SPEAK OUT SEMINAR: LANGUAGE AND MULTILINGUALISM

15 OCTOBER 2015

Summary, either in English or in Afrikaans, by Johan Blaauw[1]

Welcome and introduction of guests: Prof Fika Janse van Rensburg welcomed all participants and introduced the panel members (see brief bios).

Prof Balfour, Dean of the Faculty of Education Sciences, opened the discussion by giving some background to the Speak Out Seminars and then proceeding to introduce the topic. Some of the points he raised formed recurring themes and were reflected in the other presentations.

The following were the most important aspects Prof Balfour touched upon:

  1. The struggle to find a lingua franca yet simultaneously to continue preserving and promoting other national languages is not uniquely South African but is something with which nations the world over grapple with. This he illustrated with the interesting example of the Yunnan province in China, where the people did not support Mandarin (because of its associations with the central government and the threat to regionalism), people rather preferred English. The reasons for preferring English sound very familiar to the South African ear: international, sophisticated, modern…
  2. Turning to SA history and policies governing language in education that allow for the promotion and use of all South African languages, he stated that these policies did not allow for preservation of languages in isolation of transformation ideals. If a school for example opts for a certain language as its sole medium of instruction, it automatically excludes non-speakers of that language. Hence schools opting for Afrikaans, mostly white Afrikaans-speakers are accommodated and hence privileged. Or if a school opts for two languages and parallel streaming takes place, especially if the one language is Afrikaans, language-based streaming is actually also race-based streaming. This would clearly not have been the intention of the policies governing language in education.
  3. Identity and culture are closely related. Finding a South African identity is inextricably linked to language and race. This makes dealing with multiculturalism difficult - not just in SA, but in many other countries (Britain is but one such example).
  4. Universities (academics, students) have a role to play in dealing with social issues. Examples of such involvement in social issues are the radical thinking in the 1960s at French universities and in the so-called "Sestigers" movement in South Africa. Intellectuals (not just established ones, but also young people, students) in every generation have to influence and change thinking concerning race, culture, gender and diversity – also about language development in higher education in South Africa. This is the scenario currently playing itself out at SA universities. Student anti-racial and anti-colonial sentiments afford universities, the NWU in particular, the opportunity to (re)open debates about what it means to belong "here".
  5. Does a multicultural society consist of separate groups each sequestered within their own culture but sharing the same country, or does it mean working, at state level but also at institutions like universities, to integrate communities so as to establish a trans-cultural identity? [Lindiwe Sisulu, according to Peter Bruce writing in the Rand Daily Mail this week, asked at the ANC's National General Council meeting last week: "How do we form a common South African identity?"] Multilingualism and how it inextricably linked to multiculturalism was a recurring theme in the discussions, as was the shaping of a South African identity.
  6. At universities [and in education at all levels], this will require the use of more than one language for purposes of teaching and learning. The challenge for universities is to grow and develop indigenous languages while remaining at the top of their game. An indigenous language as a lingua franca for education is not a serious consideration for such universities. Yet universities HAVE TO play a leading role in shaping thinking in this regard, away from one language, one university, one culture, the key of which may lie not in policies of functional multilingualism but rather in provision for additive multilingualism, such as at UKZN and Rhodes), where knowledge of an indigenous language has been made compulsory for communicative purposes and for some professional qualifications.

Next up was Prof Wannie Carstens, Director of the School of Languages of the NWU Potchefstroom Campus

Prof Carstens het die volgende 15 punte behandel:

  1. Meertaligheid is die prys van vryheid ná 1994. Die 1996-grondwet het baie verwagtinge geskep en belofte ingehou waarvan daar ongelukkig tot dusver min gekom het.
  2. Meertaligheid is ’n erkenning van menswaardigheid en van linguistiese regte. 'n Mens is slegs in jou eie taal volwaardig mens, en om iemand te verhinder om hierdie basiese mensereg van funksionering in jou eie taal op te eis, is 'n skending van sodanige reg.
  3. Meertaligheid is nie ʼn luukse nie, maar ʼn verpligting in SA. Ons moet dit oor en oor vir mekaar sê dat ons hierdie reg ingevolge die Grondwet het – en dit opeis.
  4. Meertaligheid impliseer dat tale gelyk is. Ongelukkig is daar ook sedert 1994 baie min hieromtrent gedoen. Baie mooi geluide is en word van regeringskant gemaak maar maar dit was weinig meer as lippediens.
  5. Meertaligheid sluit nie uit nie, maar in. Daar is die ou gesegde van hoe meer tale ek magtig is, hoe meer is ek volwaardig mens.
  6. Eentaligheid is beperkend – en verarmend. Sluit aan by vorige punt. Ons moet almal nog tale leer.
  7. Meertaligheid kán bestuur word. Daar is taalpraktisyns, en met innovasie kan maniere gevind word om hulle te benut om meertaligheid tot sy volle reg te laat kom.
  8. Meertaligheid – die politieke wil is nodig, maar dit ontbreek (soos bo genoem)
  9. Meertaligheid vra kreatiewe oplossings. Ons moet demografiese verskuiwings by universiteite hanteer, huidige toeganklikheid behou en nog meer toegangklik word.
  10. Meertaligheid is ʼn bate, nie ʼn las nie. Die taalberoepe en meertaligheid het ekonomiese waarde
  11. Meertaligheid impliseer taalontwikkeling, vir al ons tale. Tans doen Afrikaanssprekendes dit steeds, soos oor die afgelope eeu reeds, vir hulself, vir die liefde van die saak en meestal sonder vergoeding. Dit is eintlik nodig om taalontwikkeling as 'n akademiese spesialiseringsveld te vestig, en 'n mens sou selfs aan iets soos 'n leerstoel in taalontwikkeling kon dink.
  12. Meertaligheid is nie gelyk aan taalvernietiging nie. Inteendeel.
  13. Meertaligheid hou nie in dat een taal “meer gelyk” as ander tale is nie – die hegemonie van een taal moet verbreek word, want nie een taal het die reg om oor andere te heers nie.
  14. Meertaligheid verg dapper besluite van ʼn bestuur. In 2004 het die NWU 'n besluit geneem om die huidige roete te volg, met Afrikaans as primêre taal en toegang in Engels deur tolking. Nou moet daar egter deur bestuur aangepas en aanbeweeg word, veral om in Tswana te belê. Tye het verander en daar is, benewens dat dit die morele plig van tersiêre instellings is, 'n nuwe imperatief van die nasionale onderwysdepartement om die status van inheemse Afrikatale as akademiese tale te bevorder.
  15. Meertaligheid verg eerlikheid van ʼn bestuur. Feite moet aanvaar en by aangepas word. Sou die NWU byvoorbeeld meer in parallelmedium wil belê, moet die implikasies daarvan besef en aanvaar word.

Volgende aan die beurt was prof Theo du Plessis van die Universiteit van die Vrystaat se Eenheid vir Taalfasilitering en bemagtiging. Hy het uit die uitnodiging tot deelname twee punte oor taal in hoër onderwys geïdentifiseer wat hy in sy aanbieding sou behandel:

a) The role of universities in fostering multicultural awareness

b) Language and exclusion and the perceived alignment of language policy to other policies concerning access to, and success in, the University

1) Theowould focus on (2), interpret it, and put some suggestions on the table by way of conclusion. He continued by pointing out that the current debates and restlessness around language involves the position of Afrikaans as one of the accepted languages of higher education. The picture of the restlessness on all campuses where Afrikaans still features look more or less the same. He illustrated this by discussing the debate at the UFS, quoting all the well-known arguments against Afrikaans and for English.

2) Hy wys uit dat die probleem van hegemonie van een taal en die stryd van ander tale teen sodanige hegemonie dalk vir Suid-Afrikaanse instellings na 'n groot probleem lyk, maar dit ui 'n wêreldperspektief niks uniek of groot is nie, hoewel dit natuurlik vir ons so voel, en dit inderdaad is.

3) Hy wys daarop dat die Grondwet self en dan ook sy taalklousules, die erkenning van elf amptelike tale, die Wet op Gebruik van Amptelike tale en ander taalreëlings duidelik uit 'n reeks kompromieë bestaan, en spesifiek wat Afrikaans en Engels betref, dit gebaseer is op die praktiese gebruikswaarde van hierdie twee tale. Hy verwys dan ook na die taalbeleid vir hoër onderwys (TBHO) van 2002 wat inderdaad die gevestigde posisie van en die behoefte aan die behoud van hierdie twee tale erken.

4) Die TBHO bepaal dan dat pertinente modelle ontwikkel moet word om Afrikaans se posisie te handhaaf, maar bepaal verder ook dat daar nie meer "Afrikaanse" of selfs "Engelse" universiteite sal wees nie, maar slegs Suid-Afrikaanse universiteite.

5) Dit wil voorkom of die minister van onderwys, waarskynlik aan die hand van verskeie belangrike verslae wat sedert 2002 verskyn het, die TBHO wil hersien om meer aandag aan die ander nege amptelike tale te gee. Hierdie verslae is:"...2003 se Development of Indigenous Languages as Mediums of Instruction in Higher Education(Ministerial Committee, 2003), 2011 se Charter for Humanities and Social Sciences (DHET (Department of Higher Education and Training), 2011) en 2012 se Ministerial Advisory Panel on African Languages in Higher Education (Ministery of Higher Education and Training, 2012)" ... en die "2008 Report of the Ministerial Committee on Transformation and Social Cohesion and the Elimination of Discrimination in Public Higher Education Institutions".

6) Die belangrikste boodskap hieruit is dat die ander nege tale in hoër onderwys aangewend en ontwikkel moet word sonder om noodwendig van die Afrikaans studente iets weg te neem, en dat die verpligte aanleer van hierdie tale dringend noodsaaklik geword het.Ten spyte van hierdie klaarblyklike pogings tot inklusiwiteit, bly die persepsie dat die gebruik van Afrikaans uitsluitend is steeds duidelik deurkom. En dan is daar die populistiese aandrang op Engels, wat in skrille kontras met die voorgenoemde steun vir meertaligheid staan.

7) Prof Du Plessis herhaal wat die ander sprekers ook gesê het, naamlik dat universiteite 'n plig het om hul studente as behoorlik meertalig gekwalifiseerde mense die wêreld in te stuur. Hy sluit dan af met 'n reeks taalingrepe wat kan bydra tot die skep van 'n gelyke taalomgewing wat kan verhoed dat die weg van middelmatigheid (waar almal ewe swak in Engels werk) gevolg word (verbatim aangehaal uit Prof Du Plessis se aanbieding):

  1. Institusionaliseer tweetalige onderwys, ʼn stelsel wat geïntegreerde, individuele tweetaligheid oplewer. Dit kan gedoen word deurdat studente sommige modules in Engels volg en ander in Afrikaans of waar moontlik in een van ons ander tale. Of aanvullende leergeleenthede (byvoorbeeld tutoriale, prakties ensovoorts) kan in die ander huistale as Engels of Afrikaans geskep word. Hoe ook al, soos in die Fribourg/Freiburg-model moet daar sanksionering bestaan vir die aanwending van meer as een onderrigtaal deur ʼn tweetalige uitkoms te spesifiseer. Resultaat: Kwalifikasie dat tweetalig onderrig is
  2. Institusionaliseer kommunikatiewe taalvaardigheid in ʼn addisionele Suid-Afrikaanse taal. Studente kan byvoorbeeld gemeenskapsleerkrediete verwerf om ʼn module of twee in ʼn taal wat nie as onderrigtaal gebruik word nie, aan te bied.
  3. Institusionaliseer taalsteun binne die onderrigsituasie. Dit sou onder meer inhou dat soveel as moontlik aanvullende leermateriaal ook beskikbaar gestel word in tale wat nie as hoofonderrigtale gebruik word nie.
  4. Institusionaliseer die intellektualisering van ons inheemse tale. Stel byvoorbeeld fondse beskikbaar vir die vertaling van belangrike akademiese werke in ons eg Suid-Afrikaanse tale, loof pryse uit vir uitnemende vakbydraes in hierdie tale, rig skryfkursusse in hierdie tale in ensovoorts. Ek glo die NWU doen al sulke dinge.

8) Meertaligheid kos geld, maar wat gaan dit ons kos aan wat ons verloor as ons dit nie doen nie? (Hy haal wyle Kas Deprez van Leuven hieroor aan: "Meertaligheid kos, maar eentaligheid kos meer.") Daar is nie maklike en goedkoop kitsoplossings nie. Maar ons moet daarteen waak dat ons nie die fondament van die meertalige skikking wat bereik is te erodeer nie.

Laastens, Prof Vic Webb is ongelukkig weens omstandighede verhoed om by die seminaar uit te kom, maar het benewens sy aanbieding die onderstaande opsomming daarvan voorsien. Ons is hom hiervoor dank verskuldig.

Prof Vic Webb’s notes as regards the role of universities in fostering multicultural awareness through multilingualism are provided here.

1) As is generally known in the tertiary educational context, South African universities are not effectively multilingual (ML) or multicultural (MC) and are also not really contributing to the meaningful maintenance and promotion of the country’s rich linguistic and cultural diversity. This is inter alia clear from the fact that 21 of the 23 universities in the country use only English as language of learning and teaching (LoLT), that the role of Afrikaans in this regard has declined quite considerably over the past 20 years, that the African languages are not used in this function and that multilingualism and multiculturalism and their interrelationship do not figure as or in university courses in significant ways.

2) From a variety of perspectives this situation is quite serious: besides denying the constitutional, legal and governmental policy stipulations relating to language and culture, the establishment of a meaningful democracy in the (linguistically and culturally diverse) country is also negatively affected. In addition, non-English-speaking students in the tertiary sector are disadvantaged, and, language politically, the African languages remain minoritised low-function languages. Relatedly, the economic, educational and political power relations between the national official languages continue to be totally skewed, contrary, also, to the aims of the country’s National Development Plan.

3) The question is, then: what needs to happen regarding the management of the country’s official languages?Clearly, at least the following:

The African languages (including, of course, Afrikaans) must increasingly be used in public life, in high-function formal contexts, in parliament, in provincial and local government meetings, in courts at all levels, in post-matriculation colleges and in universities; and the African languages (and Afrikaans) need to attain (or retain) economic, educational, political and social value and prestige. In brief: the fundamental role of these languages in the facilitation of the human rights of all South African citizens needs to be acknowledged and realised.

4) Accepting these language-political aims one must, of course, also ask what needs to happen to achieve these objectives? A first step is to determine the current language-political status of the country’s African languages and Afrikaans, in particular their weaknesses.

In a recent survey of the sociolinguistic status of selected official languages in home-language communities, it was found that Zulu, Tswana, Pedi, Xhosa and Ndebele had the following weaknesses:

  • A lack of technical terminology for content subjects taught in schools and tertiary institutions
  • A non-acceptance of the fully standardised variety
  • A restricted capacity for use in high-function contexts such as high school, tertiary education and the professions
  • Their non-usage in such high-function formal contexts
  • Inadequately developed literacy levels in home language communities; and
  • Low levels of economic, educational, political and social value.

5) Given that South Africa has been a democracy for almost 20 years, that the majority of the members of parliament are home-language speakers of the African languages, that institutions such as the National Language Service of the Department of Arts and Culture and PanSALB have been operational for more than a decade, one has to ask why these weaknesses still exist?

6) Several probable reasons can be listed in this regard, such as: the global dominance of English and the belief that “English is enough”; a lack of understanding of the importance of language in public life; a restricted capacity for language policy implementation; the complexity of meaningful language promotion; the material and human costs of effective policy implementation, and, also, an absence of understanding of the interrelationship between language and culture, including multicultural awareness (MCA).Given the preceding, the question is, then: how can SAUs foster ML and MCA?In general terms, the answer to this question is obviously that SAUs should accept that they also have a responsibility to promote ML, MC and MCA and that they can do this through adopting clear policies of ML and MC as fundamental features of these universities, including their course material.