[lg policy] South Africa:Let's Launch An Inclusive Effort To Develop A New Consensus About Language And Education

Sat Jan 27 15:38:02 UTC 2018

 Let's Launch An Inclusive Effort To Develop A New Consensus About Language
And Education Demonising those who consider language or culture a part of
their identity literally makes no sense.

   -
   <https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.co.za%2Fconrad-steenkamp%2Flets-launch-an-inclusive-effort-to-develop-a-new-consensus-about-language-and-education_a_23344520%2F>
   -
   <http://twitter.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.co.za%2Fconrad-steenkamp%2Flets-launch-an-inclusive-effort-to-develop-a-new-consensus-about-language-and-education_a_23344520%2F&text=Let%27s%20Launch%20An%20Inclusive%20Effort%20To%20Develop%20A%20New%20Consensus%20About%20Language%20And%20Education>
   -
   -
   - <?subject=Let%27s%20Launch%20An%20Inclusive%20Effort%20To%20Develop%20A%20New%20Consensus%20About%20Language%20And%20Education&body=Article:
   http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.co.za%2Fconrad-steenkamp%2Flets-launch-an-inclusive-effort-to-develop-a-new-consensus-about-language-and-education_a_23344520%2F>

27/01/2018 06:38 SAST | *Updated* 9 hours ago
Getty Images

*COMMENT*

Mr Lesufi, the MEC for education in Gauteng, makes a number of statements
<http://www.huffingtonpost.co.za/2018/01/19/panyaza-lesufi-language-policies-a-crude-form-of-racism_a_23337830/>
about education and the language policy (HuffPost, Jan 19) that warrant a
response.

He begins by arguing in favour of multilingual, multicultural and
multiracial schools, which are supposed to represent the full diversity of
the country. What this means in practice is not spelt out, though it seems
that he had certain multilingual teaching methods in mind.

These generally use a common language, such as English, alongside several
other languages used by the learners. Such methods are indeed useful in
multilingual classrooms, the norm in many schools in urban Gauteng. It is
also easy to understand why such methods would appeal to a department that
wants to eradicate racial inequalities in education.

However, please consider the following:

First, the introduction of a common language to integrate linguistically
diverse schools has been going on for some decades now. That is, many
schools have become English. The consequence of Anglicisation, with few
exceptions, has been the displacement of local languages like isiXhosa,
Afrikaans and others. It is possible, of course, to reintroduce the lost
mother tongues after the fact by means of a multilingual teaching method –
a good second prize.

However, as with outcomes-based education, multilingual education methods
will require a major improvement of educational skills and capacities. It
likewise harbours great potential for unintended consequences – like
breaking mother-tongue education; something that will take a long long time
to fix. Beware of good ideas.

Second, multilingual teaching methods may well be indispensable in some
situations, but there are no compelling reasons why it should be uniformly
enforced in all contexts. It is not the only method around, and there is
overwhelming evidence for the effectiveness of traditional mother-tongue
education (whether single, double or parallel medium).

If the notion that language represents a racist identity is the logic
behind the language policy of the Gauteng department of education, then it
is unconstitutional.

Unesco explicitly rejects the notion that mother-tongue education is too
expensive, that former colonial languages like English are superior to
indigenous ones, or that learning in one's mother tongue prevents one from
learning other languages. They strongly encourage African governments to
embrace mother-tongue education up to the highest level.

The second element of Mr Lesufi's piece is an argument against
single-medium Afrikaans schools, beginning with a surprisingly liberal
argument about individual rights.

First, he argues that racism is based on the notion that one is "a member
of a collective" defined by "race, culture and even language". By this
logic, schools like Hoërskool Overvaal and others make themselves guilty of
a racist form of identity by the mere fact of wanting to use
Afrikaans-medium instruction.

One cannot help but wonder whether the same logic would apply to the
tshiVenda school in Mamelodi or the isiZulu schools in rural KwaZulu-Natal?
What about the plentiful mixed-race Afrikaans schools, or all the black or
largely white English-only schools? Are stick-fights at traditional
weddings racist by nature, or does the logic of "racist identity" apply
only by virtue of the colour of one's skin?

If the notion that language represents a racist identity is the logic
behind the language policy of the Gauteng department of education, then it
is unconstitutional. The Constitution explicitly provides for the rights of
"cultural, linguistic and religious communities". It even provides for a
permanent commission to protect and promote the rights of these
"communities" (or "collectives", using Mr Lesufi's term). It also provides
for single-medium mother-tongue education.

In the real world, South Africans rely on language, culture, traditions,
religion or political philosophy, party, and identification with the nation
to fashion multiple and overlapping identities. One can identify as an
Afrikaner, Afrikaans, a Khoisan, a Zulu traditionalist, or a Presbyterian –
and simultaneously be a proud ANC- or DA-voting South African. Demonising
those who consider language or culture a part of their identity literally
makes no sense.

The stereotypes that have been deployed in the campaign against Afrikaans
in Gauteng over the past year or so do an injustice to the language and its
speakers.

Second, having equated racism with identity based on, among others,
language, Mr Lesufi concludes that "language policies" are "nothing more
than crude forms of racism". The "advocates of language policies"
supposedly use language as a means to the vilest of racist ends, namely
admissions based on race.

There is no place for racism in our society, and where schools are
deliberately using language as a tool for racist exclusion, censure would
be in order. However, one needs more than perceptions or negative
stereotypes of Afrikaans schools to argue that this is in fact what is
happening.

The resistance to English generally has much to do with the rapid shift
over the past few decades from single-medium Afrikaans schools to bilingual
schools, and from there to single-medium English schools. Barring excellent
language management, it is well established linguistically that a dominant
language, like English, easily supplants a weaker language in a
multilingual context.

Parents of all races and backgrounds have therefore become anxious about
maintaining Afrikaans schools. In many communities, all schools have
Anglicised, often leading to grassroots frustration and anger about
education – the kind of anger that can influence elections.

Not everybody will sympathise with the perspectives above. They are also
not meant to cover all situations at all Afrikaans schools. However, a
language policy is not simply an expression of crude racism. Mostly, it is
about parents wanting to ensure that their children get mother-tongue
education.

Anybody with insight into the struggle era will find it easy to empathise
with the negative gut response that many people experience about Afrikaans.
We are wounded in many ways, and it will take more than just one generation
to overcome the pain that we feel. Yet the stereotypes that have been
deployed in the campaign against Afrikaans in Gauteng over the past year or
so do an injustice to the language and its speakers.

I am in full agreement with Mr Lesufi that we need to promote
multilingualism in South Africa. True multilingualism, in which each
citizen and government services are able to use multiple languages, is the
only way in which we will achieve full economic participation and a true
democracy.

Afrikaans was also a language of the struggle, as MK veterans from Robben
Island and many communities will testify. The majority of Afrikaans schools
are largely coloured. There are even some black Afrikaans schools, and
hardly any Afrikaans schools are exclusively white. Even Hoërskool Overvaal
has black learners – happy ones who feel welcome at the school, judging by
the way that they have been defending it. Black learners at other schools
have also expressed their heartfelt support for the language.

Some schools may continue to look too "monochrome" for those in power. Yet
demonising them with stereotypes, crushing them with mass action and
forcing them to accept English is anything but progressive. Surely there
are more creative, mutually respectful ways of handling cases like this?
Mobilising the full diversity of Afrikaans comes to mind as a solution,
among others.

I am in full agreement with Mr Lesufi that we need to promote
multilingualism in South Africa. True multilingualism, in which each
citizen and government services are able to use multiple languages, is the
only way in which we will achieve full economic participation and a true
democracy. Multilingual teaching methods are just one of several tools at
our disposal to achieve this. Proper mother-tongue education is another.

We should also not confuse mother-tongue education with monolingualism.
Monolingualism is much more likely to be the consequence of an educational
language policy that favours English over all the indigenous languages. It
is one of the reasons why so many black children are becoming monolingual
English speakers.

By far the most Afrikaans speakers reject racism. They want to be part of
South African society and part of the solutions for the many problems that
we face.

Please talk to us. Let us take the discussion about schools and
mother-tongue education out of the courts and the streets. Let us launch an
inclusive effort to develop a new consensus about language and education.

I call on Mr Lesufi to do all in his power to make this possible.

-- 
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

 Harold F. Schiffman

Professor Emeritus of
 Dravidian Linguistics and Culture
Dept. of South Asia Studies
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6305

Phone:  (215) 898-7475
Fax:  (215) 573-2138

Email:  haroldfs at gmail.com
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/

-------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lgpolicy-list/attachments/20180127/f18acd14/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