[lg policy] South Africa: (blog): Why Fritz Dausab=?windows-1252?Q?=92s_?=language policy is both incorrect and deplorable

Fri Aug 17 15:01:21 UTC 2012

There should be no single base: Why Fritz Dausab’s language policy is both
incorrect and deplorable.

   - Posted by Derryn Lee
Visser<http://vryestudent.com/profile/DerrynLeeVisser>on August 12,
2012 at 23:00
   - View Blog<http://vryestudent.com/profiles/blog/list?user=37knq56hjg1hp>

<http://api.ning.com:80/files/VILjNIDsOzUJxSDSPElYDRsrtIgRidY*FeTTIxi3gcNIFWifPIO*ESVOJ2BglAIHTn9peDYAnjEZM5PemAFvuyZBYkU56ZF3/westerncape.png>“The
language policy should always be based on the language of the Western Cape,
which is Afrikaans”. – Fritz
Dausab<http://vryestudent.com/profiles/blogs/my-reasons-for-running-as-src-candidate-for-2013>
.

In post-apartheid South Africa (*South Africa* – this is important, as will
be understood shortly) the above statement evokes both fear and nausea. The
ideology underlying the notion places both my access, and the access of
many *South Africans (*Remember, this is important) in jeopardy. I can’t
help but to imagine the implementation of such a policy being realised –
Fritz Dausab would be smiling, he would be proud (supposedly protecting the
“language of the Western Cape”). But ,what about the demographic of the
student body unable to understand Afrikaans, what about those who struggle
to understand it, what about those who are still in the process of learning
it, what about those who passed Matric Afrikaans but could never understand
their course presented to them now in predominately Afrikaans, What about
those students from the rural Limpopo? None of the aforementioned students
would be smiling, none of them would be proud. Instead, they would be
forced to either struggle unnecessarily, or be forced to start applying for
education elsewhere. Has the fear sunk in yet, do you feel sick yet,
knowing that certain people would be unable to understand lectures at their
institution of choice?

“Proudly South African”. That’s how the saying goes, not “Proudly Western
Cape”. Underlying the language policy as advanced by Fritz Dausab is the
notion of provincialism. This is dangerous, the policy as such undermines
the celebration of South African diversity, instead pushing for the
exclusivity and supremacy of one culture and one language. In a country
within which there are eleven languages, this type of exclusivity is simply
disrespectful to the large majority of South Africans.  The university of
Stellenbosch, although located in the Western Cape, does not and should not
cater to the Western Cape exclusively, but instead to South Africa as a
whole, as a nation. A language policy as such would serve to exclude and
thereby sever the relationship which the university would hope to have with
many a person found in one of the other eight provinces. The university’s
student body is not constituted by the Western Cape alone, it is instead
constituted by people from all over South Africa. With such a policy
Stellenbosch University would alienate itself from many brilliant minds,
many prospective students. Ultimately, if such a language policy were to be
implemented it would undermine the University of Stellenbosch’s
over-arching goal, and moral obligation – namely, that of nation building.

The language policy which is currently in place, although not perfect, is
certainly superior to the one as advanced by Fritz Dausab. The “T-option”,
provides both Afrikaans and English with an equal footing. Although it
would be better if education could possibly be provided in one’s own
mother-tongue, the combination of Afrikaans and English as primary
languages, as opposed to simply Afrikaans as the only primary language, is
definitely more accessible to the large majority of South Africans. It
would seem as if there is simply no morally acceptable justification for
the exclusivity of Afrikaans – the T-option already serves to protect the
integrity of both the language and those which speak it, something which
Fritz Dausab’s policy would fail to do.

It is my assertion that if Afrikaans was made the exclusive basis of the
language policy it would actually serve to place the integrity of both the
language and of its speakers in jeopardy. If this is proved to be true,
then the very foundation of Fritz Dausab’s policy would be proved
unjustifiable, and his position untenable. Afrikaans as a language, and
very often, those who speak it, had been given a bad name by its and their
association with the Nationalist Party and Nationalist Party ideology as
had been rampant during the dark shadow of Apartheid. This association
serves only to undermine the beauty and cultural value which the language
holds. However, Afrikaans has come a long way; those who speak the language
and are proud of doing so have taken great strides to making amends and
creating a flourishing identity outside and removed from the Nationalist
Ideology. If Fritz Dausab’s policy were to be implemented it would go a
long way to re-establish that ugly association which Afrikaans and those
who speak Afrikaans have fought to overcome. By implementing this policy,
Stellenbosch University would serve to reanimate the ideas of ownership via
exclusivity as had been held in the Apartheid era; implementation of the
policy would be sending the message that Stellenbosch is not first and
foremost a South African university, open and accessible to all, but
instead an Afrikaans university, clutching onto the idea of the “apart”
Afrikaner mentality.

Lastly and most importantly, the policy as suggested Fritz Dausab is
contrary to public policy - to the morals of the new South African society.
According to judgements handed down in the Constitutional era, public
policy is now to be viewed through the lens of the Constitutional values as
enshrined in the Bill of Rights. The policy would simply be
unconstitutional. Factually, Afrikaans is simply not the most accessible
language to the greatest majority of people. This policy would be to the
detriment of those people who had been previously disadvantaged, not having
had access to a tertiary education. This policy, in so far as it creates an
unnecessary isolation of access to education, would serve to unfairly
discriminate against the aforementioned persons. This is not necessary.

Afrikaans, like all other South African languages, is an integral and
beautiful part of South African culture.  It needs and deserves, like all
other languages, to be protected and cherished. However, this will not be
achieved by forcibly excluding other languages. Protection is afforded
Afrikaans, like all other languages, by being a member, a constituent of a
tolerant diverse multi-culturalist environment – it is respected and
protected in so far as it offers respect and protection to other languages,
affording them the same opportunities of use it would have afforded itself.
Our multi-cultural environment, of which language is an essential if not
the essential component, is something which needs to be accepted and
embraced. To protect Afrikaans, one needs not create an exclusive
environment but instead allow for an all-inclusive environment.  Only by
affording Afrikaans with dignity, by believing that it will survive in a
multi-cultural environment, owing to its celebrated beauty and not its
enforced entrenchment, will it continue to flourish in the new South
Africa. A tolerant and self-assured Afrikaans is an Afrikaans of which we
can all be proud.

Thankfully, I know that somewhere out there, perhaps even some of you
reading this, share a similar collection of sentiments as those expressed
in this article. As a result thereof, and because I know that quite simply
Stellenbosch University will not implement such a language policy, owing to
its commitment to promoting the Constitutional values of our country, our
rainbow nation, I am able to sleep soundly tonight.

Ultimately, I trust in the language which my father and his father before
him had spoken, I allow it that dignity; Fritz Dausab himself, and any of
his would-be supporters should be so kind as to allow it that dignity too.

http://vryestudent.com/profiles/blogs/there-should-be-no-single-base-why-fritz-dausab-s-language-policy
-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to its
members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner or
sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who
disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal, and to write
directly to the original sender of any offensive message.  A copy of this
may be forwarded to this list as well.  (H. Schiffman, Moderator)

For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/
listinfo/lgpolicy-list
*******************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lgpolicy-list/attachments/20120817/61658e06/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list