LANGUAGE AND UNDERDEVELOPMENT
By Otieno Amisi
When in January last year the African Union declared 2006 as the year of African languages, they had not prepared themselves for
Kenya’s latest onslaught on language and literature.
The AU summit, held in Khartoum, Sudan, resolved that to protect the linguistic and literary diversity of Africa from the
ravages of (neo) colonization, there was need to create and enforce a raft of policies that would be both inclusive
and supportive of local languages.
It is this context that a recent report that Kenyan universities plan to phase out departments of
literature (Kwamchetsi Makokha, Sunday Nation 23rd August 2007) is both shocking and disgusting.
The onslaught against arts-based courses, and especially language and literature, is nothing new in Kenya.
What is surprising is the nonchalance with which our supposed defenders of language have tended to
accept harmful and drastic changes
to the teaching of language and literature. Kenya’s new onslaught on the already besieged study of African
languages and literature must be condemned with the vehemence that recently accompanied the controversial Media Bill.
In the early 1990s, a host of pro status-quo scholars championed the abolition of a noble course called Black Aesthetics.
Since then, our universities, prompted by a few apologists, have proceeded to diminish the place of literature, language
and culture, and even when they opened up to foreign languages like Japanese, Chinese and French, the focus has been on science.
Now, three decades after Taban lo Liyong, Owuor Anyumba and Ngugi wa Thiongo struggled to hoist African literature
and languages into the centre of higher education, short sighted policy makers are busy perpetuating foreign languages
and ideology in our schools.
It will be remembered that the literary gurus successfully championed for the creation of a department of literature at
the University of Nairobi, as opposed to the department of English.
This development not only widened the frontiers of cultural studies, but also helped place African thought
and culture at the centre of national and international debate.
The spirit of the time was that international dialogue could not be complete until Africa was included.
So Achebe and Soyinka’s worldviews became an integral part of any world debate worth its salt.
It is shocking that nearly two decades after the abolition of the department of English, and
despite the widely touted growth of democratic space, the phenomenal growth of the media and
increased political tolerance, enemies of free speech and creativity still abound.
Enemies of literature and the arts out there are still legion. What’s more, people in positions of power and
authority do not give serious thought to the importance of literature, language and culture in national development.
They are certainly not making any attempts to promote the growth of literature, yet these are crucial elements in developing
a national conscience.
As a teacher of literature, I am often infuriated when grammar, syntax and other aspects of language are squeezed into
the pulse of poetry and richness of oral literature and the theatrical intellect of dramatists.
How do we expect children to appreciate their cultures, national heritage and languages if we continue
to squeeze the study of literature out of the school system? How do we expect our youth to understand Shakespeare
if they do not have enough time to study language in the first place? This integration thing is a sham.
By squeezing literature back into the departments of ‘English’ university authorities are no better than the colonialists
of yore. They are crowding the corridors of higher education with intellectual zombies, an entire generation of semi-literate
people who are educated, but not, as Paulo Freire would put it, ‘conscientized.’
Many graduates today – whether of the arts or sciences, do not give a hoot about their language,
history or culture, and therefore by extension, their mother country.
The mere thought of abolishing literature from the formal university system means there are still by far
too many illiterate people who fear that the study of literature turns people into demagogues, and that the genre turns students
into critics, rebels and outright saboteurs.
But is it perhaps time to abandon literature? Isn’t the struggle for liberation, with its call to defend our motherland,
over? If the war is over, was it won, or did we simply give up in despair?
Why do we throw up our arms and submit sheepishly to modern day imperialism? Or does it not matter that our
children sip coca cola and chatter incessantly and intimately about European footballers when they cannot
count five heroes of the independence struggle? Maybe it doesn’t matter?
When I was admitted to study literature at Kenyatta University many years ago, I was forced to study language
against my will. The reason was that since I was taking education, and was going to be a teacher of literature,
(it was the time when Integrated English came into the syllabus), I would be better suited to teach literature if
I also studied English. Though I enjoyed the study of linguistics, I did not care much for the language of colonization.
I loved literature, and I still do. Because the study of literature nurtures creative thinking and instills a sense of
patriotism. Now, shrewd leaders, like scholars of culture and history, should know that there is a strong
connection between language and the enslavement or liberty of a people and their capacity for development.
Apartheid and its nonsense about linguistic superiority is gone, but experiences of African countries since
political independence indicates that there is even greater need to raise consciousness about language and link
it to development if our nations are to join the list of industrialized nations.
Though science and technology are crucial to industrialization, science alone with a meager sprinkling of the arts is
not enough.
The study of literature, especially, props up industrialization by instilling a sense of national pride and a deep
rooted love for our culture and our peoples. It is even more important that education systems inculcate in people
this sense of patriotism in both ordinary people and decision makers.
The Languages of Africa are a diverse set of languages. All over the continent, European languages
have a great deal of influence due to the recent history of colonization. According to Wikipedia, there
are an estimated 2,000 languages spoken in Africa. African languages such as Swahili, Hausa, and Yoruba,
are spoken by millions of people. Yet there is little literature in these languages, because conventional publishing
still puts undue emphasis on print. Educationists and policy makers don’t seem worried that many other languages,
like Laal, Shabo, and Dahalo, which are spoken by only a few hundred people, may die out unless there is a concerted,
deliberate effort to promote them.At a time when the abundant linguistic diversity of many African countries has made
language policy an extremely important issue, why should the time allocated to the study of language and literature be diminished?
In recent years, African countries have become increasingly aware of the value of their linguistic inheritance.
Recent language policies are mostly aimed at multilingualism. For example, all African languages are considered
official languages of the African Union. And the growing media space has provided a niche for
indigenous languages to thrive. But we need to move beyond mere policy and enforce the use and study of local
languages and literature not only in universities, but also in schools.
Language and thought
A professor at the University of Yaoundé, Cameroon, Prince Kum’a Ndumbe III, writes:
“Language enables us to articulate our ideas, feelings, faith, dreams and vision of the world.
Language allows us to recount our everyday, to interrogate our past and plan our future.
It enables us to articulate constructed thought. And thought is a vehicle of development – or regression.
Thus through the power of thought and its practical or technical application, discoveries are made,
acquisitions are preserved, change comes about, predictions and probabilities are programmed.”
Curtailing the study of literature at any level is like tying our children’s tongues, thus killing our languages,
and with it our cultures, history, thought processes, and national pride. It is a direct, unashamed perpetuation of neo
colonialism.
The don argues that the colonial experience of African countries “applied the breaks to the articulation of the
collective thought of the African peoples, and the coloniser’s language was imposed as the only officially
recognised language.”
He continues, “African languages were condemned to the domain of folklore as ‘vernacular languages’ or ‘patois’.
Thought that continued to be articulated by individuals in their ‘patois’, was not recognised and was marginalised.
In the colonial encounter between Europe and Africa in African lands, the articulation of thought thus suddenly
became a question of contested political power. Thought expressed in indigenous African languages became
marginalised. It was labelled primitive, barbarous, backward, incapable of intellect, incapable of communicating progress
or development.”
One can detect more or less the same hostile attitude towards literature, languages and the arts today.
Everyone is crazy about science, law, medicine, and if your thoughts are not expressed in ‘scientific’ language
(read NGO speak), no one wants to listen to you. Every project must be tailored towards some ‘millennium development
goal.’ The language must appeal to western nations who hold the dollar and the power to vet and fund ideas.
So anything outside this realm, like national pride and identity or culture, or indigenous knowledge, is shunned,
even though it may be more important in the long run.
If you want to understand our obsession with the west, with this polythene bag philanthropy, with visa cards and
Goldenberg, you need only to look at our education system. Our schools are churning out hundreds of thousands
of young people for whom ‘home’ and its indigenous language is an awkward, backward, non profit, even non existent
or meaningless. To many young people, local languages are a lifeless unreality, while by extension, everything foreign
is better, superior, or chic, or ‘cool.’ So fanaticism for the European language, like its football league is frenetic, maddening
even; young adults speak English with an American accent, much as they worship English football as if it were
Gor Mahia or AFC Leopards.
Any urban chap these days can tell you what Alex Fegurson ate for breakfast this morning,
even if they have never heard of Moyale or Butere. Or why Beyonce has just had a tiff with her latest boyfriend,
and will not write two sentences about Dedan Kimathi or Julius Nyerere.
It is no wonder, then, that we grow up to become mother-haters, impetuous looters of public funds, preferring to
study and work abroad, always looking for a chance to flee this country, to fleece this country, and to stash away
cash in European banks, despite the government’s appeal in the slogan, ‘Najivunia kuwa Mkenya.’
Only a sustained study of literature can stem this brainwashing, this pandering to western values, this forced
dependency on importation. Only a more serious attention to the teaching and learning of language will save us
from this powerlessness that has impoverished us in so many ways.
Though physically absent, the colonizer maintains a remote-controlled stranglehold over our language, thinking and
even national planning. Our African people no longer think or articulate ideas in our own languages.
Does your proposal go against donor wisdom? Do you use ‘acceptable’ language? Do you speak MDG language?
Europe has thus continued to use its languages to conquer and dominate peoples whose territories remain occupied
not militarily, but by what looks like charitable advice, propped up by philanthropy or even benevolence.
This state of affairs has been so deeply ingrained in our psyche that many people no longer see it, or simply accept it as inevitable.
While for centuries, all public support for the articulation of their ideas was suppressed, now there is simply no forum
for local languages today. The space for local literature is becoming smaller and smaller. Indigenous languages have
all but disappeared from public spaces and are virtually unknown in administration, schools, media, and even in
the so called ‘acculturation’ churches.
Our intellectuals still pass through a thinly veiled filter of linguistic domination, perpetuated by the media,
and articulated in the language of the neo colonizer. In turn, they end up convinced that Africa cannot, can never
produce original thought to steer progress or development. Ideas of progress can only be articulated in the
language of the European colonizer. Like MDG and Vision 2030.
Yet it must be remembered that Africa is only a marginal, peripheral continent, very much of secondary concern in
the global strategy of power sharing in the world. According to this subtly stated strategy, Africa must be severely
contained, marginalised, controlled, weakened and dominated in order that the winners of globalisation may
continue to draw from it what they need to nail their power and globalised supremacy.
And the killing of African languages is a vital tool for this continued domination.
African populations do not even really understand this continued global dominance, or are too weak to challenge it.
They remain for the most part ignorant of the concepts, discourses and programmes elaborated for them at national
as well as global levels. They did not conceive, and do not even have access to, the debate about the fate reserved
for them in the framework of globalised competition.