Language Situation and Language Policy in Southeast Asia

LANGUAGE SITUATION AND LANGUAGE POLICY IN NUSANTARA COUNTRIES Victor Pogadaev, Vladimir Makarenko

Language is connected with many sides of social-economic, political, cultural and everyday (private) life of society in any country. In this connection the study of language situation and language policy seems to be highly relevant not only from purely linguistic point of view, but from social-political one as well, because it helps to analyze more deeply and sometimes to look anew to one or another process in the society. Particularly fruitful is to undertake a benchmark analysis of these processes in the dynamic developing Nusantara countries (insular South-East Asia), which are distinguished by the multi-national composition and are rather dense, though not equally populated: 202.5 millions of Indonesians are placed on area of nearly 2 000 thousand km2 (nearly 80 percent of the islands are populated) (Indonesia 1997:16), 80 millions Filipinos - on the territory of 300 thousand km2 (95 percent accounts for 11 most large islands of the Philippine archipelago), 17,6 millions Malaysians occupy nearly 333 thousand km2 (Information 1997: 64). Singapore here is an exception, because its population is nearly 3 millions persons and the area of the island does not exceed 700 km2 (Census 1991: 17). However with all external similarities between these countries language situation in each of it has its own particularities, and language policy has some similar and some different features. Language situation The distinctive feature for all these countries is a multi-lingual situation though in different aspects. On approximate counts, in Indonesia there are more than 600 languages belonging to West and Central-Austronesian group, as well as to Transguinean and Papua families. In the Philippines there are nearly 120 languages and dialects belonging to Malay-Polynesian family genetically close to Indonesian and Malagasy. All these languages has quite a number of words of the same lexicon and quite a lot of the same borrowed words from Chinese, Arabic, Indian, as well as from European languages (in Indonesia – mostly from Dutch, in the Philippines - from Spanish and American English). In ditto time in Malaysia and Singapore the situation of multilinguism is connected not with the multinational composition of indigenous population, but much more with the presence of émigré population, basically from China and India. In reality only 10-15 so called main languages (known also as "local", "regional" or "zonal" languages) are playing the significant communication role in

2 political and cultural life. In Indonesia such languages are Javanese, Sundanese, Madurese, Malay with many territorial dialects (including Betawi in Jakarta), Balinese, Minangkabau, Buginese, Acheh, Batak languages, Banjar, Makasar, in the Philippine archipelago - Tagalog, Cebuano (Sugbuhanon), Ilokano, Pampangan, Pangasinan, Bikol, Panayan Hiligaynon, Sambal, Ibanag, Magindanaw (95 percent of the whole population - Makarenko 1990; McFarland 1980), in Malaysia - Malay, languages of the aborigines of East Malaysia, as well as 6 dialects of Chinese (90 percent of the whole Chinese population), Tamil (80 percent of the whole Indian population), Malayalam, Telugu, in Singapore – dialects of Chinese, Malay, Tamil. Sometimes these languages are referred to as "the most developed" (E. A. Kondrashkina, for instance, speaks of "insufficient development of Malay language" Kondrashkina 1987: 297) that in respect to languages we consider to be nonsense, because under some admissions it can be possible to characterize only the degree of "development" of the language speakers themselves. The language only serves their need and from linguistic standpoint it always will be sufficiently developed, even though only two persons may speak it. The ethnolingual differentiation is obviously promoted in certain degrees by insular dispersion of population of these countries (herewith only 931 islands from 18 thousand islands of the Malay Archipelago and nearly 800 from 7 100 Philippine islands are occupied). West Malaysia (Peninsula Malacca) and Singapore are distinguished with greater linguistic homogeneity: amongst indigenous population here Malay dominates, and notion of diversity can be possible to refer to its multiple dialects. The largest language in Indonesia and SEA as a whole according to the number of speakers is Javanese (about 76 millions - Teselkin 1990, 603). It widespreads in Central and East Java, as well as amongst the Javanese in other regions of Indonesia, particularly in Sumatra and West Java (Banten dialect), in Malaysia and Suriname. The second place amongst regional languages in Indonesia is occupied by Sundanese, which is spoken in West Java (nearly 20 millions - Kulikov 1990: 499). It has some dialects: Chirebon, Chiandjur, Bandung (the base of literary language) and others. Hereinafter follows Madurese (over 9 millions - Ogloblin 1990, 277). It wide-spreads on the island of Madura and in East Java. There are east (the base of literary language) and west (more connected with Java) dialects; it is known also the dialect of the island of Kangean. The number of Malay speaking people is 26 millions (Alieva 1990a: 280), including in Indonesia nearly 10 millions, in Malaysia - over 10 millions, in Singapore - nearly 0,5 millions This language occupies a particular place, because it was noted

3 as a language of interethnic and interstate relationships on the most territory of SEA already in early Medieval centuries. The researchers distinguish territorial dialects (Deli, Palembang, Serawai, Pasemah in Sumatra; Kutai, Banjar – in Borneo; Riau on the islands of Riau; in each state of Malaysia) and pidgin, having circulation in regions of mixed population, in cities mainly, in the scope of trade and productions (Jakarta, Ambon, Menado and some others). Minangkabau language (in Sumatra, as well as in a number of regions of Malaysia) genetically is very close to Malay. The number of people speaking it is nearly 5.8 millions (Zarbaliev 1987: 8). It has two large dialects - Payakumbah and Agam; Agam dialect forms a base for the standard literary language. The largest language of the East Indonesia is Buginese. Its main area covers part of the island of Sulawesi and East Coast of Borneo. It is native for 3.9 millions inhabitants approximately. The dialects of the language are studied poorly. In the Philippines the most widespread language is Tagalog (the Tagalogs form nearly 25 percent of the whole population of the country). It is native for inhabitants of Great Manila and nine provinces of Central and South Luzon: Batangas, Quezon (former Tayabas), Rizal (former Lagoon-de-Bay), Laguna de Cavite, Bataan, Bulacan, Tarlac and Nueva Ecija, as well as of island of Marinduque and of most part of the island of Mindoro. To them approximately correspond the dialects of modern Tagalog: Baluga Aeta, Bataan, Bulacan, Tanay Paete, Maynila, Batangan, Tayabas or Quezon and Palanan. Most of the languages linguistically heretofore are poorly studied and insufficiently described. The same can be said about languages (dialects) of Bisayan archipelago. One of the obstacles which makes difficult to study them is the absence of clear delimitation of general theoretical definitions "language", "dialect", etc. (Makarenko-Genzor 1981: 165-177). The important role in shaping of to-day’s language situation in these countries was played by foreign languages. In the Philippines during the 333 year Spain colonial period it was Spanish, but then during nearly half century’s of USA dominance it was English (more precisely American English), in Indonesia it was Dutch (Netherlands), in Malaysia and Singapore - English. Thereby, the languages of indigenous population for a long time withstood foreign languages and interacted with them. Herewith in Indonesia due to the policy conducted by the Dutch aiming to restrict the education of local people in Dutch only a small upper layer of local population knew the language of the colonizers. The same is with Spanish in the Philippines, while English at present is spoken by 70 percent of inhabitants (in different degrees) the situation, which rightly can be referred as situation of bilingualism. The similar situation is with English in Malaysia, but in Singapore it is

4 one of the official languages, either as in the Republic of the Philippines (Makarenko 1971: 191-193).

The language question The language question in the corresponding countries was becoming more and more important on the measure of growing national self-consciousness, development of national-liberation movement ideology, the growth of education of local population (in particularities with the possibility to get a higher education in the Europe and the USA) and adaptation of foreign political experience. This is referred even to Indonesia, where public service at the colonial period was open for the Dutch only, and European education for the local population (even for the upper classes) developed slowly. In spite of this, a number of Indonesians educated at the universities in the Netherlands was steadily enlarged (Knaap 1994: 641). An important milestone in the formation of national language in Indonesia became the Congress of Youth in 1928. In the Sumpah Pemuda accepted at the congress it was proclaimed that all population of archipelago belongs to the united Indonesian nation, that Indonesia is for them the united native land, and Indonesian language (such was the name of Malay with its role as lingua franca on the territory of colonial Indonesia (Tsyganov 1993: 29). In the Philippines the first who in 1903 called to the introduction of native language (in particular as a language of education) instead of foreign languages Spanish and English - to the public use was the writer and philologist Lopé K. Santos, one of the editors of nationalistic Manila-based publication "El Renasimiento" ("Rebirth"). In Malaysia due to the greater homogeneity of indigenous population and to particularities of the policy of colonial authorities (the so called nonfederated states for a long period stayed formally independent) Malay language even during the colonial period played an important role in social-political relations. In 1949, for instance, 44 percent of the students in primary and secondary schools were studying at schools with Malay as the language of instruction (Shabalina 1987: 322). The question about giving to it a status of national language seems to appear mainly after proclaiming of independence. The real language use in education, national literature, theatre, cinema (with its appearance in SEA at the end of 19th century), and other verbal arts best of all characterizes a true language situation in one or another country. For instance, literature of the Indonesian ethnoses, particularly Javanese, Sundanese, Madurese, Balinese and Sasak, Malay (including in Malaysia), Acheh,

5 Batak, Buginese and Makasar, Minangkabau have sufficiently long fixed written tradition. The bases of modern literary Javanese language was laid by the writers of two most important centers of Java - Surakarta and Jogyakarta, who using ancient Javanese literary heritage, created remarkable samples of literary works characterizing by finesse of stile, lyricism, harmony. To them belong a dynasty of writers Yasadipura (18-19th centuries) and Ronggowarsito (1802 - 73), who left after himself a great number of literary works of different genre (Fadli Zon 1997: 308-320). At the beginning of modern Malay literary language stood the Malay enlighter Abdullah bin Abdul Kadir Munshi (1796 - 1854), the author of the books on modern topics: “Syair of the fire in Singapore” (1830), “History of Abdullah journey” (1838), “Dawa-ul-Kulub” (1883), “History of Abdullah” (1849), “History of Abdullah journey to Jiddah” (1854), “Book on customs of all Malay rajah in the whole country” (1837) (Parnickel 1980: 201-203). The Philippine literature (especially Tagalog, Cebuano, Ilokano) has also rich written traditions. The particularly significant role was played by the famous Tagalog poet Fr. Balagtas who by his creative works, in the first place by poem “Florante at Laura” (1839), promoted the formation of modern Tagalog language. The modern multigenre Tagalog literature successfully contends with the Philippine English written literature, developed in the country stating from 20-th years. In Tagalog there are being published many works of bell-literature and science, newspapers and journals, radio- and telecasts are being conducted. Some of the publications are bilingual (English-Tagalog, English-Chinese and so on). Bilingual are many writers and journalists. A certain amount of newspapers are published in regional languages, as well as in Chinese, Arabic. Interaction of Tagalog and English has brought to the appearance of pidgin language – “Taglish”, “Inggalog” (Makarenko 1983: 112-117; Makarenko 1986: 78-81). In the colonial period there was a certain amount of literature on European languages. However after proclaiming independence a situation has changed. Dutch quickly lost its positions in Indonesia to Indonesian language, while English in Malaysia stays to be second by the significance after Malay, and its role due to particularities of language policy of the authorities in recent years even increases. In the Philippines Spanish after the Second World War nearly came out of public use, though according to public polls nearly 0,5 percent of inhabitants of country name it to be their mother tongue. The development of different national literatures, however, did not remove a language problem as a cultural-political one, because a common for all inhabitants, legally fixed national language (language of inter-ethnic contacts) at a colonial period

6 was absent. For instance, in the Philippines its role originally was performed by Spanish and Tagalog, but at the beginning of 20th century - English and Tagalog, in Indonesia - Dutch and Malay, in Malaysia and Singapore - Malay and English.

Language policy The language policy, as a rule, was directed to the formation of one state official language or at least bilingualism (foreign-national). The definition “national”, “official”, “state” language theoretically is not elaborated and that fact certainly influences the determination and the development of language policy in SEA countries. In Indonesia since the time of convention of the Congress of Youth the Indonesian language (Malay in its base) plays an important role in the process of national self-consciousness and struggle for independence. It became the language of the revolutionaries and the majority of national organizations (first – “Budi Utomo”). Many leaders of liberation movement gradually turned in their speeches and articles to Bahasa Indonesia (Belenky 1978: 67). Very significant for the development of Indonesian language was the activity of a group of writers united around the journal "Pujangga Baru", which was published in Jakarta since 1933 till 1942. On their initiative the First Congress of Indonesian language was convocated in 1938 in Surakarta where a demand was forwarded to declare Bahasa Indonesia as the official language in Netherlands India (such was the name of colonial Indonesia). At the same time the deputies of consultative organ Folksraad from indigenous population (there was 30 of them among 61 members) have switched to Indonesian language solely. Nearly all the press of the national parties was published in it too. The positions of Bahasa Indonesia was so strong that national-liberal party Parindra in 1936 characterized the attempts of some forces to make as a national some other languages, for instance, Javanese, as the "dissipation of time" and "regress for 100 years back" (Belenky 1978: 69). The positions of Indonesian language as the national one became stronger after proclaiming independence: in accordance with the Constitution 1945, it was proclaimed as the official state language (Pringgodigdo 1954: 13). The policy of national language in Indonesia is referred to be the most successful in SEA. At present it is a language of official correspondence, the official proceedings, education up to higher school radio- and telecasts and press. There is rich bell, scientific and publicistic literature. More than 150 millions people master it in different degree, including more than 20 millions who use it in household-home contacts (Alieva 1990: 192).

7 Tagalog language in the course of the first in Asia national-liberation revolution 1896-98 in the Philippines has gained a status of "official language" of the first Philippine republic and even "language of the national contacts" according to the Constitution 1898. The problem of one all-Philippines language appeared again in connection with granting to the Philippines limited autonomy (Commonwealth). In the article 14 of the Constitution of the Philippines 1935 was fixed: "The Congress must undertake steps towards the development and formal adoption of common national language, based on one of the existing local languages. Until its approve by the law, English and Spanish remains as official languages". In 1937 the government of the president Manuel L. Quezon created the Institute of National Language, to which was allotted a task of "making the national Philippine language" on the base of a regional one that linguistically seems to be unrealistic, as far as it looks like reproducing a Philippine variant of Esperanto, but as a natural language. In December 1937 the "national language, based on Tagalog" was officially proclaimed as the "all-Nation language of the Philippines", and in 1940 it was legislatively declared as one of the obligatory subjects in all public schools. This "national language" with highly vague essence and features was declared to be the "official language of the country alongside with English and Spanish" after proclaiming the independent Republic of the Philippines in July 4, 1946. It is worth mentioning that Japanese occupation authorities, having proclaimed in October 1943 the puppet Philippine Republic, acknowledged precisely Tagalog as “the official (national) language" with introduction of Japanese as the main foreign language in the country. Postwar language policy in the Philippines is characterized by deeper penetration of the national (Tagalog) language to all spheres of public-political, cultural, religious life, by gradual transition of primary education to regional languages. The instruction in Tagalog has been introduced in senior classes of secondary school, in colleges and some universities, in Manila University in particular. The Constitution 1974 repeats nearly word in the word the article of the Constitution 1935 on the position of the official language with only one difference: the place of Spanish was occupied by Pilipino (“a common national language must be known as Filipino”). It was also declared that “this Constitution shall be officially promulgated in English and in Pilipino and translated into each dialect spoken by fifty thousand people and into Spanish and Arabic. In case of conflict the English text shall prevail” (Art. XV – General Provisions. Sec. 3). Since 1974 a program of bilingual education was incorporated. In Manila there are a number of Chinese schools, in the Moslem South the medium of instruction in some schools is Arabic

8 language. The Philippine (Tagalog) language became one of the obligatory subjects, the second language in some provinces of the country, like Russian in so called national schools in the former USSR (Gonzalez 1980). In Malaysia the Constitution 1957 in fact only has confirmed the position of Malay as the language of interethnic contacts (Mohamed 1968, 311). English remained as the second official language for the 10-years transitional period up to 1967. Besides, the position of Malay was disputed by émigré communities, particularly the Chinese, whose number did not yield the Malay. Contradictions between them have brought (unprecedented event in the history!) to a separation of Singapore basically Chinese by population from Malaysia and in 1969 to bloody race collisions. As a result the authorities had to protect the status of Malay by adopting in 1971 amendments to the Constitution, in accordance with which it is forbidden publicly to discuss so called sensitive questions, amongst them the status of Malay (Tyurin 1980: 241). Since that even the name of the language has changed: it was defined as Malaysian. By this its consolidating role in the construction of the new Malaysian nation was emphasized (in 90th the authorities decided probably that the purpose is reached and again returned to the old name) (Dorofeeva 1998: 11). The malayization policy was going very consequently. Up till 1983 English schools were completely liquidated all over the country, though English as an obligatory subject has kept in all types of schools. Teaching on native languages of other communes was permitted in primary schools only. All secondary schools, according to the national education system, switched to Malay as a language of instruction. Gradually all higher institutions, including universities also began using Malay. The use of English at science and medical faculties was allowed only by the permission of the Paramount Ruler of Malaysia. Attempts to found an institution with Chinese as the medium of instruction (for instance, the University “Merdeka” in 1982) were rejected as not corresponding to the national policy in the field of education (Nik Safiah 1988: 68). The efforts of Malaysian authorities are directed not only to strengthening of the position of Malay in the country, but also on the international arena. This finds a reflection in statements of official representatives that “Malay must become official language of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and an international one”, and in practical actions, particularly in creation of so called International Secretariat of Malay language in Kuala Lumpur (Ismail 1997: 21),



It is worth to note that in some republics in the post-Soviet territory (Kazakhstan, for instance) Russian is still one of the official languages.

9 International Council of Malay Language and a number of centers of Malay language overseas, including Russia (Center for Nusantara Studies at the Institute of Asian and African Studies, Lomonosov Moscow State University, opened in June 19, 1998). These efforts have the objective base: Malay which is known from ancient times as lingua franca in SEA due to its structure and particularities of grammar, possesses theoretically all signs of universal international language, and, being natural language, has decisive superiority over artificial one, for instance, over Esperanto (Maevsky, Pogadaev 1997: 28-29). Meanwhile the necessity to get new technology from the West spurs authorities to be more flexible and to make corrections in the language policy inside the country. In recent statements of Malaysian leaders sounds the idea of the need to master English more actively and to restore teaching a number of subjects of science and technology in it (Dorofeeva 1995: 206). Thus, the language situation in Malaysia is characterized by distinctive bilingualism of the Malay (Malay and English) and trilingualism of the non-Malay (native language, Malay and English). The language policy in Singapore is the most flexible. Malay as the language of indigenous population was proclaimed here as the national language (in it, in particular, is written the text of the state hymn), but Chinese, Tamil and English are official languages. In official correspondence a preference is given to English. Bilingualism became in Singapore usual phenomena: 70.5 percent of the Tamils, 61.5 – of the Malays, 53.6 – of the Chinese can speak in English (Liu 1988: 155). There exists in English bell literature, also attempts were undertaken to create on the base of three main languages (English, Malay and Chinese) a pidgin variant (“Ingmalchin”) and even to write in it some poetry (Parnickel 1989: 7). With the change in cultural policy: searching the national identity on the way of deeper absorption of Chinese culture and philosophy (they say that the Confucian values played an important role in the formation of Singapore as “a young Asian dragon), Chinese language got a new impetus for development. The characteristic feature of social-political attitude towards languages in these countries (probably, with the exception of Indonesia) is the so called "sociolinguistic (language) hypocrisy": officially everybody is for national language, but in the reality the ruling and upper economic stratas often prefer foreign language (English), demonstrating by this way the high degree of education and links with outer (European and American) world. Besides, the development of education in national language is quite often obstructed by objective reasons - the absence of corresponding terminology, methodical practices, and good textbooks in national language. The best specialists, as a rule, are those who got the education overseas.

10 The national elite send their children abroad for getting a higher education. Educated Filipinos and Malaysians even in private unofficial environments prefer speaking in English or use a lot of English words and sentences. In the Philippines English keeps its position in the proceedings, in army, police, in administrative authorities of different level, in the scientific literature, in the higher education system (Makarenko 1994: 137-143). “Linguistic hypocrisy” reveals itself also in the concentration of efforts on the development of national language which occasionally resulted the neglect of regional languages. This question has much broader importance than purely linguistic, as far as influences upon the process of national unity (the separatist moods, for instance in Indonesia). The case in point is not the languages of large national communities, in particular, Javanese, Sundanese or Minangkabau and others, which have rich written traditions and literature capable to defend its identity and to survive (though they also gradually yield their own positions to the national language (see, for instance, Suryadi 1997; Ogloblin 1998), but the languages of national minorities. Their languages are unwritten as a rule, have no official status and serve mainly for communication within the closed local communities. They practically do not show trends to change into literary languages, do not play any significant role in socialcultural life of the state. These minorities, so called “small ethnos or nationalities” are unable to develop its literature, culture, education and mass-media in their own languages, but the authorities have neither facilities, nor political will for this.

The role of national linguistics in shaping language policy The language question and the realization of language policy in these countries is closely connected with the development of national linguistics, including the theory of development of national language, the realization of problems of terminology, spellings etc. However up till now there was no thorough scientific examination of many languages in the Philippines, though the Philippine branch of American Summer Institute of Linguistics in the cooperation with local linguists in one or another degrees made during last years researches of significant number of languages and dialects (in the Philippines alone more than 50 - Makarenko 1985: 194-198). The Institute of National Language of the Philippines slowly settles problems of “modernization and standardization” of national language, which on the suggestion of the public opinion was renamed in 1959 to become “Philippine language” (Pilipino, but since 70-th - Filipino). There are no descriptions of evolution of modern Filipino (Tagalog) language, no academic grammar, though some

11 language phenomena are described deeply and many-sided, in particular due to the efforts of Linguistic society of the Philippines (McFarland, 1996: 111-112). In Indonesia and Malaysia the situation in this field is much better. The Indonesian Language Center (Pusat Bahasa), created in 1975 at the Ministry of Education and Culture, has obtained much results in studying the different aspects of national Bahasa Indonesia and Indonesian literature, languages and literatures of different national communities of the country, in the strategy of teaching languages, including foreign languages, in preparation and publishing various dictionaries and lists of terminology, in coordination of exploratory and methodological activity in the field of language and literature, by organizing seminars in particular, conferences and congresses of Indonesian language. One of the large realized projects of the Center is the publishing in 1988 of the big dictionary of Bahasa Indonesia (Kamus 1988), which was republished thereafter practically annually. The Malaysian Agency for Language and Literature (Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka - DBP) founded in 1956 is also a state organization. Its most important activity is connected with efforts to enrich national language (Abdul Rahman 1996: 178-179). Particularly actual this task became after the parliament passed in 1967 the Act on Language in accordance with which Malay was declared to be the single official language in the country. The task to increase lexical possibilities of the language was pursued by making a new terminology, so as it can effectively play the role of national and official language in the government structures, in the education, in science and technology. There was created more than 30 committees to produce unified terminology of all branches of knowledge, hundreds of terminological collections with the general number of 900 thousands terms were prepared and published (Berita 1986: 63). This has allowed to higher institutions of Malaysia to come already in 1970 to teaching many subjects in Malay. The enormous contribution of DBP was in the development of lexicography (see Pogadaev 1998, 76-80; Pogadaev 1996). In 1970 the most comprehensive explanatory dictionary of Malay language Kamus Dewan compiled by Teuku Iskandar (Teuku Iskandar 1970) was published. It was the first dictionary of this kind in the history of the country. This dictionary was republished several times (1984, 1989, and 1995) and gave an important impetus to the efforts of compiling and publishing other Malay dictionaries, including in Russia (Rott 1977; Pogadaev 1986; Pogadaev 1994a; Pogadaev, Zakharov 1997). The important event in the Malaysian lexicography became the publication in 1992 of English-Malay dictionary Kamus Inggeris Melayu Dewan, the largest among the similar dictionaries in the country (Kamus Inggeris 1992; review Pogadaev 1994).

12 DBP played the significant role in the development and introduction in 1972 together with Indonesia of the new, unified spelling of Malay and Indonesian languages (Pedoman 1975). Moreover, since 1972 Malaysia and Indonesia collaborates in the efforts to unify the terminology of the two languages. In 1984 Brunei joined their activity. Thus, three-sided committee was created, which conducts meetings biannually and was able to approve thousands terms. But the practical realization of already accepted decisions, aimed to unite the two nations, is conducted extremely slowly and inconsequentially due to the nationalistic moods, hidden under slogans of conservation of national identity. The collections of already agreed terms published in Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur (Daftar 1985; Daftar 1987) show that each of the sides in many occasions gives a preference to its own variants of terms. Conclusions 1. In connection with the further intensive growth of population in SEA the course on strengthening positions of national languages in the countries of the region will be continued. 2. Together with that the language policy will be characterized by more balancing approach, acknowledging the need of active studying European, "colonial" languages due to the deep involvement of the SEA countries in the international economic integration and need of getting the modern technologies and scientific knowledge. 3. The question of the attitude to the languages of other national communities will become very important in many aspects: if the concentration of efforts on the development of the national language does not bring to the neglect of the languages of the small communities, reinforcements of separatist will be avoided (for instance, in Indonesia). 4. It is possible to expect reinforcement of the attention to national linguistics which is to settle such problems, as more intensive study of colloquial and pidgin variants of language, which render the essential influence upon its literary forms, but which hitherto were insufficiently researched from scientific point of view. Only thorough account of all aspects of development of language allows creating the most efficient language policy.

Bibliography (in Russian) Abdul Rahman 1996 - Abdul Rahman Yusuf. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka (DBP) // “Vostok” (“Oriens”). – Moscow, 1996. - N 5. Alieva 1983 - Alieva N. F. Yazyki (Languages) // Indoneziya. Spravochnik (Indonesia. Reference book). – Moscow: Nauka, 1983.

13 Alieva 1990 - Alieva N. F. Indoneziysky jazyk (Indonesian language) // Lingvistichesky entsiklopedichesky slovar’ (Linguistic Encyclopedical Dictionary). – Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya, 1990. Alieva 1990a - Alieva N. F. Malaysky jazyk (Malay language) // Lingvistichesky entsiklopedichesky slovar’ (Linguistic Encyclopedical Dictionary). – Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya, 1990. Belen’ky 1978 - Belen’ky A. B. Ideologiya natsional’no-osvoboditel’nogo dvizheniya v Indonezii (1917-1942) (Ideology of national and liberation movement in Indonesia in 19171942). – Moscow: Nauka, 1978. Dorofeeva 1995 - Dorofeeva T. V. Regulirovanie situatsii mnogoyazychiya v KualaLumpure (Regulation of multilingual situation in Kuala Lumpur) // Goroda-giganty Nusantary i problemy ikh razvitiya (The Problems of Mega-cities of Nusantara and its development) [Malayo-Indonesian Studies, VI]. Editor B. B. Parnickel – Moscow: Nusantara society, 1995. Dorofeeva 1998 - Dorofeeva T. V. O lingvonime “malaisky jazyk” (bahasa Melayu): etimologiya, konnotatsiya, modifikatsiya termina (On the linguonim “bahasa Melayu”: etymology, connotation, modification of the term) // Malayo-Indonesian Studies, XI. Editor B. B. Parnickel – Moscow: Nusantara society, 1998. Kondrashkina 1987 - Kondrashkina E. A., Dorofeeva T. V. Jazykovaya situatsiya (Language situation) // Malayziya. Spravochnik (Malaysia. Reference book). – Moscow: Nauka, 1987 Kulikov 1990 - Kulikov L. I. Sundansky jazyk (Sundanese language) // Lingvistichesky entsiklopedichesky slovar’ (Linguistic Encyclopedical Dictionary). – Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya, 1990. Liu 1988 – Liu Ju., Solntseva N. V. Jazykovaya situatsiya (Language situation) // Singapur. Spravochnik (Singapore. Reference book). – Moscow: Nauka, 1988. Makarenko 1983 - Makarenko V. A. Yazykovy vopros v Respublike Filippiny (Language question in the Philippine Republic) // Narody Azii i Afriki (Peoples of Asia and Africa) – Moscow, 1983. – N 2. Makarenko 1985 - Makarenko V. A. Izuchenie malykh filippinskikh yazykov (A Study of Minor Philippine Languages) // Referativny zhurnal (Essay Journal). Obschestvennie nauki za rubezhom (Social sciences abroad). Ser. 6. “Jazykoznanije” (“Linguistics”). – Moscow: INION, 1985. – N6. Makarenko 1990 - Makarenko V. A. Filippinskie jazyki // Lingvistichesky entsiklopedichesky slovar’ (Linguistic Encyclopedical Dictionary). – Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya, 1990. Makarenko 1994 - Makarenko V. A. Jazykovaya situatsiya i yazykovaya politika na Filippinakh (Language situation and language policy in the Philippines) // Jazykovie problemy Rossiyskoy Federatsii i zakony o yazykakh (Language problems of Russian Federation and laws of languages). – Moscow: Russian Academy of Science, 1994. Ogloblin 1990 - Ogloblin A. K. Madursky jazyk (Madurese language) // Lingvistichesky entsiklopedichesky slovar’ (Linguistic Encyclopedical Dictionary). – Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya, 1990. Ogloblin 1998 - Ogloblin A. K. Traditsii i obraz zhizni minangkabau: po literaturnym i fol’klornym materialam (Minangkabau traditions and mode of life: on literary and folklore materials) // Malayo-Indonesian Studies, XI. Editor B. B. Parnickel. – Moscow: Nusantara Society, 1998. Parnickel 1980 - Parnickel B. B. Vvedenie v literaturnuyu istoriyu Nusantary IX-XIX vv. (Introduction to literary history of Nusantara of IX-XIX centuries). – Moscow: Nauka, 1980. Parnickel 1987 - Parnickel B. B. V poiskakh svoego litsa (In the search of own face) // Sovremennaja proza Singapura (Modern Prose of Singapore). Translated from English. – Moscow: Raduga, 1987. Pogadaev, Rott 1986 – Pogadaev V. A., Rott N. V. Russko-malayziysky slovar’ (Russian-Malaysian Dictionary). – Moscow: “Russky Yazyk”, 1986. Pogadaev, Zakharov 1997 – Pogadaev Victor, Zakharov Svet. Russko-malaysky razgovornik (Russian-Malay Phrase-book). – Moscow: Malaysia Friends Club, 1997. Pogadaev 1998 – Pogadaev V. A. Leksikografiya v Malayzii: dostizheniya i perspectivy (Lexicography in Malaysia: progress and perspectives) // Malayo-Indonesian Studies, XI. Editor B. B. Parnickel. – Moscow: Nusantara Society, 1998. Rott 1977 – Rott N. V., Pogadaev V. A., Pavlenko A. P. Malayziysko-russkoangliysky slovar’ (Malaysian-Russian-English Dictionary). – Moscow: “Russky Yazyk”, 1977.

14 Shabalina 1987 – Shabalina G. S. Obrazovanie i nauka (Education and Science) // Malayziya. Spravochnik (Malaysia. Reference book). – Moscow: Nauka, 1987. Tesiolkin 1990 - Tesiolkin A. S. Javansky yazyk (Javanese language) // Lingvistichesky entsiklopedichesky slovar’ (Linguistic Encyclopedical Dictionary). – Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya, 1990. Tyurin 1980 - Tyurin V. A. Istoriya Malayzii. Kratky ocherk (History of Malaysia. Concise essay). – Moscow: Nauka, 1980. Tsyganov 1993 - Tsyganov V. A. Istoriya Indonezii. Ch. 2 (History of Indonesia. Part 2). – Moscow: Moscow University Press, 1993. Zarbaliev 1987 - Zarbaliev H. M. Yazyk Minangkabau (Minangkabau language). – Moscow: Nauka, 1987.

(In English, Indonesian, Malay) Berita 1987 – “Berita Peristilahan”. - Kuala Lumpur: DBPustaka. – 1987. - Bil. 4. Census 1991 - Census of Population 1990. Advanced Data Release. – Singapore: Department of Statistics, May 1991. Daftar 1985 - Daftar Kumulatif Istilah. Hasil Sidang Majelis Indonesia-Malaysia 19741981. – Jakarta: Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa, 1985. – Jilid (Vols) 1-2. Daftar 1987 - Daftar Istilah MBIM. - Kuala Lumpur, 1987. - Jilid 1-2. Fadli Zon 1996 - Fadli Zon. Sosok Ronggowarsito di Pentas Politik dan Seni Budaya Jawa // National Build-up and Literary/cultural Process in South-East Asia. Executive Editor Pogadaev V. A. – Moscow: Nusantara Society, 1997, p. 308-320. Gonzalez 1980 - Gonzalez A. B. Language and Nationalism. The Philippine Experience thus Far. – Manila: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1980. Indonesia 1997 - Indonesia 1997. An Official Handbook. – Jakarta: Department of Information. Republic of Indonesia, 1997. Information 1997 - Information Malaysia 1997 Yearbook. - Kuala Lumpur: Berita Publishing Sdn. Bhd., 1997. Ismail 1997 - Ismail Hussein. Persamaan Pendapat - Dasar Untuk Kerjasama Berfaedah // National Build-up and Literary/cultural Process in South-East Asia. Executive Editor Pogadaev V. A. – Moscow: Nusantara Society, 1997, p. 20-22. Kamus 1988 - Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia. – Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Balai Pustaka, 1988. Kamus Inggeris 1992 - Kamus Inggeris Melayu Dewan - Kuala Lumpur: DBP, 1992. Knaap 1994 - Knaap G. One hundred fifty volumes of Bijdragen // Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde. 150 volumes of Bijdragen. Edited by Harry A. Poeze. – Leiden, 1994. - Deel 150, 4-e Aflevering. McFarland 1980 - Curtis D. McFarland. A Linguistic Atlas of the Philippines. – Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, 1980. McFarland 1996 - Curtis D. McFarland, Masanao Oue, Maria L. S. Bautista. Problems of Preparing a Filipino-Japanese Dictionary // Philippine Journal of Linguistics. – Manila, 1996. - Vol. 27, NN 1, 2. Maevsky, Pogadaev 1998 - Maevsky Eugeny, Pogadaev Victor. Bahasa Melayu: Daripada Lingua Franca kepada Lingua Universalis? // Pelita Bahasa. - Kuala Lumpur, January 1998. - Jilid 10, Bil. 1. Makarenko 1969 - Makarenko V. A. The Purists are wet (The Philippine language dilemma) // Weekly Graphic. - Manila. - July 23. Makarenko, Genzor 1981 - Makarenko V. A., Genzor J. The Most Recent Phenomena in the Evolution of Contemporary Tagalog Language and Prognosis of its Development // Asian and African Studies. – Bratislava, 1981. - Vol. XVII. Mohamed 1968 - Mohamed Salleh bin Abas. Prinsip Perlembagaan dan Pemerintahan di-Malaysia (Principles of Constitution and Government in Malaysia). - Kuala Lumpur: DBP, 1968. Nik Safiah 1988 - Nik Safiah Nik Abdul Karim, Faiza Tamby Cik. Bahasa dan Undang-Undang (Language and Law). Kertaskerja Kongres Cendekiawan Melayu’88. Bangi, April 1988. Pedoman 1975 - Pedoman Umum Ejaan Bahasa Malaysia (A General Orthographical Guide of Malay Language). - Kuala Lumpur: DBP, 1975.

15 Pogadaev 1994 – Pogadaev Victor. (review of) Kamus Inggeris Melayu Dewan // Jurnal Dewan Bahasa. - Kuala Lumpur: DBP, January 1994 - Jilid 38, Bil. 1. Pogadaev 1994a - Pogadaev Victor. Khazanah Kamus-Kamus Melayu Yang Diterbitkan di Rusia // Jurnal Dewan Bahasa. - Kuala Lumpur: DBP, November 1994. - jilid 38, bil. 11, h. 1011-1016. Pogadaev 1996 - Pogadaev Victor. Leksikografi di Malaysia: Tinjauan dari Luar Negeri // Jurnal Dewan Bahasa. - Kuala Lumpur: DBP, Disember 1996. - Jilid 40, Bil. 12, , h. 1127-1130. Pringgodigdo 1954 - Pringgodigdo A. K. Tiga Undang-Undang Dasar. – Djakarta: P. T. Pembangunan, 1954. Suryadi 1997 - Suryadi. Sastra minangkabau di tengah tradisi sastra Indonesia modern (Minangkabau Literature within the tradition of Modern Indonesian Literature) // National Build-up and Literary/Cultural Process in South-East Asia. Executive Editor Pogadaev V. A. – Moscow: Nusantara Society, 1997, p. 321-329. Teuku Iskandar 1970 - Teuku Iskandar. Kamus Dewan. - Kuala Lumpur: DBP, 1970.