1

[[26]]Mussalmans are not a minority as it is commonly known and understood. One has only got to look round. Even today, according to the British map of India, out of eleven provinces, four provinces where the Muslims dominate more or less, are functioning notwithstanding the decision of the Hindu Congress High Command to non-cooperate and prepare for civil disobedience.

Source: Presidential address by Muhammad Ali Jinnah to the Muslim League, Lahore, 1940

What does "non-cooperate and prepare for civil disobedience" mean in this quote?

KillingTime
  • 6,206
Eloise Zeng
  • 33
  • 3
    You misquoted the text. There is no "a" between "to" and "non-cooperate." Even so, use of "to non-cooperate" as a negated infinitive verb is a strange formulation. More idiomatic might be the simpler "not to cooperate." – Robusto May 29 '21 at 20:19
  • The question does not state which aspect of the language used in this paragraph is in need of an explanation. Explaining the overall point of the paragraph is a matter of history, not of English language and usage. – jsw29 May 29 '21 at 20:21
  • @Robusto, yes, except that non-cooperation probably functions as a semi-technical term here. – jsw29 May 29 '21 at 20:22
  • @jsw29 I think that, given that the language is puzzling, it's reasonable to give the OP the benefit of the doubt. – user888379 May 29 '21 at 20:23
  • @user888379, indeed, but if the question is 'Why does the speech use to non-cooperate rather than not to cooperate?', that should be made explicit. There is nothing puzzling about 'prepare for civil disobedience'. – jsw29 May 29 '21 at 20:30

1 Answers1

1

It means to not cooperate and prepare for civil disobedience, while referring to the Indian independence struggle.

The only unusual word is "non-cooperate". It isn't a real word. "Not cooperate" or "be uncooperative" would be better grammatically, although the meaning is clear. However in India the Noncooperation movement was (and still is) a well-known piece of Indian history, an attempt at civil disobedience aimed at inducing the British government to grant independence to India. The word is intended to be a reference to that movement, and to the Indian independence campaign which was ongoing at the time of the speech.

DJClayworth
  • 25,795
  • 2
    A Google Books search for "non-cooperate" finds 409 books containing it: most of them are about Gandhi, the Indian independence movement etc, so rather than "isn't a real word", I think it's fairer to say that it's a peculiar word that is used specifically in the context of non-cooperation during the Indian independence movement. (On the other hand, satyagraha (~617 search results on Google Books) is in most English dictionaries but "non-cooperate" doesn't seem to be….) – ShreevatsaR May 29 '21 at 23:49
  • It might be more accurate to say that not cooperate or be uncooperative would be better in another context; these terms would, however, fail to make the connection with the specific political movement of noncooperation, which is essential in this context. Here, non-cooperate does not quite mean the same as not cooperate; it rather means follow the practices of the noncooperation movement. – jsw29 May 31 '21 at 17:29