My initial thoughts were comparable to that of the opposition within the article, that without a common language they can use to communicate with the majority of other countries the coming...
My initial thoughts were comparable to that of the opposition within the article, that without a common language they can use to communicate with the majority of other countries the coming generations of intellectuals from India may be disadvantaged from interacting with other predominantly English-speaking countries.
At the same time though, I imagine that not ALL Indian universities will make the switch, so perhaps those acquiring a degree in their native non-English language will be able to do great things back home, while at the same time those getting English-language degrees might be more well positioned to engage and interact with the very same English-speaking countries.
I imagine it will become a supply-demand relationship where some Indians will be able to reach levels in their home country, they might not have been able to otherwise, whereas those capable of speaking (at least basic/rudimentary) English will be able to better interact with the world and still be able to prosper.
Those unable to speak English will surely be limited in what they can do outside of India, but if someone only wants to help their local city/community then I doubt the language they speak will have any direct impact on the good they can provide.
Yeah. If someone speaks Hindi, there's 340 million others. For Bengali, 234 million. Telugu, Tamil, Marathi, Urdu, Gujarati, Kannada, Malayam, Odia, Punjabi, and Maithili each have 30-100 million...
That said, I think there's some value to the Indian state in trying to keep the white collar professionals all speaking a single mutually intelligible language, and there was significant pushback when they tried to make Hindi the one and only national language. If people are retreating to their native languages and no longer learning the language of their government, that seems to me as a place of democratic weakness. How can you engage with a government you don't understand? If you can't use the de facto lingua franca, how do you change things?
Though as I think about it, given the Hindu nationalist tendencies of the current government, maybe it's beneficial to the existing government if the educated can't actually engage with the language of the federal government. Maybe it's better for them if the only people who can rise to the national stage are the people still educated in the official languages of Hindi and English.
But who knows, really.
EDIT: Went back and re-read the article, and I think this section bears out my hypothesis:
The trend toward mother tongue education comes from the upper echelons of government. The rise in nationalist politics, starting in the early 2010s, has led to the promotion of Indian languages, especially Hindi and Sanskrit, an ancient Indian language. The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the ideological fount of the ruling Hindu nationalist government, has been a strong advocate for local language higher education and has been heavily involved in policy discussion. Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently emphasized the need to expand local-language corpora and dole out engineering degrees in regional languages.
Why exactly would a Hindu-supremacist government support educating non-Hindu people in languages other than English?
In his book, Sanu contends that India, unlike its East Asian neighbors, privileges English-only higher education and promotes a language-class separation, “thus creating a glass ceiling for progress for those educated in the native languages.” A child from a village in Japan or China could aspire to be an engineer or doctor without a forced language medium shift. That can’t be said of Indian kids. “I’m not against English,” Sanu told Rest of World. “I think it’s a good skill to have. The only problem is when it becomes a barrier to entry, rather than just a skill.”
I think this is exactly it. If you, a bright young person in India, are trained in your local language rather than in the shared language of your nation and the wider world then the size of the pool in which you swim has been decided for you. The barrier is built in to your education. You can be bright, but not influential outside of your boundary. You can experience the world that exists for your language group, but not the wider world. And who does that serve? The people who then will never need to compete with you for a place at the top.
It's worthwhile to note that if you look at European countries with high levels of English proficiency, like Germany, most education is still in the national language, even higher education. The...
It's worthwhile to note that if you look at European countries with high levels of English proficiency, like Germany, most education is still in the national language, even higher education. The principle difference with India is the linguistic diversity and language politics among the non-English languages, but given that this is advising local-language education rather than Hindi education, I'm cautiously optimistic. English is a valuable skill but not speaking it well shouldn't prevent someone from becoming a doctor in India when it wouldn't in Europe.
There's some costs to English, though, and they're not insignificant. Language codifies thought, and if you raise a people to be English speakers, then they're going end up being... well, more...
There's some costs to English, though, and they're not insignificant. Language codifies thought, and if you raise a people to be English speakers, then they're going end up being... well, more English. More European. They're more likely to read Shakespeare than the Vedic texts. Little by little, all but the most established cultures get eroded. It's happened historically, and it happens today unless the state makes it a national policy to counter this.
And for what, being able to compete for top positions? The vast majority of people don't get to do that regardless. Yes, encourage learning other languages, but not just English. We don't all need to speak one language, and there's a serious opportunity cost to English. An Urdu speaker than learns English might've had to skip Hindi. A Turkish speaker than learns English maybe would've been better served by learning Greek. And hell, if English isn't a lingua franca, maybe English speakers will feel the pressures the rest of the world feels and abandon the stereotype of stubborn monolingualism.
Mind you, on this specific topic, there's a long history of Hindi speakers (and more generally, north India) imposing their culture on all the other lands.
I get your point overall (and mostly agree with you), but Hindi and Urdu aren't the best example to use here, since they're already mutually intelligible (in fact linguistically they're generally...
An Urdu speaker than learns English might've had to skip Hindi
I get your point overall (and mostly agree with you), but Hindi and Urdu aren't the best example to use here, since they're already mutually intelligible (in fact linguistically they're generally considered the same language, with their differences comparable to something like American English vs British English) so an Urdu speaker would not need to learn Hindi outside of the different writing system.
I don’t think it would be just top positions. My field is clinical pharmacy in the US and we have a significant number of pharmacists from India that wouldn’t be here right now if they weren’t...
I don’t think it would be just top positions. My field is clinical pharmacy in the US and we have a significant number of pharmacists from India that wouldn’t be here right now if they weren’t able to speak English
The simple fact is that by learning English many people are now capable of joining pools of opportunities that they otherwise might not have, had they learned Greek or a different language that’s not widespread
If they spoke German, they might be in Germany, a much better country. Learning Spanish would give them access to an entire continent. Learning Sanskrit might give them spiritual peace, or allow...
If they spoke German, they might be in Germany, a much better country. Learning Spanish would give them access to an entire continent. Learning Sanskrit might give them spiritual peace, or allow them to become a historian. Learning Japanese would them them read and watch raws. Learning Greek would let them study the Greco Bactrian and Indo Greek civiliations in their own country.
I encourage people learning multiple languages. It just doesn't have to be English. Learning English is useful, but then you have sacrificed every possibility that I've mentioned. Learning a language isn't free.
But for the purposes of our discussion we're specifically referring to English having more potential to open you up for future opportunities Everything you mentioned is important, and a fair...
But for the purposes of our discussion we're specifically referring to English having more potential to open you up for future opportunities
Everything you mentioned is important, and a fair reason to learn each respective language, but I disagree that they would give you as much potential future opportunity as English
EDIT: I realize that there are many different opportunities, but I'm mostly thinking of those that could bring you and your family wealth and raise your standards of living
I mean, if we're defining opportunities as "make money", yes. But there are non-economic opportunities too. Moreover, if the main result of this is that the smartest and best people go to th US......
I mean, if we're defining opportunities as "make money", yes. But there are non-economic opportunities too. Moreover, if the main result of this is that the smartest and best people go to th US... well, that's not very good for India and non-English speaking countries, is it? A country invests into its people, and never see a return on that investment because that person just went to benefit a different country.
Ideally, the best trained and educated people in India stay in India and uplift the next generation.
Sorry, I realized my mistake regarding what we consider an opportunity and added that as an edit above I agree that it might not be the best for India on the surface, but it also does open up...
Sorry, I realized my mistake regarding what we consider an opportunity and added that as an edit above
I agree that it might not be the best for India on the surface, but it also does open up opportunity locally. Anecdotally, a ton of tech support and other phone calls in my experience now route through India. An opportunity which has only been possible thanks to the higher portion of English-speaking Indians
My point being that even these individuals that live in India, because they speak English they now have (fiscal) opportunities available to them that otherwise they might not have. To take it a step further, this also allows for wealth to be re-distributed into Indian communities, thanks to these English-speaking Indians having jobs interacting with and helping English speakers
I don't know well enough to make an argument for it, but to me it does seem like that has potential to uplift the next generation
Look, I'm not going to sit here and pretend learning English isn't useful. I mean, I did it, and it sure makes easier to live in New Zealand. But what would my life be like if I learned Mandarin,...
Look, I'm not going to sit here and pretend learning English isn't useful. I mean, I did it, and it sure makes easier to live in New Zealand.
But what would my life be like if I learned Mandarin, or Japanese, or Catalan? Different for sure. Worse? Can't say. Would be likely making less money. Would that be a bad thing? I'll never know, I didn't have a choice. It was English or nothing, that was my only option.
I just want people to have other options aside from English. And it would also be nice if English monolinguals put in some effort as well, but that's a different rant!
I guess I was trying to address this comment, because I do believe that English opens you up to the most opportunities, or at least could be the most "useful". (I think you were exaggerating when...
And for what, being able to compete for top positions? The vast majority of people don't get to do that regardless.
I guess I was trying to address this comment, because I do believe that English opens you up to the most opportunities, or at least could be the most "useful". (I think you were exaggerating when you said "top positions" so I take it to mean positions in general)
To me it seemed as though you were advocating we stop encouraging others to learn English under the false pretense that learning other languages would afford them more opportunity. Perhaps you were simply warning of the risks, but your commentary seemed to be "Anti-English second language"
Yeah sorry, it was mostly in reference to the comment about some Indians rising to the national stage. I think everyone knows the benefits learning English brings. People who don't learn English...
Yeah sorry, it was mostly in reference to the comment about some Indians rising to the national stage.
I think everyone knows the benefits learning English brings. People who don't learn English either don't have the opportunity, time, or make a conscious decision to learn a different language. I think opportunities to learn English should be provided, I think countries should try to uplift their people to afford them more time, and I think people trying to learn a non English language should be encouraged.
Or sometimes they don't have the interest, and you honestly shouldn't learn anything aside from your native tongue if you're going to stay where you live. It should be something you choose to do to open doors elsewhere, or for your own personal enrichment.
Language doesn't really seem to affect thinking too much if at all. Culturally, what texts are available etc is a good point, but the language itself doesn't seem to change thought processes....
Language doesn't really seem to affect thinking too much if at all. Culturally, what texts are available etc is a good point, but the language itself doesn't seem to change thought processes.
I phrased that badly. Your language is going to determine what cultural outputs you consume. Those cultural outputs are going to shape your thinking. You could, in theory, read and internalise...
I phrased that badly. Your language is going to determine what cultural outputs you consume. Those cultural outputs are going to shape your thinking.
You could, in theory, read and internalise Akkadian and Sumerian city laments. In practice, I'd bet good money that you've read Romeo and Juliet more than once, and the Lament of Ur zero times, even though it's available in English. Because you're an English speaker, not an Akkadian speaker, and city lament poetry isn't culturally relevant to you.
Language preserves human culture. It's crucial that every living language is encouraged and used as much as possible.
(unless I rolled a 1 on assumptions and found the local Tildes Mesopotamian expert)
To play devils advocate here, I am an English speaker and I don't know that I have ever read Romeo and Juliet once all the way through, although I do still agree it's important to keep living...
To play devils advocate here, I am an English speaker and I don't know that I have ever read Romeo and Juliet once all the way through, although I do still agree it's important to keep living languages alive
Now that being said, I do appreciate visual art, which is less specific to your personal culture as I enjoy art from nearly every culture I have seen. I just don't really pursue written/spoken mediums
Fair enough, though I'd still bet you know the ending. And I'm assuming you know more about it than about how Cantar de mio Cid ends. Because of what your native language is. If I hold a skull up...
Fair enough, though I'd still bet you know the ending. And I'm assuming you know more about it than about how Cantar de mio Cid ends. Because of what your native language is. If I hold a skull up in my hand and start talking about it, you'll get it. It's your culture.
Written and spoken art is hugely important because it encodes lessons, history, morals, etymology, and so much more stuff. It provides alternate ways of looking at things that aren't just through the European lens. It is technically possible to preserve, but there's a huge difference between translation gathering dust in an archive somewhere and that story being lived in and passed on through the generations.
If anything this will make regional parties even stronger and less accountable to their own constituencies.
Maybe it's better for them if the only people who can rise to the national stage are the people still educated in the official languages of Hindi and English.
If anything this will make regional parties even stronger and less accountable to their own constituencies.
It's hard to say what they'll all be, but one of the things that lets India maintain a cohesive national identity is the existence of English as a lingua franca that is equally foreign to...
It's hard to say what they'll all be, but one of the things that lets India maintain a cohesive national identity is the existence of English as a lingua franca that is equally foreign to everyone. The other main contender for national language is Hindi, which is the native language for about 40% of the country but a foreign language to the rest which can create a problematic class divide between groups since one has to work a lot less hard to access bureaucratic services. As a polyglot nation, it's very helpful to have a unifying thread that presents a roughly equal amount of challenge to everyone.
This does present some problems in the realm of formal education though, because it makes things most challenging for the poorest people who are all frozen out due to needing to go through the education process to learn English. But it'll be discriminatory evenly across all the poorest people rather than advantaging one group of poor over another.
By deprioritizing English you basically weaken its influence as a lingua franca and, consequently weaken the cross-national interactions between parts of India that allow it to politically cohere as a nation with a shared sense of community. This will empower regional/linguistic parties instead.
Of course, the financial benefits of being plugged into a global market by speaking English will probably work to keep it a medium of instruction regardless so it may not be a big deal. Other examples people have cited, like Germany or the Nordic countries where basically everyone speaks perfect English despite instruction being in their native language I'm not sure work as well. This is largely because India is a media and cultural powerhouse. American TV and movies are about as saturated into the market as they'll ever be but India's own cultural output is large enough that Hindi (and some regional languages) are equally influential within India. In contrast, the German film and TV industries just aren't as big or as influential so they end up consuming a lot of American media by default.
I might argue it’s fine because you learn English as a secondary language though, so you learn things but can still communicate with the world at large This article doesn’t seem to really...
I might argue it’s fine because you learn English as a secondary language though, so you learn things but can still communicate with the world at large
This article doesn’t seem to really emphasize that the majority of mother tongue individuals would ever actually learn English. The other comment that replied to me put it really well though
That could be the case. I'm just pointing out that not having classes entirely in English doesn't put them at a disadvantage. I'm assuming they'd still learn English, considering it's one of the...
That could be the case. I'm just pointing out that not having classes entirely in English doesn't put them at a disadvantage. I'm assuming they'd still learn English, considering it's one of the official languages of India.
My initial thoughts were comparable to that of the opposition within the article, that without a common language they can use to communicate with the majority of other countries the coming generations of intellectuals from India may be disadvantaged from interacting with other predominantly English-speaking countries.
At the same time though, I imagine that not ALL Indian universities will make the switch, so perhaps those acquiring a degree in their native non-English language will be able to do great things back home, while at the same time those getting English-language degrees might be more well positioned to engage and interact with the very same English-speaking countries.
I imagine it will become a supply-demand relationship where some Indians will be able to reach levels in their home country, they might not have been able to otherwise, whereas those capable of speaking (at least basic/rudimentary) English will be able to better interact with the world and still be able to prosper.
Those unable to speak English will surely be limited in what they can do outside of India, but if someone only wants to help their local city/community then I doubt the language they speak will have any direct impact on the good they can provide.
Yeah. If someone speaks Hindi, there's 340 million others. For Bengali, 234 million. Telugu, Tamil, Marathi, Urdu, Gujarati, Kannada, Malayam, Odia, Punjabi, and Maithili each have 30-100 million people. In any one of them you could likely have a long and successful professional life without professional-level English skills.
That said, I think there's some value to the Indian state in trying to keep the white collar professionals all speaking a single mutually intelligible language, and there was significant pushback when they tried to make Hindi the one and only national language. If people are retreating to their native languages and no longer learning the language of their government, that seems to me as a place of democratic weakness. How can you engage with a government you don't understand? If you can't use the de facto lingua franca, how do you change things?
Though as I think about it, given the Hindu nationalist tendencies of the current government, maybe it's beneficial to the existing government if the educated can't actually engage with the language of the federal government. Maybe it's better for them if the only people who can rise to the national stage are the people still educated in the official languages of Hindi and English.
But who knows, really.
EDIT: Went back and re-read the article, and I think this section bears out my hypothesis:
Why exactly would a Hindu-supremacist government support educating non-Hindu people in languages other than English?
I think this is exactly it. If you, a bright young person in India, are trained in your local language rather than in the shared language of your nation and the wider world then the size of the pool in which you swim has been decided for you. The barrier is built in to your education. You can be bright, but not influential outside of your boundary. You can experience the world that exists for your language group, but not the wider world. And who does that serve? The people who then will never need to compete with you for a place at the top.
It's worthwhile to note that if you look at European countries with high levels of English proficiency, like Germany, most education is still in the national language, even higher education. The principle difference with India is the linguistic diversity and language politics among the non-English languages, but given that this is advising local-language education rather than Hindi education, I'm cautiously optimistic. English is a valuable skill but not speaking it well shouldn't prevent someone from becoming a doctor in India when it wouldn't in Europe.
There's some costs to English, though, and they're not insignificant. Language codifies thought, and if you raise a people to be English speakers, then they're going end up being... well, more English. More European. They're more likely to read Shakespeare than the Vedic texts. Little by little, all but the most established cultures get eroded. It's happened historically, and it happens today unless the state makes it a national policy to counter this.
And for what, being able to compete for top positions? The vast majority of people don't get to do that regardless. Yes, encourage learning other languages, but not just English. We don't all need to speak one language, and there's a serious opportunity cost to English. An Urdu speaker than learns English might've had to skip Hindi. A Turkish speaker than learns English maybe would've been better served by learning Greek. And hell, if English isn't a lingua franca, maybe English speakers will feel the pressures the rest of the world feels and abandon the stereotype of stubborn monolingualism.
Mind you, on this specific topic, there's a long history of Hindi speakers (and more generally, north India) imposing their culture on all the other lands.
I get your point overall (and mostly agree with you), but Hindi and Urdu aren't the best example to use here, since they're already mutually intelligible (in fact linguistically they're generally considered the same language, with their differences comparable to something like American English vs British English) so an Urdu speaker would not need to learn Hindi outside of the different writing system.
Thanks for the correction, point taken.
I don’t think it would be just top positions. My field is clinical pharmacy in the US and we have a significant number of pharmacists from India that wouldn’t be here right now if they weren’t able to speak English
The simple fact is that by learning English many people are now capable of joining pools of opportunities that they otherwise might not have, had they learned Greek or a different language that’s not widespread
If they spoke German, they might be in Germany, a much better country. Learning Spanish would give them access to an entire continent. Learning Sanskrit might give them spiritual peace, or allow them to become a historian. Learning Japanese would them them read and watch raws. Learning Greek would let them study the Greco Bactrian and Indo Greek civiliations in their own country.
I encourage people learning multiple languages. It just doesn't have to be English. Learning English is useful, but then you have sacrificed every possibility that I've mentioned. Learning a language isn't free.
But for the purposes of our discussion we're specifically referring to English having more potential to open you up for future opportunities
Everything you mentioned is important, and a fair reason to learn each respective language, but I disagree that they would give you as much potential future opportunity as English
EDIT: I realize that there are many different opportunities, but I'm mostly thinking of those that could bring you and your family wealth and raise your standards of living
I mean, if we're defining opportunities as "make money", yes. But there are non-economic opportunities too. Moreover, if the main result of this is that the smartest and best people go to th US... well, that's not very good for India and non-English speaking countries, is it? A country invests into its people, and never see a return on that investment because that person just went to benefit a different country.
Ideally, the best trained and educated people in India stay in India and uplift the next generation.
Sorry, I realized my mistake regarding what we consider an opportunity and added that as an edit above
I agree that it might not be the best for India on the surface, but it also does open up opportunity locally. Anecdotally, a ton of tech support and other phone calls in my experience now route through India. An opportunity which has only been possible thanks to the higher portion of English-speaking Indians
My point being that even these individuals that live in India, because they speak English they now have (fiscal) opportunities available to them that otherwise they might not have. To take it a step further, this also allows for wealth to be re-distributed into Indian communities, thanks to these English-speaking Indians having jobs interacting with and helping English speakers
I don't know well enough to make an argument for it, but to me it does seem like that has potential to uplift the next generation
Look, I'm not going to sit here and pretend learning English isn't useful. I mean, I did it, and it sure makes easier to live in New Zealand.
But what would my life be like if I learned Mandarin, or Japanese, or Catalan? Different for sure. Worse? Can't say. Would be likely making less money. Would that be a bad thing? I'll never know, I didn't have a choice. It was English or nothing, that was my only option.
I just want people to have other options aside from English. And it would also be nice if English monolinguals put in some effort as well, but that's a different rant!
I guess I was trying to address this comment, because I do believe that English opens you up to the most opportunities, or at least could be the most "useful". (I think you were exaggerating when you said "top positions" so I take it to mean positions in general)
To me it seemed as though you were advocating we stop encouraging others to learn English under the false pretense that learning other languages would afford them more opportunity. Perhaps you were simply warning of the risks, but your commentary seemed to be "Anti-English second language"
I appreciate your discussions though
Yeah sorry, it was mostly in reference to the comment about some Indians rising to the national stage.
I think everyone knows the benefits learning English brings. People who don't learn English either don't have the opportunity, time, or make a conscious decision to learn a different language. I think opportunities to learn English should be provided, I think countries should try to uplift their people to afford them more time, and I think people trying to learn a non English language should be encouraged.
Or sometimes they don't have the interest, and you honestly shouldn't learn anything aside from your native tongue if you're going to stay where you live. It should be something you choose to do to open doors elsewhere, or for your own personal enrichment.
Language doesn't really seem to affect thinking too much if at all. Culturally, what texts are available etc is a good point, but the language itself doesn't seem to change thought processes.
Relevant Tom Scott video
I phrased that badly. Your language is going to determine what cultural outputs you consume. Those cultural outputs are going to shape your thinking.
You could, in theory, read and internalise Akkadian and Sumerian city laments. In practice, I'd bet good money that you've read Romeo and Juliet more than once, and the Lament of Ur zero times, even though it's available in English. Because you're an English speaker, not an Akkadian speaker, and city lament poetry isn't culturally relevant to you.
Language preserves human culture. It's crucial that every living language is encouraged and used as much as possible.
(unless I rolled a 1 on assumptions and found the local Tildes Mesopotamian expert)
To play devils advocate here, I am an English speaker and I don't know that I have ever read Romeo and Juliet once all the way through, although I do still agree it's important to keep living languages alive
Now that being said, I do appreciate visual art, which is less specific to your personal culture as I enjoy art from nearly every culture I have seen. I just don't really pursue written/spoken mediums
Fair enough, though I'd still bet you know the ending. And I'm assuming you know more about it than about how Cantar de mio Cid ends. Because of what your native language is. If I hold a skull up in my hand and start talking about it, you'll get it. It's your culture.
Written and spoken art is hugely important because it encodes lessons, history, morals, etymology, and so much more stuff. It provides alternate ways of looking at things that aren't just through the European lens. It is technically possible to preserve, but there's a huge difference between translation gathering dust in an archive somewhere and that story being lived in and passed on through the generations.
If anything this will make regional parties even stronger and less accountable to their own constituencies.
I have only a rough national-level idea of Indian politics and I know you know more; what's your thoughts on the long term effects of this shift?
It's hard to say what they'll all be, but one of the things that lets India maintain a cohesive national identity is the existence of English as a lingua franca that is equally foreign to everyone. The other main contender for national language is Hindi, which is the native language for about 40% of the country but a foreign language to the rest which can create a problematic class divide between groups since one has to work a lot less hard to access bureaucratic services. As a polyglot nation, it's very helpful to have a unifying thread that presents a roughly equal amount of challenge to everyone.
This does present some problems in the realm of formal education though, because it makes things most challenging for the poorest people who are all frozen out due to needing to go through the education process to learn English. But it'll be discriminatory evenly across all the poorest people rather than advantaging one group of poor over another.
By deprioritizing English you basically weaken its influence as a lingua franca and, consequently weaken the cross-national interactions between parts of India that allow it to politically cohere as a nation with a shared sense of community. This will empower regional/linguistic parties instead.
Of course, the financial benefits of being plugged into a global market by speaking English will probably work to keep it a medium of instruction regardless so it may not be a big deal. Other examples people have cited, like Germany or the Nordic countries where basically everyone speaks perfect English despite instruction being in their native language I'm not sure work as well. This is largely because India is a media and cultural powerhouse. American TV and movies are about as saturated into the market as they'll ever be but India's own cultural output is large enough that Hindi (and some regional languages) are equally influential within India. In contrast, the German film and TV industries just aren't as big or as influential so they end up consuming a lot of American media by default.
In Portugal, our education is, as much as possible, in Portuguese. We also learn English as a second language. It's fine.
I might argue it’s fine because you learn English as a secondary language though, so you learn things but can still communicate with the world at large
This article doesn’t seem to really emphasize that the majority of mother tongue individuals would ever actually learn English. The other comment that replied to me put it really well though
That could be the case. I'm just pointing out that not having classes entirely in English doesn't put them at a disadvantage. I'm assuming they'd still learn English, considering it's one of the official languages of India.