going native: language of instruction for education, development

advertisement
GOING NATIVE: LANGUAGE OF INSTRUCTION FOR EDUCATION, DEVELOPMENT AND
AFRICAN EMANCIPATION
KWESI KWAA PRAH.
THE CENTRE FOR ADVANCED STUDIES OF AFRICAN SOCIETY (CASAS).
CAPE TOWN.
Keynote Address presented to the Launch Workshop of Language of Instruction in Tanzania and South
Africa (LOITASA), Morogoro, Tanzania: 22nd to 24th April 2002. In, Birgit Brock-Utne, Zubeida Desai
and Martha Qorro (eds). Language of Instruction in Tanzania and South Africa (LOITASA). E & D
Limited. Dar-es-Salaam. 2003
Introduction
Africa has had almost 50 years of post-colonialism. During this period, we have seen both positive and
negative features in the evolution and transformation of African society. There is often a tendency to dwell
inordinately and a trifle masochistically on its trails and tribulations. Indeed, much of this experience bears
little triumphant to write home about, and unfortunately much to lament. The suffering of the masses in
Africa is easily perceptible by anybody who has eyes to see and ears to hear. Relentless hunger, entrenched
illiteracy, HIV/AIDS, and other epidemic health conditions, undergirded by crushing poverty, tin-pot
dictatorships and political tyrannies define the realities of contemporary African life. The existential trials,
which face the masses of Africans on a daily basis, dehumanises African humanity. African governments
are most of the time merely muddling through the processes of government and service delivery. Hardly
ever do their rhetorical promises and pontifical extravagancies match what is practically available to
Africa’s teeming millions.
However, the African experience over this past, almost, half-century, has also some positive highlights. It is
certainly not all darkness and gloom. Some areas of African life have improved, if only limitedly. Most
post-colonial governments in Africa, at least initially, created greater opportunities for people to go to
school. Indeed, almost all sub-Saharan governments, in the immediate post-colonial period, expanded
education to an unprecedented degree. During the 23-year period of 1960 – 1983, the expansion of
education in many African countries was impressive.
Table 1 (Education Enrolment for Primary and Secondary Schools Growth Percentages in Selected African
Countries; 1960-1983) (1)
Country Growth in Primary Enrolments (%) Growth in Secondary enrolments (%)
Tanzania 781% 370%
Kenya 553% 1988%
Zambia 415% 230%
Lesotho 204% 96%
Zimbabwe 440% 148%
Swaziland 382% 145%
Botswana 550% 250%
Malawi 297% 80%
Nyerere provides illustrative figures for Tanzania during its early years of independence. Writing in 1967
in his document Education for Self-Reliance he informs us that:
There has been a very big expansion of educational facilities available, especially at the secondary
levels. In 1961 there were 490,000 children attending primary schools in Tanganyika, the majority of them
only going up to standard 4. In 1967, there were 825,000 children attending such schools and increasingly
these will be full seven-year primary schools. In 1961, too there were 11,832 children in secondary schools,
only 176 of whom were in form 6. This year there are 25,000 and 830.(2)
African countries on the whole have not done badly on gross educational expansion. In this respect,
remarkably, South Africa, the last and the richest of African countries has been possibly also the poorest in
education expansion record particularly at the tertiary level, since the Apartheid regime was brought to a
formal end in 1994. Generally, in the early post-colonial period most African states have also been able to
improve the health status of their citizenry. However, in one country after the other, as economic conditions
have deteriorated on this continent, both health and educational facilities have rapidly and grievously
deteriorated and standards have gone into a tailspin. At the beginning of the 21st century, we can say with
little fear of controversy that, in both areas of education and health, Africa is manifestly retrogressing, a
one step forward two backward record of neo-colonialism prevails.
If in the sphere of education, facilities have considerably expanded over this period, clearly, the quality of
education provided and the quality of the product is declining. A range of societal afflictions is wearing
down Africa’s capacity to sustain its educational challenge. There is, for a start, the “book famine”, which
has scoured Africa over the past three decades. Books are difficult to come by and where they are available,
they are at a price very few can afford. Where three square meals a day are difficult to come by, the choice
between bread and a book is not a realistic one. People under such circumstances have little consideration
for books. Many spend their days chasing “essential commodities” (rice, flour, cooking oil, soap etc) as
they are described in West Africa. Thus, poverty and the hunger of the belly have affected the availability
of books and other materials needed in the education system.
Teachers in Africa today, generally, earn so little and enjoy such increasingly diminishing prestige that, the
teaching profession has lost its allure and the status it enjoyed in the colonial period. Few of the emerging
generation want to be teachers. Indeed, a Tanzanian academic friend of mine whose children reached
university age and were faced with, amongst others, the choice of becoming professional academics, like
their father and mother, announced firmly and with conviction that they have no time for the academic
option. The material rewards for a teacher or academic are not in the minds of many, commensurate with
the requisite investment, in time and money. It is arguable that, in today’s Africa, the overwhelming
majority of teachers do not exclusively survive on the remunerations they receive, as teachers.
In too many African countries a good number of children still go to school under trees, without proper
teaching equipment and with all too often poorly trained teachers. Excessive pupil/teacher ratios make
effective teaching impossible. Children continue, daily, to walk endless miles in order to reach
schools. Invariably, children who have to walk long distances to school are those who come from povertystricken homes and are likely to be doing this on near empty stomachs.
Most observers would agree that in recent years both academic institutions and the product of these
institutions are beginning rapidly to deteriorate to near collapse in some cases. School and university
graduates have mounting difficulties in finding work. As I have elsewhere indicated, in Nigeria there are
cases of graduates who end up as taxi/kabukabu drivers because they cannot find employment. Recently,
there was the publicised case of a graduate architect who became a fruit seller on the streets of Lagos
because he could find no openings to practice his metier. Similar cases have been reported in Kenya, where
a young lady graduate had to accept work as a bar-tender and a young male graduate became a security
guard in order to earn a living.(3) With the ethos of corruption and graft affecting much of African society,
both education and the educated have declined in importance in the reckoning of mass society in Africa.
The issues I have so far raised relate to questions of resource-allocation; inputs and outputs, which follow
from this. They are largely, more quantitative than qualitative in meaning and expression. However, there
are other issues relating more to policy and philosophy; issues which guide and underpin the principles on
which the practice of education is constructed. One of the most important of these is the thinking behind the
selection of one or the other language of instruction.
LOI; from Yesterday to Tomorrow
Language of instruction (LOI), or the language in which education is principally conducted is one of the
most far-reaching and significant features of any education system. The language of instruction, the
language of educational formation, in any society is also the language of hegemony and power. It is the
language in which basic skills and knowledge are imparted to the population, and the medium in which the
production and reproduction of knowledge is taught. Implicit in this is the acknowledgement that, it is in
this medium that knowledge is accumulated and deposited.
Where, LOI is the same as the mother tongue/home language, it not only affirms the developmental
capacity of the mother tongue to grow as a language of culture, science and technology, it also gives
confidence to a people, with respect to their historical and cultural baggage. LOI in the home language or
mother tongue is an instrument for the cultural and scientific empowerment of people. Its denial signifies
the social and cultural inferiority of the culture and people whose mother-tongue-use is denied. Therefore,
in free societies knowledge transfer takes place in the language or languages of the masses; the languages
in which the masses are most creative and innovative; languages which speak to them in their hearts and
minds most primordially. Cultural freedom and African emancipation therefore cannot be cultivated,
expanded or developed where the LOI is different from the languages or language the people normally in
their everyday lives speak. Where the language of instruction is different from the languages of mass
society, those who work in the language of instruction, foreign from the languages of the masses, become
culturally removed and alienated from the masses. Indeed, where the language of instruction is different
from the mother tongue of the people there is almost always a history and persistence of patterns of
dominance, over-lordship or colonialism.
Liliana Mammino makes the point as follows; “the use of a second language as a medium of instruction is a
heritage of colonisation. In all those countries where such a heritage is not present, students use their
mother tongue throughout the whole instruction career.
From a pedagogical point of view, the use of a second language is an objective disadvantage affecting both
the easiness and, one might say, the comfort with which knowledge is acquired by students, and the extent
and depth of the acquisition”.(4) Where a colonial language becomes the language of instruction, with all
knowledge and education fed into the people in the language of the former colonial overlord, this removes
and negates the development of confidence in home or original cultures. The removal from cultural and
linguistic primordial moorings assumes the form of denial of the home culture, a creeping amnesia of the
collective memory. This memory is rejected or regarded with a mixture of comic relief and derision. In
South Africa, many people of Khoisan historical descent who have been culturally and linguistically
Afrikanerized and who were in the past classified as Coloured under the Apartheid scheme, publicly, only
acknowledge European roots. “My grandfather was Greek/ My grandfather was Irish” would be announced.
The ostensibly acknowledged grandfather is invariably unknown and there is silence about grandmother;
total silence about African cultural and linguistic antecedents. As John Mutorwa, Minister of Basic
Education in Namibia said in 1995, the “ …. San people received so little attention that no education was
available for them in any language except Afrikaans”.(5) I have seen and heard in both Angola and in
South Africa young people and migrants say without any sense of loss or shame, the fact that they cannot
speak their native languages. Brock-Utne notes the view of an informer, about Khoekhoegowab speakers in
Namibia that, “the young ones don’t want to speak their own language, they all want to be Americans.
They watch TV and get all this American stuff. They want to be like Michael Jackson and look down on
their own culture”.(6)
Such effective cultural and linguistic denationalisation is a mark of the success of the colonial project seen
from the viewpoint of the colonialist. Bgoya has made the point that, “constant bombardment of societies in
the South with European languages, and the aggressively marketed notion of the superiority of things and
ways western, can only lead to pressures on the societies in the south to accept to abandon their cultures
and to adopt the American way.”(7)
As Obiechina put it, “the supreme sin of colonialism” was the crass devaluation of African culture and the
alienation of the educated elite from their native traditions and historical belongings.(8) But, at least
formally, in its classical form, colonialism is buried, so its persistence reflects the entrenched nature of neocolonialism in Africa. In our generation few have exposed the cultural legacy of colonialism on the African
mind, as eloquently as Ngugi Wa Thiongo.(9) Brock-Utne’s view is that, “Some may ask if Africa was
ever intellectually decolonized. No, probably not. However, attempts were made at independence in one
country after the other of building education in Africa on African roots. I claim that these attempts have
been stifled over the past ten to fifteen years.”(10) In my understanding, this view is too charitable. African
countries never seriously got started culturally decolonizing. Many of the elites who inherited the postcolonial state displayed a schizophrenic attitude to the question of culture. Invariably, they rhetorically
rejected indiscriminate westernism and extolled “Negritude” and the “African personality”, but at the same
time they in practice succumbed to the dalliance and overkill of western culture in a neo-colonial setting.
Phillipson usefully points to the fact that English in many post-colonial societies has served to maintain
western interests.(11) In his text Linguistic Imperialism, Phillipson exposes the connection between
language and neocolonialism.(12) Advancing the concept Linguicism, which means; the collection of ideas,
rationale, structures and practices which are employed to justify and legitimise the production and
reproduction of resources and power differentials between groups defined on the bases of language and
language-use; Phillipson shows that English in the developing world is an instrument of imperialism .
Bgoya’s diagnosis of the tension between globalisation and language-use is that, “English is the language
of globalisation and English serves fundamentally the interests of those for whom it is both an export
commodity and a language of conquest and domination”(13)
Struggles and processes for the revision of LOI policies mirror larger political and social struggles.
Changes in the status planning for languages are not infrequently a parallel cultural response to political
and socio-economic transformation. A good example of this is provided by the South African case. Nkonko
Kamwangamalu has explained that, the pre-apartheid years were culturally and linguistically defined by the
struggle of the Afrikaners against the British policy of Anglicisation.(14) The dominance of the English in
all areas of social life was contested with slow but steady erosion of this dominance until 1948, when with
the ascendancy of the Afrikaner political elite, the doors to Afrikaner supremacy were opened. The
apartheid years saw the formulation and institutionalisation of the policy of Bantu education, which, among
other things, sought to bring Afrikaans to equality with English by using both of these languages as a media
of instruction in all black schools. This was resoundingly challenged in full view of the whole world in
Soweto, June 1976 when African school kids in Soweto rejected Afrikaans and took to the streets to
register their protest. This protest against LOI under Apartheid marked a watershed in the history of
Apartheid fascism in South Africa. It announced the coming demise of Apartheid. The rest is history. The
post-apartheid years have seen the limited but principled dismantling of the administrative structure of
apartheid-based education and the adoption of a new education system, which reflects better, at least on
paper, the cultural and linguistic interests of African language speakers. In the Sudan, when in the late
1920s the British decided to ensure that the South should maintain its African identity unchallenged by
Arabic cultural influences from the North (Southern Policy), one of the first moves made to consolidate this
policy position was to adopt at Rejaf, in 1928, six African languages to be used as languages of instruction
in schools.
What this illustrates is that each junction in the evolution of society which registers in the partial or larger
transfer of rights and resources to broader sections of the population, at the cultural level, registers in an
changing language policy which raises the status and power of equally broader sections of the society.
Frequently, this translates as a LOI, which draws on the languages of masses who had hitherto been
unempowered. The lessons of the Afrikaner linguistic and cultural struggle against Anglicisation should
usefully inform present-day African efforts at cultural self-assertion and renaissance in South Africa. In
1908, the Afrikaner far-right politician Dr. D.F. Malan is reported to have exhorted his audience that, “raise
the Afrikaans language to a written language, make it the bearer of our culture, our history, our national
ideals, and you will raise the People to a feeling of self-respect and to the calling to take a worthier place in
world civilisation … A healthy national feeling can only be rooted in ethnic [volks] art and science, ethnic
customs and character, ethnic language and ethnic religion and, not least, in ethnic literature”.(15) He
understood what was needed to rescue Afrikaners from the inferiorities of second class whites in an English
dominated society. Later Malan’s party, the National Party, tried to use language to ultimately bring
Africans culturally under their thraldom. They have been unsuccessful.
It is remarkable that during the first decade of independence there was a considerable amount of literature
put out by various observers and educationists, which argued for the use of western languages as
LOI. Much of this would appear today as apologetics for a neo-colonial cause. Adejeji Awoniyi lists a
sample of such literature, which for one reason or the other suggested that it was better to use non-African
languages as LOI.(16)
A LOI policy, which favours the use of colonial languages, entrenches the schism between the elite and
masses. It implicitly defines the culture and language of the masses as inferior and irredeemable and seeks
to, in effect, replace it lock stock and barrel with a new advancing language and culture which is seen as
best articulated “in his master’s voice” and diction. In this respect, Andreski made cogent observations:
Instead of drawing the population together, the employment of French or English as an official language
cuts off the elite from the commonality just as the use of French in eighteenth –century central and eastern
Europe did. Having English or French as the official language prevents a crystallisation of a national
consciousness because the graduates have no vested interest in anything that could be called national
culture. It is probably because in fact they do not know where they belong that the African writers insist so
much on their Negritude. Furthermore, not understanding the official language, the ordinary people can
neither identify themselves with the state nor acquire even the most rudimentary information about public
affairs. Another important consequence of the linguistic situation is that when one is compelled to use a
language which one does not command perfectly one cannot say anything involved or subtle; and (what
might have even more serious political consequences) one incurs the risk of cutting a comic figure in the
eyes of those whose mother tongue it is. This often aggravates the inferiority complex, the feeling of
insecurity and the need for individual or collective self-glorification, which often prompt political or
economic follies.(17)
Andreski’s views here echo and resonate with the language and opinion of Frantz Fanon in his Peau Noir ,
Masques Blancs (Black Skin, White Masks). Fanon in inimitable language draws the picture in graphic and
telling terms:
Every colonised people – every people in whose soul an inferiority complex has been created by the death
and burial of its local cultural originality, finds itself face to face with the language of the civilised nation;
that is, with the culture of the mother country.(18)
A non-mother tongue LOI is the socio-linguistic basis for creating neo-colonial elites in Africa. Elites
which reproduce themselves in increasing numbers and accept this slow extinction of their own languages
in favour of the colonially bequeathed tongues. We do well to remember that, “of the 6,000 or so languages
presumed to exist on Earth, 95% seem destined to disappear within the next 100 years.”(19) Most of
Africa’s languages are included in this estimate. The surest way of ensuring the destiny of extinction for
African languages is to avoid using them as LOIs. The writing is on the wall.
What needs to be said here is that societies with colonial pasts which have been able to make a break with
the use of colonial languages as media of education and instruction are those which make progress and
development not only in the educational field, but also in other areas of social life. This point is particularly
borne out in the experience of post-colonial Asia. Our attention has been drawn to the observations of the
Sri-Lankan researcher A. Mahinda Ranaweera who writes that:
The transition from English to the national languages as the medium of instruction in science helped to
destroy the great barrier that existed between the privileged English educated classes; between the science
educated elite and the non-science educated masses; between science itself and the people. It gave
confidence to the common man that science is within his reach and to the teachers and pupils, that
knowledge of English need not necessarily be a prerequisite for learning science.(20)
Such observations prove the validity of the argument. If a post-colonial Asian society can register such
records, the doubting Thomas’ among Africans can hardly justify their intellectual turpitude.
In a text published by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) under the direction of Kabiru
Kiyanjui; Languages of Instruction: Policy Implications for Education in Africa, we are informed that:
In the wake of the Jomtien Conference in 1990, African governments have, with the help of the
international community, engaged in unprecedented efforts to resolve the educational problems their
countries face. The goal of good-quality education for all has taken centre stage in political and educational
debates. One issue that has not been resolved to everyone’s satisfaction concerns the medium of instruction,
also known as the language of instruction (LOI). What is the “best LOI policy in Africa?(21)
The report, based on studies and experiences in six African countries (Botswana, Kenya, Mali, Nigeria,
South Africa and Tanzania) suggests that LOI approaches that are based on mother tongue instruction in
the early years of basic education result in faster and improved capacity for the acquisition of knowledge by
pupils. Also, mother tongue based LOI facilitates the acquisition of second and third languages. Contrary to
popular opinion that LOI approaches are ethnically divisive, the report found that LOI policies, which use
African lingua-francas, provide pupils and students with an integrative attitude across ethnic borders. Other
important findings of the report include the points that,
The most commonly identified technical problems arising from inadequate language planning include the
inappropriateness of technical terms in LOI, the complexity of syntactic patterns in textbooks, the poor
quality and irrelevance of textbooks, and outdated teaching methodologies. Recent research indicates that
the long-term benefits of producing learning materials in a mother tongue outweigh their high initial
publishing costs. Progress in computer technology has considerably reduced the cost of offset
printing. Desktop publishing, for instance, is resulting in the growth of national publishing industries,
which will ultimately reduce African countries’ dependency on foreign publishers. African researchers are
uniting across the continent to draw the attention of policymakers to the political, economic, and, above all,
educational benefits of shifting toward LOI policies that take these research findings into account. By and
large, these researchers recommend that African countries implement bilingual or multilingual LOI policies
whereby mother tongues and the languages of wider communication (English, French, and Portuguese) are
used systematically to suit both the educational needs and the political realities of African countries. Also,
to provide reliable guidance for policymakers, researchers are recommending more empirical studies,
especially in countries where such research is lacking.(22)
Most experts in the field generally share the above findings. The value of mother tongue instruction is
literally incontestable. The point which most make is that mother tongue LOI should be mandatory for the
first two/three years of education. Practically, after the early primary stage, pupils should move, into
English, French, Portuguese, etc. This is the position espoused by all the major donor agencies, the World
Bank, the IMF, and which is accepted by most African governments, at least on paper. This position is not
new. It is an argument, which has been with us from the early colonial period. It is my view that even this
position falls far short of what should be the case. My argument is that the whole of African education,
from primary to the tertiary level, should be conducted in local languages, the home language, the mother
tongues. This is the way that all societies in the world which have managed to develop, or achieved a
sustained developmental momentum, have or are doing it. Turkish students study to the university level in
Turkish. Greeks, Albanians, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Polish, Danish, Germans, Chinese,
Indonesians/Malaysians, Japanese, and others all manage their education from the beginning to the end in
their own languages. Somehow when it comes to Africa the logic breaks down and all sorts of reasons are
found why in the case of Africa this should be different.
Tanzania should be one of the countries in the forefront of African efforts towards the use of an African
language as language of instruction at all levels of the education system. KiSwahili is understood by about
90% of the population, and is spoken by about 50 million Africans in East, Central and the northern reaches
of Southern Africa. Tanzania is the creative heartland of KiSwahili. In this area if there is anyone language
which can pioneer the use of African languages as LOI, it is KiSwahili.
I am not suggesting that, exclusively only African languages should be taught. The suggestion is that
education should be conducted in the home languages of the people. In addition, other languages can be
learnt as subjects geared towards the cultivation of multilingual cultural environments. Some of these could
be other African languages. Such additional languages can include both the old colonial languages and
some local or African languages. The ability to learn languages is more dependent on exposure to these
languages at the right age than spectacular ability. The argument that I have elsewhere made is that
development in Africa will not be forthcoming until we start using our languages as LOI from the
beginning to the end of the education process.(23)
Harmonising African Language Orthographies
For agents and advocates of the principle of mother tongue education in Africa, it is not enough to argue
the case. The legitimacy of the argument is for any analytical mind and on the strength of available
evidence clear. In Roy-Campbell and Qorro’s Language Crisis in Tanzania, the authors draw our attention
to Barrett’s contention in response to his question: Why is English still the Medium of Education in
Tanzanian Secondary Schools? The reason Barrett provides, for this situation is that maybe the arguments
for KiSwahili have simply not been sufficiently strongly put.(24) This argument does not appear plausible,
in view of the wealth of arguments that are available generally to back-up mother tongue LOI world-wide
and KiSwahili in particular. In the case of Tanzania and also Swaziland, Lesotho, Somalia and the Central
African Republic where overwhelming majorities speak one language, which is indigenous, one can hardly
say that the argument has not been sufficiently made, or is not patently clear. Francois Lim has discussed
the case of Sango in the Central African Republic to good effect.(25) In Lesotho where I spent some years
during the late nineteen-eighties, although the overwhelming majority of the people speak the same
language and are able to hold meetings of the highest governmental order in SeSotho, no attempt was made
to go beyond this stage and introduce SeSotho more comprehensively into the education system. In
Somalia, although when the country attained independence in 1960 it took English, Italian and Arabic as its
official languages, it was the military regime of General Siad Barre who came to power in 1969, who in
October 1972 settled for the use of the Latin script for the Somali language and whose administration
proceeded rapidly to produce materials in the Somali language. Over a short period, a huge volume of
literature was produced in the country. Warsame has explained how this was achieved.(26)
One of the most important lessons about the Tanzanian experience, which is well brought out in RoyCampbell and Qorro’s text is the confusion and complications created by a half-hearted attempt to use
KiSwahili as an LOI. Starting children off in primary school in KiSwahili and then expecting them at
secondary and university levels to work in English is like casting them into two worlds, with one leg in
either and belonging no-where. If we want in a country where 90% of the people speak KiSwahili, to work
in KiSwahili as LOI, then it is important to be consequent and go the whole hog. This is the appropriate
response to the following problem:
The primary uses of English are in post-secondary school classrooms and among non-KiSwahili speaking
foreigners. KiSwahili, or in some cases another mother tongue, is used in most aspects of life in
Tanzania. Consequently, secondary school students have very little opportunity to practise the English they
learn as a subject in schools. It is no wonder, then, that when such students enter Form One, they are at a
linguistic disadvantage. This follows them throughout their secondary school career, with some students
becoming marginally better with greater exposure to English.(27)
The problem that the authors describe is similar to observations I made in the Southern Sudan (Juba) during
the early-nineteen eighties. A large number of the Northern Sudanese students at Juba University, in the
south, were instructed in Arabic for their primary and secondary school education, with English as a subject
taught. At university they were lectured in English and supposed to write their assignments in English. The
result was disastrous.
The only caution one has, to my mind, to be wary of in the Tanzanian case is that although KiSwahili is
African and is spoken flawlessly by 90% of the people, it is for most not the home language. What this
implies is that its adoption as LOI should not halt attempts towards the harmonisation and development of
other regional, equally large languages. For example, the harmonisation of the languages of the Great
Lakes area, Runyakitara (Runyoro, Rutooro, Runyankore, Rukiga, Kiruwanda, Kiyamulenge) touches on
speakers in north-western Tanzania, and covers a speech community including speakers from Uganda,
Rwanda, Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo and Tanzania. Obviously native speakers of this
language would prefer the possibility of also working in their language. The harmonisation of the Luo
varieties between north Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Sudan and Ethiopia should empower culturally millions
of people. The Ngoni of southern Tanzania speak a language, which is spoken in seven countries (South
Africa, Swaziland, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Malawi, Zambia and Tanzania), in various dialects in the
southern part of the continent. There is wisdom in providing the possibility for the speakers who may well
total 40 million to use their mother tongue as a harmonised written form. In short the development and use
of KiSwahili at all levels of education should not necessarily hinder the development of other mother
tongues.
All education is best achieved in the home language. However, what needs to be done to make this option
economically viable? Make the switch profitable for both the individual and society? Economically the
development of materials and the economies of scale are only manageable when they are developed on the
basis of large mutually intelligible written forms. In practice, this means that they need to be cleansed of
missionary linguistic fragmentation of the ethno-linguistic field. One inadvertent result of missionary
linguistic practices in Africa is that dialects have been elevated to languages to the point that the myth of
Babel in Africa appears real, when in fact it is only ephemeral.
The truth is that the demographics of language and linguistic diversity in Africa are not really different
from what obtains in other parts of the world. What is different is that the identification of linguistic units
in Africa tends to be loose. The identification of language communities in Africa has been approached in a
way, which favours the recognition of practically all dialect, and phonological variations as separated
languages. This is partly because such observers have never in most instances, looked at African societies
outside the framework of colonial boundaries or the immediate areas of missionary settlement and
evangelical zeal. By this approach Cockney, Tyneside, broad Yorkshire, etc. in Britain will be languages in
themselves. This fragmentation approach is still popular with the Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL), a
leading group in the work of rendering African languages into script, otherwise translating the Bible into
African languages. The rendition of African languages into scripts for purposes of the development of
Africa cannot at the same time proceed with fragmentation of languages as is being conducted by the
SIL. In effect, the SIL is building and destroying at the same time. When one asks why this is the case, the
reason that comes easily to the fore is that the object of such endeavours at rendering African languages
into script is not in the first instance to help in the development of Africa, but rather simply to translate the
Bible into African speech forms and to evangelise and convert Africans into Christians. Unless one
assumes that converting Africans to Christianity represents development. All other considerations are for
such purposes insignificant.
The CASAS Experience
The work of the Centre for Advanced Studies of African Society (CASAS), over the past 5 years studies
has revealed that as first, second and third language speakers about 85% of Africans speak no more than 12
– 15 core languages (by core languages I mean clusters of mutually intelligible speech forms which in
essence constitute dialects of the same language). These include Nguni; SeSotho/SeTswana; KiSwahili;
Dholuo; Eastern Inter-Lacustrine; Runyakitara; Somali/Rendile/Oromo/Borana; Fulful; Mandenkan; Hausa;
Yoruba; Ibo and Amharic. These would be the first order languages of prominence. Below these, there may
be about 6 which are not so large, in terms of speakers, but which have significant numbers of users.
The work of the Centre has been to network African linguists and other specialists who technically work
towards the harmonisation of orthography between mutually intelligible clusters. Generally such clusters
need to display a degree of + 85% mutual intelligibility. An appropriate instrument for measuring mutual
intelligibility has been developed by CASAS and draft guidelines for the revision African orthographic
conventions has also been developed. Prof. Hounkpati Capo of the University of Benin has harmonised the
Gbe languages of maritime West Africa. These include Aja in Nigeria; Aja, Mina, Fon, Gun in Benin; Mina
and Ewe in Togo; and Ewe in Ghana. Prof. Capo has designated this cluster as the Gbe
languages. Recently, work on the south-central African languages of Malawi, Zambia and Mozambique
have been completed. This has been done with Prof. Felix Banda of the University of the Western Cape, as
Co-ordinator. This work has produced a harmonised orthography for languages such as ciNyanja/ ciCewa,
ciNsenga/ciNgoni/ciNsenga, eLomwe, eMakhuwa, ciYao, ciTumbuka/ciSenga, ciBemba, kiKaonde, Lunda
and ciLuvale, and related dialects. These will now have a single spelling system, rather than three or more
spelling systems within the same language, or even more systems across related Bantu languages. Given
the basic unity of the consonant and vowel structure of southern Bantu languages, technically, the
harmonisation activity should yield successful results fairly easily. Work on Nguni (IsiZulu, IsiXhosa,
IsiNdebele, IsiShangaan, SeSwati, Ngoni) and Sotho/Tswana (SeSotho, SeTswana, SePedi, SiLozi), spoken
in 7 countries in each instance is due to start later this year. In May 2002, technical meetings for the
harmonisation of the Mandenkan languages (Mande, Malinke, Dyula, Mandingo, Bambara) spoken in 5
countries; Gur (Gurunshi, Frafra, Senufo, Moree, Kulanga, etc.) spoken in 5 countries; and Akan (Twi,
Fanti, Brong, Baule, Agni) spoken in 3 countries; will be conducted in Abidjan. Hopefully, by the end of
this year (2002), these language clusters will have harmonised orthographies, and work will have
proceeded towards harmonising the Fang dialects (Ati, Meke, Dzaman, Mtumu, Mveny and Okak). An
important lesson arising out of this work is that we need to work in co-operation across borders because
practically all African languages are cross-border speech forms, which defy the colonially inherited
borders. Working within the framework of African neo-colonial borders creates more problems. The
sentimental glories of neo-colonial flags and national anthems maintain the fragmentation process of
African languages. For the sake of flag and so-called national identity, Kamuzu Banda of Malawi refused
to except the reality of the fact that ciNyanja and ciCerwa are the same language. Sometimes these tensions
are perceptible in the same country and represent attempts to own and control linguistic turf. In Ghana, for
25 years after the harmonisation of Akan to produce a unified Akan orthography, writers still persisted in
using the pre-unification orthography which separated mutually intelligible dialects like Akuapim, Asante,
Fanti, Akim, and Brong. In a report submitted to CASAS by Felix Banda who has co-ordinated work on the
languages of south-central Africa, it was revealed that,
that the new iciLamba orthography had adopted the graphemes [sy] instead of [sh] for the voiceless palatal
fricative, because they associated the [sh] sound with iciBemba. This is clearly nonsense as the [sh] sound
has nothing to do with iciBemba. Even our own cross-border orthography recommends [sh] rather than [sy]
for the voiceless palatal fricative.(28)
The approach of CASAS is that once the technical work on the harmonisation of orthography and the
development of common spelling systems has been developed, the new system needs to be taught to writers
and teachers who then produce materials using the new orthographies. These workshops have already been
started in a number of instances. The target of CASAS in the short run is to complete work within the next
few years on the 12 – 15 core languages. That will literally break the back of the problem.
In all the instances of the harmonisation work what has been realised is that invariably not all the mutually
intelligible languages equally and easily submit themselves to harmonisation. The speech forms, which lie
at the extreme ends of the phonological spectrum of a given cluster, are often difficult to unite with the
middle range speech forms. For example, CASAS has found that the Luo cluster consisting of languages
such as Anyuak, Shilluk Jur, Lafon, Acholi, Lango, Alur, Chopadhola and Lakeside Luo do not easily
collapse into one orthography. The same may be true for the Somali, Rendile, Borana and Oromo cluster.
The logic of this work is that once this approach runs its course, it should be possible to produce materials
for formal education, adult literacy, and everyday media usage for large readerships which on the
economies of scale make it possible to produce and work in these languages. It is the empowerment of
Africans with the usage of their native languages, which would make the difference between whether
Africa develops, or not.
Imperialism and Double Standards
It is interesting to note the strong attachment, which some societies have towards their languages and the
need to protect and use these languages. The French who are possibly one of the difficult interests Africans
face in the effort to develop and use African languages in Africa are most sensitive about the need to
protect French. In a recent news item, which appeared through the Reuters Agency in the Cape Times, we
read that:
Irate readers have accused the influential Parisian daily Le Monde of undermining the French language and
bowing to Americanisation by printing a weekly supplement of New York Times articles in English. Many
readers wrote letters of protest, contradicting a marketing survey Le Monde made last August in which
59% of those questioned supported a supplement in English. “This is the wrong way to be open to the
world, it’s a self-enslavement, participation in the Americanisation of France,” wrote Albert Salon,
president of the International Francophone Forum. Another reader wrote: “You shouldn’t be surprised that
the Americans treat us with such condescension.” Several letters accused Le Monde of insulting the
majority of readers who did not understand English. “They’ll be considered fools who have no place in
today’s society,” one wrote. “When will you realise you’re sawing off the branch you’re sitting on?”
another reader asked. “When will you understand that, by doing this, you contribute to isolating and
despising millions of people who do not speak English fluently?” The paper has said it will decide after the
trial period whether to continue. It wanted to attract new readers and aimed to create a Europe-wide
advertising market with dailies in Germany, Italy and Spain.(29)
It is for many, amazing that the French who have such strong attachment to their language can at the same
time be such hard-headed imperialists when it comes to the pushing of French into Africa at the expense of
the existence of the native languages of the denizens of the continent. The Portuguese have been equally
persistent in their former colonies. Speaking about South Africa, Antjie Krog draws attention to the fact
that in the post-colonial times that we live in, it is the African elites which have, willy nilly, become the
protectors of colonial languages. As an Afrikaner poetess she suggests that, “Not only whites, … but also
blacks are too dismissive of local languages as a medium in which nothing political has been said, or
nothing of relevance to the greater political emancipation of black people”.(30) The dismissiveness which
Krog speaks about attains ridiculous proportions when as Komarek has suggested:
In some countries, they count in their statistics as illiterate people, those who do not read French or
English. But they very often read Arabic. They very often read in other languages, but they count them as
illiterates. This is a scandal. It is a disaster. It is ridiculous to call them illiterate because they cannot read
one of the European or Western languages. Another thing that I always wonder about is yes English,
French, and other languages are important for international communication, but how many people in a
country need this? How many Germans are really mastering English? Perhaps 5 or 10 per cent? Why do we
bother a hundred percent of six, seven and eight-year-olds to learn a competence for which they will have
no use later.(31)
In Madagascar, where in 1975 a left-wing coup brought in a nationalist government which diminished the
usage of French and excessive reference to French culture, the educational system was nationalised, and
Malagasy, which is the only language of the country spoken by everybody, was pushed to the fore as the
only medium of instruction. For seven years this situation obtained. Primary school books, textbooks in
Mathematics and other subjects were produced in Malagasy. Under the influence of the French, in
conditions of diminishing economic well-being, and with promises of financial aid, the Madagascans
agreed to go back to French, and the teaching of Malagasy in schools was cut down to only the first two
years. Komarek is again scathing:
The scandal is that Malagasy is the only language of Madagascar. Everybody … speaks one language. Of
course, there are dialects, but 150 years ago the Bible was translated into Malagasy. Everybody reads the
Bible. Everybody knows this higher standard Malagasy. Anyway, France was waiting for the opportunity to
bring them down again and they succeeded. What is behind this?(32)
The simple point behind this is that, the French in pursuit of a neo-colonial agenda inherent in the idea of a
Francophonie (and for the British, the Commonwealth - Anglophonie) must persist in maintaining the
supremacy of the French language in their former colonies, in the same way as they persist in stationing
military garrisons in post-colonial Africa.
Tanzania’s endoglossic LOI with respect to KiSwahili needs to be more than ever encouraged and
supported. Its success depends not only on the political will of the ruling elite, but also and perhaps more
importantly the strength and tenacity of the masses to defend a LOI, which is in their interest. Rubanza
points out that, “While Tanzania’s move (lip service) to come up with a policy statement giving room for
Kiswahili to be a medium of instruction at all levels in future, is welcomed, there is also a need to have
concrete plans to bring the policy into effect.”(33) Rubagumya has drawn attention to the boost in the value
of English during the 1980s.(34) It is important to guard against any attempt to turn the clock back and go
back to the hegemony of English. That will represent a betrayal of the interests of not only the Tanzanian
people but also, Africans in general.
Concluding Remarks
We can say that by record of what has transpired in Africa since the post-colonial era was ushered in, little
structural change in the political economy of African society has registered. We are literally, where we
were, in this respect, at the close of the colonial era. We still produce primary products with little added
value in an era of what, fashionably, is called “globalisation”. International terms of trade are heavily
weighed against us. Land in the rural areas where the masses live remains under-capitalised, mostly tied up
to pre-capitalist tenurial systems or otherwise étatiste arrangements, which do not help the processes of
accumulation. Warlordism, banditry and brigandage has come into the daily lives of increasingly larger
numbers of Africans. The whole post-colonial period has been characterised by military-bureaucratic rule
or varieties of autocratic dictatorship and pillage of state coffers by the new elites that have dominated the
post-colonial state. In most senses, it is possible to say that the post-colonial elites have given scant
consideration to the needs of the teeming masses of Africa. The above socio-economic realities have been
reflected in the cultural lives of Africans. Here, the language question, in general, and the language of
instruction issue, in particular, lies at the heart of matter. The answer to the language question provides the
key to development challenge and the further emancipation of African people. It is at the same time, what
will determine whether we remain a recognisable and distinct cultural component of humanity or vanish
into another existing cultural area; that is, whether we cease to exist culturally as Africans.
The issue of the need to as soon as possible, start using our languages on the basis of harmonised
orthographies cannot be postponed. To do this successfully we need to snap out of the habit of looking for
answers restrictedly within our state borders, the borders of independence. Africans will need to work more
together, unite in this effort.
Notes
1. This table is extrapolated from World Bank figures, which appear in F.J. Nieuwenhuis. The
Development of Education Systems in Postcolonial Africa. A Study of Selected Number of African
Countries. Human Science Research Council. HSRC Publishers. Pretoria. 1996. Pp. 20 – 21.
2. Julius Nyerere. Education in Tanzania. Education for Self-Reliance. In, A. Babs Fafunwa and J.U.
Aisiku (Eds). Education in Africa. A Comparative Study. George Allen & Unwin. London. 1982. P.238.
3. K. K. Prah. Leadership and Management of Higher Education in Africa in the New Millennium;
Opportunities and Challenges. Keynote Address Presented to the Kenyatta University International
Conference on the Transformation of Higher Education Management and Leadership for Efficacy in
Africa. Kenyatta University, Nairobi, 12th November 2001.
4. Liliana Mammino. Studying the Details of the Transition from the Mother Tongue to the Second
Language. In, Sipho Seepe & Dolina Dowling (Eds). The Language of Science. Vivlia. Florida Hills.
2000. P.94.
5. Quoted here from, Birgit Brock-Utne and Halla B. Holmarsdotter. The Choice of English as Medium of
Instruction and its Effects on the African Languages of Namibia. In, International Review of Education.
Special Issue on Globalisation, Language and Education. Vol. 47. Nos. 3-4. July 2001. P.304.
6. Ibid. p.301
7. Walter Bgoya. The Effect of Globalisation in Africa and the Choice of Language in Publishing. In,
International Review of Education. Ibid. P. 288.
8. Emmanuel N. Obiechina. Language and Theme. Howard University Press. Washington D.C. 1990. P.81
9. See, Ngugi Wa Thiongo. Decolonizing the African Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature.
Heinemann. Nairobi. 1986.
10. Birgit Brock-Utne. Whose Education for All? The Recolonization of the African Mind. Falmer
Press. New York and London. 2000. P.289.
11. Robert Phillipson. Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford University Press. Oxford. 1992. In his review of
Phillipson’s book Macdonald Daly writes that “Fallaciously identified with modernity, progress, freedom,
civilisation and reason, English commands monumental financial, official and popular backing in parts of
the globe where its role is dubious. As a result, indigenous languages ‘are not accorded enough resources to
develop so that the same functions could be performed in them.’ Macdonald Daly. Linguistic Imperialism
… being the book that all English speakers should read. New Internationalist. September 1995. P.33.
12. Robert Phillipson. English for Globalisation or for the Worlds People? In, International Review of
Education. Ibid. P.187. See also, Alastair Pennycook. English and the Discourses of
Colonialism. Routledge. London and New York. 1998. And, Robert Phillipson. Linguistic
Imperialism. Oxford University Press. Oxford. 1992.
13. Walter Bgoya. Op cit. P.286
14. Nkonko M. Kamwangamalu. The Language Planning Situation in South Africa. Current Issues in
Language Planning. Multilingual Matters. Series 2 (3). 2001. Clevedon. P.37.
15. S.W. Pienaar (Ed.). Glo in U Volk: D.F. Malan as Redenaar, 1908 – 1954. Tafelberg. Cape
Town. 1964. Pp. 175-76. Quoted here from Nkonko M. Kamwangamalu. Ibid. P.12.
16. See, Adedeji Awoniyi. Determining Language in Education Policy: The Dilemma in Africa. In, Kola
Owolabi (Ed). Language in Nigeria. Essays in Honour of Ayo Bamgbose. Group
Publishers. Ibadan. 1995. Pp. 446-447. The list Adedeji Awoniyi provides includes:
- B.W. Tiffen. English Versus African Languages as the Medium of Education in African Primary
Schools. In, G.N. Brown and M. Hiskert (Ed). Conflict and Harmony in Education in Tropical
Africa. George Allen and Unwin. London. 1975. P.324.
- R.M.F. Dalton. The Position of English as a Medium of Instruction in Emergent Territories in Tropical
Africa. Education Review. Vol. 13, No. 2. 1961. Pp. 111-115.
- E.L. Makward. The Language Problem. West African Journal of Education. Vol.7, No. 2. 1963. Pp. 8793.
- N.C. Denny. Language and Education in Africa. 1971. In, J. Spencer (Ed.). Language in
Africa. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. 1963. Pp. 40-52.
- E.C. Rowlands. Yoruba and English: A Problem of Co-Existence. African Language
Studies. 1963. Vol.IV. Pp. 208-214.
- L.F. Brosnahan. Some Aspects of the Linguistic Situation in Tropical Africa. Lingua. 1965. Vol.12,
No.1. Pp. 54-65.
17. Stanislav Andreski. The African Predicament. A Study in the Pathology of Modernisation. Michael
Joseph. London. 1968. Pp. 72-73.
18. Frantz Fanon. Black Skin, White Masks. New York. 1967. P.18.
19. George Monbiot. Global Villagers Speak with Forked Tongues. Guardian Weekly. September 3. 1995.
20. A. Mahinda Ranaweera. Sri Lanka: Science Teaching in the National Languages. Prospects. 6(3): 416423. P.423. Quoted here from, Birgit Brock-Utne. Whose Education for All? The Recolonization of the
African Mind. Falmer Press. New York and London. 2000. Op cit. P.153.
21. Report of the Working Group of Educational Research and Policy Analysis Association for the
Development of Education in Africa, on, Languages of Instruction: Policy Implications for Education in
Africa. International Development Research Centre (IDRC). Ottawa. Executive Summary. 1997. P.xiii.
22. Ibid. P.xv.
23. K.K. Prah. Mother Tongue for Scientific and Technological Development in Africa. Deutsche Stiftung
fur internationale Entwicklung (DSE). Germany. 1995. And, African Languages for the Mass Education of
Africans. Deutsche Stiftung fur internationale Entwicklung (DSE). Germany. 1995.
24. Zaline M. Roy-Campbell & Martha A.S. Qorro. Language Crisis in Tanzania. The Myth of English
Versus Education. Mkuki Na Nyota Publishers. Dar es Salaam. 1997. P. 5.
25. Francois Lim. The Harmonisation and Standardisation of Sango, the Official National Language of
Central Africa. In, Kwesi Kwaa Prah (Ed). Rehabilitating African Languages. The Centre for Advanced
Studies of African Society. Cape Town. 2002.
26. Ali A. Warsame. How a Strong Government Backed an African Language: The Lessons in Somalia. In,
International Review of Education. Special Issue on Globalisation, Language and Education.
UNESCO. Hamburg. Vol. 47. Nos. 3-4. July 2001. Pp. 341-360
27. Zaline M. Roy-Campbell & Martha A.S. Qorro. Ibid. P. vi.
28. Report made to Prof. K.K. Prah by Prof. Felix Banda. Cape Town. 17th April 2002.
29. Reuters Correspondent. Articles in English Start French War of Words. The Cape Times (South
Africa). 15th April 2002. P.4
30. Hans Pienaar. Antjie Krog Gives Voice to South Africa’s Mother Tongues. Poet challenges
predominance of English. The Sunday Independent (South Africa). April 14, 2002. P.11.
31. Kwesi Kwaa Prah and Yvonne King (Eds). In Tongues. African Languages and the Challenges of
Development. Monograph Series No. 1. The Centre for Advanced Studies of African Society
(CASAS). Cape Town. 1998. P.41.
32. Ibid. P.39.
33. Y.I. Rubanza. Realistic Revolutionary Strategies in Harmonisation and Standardisation of African
Languages. In, In, Kwesi Kwaa Prah (Ed). Rehabilitating African Languages. The Centre for Advanced
Studies of African Society. Cape Town. 2002. P. 50.
34. Casmir Rubagumya. Language Promotion for Educational Purposes: The Example of
Tanzania. International Review of Education. Vol. 37. No. 1. 1991. P. 75.
Download