AGAINST the recent decision for Malaysia to use Bahasa Melayu (BM) "at every official function it is involved in, including at international meetings, as part of efforts to strengthen the national language" is the nagging issue of English competency in the country.
The two are not necessarily related, although it is often assumed the BM decision was made as an easy way out of not using English.
It is not an unusual situation, globally. Even most European nations prefer to speak their national language.
Not that they do not master other languages, notably English. It's more a matter of pride, precision and accuracy.
It is the issue of context and nuances that generally cannot be rendered with ease in other languages and cultural experiences.
For example, "happiness", a term that can be a challenge to translate into other European languages. It can mean "trivial hedonistic sensations" to "the most profound fulfilment" experienced by an individual. What more in non-European contexts.
That only a handful of official (mostly European) languages get translations at international meetings (like the United Nations General Assembly) forces other languages to "fit in", which is not without its consequences, politically and culturally.
Non-official languages tend to be pushed aside or forced-fit, with the risk of being lost in translation. BM (including Bahasa Malaysia and Indonesia) is a good example.
It is estimated that there are about 300 million speakers of the language worldwide, equivalent or more than some of the so-called "official" languages. Unfortunately, it is not even the official language for Asean.
The only way to push forward so that BM lives on is to speak it where it matters, as rightly announced by the prime minister.
Kudos. We may have to fork out additional costs for translation, but given the advances in online technology, the cost has fallen and will fall further in due time.
This is no comparison to the "absence" of the language (or any language for that matter) to bridge greater understanding through diplomacy, as demanded by the pandemic predicament.
As often said, eliminating a language is a sure way to cut off the lifeline of culture and heritage. This almost happened to many indigenous languages under colonisation, including BM, and many are struggling to survive.
As technology expands, it is ironic to see the extinction of languages worldwide accelerate too.
By the end of the century, the number of languages estimated to survive the technological onslaught is only in the hundreds out of the thousands today.
Their disappearance will be a great loss of knowledge and wisdom that define humanity.
With the unbridled expansion of technology, the use of artificial intelligence in particular, colonisation is brought back insidiously.
This time not in-person, but online, no matter how well it is perceived as an innocuous sharing of information multilaterally.
In short, we have come full circle, except the impact is more damaging and dehumanising now.
A case in point is translating multi-layered Malay words, like sejahtera, that have no equivalent in other languages. At most, the outcome trivialises it.
The reality is that BM is among the most easy-to-learn languages, such that most migrants can speak it in less than three months after landing in Malaysia.
They can get by comfortably, and with some coaching, can speak publicly with not much fuss.
At least relative to English, which has its idiosyncrasies and generally takes much longer to adapt to with confidence.
The mandatory use of BM is often seen a way to spare those who cannot command English well. But not the reverse somehow.
Consider how many Malaysians can speak the national language as comfortably as they do English before dismissing the need to make BM a dominant language not only nationally, but also as the lingua franca for Asean.
In this context, the decision must be supported.
The writer, an NST columnist for more than 20 years, is International Islamic University Malaysia rector