[lg policy] Cyril Ramaphosa and the language challenge

Harold Schiffman haroldfs at gmail.com
Mon Jun 11 10:26:50 EDT 2018

 Cyril Ramaphosa and the language challenge
Hermann Giliomee |
10 June 2018
Hermann Giliomee says the President can win over the Afrikaans-speakers by
securing the future of their language

*Text of address by Hermann Giliomee prepared for the centennial festival
dinner of the Afrikanerbond (formerly Broederbond), at which the President,
Mr Cyril Ramaphosa, was the guest of honour and main speaker, 7 June 2018. *

*Binding the nation through language diversity. A challenge to a new
President *

I have had only one previous exchange with Mr Ramaphosa. He came to the
Stellenbosch University campus early in 1994 just after agreement had been
reached on the Interim Constitution. After the speech I rose to ask a
question; “Why did the different parties agree to an electoral system that
was wrong for reconciliation between the white and black communities?”

In his book ‘*A Democratic South Africa’*, published in 1991 the highly
regarded American legal scholar, Donald Horowitz, made it very clear that
our electoral system, chosen by the parties at Codesa, namely a
Proportional Representation list system, gives powerful impetus to the
exclusion and resultant alienation of those ethnic or racial groups not
represented in the majority coalition. Given the experience elsewhere, it
would have been far better for South Africa to have a variant of the
Plurality System, which rewards the party that is most widely spread over
the different communities and regions.

Mr Ramaphosa smiled and replied: “Listen here, Dr. Giliomee, I did not come
to Stellenbosch to answer difficult questions.”

I thought that was a gentle way of putting down an ivory tower academic
trying to be smarter than the politicians grappling with thorny issues. But
of course Mr. Ramaphosa was also well aware that the Communist faction in
the ANC was pressing very hard for the PR list system. In virtually any
other system they would feature far less prominently as candidates in the
ANC-led coalition and they would have suffered a great setback in their
ambition to impose their National Democratic Revolution.

Ramaphosa belonged to the faction called the nationalist faction, who were
mostly drawn from the UDF ranks. What joined them in a coalition with the
Communists was the idea of national liberation through de-colonisation. The
Oxford philosopher Isaiah Berlin made the acute remark that national
liberation movements that claimed to be fighting for liberty against a
colonial oppressor were not necessarily fighting for liberty but for the
recognition of the distinctiveness as a nation and for national
independence that went further than formal political independence.[1]

The electoral system agreed on in 1993 also suited the National Party. Mr.
F.W. de Klerk could tell his caucus that with polls showing 20 per cent
support for the NP, virtually all members were assured of a seat in the
next Parliament. According to Horowitz with his wide comparative
perspective, it is a common error to assume that the politicians drawing up
a new constitution have the long term interests of the country at heart.
They invariably choose to put the interest of their party first. It was
predictable that the electoral system would facilitate and promote the
race-baiting that seems to be getting worse.

It also made the position of minorities more precarious especially in the
competition for jobs in the public sector and in enjoying language rights.
There is no reason to doubt that effective protection for Afrikaans was an
important issue for De Klerk. Yet the whole question of official languages
received surprisingly little attention from government. The early failure
to discuss some key issues, together with the changeover from Gerrit
Viljoen to Roelf Meyer as chief negotiator, made later negotiations
exceptionally difficult.

In June 1992 a delegation from the SA Akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns – the
main mouthpiece for Afrikaans in tertiary education – handed De Klerk a
memorandum with proposals for a post-apartheid language policy, in the
presence of some 50 Afrikaner leaders from all walks of life.

The president pledged to keep the Afrikaans language community informed,
using the Akademie as the main channel. But a year later, on 3 May 1993,
chief NP negotiator Roelf Meyer told the Akademie’s secretary he did not
know of any document on Afrikaans that had been submitted. The only
document he was aware of was the ANC’s language proposals. This was
startling news for the Akademie leadership, given that at least four
Afrikaans bodies had prepared submissions.[2]

Later in 1993 the Akademie published its ‘Language Plan for the Country’.
It argued there were eleven main languages, which it depicted as inherently
of equal worth and entitled to protection. Citizens had to be given the
opportunity to communicate with the government in any of the main
languages. It urged retention of English and Afrikaans as official
languages but proposed providing the opportunity for all nine other
languages to attain official status and offered to facilitate that process
thought technical assistance with dictionaries and so on. Language rights
ought to be seen as a human right and incorporated in a bill of rights.
These rights had to be expanded, not abridged.[3]

It was apparent from the start that the ANC, paying only lip service to
multilingualism, confidently expected making English the dominant public
language once it was in power. The multi-party negotiating body finally
decided to recognise eleven official languages. Lawrence Schlemmer
commented that this decision ‘was in fact a decision taken in bad faith’.

Almost from the start the ANC ‘back-tracked on its constitutional
commitments, pleading costs and practicality, and it would continue to make
very few resources available for effective multilingualism’.[4]
The NP secured a clause providing that ‘rights related to language and the
status of languages existing at the commencement of [the Interim
Constitution] shall not be diminished’ but this provision would be omitted
from the final Constitution.[5]

The government and the ANC were soon at loggerheads over the language
character of universities and university autonomy. Some ANC members – of
whom Kader Asmal, a future minister of national education, was the most
vociferous – soon indicated that the new government would have little
patience with attempts by universities like Stellenbosch and Potchefstroom
to maintain an Afrikaans character even if it was non-racial. Neither the
government nor the Afrikaans universities collectively developed a
comprehensive plan for the survival of Afrikaans at tertiary level.

Stellenbosch and Potchefstroom simply assumed they could continue using
Afrikaans as medium. Rand Afrikaans University and the University of
Pretoria made their own plans for dual medium and parallel medium
instruction, while the University of Orange Free State opted for parallel
As experience elsewhere demonstrates, both dual medium and parallel medium
hold the real risk that over the medium term English would drive out the
regional or national language.

On 16 September 1993 Minister of National Education Piet Marais warned De
Klerk that ‘education was not the priority among our negotiators, which it
should be’. He added that in informal talks he had with ANC negotiators he
gained the clear impression they ‘displayed an intolerance towards
Afrikaans and to the demand that the Afrikaans universities could continue
to imbue their mission with a cultural content’.

He urged De Klerk to have a list compiled of bottom lines and undertakings
the NP had given to its voters and to indicate which of them it had met. At
that stage all the main issues related to higher education had already been
De Klerk urged Marais to talk to the ANC negotiators about reopening the
issue, but Marais found no one interested.

Language is of vital importance to all minority groups. Without the
language being the medium of instruction at some schools and universities,
the group, and with it the community inexorably disintegrates.

I am not and have never been a member of the Broederbond, but in the 1990s
I was grateful that the Broederbond was still functioning because I was
convinced it would help to ensure that the new government would guarantee
the right to receive education in Afrikaans at both school and university
level. But even in the final stage of the negotiations the NP did not make
sure all the loopholes were closed for those majoritarians in the ANC –and
I believe this faction was comprised mostly of Kader Asmal and some other
members of the ANC’s exile faction- who drove the agenda of English as the
only effective national language.

In the negotiations for a final constitution some NP members became
increasingly concerned about the vagueness on the issue of language of
instruction at both schools and universities. Jacko Maree, who was one of
them, told me that he and some colleagues approached Ramaphosa, chairperson
of the Constitutional Assembly, about their concerns. He pointed out that
the NP negotiators had left him in the dark over the importance their party
attached to education.[8]

And indeed when the Constitutional Court referred the draft final
constitution back to Parliament the NP raised no concerns about the
language issue. The ANC had no reason to believe that the NP was unhappy
about it.

It was the DA under Tony Leon and Helen Zille who took up the issue of
access to Afrikaans-medium schools and universities as a right on which
citizens could rely.

Part of the problem lies with the Afrikaner community, The loss of power
and the disintegration of the NP have led to a state comparable to a wheel
whose hub had been removed. The rim is still there but the spokes are lying
about and no one knows how to put the hub back. It is extremely difficult
to mobilise Afrikaans-speakers of all colours on the vital issue of the
constitutionally protected right to receive education in one of the
official languages.

What makes matters worse is the attitude some university principals and
council chairman have, who think the issue of language of instruction is
the university’s “own affair” on which it and it alone can decide.

Dr. Rolf Stumpf who was at one stage Deputy Vice Chancellor of Stellenbosch
University put the opposite view well: “No higher-level development could
occur without the Afrikaans-speaking community’s active co-operation. As
regards the issue of diversity he said: “I have always believed that
Stellenbosch should remain an Afrikaans university from a
national-diversity perspective – diversity clearly implies much more than
just race and gender. Language coupled with culture are also important
considerations for diversity.”

Sadly the current Stellenbosch University council and management happen to
think that rising on the world rankings of universities is of greater

In 2017 several eminent scholars warned against the obsession of top South
African universities with the ranking system in which only well-endowed
universities could effectively compete.

Not only do our universities lack the resources to compete in the world
university rankings but it aslso leads to the neglect of the communities
that they were supposed to serve in the first place. Abroad, several
experienced university administrators begun expressing severe doubt about
the value of such rankings except for well-endowed top universities.

The list published by the Centre for World University Rankings show that
between 2016 and 2017 the ranking of the top South African universities all
fell by twenty points or more.

*Drop in ranking of some of top SA universities, 2015-2017*:

University of Witwatersrand to 176th

University of Cape Town to 265th,

University of Stellenbosch to 329th

University of Pretoria to 697th

The International Centre for World University Rankings, which ranks a
thousand universities shows SU falling from 330th globally (3rd in South
Africa) in 2017 to 448 5th in South Africa) in 2018.[9]

Philip Altbach and Ellen Hazelkorn sounded this warning: “The ranking
system perverts the true function of the university: namely to transfer the
knowledge and skills the graduates would need in the communities they would
one day serve.”[10]

By 2018 Afrikaans was used as a language of instruction in all courses at
only one of the country’s 37 university campuses (the Potchefstroom campus
of University of the North-West). At Stellenbosch University a fifth of the
lecturers recently indicated that they are unable to teach in Afrikaans,
puting a huge question mark behind management’ claim that there will always
be a place for Afrikaans.

In the History department, established in 1904, where I was first a student
and then a lecturer for many years, no Afrikaans-medium teaching takes
place. A Dutch/Afrikaans history tradition, of which I feel very much part,
is on the brink of extinction.

The community that has suffered most is the Afrikaans-speaking brown people
forming a majority language community in the Western Cape.

In the mid-1980s large numbers of black students started flocking to the
University of the Western Cape (UWC) established in terms of the apartheid
policy for the brown people. It put the management under huge pressure to
replace Afrikaans with English as medium of instruction. Recently Jaap
Durand, Deputy Vice Chancellor at the time, recounted these events as

‘Our experience at UWC was that when we allowed blacks as students,
although it clashed with government policy, they began to flock in large
numbers to UWC. As a result we were compelled to make English the primary
medium of instruction. The result was that the academic performance of our
brown students declined markedly. Their limited command of English was a
serious handicap. The ability of most blacks to communicate in the class
rooms were equally poor. I make no apology for our decision. UWC was in the
throes of our battle against apartheid and we had to accept the
consequences of our decision. As a result we were not prepared to subject
the issue to thorough research. But in retrospect I would say that I am not
far off the mark were I to assert that the brown Afrikaans-speaking
students were significantly disadvantaged as a result of our decision.”[11]

Presently the brown community has the lowest participation rate in
university education. Part of the reason is the low income of their
parents, while another is the tendency of parents to choose English as
medium of instruction even if the home language is Afrikaans. More than 50
per cent of the Afrikaans-speaking youths of the brown community attend
English – medium schools. But there is clearly a burgeoning interest in
Afrikaans in this community. At present the largest undergraduate class in
Afrikaans is at UWC.

In 2013 the Council on Higher Education commissioned a study to establish
the success rate of the different population groups in studying for
bachelor degrees during the period 1970 to 2010.The percentage of white and
Indian students awarded bachelor degrees rose from 18% to 29%. The figure
for blacks dropped from 11% to 9% and that of brown students sank from 10%
in 1970 to 6% in 2010.

The signs are that the performance of the latter group is deteriorating
further. These figures underline the importance of mother tongue education.
Desperate remedial measures are needed and it starts with the medium of

In the case of Stellenbosch University one can think of establishing a
fixed Afrikaans-medium stream and a fixed English medium stream. Students
apply for a particular stream and should not be allowed to switch streams
during their undergraduate studies. On high school level such a policy has
been applied with great success by Grey College in Bloemfontein.

If one uses the existing facilities for twelve instead of eight courses the
cost could be as low as 4% of the budget.

Mr Ramaphosa’s call “Send me” has made us prick up our ears. Nothing will
ensure the whole hearted co-operation of the Afrikaans - speaking community
with his presidency more than offering a fixed, secure and sustainable
place for Afrikaans both at school and university level.

Let me end with a story. In January 2000 I wrote a letter on behalf of a
couple of organisations complaining about the downscaling of Afrikaans by
the Mbeki government. He acknowledged the letter and said that he had
introduced an office in the presidency dealing specifically with language
and cultural issues. It was headed by Jacob Zuma, the Vice President.

On the appointed hour I arrived in Shell House accompanied by Dr. Van Zyl
Slabbert and Mr. Ton Vosloo. I few moments later Zuma arrived. He asked:
“What can I do for you gentlemen? I am just the baggage carrier of the ANC.”

There was no official present to take notes and we never had any response
to our requests.

When I told Jakes Gerwel the story he smiled wryly and said. “That is Jacob
Zuma for you.”

Mr. Ramaphosa: “We don’t want any Jacob Zumas to deal with the vital issue
of language, which so important to us as the Afrikaans - speaking
community. We also don’t want any other baggage carrier in the presidency
instructed with the task of setting up a toy telephone to talk to the
minorities. We want you. I can assure you the rewards will be rich.”

Michael Ignatieff, *Isaiah Berlin: A life* (London: Vitage, 1998), p.227.

Pieter Kapp, *Draer van ’n droom: Die geskiedenis van die Suid-Afrikaanse
Akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns, 1909-2009 *(Hermanus: Hemel en See Boeke,
2009), pp. 139-42.

SA Akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns, *Nuusbrief*, 33, 3, 1993.

Lawrence Schlemmer, ‘Liberalism in South Africa’, Milton Shain (ed.), *Opposing
Voices: Liberalism and Opposition in South Africa *(Johannesburg: Jonathan
Ball, 2006), p. 86.

Welsh, *The Rise and Fall of Apartheid*, p. 540.

Hermann Giliomee and Lawrence Schlemmer, *’n Vaste plek vir Afrikaans:
Taaluitdagings op kampus* (Stellenbosch: Sunmedia, 2007,pp. 36-43.

Letter from PG Marais to FW de Klerk and a memo from Marais to H Giliomee,
16 September 1993, and personal communication of the same date.

Interview with Jacko Maree, NP Member of Parliament, 21 April 1998.

International Centre for World University Rankings. 2017-18 edition

“Why universities should quit the ratings game,” *University World News,*
issue 442, Januay 2017.

E-mail communication, 3 April 2016


 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lgpolicy-list/attachments/20180611/aaade75e/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- 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

More information about the Lgpolicy-list mailing list