With all things in the world possessing one fundamental essence, any single object owes its existence to everything else. Within one object, everything else resides. The Te Awa Tupua Act took a conceptual step towards recognising this in law.
Depending on who one is talking to, these metaphysical concepts may be called spiritual or holistic, or they may have no label. But it is clearly important that we employ a language that accommodates this thinking, and that its terms are treated with the integrity they鈥檙e due, even in the political sphere.
Te Reo M膩ori is often invoked as one such language 鈥 a spiritual听, gifted by human and non-human ancestors, and imbued with their presence. It registers the more-than-human realm 鈥 Te Po (night), Te Kore (nothingness), and so on 鈥 while talking about a single thing.
These more abstract dimensions of te reo M膩ori, however, can clash with the generally more instrumentalist use of language in policy and law.
听
Deeper meanings
So it was that earlier this year Justice Minister Kiritapu Allan objected to the听听in government departments. Other M膩ori have objected to this too, and the issue also arises in the debates around science and听, and听听and law.
The problem, one suspects, relates to the overuse and inappropriate use of te reo M膩ori. Indeed, there may be times when the taonga status of the language can only be honoured when we decide听not听to use te reo in certain circumstances.
With these political and philosophical concerns at the forefront, one arm of my research has been to examine 鈥 from a M膩ori vantage point, where all things are interconnected or 鈥渙ne鈥 鈥 how a M膩ori text does not essentially connect with its English translation.
With Kiritapu Allan鈥檚 challenge in mind, and in light of this year鈥檚 50th anniversary of the听听itself, consider the position of te reo M膩ori in policy and legal texts. From a M膩ori perspective of the interconnectedness of things, there is a particularly isolating, divisive tendency in English, which diminishes full M膩ori meanings.
Words such as 鈥渨hakapapa鈥 and 鈥渨hanau鈥, for example, often lack their more holistic dimensions in these contexts. Ironically, they have no听听or听听with the text. The surrounding English text in law and policy will emphasise measurable, tangible things, whereas te reo terms always refer to intangible worlds as well.
The problem for te reo M膩ori in these situations is that a term鈥檚 鈥渆ssence鈥 鈥 some might call this its 鈥溾 鈥 has been modified to refer and equate to an English language term, and also to conform to a colonising worldview in the background.
听
The M膩ori worldview
As I said earlier, this worldview is isolating. It separates out things in the world, it actively rejects their togetherness and their relationship with the more-than-human, and it inhibits te reo M膩ori鈥檚 ability to transcend human existence.
We see a warping of te reo Maori in these circumstances 鈥 a negating of its spiritual character in order to refer to more tangible things. 鈥淲hakapapa鈥 in those instances merely refers to genealogy, 鈥渨hanau鈥 to human family.
Te Wiki o Te Reo M膩ori offers a chance to recall and honour the work of those who have fought to increase the number of M膩ori speakers. Through their efforts we鈥檝e seen the language flourish in areas we would never have dreamed of only a decade ago.
But with the language now being so widely deployed in previously unforeseen ways and contexts, it鈥檚 also timely to think about how the spiritual reality of te reo should be preserved against these colonising backdrops.
听
When English will do
This is just as important as the effort to have te reo widely used. Sometimes the two camps may not agree with each other, either. It might involve, for instance, not being scared to reject an offer to use te reo M膩ori in certain forums.
Wherever we see the naturally expansive nature of te reo M膩ori being 鈥渄isciplined鈥 by other registers of language, we need to consider withdrawing it. We would simply advise policymakers and legislators to use English terms if they are referring to a non-M膩ori worldview.
This might seem unthinkable for many, given the apparent push to use te reo M膩ori at every opportunity to ensure its survival. But it would also be the face of a deeper mission to ensure te reo M膩ori accords with a M膩ori worldview.
Instead of being forced to act as a receptacle for a colonising worldview, te reo M膩ori could 鈥渢ake a breather鈥 to allow M膩ori to discuss the issue in more depth. After that, it might be that our precious terms are returned to the text with special provisos 鈥 or maybe not at all.
This article was originally published on听
