Summary
The linguistic situation in Kenya as a prerequisite for the
acquisition of German as a foreign language
The following study deals with the question of how the transmission of German as
a foreign language in Kenya is influenced by the prevailing linguistic situation in
the country. Typical of this situation is the multilingualism of a large majority of its
citizens. Apart from speaking their ethnic languages (which total between 30 and
40) most Kenyans speak both English and Kiswahili. English is the official language and the main medium of instruction in primary education, the sole medium
of instruction in secondary school and other institutions of higher learning. Kiswahili is the national language, which originally spread from the East African coast to
the inland outside the formal education system in such sectors such as trade; transportation and plantation work (Heine 1980).
The confrontation of a series of typologically different languages is the basis on
which further foreign languages such as German are learnt in Kenya. Kenyan pupils are multilingual and this makes transfer phenomena, which differ according to
their L1, a possibility when they learn a foreign language. Transfer refers to the
cross-linguistic influence of all the possible languages involved in their linguistic
repertoire. In the Kenyan foreign language context the source of linguistic transfers
is not always clear and the pervading influences cannot be unambiguously determined as coming from a specific language. Due to the linguistic and typological
diversity of the languages involved, language transfer can be expected at all language levels: on the phonetic, phonological, morpho-syntactical, lexical, and semantic and discourse levels.
As English and – to a lesser extent – Kiswahili are the main media of instruction in Kenya, transfer phenomena from these two languages during the acquisition
of German are more likely to occur. The linguistic competence of pupils is better
developed in these two languages and both are more likely to be the chosen medium when discussing school related themes, whereas the various L1 play a role in
family communication and are rarely used as communication media in school.
An investigation of the learning of German as a foreign language in the context
of a wide diversity of first languages is not only important from a linguistic and
language acquisition point of view, but it also has didactic relevance. The German
language teacher in Kenya is confronted on a daily basis with a series of language
problems brought about by the different L1 his pupils speak. In order to be able to
counter these problems, therefore, a complex linguistic analysis is necessary. This
study hopes to contribute to this effort.
10
Summary
On the basis of my own knowledge of Gikuyu, Dholuo, Kiswahili, German and
English I intend to work out reflected presentation forms for the teaching of German as a foreign language, hoping that language instruction in general will receive
practical and attainable suggestions. Using error and discourse analysis it should be
possible to make an empirically testable hypotheses about the manifestations of
transfer phenomena among the fourth year German pupils in Kenyan secondary
schools in regard to the phonetic, phonological, morpho-syntactical, lexicosemantic
as well as discourse levels.
The study is divided into three major parts: Part I describes the general linguistic situation prevalent in Kenya (chapter 2-4); part II elaborates on the linguistic
competence of the pupils under study, their L1, their knowledge of second and foreign languages as well as their language use in selected domains (chapters 5-7);
Part III is a linguistic analysis of the empirical data (chapters 8-10), a discussion of
the didactic implications of multilingualism (chapter 11) and the conclusion (chapter 12).
Chapter two deals with general definitions in socio-linguistics, it discusses research areas and applications in this field, with special reference to socio-linguistic
research in Kenya.
Socio-linguistics examines the correlation between language use and social
structure and distinguishes between micro and macro socio-linguistics. Micro
socio-linguistics investigates how social structures influence, language use and language varieties and how these are further influenced by variables such as social
class, gender and age. Macro socio-linguistics illustrates what societies do with
languages: Language attitudes, language loyalties, which influence the functional
distribution of languages in society, language transfer, language maintenance, language loss, as well as the separation and interaction of speech communities (Coulmas 1998: 2).
Due to the diverse nature of socio-linguistic research, methodologies and theories play a different role from that found in either sociology or linguistics. The research paradigms incorporate descriptive and comparative (historical/anecdotal/typological) methods as well as descriptive analytical approaches (questionnaires/statistical analysis). The diversity of phenomena dealt with in sociolinguistic research, therefore, demands and results in a variety of theoretical approaches (Coulmas 1998: 6).
Socio-linguistic themes are often identical with their impacts: Language planning and language policies point to the political goals of a country; Language
change, language degeneration and language loss are possible long-term results of
language contact, transfer and language interference can be short-term phenomena,
Summary
11
while code switching, diglossia and multilingualism come about as a result of certain individual and societal language uses.
Demographic questions in socio-linguistics as discussed by Verdoodt (1998)
deal with the presentation of information on various populations and their mother
tongues. Problems arise in computing information on the languages of a certain
population because many researchers rely on census information. There are differences not only between individuals‟ self-reports and the actual use of language but
also political and social conditions can influence the outcome. Relying on government population information in a country like Kenya does not guarantee reliable
statistics because births, deaths and marriages are not always reported.
Variation studies are very diverse: they deal with variables such as dialect differences, socio-phonology, social class and social networks, gender and age, which
are measured using quantitative methods.
The notion of density and complexity (Milroy & Milroy 1998: 60), which describes an individual‟s social networks, is of particular importance in this study.
These can be determined by an individual‟s social relationships, or be correlated to
other variables such as language varieties, gender and age. The fact that the pupils
in this study attend predominantly pure boys‟ or pure girls‟ boarding schools means
that their networks are extremely dense because school mates are dorm-mates and
they probably come from the same social milieu. The density of these social networks plays a role in their language competence as well as in their language
choice/use.
The use of Sheng among young Kenyans, a sociolect that mixes English
Kiswahili and elements from other Kenyan languages and encodes friendliness and
solidarity with fellow youth, is comparable to the use of non-standard varieties of
English in Reading and London as cited by Honey (1997: 103). However, the use
of standard or non-standard varieties of English in Kenya has other connotations.
To be well educated in Kenya implies speaking “correct” English just as in the
studies cited by Honey (1997), but speaking “good” English practically implies
having a poor command of the mother tongue.
Language, ethnicity and identity are further variables with particular relevance
for Kenya. The connection between language, identity and ethnicity can either be
strong or weak depending on the ethnic group concerned. The Luo in Kenya for instance, demonstrate such an ethno linguistic vitality (McConnell 1997: 353-4) that
they have managed to preserve their language and culture against all odds, whereas
for the Suba the language they choose to speak (Dholuo) has nothing to do with
their ethnic Suba identity (Kembo-Sure/Webb 2000: 125).
12
Summary
Language and ethnic identity are parameters, which help categorise individuals and
assign them to an ethnic group. The Kamba speaker in Kenya can be identified because he leaves out or adds the aspirated hh at the beginning of certain words, the
Gikuyu speaker through his mixing up of l and r sounds while the Dholuo
speaker has difficulty in distinguishing between s and [ sounds. The connection
between language and ethnicity or identity is best illustrated by the Kiswahili expression mkosa kabila, which literary means “a person without ethnicity”. Used in
a derogatory manner to describe children whose parents have brought them up
without the knowledge of an African language, the term shows the symbolic importance attached to language as the most important mark of one‟s membership in a
particular speech community.
Language contact, language conflict and language change are also themes in
socio-linguistics with particular relevance for Kenya, and indeed for Africa as a
whole. Indigenous Kenyan languages are threatened with extinction for various
reasons. English is the dominant language of education and the sole medium of international communication. Migration to major cities, socialisation practices of the
elite as well as the increase in inter-ethnic marriages all encourage the use of English at the expense of other local languages. Other languages such as the Yaaku and
Omotik are threatened with extinction because there are only a few living members
of the speech community and when these die, so do their languages.
Language shift is normally the step preceding language death but as Brenzinger
(1998: 283) suggests “we can never be sure whether changes in language behaviour
will eventually result in extinction of the language or not”. Kenya‟s elite socialise
their children in English, but a return to the mother tongue can ensue should the
family be forced, for whatever reason, e.g. the death of the breadwinner, to return
to their rural home.
Obondo (1996), a more recent socio-linguistic study on Kenya analyses the
consequences of language shift on a group of children in a modern urban setting,
the role lingua franca plays in language loss and language shift and the way in
which societal socialisation practices contribute to language shift. Even for this
group of children with its strong family and clan network, its strong bonds to the
rural home and the firm sense of belonging among the Luo all serve to negate an
eventual total loss of the mother tongue.
Languages in contact can also be a source of conflict. Ethnic conflicts in Europe
occur mainly among town dwellers whereas similar conflicts in Kenya are more
likely to take place among rural communities where those in power manipulate
economic, social and political differences and language is the only distinguishing
factor between “us” and “them”.
Summary
13
Code switching, language loss and multilingualism may all arise due to language
contact situations. Kenyans engage in code switching for various reasons (cf.
Myers-Scotton 1993). An individual„s reasons for engaging in code switching differ from those that prevail on a societal level (Myers-Scotton 1997: 219). Though
an important feature of communication among Kenyans, code switching does not
seem to play a role in second or foreign language learning. But like language loss,
code switching can be situated in a continuum with bilingual speech. Language loss
on this continuum is manifested, for instance, in the case of a Kenyan child who
grows up without speaking any local Kenyan language and whose parents rarely if
ever use the mother tongue at home. Such a child will show signs of language loss
and may be forced to engage in bilingual speech not through choice, but as a product of necessity (Myers-Scotton 1998: 225).
Second language and foreign language learning can also be placed on a continuum with code switching. The L2 or foreign language learner switches often between the L1 and the L2 and uses combined forms from both the target language
and the L1, or transfers morphological and lexical patterns from the L1 in the L2
(cf. Chapter 9.3).
Although the majority of the Kenyan population is multilingual, none of the local Kenyan languages has a comparable prestige, or is used as frequently as English, the language of the former colonial power; None guarantees economic mobility and none boasts a long literary tradition as does English. Nevertheless, English
has not managed to reduce the rate of multilingualism in Kenya as it has done in
Europe, Canada and the USA.
The relationship between orality and literacy is a language policy variable,
which has significant implications for this study. Kenya is a country between modernity and tradition. On the one hand, literacy is propagated and promoted through
schools, and on the other hand, adult literacy programmes, which are closely associated with Christian missionaries, impact negatively on the value systems and
norms of traditional societies. Oral traditions play an insignificant role in the school
context and the emphasis here is on writing. Even in adult literacy programmes, the
emphasis on writing ultimately implies that oral mother tongue communication is
pushed to the background since even teaching materials are prepared in English and
Kiswahili (both minority languages in terms of number of L1 speakers).
Equating illiteracy with “ignorance, stupidity, cognitive deficiency” and the
stigma that accompanies it “is part of a wider ideological discourse which devalues
vernacular literacy‟s and non-standard varieties of oral practice” (Roberts/Street
1998: 175). This means that the value of a language is measured by its writing system. Although in Africa south of the Sahara, prior to colonialism, quite a number of
communities had written cultures, e.g. the hieroglyphics in Egypt, the writing of the
14
Summary
Bamileke in Cameroon, Amharic in Ethiopia or Arabic (Batibo 2000: 152), this has
led many people to disregard and devalue African cultures. The problem lies less
with Europeans and Asians who believe that writing is an important part of culture,
but with the fact that Africans have internalised this opinion. The consequence is
that they have distanced themselves from both their cultures and their societies and
now identify more with Europe and America and with European and American cultures.
Orality and writing as skills of equal value are part of classroom discourse practice, which ought to be taken into account during instruction, and thereby reflect on
prevalent societal practices. This means that pupils‟ work ought not to be evaluated
solely using standard criteria, but that the experiences of the speech community,
their norms and communicative repertoire ought to be considered (Roberts/Street
1998: 179). This further implies not only evaluating linguistic differences but also
taking cultural differences into consideration. The importance of mastering both
oral and written skills is most obvious in other institutional contexts, for instance
during interviews, in court or during physical examinations and the recording of a
patient‟s medical history at the doctor‟s. In many cultures and societies the functional distribution of both oral and written skills differs and in most societies both
are inseparable (Roberts/Street 1998:185).
Although socio-linguistic research has been carried out in Kenya, the need for
long-term studies has not been fully met. The three major studies by Whiteley et al.
(1974), Heine/Möhlig (1980a, 1980b), and Reh/Heine (1982) were all carried out
more than thirty years ago. Some research questions dealt with in these studies
have not been sufficiently answered to date. The question of language competence
has not been adequately addressed. There is only data on the competence level in
English and Kiswahili (cf. Kembo-Sure/Webb 2000). Research in the other languages presupposes that the linguist dealing with them has adequate knowledge of
the languages in order to be able to make informed judgements.
Chapter 3 classifies Kenyan languages and addresses the problem of the number of languages. This question has not been sufficiently answered because the degree of dialect proximity, especially for Bantu languages, has not been clearly defined.
Language policies and language planning are carried out in all speech communities and chapter four looks at language policy and language planning in Kenya.
Definitions of language planning differ according to whether the focus is on language, the society, or politics (McConnell 1998: 348). In order to adequately assess
language policy it is necessary to consider the goals it aims to achieve. These can
be 1) linguistic pluralism; 2) linguistic assimilation or nationalism; 3) purism; 4)
internationalism or 5) vernacularization (Daoust 1998: 440-1). The present day lan-
Summary
15
guage policy in Kenya adheres to all the above goals (apart from purism) without
explicitly naming them in government programmes, decrees and measures (cf.
chapter 4).
In Kenya, the connection between the linguistic situation and language planning
is often not transparent. At independence in 1963, the question arose whether English or Kiswahili should be the official language. To understand the choice in favour of English one has to take into consideration the 60-year language policy during the colonial era and the approximately forty years of independence. The present
day language policy is a direct consequence of the colonial language policy, which
encouraged the use of indigenous Kenyan languages, especially Kiswahili in the
education system, local administration and in the mass media.
Kiswahili continues being an important medium of communication in Kenya
today without usurping the position held by English. Although not as prestigious as
English, the current language policy continues to assign Kiswahili an ever increasing value alongside English. As a compulsory subject in the entire school system it
has contributed to the social and political integration of all Kenyans irrespective of
their level of or lack of formal school education. Kiswahili is not only suitable as a
language of national unity because it is spoken by more than half of the total population; it also possesses all the prerequisites to replace English as an official language, given political backing. The enhancement of Kiswahili has political as well
as social goals such as providing political and social justice, while the retention of
English enables the country to participate effectively in international political discussions and economic co-operation.
The Kenyan language policy seems to support and promote multilingualism by
encouraging mother tongue education in the first three to four years of primary
school education. In addition, the development of teaching materials in the various
Kenyan languages, and the promotion of school subjects such as oral literature are
a means of encouraging the preservation and the pride in our cultural heritage.
Multilingualism is, therefore, a fact in Kenya and will continue to be so in future. English seems set to remain the official language and Kiswahili the national
language. The status of the other local languages will largely depend on the demands of the particular speech community. Should the Kalenjin, Gikuyu, Luo, and
Maasai demand the increased use of their languages as was predicted for the latter
three by Laitin (1991), then these languages will continue to gain importance and
their statutory establishment will become absolutely necessary. The use of indigenous Kenyan languages in the mass media, especially on the radio and in other
print media, but also in the law courts has increased in recent years. This means
that the languages, which are not established through statutes, need not be forgotten. The prerequisite that these languages will continue to be used as languages of
16
Summary
instruction in schools and universities is their scientific nurturing, for instance the
research into their grammatical structures.
The linguistic situation in Kenya challenges both teachers and pupils to promote and improve their skills in the L1, Kiswahili and English in order for them to
succeed and be effective in the school system. The teacher is required to enhance
the language skills of his pupils and to help them acquire knowledge of the structures in their languages. Language policy makers in Kenya should take up the challenge by ensuring that all Kenyan children have the opportunity to learn all three
languages, thereby “promoting cultural identity, protecting the universal heritage
and encouraging multilingual education” and in the process helping spread the concept of tolerance (UNESCO Sources, No. 104, September 1998).
Chapter five describes the five secondary schools where German is taught, and
at which data for this study was collected in various regions of Kenya. Data was
collected using questionnaires, interviews and free conversations with learners of
German as a foreign language (aged 16-18 years). The mother tongues of the learners varied, but those considered for further analysis spoke Kiswahili, Gikuyu and
Dholuo and had good or excellent knowledge of English as well as other foreign
languages.
The two secondary schools in the capital city Nairobi were – Kenya High
School, a national girls‟ boarding school and Starehe Boys‟ Centre, a national
boys‟ boarding school. As national schools, both schools have learners from the entire republic, who speak all or most Kenyan languages. It was therefore assumed
that they would communicate more in English and Kiswahili and that they would
manifest more transfers from code switching using these two languages.
In Mombasa, the second largest city in Kenya, a provincial boy‟s day school –
Allidina Visram – was taken into consideration. The school is situated in a predominantly Kiswahili area and therefore it was expected that the learners would
communicate more in this language and hence manifest more language transfers
from Kiswahili.
In Thika, a small town situated north-east of Nairobi, girls‟ boarding school –
St. Francis Girls‟ School – was the focus. The school is provincial, which means
that the majority of the learners come from the area immediately surrounding the
school, whose primary language is Gikuyu. It was consequently assumed that these
learners would manifest more transfer elements from this language as well as those
from English and Kiswahili.
In the Kisumu area, data was collected at a national boys‟ boarding school –
Maseno School. The school is situated at a border area to the Luhya (Bantu) and
Dholuo (Westnilotic) languages. Although a national school with the possibility of
taking learners from the entire republic, most of the learners interviewed were Luo
Summary
17
with a few Luhya speakers. It was expected that these learners would show transfer
phenomena predominantly from Dholuo as well as from English, and less from
Kiswahili.
It was also important for this study to obtain information about the development
of German in the country in general, and in the various schools in particular, and to
obtain statistics on the overall number of students learning German.
Chapter six is the analysis of the first questionnaire in which the learners provide information on their and their parents‟ linguistic competence in L1, L2 and
foreign languages, as well as an analysis of language use in varying situational contexts. The results show that Kenyan learners have different motives for learning
German as compared to learners in Europe. They do not perceive German as “Das
Tor zum Westen”; - the gate to the West, as Ammon (1991) calls it. The majority
of them begin learning German at the age of 14 or 15, by which time they are already bilingual in English and Kiswahili or trilingual in the L1, English and
Kiswahili. This means that they build on past experiences and learning strategies
when they learn German and, furthermore, there does not seem to be a “critical
age” at which mastering a further language would be impeded.
Three major motives were cited for learning German:
l am interested in the language;
the subject is offered at my school;
the knowledge of German improves my chances of getting a job.
Interest in the language was by far the most cited reason, even more than the need
to acquire an additional qualification. Knowledge of and an interest in the German
language are not only important as a professional qualification but also for language promotion purposes. The future of German as a foreign language in Kenya
depends on the number of secondary school students doing German at school and
pursuing it later at university level.
Most of the learners spoke a Bantu language as L1 78%, while 22% spoke either a western or a southern Nilotic language. There were no speakers of a Cushitic
language among the interviewees. This trend, showing a dominance of Bantu
speakers, should be taken into account in the foreign language classroom. Language problems in the classroom will reflect this bias with more problems arising
from Bantu languages than from either Nilotic or Cushitic languages, although it
should be noted that different Bantu languages give rise to varying language problems.
The question of the four language skills: listening and reading comprehension,
speaking and writing presented specific analytical problems. Is it possible to unam-
18
Summary
biguously define a L1? Does the L1 change according to the situation and usage?
Reading and writing in the L1 presupposes that one understands and perhaps even
speaks the language. Among the interviewees, the language noted as the L1 was not
necessarily a language which they understood, wrote, spoke or read. In addition to
this, because the choice of interviewees was carried out randomly, it was not always possible to clarify certain questions prior to the filling in of the questionnaires. For instance, whether or not they all understood and spoke their parents‟ L1,
whether both parents spoke the same L1 and whether or not the parents used this
language extensively with their children.
The degree of linguistic competence in the various languages could also not be
answered sufficiently. The analysis of the first questionnaire showed the following
results: 14% of the learners were bilingual in English and Kiswahili, 44% were trilingual in the L1, English and Kiswahili, 28% spoke four languages the L1, English, Kiswahili and an unspecified foreign language; 8% spoke five languages the
L1, English, Kiswahili, a further Kenyan language and a foreign language, while
6% spoke six languages: the L1, English, Kiswahili, two Kenyan languages (apart
from the L1) and a foreign language. The students‟ parents, from the children‟s
perspective, were just as multilingual as their offspring, the majority of them, i.e.
65% of the mothers and 58% of the fathers being trilingual in the L1, English and
Kiswahili.
Chapter seven portrays the students‟ language use in certain domains and with
particular persons. A second questionnaire was used to determine which language
was spoken, when, with whom and in which situation (cf. questionnaire 2). A comparison and computation of all tokens in the various languages shows that English,
used with 38% frequency, is the dominant language of this group of learners with
Kiswahili used just as frequently at 36% of the time and the L1 came third with
20% frequency. Other foreign languages and the sociolect Sheng, popularly used
among the youth, play very minor roles. The results confirm the hypothesis that the
linguistic competence in English and Kiswahili are the best developed and that
these two languages are used with preference for topics and themes in school,
whereas the various L1 have communicative functions in the family and play no
role in the school discourse.
Chapter eight deals with phonetic and phonological transfer from the L1, L2
and Ln into the foreign language. The analysis of phonetic transfer (chapter 8.1-8-5)
uses the methods commonly used in contrastive and error analysis. The German
phoneme system was compared and contrasted with the phoneme systems of Gikuyu and Dholuo. From this analysis it was possible to tell in what ways the systems differ from or are identical to one another and to predict which sounds would
be easier, more difficult or problematic to master. Nevertheless, in order to make
Summary
19
conclusive statements about which sounds would be problematic and which would
have to be re-learnt, other analytical methods had to be considered.
A comparison of two differing sound systems is not always a sufficient method
of analysis because it allows no conclusive statements about the actual realisation
of sounds. The presence of sounds in two languages says nothing about their pronunciation, the position in which the sounds occur, or their orthography (Slembek
1986: 32). A comparison of the vowel systems shows that Gikuyu has quantitatively fewer and qualitatively different vowels from German. Though five of the
Gikuyu vowels show similarities with five German vowels, none can be said to occur in the same position, and thus they are all pronounced differently.
A comparison of the Dholuo vowels, on the other hand, shows that although
there are also quantitative and qualitative differences, they are not as marked as
those in Gikuyu. Though fewer in number than German vowels, Dholuo vowels are
pronounced in the same position as their corresponding German vowels. Dholuo
distinguishes open and closed vowels though, unlike German vowels, does not differentiate between long and short vowels. Thus speakers of Bantu languages such
as Gikuyu and Kiswahili will have considerably more problems with German vowels than speakers of a Nilotic language such as Dholuo. These assumptions were
confirmed in the data.
The phonological analysis (chapter 8.6-8.10) used methods and procedures employed in the research of prosodic features. Central to this was the analysis of accents, sentence melodies and intonation patterns. A problem which could not be
overlooked when using the methods used in conversation and contextualisation research was that the data used here was elicited and not occurring naturally. It was
not possible to avoid the observer paradox (Labov 1972) because the students were
aware they were being recorded and the interviews took place during normal school
hours.
The details provided in this chapter on the intonation patterns of Kenyan learners have not been considered in previous contrastive studies (cf. Agoya 1993;
Thirimu 1998; Tsuma 1998). Pauses in the speech of Kenyan learners can be attributed to several factors. There are pauses, which are brought about by the tempo
in speech, some caused by affective conditions, others yet can be attributed to the
intonation and syntactic focus, and finally those brought about by language specific
habits. The incorrect use of pauses by Kenyan learners is very often a result of the
imposition of L1 specific speech habits, while others are of a general structural nature. The incorrect use of pauses is further brought about by an insufficient competence in the foreign language, especially pauses before unknown or difficult words.
20
Summary
The transfer of mother tongue performance habits is clearly manifested in the intonation patterns of the more competent learners. Gikuyu and Kiswahili speakers
show a raised intonation and a short break in front of syntactically important words.
Dholuo speakers on the other hand, have a descending intonation at phrase borders.
Syntactic focus in Dholuo seems not to be realised using intonation. It however remains a problem to draw general conclusions concerning all speakers of the same
L1 using data from individual speakers, so that any generalisations made here can
only be formulated with caution. On the whole, the organisation of propositions
remains an important aspect that needs careful consideration in foreign language
instruction.
Morpho-syntactic transfer, where L1 elements are used in the construction of
L2, was handled in chapter nine. Various theoretical methods and approaches in
L2-acquisition studies were compared and contrasted, namely: Universal Grammar,
Functional Pragmatics, and Conversation Analysis as well as language typology
approaches.
Before the discussion on the morpho-syntactic structure of the learner utterances, the language systems in Gikuyu, Kiswahili, and Dholuo were described typologically. Selected transcriptions were then examined on the basis of the following categories chosen on account of their frequency of occurrence in the learner
discourses: word order, wh-questions, gender, prepositions, tense and the omission
of direct objects.
Morpho-syntactic transfer is more difficult to account for than is phonetic or
phonologic transfer because various studies discuss the same or similar phenomena
in a different way. What in one study is a transfer phenomenon is viewed in another
as developmental. Kenyan learners draw from a repertoire of various languages,
which in turn influence their language production in German. Transfer in this context can be understood as the activation and use of the most fore-grounded language, which in the Kenyan situation, can be the respective L1, English or Kiswahili depending on the situation and the interlocutors. The resulting inter-language in
the foreign language context shows signs of being an independent language with its
own rules, but it is extremely prone to change. Morpho-syntactic transfer in the inter-language of foreign language learners has various manifestations: it may be a
“mistake”, an avoidance of unknown structures, an instantaneous borrowing from
another known language, and a hesitation in speech or a breaking off of speech or
an over-generalised use of certain structures.
Irrespective of their L1, the canonical word order SVO remains the preferred
sequence in the learners‟ language beyond the initial stage of acquisition. The verb
is often, though not always, wrongly conjugated; often there is no agreement between the verb, person and number. Most word order problems arise with the sub-
Summary
21
ordinate clauses, especially those introduced using conjunctions. A distinction of
„stages of acquisition‟ as posited by Vainikka/Young-Scholten (1996a) cannot be
adequately accounted for with these learners because their language remains
changeable even for the same learner at any time. Although all the languages the
Kenyan learners speak have an SVO-word order, it seems very likely that the transfer phenomena observed in their German are from English rather than from the L1
or Kiswahili. Adverbs such as back, ago, as well as conjunctions with a phonological or orthographical similarity in German and English such as when/wenn are often used according to English word order rules.
The omission of direct objects by Gikuyu speakers is a transfer phenomenon
from the L1. The learners activate parameters of UG, which are not found in the
L2, and carry them over from their L1. However, to call the omission of the direct
object pro-drop as suggested by White (1985) is to categorise the phenomena
wrongly because in Gikuyu and Kiswahili this is done for discourse and pragmatic
reasons. As long as the named object remains the focus of the conversation, the
speaker need not keep naming it.
The transfer of tense aspects from English result either due to the orthographic
and phonological similarity between had and hat, were and war, or they are due to
the inadequate acquisition of tense aspects in the L1, as illustrated by the interviewee Mumbi. Her transfer of English tense aspects (i.e. the use of the simple past
tense in narration) into Gikuyu shows her problems with the mother tongue.
Code switching, an expected behaviour in the language of these learners, was
not fully manifested. Although they used single words and phrases in English,
Kiswahili and their respective L1, these were borrowed mainly due to their difficulties with the German vocabulary and were not code switching in the sense used by
Myers-Scotton (1993, 1998). An interesting observation, though, is that the use of
words and phrases in another language is so normal for these learners that a differentiation between „cultural and core borrowed forms‟ (Myers-Scotton 1993: 5) is
absolutely unnecessary. Code switching was not possible because the interview
situation and my presence “as an agent of the institution” (Rehbein 1998: 662) did
not encourage such behaviour.
Chapter ten deals with semantic and lexical transfer. The methods and approaches used in Functional Pragmatics (cf. Rehbein 1999, Graefen 1997, Ehlich
1991), by which spoken language is analysed as a component of mental and practical forms of actions, show that it is not enough to look at „mental‟ aspects as an abstract lexicon in the speaker‟s head. Rather, the context of the action plan is just as
important as is the context of the Symbolfeldausdrücke (Bühler 1934/1982) (i.e.
Verbs, Nouns, Adjectives) in discourse. The actual use of language in the day-today interaction of Kenyan learners in school and their multilingualism is the driv-
22
Summary
ing force behind conceptualisation and communication, and not the use of language
as it is learnt and used during foreign language instruction. The learners are multilingual and this cannot be overlooked in language instruction as they use their multiple languages as a basis for their activation of concepts and the use of formulaic
expressions.
Lexical and semantic transfer is attested to using formal as well as semantic criteria. The better the language is mastered, the more one expects the transfer of elements with formal as well as semantic similarities. Less competent learners are influenced by phonological and orthographic similarities, while more competent
learners use all available resources in a manner similar to that used by native
speakers (Haastrup 1991: 55). Many “mistakes” the Kenyan learners of German
make result from confusing phonological and orthographic forms in English with
those in German: bekommen (for become) instead of werden; also (also) instead of
folglich etc. The transfer and use of English lexical items is found primarily in the
domain of school: school captain, Primarschule (primary school), standard etc.
Chapter eleven discusses the consequences of the complex linguistic situation
prevalent in Kenya for the instruction of German as a foreign language. Kenyan
secondary schools are either predominately linguistically heterogeneous (national
or town schools) or homogeneous (provincial, district and up-country schools).
Linguistically heterogeneous schools provide opportunities for dealing with contrastive themes on the linguistic as well as the social level. Ethnic clashes brought
about by stressing differences in languages and latent cultural differences can be
discussed during instruction. Because German teachers are generally of Kenyan
origin, speaking just as many languages as their learners, this fact underlines the
importance of finding possibilities to help them develop contrastive instruction material, which in turn would help them deal with the diverse problems their learners
bring along. This would mean, on the one hand, sensitising teachers during their
training to the problems of multilingual classrooms and providing them with guidebooks and teacher‟s books with specific details on the most common problems.
And, on the other hand, encouraging teaching methods and approaches that allow
the use of more than one language. Even if the language teacher herself does not
speak all the languages, her learners can provide the necessary examples and thus
be encouraged to reflect on the different structures and possibilities.
Language instruction materials are not available in the same quantities and
quality in the various schools, therefore the development of multilingual teaching
materials should be a task taken very seriously by curriculum developers. This will
ensure that all schools are effectively equipped and the various languages integrated in the instruction process. Results of workshops held during regional and na-
Summary
23
tional seminars should be made available to all teachers so that the various regions
can learn from one another and the duplication of work is minimised.
Chapter twelve concludes with observations of the linguistic prerequisites that
need to be taken into account when a foreign language is learnt in Kenya. Some
Kenyan languages have not been described to date, while others have detailed
grammatical descriptions. A description of linguistic transfer phenomena can therefore not be provided for all languages. I hope I have encouraged teachers of German to look for possibilities of incorporating the languages of their learners in the
instruction process. I hope I have also challenged other scholars to provide detailed
contrastive studies of other Kenyan languages so that the general situation of foreign language instruction in Kenya will be improved.