Journalist Mark Laurence Zammit had something to say about the Maltese language.
‘I wouldn’t have a problem if Maltese dies out. And I graduated in Maltese. I wouldn’t have a problem. Every beginning has an end. We can’t keep everything. Sometimes something starts and ends. Every beginning has an end. It’s a Maltese saying. And it could be that Maltese itself has an end. Hopscotch, for example, will probably die out. But isn’t it a lovely game? But should we keep everything? Some things end. I don’t have a problem with that. The problem I have with Maltese and English is our attitude towards Maltese. We look at language as a tool for people to understand us. We think that people speak to be understood. And so we tell ourselves which language is most understood? English, because speaking in English reaches the widest range of people possible. And so we should speak in English. What we fail to understand and people who work in media really understand this, is that people don’t speak to be understood, but they speak to share their emotions. And so far, in Malta, we have been able to share our emotions in the most raw and profound manner with our mother tongue. That’s why many ‘tal-pepe’ people, to call them that, who speak almost exclusively in English, still swear in Maltese. Because when it comes to our really raw emotions within us, we’re back to our mothers’ laps. That’s why it’s called a mother tongue. I like using this example. My interview that many people still talk to me about – with Joseph Portelli. We could have done it in English. We could have spoken in English. I know how to speak in English and so does Joseph Portelli. People would have understood us. In fact, many more people would have understood us. But we did it in Maltese, actually practically in Gozitan, and would it have been the same if we had done it in English? Of course not. So the language issue isn’t about people understanding us. This idea we are giving children that they should only learn English so they can be understood. No, no, no, no. In my opinion, those who don’t know how to speak proper Maltese suffer in all sectors of life and up until now, that’s why it’s important to keep Maltese because it allows us to share our emotions.’
Who would have told me that in 2024 we would come to a stage where we would debate if we have to keep the Maltese language or not?
If Zammit doesn’t have any issues whatsoever with Maltese dying out, it is his problem, and he should keep it to himself instead of using the media he’s part of to start brainwashing the populace to accept the phasing out of the Maltese language. Double shame on him for being of this opinion when he graduated in Maltese when he should be standing firm and protecting it. According to him, we cannot keep everything so, let us dump the language because every beginning has an end and he makes an analogy with the fact that the hopscotch, a once popular game, got phased out. Excuse me but what analogy is this? How can you justify the death of a language with such an analogy? How can you compare a language with a game? And the hopscotch is not being phased out. It has died already thanks to the importation of the cursed and diabolical video games which have locked the children in their rooms while turning them into a desensitized species. And where can one play hopscotch nowadays? In the middle of traffic? That is to say, it is the agenda that brought the hopscotch to its end and so, this analogy serves to show us that there is an agenda to bring the Maltese language to an end! But why does this country have to have this kind of journalism of bigilla and galletti? Do you know what beginning I wish to see the end of, apart from that of corruption and pathocracy, dear Mark Laurence Zammit? That of the local mainstream media which has been playing with the minds of the people through ‘continuing education’ and vile propaganda.
Then Zammit talked about the functions and purpose of a language. But, again, he fails to give you the whole truth. First, there are six functions of a language which are: referential function, emotive function, poetic function, conative function, phatic function, and metalingual function. By ‘referential function’ it is meant sharing information; by ’emotive function’ it is meant interpreting emotions, feelings, desires, and moods. This is on which Zammit got stuck. By ‘poetic function’ or what is also known as ‘aesthetic function’, it is meant the way that the message is communicated, like for example, when we use analogies but which make sense, unlike that used by Zammit. By ‘conative function’ it is meant the reaction that the person who is being communicated the message, or that who is paying attention, makes. By ‘phatic function’ it is meant those words which are used to start or stop a conversation – like ‘How are you’ or ‘See you later’. Basically, the phatic function establishes a social connection between people without really communicating any meaningful information. By the ‘metalingual function’ it is meant the features, diction and so forth of a language itself.
Most importantly of all, and which Mark Laurence Zammit fails to tell you is that ‘language is one of the most important parts of any culture. It is the way by which people communicate with one another, build relationships, and create a sense of community‘. So, basically, what Mark Laurence Zammit is telling you is to drop patriotism and start accepting the fact that you will live in a secular society with no sense of culture, belonging and community.
But, here comes a big truth that Zammit exposes: ‘What we fail to understand and people who work in media really understand this, is that people don’t speak to be understood, but they speak to share their emotions‘. In other words, Zammit is telling you, and admitting, that journalists use psycholinguistics, that is the way they put words together to indoctrinate you and modify your behaviour by tapping on your emotions, while brainwashing your brain! This is how the media shapes you and modifies you while assisting to bring tremendously vast changes that the controllers want.
The analogy between the Maltese language and the hopscotch was not stupid enough to decorate his argument. Here comes another stupidity: ‘And so far, in Malta, we have been able to share our emotions in the most raw and profound manner with our mother tongue. That’s why many ‘tal-pepe’ people, to call them that, who speak almost exclusively in English, still swear in Maltese. Because when it comes to our really raw emotions within us, we’re back to our mothers’ laps.‘ It seems that for him, swearing is a raw and deep way to express our emotions and it is fine for the ‘tal-pepe’ to do it in the Maltese language. Yeah, let’s continue swearing and do it in Maltese, shall we? Dear God, who are in heaven, please take heed of my prayer, and enlighten the offices of our local media so hopefully its journalists can clear the cobweb that have filled the ceiling of their offices and start thinking clearly.
On the other hand, he calls the Maltese language ‘a mother’s tongue’ and this is why you should have a big problem if it dies, dear Mark Laurence Zammit! Because it takes us to ‘our mother’s laps’. But towards the end of his argument, he makes a twist to tell you that ‘it’s important to keep Maltese because it allows us to share our emotions,’ in other words, it will continue to allow you to swear because it is important that this Catholic nation of pagan celebrations and the ‘sinning of the calf,’ keeps the swear words. But Zammit did not make this twist because he had a change of heart.
It was done on purpose so to keep you confused and to set you up to live in a community where it is fine if you hear Maltese, and it is also fine if you don’t hear Maltese. Just like on the new supposedly Maltese airlines – you might hear Maltese and you might not. And you should be fine with it and you will not revolt. Because that is what the media is brainwashing you to accept.
And please note that he said that up until now the Maltese should be kept. Meaning, that in the future, it won’t be important to be kept. Also, the stupid reason he again gives is that of sharing emotions, that is, to keep on swearing. Forget about your cultural identity, your sense of belonging, your sense of community, and love towards your country and your language. As long as you swear in Maltese, you are doing a great job.
Anyone who still thinks that the Maltese language should not be spoken even though they are Maltese because it is ‘ħamallu’ to do so but then it is not ‘ ħamallu’ to swear in Maltese, should do us a favour, pack up, and leave.
Anyone who thinks that the Maltese language should be wiped out should do us a favour, pack up and leave.
Anyone who finds no problem whatsoever if the Maltese language dies, because they fail to have a sense of patriotism and stand up for their own native language, should do us a favour, pack up, and leave.
Mark Laurence Zammit’s argument is one which lacks principles and mirrors all those who do not carry the balls to take a position and stand up for it.
Once upon a time there was the Maltese language – and there was Mark Laurence Zammit.