3News » Home

Maori Language Week

Did they speak Spanish or Te Reo? Did they speak Spanish or Te Reo?
Tue, 27 Jul 2010 11:17a.m.

By Nandor Tanczos

You can't force people to learn to speak Maori. Actually, you can't force people to do very much at all in the long run, which is why the PR techniques pioneered by Dr Goebbels remain such a popular means of social control.

No, Maori speaking will become more widespread in this country for the same reason that most immigrants learn to speak English: you can't be a fully functioning citizen of this country until you can speak the languages of the land.

You can get by of course, as did those old aunties I knew as a child, who had come out from Europe at an advanced age and who struggled to say more than the basics in English. Many of them spoke multiple European languages but that didn't help much in New Zealand in the 1980's so they stayed within their ethnic enclave, lived long and happy lives and never understood the country they now lived in.

What separated them, and I think most Pakeha, from the unashamedly monolingual and the proudly ignorant that I occasionally come across these days is that they understood it as a weakness. They would have changed it if they could.

I think that a growing number of people feel that about Te Reo today. It is embarrassing for both Maori and Pakeha to go on to a marae, to hear the kuia open the ceremony and lay down the kaupapa of the day with their karanga, to hear the kaumatua follow the women with whai korero, to hear the hapu stand and sing ancient chants in support, full of history and whakapapa and wisdom, and to not understand a word of it.

It is embarrassing to sit stony-faced as the assembly roars with laughter over the banter and the barbed jokes. It is discomforting to stand and mouth words to songs you don't know as the people around you fill the air with rising harmonies and deep booming notes. It is most of all disturbing to realise the extent of ones own cultural ignorance and incompetence.

For most of us that realisation of ignorance leads to a desire to learn more so as to understand more. For some others it creates a defensiveness and a retreat back to the comfort zone. Perhaps that is why some people continue to determinedly call Taranaki mountain 'Mt Egmont', continue to butcher simple Maori phrases or seek to make a virtue (and political capital) out of their refusal to spell place names correctly.

It's just the frightened child inside them, feeling lost in a complex world. Nevertheless the fact that many of us are less able than a toddler when entering a Maori environment is not really our fault.

Luckily Maori people tend to be extraordinarily forgiving of even quite serious unintended offences. They know that our education system does little, by and large, to prepare New Zealanders for the social reality of living in Aotearoa today, where the ability to walk confidently in both worlds will increasingly determine our ability to participate and succeed.

Most of us, I think, welcome this new reality. We live in Aotearoa, in Polynesia, and we reflect that in our food, our lifestyles, our attitudes and in the maorified English that we increasingly speak.

What is also clear is that, as with many other indigenous cultures around the world, the Maori worldview has something of great importance to offer a human population increasingly alienated from the natural world of which we are a part.

This is not to romanticise or wish away the many problems that Maori society faces, but simply to recognise that Maori people, after killing off the moa and irreparably changing the New Zealand environment, learned over time to live in balance with the natural ecosystems of this land and much of that knowledge remains. Pakeha culture has not yet done so, and has much to learn from tangata whenua in this regard.

Maori Language Week is a good time to acknowledge this, to do a stocktake of the state of the language and for people to pick up a few more words and phrases to bring into their lives. Hopefully it will also renew that desire in a few more of us to become true bicultural citizens.

Nandor Blog

 

 

Nandor Tanczos, is a social ecologist and rastafarian of Hungarian and Cape Coloured ancestry.

 

He has been a businessman and a beggar, a legislator and an outlaw, and is currently a community educator, freelance writer and orator.

 
Subscribe to this blog by email
  

 

Comments [25]

nick a
14 Aug 2010 10:55p.m.

You almost had me right up to the comment about how after the maori wiped out species like moa and destroyed over half of NZs forests they learned over time to live in balance with the natural ecosystems of this land. Please post the reseach to support this? as far as i am aware all large bird spp. especially flightless ones "kiwi,wood pigeon etc, were on the brink of extinction also when the europeans arrived.To imply that maori were some how living in a sustainable manner such as the aboriginals were is ridiculous!

Nandor
06 Aug 2010 04:30p.m.

Hi Scott A misunderstanding. I was continuing the idea about the development of human culture being analogous to the genetic evolution of species. It was in that sense that I was referring to how people filled different ecological niches and adapted to them - by developing divergent technologies and cultural practises. Relative to the past, globally we are more culturally homogenised but internally more heterogenous as a result of mass migration. That will once again reverse IMO as energy and other resource constraints begin to bite. Thanks for the interesting discussion.

scott t
06 Aug 2010 01:32a.m.

I would agree with you that the extermination of species and culture derive from the same or at least similiar process, What I am saying is one matters more than the other because if our species loses one or more cultures then the affected individuals can adapt and survive, if our planet loses one or more species then they are all dead and a chain reaction among other species will ensue.
A niche exists within an ecology, I could extrapolate but that was not the point of the analogy, it was convergance as opposed to divergance.
"In cultural terms this is like the development of similar kinship systems among a wide range of cultures."
This is very true, correct me if I am wrong but I believe most maori people have happily adopted the european system of marriage and family along with (some) the christian religion?
"If you look at ecological succession, pioneer species quickly colonise a disrupted open space and fill it with numerous individuals from their generalist species. Over time this changes to a more stable system, with more numerous specialised species but less individuals of each. This is what happened as humans walked out of Africa and inhabited the world."
I'm sorry but are you suggesting that there are different species of humans inhabiting the earth? I think you have some fundamental misunderstandings of natural processes.
"The current trend to homogeneity is a response to a disruption, rather than an evolution."
The current trend to homogeneity is a result of two gene pools, within ONE species, being introduced to each other. Like I said this is the basics of biology, If you are going to assert an opinion on these issues you need to understand the science.
We are not moving towards a homogenised society, we ARE a homogenised society. You understand geographical isolation I would hope?.
Those are functions of language but not maori language, english ..or japanese would suffice.
Thankyou.

I genuinly appreciate you responding

Nandor
05 Aug 2010 06:28p.m.

Hi Scott. Thanks for your considered response. To my mind the mass extermination of species and of cultures derive from the same process. The alienation of indigenous lands and the destruction of their social systems is for the purpose of cutting down the forests they live in / enclosing the grasslands they herd on / mining the minerals from the land they inhabit etc etc. I don't see it as an either / or situation. My understanding of convergent evolution is that different species develop similar responses to their ecologies. So sea mammals and fish might develop similar propulsion mechanisms. In cultural terms this is like the development of similar kinship systems among a wide range of cultures. The loss of language and culture is more akin to an extinction than a convergent evolution. If you look at ecological succession, pioneer species quickly colonise a disrupted open space and fill it with numerous individuals from their generalist species. Over time this changes to a more stable system, with more numerous specialised species but less individuals of each. This is what happened as humans walked out of Africa and inhabited the world. The current trend to homogeneity is a response to a disruption, rather than an evolution. I agree that ultimately we will move towards more homogenised societies again, but in my view it will be a multiplicity of local cultures once more rather than a global one. ps I did give some functions of language already - it shapes how we perceive the world and is a repository of culture.

scott t
03 Aug 2010 09:37p.m.

First I would say that mass deforestation is an issue and II feel the idea of losing entire species deserves more attention than losing culture.
Second, to say that evolution tends "towards" anything is wrong let alone complexity, it is generally the most specialised or complex species that meet extinction. You used the word diversity which is more accurate, in nature we see divergent evolution to fit a new niche but we also see convergent evolution to share a niche. Your statement of human culture tending towards multiplicity is analogous to divergent evolution, what I am saying is we are now experiencing a convergent evolution of culture, we are not pakeha and maori, we are kiwi and we are human. Unfortunately for language, it does not merge so easliy so something has to give. I dont view cultural diversity as a bad thing I view it as unsustainable in one society. If in the future I should need to learn an asian language to be functional in society and english becomes unnecesary then I would, I would teach my children that language and unfortunately individuals who identify themselves as maori would need to do the same. I should point out that adopting a new language would not change my way of life, my culture. Could you point out some functions of language beyond communication?

Nandor
03 Aug 2010 06:25p.m.

Scott, I agree that we are an evolving animal. The tendency of evolution is towards more complexity and more diversity, rather than to uniformity. There is a reversal of this trend currently, through species extinction, genocide of indigenous people, decreasing genetic base for agricultural crops, mass deforestation etc but this is a temporary aberration. Human culture, like other natural phenomena, tends to multiplicity. One element of culture is language, which has many functions beyond simple communication. Language shapes how we think as much as it communicates. It is a repository of culture. Of course as you seem to view cultural diversity as a bad thing you may not like that. A question then, will you be so happy about one world culture if it is predominantly Asian rather than Anglo-American or does your support depend on your membership of the (currently) dominant culture?

Nandor
03 Aug 2010 06:24p.m.

Scott, I agree that we are an evolving animal. The tendency of evolution is towards more complexity and more diversity, rather than to uniformity. There is a reversal of this trend currently, through species extinction, genocide of indigenous people, decreasing genetic base for agricultural crops, mass deforestation etc but this is a temporary aberration. Human culture, like other natural phenomena, tends to multiplicity. One element of culture is language, which has many functions beyond simple communication. Language shapes how we think as much as it communicates. It is a repository of culture. Of course as you seem to view cultural diversity as a bad thing you may not like that. A question then, will you be so happy about one world culture if it is predominantly Asian rather than Anglo-American or does your support depend on your membership of the (currently) dominant culture?

scott t
02 Aug 2010 06:18p.m.

Mate, I made no comment on who invented hospitals, my point was it is one part of our society that has been introduced or 'forced' on maori in New Zealand and i don't think they mind. As for one global culture being sad and boring, I should think countrys living together minus religous or cultural difference may be a little more boring if your idea of excitement is conflict and war. In how many dimensions can a view on language exhist? I don't think you have any clue as to my vision of life as life concerns more than just a discussion on human culture, it has been evolving for around 3.5 billion years and I can't think of anything more exciting than understanding and appreciating its grandeur.

Nandor
01 Aug 2010 11:06p.m.

That's pretty funny Scott, since hospitals were invented by the Muslims. Your prediction of one global culture seems sad and boring and your view on the functions of language is one dimensional. Your vision of life is as exciting as a paddock.

scott t
01 Aug 2010 04:30p.m.

Absolute mindless dribble. I dont know were to start. first of all we are all animals, culture is simply a bi product of our unique inteligence which in my opinion could be put to far greater use rather than dwell on the past. Geographic isolation is long gone, ethnicity is or will soon be a meaningless label,culture and language will keep evolving globally. Language has one purpose, communication not identity. everyone has the right to learn maori if they choose but I suspect it wont do them much good in communicating with the world or help entire species from being wiped out. Also,if the english way of life being forced on "indigenous" people is so bad then feel free to save the hospital beds for those of us that appreciate them

jan..
01 Aug 2010 06:46a.m.

The Maori are the Tangata Whenua are lucky and gifted within their own family inheritance their country by right and languages through breeds..
The Book for the Maori Adult is to translate worldwide and the MAORINZ FLAG TO FLY ALONG SIDE IT..
NOTHING HAVE FORGOTTON BUT RE-GAINNING WHAT'S LOST or stolen..
Ian, you want to live in a high tech world, but just look at the BP oil spills that kills and our country full of crims that bashing policeman around, murders to what next?..

Peter Jackson
29 Jul 2010 08:10a.m.

I dont feel ignorant because I know only english. And I don't expect others to feel ignorant if they can't program a computer, fix a car, fly a plane, speak german, etc etc - we are all limited in our cognition and we cannot all learn everything. For me it is great when anyone learns something of interest, but it does not have to be cultural.

Andrew Stevenson
28 Jul 2010 11:30a.m.

@ SillyKiwiMan: Maori is spoken by many people in NZ, so it's technically not a dead language. Which linguists are you conversing with who think otherwise?

Languages are usually classified as dead once there are no fluent speakers left. Perhaps several generations ago Maori might have been *dying* (though not dead) but that isn't the case now.

@ john: I agree. I learned French at school and even 20 years later found it useful, fun and exciting to trot out "bone-jewer" in Caen.

(Aside: I found all the stereotypes of the French - outside Paris - to be completely wrong.)

@ Nick: I agree with your first paragraph - it was only when I learned French that I understood nouns, verbs and adjectives etc properly. Well, better, anyway.

@ Sarah: Live long and prosper.

Nick
28 Jul 2010 09:52a.m.

One of the best arguements I've heard for making Maori compulsory is that by teaching Maori alongside English enhances the students understanding of English because it's the best way to teach the rules of grammar. So making learning Te Reo as part of the English curriculum would result in a population with a better understanding of English as well as preserving Maori - win win as far as I see it.
I wouldn't worry about not understanding the words of Haka's and welcomes though in recent months I've seen haka's preformed to celebrate 'acheivements' such as drinking yourself to death (Preformed by the victims 'friends' who encouraged the poor boy to drink more when he was clearly intoxicated), stealing a moterbike, going street racing without a helmet and wrapping yourself and a friend around a powerpole (A 'friend' who left them to die on the road was almost certainly one of the preformers) and a couple of years ago I saw a musician who's songs encouraged criminal behavour and the oppression of women been given a full maori welcome upon arrival at the airport. This misuse of these rituals have completely debased them and they are now nothing more than empty gestures and meaningless noises devoid of any mana.

Andrew
27 Jul 2010 10:59p.m.

Go Sarah, (in response to Bill)! "Humour, arh, arh". I think it was Mork (from Ork) who said that first!

Post a comment

Name:
Email: (Won't be published)
Comment:


3News Video 3News Audio

Blogs