University of Venda Discourses on Difference and Oppression

As the process of transition unfolds some people in society gradually but readily cast away old practices, change their perceptions about other humans and about life in general (while others resist change by clinging to old practices and attitudes). For the former, a "new ethos" is evolved while the latter experience stagnation. Whatever our judgement, each group believes that what it is doing is appropriate and sound.

The scenario above currently manifests in Azania (South Africa) particularly as regards language use in various spheres of the fabric of society. Furthermore, the language issue is central to race relations, economic activity, delivery of social services, education and the mass media (both print and electronic) to mention but few areas of human activity. Central to all these aspects in our current political epoch, is the status of the languages in our country. The daunting point to us all is the tradition of bilingualism that promoted the exclusive use of both English and Afrikaans in carrying out official business. Unfortunately, this approach led to the suffocation of indigenous languages. This was a sad episode indeed. In the post-apartheid era Azanians are finding it tough to deal with linguistic vicissitudes arising as a result of the above reality.

Language, any language in society represents power. This is captured in the verbal tapestry of The President of AZAPO, Mosibudi Mangena, when he aptly says, "language, just like knowledge, is power. If you take away or cripple the language of a people, you take away their power to interact with their situation effectively."(1996:100) To investigate this "linguistic robbery", a look at the role of language in society is essential.

Ngugi Wa Thiongo aptly illustrates this role by focussing on the character of language, any language. He posits the view that "any language has a dual character: it is both a means of communication and a carrier of culture"( :116). As a means of communication, language implicitly enables people in society to convey messages to each other. During this, exchange people come to understand one another. Furthermore, as a means of communication, language as Ngugi purports has three aspects, namely "language of real life; language of speech and the written signs" ( :116). The language of real life facilitates interaction among people during the labour process. It provides the basis for survival of a community. As people in the community interact, they come to assume different roles and tasks; consequently, their efforts yield shelter and other essentials. The language of speech provides communication in the production process, through "verbal signposts." It also serves the purpose of aiding the established relations emanating from the use of the language of real life. Lastly, the written signs initiate the spoken word and result into writing. Writing is thus a "representation of sounds with visual symbols" ( :116).

Throughout recorded history, most societies hitherto have the written and spoken languages as one and the same thing. Ngugi eloquently illustrates the effects of this on the recipients, especially the young members of society when he observes,

Trends in society

The dual character of any language implies that its recipient may aggregate the "social reality" obtaining in the world, from the cultural and historical perspective upon which the language is based. This forges cohesion of a group speaking a particular language thus the linguistic solidarity among group members is strong. This then represents the power of language. Therefore, in Azania, the state unleashed apartheid’s wrath by promoting the exclusive official use of both English and Afrikaans in essential areas of societal activity. The state achieved this through legislation that manifested itself as the bilingual language policy. Non-mother tongue speakers of English and Afrikaans were forced to use either one of these languages at the workplace, in business transactions, in education, in the delivery and/or receipt of social services and in the mass media. The indigenous people were therefore linguistically disempowered. They had to aggregate the world through a "foreign" cultural window. The two languages were the official languages thus the languages of power!

Both politically and culturally, white people dictated to the indigenous people in more ways than one. Presently there is a coalition government in Azania.

Supposedly this is now one country, one nation ("Simunye"; "Rainbow nation"). The political history, especially race relations and linguistic history of this country make a mockery of the foregoing cliche' s. The effects of the bilingual language policy of the past establishment are vast and varied. The senses of self worth, pride and self-perception in general of indigenous people have been adversely affected. In fact, the "new South Africa" offers no lifeline at all, save for the constitutional declaration of the nine indigenous languages as official languages alongside Afrikaans and English. Practically, the "officialdom" of the nine indigenous languages, at best amounts to arousing linguistic sentimental awareness. At worst, it amounts to pulling wool over the faces of speakers of these languages, as both Afrikaans and English cultures presently dominate.

In a paper titled ‘Black Lingual and Cultural Suffocation’ Mosibudi Mangena’s observation therein serves to buttress the view that the dominant culture is either English or Afrikaans and that this suffocates indigenous languages and negatively impacts upon people who are forced to use these languages. It goes thus, "Many of us watched with utter dismay on "NEWSLINE" (a SABC current affairs program) on Mother’s Day, a great woman being diminished by having to state her case in English. It was a Red Cross documentary dedicated to three women who are battling through adversity with admirable courage and strong will to overcome. The first one was a woman from Kwa-zulu Natal, whose husband was murdered in cold blood and her house burnt down in the ongoing violence in that province. Left with nothing except her positive spirit, she had picked up the pieces and was looking after herself and her children with a great measure of success. There is no doubt that if she had spoken in her native Zulu she would have been able to communicate better and inspire us all. There is something comical about people struggling badly through a language they do not speak and their message gets stolen by the comic. Unfortunately, she is not the only one. We have seen many a time people interviewed on television and radio in English when it is apparent they would do better in an indigenous language. This despite the fact that we are supposed to have eleven equal official languages in this country. The extent of the downgrading of and contempt for indigenous languages in our country, especially in public life and national institutions, is alarming. Some of us consider it some kind of national suicide."(1996:100) The fact that almost all documentary programmes on SABC TV are conducted through either English or Afrikaans proves that these are the dominant cultures, especially English. In the newspapers emerges no different picture either. The indigenous languages are simply not seen as being economically viable. This is not surprising, as there is still remnants of cultural domination in Azanian society. The media generally reflects this sad reality. Skutnabb and Kangas as quoted by Kathleen Heugh (1992:2) point out a fundamental factor. And this, is witnessing,

This very textbook of which this chapter forms a part, is couched in a language foreign to the majority of people in Azania. Yet, it addresses crucial issues pertaining to their experiences in society. This illustrates how entrenched linguicism is in Azania. Academic discourse, such as this textbook, on such an important subject as "Discourses on Difference and Oppression", deserves to be accessed by the majority if not all people in Azania. As of now it will be available to those who are literate in the language of power – English. Is nation building possible in such linguistic conditions? President Mbeki when addressing the upon receipt of the election results from the IEC asserted that the centre can hold only if all peoples of this country speak each other’s language, tolerate and work together as one nation. Surely, it must go beyond this. The use of and development of indigenous languages should be pursued vigorously. Mangena is spot on when he says, "by all means let us learn English and other people’s languages, but let our indigenous languages come first."(1996:103)

The Utterances of both President Mbeki and Mosibudi Mangena notwithstanding, politicians tend to be the worst culprits in perpetuating suffocation of indigenous languages by not using them in parliament especially during debates. This is a display of either unwillingness on the part of politicians to ameliorate the situation or helplessness in uprooting the culture of linguicism. The scenario above manifests despite the constitutional provision for languages. The provision indicates,

As a country of "two nations", Azania finds herself in a difficult linguistic position. Linguicism affected and continues to affect these "two nations" differently. As alluded to already, mother tongue speakers of indigenous languages view proficiency in the de facto language(s) as a status symbol and as a ticket to economic advancement – the "open-sesame" to all doors. Their preparedness to particularly learn English, to know it, and to know it well, is therefore not in doubt. The same cannot be said of mother tongue speakers of the de facto languages. At best, their learning of indigenous languages is for academic experimental purposes. At the worst, they just simply look down upon such languages. The rule here appears to be ‘speak your own language to the exclusion of other languages in order to preserve your culture’. The incidents at Vryburg high school in the North West province and at Potgietersrus primary school in the Northern Province both confirm the assertion above. A group of speakers of one of the de facto languages has even gone further to establish a model for the much-publicised "volkstaat" – Orania, in the Northern Cape province. This is a deliberate attempt to foster cultural exclusion, implicitly this amounts to cultural arrogance and isolation.

Historically advantaged "white" tertiary institutions epitomise the extent to which linguicism has been entrenched in Azania. These institutions are classified into Afrikaans and English universities or technikons. Tuition, research and other academic activities are carried out through the medium of both these languages. This occurs despite the fact that Azania is a multilingual society. The historically denied "black" institutions follow the pattern at English institutions – English is the language of discourse, tuition and research. Even worse, at almost all these universities, the study of indigenous languages at masters and doctoral levels is carried out through the medium of English.

The linguistic reality as sketched so far, paints a cultural tapestry interwoven with conflicts and tensions of a changing society. Therefore, linguistic tolerance hence cultural exchange presents an ontological bewilderment for policy makers and speakers of the many different languages in Azania alike. A closer look at imported concepts such as "official language" and "national language" is essential in exploring the language question. So far, the concept "official language" has been used loosely; therefore, a working definition will assist as regards the use and understanding of language in general. Phillpson (1992:40-41) strings together the following expositions as regards "official language" and "national language":

1. UNESCO’s working definition is very interesting in that it relates language to the institutions in society:

 

 

an official language is the language used in the business of government – legislature, executive and judiciary … a national language is the language of political, social and cultural entity… (1993)

2. From a socio-cultural viewpoint, Fishman (1972:215) holds that the two concepts are often used one instead of the other. He asserts:

 

 

While the designation national tends to stand for past, present or hoped-for socio-cultural authenticity in the ethnic realm (nationality being a broader level of integration growing out of coalescence’s between earlier and more localized ethnicities), the designation official tends to be associated primarily with current political-operational needs … The term national language … designates that language (or languages) whose use is viewed as furthering socio-cultural integration at the nationwide hence national level.

3. Finegan and Besnier (1989) note the following:

Legislature

As alluded to before, debates in parliament are conducted through English (and Afrikaans speakers unapologetically use Afrikaans in such debates). This pattern permeates the national council of provinces, the various portfolio committees and most of the provincial legislatures. Generally, English has become the language of political discourse – acts of parliament; statutes and papers (the white, the green etc.). Other languages are also used; especially Afrikaans, but these are employed seldom and not for all government documents. The reasons for the domination of English are not hard to find. In the Language Project Review, Dr Neville Alexander provides cardinal points that might be helpful in the search for these reasons. His assertion is centered on the relationship between language and political power; he says,

Judiciary

Prior to 27^th April 1994 and to date, the languages used to conduct all the business of all courts including the appellate division and the constitutional court, have been Afrikaans and English. As regards indigenous languages, services of interpreters were and are still utilised to assist speakers of these indigenous languages to follow proceedings. The records of cases in law reports are either in Afrikaans or English or in both languages. Also most of the original acts are in Afrikaans and have been translated into English, but not into any of the indigenous languages. Basically, the judiciary does not permit the equal use and enjoyment of all official languages. How then is multilingualism possible in other institutions of society? Practically this is how the idea of eleven official languages becomes problematic in as far as the notion of equal status of all these languages is concerned.

Socio-culturally, Fishman argues that "the designation official tends to be associated primarily with current political-operational needs" (1972:215). While Finegan and Besnier are of the view that "official languages are … for use in certain activities such as voting, legislation, record keeping and education"(1989:494). What occurs in the judiciary negates the socio-cultural application of the designation "official". Furthermore, legal records are still kept in Afrikaans and English only. Surely, records should be kept in all official languages. The "current political-operational" needs in this country are supposedly, nation building and national reconciliation; but events thus far show that these might be difficult to attain for as long as the use of languages other than English and Afrikaans do not manifest. A case in point is the TRC Report, though proceedings during the hearings made room for interpretation from other languages to English and vice versa, the entire report handed over to government is written in English. This appears to be a travesty of linguistic equality!

Health and Social Services

In an article titled Healing language gaps, Leslie Swartz examines power relations in the health and social services and explains how language can be used to maintain or challenge these relations. She is of the view that:

If communication is not adequate, then treatment as a process cannot be effective. In fact, communication is supposed to be two ways – between the patient and the medical practitioner. For the Centre of Azanian society to hold – for people to be truly "simunye" and for "rainbowism" to manifest, then linguicism should be eradicated in all its forms. Both in spirit and practically the constitutional provision for languages should prevail.

There is also an emerging trend in as far as the language issue is concerned in the provision of services to the majority of the people in this country. This trend is well captured in the words of Swartz when she argues, "there is increasing realisation within health and social service care that the voice of the recipient of our services is in fact central to adequate practice" (Language Project Review Vol. 7 No. 3 1992:11). To effect this realisation, there should be a willingness on the part of the practitioners to learn the language(s) of their clients; also various training programmes should be put in place to effect a requirement obliging would-be practitioners to learn to speak the language(s) of their potential clients. Currently, practitioners are improvising by employing the "services" of nurses and service staff in hospitals and other clinical institutions, to serve as interpreters and translators. This approach is problematic in that these people are not trained interpreters and translators. In most instances, the privacy of the patient with her/his doctor is compromised by the presence of the "interpreter". Patients or clients have come to counter this by hiding what they deem as intimate and embarrassing information – this information may be crucial to adequate care but it cannot be revealed for reasons of confidentiality.

Also interpreting has the shortcoming of marginalising the patient or client into the background. When this occurs then the interpreter and the practitioner talk about rather than to the patient or client. This is of course alienating for the patient. The constitutional provisions for languages; the right of access to health care; and the provision of social services, all notwithstanding, it is essential for Azanians to take a leaf out of Swartz’s book on the examination of power relations in the health and social services. She asserts the following:

In Section 32, the constitution provides that a person "shall be entitled to instruction in the language of his or her own choice where this is reasonably possible"(). However, the linguistic reality in institutions of learning is that either English or Afrikaans or both are languages of instruction (learning). Put differently, linguistic racism operates to ensure that the constitutional provision referred to above is applicable only to speakers of Afrikaans and English.

Implicitly, learning through the medium of indigenous languages amounts to romanticism, especially at higher levels of education. As alluded to earlier there seems to be a preparedness on the part of speakers of indigenous languages to embrace English, to know it and to know it very well; this is largely influenced by the perception that English is the seeming "open-sesame" to higher realms. In addition, that articulacy in it is seen as a status symbol. It is therefore not surprising to see more and more private crèches, preschools, primary and secondary schools being opened – these "advertise ‘English medium education’, charge higher fees and attract higher numbers of learners" (Forson 1998:7). Black parents are prepared to break a leg to ensure that their children attend these ‘prestigious schools’. Clearly English is the one sort after language in Azania. The well-couched constitutional language and education act notwithstanding, multilingualism appears to be unattainable in this country.

The emerging trend of portraying English as the only de facto and the de jure language in education is slowly but surely leading to a devaluation and marginalisation of indigenous languages. Afrikaans as a language has nothing to lose as it has since 1948 to 1958 been aggressively scientifically developed. Indigenous African languages have a lot to lose, as their scientific development has not taken place yet. This linguistic reality presents a challenge to the intelligentsia in this country; especially to generic intellectuals. One student of mine registered for the English Communication Skills course eloquently sketches this reality and shoots straight from the hip in as far as Africa’s linguistic history is concerned particularly Azania’s linguistic dilemma. In a response to the question "Do you think all our 11 languages should be used officially?" she provides an interesting preamble to her answer. I quote her inextenso:

Media

As alluded to before, language is a means of communication and as such enables people in society to convey messages to each other. This exchange leads to a flow of information, and from this exercise people’s perceptions are either entrenched or dispelled. In a multilingual society like Azania where linguicism operates, the dominant language(s) – English and Afrikaans dictate this flow of information. The media is the tool used to spread this flow. Therefore communication can be achieved through this instrument – media. Oupa Ngwenya provides the following exposition as regards media:

A critical examination of the media in this country shows that not much has changed in terms of ownership and control of both categories of the media. As public broadcasters SABC radio and television are still government owned and controlled (though partially); thanks to the existence of the Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA) which has since been replaced by the South African Telecommunications Regulation Authority (SATRA) headed by the minister of telecommunication. Government appoints the board of SATRA like the one of its predecessor, all the same. As regards the print media, the following is observable: "The Argus company owns newspapers like Sowetan, the Star, Pretoria News and Cape Times. Times Media Limited (TML) owns the Financial Mail, Sunday Times and Business Day. The Argus and TML are both controlled by Anglo-American Corporation. Nasionale Pers owns City Press, Drum and True Love. Perskor owns the Citizen and Tribute magazine is owned by Enosi Publishing." (ACA News Vol. 1 & 2 1991:44)

Ownership and control of the media is crucial in this country especially as regards language use in society. Currently SABC TV has three main channels, namely SABC 1; SABC 2 and SABC 3. As reflected in the Sunday Times Magazine, 10 October 1999, English dominates the programmes on these channels. The guide to the TV programmes vividly states that; "All programmes are in English unless otherwise coded." (1999:22) The other languages are accorded codes and appear rarely on the schedule of the TV channels. Furthermore, the programmes marked multilingual are almost entirely in English. In fact, programmes that enshrine the interests of the majority of the viewers (in terms of age, racial group, language group etc.) are exclusively broadcast in English. The list of examples is fairly lengthy but the following serve to illustrate the concern: ‘World Sport Special’ (SABC 2, Sunday 18:05); ‘People of the South’ (SABC 2, Sunday 20:00); ‘Isabel Jones – Fair Deal’ (SABC 3, Monday 18:05); ‘Big Bucks Bonanza: Game Show’ (SABC 1, Monday 18:30); ‘Felicia Mabuza-Suttle Show: Talk Show’ (SABC 1, Monday 21:00) currently this programme is discontinued and Felicia Mabuza-Suttle runs a similar one on e.TV; ‘Bambanani Game Show’ (SABC 2, Thursday 18:30); ‘Jam Alley’ (SABC 1, Friday 18:30); ‘Selimathunzi’ (SABC 1, Saturday 18:30); ‘MTN Gladiators’ (SABC 3, Friday 19:00); ‘Woza Weekend’ (SABC 1, Friday 20:30); ‘Studio Mix’ (SABC 1, Friday 21:00), (For detailed schedule see TV programme sample in appendices). Clearly English is the language that dominates, as such those viewers who are not conversant with this language are disadvantaged (see 1 above). A typical example is the programme ‘Fair Deal’; it is a crucial programme to all viewers as it primarily deals with consumer related issues and helps to raise the consciousness of consumers.

To its credit, the SABC tries to balance this domination of English on the screens by allowing for a regional break of thirty minutes from Mondays to Fridays between 18:00 and 18:30. In this regional slot, occurring only on SABC 2, news and discussions feature in "regional languages". The ‘regional languages’ are some of the indigenous languages like Isixhosa, Seswati, Isindebele, Sepedi and Isizulu. Other languages such as Setswana, Tshivenda, Xitsonga, Sesotho, either feature minimally or do not feature at all. This attempt by the SABC TV is a far cry from the constitutional provision for languages (see underlined part of 2 above). Stated clearly, there is no equal use and enjoyment of all official languages on the screens. An interesting point to note is that in these regional slots the indigenous languages share with both English and Afrikaans. To claim that all official languages are equally used, is no less than the fantasy of birds that wish to be counted as flying even before their ability to stretch a wing. The status quo is as is, because of linguicism. The private/independent channels do not fair better either – M-Net and e.tv mostly use English. In fact M-net uses English exclusively, save for sports commentary where Afrikaans is used (especially for rugby and cricket). e.TV has at least an early morning multilingual news edition, though indigenous languages still share with Afrikaans and English but at least they feature.

The print media is not better either – English is mostly used, save for a few Afrikaans newspapers and the Ilanga la se Natal. The reasons for this development are to be deduced from the ownership of the print media. Obviously the print media reflects the interests of the owner and these are ‘white interests’. The language issue as regards language choice in the media has everything to do with power relations in this country (see 3 above). What manifests linguistically in Azania in terms of practice, is the fact that all languages are not equal. Equality of all languages amounts to politicking only. Furthermore, language choice is essential in the media, as the media (both print and electronic) has profound impact on members of society. Wright Mills shows this effect when he purports:

1. the media tells the man in the mass who he is – they give him identity;
2. they tell him what he wants to be – they give him aspiration;
3. they tell him how to get that way – they give him technique; and
4. they tell him how to feel that way even when he does not – they give him escape. (ACA News: 1991:47)

As a country of many languages hence many cultures, Azania is in a difficult position especially as regards official versus national status of languages. The difficulty emanates from the fact that the constitutional provision for languages presents an ontological bewilderment especially as regards the use of language(s) in general. Ideally, languages, all eleven languages should be used in society. Fundamentally, in the past, the scientific development of indigenous languages was non-existent, therefore to accord these languages equal status with English and Afrikaans is not only flawed but also unfair. What then should be done? The following is suggested: indigenous languages should be vigorously, aggressively, deliberately and scientifically developed – these languages should simply be made scientific languages! A leaf should be taken out of the book of Afrikaners as regards language development – tons and tons of knowledge was translated into this language; volumes and volumes of books on various subjects and fields of research written in Afrikaans are stacked in libraries across Azania. If and only if this is done will true multilingualism be attainable in Azania. This is one of the ways to contend with the power of linguicism. To achieve this goal, politicians as well as policy makers (academics and the intelligentsia), owners of the media and big business will have to be truly "Simunye" and allow the centre that President Mbeki speaks of to hold. The ingredients for this can be found aptly stated, in well-couched linguistic tapestry of UNESCO in its Dossier on national languages. It goes as:

Conclusion

The current transition surely has so far not yielded any meaningful linguistic change as regards equal language use. What then is to be done? The language reform process can be practically achieved in two phases. Phase one is the short term while phase two is the long term. Mangena sums up these practical steps eloquently.

1. Speak our languages as much as possible.
2. Teach our children our languages and culture and ensure they learn a Black language at school.
3. Ensure that the official language status conferred on our languages is real and manifests itself in our daily experience.
4. Insist that Black languages get equal treatment on television and radio.

1. Group some of the languages together with the intention of producing one standard language out of them. If it were Sotho languages, for instance, you could still have Setswana, Sepedi and Sesotho as dialects of the Sotho languages. Then the pool of talent, resources and audience for material produced becomes larger.
2. Move towards availing more literary works and content subjects such as mathematics and others in our standardised languages. It might sound intimidating to some, but it is something self-respecting nations are doing all over the world. (1996:103)

ACA News (1991), June Vol. 1 and 2.

Finegan, E. & Besnier, N. (1989) language: Its Structure and Use (New York: Harcourt Bruce Jovanovich).

Fishman, J.A. (1972) Language in Sociocultural Change. Essays by Fishman, selected and introduced by A.S. Dil (Standford: Standford University Press).

Forson, B. (1998) Coping with ten other official languages: English in a post-apartheid South Africa. Conference paper, University of Venda.

Language Project Review (1992) October 7(3).

Mangena, M. (1996) Quest for True Humanity: Selected speeches and writings (Johannesburg: Bayakha Books Newclare).

Mateene, K. (1985) Reconstruction of the official status of colonial languages in Africa. In K. Mateene, J. Kalema  and B. Chomba (eds.) Linguistic Liberation and African Unity (Kampala: OAU Bureau of Language, OAUBIL Publications 6).

Ngugi Wa Thiongo. ( ) Writers and Politics (London: Heinemann).

Sowetan (1995) September.

Unesco Dossier (1990) National Languages: The Courier. No. 119

Unesco (1953) The Use of the Vernacular Language in Education, part 1 (London: Department of Education in Developing Countries, University of London Institute of Education, EDC occasional papers 6).