With reference to my mentioning of recognized Konknni writers using S-words, I
again point out to Daniel F. de Souza's Niyallunk - Kovnam ani Kovita, a slim
book with poems in Roman script and translated into Devnagiri script. It does
not say if the writer himself did the translation.
I pick a poem relevant to the debate on the Official Language Act of 1987. It
is titled "Konknni Raj Bhas".
Proxn khub vorsam fattlo
Xekim az zalo mekllo
Vidhant Sobhent tharav ghetlo
Konknni maim bhaxek man meulo
Akaxar dislim sovostayechim kupam
Pollear denvlim khoxechim dukhm
Vhodd bhag Goykarank amkam
Konknni zali Rajbhas atam
Bhaxe khatir mar-far kelo
Xant'tayecho prodo ubon gelo
Goychea putanim aplo prann dilo
Martir, Bab Floian Vaz omor zalo
Itihasik zali char tarik Febrerarchi
Konknni maink keli Ranni ghorachi
Konknni Goykarank dori ekvottachi
Zolll'ti divli obhimanachi
Soglle Goykar fuddem sor-ia
Konknni bhaxechi udorgot kor-ia
Bhed-bhav dhorm' kuxin dovor-oa
Ekech avoyche put koxe vag-ia
---
Notice that the words Raj Bhas in the title are split, while in the body copy
it is combined. Not a big issue because many English writers write
mother-tongue as one word as well as as mother tongue. However, I feel that
"Raj" should not be capitalized as also "R" in Ranni in the fourth stanza.
For mother, "maim" and "avoy" are both accepted. But is it okay to write
"maink" instead of "maimk", taking into consideration its phonetic sound, as in
the fourth stanza?
There are many S-words, I found "akaxar", "itihasik", "tharav" (though I am not
sure about this one as I have heard it often spoken in Konknni even before this
"Sanskritization" of Konknni), "prann", "omor" (which comes from amor
(immortal), "udorgot". Maybe, I missed some or maybe I mistook some as S-words
when they could be real Konknni words.
I write this as not criticism of Daniel's art, but to show someone like Colaco
that even a noted writer like Daniel is well-versed and very comfortable using
S-words.
In this poem, Daniel shows his joy at the annoucement of official recognition
for Konknni and, at the same time, notes that the "recognition" is a "tread of
unity" among Goans. Is it true in the current demand for recognition of Roman
script?
He wants Goans to set aside the "dividing issues" of religion, etc and embrace
each other in the spirit of being the sons of a single mother, that is Konknni.
The issues that divided Goans into two camps remain, now more antagonistic
towards each other.
The hope that the OLA brought has not remain the lighted lamp of pride. People
from their respective groups have sharpened their pencils and use as weapons
against each other. There is a need for a "new lamp" of reconciliation. A new
spirit of
hope must arise among the fighting factions. There must be acceptance from the
Devnagiri group to allow Roman script.
Only then will Konknni and, with it, our heritage survive.
Daniel has another poem, Avoycho Xinn, written during the the language
agitation 1986-87. Here he admonishes Goans who support Marathi, calling the
language "Madam", and pushed aside Konknni, the mother. Elsewhere he calls
Marathi "mauxi".
It was then Marathi vs Konknni, and now its Devnagiri Konknni vs Romi Konknni.
The ground has shifted and the problem is different.
This brings me to a letter I read in the latest The Goan Review. The writer,
Gable D'Souza, raises the question, Goykarponn anik khoim urlam?" He main point
is on the meeting held in Mumbai to save the "kudds". He regrets that "today's
Goans do not even know to speak in Konknni, forget reading and writing." He
implores Mumbai Goans to save "amchem daiz, sonskrutay and osmitay".
Another writer, Renato Pereira, says that because Mumbai Goans are spread out
in the city, their "bhas ani osmitay viron geli." Seems the writer wants all
Goans to say in one place. He thinks because Goans have not been able to keep
"sombond", "Konknni bhas, ani Goychi sonskrutai ani somitay unnem zait veta."
He wants Goans to speak Konknni at home and also make attempts to keep out
culture and heritage alive. He thinks that because Goans have failed to do so,
the "kudds" have become empty. He does seem to grasp the new economic
realities. The new generation of Mumbai Goans have moved into the suburbs
because most of them, I believe, make enough money to pay for mortgages.
The Goan Review did a wonderful job of bringing forward the issue of the state
of "kudds." It is a wise move that some kudds have been amalgated to have
enough members who contributions could help pay the rent of at least a single
kudd.
many kudds have very small numbers.
Like many other Goan institutions in Mumbai, the kudd is on its last leg. As
the headline on the Renato's writer says, Sonvsar Boldota, Goykarui Bodolta.
So, why raise a hue and cry?
Eugene Correia
