‘cyclone’. As opposed to “siklonn,” an established MC lexical item used by all speakers, both urban and rural, the word “toufann” is restricted to rural areas where its usage is even narrower, since the use of Bhojpuri is rapidly decreasing under the growing influence of MC (see Chapter 1). Despite L P T ’s commitment to include, in their dictionary, words of Bhojpuri origin which are strongly rooted in MC as well as those terms which are more characteristically part of the rural Indo-Mauritian ethnic group’s repertoire, the word “toufann” does not figure there. “Toufann,” therefore, marks a departure from the norm. Tymoczko highlights proper names, which often not only have lexical meaning but function as sociolinguistic signs, as “central textual elements to be translated.”30 Indeed, naming practices are pivotal to cultural formations. Given that part of the Western imperialist project was to rename the places and people conquered, in a postcolonial context in particular, naming strategies can be reclaimed as assertions of identity and self-determination. Virahsawmy’s choice of title encourages the linguistic and sociocultural complicity of a Mauritian audience and brings to the Shakespearean canon postcolonial elements alien to it. It does not, however, signify an attempt to return to ancestral roots in India but, rather, an exploration of the cultural and sociolinguistic routes by which present-day Mauritius can be explained. Moreover, to focus on a unique and direct line of enquiry into the more obvious etymological roots of the word is too narrow an agenda. As suggested by Françoise Lionnet, “Toufann” is also itself MC from “Tou fané” (all falls apart),31 which sustains the subversive dismembering of the source text and provides thematic support, since the newly established neocolonial order is about to be toppled at the end of Virahsawmy’s play. This interpretation of the title, ‘all falls apart’, also opens up links with the classic postcolonial African novel, Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart. Furthermore, there is a close parallel to the Kiswahili word for tempest, ‘tufani’, also the title of S.S. Mushi’s translation of the Shakespearean play. “Toufann” is therefore a dense signifier, an example of the interlingual polysemy which testifies to the plural and hybrid rhizomes of MC . 30

Tymoczko, Translation in a Postcolonial Context, 8. Françoise Lionnet, “Creole Vernacular Theatre: Transcolonial Translations in Mauritius,” Modern Language Notes 118.4 (2003): 914. 31

152

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

The presence of both lexical options, “siklonn” and “toufann,” in the play does not imply synonymy. In fact, where choice is involved between two terms which both refer to the same thing, stylistic implications are particularly obvious. The stylistic variation between the two seemingly equivalent words encodes specific and separate meanings. Through the choice of the marked alternative, Virahsawmy immediately distances and defamiliarizes the audience/readers from the recurrent natural phenomenon “siklonn.” The very title, reinforced by the constant claim that Prospero makes: “moi ki kontrol Toufann” (I am the one who controls Toufann) and, further, “mo Toufann” (my Toufann) (I.ii), emphasizes an unnatural phenomenon. Virahsawmy further exploits this semantic difference by grounding the two terms in systematically different contexts. Prospero describes to Kordelia the day when they were exiled, referring to past cyclones as “siklonn” but highlighting the one he created as “toufann”. P R O S P E R O : Bannla ti profit enn siklonn pou tortir moi. Zordi mo’nn

fabrik enn Toufann pou pini zot. (I.iii) P R O S P E R O : They took advantage of a storm to torture me. Today

I’ve created a Toufann to punish them.

Ferdinan is later reprimanded for not using the correct term: F E R D J I N A N : Nou bato finn tass dan siklonn P R O S P E R O : Toufann! F E R D J I N A N : Ki ou djir? P R O S P E R O : Pa siklonn, Toufann.

(I.iv) F E R D I N A N D : Our boat is stuck in a cyclone P R O S P E R O : Toufann! F E R D I N A N D : What did you say? P R O S P E R O : Not cyclone, Toufann.

In this case, the immediate impact of this localization (“Toufann!”) interrupts the progression of the dialogue and disturbs cohesion, drawing the reader’s/audience’s attention to the word “toufann.”

½¾

Iconoclastic Translation

153

Moreover, “toufann” becomes a leitmotif which is extended into several metaphors. Aryel describes the distressed condition of the captives thus: A R Y E L : Prenss ferdjinan pé manz so zong dan so kaso. So papa, li

dan enn pli gran Toufann. Li refiz manze, li refiz bwar…larm dan lizié… fèr sagren Kapitenn. (I.vii) A R I E L : Prince Ferdjinan is biting his nails in prison. And his father is

in an even worse Toufann. He won’t eat, he won’t drink… his eyes are full of tears… it’s sad, Captain.

“Toufann” refers to a figurative storm, to Lir’s feverish mental state. P R O S P E R O : Zot kouma sevret lor ross, kouma…kouma… K O R D E L I A : Djimounn dan Toufann?

PROSPERO: Samem. Djimounn dan mo Toufann. Zot tou ebeté, abriti, lespri paralizé… konfizion pé fer gamat dan zot latet. (I.vii) P R O S P E R O : They are like fish out of water, like … C O R D E L I A : Like people in a Toufann? P R O S P E R O : Exactly! People caught in my Toufann. Confused, be-

wildered … mentally paralyzed.

In the above example, a parallel is established between the existing simile “n(sevret) pp(lor) n(ros)” and a newly coined one, “n(djimounn) pp(dan) n(toufann)”32 inviting the reader to search for connections of significance between the similes. “Djimounn dan toufann” builds on the sense of distress and helplessness suggested by the previous metaphor. As the other characters, including his enemies such as Yago, start to express and understand their experiences in terms of the new word without having prior knowledge of it, “toufann” seems to have created a new reality. The repetitive use of the title (which appears nineteen times) suggests Prospero’s subliminal and controlling influence over all the other characters. The incantational power of “Toufann,” which can be seen as 32

‘n’ stands for noun and ‘pp’ for preposition.

154

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

an instance of magic verbal ritual, matches the invocational power of language in the source text.33 It thereby reinforces the sense of a coherent fictional world. As Virahsawmy exploits a marginal word to several dramatic ends, it becomes increasingly clear that, although MC has a restricted vocabulary in comparison to more established literary languages such as English and French, the resources for lexical expansion are abundant.

Syntax A striking formal point about Toufann is Virahsawmy’s manipulation of structural resources, which often remain untapped in face-to-face interaction, as he exploits the possibilities of the written medium to create various dramatic effects. Secondly, the most marked, complex, and consistent grammatical structures are concentrated in Prospero’s idiolect, setting the latter against other idiolects as a potential model for a written M C acrolect. Prospero’s distinctive idiolect involves no code-switching. Whereas, in Li, suspense and tension were created mainly by movements on stage and by the absence/presence of the protagonist, in Toufann it is often through grammar that suspense is created and dramatic revelations made. In Act I.ii, Prospero defers mention of his brother’s name until after a lengthy and vivid description, making use of a marked element of cataphoric (forward) reference which, again, strongly associates the text with the written medium:34 P R O S P E R O : Dousma-dousma mo ti larg tou mo responsabilite ar mo

premie minis, mo prop frer. Enn dimoun korek, debrouyar, intelizan ... tro intelizan. Gran malin la, dousma-dousma ti koumans gagn gou pouvoir absoli. San ki mo realize li bayant mo bann minis enn par enn, met so zom partou, dan lapolis, dan larme, dan lakour ... partou kot ou pase nek so dimoun ... dousma-dousma li pran tou pouvoir ... pa koz separasion pouvoir! Sa bebet la pa koir ladan. K O R D E L I A : Pa! Ki finn arive lerla? P R O S P E R O : Atann gate! To tro prese .... Sa serpan la! Ki mo pa ti

finn fer pou li. Li ti enn inkoni, enn nanye ditou. Mo gran erer se plas

33

This is partly engendered by the repetition of keywords such as ‘strange’, ‘monster’, ‘spririt’. 34 In speech, anaphora is a more common example of cohesion, especially in terms of intersentential reference.

½¾

Iconoclastic Translation

155

mo konfians dan li. Yago – samem so non – profit mo retret tanporer, koumans fer lalians ar bann ennmi tradisionel nou pei. (I.ii) P R O S P E R O : Gradually, I surrendered all my responsibilities to my

prime minister, my own brother. An honest man, resourceful, intelligent … too intelligent. The sly man, little by little he began to develop a taste for absolute power. Without my realizing it, he gets rid of my ministers one by one, putting in his men everywhere, police, army, the law… everywhere you go, nothing but his men… bit by bit he takes all the power… do not even raise the subject of the democratic separation of the executive from the legislative! That beast does not believe in it. C O R D E L I A : Come on, Dad! What happened then? P R O S P E R O : Wait, darling! Don’t rush me! That snake! What did I

not do for him. He was an unknown, a complete nobody. My biggest mistake was to place my trust in him. Iago – that’s his name – exploits my temporary retreat from politics, starts to negotiate a pact with our country’s oldest enemies.

We are given significant and detailed insight into Yago well before his name is identified, “Yago – samem so non – profit mo retret tanporèr.” This deferral, supported by punctuation and syntax through “samem,” in apposition to Yago (that’s his very name), creates an emphatic construction which builds up towards a dramatic revelation. Cataphoric reference, more common between clauses than between sentences, unlike anaphora (backward reference), is the more unusual in this situation. By delaying more precise information over several sentences, in this example, cataphoric reference creates suspense. It also provides a useful way for the author to stress that Prospero’s brother is not Antonio but, rather, a character from a different Shakespearean text (Othello). Although accidents of speech, such as hesitations, false starts, and repetition, are recurrent in Toufann, their nature and function are different from those of disfluency features in spontaneous forms of communication, where they occur as a result of pressures on language producers. Since we know that dramatic language has been written prior to being spoken, these instances of disfluency are automatically highlighted. In Prospero’s description of his arrival on the island, “Enn tchi lil inabité – anfen preské” (A small uninhabited island – well, almost), what looks like an after-

156

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

thought characteristic of speech is, rather, a product designed to look like a process. Virahsawmy uses this structure to point out Prospero’s nonchalant attitude towards his colonizing role at the expense of barely visible natives. Although the language of the play is certainly characterized by a significant amount of asyndetic coordination and meaningful relationships between sentences are implied by their juxtaposition, examples of syntactic complexity abound, particularly in Prospero’s language. As in the source text, Prospero’s history is revealed in concentrated manner. While, in speech, extra prominence on certain elements can be made simply by stress and tone of voice, in Toufann Virahsawmy exploits syntactic constructions to that end: (Pandan enn semenn, kikfwa pliss), [baloté, sakouyé], [nou traverss siklonn, soley djifé] [ziska ki nou zwenn sa lil la] (I.ii) (For a week, maybe more), [reeled, shaken], [we cross cyclones, scorching sun] [until we reach this island]

The main clause (italicized) is deliberately deferred while the initial adverbial and adjectival phrases are topicalized. Moreover, new information is placed in a marked frontal position, emphasizing the length of time during which Prospero and his daughter endured the difficult conditions of the stormy seas. The participial adjectives “baloté” and “sakouyé,” foregrounded through their preposed position in relation to the noun/subject, also highlight the vulnerability of Prospero and his daughter. A possibility of the written medium, the syntax effectively points up the dramatic conditions preceding the exiled characters’ arrival onto the island. In the following extract, hypotactic constructions prevail: P R O S P E R O : Tchi ena enn kabann kot Bangoya ek so batar tchi pé

viv. K O R D E L I A : Batar? P R O S P E R O : Samem. Kalibann. Bangoya tchi enn negress esklav. So propriyetèr tchi enn pirat ki tchi finn fèr li ansent é lerla tchi vinn abandonn li lor nou lil.

(I.ii))

½¾

Iconoclastic Translation

157

P R O S P E R O : There was a hut where Bangoya and her bastard lived. C O R D E L I A : Bastard? P R O S P E R O : That’s him. Kalibann. Bangoya was a black slave. Her owner was a pirate who had got her pregnant and then abandoned her on our island.

Prospero’s sentence “So proprietèr tchi enn pirat ki tchi finn fèr li ansent é lerla tchi vinn abandonn li lor nou lil” is an example of complex coordination where the conjoins are combinations of units rather than single units. Such coordination, according to Greenbaum and Quirk, usually requires and reinforces a strong parallelism between the conjoins and for this reason tends to be associated with a premeditated written style rather than with informal conversation.35 The grammatical structure of this sentence also reveals colonial and patriarchal power structures. In the previous sentence, the only agentive position in which Bangoya, Kalibann’s mother, is placed is when she is described as “negress esklav.” She is then, immediately, referred to as the possession of a pirate. While “ansent” is usually used as a stative verb, here the verb phrase “tchi finn fèr li ansent”, with the pirate as agentive and “fèr” as a dynamic causative verb, is suggestive of coercion and portrays Bangoya as a victim on whom impregnation, just as easily as abandonment, is enforced. Moreover, the parallelism between the two coordinated acts of ‘impregnating’ and ‘abandoning’ has the stylistic effect of reinforcing the agentive’s power over the object. Although, lexically, Virahsawmy is careful not to use the word ‘rape’, the connotations of asymmetrical colonial racial and sexual power relations are clearly present in the grammatical structures employed. In the transition from speech to writing, conjunctions play a crucial role, as they replace the linking role of intonation. Hazaël–Massieux underlines the importance of studying the rules according to which connectors function in literary texts and their varied positions in the sentence.36 In relation to MC , Baker claims that the three forms “ar,” “ek,”

35

Sidney Greenbaum & Randolph Quirk, A Student’s Grammar of the English Language (London: Longman, 1990): 278. 36 Marie–Christine Hazaël–Massieux, “Les ‘mots-outils’ dans les écrits en créole des Petites Antilles: Proposition de classement et d’analyse,” in Matériaux pour l’étude des classes grammaticaux dans les langues créoles, 91–92.

158

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

“avek” occur in speech as prepositions and/or conjunctions.37 He identifies ‘ek’ as an urban innovation and suggests that there may be significant regional variation in Mauritius with regard to the use of these competing prepositions. In Toufann, however, “avek” is not used at all. Virahsawmy’s “near perfect division”38 of usage between “ar” as the preposition (with) and “ek” as the conjunction (and) can be illustrated by the following examples. In “koumanns fer lalianss ar bann enemi” (create alliances with the enemies), “ar” functions as the preposition ‘with’. By contrast, ‘ek’ in “li met enpé manzé ek lenz pou nou” (he put some food and clothes for us) clearly functions as a coordinating conjunction. Virahsawmy already pointed out that his writing experience had directed him towards making systematic use of “ek.”39 From the following examples taken from Prospero’s idiolect, it can be further deduced that whereas “ek” coordinates noun phrases, “é” is used to coordinate adjectival phrases, as in “mo tchi enn lerwa pouisan é respekté” (I was a powerful and respected king), as well as clauses, as is the case in this example: “So proprietèr tchi enn pirat ki tchi finn fèr li ansent é lerla tchi vinn abandonn li lor nou lil” (Her owner was a pirate who had got her pregnant and then abandoned her on our island) (I.ii). This systematic differentiation among “é,” “ar,” and “ek” remains to be tested in further texts. Since an acrolectal form is associated with Prospero in Toufann, his consistent use of prepositions and conjunctions can be established as a model, and the care taken by Virahsawmy to establish a significant degree of consistency can be seen as an act of grammatical codification.

Conclusion Rewriting Shakespeare in many a postcolonial context becomes an almost irresistible endeavour to redress the asymmetry of relations between languages, cultures, and ultimately peoples. In Virahsawmy’s case, the careful wielding of languages becomes itself a political and cultural site of 37

Philip Baker, “On the Development of Certain Prepositional Forms in Mauritian and Other French Creoles,” 55–56. 38 Adone, “Creolization and Language Change in Mauritian Creole,” 57. 39 Virahsawmy, “La Poésie Mauricienne d’expression créole (C M ) et la ‘Culture de la langue’,” in Formes-Sens / Identites, ed. Daniel Baggioni & Carpanin Marimoutou (Université de La Réunion, 1989): 77–104.

½¾

Iconoclastic Translation

159

contestation, deconstructing colonial perceptions of linguistic and cultural otherness and positing alternative views of the colonial discourse on language. The nature of Virahsawmy’s rewriting and his use of code-switching in Toufann suggest that he sustains admiration for Shakespeare while simultaneously demonstrating that bardolatry does not command his intellectual respect. His attempts at making MC the meeting-point of world cultural currents certainly promotes the prestige of the target language and extends its stylistic range through lexical and syntactic elaboration. In Toufann, Virahsawmy, by playing on the phenomenon of language contact, contributes to establishing the semantic structures of the vocabulary. Not only are regional and/or ethnic lexical variants brought to attention through their use in privileged places but, through their insertion in specific semantic fields, they acquire new associations. In Bakhtin’s words, “Every word tastes of the context and contexts in which it has lived its socially charged life.”40 Literature, indeed, expands the contexts of word-use. The previous analysis of the semantic exploitation of “toufann” has shown how the text creates its own references through the use of lexical items and references which connect with the reader’s experience outside the text. Virahsawmy undertakes an important work of lexical elaboration by illustrating how several of the languages in use in Mauritius have the potential to contribute significantly to the development of the vocabulary.41 Representing the intellectual in a play which at once relates to and subverts the Shakespearean canon in intricate ways, Prospero’s idiolect is accordingly sophisticated. Generally, his speech often reflects more complex and coherent programming than would be possible in the processing of the same information in the oral medium. The conjoining of verb phrases, adjective phrases or noun phrases, the chaining of prepositional phrases, and the embedding of whole clauses allow dense information to be packed into a sentence. This chapter has explored the creative assimilation of The Tempest into MC through a process of irreverent rewriting. The next chapter explores

40

Mikhail Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, ed. Michael Holquist, tr. Caryl Emerson & Michael Holquist (Austin: U of Texas P, 1981): 293. 41 Had the two dictionaries been published after the performance of the play, it would have been interesting to see if either would have included ‘toufann’ as a lexical entry.

160

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

the “creative iconoclasm” that results from a different type of engagement with Shakespeare in Virahsawmy’s translations of Hamlet and Much Ado about Nothing. ½¾

5

Identity-Forming Translations Hamlet and Much Ado about Nothing

I Prins Hamlet: Adding the Genre of Revenge Tragedy to the Literary Corpus in MC

O

the general historical, cultural, and linguistic aspects which make of the translation of Shakespearean plays into MC a particularly challenging and necessarily innovative task, key elements of the themes and forms of Hamlet1 deserve some attention. The wordiest and one of the most acclaimed dramatic work in the Shakespearean canon, Hamlet raises an abundance of fundamental questions about the meaning of life, suicide, and incest unprecedented in English tragedy.2 By translating Hamlet, a play that ranks high in the Shakespearean canon, Virahsawmy invokes the authority of the text, already performing in relation to his main endeavour an act of status planning. Moreover, by the time Shakespeare wrote Hamlet, he had also developed a keen awareness of words and the problems of language as these are manifested in the metalinguistic focus of the play. Doubling, a predominant characteristic of the language of the play, a deliberate formal syntax, and copious lexis, as well as a range of rhetorical figures all contribute further to the formal tautness of exchanges. Hamlet also brings 1

THER THAN

Edition used: Hamlet, in The Oxford Shakespeare: The Complete Works, ed. Stanley Wells & Gary Taylor (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994): 653–90. 2 George R. Hibbard, The Making of Shakespeare’s Dramatic Poetry (Toronto: Toronto U P , 1981): 14.

162

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

together a multitude of styles and constantly shifting registers, demonstrating the flexibility and the range of Shakespeare’s verse. This brief overview contextualizes Virahsawmy’s description of Prins Hamlet as the most difficult of his translating experiences.3 It is, however, those very difficulties encountered in finding adequate renderings for specific modes of social interaction and linguistic patterns that make the analysis of this translation potentially revealing in relation to my main hypothesis. Indeed, linguistic and cultural gaps could potentially lead to an outburst of creative energy, encouraging the translator to dig into and extend the linguistic resources of MC . Since the purpose of my exploration into Virahsawmy’s translations is to see how the enrichment of the literary system leads to linguistic enrichment, the analysis of Virahsawmy’s translation is accordingly centred on the powerful and disturbing language that characterizes this tragedy. The focus is on lexis and syntax, contrasts in registers and idiolects, and the metalinguistic focus retained in the target text.

Translation Strategy In terms of general translation strategy, Virahsawmy does not carry out a mechanical transfer of translation units but feels free to cut and add to the number of words in the source text. He juxtaposes different translation techniques, ranging from hyperliteralism – where he transliterates as a gloss, at times choosing to retain Shakespeare’s exact imagery and vocabulary – to free adaptation, or even non-translation. In relation to formal aspects, there are again compromises. Since MC prosody is different from English prosody, English being a stress-timed language and MC a syllable-timed language, the rendering of a scrupulous iambic pentameter is not an option. Virahsawmy is, however, meticulous in retaining ten syllables per line in blank verse with an average of two to three stressed syllables. The question of choice between replicating the play in archaic language or modernizing it does not apply in this case, since M C is a relatively new language. Virahsawmy’s translation, therefore, modernizes rather than historicizes the translation, although, as will be demonstrated, there are traces of attempts at creating a pseudo-archaic effect. In both Prins Hamlet and Enn ta Senn dan Vid, Virahsawmy occasionally undertranslates. These intermittent instances of undertranslation may open both 3

http://pages.intnet.mu/develog/tradiksion

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

163

Virahsawmy’s translation work and the target language itself to criticisms of linguistic deficiency along the lines of those expressed by Prosper, for example. Instances of undertranslation are, however, atypical in both texts and overridden by the stylistic extension engendered in MC by the creative effort to match the linguistic expressiveness and ingenuity of the source text. Moreover, the fact that all the stage directions and the cast lists are in MC adds to the artistic unity of the target texts and further shapes the integrity of the target language.

Registers and Idiolects Claudius’s Public and Private Registers The translation of Hamlet, where nearly every character has his/her own idiom, encourages the elaboration and illustration of distinct idiolects in MC . Claudius speaks in at least two distinct voices, the public and the private. His opening statement, where he appears to speak but avoids genuine communication, is an example of devious rhetoric which seeks to make acceptable and wise an action that is highly contentious. I consider some of the lexical and grammatical strategies used by Virahsawmy to replicate the contorted delivery and oxymorons for which this passage is well known. K L O D I U S : Mem si souvenir lamor nou Gran Frer Ankor bien-bien fre dan memoir nou tou, Mem nou ti bizin gard leker andey, Met pavyon anbern, montre figir tris Nou finn reysi gard enn bon lekilib Ant larezon ek santiman normal: Plor so lamor san bliye nou devoir. Akoz samem nou belser yer, zordi Nou larenn, partner egal dan pouvoir, Finn vinn – koumadir lazoi dan tristes, Sourir ki finn may dan tanay imid,

Maryaz karrmadi, lanterman vinndou Zouisans kontrole marye ar tristes – Nou madam. (I.ii)

164

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

C L A U D I U S : Though yet of Hamlet our dear brother’s death

The memory be green, and that it us befitted To bear our hearts in grief, and our whole kingdom To be contracted in one brow of woe, Yet so far hath discretion fought with nature That we with wisest sorrow think on him Together with remembrance of ourselves. Therefore our sometime sister, now our queen, Th’ imperial jointress to this warlike state, Have we, as ‘twere with a defeated joy, With an auspicious, and a dropping eye, With mirth in funeral, and with dirge in marriage, In equal scale weighing delight and dole, Taken to wife (I.ii.1–14)

The translation of Claudius’s convoluted language demonstrates in M C syntactic and lexical manipulation and creativity. A periphrastic sentence opening with two coordinated and protracted subordinate clauses, “Mem si souvenir lamor nou Gran Frer / Ankor bien-bien fre dan memoir nou tou” and “Mem nou ti bizin gard leker andey / Met pavyon anbern, montre figir tris,” serves to delay and highlight the main clause, “Nou finn reysi gard enn bon lekilib” (We have been successful in retaining a right balance), thereby building up Claudius’s success in keeping a balance between his duty as both brother and statesman. In the second sentence, the adverbial phrase “zordi nou larenn, partner egal dan pouvoir” (today our queen, equal partner in power) and the series of oxymoronic metaphors which separate the subject “belser” (sister-in-law) from the complement “madam” (wife) serve to delay the acknowledgement of the incestuous marriage. The translator necessarily explodes the norms of MC syntax to help to pass off as harmonious what is shocking. Virahsawmy’s syntactic structure “nou belser […] finn vinn […] nou madam” (our sister-in-law has become our wife) further allows Claudius to present the marriage as a fait accompli, taking the responsibility away from himself through the absence of the first-person pronoun as subject and agent. A faithful rendition of “our sometime sister, now our queen” (“nou belser yer, zordi / nou larenn”) engenders an example of linguistic extension through a loan transfer which in turn generates a conversion in the target language – “yer” is used as adjective rather than adverb, as a contrast to “zordi,”

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

165

which, through its position in the sentence, still functions as adverb. Incidentally, Virahsawmy’s repeated use of conversion in this translation is fitting, since the conversion of lexical items from one part of speech to another is a particularly dynamic and innovative aspect of Shakespeare’s own use of language. Virahsawmy employs several strategies to replicate the oxymorons of the source text. “Defeated joy” is translated as “lazoi dan tristess” (joy in sadness), where two antonyms are syntactically connected following the pattern of “mirth in funeral.” “An auspicious, and a dropping eye” is rendered as “sourir ki finn may dan tanay imid,” a new metaphor using the contrasting images of smile (“sourir”) and tears (“tanay imid”). He translates other oxymoronic metaphors through hybrid compounds. In “Maryaz karrmadi” (“With mirth in funeral”), the Tamil noun for ‘funeral’ is used as an adjective with “maryaz.” “Lanterman vinndou” (with dirge in marriage) follows a similar pattern, with the Tamil noun for ‘wedding’ functioning as adjective qualifying the MC noun “lanterman.” Both collocations express the semantic density and oxymoronic features of the source text. In Virahsawmy’s translation, the oxymoronic aspect is further highlighted through the juxtaposition of words from disparate languages. “In equal scale weighing delight and dole” is rendered by a new metaphor, “Zouisans kontrole marye ar tristes” (controlled delight married to sadness). In addition to the semantic contrast between “zouisans” (delight) and “tristes” (sadness), there are further contrasts between “zouisans” and “kontrole,” and between “marie” and “tristes.” Convincing neologisms are provided which retain the strangeness and remoteness of Claudius’s lexis in MC . Translating Claudius’s private register leads to further innovations in MC : C L A U D I U S : My soul is full of discord and dismay

(IV.i.40) K L O D I U S : Traka fer maja, lavi vinn lasid

(IV.i1)

In the source text, Claudius’s distress is represented through doubling – more specifically, in the form of a hendiadys where the two nouns “discord” and “dismay” are connected by “and,” which creates intensification. In the target text, Virahsawmy replicates the doubling “discord and dis-

166

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

may” through two carefully balanced metaphors of five syllables each sharing the same syntactic structure, thus echoing the syllabic and phonological symmetry within Shakespeare’s doubling. The two metaphors which are semantically equivalent are mutually reinforced by being lined up, providing redundancy, excess, mnemonic support, and the feel of oral language. There is a sharp semantic contrast between “traka” (worry) and “fer maja” (is having a ball) in the first one, and between the paronyms “lavi” (life) and “lasid” (acid) in the second. The use of two metaphors in the target text is possibly the result of the constraints of the ten syllables imposed by the pentameter, in which case, taking into account the formal constraints of the source text, leads to creativity in the target language. If the replacement of one metaphor by two illustrates an attempt to render the wider duplicative language of Hamlet and the general rhetoric of copiousness characteristic of Elizabethan drama, then it is a particularly productive endeavour at this point in the history of literature in MC . By illustrating and validating semantic equivalents, Virahsawmy provides a richness of vocabulary which is considered the hallmark of literary language, performing in relation to his chosen medium an “element of showing off.” Many of the lexical and syntactic patterns used in this translation, as illustrated earlier, cannot be associated with contemporary spoken MC . Virahsawmy’s translation, taking into account theatre as both literary text (product) and drama (process), retains a certain amount of speakability. He translates the sharpness of dramatic speech while retaining sensorial aspects through redundancies, repetitions, metrical structure, and verse schemes to which an audience would be sensitive and which enhance comprehension. The following is an example where prosody is manipulated to dramatic effect in Claudius’s soliloquy: C L A U D I U S : O, ’tis too true!

How smart a lash that speech doth give my conscience! The harlot’s cheek, beautied with plastering art, Is not more ugly to the thing that helps it Than is my deed to my most painted word: O heavy burthen! (III.i.52–56) K L O D I U S : Ayo! Vré! Sa parol la fouet mo move konsians!

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

167

Figir ipokrit deryer makiyaz Ki kasiet malang, enn nanye ditou Kan fer li koste ar senn kolorye Ki maske mo fot. Konsians koupab lour. (III.i)

The repetition of the plosive /k/ eleven times reinforces the sense of guiltridden agitation already expressed by some of the metaphors. The exploitation of prosody, here through alliteration, in other instances through assonance and rhyme, ensures that disparate words gain a new degree of connectivity as attention is drawn to their shared sounds.

Hamlet’s Idiolect The metalinguistic hold of the play, which, according to Benjamin Evans, is what separates this revenge tragedy from all other great tragedies,4 is often generated or highlighted by Hamlet’s own acute philologist’s sensitivity and criticism of language. “how prodigal the soul / Lends the tongue vows” (I.iii.116–17) is translated as “Lerla – lalang pena lezo – parol / Anler deklar monper,” where Virahsawmy uses two proverbs, one which he previously coined (“lalang pena lezo,” the boneless tongue) and is now in wide currency, and a new one (“parol anler deklar monper,” shallow words claim sanctity), rendered particularly memorable through four disyllabic words with assonance between the second and last word. A relatively faithful translation of “For murder, though it have no tongue, will speak / With most miraculous organ” (II.ii.595–96) engenders a further metaphor in MC : “Mem si mert peyna / Lalang, mirak lar konn fer li koze” (Even if murder has no tongue / The miracle of art will prompt it to speak), reinforcing a metalinguistic register. The translation echoes the sonorities of the source “murder, most, miraculous” through the alliteration of “mem,” “mert,” “mirak.” The love of word and imagery, sound and rhythm that permeates Shakespeare’s work reverberates in Virahsawmy’s translation. Virahsawmy responds to Hamlet’s prominent use of wordplay in the form of unusual figures and ambivalence through a variety of translation strategies. Hamlet’s reference to Claudius and Gertrude as “my uncle– 4

Benjamin Evans, The Language of Shakespeare’s Plays (London: Methuen,

1964): 91.

168

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

father and aunt–mother” (II.ii.377) is an example of Shakespeare’s bold experimentation with compounds. In this case, the substantival compounds, where two nouns are joined in such a way that one defines the other, expresses with conciseness Hamlet’s disturbing charge of incest. Remaining close to the source text in his translation again encourages forms of linguistic innovativeness in the target language. In translating Hamlet’s irony, Virahsawmy demonstrates the arresting collocations of properties that usually clash in M C . The literal translation to ‘mo tonton– papa ek mo tantinn–mama’ illustrates the encapsulation of whole clauses through compounds in M C and also the functioning of the nouns “papa” and “mama” as adjectives. A literal translation rather than explanatory recreations in this instance is not only an appropriate way of evoking the theatrical energy of the source form but the compounds introduce extra ambiguity into the syntactic and semantic structures of MC . The ambivalence of the word “mama” is further raised in the target text, as “mother” is in the source text, when Hamlet later calls Claudius “mama” in the sense of there being no division between him and Gertrude, albeit in dissimilar ways to himself and his mother. The word “mama” is here used as a metaphor which succinctly and further expresses the sharp undertones of Hamlet’s disgust and accusations. The metaphoric force of the word is sharpened by the gap between the proposition expressed and the meaning intended. By retaining the disturbing violence of the Shakespearean image in one word instead of providing an expanded phrase or sentence for the sake of comprehension, this translation demonstrates new ways in which metaphoric density can be created in MC . Fresh metaphors in MC also compel the reader/audience to look at everyday objects and experiences from a different perspective. As in the source text, Virahsawmy associates the word “mama” with derogatory verbs in Hamlet’s words: “Finn touy mo papa, malang mo mama” (That have a father kill’d, a mother stain’d) (IV.iv.48). “Malang” (dirty), which usually functions as an adjective and noun, is here foregrounded in its unusual function as a transitive verb. “Whor’d my mother” (V.ii.65) is translated to “polie mo mama,” where the new metaphoric use of the verb “polie” is marked. Through the grouping of disturbing images into clusters, the negative associative and connotative force surrounding the word “mama” is strengthened, reproducing the emotional intensity generated in the source text. The new metaphors are forceful, insightful, and appropriate in giving new meaning to experiences. Because the meta-

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

169

phoric uses of the word “mama” mask the experience of maternal love, projecting instead sordid and negative connotations, it gives the word new meaning. Moreover, responding to the challenging task of exposing the self-referentiality of Hamlet’s language, where words and concepts are made to connect with other words and concepts, encourages the creation of highly cohesive text in MC . I look next at the impact of translating some of the most poignant and innovative examples of Shakespeare’s poetic imagination. Hamlet’s self-description of being close to madness without being mad – “I am but mad north-north-west” (II.ii.380) – is translated as “Mo katorz finn vinnset-edmi, pa vintnef, pa vintwit” (My fourteen has turned twenty-seven and a half, not twenty-nine, not twenty-eight). In this case, Virahsawmy extends a commonly used metaphor involving numbers: “mo katorz finn vintwit” (my fourteen has turned twenty-eight), which refers to madness, thereby manipulating existing resources of MC to match Shakespeare’s ingenious innovations. “I would have such a fellow whipt for o’erdoing Termagant, it out-Herods Herod” is rendered by “Akter-tapazer ki fer rote vinn bonbardman!” (Ear-splitting actor who turns a burp into a bomb). The reference to the noisy and violent roles of Termagant and Herod is succinctly replaced by the compound “akter-tapazer” and a metaphor on noisiness replaces Shakespeare’s own bold coinage “out-Herods Herod.” Both the compound and the metaphor stand out as novel, intentionally strange, and challenging in the target text. In exploiting and extending the resources of MC to overcome both cultural and linguistic untranslatability, Virahsawmy creates a register with at least something of the experimental quality of Shakespeare’s language. One of Hamlet’s most widely discussed puns, “A little more than kin, and less than kind” (I.ii.65), is seen as a challenge to the translator, in whose language there are no two such words for relatedness as “kin” and “kind.” It is translated ingeniously as “inpe plis fami, inpe moins ami.” In addition to the close syntactic correspondence between the target and source languages, the translation also generates prosodic echoes of the source text. The phonological closeness between “kin” and “kind,” which only accentuates the semantic contrast between the two clauses, is rendered through the assonance between “fami” (family) and “ami” (friend). Further prosodic patterns draw attention to this utterance. The use of “fami”/“ami” creates an internal rhyme. Moreover, whereas most of the translated lines in MC contain two or three stresses, here there are four:

170

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

“Inpe plis fami, inpe moins ami.” The correspondence between rhyme and stress patterns further enhances the mnemonic aspect of this sentence. Virahsawmy takes into account the sensorial aspects of the language of drama through metrical structure and verse schemes, illustrating the sharpness of dramatic M C speech in which the perception of rhythm and verse enhances comprehension. Virahsawmy aims to at once do justice to the language he translates from and to serve the target language. In doing so, he attempts a translation that values experimentation, matching the ambivalence and expressive stresses of the original by producing its own, as well as echoing some of the syntactic and prosodic patterns of the original. The M C wordplay suggests the protagonist’s cynicism and despair and his use of puns is put to dramatic effect by functioning as an emotional outlet for his frustration in coping with the immorality around him. The translation of wordplay as used by noble protagonists at moments of great seriousness further dissociates MC from a restricted connection with bawdy and low comedy and illustrates its potential to create wordplay for the purposes of dramatic tension. Hamlet, who speaks the most poetic language, uses a fair number of Bhojpuri words. “Douniya anbalao” (The time is out of joint) is a hybrid term combining a Bhojpuri/Hindi word “douniya” and an MC word “anbalao” (upside down). This serves to illustrate, as part of a high register, the bridges between the two vernaculars of Mauritius. Note again the ease with which Bhojpuri words are incorporated into MC constructions in Ophelia’s idiolect: “Lamour–foser–nimakarram–egois” (love–treacherous–dishonest–selfish) where “nimakarram” is a Bhojpuri/Hindi lexical item. This long compound replaces the thoughts of ingratitude and sorrow evoked by the different flowers enumerated in the source text, the connotations of which would be lost in a literal translation into MC .5 Virah5

There’s rosemary, that’s for remembrance; pray, love, remember: and there is pansies. That’s for Thoughts […] There’s fennel for you, and columbines: there’s rue for you; and here’s some for me: we may call it herb-grace o’ Sundays: O you must wear your rue with a difference. There’s a daisy: I would give you some violets, but they withered all when my father died: they say he made a good end (IV.v.175–84).

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

171

sawmy’s coining of hybrid terms is particularly fitting in relation to the playwright he translates from. Whereas other Elizabethan writers often created innovations from homogeneous morphemes, Shakespeare created hybrid forms from latinate and English morpheme combinations, often using Latin roots and affixes already in use from English.

An Archaic Register The acrolectal “ami” (present in neither LPT , 1985 nor Baker–Hookoomsing, 1986) from French also stands out in a distinctly MC construction where the usual word for friend would be “kamarad”. A further motivation for the strategic use of words from older cultures – Tamil, Hindi, the French word “ami” – may be that they contribute to the diachronic distance between the audience and the world of the play. An archaic register in the context of a new language is necessarily a matter of artifice. Virahsawmy partly restores the historical dimension of the foreign text through an attempt at archaizing the language while using resources available and recognizable in a local context. Indeed, he invents domestic analogues for foreign forms and themes by drawing from the heterogeneity of the sociolinguistic landscape of the target culture. His translation of titles and terms of address also marks an historical and cultural distance from a bygone world of nobility. “nob misie” (I.ii), used by Hamlet to address Horatio instead of the less formal “misie” followed by the latter’s name, is a marked term of address, as is “Enn Maha-leroi” (So excellent a king) (I.ii), where “Maha” (supreme), a Hindi adjective originally from Sanskrit, is tagged to a MC word to replicate the outstanding stature of King Hamlet. A formulation of domestic linguistic norms which foregrounds the hybridity of the target language also has repercussions on existing sociolinguistic stereotypes. Indeed, by putting on a par the lexis from French and Indian languages in circulation in Mauritius in creating an archaic register, Virahsawmy shifts the colonial and asymmetric values associated with these languages in the local sociolinguistic context. The language of the target text reveals the manipulative potential of the translator in influencing the cultural connotations and perceptions of languages in the target culture. Manipulating established syntax is another means of archaization: H O R A S I O : Ou ki ou ki trouble lape asoir? Kifer ou finn degiz ou lamanier

172

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Defin Samazeste Leroi Danmark Dan so larmir roiyal? (I.i) H O R A T I O : What art thou that usurp’st this time of night, Together with that fair and warlike form In which the majesty of buried Denmark Did sometimes march?

(I.i.44–47)

“Ou ki ou” is calqued interlingually from “twa ki twa” (who do you think you are!), a register associated with the lumpenproletariat with connotations of challenge and informality. The replacement of the informal pronoun “twa” (thou) with “ou” (you) achieves a different effect, marking respect and formality as well as distance, since Horatio is addressing a mystifying presence. The defamiliarization achieved through this substitution also creates distance between the audience’s language and that of the play while maintaining, through linguistic and cultural complicity with a local audience, the speakability necessary for the language of theatre. A result of the complementary principles of familiarity and novelty operating in conjunction, the final product is both intelligible and refreshing. While an archaic register of MC is not available, given that it is a relatively new language, Virahsawmy attempts a rendering of pseudo-archaic language through resourceful stylistic means that stubbornly refuse to draw from the source language. Indeed, the gradience of power and prestige in relation to English and MC seems to be a major consideration in Virahsawmy’s translation context. In terms of lexis, it is a point of interest that there should be no borrowings from English in Prins Hamlet. The use of “jenntoulmenn,” phonologically adapted from ‘gentleman’ and already an existing word in MC dictionaries, can hardly be classified as a borrowing. Whereas the use of English for the purposes of lexical extension seemed acceptable and even confident in most of Virahsawmy’s original creative writing, in particular in Toufann, his subversive rewriting of The Tempest, the self-consciousness of translation in Prins Hamlet seems to call for a greater degree of domestication. If translation from English into MC is to defeat the argument that it is too poor a language to be a vehicle for the Shakespearean canon, then MC should be able to accommodate Hamlet without resorting to lexical borrowings from the source text. In other words,

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

173

Virahsawmy as translating subject is constrained by the order of discourse in the target culture for which he acts as a spokesman. This constraint, however, is creative rather than disabling. Indeed, the translation of Hamlet into a target text which carefully and deliberately avoids lexical borrowings from the source language further foregrounds Virahsawmy’s relationship with Shakespeare as one of “creative iconoclasm,” to use Hoenselaars’s term.6 Through this dialectic of dependence on and independence from the source text, symbolic power is detached from an exclusive association with English and associated with MC .

Further Metaphors and Proverbs As is to be expected, given Virahsawmy’s agenda as language planner, Prins Hamlet involves new forms, and the creative manipulation of existing expressions rather than standard turns of phrases. Figurative, metaphoric modes of expression that transcend traditional semantic limitations of language are particularly difficult to translate. The transposition of metaphors from the source text generates new linguistic potential through a number of novel metaphors in the target language. In the opening act, when rendering Marcellius’s and Horatio’s discussion of the ghostly appearances they have been witness to, Virahsawmy, in order to re-create a sense of supernatural dread, uses figurative language which violates the rules of inanimate objects while remaining close to the source text: M A R S E L O U S : Li refiz aksepte seki de foi

Finn teroriz nou lizie dan asoir. (I.i) (He refuses to accept that which twice Has terrorized our eyes at night.) M A R C E L L I U S : And will not let belief take hold of him

Touching this dreaded sight twice seen of us. (I.i.22–23) H O R A S I O : Lafreyer angourdi mo lespri.

(I.i) (Fear numbs my mind)

6

Ton Hoenselaars, “Introduction” to Shakespeare and the Language of Translation, ed. Hoenselaars (Arden Shakespeare; London: Methuen, 2004): 26.

174

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

H O R A T I O : It harrows me with fear and wonder.

(I.i.42)

Personification brings a particularly lively quality to the language, allowing objects or abstractions to act, feel, and respond. In Virahsawmy’s translation of “this dreaded sight twice seen of us” into “seki de foi / Finn teroriz nou lizie”, the verb “terrorize” is used with an unusual inanimate object, “lizie.” Remaining faithful to the English source in terms of the vehicles used allows for innovativeness in M C . While the gloss “fear numbs my mind” is an established metaphor in present-day English, “Lafreyer angourdi mo lespri” is a new ontological metaphor in MC . “Angourdi,” which usually functions as an adjective or intransitive verb, is here made to function as a material verb, and the abstract entity “lafreyer” is animized. The syntactic function of “lafreyer” as agent and “lespri” as beneficiary also serves to highlight the sense of dreadfulness vividly expressed by Horatio: H O R A T I O : In what particular thought to work I know not, But in the gross and scope of mine opinion, This bodes some strange eruption to our state.

(I.i.66–68) H O R A S I O : Mo pa kone kouma pou interpret sa Me mo disan pe averti moi Ki pou’ena bel-bel tourman pli divan.

(I.i) (I don’t know how to interpret this But my blood is warning me That there will be huge disruptions in the future.)

Again Virahsawmy associates a verbal process with an inanimate agent in the ontological metaphor “mo disan pe averti moi” to express Horatio’s ominous instinct, as opposed to any strictly cognitive knowledge. The unusual syntax, whereby “disan” (blood) functions as agent and “moi” as beneficiary, reinforces Horatio’s sense of helplessness in the presence of mounting evil. The repeated use of marked syntax, whereby unusual nouns function as agents, is a constant in Virahsawmy’s translation. This functions as a means of expressing the supernatural experiences of the

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

175

play and creates distance between the language of the play and that of the audience. Redundancy is very much part of Hamlet, building up frantic emotions and climaxes, as seen previously with the repeated and ambiguous use of the word “mother.” To match the copiousness of Laertes in his use of five proverbs to the same cautionary effect, new proverbs in MC are created: The chariest maid is prodigal enough If she unmask her beauty to the moon. Virtue itself scapes not calumnious strokes. Too oft before their buttons de disclos’d, And in the morn and liquid dew of youth Contagious blastments are more imminent. Be wary then, best safety lies in fear: Youth to itself rebels, though none else near. (I.iii.36–44) Mem enn tifi pir ek prop andanze Si li les bann zetoil pionn so bote. Mem bann dimoun prop sali par palab. Move moutouk manz freser nouvo fler; Laroze gramatin bril bourzon zenn. Akoz sa mo koko fer atansion; Nou prop lafors kapav vinn nou febles. Akoz sa mo koko fer atansion. (I.iii)

Rendering verbosity in replicating the details of the original both furthers the archaic texture of the text and is stylistically productive. Proverbs, which also rely on metaphoric language, tend not to find ready analogues across languages that are not closely related. The translator therefore has to search his own linguistic repertoire for sayings which may conceal similar tenors behind different vehicles or create new, unfamiliar expressions modelled on the English original. Out of the five proverbs in the target text, the first four are neologisms and are all based on antithesis, a feature of many existing proverbs in MC . The neologisms thus accord with the principles of familiarity and innovation, so that they are at once accessible and refreshing. The novel applications of familiar words arrests the reader’s/audience’s attention, as does the extension of the meaning of

176

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

simple phrases, by which process a sentence comes to mean more than the sum of the words composing it. Throughout the history of proverbs, interlingual translation has been an abundant source of new sayings, “an important means of enlarging a nation’s proverbial stores.”7 Rendering the redundant elements of Hamlet is a useful exercise in the context of language engineering, encouraging both the illustration of existing copiousness of vocabulary in the target language and promoting the extension of its linguistic resources. Virahsawmy does not aim at easy readability but, rather, to evoke Shakespeare’s torrential vocabulary and the aural quality of his script. The impact of Virahsawmy’s translations of metaphors into MC is manifold. One of the functions of metaphor is to plug lexical gaps, to give a label and a name to new concepts and new experiences.8 The prevalence of new metaphors in the translation of Hamlet confirms the creative and enabling function of translation in the enrichment of the target language. Moreover, metaphor could be seen as a more successful strategy for wordformation than borrowing, since the imagery it provides will have a positive mnemonic effect. Virahsawmy can be said to make a contribution to the national repertoire of metaphors, as Shakespeare did for his own vernacular. Moreover, the abundance of metaphor serves to increase the verbal energy of the target text as it does in the source text; and, through the creation of new metaphors and similes, two different fields of association become connected. Indeed, by engaging in the translation of metaphors and generally word-play, Virahsawmy activates the metalingual and poetic function of the target language, foregrounding its structural properties. Finally, metaphoric transfer is also a means by which word forms acquire polysemy. As a concluding word on Prins Hamlet, it was noted at the beginning of Chapter 4 that one of the most apparent historical functions of translated literature, according to polysystems theory in particular, is the creation of new stylistic models. As demonstrated in this section, Virahsawmy approaches literary translation as a primary activity, in which his main concern is to use the strategies necessary for literary translation to extend the registers and vocabulary of MC . Given Virahsawmy’s role as translator/‘aménageur’, combining practical and theoretical interest in enrich7 8

Archer Taylor, The Proverb (Cambridge M A : Harvard U P , 1931): 47. Andrew Goatly, The Language of Metaphors (London: Routledge, 1997).

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

177

ing the vocabulary of MC , his translation work becomes a channel not so much for the introduction of new items to the target code’s repertory as for the modification of existing ones. Various stylistic processes are designed to suggest the distance that separates the audience/reader from Hamlet. Virahsawmy endeavours to convey as much of Shakespeare as possible at the risk of challenging the audience through new linguistic deployment. A rendering of Hamlet’s antic and violent lexical choices that runs counter to a sense of fluency not only ‘foreignizes’ the translation but is also linguistically productive. Indeed, retaining the strangeness of a remote lexis, producing a syntax with an erudite ring, and preserving the rhetorical economy of Shakespeare – all this generates linguistic innovation. Virahsawmy’s use of lexical items which do not figure in either MC dictionary is evidence that he carries out an important work of lexical elaboration, encouraging within literature a significant amount of de-automatization in relation to ‘ordinary language’. Although the lexical expansion of MC beyond the world of Prins Hamlet depends partly on French and increasingly on English for a specialized vocabulary of knowledge and technology, the translation demonstrates that borrowing from the languages of more restricted usage, such as Hindi, has the potential to contribute to the development of the vocabulary. Prins Hamlet reveals that M C is evolving in a hybrid culture, has its own specificities, and shows variational vitality through the display of distinct registers and styles. Furthermore, new compounds which weave together distinct contexts and separate text passages illustrate the creative and cohesive power of language. Translation, therefore, by illustrating that the vernacular can no longer be defined purely as the language of orality or informality, let alone vulgarity, removes the ground from under some of the acrimonious language myths surrounding MC .

½¾

178

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

II Much Ado About Nothing: A Skirmish of Wit or “satini laservel” (Brain Chutney) Although the language of Much Ado About Nothing9 has not attracted much scholarship in comparison with the other comedies, several stylistic aspects of this romantic comedy are notable. The sophisticated use of double entendre, the intricate linguistic love-games, and the exploration of language as an imprecise symbolic medium of communication all make the translation of this comedy an audacious endeavour. A particularly relevant aspect of this play, in considering it in translation, is its range of comic uses of language, from broad low comedy to witty repartee. Brian Vickers describes Much Ado as the wittiest of Shakespeare’s comedies, displaying not only resourceful and witty repartee between the equally matched combatants, Beatrice and Benedick, but also prolonged verbal ingenuity throughout the play.10 The most impressive aspect of Much Ado, according to Vickers, is that these patterns of wit are used to complex dramatic effect. He foregrounds the artistry with which comic resources are exploited for the development and interaction of different characters, and sees the stylistic individualization of characters and their relationships as one of Shakespeare’s greatest achievement. Unlike the tragedies, the Shakespearean comedies have few renditions in other languages. Alexander Shurbanov proposes that it is precisely because word-play, from which much of the magic of Shakespearean comedies derives, is the hardest linguistic aspect to reproduce in translation, which explains the relatively low number of translations of the comedies.11 Indeed, since the comic incorporates language, ideology, social organization, and material culture, and is expressed in language on all levels, from phonology and lexis to discourse, translating humour is notoriously difficult. Virahsawmy admits that the main difficulty he ex9 Edition used: Much Ado about Nothing, in The Oxford Shakespeare: The Complete Works, ed. Stanley Wells & Gary Taylor (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994): 541–65. 10 Brian Vickers, The Artistry of Shakespeare’s Prose (London: Methuen, 1968): 173–99. 11 Alexander Shurbanov, “The Translatability of Shakespearean Texts into an Unrelated Language/Culture,” in Translating Shakespeare for the Twenty-First Century, ed. Rui Carvalho Homem & Ton Hoenselaars (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2004): 60.

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

179

perienced in his translation of Much Ado About Nothing into MC was in the rendition of many of the puns that are central to the general tone of the play.12 If comic language is difficult to retain in translation, this is especially the case when the cultural and linguistic disparity between the source culture/language and the target culture/language is considerable. The next section focuses briefly on Virahsawmy’s translation strategy before investigating key areas of his translation, focusing on double entendre, the witty repartee between Beatrice and Benedict, his treatment of the substandard through the egregious malapropisms of Dogberry and Verges, and the different love registers.

Translation Strategy Virahsawmy adopts a translation strategy which conveys the humorous qualities of the source text while de-emphasizing exact matchings of syntax and lexis. In the translation of this comedy, more liberty seems to have been taken by Virahsawmy than in Prins Hamlet. He avoids classical allusions and adds references from contemporary popular culture. References to Cupid are left out or replaced but are not translated literally. The metaphoric clause “challenged Cupid at the flight” (I.i.37) is translated into “fer so vantar” (make a display of arrogance), where the vehicle (challenged Cupid at the flight) of the source text is replaced by its tenor “display of arrogance.” On the other hand, references to contemporary popular culture stand out against the attempts at archaization in Hamlet. “Twas the boy that stole your meat, and you’ll beat the post” (II.i.197–98) is translated to “Move nouvel lor t.v., to kraz lekran” (If there’s disagreeable news on T V , you smash the screen). There is further anachronistic reference in the translation of “she would have made Hercules have turned spit, yea, and have cleft his club to make the fire too” (II.i.231–33) to “Sa, li kapav fer Rambo souiside” (She would cause Rambo to commit suicide). There is also an example of sanitized translation when Claudio’s reference to the ugliness of the Ethiopian woman, an Elizabethan stereotype, is replaced with “enn mons ki fer zanfan per” (a monster who scares children).

12

Personal communication (September 2004).

180

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Double Entendre It is not always possible to convey the multifaceted nature of Shakespeare’s puns, given the linguistic distance between the source and target languages. “Mo pa finn get li” (I did not look at her) barely does justice to Benedict’s words “I noted her not,” where the polysemous “noted” means at once ‘scrutinized’, ‘set to music’, and ‘stigmatized’. There are, however, numerous occasions when the translator digs into the resources of the target language to find compensatory strategies or adds to the source text to reinforce certain stylistic or prosodic effects from the source. The translated title “Enn ta senn dan vid,” which echoes the source title both semantically and syntactically, is itself a new idiomatic expression, featuring in neither dictionary (L P T , Baker–Hookoomsing). The repeated appearance of the title under different forms, in different contexts, and with different semantic nuances across the play further highlights the neologism: B E A T R I S : Mo koz tro. Enn ta senn dan vid.

(II.i) B E A T R I C E : I was born to speak all mirth and no matter.

(II.i.303–304) B A L S A Z A R : Dimoun bien kontan fer enn ta senn dan vid / Pou fer

lezot koir zot pasion sinser. (II.iii) B A L T H A S A R : Since many a wooer doth commence his suit / To her

he thinks not worthy, yet he woos. (II.iii.48–50)

In the first instance, the idiom “enn ta senn dan vid” is associated with the pointlessness of speech, and in the second, it refers to the deceptiveness of the language of love. Both “senn” and “vid” are demonstrably polysemous. The repetition of the title may, moreover, be a compensatory translation strategy to replace the double entendre surrounding part of the title, “nothing,” a potentially exploitable semantic resource in Elizabethan English pronunciation, since “nothing” would have sounded very much like “noting.” Moreover, in Shakespeare’s verbal universe “nothing” also belongs to the extensive category of bawdy terms for the female sexual

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

181

organs. Virahsawmy is unable to replicate the puns on nothing/noting from the source text, but the following examples demonstrate how new associations are created in the target text: D O N P E D R O : Si to anvi fer to senn akord li / ar detroi not.

(II.iii) D O N P E D R O : if thou wilt hold longer argument / do it in notes.

(II.iii.54–55) D O N P E D R O : Get kouma li fer koustik ar lalang! / Not-note, not-note dan

vid. (II.iii) D O N P E D R O : Why these are very crotchets that he speaks! / Note notes, forsooth, and nothing!

(II.iii.51–52)

In both examples, the punning on noting/nothing is replicated through links between echoes of the title and “not/note” (note/noting). In the second, in particular, there is a clear rapprochement between “note” (noting) and “vid” (nothing). Also foregrounded is the innovative metaphor “fer koustik ar lalang” (does somersaults with his tongue), which makes overt metalinguistic reference to word-play that will be discussed further in the following section. Given that both English and MC share French as one of their etymological roots, some of the puns can be more or less directly transposed: Not bien dan kaye not / Ki pa vo lapenn pran not lor mo bann not. (Note well in the note book that it’s not worth taking notes on my notes) Note this before my notes / There’s not a note of mine that’s worth the noting. (II.iii.54–55)

In the above example, the four different syntactic and semantic uses of the word “not” in the target text highlight the polysemous range of an M C lexis.

182

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

A Skirmish of Wit In Shakespeare’s text, Beatrice’s wit is set above that of the others right from the beginning. Many of her quick sparks hinge on the similarity of sound or meaning between two different words or phrases. They are almost impossible to retain automatically in translation, and missing out the subtleties of the repartees between her and Benedick would deprive her of the seductive aspects of her character. L E O N A T O : There is a kind of merry war betwixt Signior Benedict

and her: they never meet, but there’s a skirmish of wit between them. B E A T R I C E : Alas! he gets nothing by that. In our last conflict four of

his five wits went halting off, and now is the whole man governed with one: so that if he have wit enough to keep himself warm, let him bear it for a difference between him and his horse: for it is all the wealth that he hath left to be known a reasonable creature. (I.i.61–67) L E O N A T O : Ant mo nies ek misie Benedik ena enn lager koze

permanan. Sak foi zot zoinn zot fer satini laservel. (Between my niece and Mr Benedik there is a permanent war of words. Each time they meet, they make brain chutney.) B E A T R I S : Fode ena laservel pou fer satini. Dernie foi mo ti bat

lamok. Senn lor senn dan vid. (One must have brains in order to make chutney. The last time there wasn’t very much for me to do. Much ado about nothing.)

In Virahsawmy’s translation, two creative metaphors with metalinguistic reference stand out in Leonato’s utterance: “lager koze” (verbal jousting) and “fer satini laservel” (make brain chutney). The latter is immediately appropriated and given an insulting twist by Beatris. Forgoing the reference to the five types of wit in the source text, Virahsawmy’s translation nonetheless establishes a humorous connection between Leonato’s use of “laservel” and Beatrice’s insolent appropriation of it. Her twist “Fode ena laservel pou fer satini” (chutney making requires brains) indicates her ability to make quick retorts and sets the scene for the sequence of repartee that will take place between Benedick and herself. What makes the following exchange successful in the source text is the effect of repartee, which creates the impression that each blow should be

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

183

the last when, in fact, each seemingly final blow generates an equally caustic response: B E A T R I C E : I had rather hear my dog bark at a crow, than a man

swear he loves me. B E N E D I C K : God keep your ladyship still in that mind, so some

gentleman or other shall ’scape a predestinate scratched face. B E A T R I C E : Scratching could not make it worse, an ’twere such a

face as yours were. B E N E D I C K : Well, you are a parrot-teacher. B E A T R I C E : A bird of my tongue is better than a beast of yours. B E N E D I C K : I would my horse had the speed of your tongue, and so

a good continuer. But keep your way a God’s name, I have done. B E A T R I C E : You always end with a jade’s trick; I know you of old.

I.i.125–39) B E A T R I S : Mo perfer ekout mo lisien zape ar lalinn ki tann enn boug

fer seman li kontan moi. B E N E D I K : Bondie prezerv ou tanperaman. Sa omoin pou anpes enn

bon dimoun gagn grife lor figir. B E A T R I S : Me si so figir kouma ou, grife kapav amelior so bote. B E N E D I K : Zaza, zaza, zaza. Lalang pena lezo. B E A T R I S : Vomie lalang pena lezo ki latet pena servo. B E N E D I K : Ayo! Si mo seval ti galoup osi vit ki ou lalang mo ti pou

gagn lekours Medenn. Me pa fer nanye. Bondie protez ou malang … pardon … lalang. B E A T R I S : Samem so manier. Bez koutpie kouma bourik!

The MC version reproduces many of the scathing effects of the source text while exploiting MC resources. In the target text, Beatris and Benedik also take an unflattering second meaning from the other’s previous utterance and return it in trumps. The target text demonstrates the ability of each party to appropriate and develop metaphors which, while delivered in creative, idiomatic, and racy MC , also evoke the source text. The repetition of the verb “zaza” (rattle on), reinforced by the proverb “lalang pena lezo” (the tongue is boneless), replicates the verbal monotony and nonsense implied by “parrot-teacher.” “Lalang pena lezo” also allows Beatris the opportunity for further word-play, “Vomie lalang pena lezo ki

184

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

latet pena servo,” which, like the source text “A bird of my tongue is better than a beast of yours,” implies that Benedick is subhuman and incapable of rational speech. Moreover, through the alliteration of “lalang,” “lezo,” “latet” (tongue, bone, head), which echoes that of “bird,” “better,” and “beast,” Virahsawmy draws on prosody to sharpen the repartee. Furthermore, the internal rhyme “lezo”/“servo” (bone/brains) and the syntactic and phonological parallels between the clauses “lalang pena lezo” (the boneless tongue) and “latet pena servo” (the brainless head) reinforce the semantic contrast that Beatris is trying to make. Beatris’s accusation of “latet pena servo” is also reminiscent of her previous comment in relation to Benedik: “fode ena laservel pou fer satini,” foregrounding the cohesion within her idiolect. There is a further metaphor involving the word “servo” in connection with Benedict, this time with bawdy connotations. “So servo dan so bavant” (I.i) (his brains are in his trousers) is the translation of Claudio’s accusation that Benedict “could never maintain his part, but in the force of his will” (I.i.221–22). Through a series of new metaphors involving the word “servo,” links are created in Enn ta Senn dan Vid, independently of the source text and enhancing cohesion. As demonstrated in the next section, further collocations and metaphors involving “lalang” are elaborated in relation to Beatrice. Naming is a potent part of Beatrice’s and Benedict’s linguistic jousting, allowing them to assert power over each other and to strengthen themselves. By finding creative MC equivalents through names that are dense in information, the translator demonstrates the manipulative connection between naming and power in the target language. Virahsawmy translates Beatrice’s witty reference to Benedick from “Signior Mountato” (I.i.28) to “Sir Granlagelli,” forfeiting the cultural reference to fencing in “Mountanto” and instead creating a proper noun from the existing MC collocation “gran lagel” (loud mouth) and, appropriately, the suffix “li,” suggestive of an Italian name. Her further play on Benedick’s name in “God help the noble Claudio if he have caught the Benedict” (I.i.83–84), itself a Shakespearean improvisation on an Elizabethan cure-all, “Carduus Benedictus,” to create a marked association between Benedict and disease, is aptly rendered as “Pa les li ramas Maledik” (let he not catch the Maledict), in which a clipped version of “Malediksion,” the antonym of “Benediksion,” is depicted as a disease. Benedick’s reference to Beatrice as “Lady Disdain” (I.i.112) is translated as “Ledi Mepriztou.” While “Lady” is an established word in MC , ‘Mepriztou’ is a new compound made up of a

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

185

clipped version of the verb “meprize” (scorn) and the noun “tou” (all). The new compound is based on an existing structure in MC “Misie konntou” (Mr I know it all). In the rendering of proper nouns, Virahsawmy’s translation triggers further creative neologisms relying on complicity with his audience through improvisation on local cultural and linguistic material. The centrality of punning, highlighted by overt metalinguistic references to word-play in the source text, is acknowledged and translated by Virahsawmy. This consolidates a metalinguistic register in MC through innovations. “so labous enn mitrayez, sak silab enn bal” (her mouth is a machine-gun, each syllable a bullet) retains the vehicle of weaponry in translating Benedik’s description of Beatrice “She speaks poignards and every word stabs” II.i.226–27). In translating Benedict’s words “here’s a dish I love not: I cannot endure my Lady Tongue” (II.i.251–52), Virahsawmy uses a collocation which establishes a more transparent link between the first and second of Benedict’s propositions: “Sa enn manze rans sa. Kari lalang mo pa’le” (That’s a boring dish. Tongue curry I want none of). The syntactic inversion in the second sentence, whereby the object is placed in initial position, further highlights the description of Beatris as “Kari lalang.” There are further associations between Beatrice and “tongue.” Hero’s acerbic criticism that “It were a better death than die with mocks / Which is as bad as dying with tickling” is translated as “Prefer mor anpe ki viv dan tortir / Enn lalang mesanste” (It would be better to die in peace than to live in the torture of a devious tongue). In this case, Virahsawmy, through the metonymic description of Beatris as “enn lalang mesanste” (a devious tongue), echoes the previous associations between the word “lalang” and Benedict’s references to her. In particular, it also echoes the Shakespearean reference to her as Lady Tongue. Benedict’s later acknowledgement of Beatrice’s wit, “Thou hast frightened the word out of his right terms, so forcibly is thy wit” (V.ii.52–53), is rendered by “To lespri fer bann mo sove depi diksioner” (Your wit drives words out of the dictionary). In describing Beatrice’s ability to rearrange the meaning of words in innovative metaphoric terms, literary translation itself shows the ability to destabilize and renegotiate the value of dictionary terms. Benedict also comments on Claudius’s linguistic behaviour: “aster li servi metafor, parabol, li koz gramatikal” (now is he turned orthography; his words are a very fantastical banquet, just so many strange dishes) (II.iii.19–21). In “li koz gramatikal” (he talks grammati-

186

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

cal), the adjective “gramatikal” is used as a metaphoric noun for stylistically polished and pedant language. The illustration of the displacement of words, semantics, and syntax in MC through Benedict’s and Beatrice’s use of language is a resourceful means of stylistic expansion relevant to the linguistic engineering of MC .

Registers: The Malaprop, the Malcontent and the Malade d’amour The translation of Dogberry and Verges’s markedly non-standard idiolects is significant on several fronts. Most obviously, it reinforces the stylistic range of literary MC by distinguishing between adroit and maladroit types of word-play. Beatrice’s and Benedick’s sophisticated play with the lexis and semantics already demonstrates in MC a different kind of humour than those stereotypically attributed to MC . In the source text, Dogberry’s and Verges’s inept word-play is set as a contrast to the subtler wit of Beatrice and Benedict. The translation of Dogberry’s egregious malapropism, provided with a ‘feed’ in Verges, could provide further experimentation with humorous word-play in the target language. In the next section, I explore how and to what effect Virahsawmy translates Dogberry’s nonstandard idiolect. Much of the humour generated by Dogberry and Verges comes from the discrepancy between their consistent malapropisms and any efficiency one might have expected from the representatives of justice. Dogberry’s vice is that of using a word in the sense opposite to that meant – for example: “for the watch to babble and talk is most tolerable, and not to be endured.” The translation “se enn zafer ... toutafe rekomandab” (it’s something … perfectly advisable) (III.iii) conveys the humorous qualities of the source text by retaining a pretentious ring via the inappropriate use of the adverb “rekomandab” (advisable), a parallel to Dogberry’s use of “tolerable.” At other times, Virahsawmy’s translation attempts to echo the source of the malapropism from the Shakespearean text. In “Vot ekselans, mo ena enn konfirmasion ki konserv ou” (Marry, Sir, I should have some confidence with you, that decerns you nearly) (III.v), where “decerns” is wrongfully used instead of “concerns,” Dogberi uses “konserv” (literally, ‘preserve’) when he means “konsern.” Malapropism is further transparent in Dogberry’s orders regarding the guilty parties: “let them be opinioned,” when he means “pinioned.” In the target text “fou zot antret, antro… antray,” “antret” means ‘to swindle’, “antro” means ‘excess’, and “antray” means ‘in prison awaiting trial’. This displays, in sonorous terms which

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

187

are independent of the source text, Dogberry’s hesitation among three words which are phonologically similar but semantically distinct. The translation reinforces his absurd inability to know what his words mean to himself, let alone to other people. The translation of Dogberry’s language encourages further word play in MC . In “kan enn vagabon, ninport ki vagabon kape, kap li, fou li kap” (III.iii) (“You shall comprehend all vagrom men; you are to bid any man stand,” III.iii.23–24), the translator plays on distinct and often antithetical meanings of ‘kap’ which tie in with the indeterminacy of most of Dogberry’s utterances. “Kap” means ‘escapes’ in the first example, ‘bite or snap at him’ or, even the opposite, ‘miss or let go of’ in the second example. Finally “fou li kap,” which sounds convincing, appears to be a semantically void invention, one of the many meaningless terms that are characteristic of Dogberry’s idiolect. Dogberry’s malapropisms also extend to the hilarious misuse of rhetoric, which is put to further comic use as Don Pedro conforms to rhetorical courtesy by answering under the heads proposed by the former: D O G B E R R Y : Marry Sir, they have committed false report; moreover, they have spoken untruths; secondarily, they are slanders; sixthly and lastly, they have belied a lady; thirdly, they have verified unjust things; and, to conclude, they are lying knaves. D O N P E D R O : First, I ask thee what they have done; thirdly, I ask

thee what’s their offence; sixthly and lastly, why they are committed; and, to conclude, what you lay to their charge. C L A U D I O : rightly reasoned, and in his own division; and, by my troth, there’s one meaning well suited.

V.i.207–17) D O G B E R I : Sef zot bann faner rimer; lor la zot koz manti; deziem dabor zot bann difamasion; siziem ek dernie dabor zot finn fann labou lor enn madam; troiziem dabor zot finn konfirm laverite mansonz; e lor poto-finis zot bann manter-kouyoner. D O N P E D R O : Premie dabor: dir moi ki zot finn fer. Troiziem dabor:

Ki zot ofans ete? Siziem ek dernie dabor: Kifer pe poursouiv zot? E lor poto-finis: Kifer pe akiz zot? K L O D I O : Bien rezone dapre metodolozi. Foutou! Pa kapav pli kler ki

sa.

188

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

In the target text, the comic use of predicating as opposed to referring is retained, as is the unusual order with which Dogberry enumerates his statements. His extended tagging of “dabor” to other ordinal numbers (“deziem dabor,” for example) than “premie” (to which it is, according to correct usage in MC , exclusively attached), which is adopted for ironical purposes by Don Pedro, is a malapropism that draws specifically on material from the target culture. In the target text, the tautological nature of Verges’s words is partly rendered by the recurrence of the pompous phrase “Foul laverite e sertennman osi” (It’s the whole truth and certainly as well), which becomes an idiosyncratic part of Verges’s idiolect. The latter’s misuse of extravagant words is further apparent in “nou ena pu fer kestionnman bann piez a konfeksion” (we have the exhibition to examine), where “kestionnman” is a non-existent noun coined from the noun “kestion” and the common adverb-forming suffix “man,” while the second malapropism is based on “pies a konviksion” (exhibit). Shakespeare’s take on verbal ornateness as a target for ridicule is a useful device for Virahsawmy. Like Lir, Poloniouss, Dammarro, and Kaspalto, Dogberi and Verzes are punished for their pedantry. The recognition of non-standard features by a Mauritian audience/reader confirms the delimitations of a standard in MC . Furthermore, as illustrated in the example “we have the exhibition to examine,” the non-standard, as in Shakespeare, is not limited to words belonging exclusively to distinctive categories of lower-class usage; words that are pompous and extravagant are more likely to be regarded by speakers of the language as unacceptable. Virahsawmy’s pervasive use of “malaprop codemixing” is not only a distinctive part of Verges’s idiolect but also acts as a means of transferring Shakespeare’s sociolinguistic commentary to a Mauritian context. The translation of Much Ado about Nothing also involves the creation of a register for the malcontent in MC . Don John, “a brutal user of language,”13 expresses his malcontent and scorn through distinct stylistic choices and vigorous syntax: D O N J O H N : I cannot hide what I am; I must be sad when I have

cause, and smile at no man’s jest; eat when I have stomach, and wait

13

Vickers, The Artistry of Shakespeare’s Prose, 177.

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

189

for no man’s pleasure; sleep when I am drowsy, and tend on no man’s business; laugh when I am merry, and claw no man in his humour. (I.iii.12–17) D O N J O N : Mo refiz kasiet seki mo ete. Kan mo tris mo boude, mo refiz fer mem enn ti sourir; kan mo fin mo manze, mo refiz atann lezot; dormi kan mo gagn somey, vey mo prop zafer; mo riye kan mo anvi, refiz pas bagou.

Virahsawmy’s translation remains close to the source text by reproducing parallel structures which represent Don John’s obstinate and contemptuous refusal to conform to the demands of society. Further rigid syntactic symmetries in MC are employed in his self-description to show his selfish, unbending nature and refusal to change: Mo prefer res enn pikan lor balizaz ki vinn enn roz dan so zardin; plito dimounn foud moi ki mo fer zoliker pou enn ti faver. Mo pa enn jenntoulmenn paser-siro. Moi mo fier mo enn bezer-pake fran-fran, kare-kare. (I.iii) I had rather be a canker in a hedge than a rose in his grace, and it better fits my blood to be disdained of all than to fashion a carriage to rob love from any. In this, though I cannot be said to be a flatterring honest man, it must not be denied but I am a plain-dealing villain. (I.iii.25–30)

The formality of Don John’s structure in MC , with its uncompromising disjunctions, sets him apart from the other characters. The oxymoronic collocation “jenntoulmenn paser-siro” (flattering honest man) compounded by the epithet “bezer-pake” (villain) followed by two further postmodifying adjectives, “fran-fran” (honest) and “kare-kare” (straightforward), brings out his ruthlessness. His characteristic preference for self-descriptive metaphors and epithets of discord takes on an even more sinister form through the images Beatrice later uses to describe him: “Ala li eg la. Sak foi mo trouv li mo gagn brilir lestoma” (How tartly that gentleman looks. I never can see him but I am heartburned an hour after) (II.i.3–4). The retention of Beatrice’s ability to catch a metaphor “eg”

190

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

(sour) and develop it into “brilir lestoma” (heartburn) and the physicality of her language sharpen the image of the malcontent in MC . A striking aspect of this particular romantic comedy is that it presents not one but several, often antithetical, languages of love. There is the sentimentality of Claudio to Hero, for example: “ I give away myself for you and dote upon the exchange” (II.i.305–306). The translation into MC , “Mo finn perdi mo momem pou gagn ou oumem,” leads to innovative syntactic structures whereby the pronominal pronouns “momem” (myself) and “oumem” (yourself) are used as nouns preceded by possessive personal pronouns. Claudio, however, also sees love as a business transaction when he doubts Don Pedro’s integrity in his role as go-between: D O N P E D R O : Lamitie li ferm dan tou zafer

Apart zafer fam, tranzaksion leker. Fale pa lamour rod enn mesaze; Sakenn so program, sakenn so kontra; Blok bann agoi, tansion zoli lizie Fer kourtie kokin rol nouvo marye. (II.i) D O N P E D R O : Friendship is constant in all other things,

Save in the office and the affairs of love: Therefore, all hearts in love use their own tongues; Let every eye negotiate for itself’ And trust no agent; for beauty is a witch Against whose charms faith melteth into blood (II.i.160–65)

The association of the notion of romantic love with words from the lexical field of business – “tranzaksion” (transaction), “kontra” (contract), “kourtie” (middleman) – presents an unconventional depiction of love which is reinforced by the pervasive harshness of the consonant /k/ in all three M C words. By the same token, the exchanges of repartee between Beatrice and Benedict, which come to define their relationship, provide a contrast to the conventional language of love. They adopt the destabilizing linguistic forms of parody and ambiguity, as previously demonstrated. Changes in their respective linguistic behaviour, however, announce the mutual flaring of romantic feelings. Beatrice had previously referred to Benedict

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

191

as a “stuffed man” – “He is no less than a stuffed man. / But for stuffing – well we are all mortal” (I.i.55–56), which is translated as “Finn fer ranplisaz. Enn zom farsi. Alala fars,” with exploitation of the phonological closeness between “farsi” (stuffed) and “fars” (farce) in the target language. In the source text, Beatrice’s joke about a “stuffed” man is subsequently applied to her when Margaret takes up a second and bawdy sense of the word ‘stuffed’: B E A T R I C E : I am stuffed cousin. I cannot smell. M A R G A R E T : A maid and stuffed!

(III.iv.59–60) B E A T R I C E : Mo pa santi nanye, mo nene bouse.

(I can’t smell anything, my nose is stuffed) M A R G A R E T : Ler li debous ou, ou pou santi.

(When he uncorks you, you will feel it!)

In the target text, the polysemous resources of MC are exploited for humorous purposes as Margaret plays on the sexual meaning of “debouse” (uncork/screw) and “santi” (smell/feel). This particular word-play suggests that if Beatrice’s wit is an antidote to romantic love, love unbalances wit, as Beatrice loses her weapons to Margaret. The sudden change in Benedick’s linguistic behaviour when he acknowledges being in love with Beatrice is also marked. The following demonstrates how he bends all his wits to discover hidden compliments behind what are in effect insolent comments from Beatrice: Mari sa! “Malgre mo pa anvi, mo bizin dir ou dine inn pare. Doub sans! “Mo lapenn pa merit mersi. Pa gagn lapenn dir mersi.” So mesaz kler: “pa neseser dir mersi. Peyna lapenn, ena plezir”. Desizion finn pran. Si mo pa pran li kont, mo en gopia; si mo pa ador li mo enn sovaz. (II.iii) Ha! “Against my will I am sent to bid you come to dinner;” – there’s a double meaning in that. “I took no more pains for these thanks, than you took pains to thank me;” that’s as much as to say, any pains that I take for you is as easy as thanks. – If I do not take pity of her, I am a villain; if I do not love her I am a Jew. (II.iii.248–54)

192

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

The close translation into MC also illustrates the use of the affirmative through double negation. The conventions of repartee previously established are thus overturned. By re-creating the variations in style that Shakespeare manipulates, Virahsawmy conveys, through stylistic differentiation in MC , the changes in Benedick’s psyche from a “confident extrovert bachelor to shaken neurotic lover.”14 The following song further illustrates his new state of mind: The god of love, That sits above And knows me, and knows me How pitiful I deserve (V.ii.26–29) A bondie lamour Lao lor so tronn Bien konn mo dilem Ze vou tem, ze vou tem.

As does Shakespeare, Virahsawmy creates humour through play on phonology and lexis, and a shift in register. The repetition of “ze vou tem,” which syntactically is neither French nor MC , would be recognized as a parody of the courtly language of love by the target audience/reader. Benedick cannot, however, resist impudent symmetries when he attempts to compose love poetry: “I can find out no rhyme to lady but baby” is translated into rhyming poetic form by Virahsawmy: “Toulesoir mo reve / Klinik, maternite” (Every night I dream of / Hospital, maternity). Nonetheless, the change in Beatrice’s and Benedict’s stylistic choices reveals a change in temperament. This change further clashes with the persistent rigidity of the syntactic symmetries that reveal Don John’s intransigently selfish and unbending nature. By linking word-play and linguistic patterns to characterization and to changing relationships between key characters, Virahsawmy replicates in MC the artistry which Vickers associates, in particular, with this Shakespearean comedy. In demonstrating that a similar artistry can be produced by crafting linguistic and cultural material from the target language, the translation acts a means of language engineering. Successful word-play draws on knowledge which is shared be14

Vickers, The Artistry of Shakespeare’s Prose, 186.

½¾

Identity-Forming Translations

193

tween sender and recipient. The translation of comedy, therefore, encourages the interaction of the linguistic, socio-cultural, and poetic resources of MC , which leads to innovations that often include a disruption of target-language codes. Through the cultural expansion that the translation of comedy in particular triggers, linguistic options are expanded through calques, loan transfers, and new collocations to overcome lexical gaps.

Conclusion Bearing in mind the creative potential of literary translation and Virahsawmy’s own linguistic and cultural agenda, Chapters 4 and 5 have explored the ways in which translations of Shakespeare create new positions for MC in terms of both corpus and status. Virahsawmy’s translation of The Tempest, Hamlet, and Much Ado about Nothing into MC was revealed to be a literary and linguistic activity of a transformative nature – a primary activity, in Even–Zohar’s term. As foreign works are borrowed and used to increase the creative capital of the national theatre, a significant amount of language engineering necessarily takes place. The literary translation of Shakespeare challenges the translator to match the manifold achievements of Shakespeare by not only exploiting but also extending the full range of linguistic effects attainable in M C . Indeed, Virahsawmy’s sensitive re-creation of the stylistic texture of the plays, of idiolects and sociolects, of different forms of verbal ingenuity, including wordplay, functions as an effective means of language planning. This chapter, in particular, has revealed that the lack of close linguistic correspondence between the source and target languages further encourages alterations and extensions in the target language to accommodate whatever does not fit. Moreover, several of Virahsawmy’s translation choices even do honour to Shakespeare’s own stylistic choices. Virahsawmy’s translation strategy in Prins Hamlet, in particular, parallels Shakespeare’s own act of rejecting the acceptance of the superiority of the classical (Latin) to his own vernacular. Finally, many of Virahsawmy’s linguistic innovations are to be found in the more everyday words, like those of Shakespeare,15 and lie in the extension of meaning through functional shift and metaphor. Matching the polysemic richness of the Shakespearean original, exploiting prosody to comic and tragic effects while retaining the lively, conversa15

Blake, Shakespeare’s Language, 55.

194

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

tional quality of the language are productive endeavours within Virahsawmy’s efforts at language planning. The status planning engendered by Virahsawmy’s translation in relation to MC have ramifications which further ground his works within a framework of postcolonial creolistics. By validating the identity of the target language, MC , translation, in turn, validates by implication the identity of its speakers. Ironically, then, through the linguistic self-representation that translation encourages, Shakespeare becomes an instrument of self-assertion. The case of Virahsawmy’s translation work further reinforces the need to consider translation strategies in postcolonial contexts outside of binary modes of thinking. The decolonization of literature and that of translation in the postcolonial Mauritian case lies neither in a vitriolic banning of the Bard, nor in a conspicuously antagonistic relation to him. This decolonization, as Virahsawmy’s translation ideology and strategies indicate, resides, rather, in a reassessment of priorities, in a quietly confident paradigm-shift from the flourishing and reinvention of Shakespeare in MC to the flourishing and reinvention of MC in Shakespeare. Virahsawmy’s evolving encounter with Shakespeare suggests a journey from the radical transformation of Shakespeare by Caliban’s language to the creative transformation of that language by Shakespeare in his identity-forming translations.

½¾

6

S

The Novel Establishing the Narrative Voice

reinforce the status of the novel as one of the most prestigious forms of literary register. Partly because it is the characteristic literary product of the printing press, and partly because the stabilized written language of the novel distanced from spontaneous oral language is the result of a long history, the novel is seen as the most firmly fixed literary genre.1 Of traditionally longer form, it is, in Bakhtin’s words, a genre that arises in “more complex and comparatively highly developed and organised cultural communication.”2 This chapter highlights the sociolinguistic and linguistic issues involved in forging literary prose in a relatively new language and assesses the extent to which the process of linguistic change is accelerated as new pressures are put on MC . The analysis has four main subsections: the construction of the narrator’s idiolect in terms of lexis and syntax; the polyphonic aspect; the representation of time frames; and, finally, codifying elements across two novels in terms of graphic syntax and the use of grammatical words. EVERAL FACTORS

Formal Characteristics of the Novel Michael Toolan refers to the first characteristic by which narrative is typically defined as a significant degree of fabrication or constructedness, 1

The rise of the genre of the novel in Europe was part of an historical movement that involved the rise of the bourgeoisie. 2 Mikhail Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination, 62.

196

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

usually absent from spontaneous conversation.3 Narrative is “worked upon,” since sequence, emphasis, pace, and the demonstration of relationships between one item and another require a substantial amount of planning. The following subsections outline the formal aspects contributing to the complexity and ‘constructedness’ of the novel-genre. The novel cannot be discussed without reference to what Bakhtin describes as its ‘polyphonic’ quality, a term referring to the view that the novel (a “secondary genre”), more than other literary genres, entertains a dependence on multiple codes (“primary genres”), thus being indirectly linked to other texts that draw on these same codes.4 Bakhtin sees the actualized social diversity of language as a constituent element of the novel-genre: the mixing of different languages, linguistic consciousnesses, separated by time, by social differentiation, or by some other factor within the bounds of a single utterance. Bakhtin’s distinction between primary and secondary genres is a useful theoretical framework with which to approach the complexity of the novel in terms of registers. The “subdiscourses” of monologue and conversation are interpreted as primary genres, forming part of the overarching discourse which is the novel itself. Dialogue in the novel is a behavioural resource by which characters negotiate their values, culture, intentions, and desires, and is therefore also closely linked to characterization and point of view.5 Roger Fowler refers to “mind-style” to describe the distinctive linguistic presentation of an individual’s mental self through the latter’s idiolect, particular choice of words, and value-laden expression and constructions.6 The polyphonic aspect thus reveals the novel-genre as a site for the elaboration, coexistence, and clash of various registers. I now examine briefly the ‘displacement aspect’ of the novel in its manipulation of the linguistic resources necessary to recount events that are temporally remote. The emphasis on the representation of the past is one reason for our sense of detachment in the reading of narratives. Past experience is, however, interpreted broadly, since even if the narrative is futuristic science fiction or is presented in the present tense, the reader interprets the events 3

Michael Toolan, The Stylistics of Fiction (London: Routledge, 1990): 4. Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination, 62. 5 Michael Toolan, Narrative: A Critical Linguistic Introduction (London: Routledge, 1988): 249. 6 Roger Fowler, Linguistics and the Novel (London: Methuen, 1977): 104. 4

½¾

The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

197

as having already happened. Nevertheless, given the attempt in novels to narrate experiences that are distanced from the reader, the use of temporal references is particularly necessary. Time-definers act as essential agents of continuity, progression, and cohesion and contribute to the possibility of autonomous organization in relation to the external organization of the text, or exterior time, enabling the narrative to create and sustain its own references. The ability to play on the anteriority, simultaneity, or posteriority of an event in relation to another, to note the frequency, periodicity, and duration of a particular phenomenon, to express suddenness and progression also contributes to creating time references and frames. Although, linguistically, the ordering of narrative events in terms of a time-scale is primarily locatable in the verb tenses, it may be secondarily marked in time adverbials, adverbs, and the semantic value of nouns and verbs. Although the novel is characterized by an important degree of displacement and detachment from the here-and-now of the potential reader, narrative is still language communication between speaker and addressee and relies on the ability to create and sustain the illusion of real experience. Leech and Short claim that the main distinction between factual and fictional prose is that the illusion of real experience is central to fiction, whereas a scientific description distances us from that illusion.7 Language in the novel is thus used to convey a mock-reality. Given the importance of the notion of verisimilitude, details about the cultural context, the geographical setting, the historical period in which a work is situated need to be sufficient and consistent. These contribute towards setting up the references of the world of the text, making the individuality of the experience credible, and giving the reader the sense of participating or observing. Given the polyphonic, displacement, illusionary, and quantitative aspects of the novel, cohesive devices play a vital role in tracing the narrative trajectory and enhancing the communicative function. Cohesive devices provide readers with a route-map, allowing them to make their way through the text and keep in view the connection of and relationship between spatiotemporally remote passages. As previously mentioned in Chapter 1, cohesion is not only about lexico-grammatical linkage but includes consistent time references, verisimilitude, and deixis.

7

Geoffrey Leech & Michael Short, Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to English Fictional Prose (London: Longman, 1985): 150.

198

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Owing to the structural requirements of the novel, stylisticians such as Fowler and Leech point out the potential of narrative to extend the linguistic code through the innovative skills of its users. The possible transformations do not only revolve around rearrangements within existing forms but involve more radical creativity in terms of changes in the stock of formal possibilities. Similarly, Pascale Gaitet notes that the number of words increases with the variety of literary themes and the writer’s command of social usages.8 Walter Nash, too, sees in common syntactic processes a latent rhetorical potential.9 The ordinary phrase, for example, can be turned and enlarged to figurative or more complex purposes. These accumulative, small, and gradual changes progressively reshape language and may even pave the way for subsequent and more profound innovations.10 The common denominator among all these linguists’ points is the acknowledgement of the novel as a potential tool in corpus planning.

The Failure of the Early Novel in MC Within literature in MC , the novel is the last and the least genre to be experimented with. The early postcolonial novels in MC were poorly circulated and often described as failures. None of the early writers, including Renée Asgarally, Sami Periacarpen, and Jo Seetohul, were to publish any further novels in MC . While Ramharai considers poetry and theatre as the privileged genres of literature in MC , he regarded MC (until 1990) as being incompatible with the genre of the novel. The difficulties of writing prose in MC which he identifies can be pinned down to syntax, notably time and aspectual references, and lexis.11 (i) Ramharai, who sees the passé simple as the tense of the narrative voice par excellence while the present tense, the past, and the future can be used for the representation of dialogue, attributes the lack of coherent narration in literary prose in MC to the absence of precisely 8

Pascale Gaitet, Political Stylistics: Popular Language as Literary Artefact (London: Routledge, 1992). 9 Walter Nash, Designs in Prose: A Study of Compositional Problems and Methods (London: Longman, 1980): 65. 10 Fowler, Linguistics and the Novel, 131. 11 Ramharai, La Littérature Mauricienne d’expression créole, 113–15.

½¾

The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

199

that passé simple. He also maintains that simultaneity cannot be reflected in MC because of the absence of the imparfait. Thus, authors using MC are unable to exploit distinct time-scales to highlight distinctions between narration and dialogue; for example, because description and narration are restricted to the present tense there is no frontier between the time of narration and that of description, which results in a highly monotonous text. (ii) The authors are also unable to play on parallelisms or antithesis, and the chronological order of the narrative remains undisturbed by digressions, inversions or anticipations, so that the plot is presented in a linear fashion. This point is linked to the previous one – Ramharai notes that there is no appropriate tense, the plus-que-parfait (the pluperfect), to mark the digressive flashback. (iii) Ramharai also remarks the near-total absence in the MC novel of a vocabulary for technical and vivid descriptive details as well as of verbs of perception, which leads to a lack of realism and conviction in the world created by the novelist. The fact that Ramharai deplores the absence of the passé simple is problematic, since this tense is non-existent in numerous other standard languages which have still managed to produce abundant and complex literary prose. English is an obvious example, where the past definite and perfect are used instead. Ramharai’s comment on the absence of the imparfait ignores the possibility in MC of expressing the past continuous through the past tense marker ‘ti’ followed by the aspect marker ‘pé’ (was). In making persistent use of French as the point of reference and comparison in terms of verb tense and aspect system, he fails to recognize and focus on the formal specificities of MC . His more pertinent concerns turn on the distinction among various time-frames and various narrative modes and voices, and on the availability of precise lexical resources for creating a significant amount of verisimilitude, all of which require linguistic structures that it may not have been necessary to devise and implement in the previous genres, let alone in speech.

½¾

200

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Renewed Efforts in Novel Writing Lindsey Collen, Sedley Assonne, and Dev Virahsawmy are all intellectuals who have enjoyed a significant amount of recognition. In the making of standard languages, the influence of writers on public perception of a language can be significant not merely for what they write but also for who they are (as illustrated above, Introduction). Pierre Bourdieu comments as follows on the function of authors’ symbolic capital in the legitimizing of a standard: The linguistic relation of power is never defined solely by the relation between the linguistic competences present. And the weight of different agents depends on their symbolic capital, that is, the recognition institutionalized or not, that they receive from a group.12

Lindsey Collen, a South African by birth, settled permanently in Mauritius thirty years ago after postgraduate studies in the U K . A political activist against racial segregation in education under apartheid in South Africa, she has carried on her political engagement in Mauritius through her participation in feminist movements and trade unionism. Although her mother tongue is English, MC has become not only her adopted language, the one she insists on using in formal as well as informal contexts, but also one which she promotes mainly though her support of the literacy, publishing, and literary activities of L P T . She also played a leading role in the compilation of the Kreol–English Dictionary (L P T , 1985). In addition to some poems and short stories for children (Zistwar Labalenn), Misyon Garson is her first substantial attempt at creative writing in MC . It is significant that Collen, who had been successful in novel-writing in her mother tongue, particularly with The Rape of Sita, which won the Commonwealth Prize in the African category in 1994, chose to write a novel in her adopted language. Sedley Assonne, a successful journalist who writes in French professionally, also maintains links with LPT and is dedicated to the use of MC as a means of cultural empowerment. He followed the L P T literacy course in MC before attempting his first novel in MC . All three authors’ shared linguistic interest in MC are further indications that their literary works are channelled towards efforts in corpus planning.

12

Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power (Cambridge: Polity, 1991): 72.

½¾

The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

201

Lindsey Collen’s Misyon Garson (1996) Inspired by The Catcher in the Rye, Collen wrote her first novel in MC with an adolescent readership in mind, although it was received as a novel for adults. The narrator Garson, stifled by overprotective parents, is entrusted with the mission of picking up a mysterious parcel, which turns out to be marijuana, from an uncle who lives on the other side of the island of Mauritius. Garson undergoes an epic journey where he encounters real danger when he is left for dead by thugs. Unlike in Salinger’s novel, it is clear that Collen’s narrator has been through a transformative rite of passage. Emerging towards the end from his adolescent lethargy, he participates in a trade-union strike organized by the trade unionist Vikas, undergoes his first sexual and romantic experience with Tifi, comes to terms with bereavement (the death of his brother), two years prior to the start of the novel, and asserts himself in relation to his parents. Sedley Assonne’s Robis (1997) Robis (1997), a successful social novel and the first detective story in MC , won the first prize in the L P T literary contest in the same year. Narrated in the first person, in the whodunit tradition, the novel relates five murders which take place consecutively in Ros Bwa, the deprived outskirts of the capital, Port–Louis. While the “robis” (the rubbish pile) starts to build up right in the middle of the main street, a series of murders take place, kicking off with that of Misie Lewas, an unscrupulous shopkeeper who secretly disposes of domestic waste on the “robis.” Then it is the turn of Bede, a homosexual, followed by that of Kliford, an alcoholic teacher. The last two murders are those of the newcomer Ferozia, a beautiful young prostitute, and Mr Kara, an affluent patriarch. With every additional crime, the presence of the police force and that of local and international journalists is doubled, while most of the inhabitants leave the location. In the meantime, the murderer roams about free and unsuspected. Assonne successfully maintains the suspense until the very end, when the reader realizes that it is, in fact, through the eyes of a psychotic serial killer that the author has been investigating a degenerate society.

½¾

202

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Dev Virahsawmy’s Jericho (2000) Written in third-person narration, Jericho is a revisiting of the riots of February–March 199913 that occurred in Mauritius during a time of acute drought, and deals with the themes recurrent in the author’s previous work, multiculturalism, miscegenation, racism, and politics. The novella does so by bringing together the stories of various characters’ life choices and history, in Jericho, a pseudonym for Mauritius. The book opens with a description of the complex demographic history and life-style of Jericho. After this introduction, the narrative moves to the ordination of the first non-white priest, Martin King, of mixed race, half ‘Indo-Kreol’ and half ‘Afro-Kreol’. The narrative then moves to a group of intellectuals, the Disidan Dan Ton (D D T ), who meet up socially to discuss political and racial events on which they try to act through the press and as negotiators between the leaders of opposing ethnic factions. Another couple to whom we are introduced are Martin King’s friend Kamini and her boyfriend, who are expecting a child. Kamini hopes it will be a ‘Joshwa’ to break down the walls of Jericho. As tensions build up between the Indo-Kreol, fired up by an extremist Hindu group, and the Afro-Kreols, culminating in the death of an Afro-Kreol icon, Fanfan Tabardenn, all the above groups are connected through their individual efforts to defuse the situation of acute racial antagonism. At the funeral of Fanfan, despite the general failure of law and order, Jericho is spared what would have been close to a civil war. At the end of the novella it is revealed that Kamini is Martin’s half-sister. Kamini gives birth to a baby girl. Joshwa’s time has not yet come, and the metaphoric walls of Jericho will not come tumbling down. The need to make immediate political and social changes, to bridge the gap between the elite and the excluded Afro-Kreols, and to reinvent life on Jericho are all the more urgent.

The Narrator’s Idiolect The analysis in this section aims at outlining the narrator’s idiolect in the three novels and at examining how the voices of an adolescent, a serial killer, and an anonymous intellectual observer are created and sustained through particular lexical and syntactic features.

13

See Chapter 1.

½¾

The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

203

Misyon Garson The most striking feature of the narrator’s idiolect is the constant use of lexical synonymy, so that the novel almost functions as a dictionary of synonyms. Witness this example from the opening page, where the narrator expresses, via seven utterances, his wish to ‘disappear’: 1 Si mo ti kapav pa la. 2 Si mo ti kapav tom dan enn fant dan liniver. 3 Si mo ti kapav glise, ale. 4 Disparet. 5 Si mo ti kapav volatilize. 6 Si mo ti kapav fonn. 7 Evapore.14 1 If I could be absent. 2 If I could fall down a hole in the universe. 3 If I could slip away, go. 4 Disappear. 5 If I could vanish. 6 If I could melt away. 7 Evaporate.

Starting off from the wish to be absent, he then specifies, via seven verbs with equivalent meaning, ways in which he would like to disappear. Since the text is in the style of stream of consciousness, it is only appropriate that his language be presented as process, remaining close to oral patterns through ellipsis and repetition rather than as the product of written prose. Besides being the hallmark of Garson’s idiolect, the presence of numerous synonymous terms, by illustrating the possibility of functional differentiation and stylistic multiplicity in MC , is an important example of corpus ‘aménagement’. Indeed, circumlocution or paraphrase provides a means of increasing the referential range of the language.15 Moreover, as to be expected in a novel modelled on stylized Bakhtinian skaz or colloquial vernacular narrative, the syntax is close to that of orality:

14

Lindsey Collen, Misyon Garson (Rose-Hill: L P T , 1996): 3. Further page references are in the main text. 15 Sebba, Contact Languages: Pidgins and Creoles, 116.

204

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

1 Lakaz, bann la kriye mwa Garson. 2 Bet. 3 Me alalila, zot apel mwa Garson. 4 Tultan. 5 Mo pa tro kontan 6 Me, ki mo pu fer? 7 Zot kriye mwa Garson mem. 8 Zame mo pa finn dir zot naryen lor la. 9 Me mo res agase. 10 Andan-andan mo res agase. (4) 1 At home they call me Garson. 2 Silly. 3 But there you go, they call me Garson. 4 All the time. 5 I’m not too happy. 6 But, what am I to do? 7 They keep calling me Garson. 8 I have never said anything on the matter. 9 But it annoys me. 10 Deep down, I’m annoyed.

Elliptical sentences such as 2 and 4 consisting of single lexemes are a prominent feature of the novel. The text is also segmented into sentences on the basis of utterances rather than grammatically complete sentences, reflecting, like the lexical patterns, a stream of consciousness. At the syntactic level, assertive sentences, except for the question (6), and an S V O ordering of constituents predominate. In terms of intersentential cohesion, the links are mostly established by asyndetic paratactic juxtaposition, except for the conjunction “me” (but) used three times over ten lines (3, 6, 9). There are, however, examples of periodic sentences: Alor kumsa ki mo deside [pu gard en lot parti mo kas transpor returne], [met li ansam avek sa kas [ki reste [depi seki mo ti deza ekonomize ant Karo Lalyann ek Katborn ek lor dipin mul [ki pa ti ena]]]], [e gete plitar [ki mo pu fer.]] (63) And thus I decide [to keep some of my return journey bus fair], [put it together with the money [which is outstanding [from what I had already saved between Karo Lalyann and Katborn and on the loaf [of which there was none]]]], [and to see later [what I would do]].

½¾

The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

205

The above sentence is made up of instances of coordinated clauses, subordinate clauses, and embedded subordinated clauses introduced by prepositions as well as relative pronouns. The syntax matches the transition from Garson’s initial state of inertia, illustrated in the first extract, to one of self-assertion.

Robis The most striking linguistic feature of Assonne’s novel is the narrator’s reliance on a heavy use of pejorative or vulgar slang. Impoliteness in the narrator’s idiolect, being a motivated choice of the writer, encourages the interpretation of such behaviour as significant. In particular, the word “beze” is used repeatedly in the novel – for example, in “kat butey labyer ti gayn beze sa zur la” (four bottles of beer went down that day), where “gayn beze” is a marked form for ‘were emptied’. Although “beze” has undergone a semantic shift from the French lexeme baiser (‘fuck’), it still retains pejorative connotations. By constantly selecting sexual swearwords over neutral alternatives, the narrator reveals implicit information about himself and his view of the world, or ‘mind-style’.16 The narrator’s idiolect can, in fact, be compared to a version of anti-language17 in fiction which functions as a register with specific semantic potentials reflecting his antithetical position as a criminal. His deliberate choice of a ‘taboo’ register signals his rejection of dominant social, authoritative, and legal norms: “Mo ti byen ferfut ar zot” (they could piss off),18 for example. When, after the most marked of his idioms, “Falu sor ma!” (his mother’s cunt!) (87), he acknowledges that he has cursed, he justifies his use of language by blaming it on the detrimental influence of his environment, pointing out this register not as choice but as imposed on him by a literally and metaphorically rotten environment:

16

Fowler, Linguistics and the Novel, 104. A term, originally coined by Halliday (Language as Social Semiotic: A Discussion of Dominant Structures in Verse and Prose, 1978) and used by Fowler (Literature as Social Discourse: The Practice of Linguistic Criticism, 1981), which has already been discussed in relation to Tras in Chapter 3. 18 Sedley Assonne, Robis (Rose-Hill: L P T , 1997): 48. Further page references are in the main text. 17

206

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Zot eskiz moi si mo zure, me kan frekant lisyen gayn pis. Si pa ti avoy moi lor sa misyon la, parmi sa bann salte la, mo pa ti pu vinn kumsa. (87) Please excuse me if I swear, but whoever sleeps with dogs will rise with fleas. If I hadn’t been sent on that mission, amidst all this rubbish, I wouldn’t have turned out that way.

His increasingly deviant lexical features not only prompt the reader to adopt a suspicious distance but also brings to the fore the dismissed and marginal existence of Ros Bwa (Roche Bois) and confronts the reader with an alternative reality. Assonne’s detective story is situated in the nonfictitious outskirts of the capital, Port–Louis, which were identified by the Interdisciplinary Study of Exclusion in Mauritius as being permeated by the worst forms of exclusion.19 Whereas anti-language can act as a means of recognition crucial to the internal coherence of the group, in Robis it singles out the narrator.20 The title of the novella, “robis,” unlisted in either MC dictionary and thus a relatively new lexical item of MC , is explained by the author at the beginning of the text: Robis se enn mo ki bann dimunn Ros Bwa servi pu dekrir depotwar ki ena dan sa fobur Porlwi la. So lorizinn sirma sorti depi mo angle rubbish, ki ve dir salte, depotwar. An kreol, rubbish finn deforme pu vinn robis. (7) Robis is a word which the inhabitants of Roche Bois use to describe the rubbish tip that exists in that suburb of Port–Louis. It doubtless derives from the English word ‘rubbish’, which means ‘waste’, ‘tip’. In creole it has become distorted into ‘robis’.

19

Asgarally comments: Once people start living on the fringes, the outskirts of society, not by choice of course, but because they have been pushed into such slots by various mechanisms, they often start developing a different social identity from that of the mainstream. — Étude pluridisciplinaire sur l’exclusion à Maurice, 8. 20 Although he mentions the existence and predicts the arrival of others of his ‘kind’, we never see or hear any of them.

½¾

The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

207

The word ‘robis’, phonologically nativized, fills a lexical gap by describing the increasingly obvious phenomenon of piles of waste in the ghettoized outskirts of the capital. The title and recurrence of the word also enhance the realism and verisimilitude of the novel. Moreover, building on the meaning given to “robis” by the inhabitants of Ros Bwa, Assonne also employs it metaphorically to refer to the increasing social decadence. It becomes clear through the lexical and semantic links made by the author that the “robis” and the unwholesome fumes emanating from it, described in detail at the beginning of the novella, are metaphors for human corruption and weakness: Me selma mo kone mo ti bizin eliminn sa bann salte la. Parski pa kapav less landrwa gate kumsa. Ti bizin enn kikenn pu netwaye. Monn pran sa sarz la. (90) But I knew that I had to eliminate the filth. Because you can’t let the area degenerate like that. Someone was needed to clear up. I’ve taken that responsibility.

Assonne uses a combination of paratactic and hypotactic syntactic constructions appropriate to the confessional nature of the novel. While much of the narrative is based on relatively simple syntax, the author uses to advantage the complexity made available by the context of writing, in particular the device of deferral to create suspense. In the following sentence, the discovery of the second victim’s fate is deliberately deferred: Bede dapre seki mo tande, parski li ti pe res kot legliz sinwa laba li, ase lwen ar mo lakaz, bann la finn trangle li. (31) Bede according to what I’ve heard, because he lived close to the pagoda over there, quite far from my house, was strangled.

Jericho In marked contrast to the confessional language of a serial killer in Robis, in Dev Virahsawmy’s Jericho, where the narrator takes on the role of an anonymous, non-interfering commentator, the narrative is conducted in a register of distance, detachment, and formality. The latter is reflected in the precise deployment of lexical resources and syntactic complexity.

208

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Lexical innovations abound in terms of both coinages and borrowings. Virahsawmy borrows “iltra-konservater” (ultra-conservateur ‘ultra-conservative’) from either French or English.21 Repeated examples of coining are achieved by the agglutination of adjectives, as in “dou-amer” (6), which is neither a calque on the English adjective bitter-sweet nor on the French “aigre-doux,” or the compounding of nouns, “bann panser-pret” (the thinkers-priests) (6), “teorisien ekonomiko-politik” (economico-political theorists) (7). Compound nouns are highly elliptical and mark a departure from ordinary language by avoiding verbs and clauses. In “enn lakoler-perdi-kontrol” (an uncontrollable anger) (32), the compounding of the verb “perdi” and the noun “kontrol” with the initial noun again circumvents the use of a clause. This tendency suggests a preoccupation with privileging, often through creativity, the use of nouns over clauses. Nominalization contributes to the formal and impersonal register of the narration and sustains the impression of a narrator who wishes to remain an objective observer. Nominalization is also an important source of derivation and lexical extension. In describing the drought, “Tanzantan dimunn lev lizie lao pou gete si ena niaz dan lesiel me zot gete tas ar ble elektrik” (From time to time people look up to see if there are any clouds in the sky but their gaze gets stuck in the electric blue) (5), Virahsawmy uses “gete” both as a verb, in the first part of the sentence, and in novel fashion as a noun, in the second part. Several of Virahsawmy’s coinages are ideologically loaded. “Mahafonksioner” (supreme-government official) (32), which combines the Bhojpuri prefix ‘maha’ as a superlative marker with the existing MC word ‘fonksioner’, is a sarcastic comment on the hegemony of the IndoMauritians, particularly in the civil service. Another Bhojpuri suffix, ‘wa’, denoting ‘person’, is used in “Gangawa” to describe the first Indians who came to settle in Jericho from the valleys of the Ganges, a term that implies an atavistic attitude based on cultural roots.22 These connotations are further reinforced through creative uses of MC such as the contradictory term “pirte zenetik fabrike” (fabricated genetic purity) (8), which highlights the notion of genetic purity as a culturally constructed myth, an 21

Dev Virahsawmy, Jericho (Rose-Hill: Bukié Banané, 2000): 17. Further page references are in the main text. 22 See Paul Gilroy, The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness (London: Verso, 1993).

½¾

The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

209

artefact that operates as a wall. Ideological barriers are described through a further metaphor: “Sak zenerasion amenn nouvo zimaz, nouvo vizaz ki ti met menot dan zot lespri e efas zot memoir” (Each generation brought new images, new faces which manacled their minds and erased their memory) (8). In describing the Indo-Creole tendency to idealize the past, the land of origin and ancestral culture to which they dream of returning in the future, Virahsawmy writes “Lepase vinn fitir-plis-ki-parfe” (The past turns into a pluperfect/more than perfect future) (8). The author puns on the French verb aspect plus-que-parfait and the literal meaning ‘more than perfect’ to reveal the diaspora’s fabrication of a future that is based on a mythical past. As a contrast to “Gangawa,” Virahsawmy also coins the terms “Indo-Kreol,” “Euro-Kreol,” and “Afro-Kreol” to refer to the various ethnic groups of Jericho. As previously suggested, ‘Creole’ is a slippery term, its senses in relation to Mauritius shifting historically. By using the term “Kreol” as an affix, the author plays on the various meanings of the word ‘Creole’: people born in a colony, which already suggests a transition from the culture of the continent or country of origin; and the notion of biological and cultural miscegenation that has come to be associated with the word.23 By attaching the term ‘Kreol’ to every ethnic group, Virahsawmy also dissolves its exclusive association with the AfroMauritian group, revalorizing it as part and parcel of every individual in Mauritius. The need to create a new perspective or new sense of identity based on cultural routes leads to the creation of new meanings which shift the focus from land of origin, a segregating factor, to a common denominator, a shared Creole culture. From “Euro-Kreol” (22), functioning as both noun and adjective, Virahsawmy also coins the noun “Euro-Kreolite” to describe the new culture developed on the island, thereby demonstrating the further possibility of lexical expansion through affixation. New terminology expresses and encourages a revisioning of identity and a metaphoric pulling-down of old walls. In contrast to Assonne’s novel, Virahsawmy uses a high level of hypotactic constructions. The following sentences on the opening page provide a description of the strategic position of the island, its economic situation, and its complex demographic constitution: 23

See Jean Bernabé, Patrick Chamoiseau & Raphaël Confiant, Éloge de la Créolité (Paris: Gallimard, 1989), tr. M.B. Taleb–Khyar as In Praise of Creoleness: Édition bilingue français / anglais (Paris: Gallimard, 1993).

210

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

1 Toulede lendroi ti bien devlope par zot propriyeter, bann Euro-Kreol, desandan bann premie pionie [ki ti vinn pou etablir lor sa bout later lor kontinan Lafrik]. 2 Kote les se aryer-pei Jericho [ki ranpe atraver laflore ziska Montagn Pous – [skilptir taye par lapli, letan ek divan, [ki rapel bann Jericho/nn, [san ki zot tro konpran], pouvoir ek bote lanatir]] – [ki depi dan niaz get dimoun anba lor laplenn ek laplaz ar kiryozite ek konpasion.]] (1– 2) 1 Both regions were well developed by their owners, the Euro-Creoles, descendants of the first pioneers [who had come to settle on this bit of land on the African continent]. 2 In the east, it’s the back-country of Jericho [that sprawls through the vegetation up to Mount Pouce – [a sculpture carved by rain, time, and wind, [which reminds the Jerichonians/ans, [without them understanding it too well], of the power and beauty of nature]] – [which from the clouds looks at humans down in the fields and on the beach with curiosity and compassion]]

Sentence 2 is periodic, with two coordinated subordinate clauses: [ki ranpe atraver laflore ziska Montagn Pous – [skilptir taye par lapli, letan ek divan, [ki rapel bann Jericho/nn, [san ki zot tro konpran], pouvoir ek bote lanatir]] and [ki depi dan niaz get dimoun anba lor laplenn ek laplaz ar kiryozite ek konpasion]. There are three layers of embedded clauses within the first subordinate clause and extensive right-branching in the second subordinate clause. This example of extensive complexity is the result of careful ‘constructedness’. Relativization and various levels of embedded clauses are the marked features of the numerous examples of periodic sentences that characterize Virahsawmy’s text. He often achieves syntactic complexity by maximizing the expansive potential of the noun phrase. lor dra plin ar tas dezir feros e lapeti rans san souvenir, parfoi enn reyon lamour pers enn trou dan niaz. (6) on the linen full of stains of ferocious desire and rancid memory-less appetite, sometimes a ray of love pierces through the clouds.

the lexically dense noun phrase “tas dezir feros e lapeti rans san souvenir” here is a powerful evocation of the rape of slaves by their owners. Nominalization and the left-branching construction (with the heavily modified

½¾

The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

211

prepositional phrase highlighted above), which put a considerable memorizing burden on the addressee, are, again, syntactic features associated with the context of writing. The formality of the narrator’s tone in Jericho, already suggested by the lexical choices made, is supported by syntactic structures.

Polyphony and Verisimilitude Misyon Garson Collen uses code-mixing and code-switching as an efficient means of maintaining the polyphonic and distinctive aspects of several characters’ utterances in her novel. It also contributes an important element of verisimilitude to the attitudes towards and use of various languages in Mauritius, especially in the field of the media, where a mixed code is predominant. A magician’s show is advertised thus: “Pa manke. Dan son nimero de pandezon. Frison asire” (Not to be missed. In his hanging trick. Assured thrill) (125), where the possessive adjective “son” is French and the rest of the syntax is that of MC . While there is an increasing use of MC in advertisements, resorting to French or an acrolectal variety of MC is still seen as up-market. A mixed code is also part of the chief thief’s idiolect. He constantly attempts to code-switch to French, with interference from MC , to assert his authority. In “Espes de ganga lakanpayn” (151), he combines the typical starting-point of an insult in French, “espèce de,” and follows it by an idiomatic MC term for ‘country bumpkin’ or ‘simpleton’. Code-mixing functions as a means of characterization, representing the thug as laughable. The use of variable accents is also in line with the sociolinguistic context of the novel: “Kifer, cher Mayk, pourquoi cher Mayk,” Vikas met enn aksan Franse, pu sikann mwa ek mo ledikasyon […]. (186) “Why, dear Mike, why, dear Mike,” Vikas puts on a French accent, to tease me and my education […].

Vikas, the trade unionist, resorts to a French accent to mock Garson’s ignorance of the social and economic realities of Mauritius. His ironic use of language is designed to highlight the superficiality of a mainstream

212

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

education, which, by focusing on the teaching of the languages of prestige, English and French, fails to create any political awareness.

Robis Although all events are seen and represented through the narrator, other characters’ speeches and utterances retain their own distinctive features. The policemen who come to investigate the crime occasionally speak to one another in English. It is a significant point in itself that the narrator does not report the English words used by the policemen: “Si lisyen la santi kitsoz bizar, la sipa ki zot dir an angle, e zot swiv lisyen la” (If the dog sniffs something funny, they mutter something in English, and follow it) (34). It implies, first of all, that the narrator, like most inhabitants of Ros Bwa, does not understand English, and reinforces a point made earlier by the narrator, “Si resi pas form sink, mirak” (To get through your ‘O’ Levels is a miracle) (32). Moreover, this reference to code-switching clearly shows that the policemen use the official language, English, as an intragroup code, safe in the knowledge that those outside their occupational group: i.e. the ordinary inhabitants of Ros Bwa, will not understand. Whereas the command of different languages in a multilingual context favours integration and strengthens social links, monolingualism in M C provokes feelings of powerlessness and alienation from the areas where official languages are used. As a sharp contrast to the narrator’s confessional style of speech is the public register of politicians. Although the words of the Police Commissioner are not represented verbatim but in the form of a summary reported by the narrator, particularities of the Commissioner’s formal communiqué are conveyed: Dan so kominike, komiser ti reiter so determinasyon pu konbat le krim, e ti rasir popilasyon ek dimunn La Salinn ki li pu fer tu pu aret le kupab. […] Me misye Cushing, dan so maynanimite, tu dimunn ti al rod sinifikasyon sa mo la apre, ti donn garanti ki dan ka de krim La Salinn, vre kupab ki pu trape, pa buk emiser. (36) In his brief, the superintendent reiterated his determination to combat crime, and reassured the population and the inhabitants of La Salinn that he would do anything to stop the culprit. […] But Mr Cushing, in his magnanimity, everyone looked up the meaning of the word later, gave the guarantee that in the case of the two murders of La Salinn, it was the real culprit who would be arrested and not some scapegoat.

½¾

The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

213

The repeated acrolectal use of the article “le” in “le krim” and “le kupab” instead of ‘krim’ (crime) and ‘kupab’ (culprit) as well as the use of the acrolectal verb “reiter” and noun “maynanimite” are marked syntactic and lexical features. The narrator, in fact, comments ironically on the use of the word “maynanimite,” since the inhabitants had to look up the meaning of the latter noun, pointing out that figures of authority self-consciously use a register of formality close to the acrolect in order to impress the layman. [What about the apparent malapropism of ‘escape goat’ for ‘scapegoat’?]

Jericho Although complex sentences are the norm, there are syntactic shifts in the narrative voice as it adapts itself to the consciousnesses of other characters and reveals their perspectives. Virahsawmy manipulates syntax to reflect the simplemindedness of the inhabitants of Jericho: 1 [Dan Jericho routinn pe donn bal], [labitid souiv labitid san fatig]. 2 [Sak sitoiyen [san get divan-deryer], pe tras so lazurne ek so aswar

kouma so gran-dimoun avan li.] 3 [Lavi ti koumsa], [pou res koumsa], [pou toultan koumsa.] (1) 1 [In Jericho, routine predominates], [habits pursue further habits relentlessly.] 2 [Each citizen [without thinking very much], is going about his / her day and evening like his / her ancestos previously did.] 3 [Life was like that], [will remain the same], [will always be the same.]

Paratactic constructions and asyndetic coordination predominate, with the exception of subordination in sentence 2, so that syntax supports content. A similar syntactic change takes place when the narrator reproduces the thoughts of a character. In a flashback, the narrator describes Kamini’s first encounter with the priest Martin: 1 Ler li ti trouv li pou lapremier foi Kamini ti gagn enn sok. 2 Vadire li ti retrouv so papa kan li ti dan leral. 3 Telman zot ti resanble. 4 Sof ki so papa ti enpe pli gro. 5 Extra sa resanblans la. (10)

214

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

1 When she saw him for the first time, she was shocked. 2 As if she recognised her father when he was on his death bed. 3 They looked so alike. 4 Except that her father had been a bit fatter. 5 Incredible that likeness.

There is a movement from sentence 1 to 5 from the voice of the narrator to the increasingly permeating consciousness of the character Kamini. The syntax in the last four sentences is close to the context of orality and segmented into utterances, rather than the carefully constructed sentences of the narrator. The final exclamative sentence is a direct reproduction of Kamini’s thoughts at that particular time. The short sentences also convey effectively the element of shock in Kamini’s discovery. The analysis below investigates the impact of increased expressive needs in terms of tense and aspect, and the use of prepositions and connectives made by the three authors in the construction of significantly different narratives. It also assesses the degree of codification in terms of orthography and the regulated use of some grammatical words.

Verb Tense and Aspect Misyon Garson Collen’s narrative is carried out predominantly in the present tense. When making a flashback to the past, the narrator switches to the past tense with the marker “ti,” but only over a couple of sentences, before reverting to the historical present, as is characteristic of oral narratives. In “Mo ti oredi amenn enn sapo” (I should have brought a hat) (52), and “Mo ti oredi rapel sa” (I should have remembered that) (67), she makes use of the past conditional in MC by borrowing from French the compound form aurai/s/t dû (should have). But she adapts the compound to MC syntax by using it as one lexeme marking aspect. “Oredi,” which provides a means of expressing another temporal dimension while respecting the specificity of MC , can be seen as an example of the increasing grammaticalization that accompanies writing. Collen also uses a form of the acrolectal copula être in “Zistwar ki finn fer mwa kontan pu et vivan” (The story which made me happy to be alive) (187). In a pseudo-cleft sentence, Collen employs the acrolectal form “se” (from c’est ‘it is’) in “Seki sok mwa se

½¾

The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

215

konsekans telman vast […]” (What shocks me is the enormous consequence […]) (123).

Robis Robis, which starts off in the past tense with the past marker “ti,” effectively moves forward to the present towards the end as the narrator rushes to finish this novel, describing events as they take place, so that the time of narration coincides with the time of the occurrence of events, as in a live-commentary mode. This switch intensifies the mock-reality aspect of the novella and helps to build up towards the climax where the police break into the narrator’s house as he writes the last words: “Mo kwar mo pa pu resi terminn sa roman la. Mo tann zot pe defons laport” (I think I won’t be able to complete this novel. I hear them breaking down the door) (91). Writing most of the novella in the past tense, the narrator manipulates various temporal levels. The anteriority of events, for example, is represented by the consistent use of the past perfect: “Lagazet ti mete apre ki aparaman lasasin, apre ki li tinn fini tuy Bede, finn pas dan kodan” (The newspaper later claimed that apparently the killer, after he had killed Bede, went through Kodan) (35). Assonne also uses the passive form on various occasions in both the present and the past tenses. In “kumadir premye fwa enn dimunn dan landrwa pe asasine” (18) (as if it’s the first time that someone in the neighbourhood is being murdered), the passive form is appropriately combined with the continuous aspect to maintain the criminal’s anonymity and to reinforce the closeness of the crime in terms of space and time. The passive is also used in the past, “naryen pa finn kokin dan labutik” (nothing had been stolen from the shop) (18), which again allows the narrator to avoid the use of an agent, thereby sustaining the suspense. A marked feature of the syntactic patterns of the novella is the use of the acrolectal form “sete,” the past form of the French copula (c’était ‘it was’), in “sete enn abitan La Salinn mem ki ti pe fer sa bann krim la” (it was a resident of La Salinne who was committing those crimes) (55), for example. The fact that this additional grammaticalization is not identified with an acrolectal register but is part of the narrator’s idiolect suggests that, to Assonne, both the present and past forms of the copula are seen as accepted MC features.

216

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Jericho Virahsawmy’s use of the passive, apart from sustaining the voice of the narrator as impersonal observer, creates various effects. 1 Toulede landroi ti bien devlope par zot propriyeter, bann Euro-Kreol, desandan bann premie pionie ki ti vinn pou etablir lor sa bout later lor kontinan Lafrik. 1 Both regions were well developed by their owners, the Euro-Creoles, descendants of the first pioneers who had come to settle on this bit of land on the African continent.

The use of the passive form in the first sentence, by re-allocating agent and object to an unusual place in the sentence, draws attention to both and also disturbs the unmarkedness of an S V O syntactic pattern. Re-allocating items occupying thematic and focal position allows the author to give end focus and end weight to the agentive item, “Euro-Kreol,” which he goes on to specify through apposition. The first characteristic of creoles pointed out by Bickerton is that focused constituents are restricted to the front of the sentence as a means of marking focus.24 The passive, therefore, provides a different means of foregrounding than movement rules. Virahsawmy also makes use of the passive form in the past perfect tense in “Ler bann invite ti pre pou koumans arive tou ti finn fini pare” (When the guests were almost there, everything had been prepared) (13). Like Assonne, he uses the copula, “se” (c’est ‘it is’): Premie demars bann anset Euro-Kreol se fer vinn sex-worker pou deblok leren bann zom (…). Deziem demars se aste esklav pou fer travay dan lakaz ek dan karo. (6) The first enterprise of the Euro-Kreol’s ancestors was to get sexworkers brought over to unbind the men’s waists (…). The second enterprise was to buy slaves to carry out house chores and work in the fields.

It is however, of relevance that although these two sentences are situated in the past, the author does not use the past tense of the copula “sete”

24

Derek Bickerton, Roots of Language (Ann Arbor M I : Karoma, 1981).

½¾

The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

217

(c’était ‘it was’), which suggests that Virahsawmy sees the use of “se” as an emphatic device, rather than the present form of the French copula.

Evidence of Increasing Codification and Grammaticalization Collen uses the L P T orthography while Virahsawmy uses the Catholic Church’s proposed standard orthography (1999). In terms of establishing word boundaries, all three authors use consistent principles that take into account the lexical structures of MC , especially in terms of the agglutination of the articles “le” and “la,” which is a problematic area in the early novels. In terms of word boundaries, Virahsawmy represents the agglutinated nominal forms that are typical of MC lexis – for example, “dorizinn” in “zot pei dorizinn” (their country of origin) (7). Although he uses an acrolectal lexicon, as demonstrated above, the drawing of word boundaries does not bring written MC any closer to French. Assonne’s decision to abide by LPT ’s orthography could be seen to be pragmatically motivated, since their orthography has been instrumentalized through the yearly literacy classes. Nevertheless, more widely disseminated on a daily basis are the orthographic conventions, broadly etymological in nature, commonly used by journalists to transcribe snippets of direct or reported speech in MC in articles that are otherwise entirely in French. As a journalist himself, Assonne makes a conscious ideological rejection of the etymological conventions of the media representation of MC , opting instead for an orthography that systematically asserts the autonomy of MC in relation to French. Moreover, while an etymological orthography bears an important bias towards readers already literate in French, using the L P T orthography does not alienate those who are monolingual and monoliterate in MC . Almost thirty years since the first orthography of maximal deviance was proposed,25 maintaining the autonomous image of MC is still high on the agenda of key ‘aménageurs’. In line with his chosen orthographic conventions, Assonne also transcribes all proper names phonologically, starting with the location “Ros Bwa,” which, officially, is written “Roche Bois.” The same applies to various characters’ names – for example, “Zaninn” (Jeannine) (15), as well as English proper names, “Rwayal Sekspir Kompeni” (Royal Shakespeare Company) (41). A comparison between the inconsistent graphic syntax of 25

Virahsawmy, “Pour un parler national,” L’Express (12 August 1967).

218

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

the early novels26 and the conventionalized one of the more recent novels considered in this chapter illustrates a crucial move from a diffused situation, characterized by more relaxed orthographic norms, to an increasingly focused one27 where spelling, grammar, and punctuation are conventionalized to meet the requirements of a print language. This development is an important element of codification which also enhances the status of MC . Virahsawmy’s systematized use of prepositions and conjunctions has already been commented on in Chapter 4. Both Collen and Assonne make more or less systematic use of the prepositions “ar” and the conjunctions “ek” and “e.” The distinction between “ar” as preposition and “ek” as coordinating conjunction is clear in Collen’s writing, as illustrated in the following example: “Dan mo sak, ena osi enn po zasar bilinbi, ena enn duzenn limon, ek ena enn gardmanze ranpli ar kari zezye” (In my bag, there is also a jar of pickle, a dozen lemons, and a tupperware full of curry) (47). Like Virahsawmy, she uses the coordinating conjunction “e” to coordinate two clauses, “mo rapel e mo truv li anmemtan” (I remember and see it at the same time) (62). Further grammaticalization is also illustrated in “Anpes gayn drwa a lib sirkilasyon dan mo prop pei” (obstruct the right to free movement in my own country) (12), where Collen uses the acrolectal preposition “a” (à ‘to’). Two further prepositions that appear in both Collen’s and Assonne’s works are “de” (de ‘of/from’) in, for example, “lavi kumans kalme otur de mwa” (life starts to calm down around me) (Misyon Garson, 52), and “avek” (avec ‘with’), as in “avek sa de malere kas” (with these two damn shillings) (Robis, 15). These syntactic innovations suggest that ten years after the first publication of the dictionary (1985), which does not acknowledge these grammatical words, the written elaboration of MC has made the use of these prepositions necessary. Despite an acrolectal register in terms of lexicon, however, Virahsawmy, unlike Collen and Assonne, avoids the use of the acrolectal preposition “avek” and that of the preposition “a” (à) independently. In Virahsawmy’s text, meaning is logically explicit and finely differentiated through copious use of connectives.

26 27

See Ramharai, La Littérature Mauricienne d’expression créole. Le Page & Tabouret–Keller, Acts of Identity, 116.

½¾

The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

219

1 Parfoi Fatma ti pe montre bann sign ki li trouv tousa fatigan me pa Nann. 2 Sa pa vedir ki Nann ti pli for. 3 Nann ti konn bliye problem, bes latet, fons dan nouvo aktivite. 4 Par kont Fatma ki ti ena enn gran lafors karacter, pa ti kontan zoue bliye; li ti alez selman kan li ti konpran enn problem net, san fos lizour. 5 Akoz sa, malgre so sourir akeyan ek so konpreansion, tanzantan enn niaz kasiet briyans so lalimier. (13) 1 At times Fatma gave hints that she found all that tiring, but not Nann. 2 That does not mean that Nann was stronger. 3 Nann knew how to forget problems, keep his head down, charge into

new activities. 4 On the other hand, Fatma, who had great strength of character, did not like to pretend oblivion, she was at ease only when she understood a problem in depth, without misapprehensions. 5 That was why, despite her welcoming smile and her understanding nature, from time to time a cloud hides the brilliance of her light.

The first sentence is introduced by a time distributor, “parfoi” (at times). The contrastive conjunction “me” (but) specifies Nann’s position. Sentence 4 is introduced by the contradictive “par kont” (on the other hand). The last sentence is introduced by the causal connector “Akoz sa” (that was why), followed immediately by “malgre” (despite) and, finally, the temporal distributor “tanzantan” (from time to time). Sentences are fashioned with fastidious care, with elaborate intersentential, extrasentential, and textual connections, further creating the effect of tightly constructed syntax. Connectives run from one sentence to the next in a scheme of linkage, producing a ‘progressive’ text in the sense given to it by Fowler: i.e. one that projects the reader forward smoothly through temporal and logical ongoingness.28 Connections between sentences are clearly demonstrated, filling in the gap present in the succession of two sentences, thus making the desired meaning evident and precise through modification and amplification.

½¾

28

Fowler, Literature as Social Discourse, 72.

220

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Conclusion Creating the novel in M C leads to an important instance of intellectualization as the precise lexical items and registers appropriate to modern society in the field of politics, culture, technology, and ethnicity are devised. Indeed, the need to convey complex as well as subtle ideas, emotions, and events leads to the expansion of the lexicon. Virahsawmy, in particular, discusses postcolonial diasporic identity through extensive new terminology that specifically evokes the title of his novel by means of allusion to ‘walls’. The distinctive identity of the narrator in each of the novels is represented by carefully selected lexical features. The elaboration of registers, which allows speakers to use language to define themselves in what Le Page and Tabouret–Keller refer to as “acts of identity,”29 social situations, and various functions, indicates the increasing complexity of MC and its ability to function in a wide range of formal and written situations. All three authors demonstrate that linguistic expansion in the case of MC is not restricted to borrowings from the acrolect but follows similar patterns to non-creole languages, particularly through the use of conversion, neologisms, coinages, compounds, and metaphors. As the expressive and referential range of written MC expands, its syntax also becomes more complex. In terms of verb tense and aspect, the authors make full use of the spectrum of tense and aspect available in MC , including the passive, which can be seen to be, by now, an established verb form in MC . Virahsawmy’s prose, which is the more distanced from a context of orality, displays a wider range of hypotactic constructions and periodic sentences. There is evidence throughout the three texts of the added grammaticalization that necessarily accompanies the transformation of a written medium.30 Instead of seeing the latter feature as a sign of decreolization involving incursions into the syntax of MC , it can be interpreted as simply a linguistic development no different from that of French from Latin. Furthermore, there is a significant degree of codification in terms of the systematized use of orthographic conventions, word-boundary, and function words which suggests a consensual approach among the three writers. The corpus ‘aménagement’ observed in the later novels, in terms of elaboration and codification, suggests an in29

Robert Le Page & Andrée Tabouret–Keller, Acts of Identity: Creole-Based Approaches to Language and Ethnicity (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 1985). 30 Hazaël–Massieux, “La Littérature Créole: Entre l’oral et l’écrit,” 210–11.

½¾

The Novel: Establishing the Narrative Voice

221

creasing degree of standardization. The analysis of key linguistic aspects of these novels disproves Ramharai’s theory that intrinsic features in the structures of MC make it incompatible with the genre of the novel. In terms of status planning, the very act of writing in one of the most prestigious literary genres is a deliberate effort to revalorise MC by providing it with a new source of legitimacy, that of the language of fictional prose. In fact, Marimoutou describes the construction of a written narrative register as a final debunking step in relation to diglossia involving a creole language.31 Indeed, the establishment of MC as a narrative voice marks an advanced phase in literary development and establishes the code on a level of authority.

½¾

31

Jean–Claude Carpanin Marimoutou, “Le roman réunionnais, une problématique du Même et de l’Autre: Essai sur la poétique du texte romanesque en situation de diglossie” (doctoral dissertation, Université Paul-Valéry, 1990): 75.

Conclusion From Creole to Standard via Shakespeare

C

HANTAL ZABUS’S assertion in relation to language planning that “writers will often prove to be reliable precursors of governmental implementation”1 certainly holds true in the case of Mauritius. What is being witnessed in relation to MC is a bottom-up sociolinguistic change: i.e. the initiative on the part of individuals to perform linguistic change is being supported at governmental level. It is true that lexicographers and linguists interested in the genesis or description of MC , for example, have brought an element of scientific rigour and prestige to the study of the language. The impact of creative writing by those held in high social esteem on standardization is, however, particularly significant. Literature in MC has acted as both an indicator of language attitudes and a catalyst of language change. Although both English and French exert a strong attraction for some creative writers, other values have pushed a growing group of writers strongly towards the use and development of MC as a literary language. In this movement, Virahsawmy’s committed, forty years’ engagement in the promotion of MC remains a signal achievement. Given his interlinked social, political, literary, and linguistic goals, he occupies a privileged position in performing two functions that are intimately linked with the standardization of the vernacular: its linguistic development through codification and elaboration, and the legitimization of the vernacular through the illustration of its literary functions. This conclusion summarizes the main findings of this study in terms of the influence of creative writing on the corpus and status

1

Chantal Zabus, The African Palimpsest, 32 (rev. ed. 35).

224

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

planning of MC , and considers the potential impact of these findings on wider academic fields. The development of literature in MC away from the militant navelgazing of protest literature, which was often close to écriture, towards an attempt at littérature has led to a significant amount of corpus planning. As MC is used in new literary territories, it is revealed to be a dynamic and expanding language with diverse means of lexical elaboration. In addition, the writers’ works demonstrate syntactic elaboration, illustrating the fact that the syntax of MC , far from being simple or (according to Jacques Lee – see Chapter 1) even non-existent, is a creative linguistic resource. In narrative prose, in particular, extra grammaticalization, relativization, passivization, and nominalization, further characteristics of written language, have become used with increasingly frequency. The microlinguistic findings of the analysis suggest that the later literary works can be situated between stages 2 and 3 on Hazaël–Massieux’s scale of language standardization.2 In fact, Virahsawmy’s narrative prose, characterized as it is by lexical and syntactic formality and complexity, can be said to be at stage 3, and a potential model for a written standard. Even if some of his lexical and grammatical applications and innovations could be determined to be idiolectal, an influential writer’s neologisms nevertheless have an important part to play in the linguistic elaboration of MC , particularly at this point in its history. Reference was made in Chapter 1 to Butler’s point that it is by their range of styles, and not by their linguistic features, that ‘developed’ languages are recognized and distinguished from ‘undeveloped’ ones.3 From a broad stylistic perspective, since the literary register is seen as “the most powerful and complex language developed by a community,”4 the creation of literary texts in any genre in MC already provides it with this new register. Secondly, by working across several genres, subgenres, and translations, the authors demonstrate that MC has had at its disposal a range of registers associated with standard languages. Furthermore, it was 2 As described in greater detail in Chapter 1, Hazaël–Massieux highlights four stages of linguistic development – from oral literature (stage 1), through graphicization (stage 2) and a crucial stage where the establishment and codification of rules transform the language into a written form (stage 3), to an autonomous standard written form established after centuries of use (stage 4). 3 Butler, Registering the Difference, 13. 4 David Crystal, Linguistics, 30.

½¾

Conclusion

225

observed that norms differ from author to author, either under the pressure of individual authors’ “fingerprinting”5 or under that of the contexts surrounding the readers/audience, revealing the stylistic richness of MC . The register analysis of texts revealed that literature in MC encourages and illustrates the development of a stylistic continuum in the language, thereby conferring on MC further characteristics of a standard language. Code-switching was also shown to be a useful stylistic device in the construction of MC as a literary language. Code-switching to English and French seems to be less tolerated by those literary characters who have a highly developed understanding of their language and a high opinion of it. An MC literary voice thus establishes itself as a voice of authority in relation to the marked codes, which are often used for the purposes of comedy or satire. Although a standard form has not been prescribed through literature, since writers function as ‘aménageurs’ and not as authoritarian language planners, creative writing provides a medium for identifying efficient varieties of MC for written communication. Moreover, there are emerging norms, particularly in the use of grammatical words and the establishment of word boundaries and orthographic conventions that are accepted and implemented by a small but influential community of writers. Whereas Mark Sebba points out that most writers using Jamaican or other Caribbean creoles continue to use etymological orthographies (traditional English spellings with modifications, resulting in a large amount of variation in spelling6), forty years of experimentation in Mauritius has produced a high degree of convergence and stability in orthographic standardization. My case study confirms the theory posited by several linguists that writing is a complex factor in language standardization. Indeed, as seen with orthographic conventions, since the written message assumes the qualities of a visible object which can be investigated and regulated, the standardization process becomes both a possibility and a necessity. Moreover, the diachronic variations in Virahsawmy’s orthographies have been the result of his experimentation with different writing systems at different points in his writing career. Literature in MC has thus served as a testing-ground 5

Stanley Fish, “What Is Stylistics and Why Are They Saying Such Terrible Things About It?” (1979), in Essays in Modern Stylistics, ed. Donald Freeman (London: Methuen, 1981): 57. 6 Sebba, Contact Languages, 245.

226

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

for the possible success of an orthographic form. The analysis further revealed that creative writing and translation foreground both the ‘abstand’ and the ‘ausbau’ aspects of MC , as they highlight a focused standard in a linguistic situation which is sometimes perceived as diffuse. Chapters 4 and 5 aimed to test Even–Zohar’s theory that the part played by translation in a literature is inherently connected with the historical evolution of that literature. It was revealed that Virahsawmy’s calculated choice of Shakespeare as source text and his translation strategy consolidate a literary corpus in MC and change several literary and linguistic paradigms. MC emerges as a language that can accommodate both Shakespeare’s tragedy and comedy as comfortably as does the source language. Literary translation therefore acts positively on both the corpus of MC , through a demonstration of its linguistic range, and on its status, by transforming it into the language of Shakespeare. Shakespeare’s hypercanonicity, combined with Virahsawmy’s own cultural capital, makes of the translations considered potential models of standardization. Exploring the extent to which the primary norms generated by Virahsawmy’s translations enrich the target language through the acceptance and diffusion of these new trends in a second phase would be productive, although this remains beyond the bounds of the present study. What an investigation of translations does reveal, however, is the linguistic patterning of MC . It is often argued that translation language differs from source-text language, in that it does not refer to objects in the real world but to a linguistic formulation and that it thereby constitutes a kind of metalanguage. The analyses in Chapters 4 and 5 revealed that Virahsawmy’s translations of The Tempest, Hamlet, and Much Ado about Nothing generate distinct rules across the three plays. At the same time, however, his translation work functions within the larger literary system of his creative writing, so that it performs in much the same way as his original work. While the analysis of his translations did reveal a significant degree of metalanguage in MC , this could be attributed to the metalinguistic focus of Shakespeare combined with the particular metaliterariness of literature in creole identified by Lang and illustrated in the analysis. Virahsawmy’s sustained literary efforts in MC were revealed to be a productive field of engagement, an ongoing process of renegotiating the prestige of MC , and as providing some of the historical and sociocultural factors that emphasize the autonomous status of the language. The Mauritian writer Jean–Georges Prosper, who, in the 1960s, referred to M C as a

½¾

Conclusion

227

vulgar patois with no social use, acknowledged, in his 2000 anthology, the importance of MC as the medium of a significant and expanding amount of literature: The return in strength of the Creole language was initiated on the socio-cultural level – or perhaps ‘kiltirel’ – supported by an arsenal of politics and ideology. Dev Virahsawmy is the great bard of this language, transforming it into a powerful vehicle for poetry and equipping it with new dynamism through his various translations–adaptations of the oeuvres of Shakespeare, Molière and Hugo.7

This literary development has caused a change in the view of MC from dialect to language. Indeed, Prosper, in writing “kiltirel” (culturel ‘cultural’), acknowledges the autonomous status of MC through an established phonemic orthography. By illustrating the H(igh) functions of MC and thereby dispelling some of the deeply entrenched language myths, literature has functioned as a major driving force behind the legitimization of the vernacular. MC benefits from acceptance (the fourth but crucial step mentioned by Haugen). Prosper’s reference to the Creole “language” suggests that the discursive representation of the Mauritian vernacular has been subject to significant transformation. Moving on from its early description as ‘patois’, the Mauritian vernacular has, since independence, more commonly been referred to as ‘Mauritian creole’ or ‘Mauritian French creole’. While it is common to precede pidgins and creoles with the name of the country where they are spoken as well as the lexifier language, as in the latter example, this formula reinforces the image of the pidgin or creole as a non-standard variant of the colonial language. LPT have, however, used the term ‘Kreol’ consistently and in accordance with their attempt to situate the Mauritian vernacular and society within the wider context of pidgin and creole studies. Virahsawmy has advocated “Morisien” since 1967, for reasons already mentioned. While an independence in name: i.e. cutting

7

“Et le retour en force de la langue créole allait être amorcé sur le plan socio-culturel – ou plutôt ‘kiltirel’ – porté par tout un arsenal politico-idéologique. Dev Virahsawmy en serait le grand chantre, transformant la langue en un véhicule puissant de poésie et lui prêtant à travers ses traduction–adaptations des oeuvres de Shakespeare, Molière, Hugo, une nouvelle dynamique” (Anthologie de la littérature mauricienne d’expression française, vii).

228

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

off the ‘creole’ part, may not signify the end of stigmatization, it is supported by Virahsawmy for further reasons: Creole / creolization is a stage in the evolution of a contact language. but Morisien has reached an advanced stage of development. It is only legitimate that it should be given the name of the people for whom it is now a criterion in defining their national identity […].8

It may make sense to discard a term which is seen by several linguists as linguistically arbitrary and, historically, certainly problematic. Renaming the vernacular ‘Mauritian’ might also be a means of getting away from what Degraff terms the “Creole Exceptionalism” created by colonialism, which assumes a-priori, fundamental differences between creole and noncreole languages in terms of both development and structure.9 There is, moreover, as demonstrated throughout this book, copious evidence of linguistic evolution away from the simplicity and reduction with which MC was originally associated in the early creolization period towards full language status. Virahsawmy’s initial suggestion of ‘Mauritian’ rather than ‘Mauritian creole’ did not entail the immediate dispersal of restrictive associations. A change in name, just like a change in language policy, can only be successful if it is supported from below by a broader basis rather than on the basis of an authoritative demand. In the light of the recent transformations of status and corpus which MC has been subjected to, it remains to be seen whether it will be renamed ‘Mauritian’. The next few, closing paragraphs evaluate further the impact of these findings on studies of MC , language planning, pidgin and creole studies, Shakespeare, and postcolonial studies. The very act of subjecting literature in MC to the advanced level of stylistic analysis, which is seen as the imprimatur of languages that benefit from diachronic depth, draws attention to the fully-fledged linguistic structures of MC and provides it with a sense of diachronic and synchronic depth. This study thus not only highlights the processes of standardization that MC has already been undergoing through creative writing but also foregrounds the literary texts that have been the most influential 8

Tranquille, Interview with Dev Virahsawmy. Degraff defines “Creole Exceptionalism” as “a set of beliefs, widespread among both linguists and nonlinguists, that Creole languages form an exceptional class on phylogenetic and or typological grounds.” 9

½¾

Conclusion

229

in this process and that may be used for pedagogical purposes. In this respect this case study has a constructive bearing on the recent proposals for the implementation of MC in formal education. In fact, in documenting key aspects of the history and processes of the standardization of MC , the analysis underlines at least some of the highly ideological underpinnings that have finally made the current sociolinguistic climate conducive to the official implementation of a major language policy that meets the postcolonial specificities of Mauritius. The case of MC confirms Wright’s and Spolsky’s proposition that most top-down language planning is ineffectual and that language engineering has a greater chance of success when the ideological underpinnings of the new patterns of language use are obvious. Indeed, the ideology of nationalism in the early years of Mauritian independence failed to convince the majority of the population to accept MC . On the other hand, the congruity of a minimal degree of recognition of language rights related to the provision of a more democratic distribution of knowledge, the consensual ideology or language beliefs regarding MC , the degree to which it has already penetrated the sociolinguistic repertoire as witnessed through the act of writing literature in MC – all these make of current language management in Mauritius a potential success. A further specificity of the case of MC is that it is one of the few creoles to be developing without undergoing decreolization. The linguistic and literary journey of MC , therefore, has the potential to redress the view of creoles as deviations from European norms which would ultimately merge back into the European language. MC , far from being a “linguistic dodo,”10 has been spreading its wings, moving out of the domains in which it was traditionally used towards new and prestigious ones. Along this journey, it is developing its own resources as well as exploiting the multilingual sociolinguistic situation of Mauritius. Literature in MC prospers not in isolation but absorbs influences through translation and engagement with the multilingual and multicultural environment, including oral and folk traditions. The success story of MC provides a potentially influential postcolonial case study for language planners. As a thriving literary language, it also makes a positive response to the concern within postcolonial studies that the growth of literatures in Eng-

10

Degraff, “Linguists’ Most Dangerous Myth,” 552.

230

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

lish could be at the expense of other languages and literatures.11 M C is not only the most effective language for dramatic experimentation in the multilingual context of Mauritius but works in MC are, in turn, translated into languages of wider access, in particular English and French. The translation of Toufann into French and English helps to establish a twoway flow between MC and established European languages. Through Border Crossings’ production of the play in London (1999)12 and the international conference “Toufann and other Tempests: Shakespeare in Postcolonial Contexts,”13 of which it was the focus, Toufann has gained international viability. The fact that Collen’s novel Boy, originally written in MC (Misyon Garson, 1997) and later translated into English, won the Commonwealth Prize for Africa in 2005 provides further indication that MC is a world literary language. Since translated languages are usually the ones that hold the greatest socio-political power, translations from MC texts are of paramount significance in their effect of representing the autonomous status of the source language. Finally, in the process of investigating the productive act of translating classical texts into the Mauritian vernacular, the present study, in ancillary fashion, has also endeavoured to suggest new views of the dialogue between Shakespeare in translation and postcolonial studies. The paradox of using Shakespeare to promote the Mauritian vernacular was seen to lead to creative tensions in Virahsawmy’s translation strategies. While elaborating a single model for translation in postcolonial contexts would be restrictive and futile, given the breadth of historical trajectories across postcolonial nations, the study of one particular translator in one particular postcolonial context may inform theories of (Shakespeare in) translation in wider postcolonial contexts.

½¾

11

Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o, Decolonizing the Mind; Talib, The Language of Postcolonial Literatures: An Introduction (London: Routledge, 2002). 12 Toufann was produced by Border Crossings and directed by Michael Walling at the African Centre in London in 1999. 13 Birkbeck College, London, November 1999.

Works Cited

Adamson, Sylvia. “Literary Language,” in The Cambridge History of the English Language, vol. 3: 1476–1776, ed. Roger Lass (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 1998): 539–653. Adone, Dany. “Creolization and Language Change in Mauritian Creole” (1994), in Creolization and Language Change, ed. Adone & Plag, 23–43. ——, & Ingo Plag, ed. Creolization and Language Change (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, 1994). Alleyne, Mervyn. “Problems of Standardization of Creole Languages,” in Language and the Social Construction of Identity in Creole Situations, ed. Marcyliena Morgan (Berkeley: University of California, Center for Afro-American Studies, 1994): 7–18. Asgarally, Azize. Ratsitatane (Port–Louis: Hart Printing, 1984). Asgarally, Issa. Littérature et Révolte (Mauritius: Le Flamboyant, 1985). ——, ed. Étude pluridisciplinaire sur l’exclusion à Maurice: Rapport final 1997 (Réduit: Government Printer, 1997). Asgarally, Renée. Quand montagne prend dife (Mascarena University Publications, 1977). Assonne, Sedley. Robis (Rose-Hill: L P T , 1997). Baeumer, Max. “Luther and the Rise of the German Literary Language: A Critical Reassessment” (1984), in The Emergence of National Languages, ed. Baeumer & Scaglione, 95–117. ——, & Aldo Scaglione, ed. The Emergence of National Languages (Ravenna: Longo Editore, 1984). Baggioni, Daniel, & Jean–Claude Carpanin Marimoutou, ed. Formes-sens / identités (Saint-Denis: Université de La Réunion, 1989). ——, & Didier de Robillard. Île Maurice: Une francophonie paradoxale (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1990). Baissac, Charles. Étude sur le patois créole mauricien (Nancy, 1880). ——. Le folk-lore de l’Île Maurice (1888; Paris: Maisonneuve & Larose, 1967). Baker, Philip. “The Contribution of Non-Francophone Immigrants to the Lexicon of Mauritian Creole” (doctoral dissertation, University of London, 1982).

232

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

——. “On the Development of Certain Prepositional Forms in Mauritian and Other French Creoles” (1996), in Matériaux pour l’étude des classes grammaticaux dans les langues créoles, ed. Véronique, 41–59. ——. Kreol: A Description of Mauritian Creole (London: C. Hurst, 1972). ——, & Chris Corne. Isle de France Creole: Affinities and Origins (Ann Arbor M I : Karoma, 1982). ——, & Vinesh Hookoomsing. Morisyen–English–Français: Dictionnaire du créole mauricien (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1986). Bakhtin, Mikhail. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, ed. Michael Holquist, tr. Caryl Emerson & Michael Holquist (Austin: U of Texas P , 1981). ——. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays, ed. Caryl Emerson & Michael Holquist (Austin: U of Texas P , 1994). Bassnett, Susan, & Andre Lefevere. “Preface” to Translation, Poetics and the Stage, ed. Romy Heylen (London: Routledge, 1993). Bauer, Winifred. “Some Languages have no Grammar,” in Language Myths, ed. Laurie Bauer & Peter Trudgill (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1998): 77–84. Blake, Norman. Shakespeare’s Language: An Introduction (London: Macmillan, 1983). Bernabé, Jean. Fondal-natal: Grammaire basilectale approchée des créoles guadeloupéen et martiniquais (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1986). ——, Patrick Chamoiseau & Raphaël Confiant. Éloge de la Créolité (Paris: Gallimard, 1989), tr. by M.B. Taleb–Khyar as In Praise of Creoleness: Édition bilingue français / anglais (Paris: Gallimard, 1993). Bernstein, Basil. Class, Codes and Control, 2 vols. (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1971). Bex, Tony. Variety in Written English: Texts in Society: Societies in Texts (London: Routledge, 1996). Bhautoo–Dewnarain, Nandini. “Mauritian writing in English: A survey,” Wasafiri 3 (1999): 21–24. Bickerton, Derek. Roots of Language (Ann Arbor M I : Karoma, 1981). Bourdieu, Pierre. Language and Symbolic Power (Cambridge: Polity, 1991). Brisset, Annie. A Sociocritique of Translation: Theatre and Alterity in Quebec, 1968– 1988, tr. Rosalind Gill & Roger Gannon (Toronto: U of Toronto P , 1996). Butler, Lance St John. Registering the Difference: Reading Literature through Register (Manchester: Manchester U P , 1999). Calvet, Louis–Jean. Linguistique et colonialisme: Petit traité de glottophagie (Paris: Payot, 1974). Cartelli, Thomas. Repositioning Shakespeare: National Formations, Postcolonial Appropriations (London: Routledge, 1999). Chaudenson, Robert. Les Créoles (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1995).

½¾

Works Cited

233

——. Créoles et enseignment du français: Français, créolization, créoles et français marginaux: Problèmes d’apprentissage, d’enseignement des langues et d’aménagement linguistique dans les espaces créolophones (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1989). ——. Le lexique du parler créole de La Réunion (Paris: Champion, 1974). ——. Textes créoles anciens (La Réunion et Île Maurice): Comparaison et essai d’analyse (Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 1981). Chelin, Antoine. Le théâtre à l’Île Maurice: Son origine et son développement (Port– Louis: Société de l’histoire de l’île Maurice, 1954). Coates, Jennifer. Women Talk (Oxford: Blackwell, 1996). Collen, Lindsey, Misyon Garson (Rose-Hill: L P T , 1996). ——. Boy (London: Bloomsbury, 2004). Corbett, John. Written in the Language of the Scottish Nation (Clevedon: Multingual Matters, 1999). Coulmas, Florian, & Konrad Ehlich. Writing in Focus (Berlin: Mouton, 1983). Crowley, Tony. Beach-la-Mar to Bislama: The Emergence of a National Language in Vanuatu (Oxford: Oxford U P , 1990). Culpeper, Jonathan. “(Im)Politeness in Dramatic Discourse” (1998), in Exploring the Language of Drama, ed. Culpeper, Short & Verdonk, 83–95. ——, Mick Short & Peter Verdonk, ed. Exploring the Language of Drama: From Text to Context (London: Routledge, 1998). Cuttayen, Bam. Nuvo Lizur, preface by Dan Callikan (Rose-Hill: M M M S P , 1977). DeCamp, David. “Towards a Generative Analysis of a Post-Creole Speech Continuum,” in Pidginization and Creolization, ed. Dell Hymes (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 1971): 349–70. Decotter, André. Le Plaza: Un demi siècle de vie théâtrale (Port–Louis: Précigraph, 1983). Degraff, Michel. “Linguists’ Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Creole Exceptionalism,” Language in Society 34 (2005): 533–91. Eriksen, Thomas Hylland. Common Denominators: Ethnicity, Nation-Building and Compromise in Mauritius (Oxford: Berg, 1998). Evans, Benjamin. The Language of Shakespeare’s Plays (London: Methuen, 1964). Even–Zohar, Itamar. “Polysystem Studies,” Poetics Today 11.1 (1990): 9–26. ——. “The Position of Translated Literature Within the Literary Polysystem,” in Literature and Translation ed. James Holmes (Leuven: Acco, 1978): 117–27, repr. in Poetics Today 11.1 (1990): 45–51. Fanon, Frantz, Black Skin, White Masks, tr. Charles L. Markmann (Peau noire, masques blancs, 1956, tr. 1967; New York: Grove, 1967). Ferguson, Charles. “Diglossia,” Word 15 (1959): 325–40. Fish, Stanley. “What Is Stylistics and Why Are They Saying Such Terrible Things About It?” (1979), in Essays in Modern Stylistics, ed. Donald Freeman (London: Methuen, 1981): 53–78.

234

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Fishman, Joshua. “Introduction” to M O S T : Journal on Multicultural Societies 4.2 (2002). Fowler, Roger. Linguistics and the Novel (London: Methuen, 1977). ——. Literature as Social Discourse: The Practice of Linguistic Criticism (London: Batsford Academic and Educational, 1981). Gaitet, Pascale. Political Stylistics: Popular Language as Literary Artefact (London: Routledge, 1992). Gardes–Tamine, Joëlle. La Stylistique (Paris: Armand Colin, 1992). Gilroy, Paul. The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness (London: Verso, 1993). Goatly, Andrew. The Language of Metaphors (London: Routledge, 1997). Gramsci, Antonio. Selections from the Prison Notebooks, ed. & tr.. Quintin Hoare & Geoffrey Nowell–Smith (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1971). Greenbaum, Sidney, & Randolph Quirk. A Student’s Grammar of the English Language (London: Longman, 1990) Halliday, M.H.K. Language as Social Semiotic: A Discussion of Dominant Structures in Verse and Prose (London: Edward Arnold, 1978). ——. Spoken and Written Language (Oxford: Oxford U P , 1989). ——, & Ruqaiya Hasan. Cohesion in English (London: Longman, 1976). Haugen, Einar. Language Conflict and Language Planning (Cambridge M A : Harvard U P , 1966). Havránek, Bohůslav. “Emploi et culture de la langue standard” (1932), in La Norme Linguistique, ed. Edith Bédard & Jacques Maurais (Quebec City: Conseil de la langue française, 1983): 815–33. Hazaël–Massieux, Marie–Christine. Écrire en créole: Oralité et écriture aux Antilles (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1993). ——. “La littérature créole: Entre l’oral et l’écrit,” in Les créoles français entre l’oral et l’écrit, ed. Ralph Ludwig (Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 1989): 277–305. ——. “Les ‘mots-outils’ dans les écrits en créole des Petites Antilles: Proposition de classement et d’analyse” (1996), in Matériaux pour l’étude des classes grammaticaux dans les langues créoles, ed. Véronique, 77–112. Hermans, Theo. The Manipulation of Literature (London: Croom Helm, 1985). Hibbard, George R. The Making of Shakespeare’s Dramatic Poetry (Toronto: U of Toronto P , 1981). Hills, Laura. “Literacy in the Vernacular: A Case Study Based on the Post-Colonial History of Mauritius, with Particular Reference to Mauritian Creole” (doctoral dissertation, University of St Andrews, 2000). Hoenselaars, Ton. “Introduction” (2004) to Shakespeare and the Language of Translation, ed. Hoenselaars (Arden Shakespeare; London: Methuen, 2004): 1–27. Homem, Rui Carvalho. “Introduction” (2004) to Translating Shakespeare for the Twenty-First Century, ed. Homem & Hoenselaaars, 1–24.

½¾

Works Cited

235

——, & Ton Hoenselaars, ed. Translating Shakespeare for the Twenty-First Century (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2004). Hookoomsing, Vinesh. “L’emploi de la langue créole dans le contexte multilingue et multiculturel de l’Île Maurice: Une étude de son importance en tant que langue commune et des implications sociolinguistiques de son élaboration en mauricien” (doctoral dissertation, Universitée Laval, Quebec, 1987). ——. A Harmonized Writing System for the Mauritian Creole Language: Grafilarmoni (Réduit: University of Mauritius, 2004). ——. “Langue créole, littérature nationale et mauricianisme populaire,” in Anthologie de la Nouvelle Poésie Créole, ed. Lambert–Félix Prudent (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1984): 377–422. Hudson, Richard A. Sociolinguistics (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 1996). Hussey, Stanley. The Literary Language of Shakespeare (London: Longman, 1982). Hulme, Peter, & William Sherman, ed. “The Tempest” and Its Travels (London: Reaktion, 2000). Johnson, David. Shakespeare and South Africa (Oxford: Clarendon, 1996). Kermode, Frank. Shakespeare’s Language (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 2000). Kershaw, Baz. The Politics of Performance (London: Routledge, 1992). Lang, George. Entwisted Tongues: Comparative Creole Literatures (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2000). Larthomas, Pierre. Le langage dramatique (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1993). Ledikasyon Pu Travayer. Diksyoner Kreol–Angle (Port–Louis: L P T , 1985). Lee, Jacques. Mauritius: Its Creole Language; The Ultimate Creole Phrase Book and Dictionary (London: Nautilus, 1999). Leech, Geoffrey, & Michael Short. Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to English Fictional Prose (London: Longman, 1981). Lefebvre, Claire. “Les notions de style,” in La Norme Linguistique, ed. Edith Bédard & Jacques Maurais (Quebec City & Paris: Conseil de la language française, 1983): 305–35. Lefevere, André. Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame (London: Routledge, 1992). Le Page, Robert, & Andrée Tabouret–Keller. Acts of Identity: Creole-Based Approaches to Language and Ethnicity (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 1985). Lionnet, Françoise. “Creole Vernacular Theatre: Transcolonial Translations in Mauritius,” Modern Language Notes 118.4 (2003): 911–32. Loomba, Ania, & Martin Orkin, ed. Post-Colonial Shakespeares (London: Routledge, 1998). McDonald, Russ. Shakespeare and the Arts of Language (Oxford: Oxford U P , 2001). McMahon, April. Understanding Language Change (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 1994).

236

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Marimoutou, Carpanin. “Le roman réunionnais, une problématique du Même et de l’Autre: Essai sur la poétique du texte romanesque en situation de diglossie” (doctoral dissertation, Université Paul-Valéry, 1990). Milroy, James, & Lesley Milroy. Authority in Language: Investigating Standard English (London: Routledge, 1999). Mooneeram, Roshni. “Mauritius and Réunion,” in A History of Theatre in Africa, ed. Martin Banham (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 2004): 405–29. Moutou, Benjamin. Les chrétiens de l’Île Maurice (Port–Louis, Best Graphics, 1996). Mufwene, Salikoko. The Ecology of Language Evolution (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 2001). Myers–Scotton, Carol. Duelling Languages: Grammatical Structure in CodeSwitching (Oxford: Clarendon, 1993). Nash, Walter. Designs in Prose: A Study of Compositional Problems and Methods (London: Longman, 1980) Nevalainen, Terttu. “Shakespeare’s New Words” (2001), in Reading Shakespeare’s Dramatic Language, ed. Sylvia Adamson et al. (Arden Shakespeare; London: Methuen, 2001): 237–55. Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o. Decolonizing the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature (London: James Currey, 1986). Niranjana, Tejaswini. Siting Translation: History, Post-Structuralism, and the Postcolonial Context (Berkeley & Oxford: U of California P , 1992). O’Donnell, William R., & Loreto Todd. Variety in Contemporary English (London: Routledge, 1993). Ong, Walter J. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word (London: Routledge, 1993). Pask, Kevin. The Emergence of the English Author (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 1996). Periacarpen, Sami, Depi Kan Ziska Kan (roneo, 1981). Pratt, Mary Louise. Imperial Eyes: Studies in Travel Writing and Transculturation (London: Routledge, 1992). ——, & Elizabeth Closs Traugott. Linguistics for Students of Literature (New York & London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1980). Prosper, Jean–Georges. Histoire de la Littérature Mauricienne de Langue Française (Mauritius: Éditions de l’Océan Indien, 1978, 1984). ——. “Le patois-créole, le bilinguisme et Robert Edward–Hart, traducteur,” Le Mauricien (27 November 1967): 3. ——, & Danielle Tranquille. Anthologie de la littérature mauricienne d’expression française (Moka: Mahatma Gandhi Institute, 2000). Ramharai, Vicram. La Littérature Mauricienne d’expression créole: Essai d’analyse socio-culturelle (Port–Louis: Éditions Les Mascareignes, 1990). Rauville, Camille de. Lexique des mauricianismes à éviter: Des barbarismes et des solécismes les plus fréquents à l’Île Maurice (Port–Louis: Livre Mauricien, 1967).

½¾

Works Cited

237

Rickford, John. Dimensions of a Creole Continuum (Stanford C A : Stanford U P , 1987). Robillard, Didier de. “L’aménagement linguistique: Une gestion des conflits de langues?” in Langues, économie et développement, ed. Robert Chaudenson & Didier de Robillard (Montmagny: Marquis, 1989): 81–113. ——. “Le procéssus d’accession à l’écriture: Étude de la dimension sociolinguistique à travers le cas du créole mauricien” (1989), in Les créoles francais entre l’oral et l’écrit, ed. Ludwig, 81–107. Robinson, Douglas. Translation and Empire: Postcolonial Theories Explained (Manchester: St Jerome, 1997). Romaine, Suzanne. Communicating Gender (Mahwah N J & Oxford: Laurence Erlbaum Associates, 1999). ——. Language, Education and Development: Urban and Rural Tok Pisin in Papua New Guinea (Oxford: Clarendon, 1992). Said, Edward W. Orientalism (New York: Pantheon, 1978). Sebba, Mark. Contact Languages: Pidgins and Creoles (London: Macmillan, 1997). Seetohul, Jo. Jennifer, M.A.D., Ku-Deta (Rose-Hill: L P T , 1987). Seuren, Pieter. “Notes on the History and the Syntax of Mauritian Creole,” Linguistics 33.3 (1995): 531–77. Shurbanov, Alexander. “The Translatability of Shakespearean Texts into an Unrelated Language / Culture” (2004), in Translating Shakespeare for the Twenty-First Century, ed. Homem & Hoenselaaars, 51–64. Spolsky, Bernard. Language Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge U P , 2004). Stein, Peter, Connaissance et emploi des langues à l’Île Maurice (Kreolische Bibliothek; Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 1982). ——. “Problèmes liés à un parler créole dans une société multilingue: Le cas de l’Île Maurice,” in Languages in Contact, ed. Jürgen M. Meisel (Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 1977): 187–206. Syea, Anand. “The Development of Genitives in Mauritian Creole” (1994), in Creolization and Language Change, ed. Adone & Plag, 85–97. ——. “The Short and Long Forms of Verbs in Mauritian Creole, Functionalism versus Formalism,” Theoretical Linguistics 18.1 (1992): 61–97. Talib, Ismael. The Language of Postcolonial Literatures: An Introduction (London: Routledge, 2002). Tannen, Deborah, ed. Spoken and Written Language: Exploring Orality and Literacy (Norwood N J : Ablex, 1982). Taylor, Archer. The Proverb (Cambridge M A : Harvard U P , 1931). Tollefson, James. Planning Language, Planning Inequality: Language Policy in the Community (London: Longman, 1991). Toolan, Michael. Language in Literature: An Introduction to Stylistics (London: Arnold, 1998). ——. Narrative: A Critical Linguistic Introduction (London: Routledge, 1988). ——. The Stylistics of Fiction (London: Routledge, 1990).

238

FROM CREOLE TO STANDARD

½¾

Tranquille, Danielle, “Interview with Dev Virahsawmy” (2000): http://pages.intnet .mu/develog Tymoczko, Maria. Translation in a Postcolonial Context: Early Irish Literature in English Translation (Manchester: St Jerome, 1999). Ullmann, Stephen. Semantics: An Introduction to the Science of Meaning (Oxford: Blackwell, 1962). Unmole, H. ed. National Seminar on the Language Issue in Mauritius, October 4–11 1982 Proceedings (Réduit: University of Mauritius, 1984). Ure, Jean, & Jeffrey Ellis. “Register in descriptive linguistics and linguistic sociology,” in Issues in Sociolinguistics, ed. Oscar Uribe–Villegas (The Hague: Mouton, 1977): 195–207. Valayden, Gaston. “Le festival de théâtre en créole: Événement culturel de l’année,” Weekend (29 July 1979): 13. Valdman, Albert. “Creolization: Elaboration in the Development of Creole French Dialects,” in Pidgin and Creole Linguistics (Bloomington & London: Indiana U P , 1977): 155–89. Vaughan, Megan. Creating the Creole Island: Slavery in Eighteenth-Century Mauritius (Durham N C & London: Duke U P , 2005). Venuti, Lawrence. Rethinking Translation: Discourse, Subjectivity, Ideology (London: Routledge, 1992). Véronique, Daniel, ed. Matériaux pour l’étude des classes grammaticaux dans les languges créoles (Aix-en-Provence: Presse de l’Université de Provence, 1996). Vickers, Brian. The Artistry of Shakespeare’s Prose (London: Methuen, 1968). Virahsawmy, Dev. Abs Lemanifik (Rose-Hill: Bukié Banané, 1985). ——. “Back to School,” L’Express (14 September 2004): 7. ——. “Le créole et l’identité culturelle,” Études Créoles 9 (1986): 21–26. ——. “Dix Ans d’Engagement Littéraire,” Weekend (13 July 1980): 11. ——. Dropadi (Rose-Hill: Bukié Banané, 1982). ——. Enn ta Senn dan Vid (Port–Louis: L P T , 1995). ——. “Insularity and All That,” L’Express (5 October 1967). ——. Jericho (Rose-Hill: Bukié Banané, 2000). ——. Kantik (http://pages.intnet.mu/develog/poezi/kantik/htm, 2001). ——. Kayse Ba? Larivièr Tanié pé Nwayé (Rose-Hill: Boukié Banané, 1997). ——. Lafime dan Lizie (Rose-Hill: M M M S P , 1977). ——. Li (Rose-Hill: M M M S P , 1977); M C , R C , French trilingual version (SaintLouis: Les Chemins de la liberté, 1979); Li / The Prisoner of Conscience (Moka: Éditions de l’Océan Indien, 1982). ——. Les Lapo Kabri Gazuyé (Rose-Hill: Bukié Banané, 1980). ——. “Mamzel Zann,” in Au Nom de l’Amour, For the Sake of Love, Parski kontan (Immedia, 1997). ——. “Les Misérables” (unpublished but produced repeatedly in Mauritius since 1999). ——. Nwar, Nwar, Nwar do Mama (Rose-Hill: Boukie Banane, 1986).

½¾

239

Works Cited

——. “La Poésie Mauricienne d’expression créole (C M ) et la ‘culture de la langue’,” in Formes-Sens / Identites, ed. Baggioni & Marimoutou (1989): 77–104. ——. “Pour un parler national,” L’Express (12 August 1967). ——. Prins Hamlet (Rose-Hill: Boukie Banane, 2004). ——. “Quel Mauricianisme?,” M.I.E. Journal 3 (1984): 131–35. ——. “La Sacro-Sainte Graphie,” L’Express Supplément (3 March 1988). ——. Sir Toby (Port–Louis: L P T , 1998). ——. “Le système éducatif mauricien: Problèmes et possibilités,” Études Créoles 7.1– 2 (1984): 116–25. ——. Tartchif Froder (Rose-Hill: Bukié Banané, 1999). ——. Testaman enn Metchiss (Rose-Hill: Boukié Banané, 1999). ——. Ti-Marie (Rose-Hill: Bukié Banané, 2001). ——. Toufann (Rose-Hill: Boukié Banané, 1991). ——. “Towards a Re-evaluation of Mauritian Creole” (thesis, Diploma in Applied Linguistics, University of Edinburgh, 1967). ——. Trazedji Makbess (Port–Louis: L P T , 1997). ——. Trip Seré Lagorz Amaré (Rose-Hill: Bukié Banané, 1980). ——. Zeneral Makbef (Rose-Hill: Bukié Banané, 1981). ——. Zil Sezar (Rose-Hill: Bukié Banané, 1999). ——. Zozo Mayok (Rose-Hill: Bukié Banané, 1981). ——. http//pages.intnet.mu/develog Wales, Katie. A Dictionary of Stylistics (London: Longman, 1995). Wells, Stanley, & Gary Taylor, ed. William Shakespeare: The Complete Works (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994). Wilkinson, Jane. “Interviews with Dev Virahsawmy and Michael Walling,” in African Theatre, Playwrights and Politics, ed. Martin Banham, James Gibbs & Femi Osofisan (Oxford: James Currey, 2001): 109–24. Wright, Sue. Language Policy and Language Planning (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2004). Zabus, Chantal. The African Palimpsest: Indigenization of Language in the West African Europhone Novel (Cross / Cultures 4; Amsterdam & Atlanta G A : Rodopi, 1991, rev. ed. 2007). ——. Tempests After Shakespeare (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2002).

½¾