scholarly journals OPERATIONALIZING KISWAHILI AS A SECOND OFFICIAL LANGUAGE

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Miriam Osore ◽  
Brenda Midika
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
South African ◽  
National Language ◽  
Language Usage ◽  
Official Language ◽  
African Language ◽  
Language Of Instruction ◽  
Policy Models ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
The Republic

In the last decade, Kenyans became extremely aware of the issue of language and language usage in the country. This awareness led to the recognition of Kiswahili as one of the official languages of Kenya. The Kenyan 2010 Constitution recognizes that the national language of the Republic of Kenya is Kiswahili while the official languages are Kiswahili and English (Chapter 2, Section 7 (2). Previously, English was used as the official language and language of instruction in education sector while Kiswahili was the national language. This paper is anchored around the success of the Canadian and South African models of promoting two or more official languages. The paper seeks to borrow from the language policies of the two nations and make recommendations on how the new language policy can be operationalized in tandem with the spirit of the new constitution promulgated in 2010. The paper seeks to isolate the strengths of bilingual language policy as exemplifed by both Canadian and South African language policy models that can effectively contribute to the promotion of Kiswahili as an official language in Kenya.

scholarly journals National language issue in Soviet Azerbaijan (1920’s)

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 141-152
Author(s):  
Khagan Balayev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Executive Committee ◽  
National Language ◽  
Official Language ◽  
Soviet Power ◽  
Socialist Republic ◽  
Soviet Socialist Republic ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Military

On April 28, 1920, the Peoples Republic of Azerbaijan was overthrown as a result of the intrusion of the military forces of Russia and the support of the local communists, the Soviet power was established in Azerbaijan. The Revolutionary Committee of Azerbaijan and the Council of Peoples Commissars continued the language policy of the Peoples Republic of Azerbaijan. On February 28, 1921, the Revolutionary Committee of Azerbaijan issued an instruction on the application of Russian and Turkish as languages for correspondences in the government offices. On June 27, 1924, the Azerbaijani Soviet Socialist Republic executed the resolution of the second session of the Central Executive Committee of Transcaucasia and issued a decree “on the application of the official language, of the language of the majority and minority of the population in the government offices of the republic”. Article 1 of the said decree declared that the official language in the Azerbaijani Soviet Socialist Republic was Turkish.

Language Policy Execution

2020 ◽  
pp. 579-614
Author(s):  
Paul Hendry Nkuna
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Language Policy ◽  
South African ◽  
Indigenous Languages ◽  
Public Institution ◽  
Ministry Of Education ◽  
Language Policies ◽  
South African Universities ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
The Republic

South Africa is a multilingual country with 11 official languages. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, provides that every learner may use the official language of his or her choice in any public institution of the country. The Language Policy for Higher Education (Ministry of Education, 2002) requires all South African universities to develop and execute language policies. This chapter focuses on language policy execution by South African universities. The emphasis is on the execution of language policy in relation to the promotion and development of the nine official indigenous languages, namely isiNdebele, isiXhosa, isiZulu, Sepedi, Sesotho, Setswana, siSwati, Tshivenda and Xitsonga.

Language Policy Execution

2017 ◽  
pp. 220-255
Author(s):  
Paul Hendry Nkuna
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Language Policy ◽  
South African ◽  
Indigenous Languages ◽  
Public Institution ◽  
Ministry Of Education ◽  
Language Policies ◽  
South African Universities ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
The Republic

South Africa is a multilingual country with 11 official languages. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, provides that every learner may use the official language of his or her choice in any public institution of the country. The Language Policy for Higher Education (Ministry of Education, 2002) requires all South African universities to develop and execute language policies. This chapter focuses on language policy execution by South African universities. The emphasis is on the execution of language policy in relation to the promotion and development of the nine official indigenous languages, namely isiNdebele, isiXhosa, isiZulu, Sepedi, Sesotho, Setswana, siSwati, Tshivenda and Xitsonga.

scholarly journals The Language Question in Cameroon

2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
George Echu
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Mother Tongue ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Indigenous Languages ◽  
National Language ◽  
Education Administration ◽  
Official Language ◽  
National Unity ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
Main Components

In multilingual Cameroon, 247 indigenous languages live side by side with English and French (the two official languages) and Cameroon Pidgin English (the main lingua franca). While the two official languages of colonial heritage dominate public life in the areas of education, administration, politics, mass media, publicity and literature, both the indigenous languages and Cameroon Pidgin English are relegated to the background. This paper is a critique of language policy in Cameroon revealing that mother tongue education in the early years of primary education remains a distant cry, as the possible introduction of an indigenous language in the school system is not only considered unwanted by educational authorities but equally combated against by parents who believe that the future of their children lies in the mastery of the official languages. This persistent disregard of indigenous languages does not only alienate the Cameroonian child culturally, but further alienates the vast majority of Cameroonians who are illiterate (in English and French) since important State business is carried out in the official languages. As regards the implementation of the policy of official language bilingualism, there is clear imbalance in the use of the two official languages as French continues to be the dominant official language while English is relegated to a second place within the State. The frustration that ensues within the Anglophone community has led in recent years to the birth of Anglophone nationalism, a situation that seems to be widening the rift between the two main components of the society (Anglophones and Francophones), thereby compromising national unity. The paper is divided into five major parts. After a brief presentation of the country, the author dwells on multilingualism and language policy since the colonial period. The third, fourth and last parts of the paper focus on the critique of language policy in Cameroon with emphasis first on the policy of official language bilingualism and bilingual education, then on the place of indigenous languages, and finally on the national language debate.

scholarly journals Language Policy in Switzerland

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elżbieta Kużelewska
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
National Language ◽  
German Language ◽  
Official Language ◽  
Success Story ◽  
Federal Constitution ◽  
The Status ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
Recent Project ◽  
National Languages

Abstract Switzerland is often referred to as a success story for handling its linguistic and cultural diversity. Traditionally four languages have been spoken in relatively homogeneous territories: German, French, Italian and Rhaeto- Romanic (Romansh). The first three have been national languages since the foundation of the Confederation in 1848; the fourth became a national language in 1938. In effect, The Law on Languages, in effect since 2010, has regulated the use and promotion of languages and enhanced the status of Romansh as one of the official languages since 2010. While Swiss language policy is determined at the federal level, it is in the actual practice a matter for cantonal implementation. Article 70 of the Swiss Federal Constitution, titled “Languages”, enshrines the principle of multilingualism. A recent project to create legislation to implement multilingualism across the cantons, however, has failed. Thus Switzerland remains de jure quadrilingual, but de facto bilingual at best, with only a handful of cantons recognizing more than one official language (Newman, 2006: 2). Cantonal borders are not based on language: the French-German language border runs across cantons during most of its course from north to south, and such is also the case for Italian.

Majority language instruction as a basis for plurilingual education – Mehrheitssprachenunterricht als Basis plurilingualer Erziehung (MARILLE)

2011 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 404-406
Author(s):  
Klaus-Börge Boeckmann
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Native Language ◽  
Language Instruction ◽  
Official Language ◽  
Language Of Instruction ◽  
Native Languages ◽  
Second Languages ◽  
Project Title

This project is unusual as an ECML project in that it explicitly does not deal with foreign or second languages. Our working term ‘majority language’, used in the project title, denotes a language variously referred to as a ‘national’ or ‘official’ language, a ‘language of instruction’ or a ‘language of education’ in Beacco & Byram's 2007 report (http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/guide_niveau3_EN.asp), but that has recently been termed a ‘language(s) of schooling’ in the 2009 project of that name by the Council of Europe's Language Policy Division (www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Schoollang_EN.asp). Such a language is usually the native language of a majority of pupils in a country, but not necessarily in an individual class or school, where many other native languages might be represented.

De Nederlandse taal als luxe-waar op de Surinaamse markt?

1979 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 137-154
Author(s):  
Hugo W. Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Intermediate Stage ◽  
European Population ◽  
National Language ◽  
Official Language ◽  
The Status ◽  
Dutch Language ◽  
The Government ◽  
Attitudinal Changes

In the multilingual community of Surinam the official language is Dutch. This language has occupied the official status during almost three centuries of colonial government, the intermediate stage of self-government (as part of the kingdom of the Netherlands from 1954 through 1975) and after complete independence in 1975. Though the status of official language did not change, a different language policy had to be adopted with respect to different role components in each of four historical periods. The language policy adopted in each of these periods can be considered the result of social changes which took place, and of attitudinal changes with respect to the functioning of other languages in the community. The changing role of the Dutch language in the four periods is discussed in terms of its changing socio-linguistic profile. The first change was that from an ethnic group specific position (the European population only) to an obligatory position which concerned the whole population. In each of these two periods Dutch was used in relation to all main functions (communication* education., religion and literature). During the period in which Dutch played the ethnic specific role the language Sranan was used as a promoted language to perform the same functions for the slave population of the 17th, 18th and 19th century. This language was also used as language of communication between the Europeans and the slaves. The social change from a slavery society to a society of citizens only had forced the governement to discourage the use of Sranan and to consider Dutch the only language in the country. This obligatory position was eventually disregarded in favor of a partial role of the Dutch language in a multicultural society. The recognition by the government of a multitude of cultural ambitions has led it to accept the possibility of the sharing of functions among languages. Especially with respect to intergroupcoinmunication and literature, the recognition-of the role of Sranan as national language became the main feature of this period. However, the emergency of Surinam-Dutch, as a variety (xized language) of the Dutch language used by the majority of the Dutch speaking community in Surinam, has given the governement of the new republic of Surinam an opportunity to promote cultural integration by means of this language variety. Though this too will have to share functions with Sranan (inter-group communication, literature, etc.), it is suggested that a stan-dardized version might not only change its promoted language status into that of national official language but also give a better criterion to judge and to stimulate performances in education and literature.

Compulsory African language learning at a South African university

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Rudwick
Keyword(s):  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Policy ◽  
South African ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
English Language ◽  
African Language ◽  
The South ◽  
Language Management ◽  
Higher Education System ◽  
Vernacular Language

Abstract While many universities in the world are making provisions to include the English language in their institutional structure, the South African University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN) is opposing the hegemony of English in its institution. The University has launched a language policy and planning (LPP) strategy that makes provisions first to incorporate the vernacular language Zulu as language of learning and teaching, and second, to promote it as a subject. In this vein, the institution recently made an unprecedented decision for the South African higher education system. Since the first semester of 2014, a specific Zulu language module is a mandatory subject for undergraduate students who have no proficiency in the language. Although considered a watershed moment among many African language promoters, the mandatory ruling is fiercely discussed and debated in the institution and beyond. Theoretically grounded in Language Management Theory (LMT) and empirically based on semi-ethnographic fieldwork, this article examines the interplay between macro and micro language dynamics at UKZN in the context of the mandatory Zulu module. In juxtaposing interview discourses of language policy stakeholders with those of Zulu lecturers, the study reveals a stark discrepancy between macro and micro language management at this university. The article argues that this mismatch between the language policy intents and actual practices on the ground is symptomatic for South Africa’s language policy in education being shaped more by ideological interests than by pedagogical regards.

The Official Language Problem

1991 ◽  
Vol 85 (2) ◽  
pp. 495-514 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Pool
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Policy Maker ◽  
Official Language ◽  
Language Problem ◽  
Language Groups ◽  
Language Minorities ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
Elegant Solution

Polities and organizations use and require particular languages for official business. The choice of official languages is a vexing issue. Theorists, convinced that a fair language policy cannot be efficient, have despaired of an elegant solution. To investigate this apparent dilemma, I mathematically model the problem of choosing an efficient and fair language policy for a plurilingual polity. The policy designates official languages and taxes the language groups to pay for translation among the official languages. Contrary to prevailing wisdom, this model implies that a fair language policy can be efficient. But what if language groups rationally misrepresent the costs of using a nonnative official language? Even then, the policy maker can discover a fair language policy and, under some conditions, can use a cost-revelation procedure that discovers a fair and efficient language policy. The results challenge the claim that efficiency and practicality excuse the inferior treatment of language minorities.

Opvattingen Over Nederlands En Andere Talen Als Instructietaal Op Aruba En In Suriname

2009 ◽  
Vol 82 ◽  
pp. 57-68
Author(s):  
Sjaak Kroon ◽  
Jeanne Kurvers
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Linguistic Landscape ◽  
Official Language ◽  
Language Of Instruction ◽  
Clear Preference ◽  
Lay People ◽  
Educational Professionals ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Multilingual Societies

The Republic of Suriname in South America and the Carribean island of Aruba are both former Dutch colonies. After its independence in 1975 Suriname opted for maintaining Dutch as an official language and a language of education and also in Aruba, which is nowadays an autonomous part of the Kingdom of The Netherlands, Dutch remained the official language and the language of instruction in education. The fact that Suriname and Aruba are both multilingual societies - Suriname has some twenty different languages and in Aruba, apart from Dutch, Papiamento is the main language - over the years gave rise to heated debates about what language or languages should best serve as a medium of instruction in schools. This question was investigated by means of a survey that was administered with 200 respondents in the case of Aruba (educational professionals and lay people living in Aruba) and 315 in the case of Suriname (partly living in Suriname and partly in The Netherlands). The investigation showed that on Aruba lay people, among which parents of school going children, are the main advocates of Dutch as language of instruction in schools whereas educational professionals show a clear preference for including Papiamento as a language of instruction. In Suriname on the other hand, both groups of respondents showed a clear preference for using Dutch as a language of instruction. These outcomes seem to be related to differences in the linguistic landscape in Suriname and Aruba and to the different colonial history of the two countries.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document