By Tariq Manzoor Since the political changeover of 2024, several new questions have begun to emerge. Some people have started using words like “insaf” instead of “nyaybichar” (justice), “bondobost” instead of “byabostha” (system or arrangement), “foysala” instead of “mimangsa” (resolution), and so on in everyday speech. Many fear that such usage could alter the face of the language. They ask: Why impose or add these when Bangla (Bengali) already has its own words? This trend has sparked various discussions and criticisms.
On the other hand, if we accept that the student movement began with the demand for a discrimination-free Bangladesh, and if English-medium schools, English-version curricula, and madrasa education were all integrated into the general education system, what might happen? Could this prevent economic inequality or linguistic dominance? And if it is possible, would it be right to do so?
Another rather old question has been reignited by Generation Z. This generation does not use standard language in spoken form. Even in formal settings, they either do not or cannot do so. Is this conscious or unconscious effort accelerating the “distortion” of Bengali? If so, what should we do?
These questions—and many more branches of them—exist within this society and state. Alongside the questions are sighs of concern about the present time and the new generation. The times are not good; this generation does not read books or newspapers, chats in Bengali using English script on mobile phones, and posts and comments in “impure” language on Facebook. They do not know the “correct” use of Bengali; Bengali is not “safe” in their hands!
To find answers to these questions and sighs, let us turn to the Pakistan era. In 1949, the government of East Bengal formed the “East Bengal Language Committee” with specific objectives. This committee proposed that in the newly formed “Muslim” state, words like “qiyamat” should replace “jonmo-jonmantor” (birth and rebirth), “karj” instead of “rin” (debt), “tajjob” instead of “bishmoy” (wonder)—such “Muslimized” words should be used. When the Language Committee’s report was published, Munir Chowdhury raised objections, saying that those “inexperienced in linguistics, unaccustomed to deciphering grammar, and distrustful of dictionaries” had made such reform recommendations. Later, Humayun Azad described it as a “conspiracy to subdue Bengali national identity.”
Jamaat-Shibir behind the Inqilab Zindabad slogan
What did Bangabandhu say about the Language Movement of 1952?
Legacy Of Bangabandhu: From language to liberty
The distortion of spoken language or misuse in writing is not the main crisis of Bengali; the real threat is the failure to increase its usability in technology. Delay in this will shrink the language’s domain. We need to produce skilled linguists and language-proficient graduates. University Bengali departments must emphasize language technology and applied skills alongside literary studies.
In any language, multiple words can express similar meanings. For example, in Bengali, “mimangsa,” “nishpotti,” “foysala,” or “mitmat” carry roughly the same sense. Similarly, “nyaybichar,” “insaf,” and “justice” are used almost interchangeably. The word “bondobost,” now being used with new intent, existed even before the “Permanent Settlement.” This kind of new word usage is less a linguistic matter and more one of ethnic distinctiveness or political differentiation. It is not linguistic distortion—there is no need to worry or fret over it. However, such artificial and imposed efforts do not align with the language’s core structure; they are not spontaneous, and a large portion of language users remain outside them.
The tendency to use new words often becomes more a question of ethnic identity or political affiliation than of language itself. It is not a linguistic distortion, and there is no reason for unnecessary alarm. Yet artificial and imposed initiatives are not in harmony with the natural development of language. Because, ultimately, language survives through the collective practice of its users.
The next question concerns the relationship between the concept of discrimination, language rights, and linguistic dominance. A state can have multiple languages, and providing opportunities for multiple languages as mediums of education is not unnatural for a state. But imposing a language other than the mother tongue as the medium of education for a child entering school for the first time is a clear violation of language rights and an injustice. That said, a multifaceted and diverse education structure enhances the state’s capacity. One can consider at which stage of education to provide alternative media or arrangements for students.
MP Rumeen Farhana warns BNP of dire consequences for mob attack
Jamaat chief goes to Shaheed Minar with war criminal Azhar, faces backlash
Chhatra Shibir member who spread video of PM’s daughter Zaima Rahman identified
Now, let us address pronunciation. The disappointment over the younger generation’s lack of standard pronunciation dates back at least two decades. It is a good concern, but who will connect them with standard language? A child enters standard written language through textbooks soon after starting school, yet their spoken language remains non-standard. Textbooks play no role in this, nor do teachers make efforts. In family and society—and even in formal and institutional settings—people now speak freely in non-standard forms. If spoken language is to be standardised, the responsibility lies with school textbooks in Bengali and classroom Bengali teachers.
The final question revolves around this technology-dependent era. The new generation reads news online instead of printed newspapers and gathers information through digital media instead of television. Where is the threat in this?
Even the world’s major languages have not escaped English influence. There is no gain in making English an adversary; what is needed is to make Bengali technology-enabled. Its usability in online and digital media must increase. Technologies for converting spoken language to text and text to speech exist, but their use is limited. There are no high-quality digital dictionaries, translation systems are not smooth, effective language-editing apps are lacking, and font conversion remains complicated.
Due to delays in incorporating the Bengali script into technology, many still write Bengali in English letters. Shortfalls in terminology development keep English dominant in machine instructions. To internationalise Bengali, enhancing technological capability is the primary task.
There is no need to despair if printed books lose readers. Instead, reading devices must be made more accessible. Publishing houses can take initiatives to supply digital books at low cost through their websites.
The distortion of spoken language or misuse in writing is not the main crisis of Bengali; the real threat is the failure to increase its usability in technology. Delay in this will shrink the language’s domain. We need to produce skilled linguists and language-proficient graduates. University Bengali departments must emphasise language technology and applied skills alongside literary studies.
Along with this, the practice of free thought and open culture is essential. Dramas and films in Turkish, Hindi, English, Persian, Korean, and other languages are watched worldwide. The practice of art, literature, and culture strengthens language. For the sake of the language, cultivating a culturally minded new generation is now a demand of the time.
Tariq Manzoor is a Professor in the Department of Bangla at Dhaka University.
English 
Bengali