KHUMBULANI MNGADI
The UN General Assembly (Resolution A/RES/74/135) proclaimed the period between 2022 and 2032 as the International Decade of Indigenous Languages. This was done for many reasons, but primarily to canvass sharp focus on the plight of indigenous languages worldwide.
This need for a pointed focus was necessitated by the fact that research has shown an alarming decline in the use and preservation of these indigenous languages globally. There has been ample evidence that suggests that if resources and time are not allocated to these languages in the next 10 to 20 years, they will be extinct. There is no doubt that if that happens, the African continent would lose the most, since the majority of languages that are facing extinction are in Africa. Consequently, Africa would have nothing to contribute to the global discourse. This article attempts to look at the responses from concerned groups in South Africa. It navigates selected interventions from various stakeholders with an intention to point out deficiencies that might lead to the failure to elevate the status of these indigenous languages.
There is no doubt that in South Africa, academia leads the charge among concerned groups. The South African academic fraternity has been vocal about the plight of indigenous languages in the country. It is one sector that has been consistent in its position, and many publications have been produced in this field pre- and post-1994. The recent Vice-Chancellor’s Colloquium themed "Moving the Conversation Forward" that was held at the University of Pretoria is a big step by this sector to decidedly bring the language discourse to the fore. The colloquium was co-organised by Universities South Africa (USAf) and the Community of Practice for the Teaching and Learning of African Languages (CoPAL). It would be remiss of me not to point out that the South African government has also been on board in navigating various political, legal, and socio-economic complexities around the issue of indigenous languages. Since 1994, it has looked at how to allocate resources smartly and how to get the best possible human resources to handle this complex phenomenon. A lot of legislative provisions have been passed to enable this language development, e.g., the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of the Constitution (1996), section 29 (2), the Use of Official Languages Act, 2012 (Act No. 12 of 2012), the Pan South African Language Board Act No. 59 of 1995, the National Development Plan, the Promotion of Access to Information Act 2002, Act No. 2 of 2000, to mention but a few. I must say, it has not been a smooth ride. A lot has been done as well from the legislative point of view, but again, a lot is still to be done at the ground level so that the resolution by Unesco is not in vain, at least in the context of South Africa.
Firstly, the elephant in the room in the South African context is the mixed messages from various stakeholders. There is evidently a lack of consensus among South Africans as to how this language issue should be handled. The business, government, and linguistic pundits are silently pulling in different directions, and sadly, the language speakers themselves are also pulling in another direction. On one side, business sees this as not important since English is considered the lingua franca of the nation, and on the government and linguistic side, pundits are saying there is more to this than meets the eye. At the extreme end of the spectrum, the language speakers are also divided. There are those who see English as their gateway to global financial and technological freedom, and there are those who see English as the main hindrance to their economic, linguistic, sociocultural, and technological advancement and freedom. This paradox has all the elements of a national crisis in my assessment; it is something that should concern all of us. Unfortunately, the reality points to the two enemies, i.e. colonialism and to some extent to our unique immediate past, i.e. the apartheid system. The double whammy that befell South Africa makes this situation even more difficult.
Secondly, there is a palatable agreement among the language pundits that the linguistic disparities of the nation need to be arrested. However, the most worrying factor in that agreement is that they (language pundits) themselves are equally divided on the “how to” part. This has been evident even prior to 1994. When one carefully reads literature on the South African language debate, there are pointed cracks in the direction of our language discourse. On one side, there are proponents of the linguistic harmonisation theory, i.e., group Sotho languages together and Nguni languages group together so that you create a standard Nguni language and Sotho language, respectively. This group believes that this approach will quicken the development of indigenous languages and it will save time and resources. The other group of language pundits believe that language carries the identity, culture and traditions of each speech community and therefore it is not the solution to harmonise these indigenous languages. This group believes there are sufficient grounds for these languages to be developed individually. This group further says some of these languages have fully developed orthographies and conventions that have been taught for centuries to their speakers, and to change their orthographies now will be tantamount to language extinction. These pointed differences have been the bone of contention scientifically among these two groups, and there is very little hope that they may find each other any time soon.
The third group believes that in 1994, when the government decided on officialising nine South African official languages, it erred. This group argues that the Khoi and San languages were politically excluded and that other language varieties that had their own native speech communities were wrongly incorporated into these nine official languages. They are calling for the revision of this provision so that their languages could attain official status and have their own orthographies. In my small mind, South Africa is a microcosm of Africa; therefore, this paints a picture of what is happening in Africa as a whole. In Africa, these linguistic wars have crippled the development of indigenous languages for centuries; bloody wars have been fought and millions of lives have been lost due to these disparities. History is the best teacher, and therefore history can only be ignored at one’s own peril.
Thirdly, the lack of consciousness (Africa-ness) is very evident in what we as (Africans) think, do, and believe in. This evident lack of civic education in South Africa and on the continent is a cause for concern. Post-colonialism, a lot of focus has been on the wrong things, I postulate. We are all in agreement that a significant part of being African was eroded during colonialism and made even worse in the South African case by apartheid, which aggravated the situation. Post-independence, all African countries should have focused on unlearning colonial ways and focusing on pro-African virtues. Africa should have spent resources and time unlearning how to be European. Africa should have spent time rediscovering what it is in the global space. What is Africa’s worth, and how can it be maximised? There is a lot of mental damage that is being passed from one generation to the next, linguistically, economically, politically, and socially. Sadly, African leaders are paying less attention to this phenomenon. The language issue is just the tip of the iceberg; there is a lot that Africa should try to arrest if it is intentional about African development and its role in the global sphere.
In conclusion, considering the factors expressed above, it is clear that the language situation in South Africa is dire, and it needs collective wisdom to be rescued. It is also equally evident that language is not the only aspect that needs attention; there are so many things that have gone wrong. Language is so glaring because it is the resource that we all use in communicating our thoughts, feelings, and the reality around us. Lastly, it is important that scientists provide a conducive and coherent environment for the language debate to thrive. If they continue pulling in extreme directions like what is currently happening, it will be difficult to achieve what Unesco is nudging us to do. There are a number of issues one can attempt to elucidate, but to process them all at once can also be counter-intuitive. I therefore choose to pause here and invite a healthier debate.
Khumbulani Mngadi is an independent analyst based at the University of KwaZulu-Natal.