Art & Literature: The Safeguard of Local Languages

Mother-Tongue Education, Academic Development, and the Role of Artistic Heritage

Language policy must be grounded in realities rather than dreams, fantasies, regrets, or unfulfilled aspirations. When examining the condition of local languages in Iran from a realistic perspective, one must confront difficult questions about the practical consequences of introducing mother-tongue education. Although the idea may appear appealing in principle, its implementation could entail considerable disadvantages, particularly in terms of academic development, access to knowledge, and participation in the international scientific community.

One of the principal concerns surrounding mother-tongue education is the potential academic isolation of students educated exclusively in local languages. Such a system could gradually distance them from Iran's broader academic community and, ultimately, from the international exchange of scientific knowledge. At a time when many university scholars and researchers, despite their profound attachment to Persian and their recognition of its importance as a pillar of national identity, consider it insufficient for certain advanced academic and research requirements, the promotion of English at higher educational and research levels has become an increasingly prominent consideration. The objective is to facilitate unrestricted participation in the global circulation of knowledge. Under these circumstances, it is reasonable to question what educational advantages could be achieved by introducing additional linguistic barriers into the academic system.

The practical and financial implications of such a policy would also be substantial. Establishing educational institutions for Iran's numerous ethnic and linguistic communities would require extensive investment in infrastructure, buildings, equipment, qualified teachers, libraries, textbooks, academic programmes, and specialized departments. Even after these institutions were established, the development of scientific terminology, technical vocabulary, and comprehensive academic literature in each language would remain a formidable challenge.

Furthermore, the availability of qualified specialists capable of teaching and conducting advanced research in these languages would need to be carefully assessed. Would graduates of a Kurdish-language university, for example, have sufficient opportunities to pursue further education at other Iranian universities or internationally? How would they publish their research, participate in international conferences, or communicate their findings to the wider scientific community? Would their academic qualifications provide them with the same professional and geographical mobility as graduates educated through the country's established academic languages? These questions raise serious concerns about the long-term consequences of creating separate linguistic systems within higher education.

Another important consideration concerns the actual linguistic choices made by advocates of local-language development. Many intellectuals and cultural figures who support the expansion of local languages have themselves historically chosen Persian as their principal language of literary and intellectual expression, despite the absence of any general prohibition against publishing in their mother tongues. This choice is not necessarily a rejection of their linguistic heritage; rather, it reflects the practical desire of writers and intellectuals to reach the widest possible readership and achieve a broader cultural influence.

The literary record illustrates this reality. The celebrated Azerbaijani Turkish poem Heydar Babaya Salam demonstrates the expressive and artistic potential of Azerbaijani Turkish. Nevertheless, the proportion of Persian poetry in its author's collected works is considerably greater than that of Turkish poetry. Similarly, the possibility of producing extensive literary collections in Tabari was never inherently restricted, yet Persian remained the principal language of much of the country's broader literary and intellectual production. The same question can be raised about literary criticism, academic writing, and poetry in other local languages. Ultimately, the choice of language often reflects the intended audience, the scale of cultural influence, and the opportunities available to the creator.

Today, Iran's local languages already enjoy various opportunities for cultural and artistic expression. Provincial newspapers and magazines publish material in these languages; books are written and distributed; musical performances take place; and radio stations, television channels, and numerous other platforms provide opportunities for their continued use. Speakers of these languages can create and disseminate literary and artistic works in their mother tongues without necessarily requiring a separate educational system.

Indeed, the distinction between educational policy and artistic production is particularly important. The preservation and vitality of local languages depend substantially on the continued creation of cultural works: songs, folk narratives, lullabies, poetry, literature, and other forms of artistic expression. These are the elements that preserve a language's emotional depth, collective memory, cultural identity, and intergenerational continuity. Artistic production can therefore provide a powerful foundation for the survival and development of local languages.

The historical experience of Persian itself offers an important example. For centuries, Arabic occupied a dominant position as the language of scholarship, religious sciences, and much of the intellectual life of the Islamic world. Persian consequently faced considerable competition in academic and scholarly domains. Nevertheless, its extraordinary literary heritage ensured its continued vitality. Persian poets and writers continued to create works in their own language, even when the principal language of formal scholarship was different.

The experience of classical Persian literature demonstrates the importance of this cultural mechanism. The great Persian literary tradition developed and flourished despite the predominance of Arabic in many educational and scholarly institutions. The enduring works of Persian poetry became a central foundation for the language's preservation and transmission across generations. This historical experience suggests that literary excellence and artistic creativity can play a more decisive role in linguistic survival than the establishment of separate educational institutions.

Iran's various ethnic and linguistic communities would therefore benefit from directing their cultural and intellectual resources towards producing exceptional literary works and enduring artistic creations. The continued development of poetry, music, storytelling, and other cultural forms can strengthen local languages while ensuring that they remain active components of the country's shared cultural heritage.

It is equally important to recognize that Iranian and non-Iranian local languages have an inherent and legitimate place within Iran's linguistic landscape. The development of Persian does not require the suppression or marginalization of these languages. Nor does their continued vitality constitute a threat to Persian. On the contrary, the linguistic and cultural diversity of Iran has historically contributed to the richness of its common language. Persian has continuously absorbed vocabulary, expressions, cultural concepts, and literary influences from the languages and traditions of the communities that have shaped Iranian civilization.

The relationship between Persian and Iran's local languages should therefore be understood as one of historical interaction, mutual enrichment, and cultural coexistence rather than competition. Turning this longstanding relationship into a source of hostility would undermine a valuable element of Iran's cultural heritage.

Ultimately, the preservation of linguistic diversity and the development of a common national language need not be mutually exclusive objectives. Local languages can flourish through artistic creativity, literary production, cultural institutions, and intergenerational transmission, while Persian continues to serve as a shared medium of communication and national intellectual life. The challenge is not to transform linguistic diversity into a political or cultural confrontation, but to preserve the conditions under which all of Iran's languages can contribute to the country's collective cultural and civilizational heritage.