The languages we use are part of what makes us who we are; they give us community and meaning. In Naga society today, many individuals including educated youths are seen referring to their native language as dialects. For the purpose of this column, let us consider the Ao Naga language. This is to strike a constructive debate and conversation on the meaning and difference between language and dialect.
Linguistically, there is no absolute difference between a language and a dialect. Both are systems of communication with grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation rules. The distinction is mostly social and political, not linguistic. A language is often a dialect that has social prestige, institutional recognition, or political power. A dialect is a regional or social variety of a language, usually without official status. That is why we have the famous saying by linguist Max Weinreich: “A language is a dialect with an army and a navy.”
Hindi and Urdu are linguistically very close, often mutually intelligible, but considered separate languages because they have different scripts, religions, and national identities. Conversely, “Chinese” is officially one language, but Mandarin and Cantonese are not mutually intelligible and in a linguistic sense could be considered separate languages.
Some people think their language is a dialect because it lacks recognition or official use, or because it coexists with a more dominant language such as English or Hindi. Others are influenced by colonial classifications that once labeled smaller languages as dialects. Some also believe their language is a dialect simply because it does not have a native script, like the Ao Naga which uses the Roman script.
However, Ao Naga is a distinct language within the Sino-Tibetan family, under the Tibeto-Burman branch. It has its own grammatical structure, vocabulary, and phonology. It possesses a standardized form and a written tradition and is mutually unintelligible with other languages. Within it, Chungli Ao, Mongsen Ao, and Changki can be considered dialects, and even within these, villages have their own variations. The Ao Naga is recognized as a language by Ethnologue, the world’s most comprehensive catalog of languages.
Perhaps an inferiority complex among some Ao Naga speakers has led to the belief that their language is inferior and therefore merely a dialect. When a community’s speech is viewed as “broken” or “uneducated,” its speakers internalize such perceptions. It is time to move beyond this mindset and affirm that Ao Naga is not a dialect to be diminished but a language to be cherished and preserved.
