Having never formally learned Tamil in school, I often experience a severance from my ethnolinguistic community and roots. Growing up overseas, I learned to embrace diverse cultures and languages, nurturing me to encompass a multicultural identity. However, now in my 20s, I recognise how my limited linguistic and cultural immersion with Tamil has contributed to my disconnect with my heritage.

When working on this archive, I recognised a corresponding pattern to individuals like me from Non-Tamil Indian Language (NTIL) roots. Instead of learning their native tongues, some opted to study one of Singapore’s three primary languages in school. Further research presented how this language selection was not a new occurrence, but one that has been chartered by economic, social, and political factors since Singapore’s independence. Drawing from my own experience, I questioned how these individuals navigated their cultural identity and ties with a lack of formal education in their native mother tongues.

Post-independence language policies in Singapore, shaped by political objectives of nation-building, encouraged some NTIL speakers to adopt state official languages over their native mother tongues. Since independence, Singapore’s multiracial policy has been grounded in the CMIO (Chinese, Malay, Indian and Others) framework, which retains racial distinctions while homogenising the individual racial identities (Siddique, 1990). This is presented through Singapore’s education policy, in which Malay, Mandarin, Tamil (Tang, 2018) were institutionalised as mother tongue languages to construct a collective and “national identity” (Jain, 2021). This consolidation of the identity of individuals from the Indian subcontinent diaspora through language policy was maintained until the 1990s, retaining Tamil as the default “Indian” language by policy.

The option to learn Indian languages- Urdu, Bengali, Punjabi, Hindi and Gujarati- aside from Tamil was introduced in 1990 to the secondary school curriculum and 1994 to the primary school curriculum (Purushotam, 1998). However, there was a lack of infrastructure in place to cater to them. Education Minister Tony Tan stated how “pupils would have to make their own arrangements… as the ministry would not be able to provide instruction” (The Straits Times, 1989), delegating the duty to the community (Jain, 2021). During an interview with the Bangladesh Language and Cultural Foundation’s principal, he recalled how many of these NTIL schools became places of socialisation rather than learning during the initial years, owed to the lack of structured learning. A Hindi-speaking interviewee stated how despite the offerings of NTIL languages being piloted when she was in school, her parents opted for her to take Mandarin. This was due to their recognition of the lack of structured curriculum development in place which would handicap her ability to excel as compared to the established syllabi of the official languages. With the absence of government support to develop the teaching of minority Indian languages to be on par with the curriculum of the state-sponsored languages, these students from NTIL backgrounds opted out of learning their heritage language.

Socioeconomic concerns contributed to NTIL families in Singapore hierarchizing proficiency in Singapore’s official languages rather than their native tongues for greater economic merits. Though Tamil might present to be the logical preference for NTIL students due to cultural connections, a 1980 report revealed that only 55% of the

“Indian students had opted for Tamil” as their mother tongues, with others choosing Malay or Mandarin (Jain, 2021). A 1998 study presented how North Indians were primarily engaged in the “trade and commerce” industry, with Malay being the primary language of communication in these professions (Purushotam, 1998). An interview conducted with a Hindi-speaking man in his 40s presented how many in the community were encouraged to learn Malay as a result, with their families recognising the advantages of their children speaking the language for employability in these industries. Within the Hindi-speaking and wider North Indian community, Malay functioned as the lingua franca in the professional environment, aiding their children to make career strides more than Hindi and their native tongues would. Furthermore, 60% of interviewees voiced that learning Malay or Chinese aided them professionally, citing the necessity of these languages for career advancement and integration within the workforce, where proficiency was often a prerequisite to the jobs. This suggests linguistic gatekeeping, alienating individuals who did not speak Singapore’s official languages, emphasising the importance of these bilingualism in the workforce. For some NTIL parents, these economic considerations for their children’s future outweighed the heritage-based language choices as a result.

Practical considerations motivated individuals from NTIL backgrounds to formally learn Singapore’s official languages, due to its prevalence within the society. The preference for Singapore’s official languages over minority Indian languages can be owed to Singapore’s “linguistic landscape” (Tang, 2018). The prominence of distinct languages and absence of other languages within society is a testament to the “importance, power, significance” (Shohamy, 2006) of these languages. Research presented how 97% of bilingual shop signs feature English and Chinese (Shang & Guo, 2016), showcasing the prominence of the Chinese language within the community. This supremacy is further reiterated through the practical determinations made by individuals from NTIL backgrounds when choosing their mother tongue. For example, 75% of our interviewees stated that their families had chosen for them to learn Malay or Chinese over their native languages due to its functional use, citing the invisibility of NTIL in everyday contexts in Singapore. One interviewee recognised the essentialness of learning Chinese for integration while another interviewee saw learning Malay as useful in aligning with the CMIO model and its historical role as a bridging language in Singapore and across Southeast Asia. This preference for Malay and Chinese over minority Indian languages presents how NTIL speakers course through linguistic pressures in a society which places the significance of languages through practicality and linguistic landscape. Both interviewees, one from the era in which the formal offering of NTIL had pioneered and one who is currently in the education system, their recognition of the impracticality of learning Hindi presents how Singapore’s language policies and societal standards have shaped the academic journey of minority language speakers.

Beyond my own experience, research presents how identity is correlated to language learning within the “bilingual school system”, in associating with a “relevant racial niche” (Siddique, 1990). In Singapore, this is further reiterated the active efforts of mother tongue classes aiding the retention of culture through activities such as mother tongue fortnight. Here, students are able to engage in games and experiences which provide ethnic awareness (Queensway Mother Tongue Language, 2025) – such as

making Ondeh Ondeh and learning how to play the Kompang for the Malay language students. However, with NTIL students taking languages in schools that did not correlate to their cultural backgrounds, they stand to miss out on this heritage exposure and bonding with peers from similar ethnic backgrounds through these language classes. This made me ponder about how they reconnected to their roots.

Notably, NTIL individuals were able to connect with their heritage through a multitude of ethnic and social communities that extended spaces for language use, cultural education and social support. Interviews demonstrated how despite not learning their NTIL mother tongues in school, many informally learned the language within their primary social structure – their families. Families played a key role in using these languages as mediums of communication, exposing them to NTIL media and arranging regular visits back to their hometowns which bolstered language use with their extended family. Additionally, established cultural organisations contribute a substantial part in retaining linguistic and cultural ties. This include Singapore Gujarati Society which holds cultural events such as Navaratri for the Gujarati community (Singapore Gujarati Society, 2025) and the Singapore Pakistani Association’s provision of Urdu classes since 1988 for examinations and language learners (Ahmad, 1995). Recognising the underrepresentation of minority South Asian communities in Singapore, these societies provide a platform for individuals to reconnect to their traditions and customs beyond the formal school environment.

While “language is not synonymous with culture”, it is “closely related to it” (Pakir, 1993) and many of our interviewees attributed their connection to their culture with their ability to understand and speak their native language. Religious institutions also provide platforms to preserve language and to engage the community. For the Sikh community, the gurdwara serves as their place of congregation and worship (Shee & Woods, 2022), transmitting contact with their traditions and retaining a space for conversing in Punjabi (Woods & Kong, 2023). By learning the language informally at home, these individuals were able to retain contact with their communities through being able to understand and converse in these cultural spaces, further developing their ties to their heritage. These formal and informal arenas to conserve their linguistic customs and establish cultural distinctiveness in multicultural Singapore, beyond the means of formal education.

With our archive recollecting the experiences of NTIL speakers in Singapore’s education system, the stories of those who opted out of learning their mother tongues are an overlooked yet crucial contribution. Shaped by language policies, a desire to secure professional advancement and to integrate better into Singapore’s CMIO model, these individuals opted out of formally learning their native tongues. Despite this, many retained ties to their heritage through their own efforts such as actively learning the language through their households and involving themselves in cultural societies during their free time. Recognising their own efforts in bridging this gap to their communities and identity to their culture, it has made me more deliberate in my endeavours to strengthen my own ties to my heritage.

Written by: Maziyah