A constitutional language name, lost in translation and its impact on the identity of the first language speakers

Rakgogo, Tebogo Jacob; Huyssteen, Linda van

doi:10.1080/02572117.2019.1618015

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This confusion is confirmed by scholars such as Mojela (1997Mojela ( , 1999Mojela ( , 2007, Kretzer (2016), Rakgogo (2016), Rakgogo and Van Huyssteen (2018), Rakgogo (2019), and Rakgogo and Van Huyssteen (2019). Furthermore, the Parliamentary Joint Constitutional Review Committee of 2011, 2016, 2017 and 2020 shared a similar perspective with the researchers, and the members of the above-mentioned committee criticised the replacement of the Sesotho sa Leboa name with Sepedi in the final Constitution without proper consultation with the relevant stakeholders, more particularly the L1 speakers of the language under scrutiny.…”

Section: The Onomastic Status Quo On Sepedi and Sesotho Sa Leboa (Nor...mentioning

confidence: 82%

“…Touching on the onomastic and sociolinguistic confusion brought by the concurrent use of Sepedi and Northern Sotho (Sesotho sa Leboa) to refer to the same language, it is for this reason that scholars such as Mokgokong (1966), Mönnig (1967), Mojela (1997Mojela ( , 1999Mojela ( , 2007, Kretzer (2016), Rakgogo (2016), Rakgogo and Van Huyssteen (2018), Rakgogo (2019), Rakgogo and Van Huyssteen (2019) and Rakgogo and Zungu (2021) attest that Sepedi was a dialect that was at a later stage escalated to the status of an official language. This was because of the influence of the early missionaries who used Sepedi and Sekopa dialects as the foundational standard language.…”

Section: The Onomastic Status Quo On Sepedi and Sesotho Sa Leboa (Nor...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A blatant disregard of Section 6 (1) of the Constitution of South Africa by higher education institutions and language authorities: An onomastic discrepancy

Rakgogo

Zungu

2022

Literator

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary focus of this article is the onomastic discrepancies that are considered a blatant disregard of Section 6 (1) of the Constitution of South Africa (Act No. 108 of 1996). The article employs a qualitative research approach where text analysis is used, focusing on constitutional documentation, legislative frameworks on language-related matters and higher education policy documentations, as well as language policy documentation from the selected 10 South African universities that offered Sepedi as a first language or conversational module. It is found that there is a constitutional disregard by competent organisations such as universities, financial institutions, Google and language authorities (such as Pan South African Language Board, Sesotho sa Leboa National Language Body and Sesotho sa Leboa National Lexicography Unit), since most of the policies are inconsistent with Section 6 (1) of the South African Constitution, 1996. In summary, the article records that the policies supersede the Constitution, since the language name ‘Northern Sotho/Sesotho sa Leboa’ is the most used name to refer to the official standard language rather than its counterpart, Sepedi.

show abstract

Section: The Onomastic Status Quo On Sepedi and Sesotho Sa Leboa (Nor...mentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: The Onomastic Status Quo On Sepedi and Sesotho Sa Leboa (Nor...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A blatant disregard of Section 6 (1) of the Constitution of South Africa by higher education institutions and language authorities: An onomastic discrepancy

Rakgogo

Zungu

2022

Literator

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Critics may argue that the onomastic controversy of language names Sepedi and Sesotho sa Leboa (Northern Sotho) to refer to one and the same official language was promulgated by the Constitution that came into effect on 18 December 1996, after it was adopted and amended by the Constitutional Assembly on 11 October 1996. This confusion is confirmed by scholars such as Mojela (1997Mojela ( , 1999Mojela ( , 2007, Kretzer (2016), Rakgogo (2016), Rakgogo and Van Huyssteen (2018), Rakgogo (2019), and Rakgogo and Van Huyssteen (2019). Furthermore, the Parliamentary Joint Constitutional Review Committee of 2011, 2016 and 2017 shared a similar view.…”

Section: The Onomastic Status Quo On Sepedi and Sesotho Sa Leboa (Nor...mentioning

confidence: 83%

The onomastic possibility of renaming the Sepedi and Sesotho sa Leboa (Northern Sotho) language names to restore peace, dignity and solidarity

Rakgogo

Zungu

2021

Literator

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study embraced the onomastic possibility of renaming the Sepedi and Sesotho sa Leboa (Northern Sotho) language names that have caused and are still causing onomastic confusion to the first language (L1) speakers of the language under scrutiny, and also to the speakers of other languages. The study was conducted in 2019 at five selected South African universities – University of Johannesburg, University of South Africa, University of Limpopo, University of Venda and Tshwane University of Technology – which offered the language under investigation as an L1 module. In addition, language experts (practitioners) at the Pan South African Language Board (PanSALB) and its sub-structures and the National Department of Arts and Culture, including Limpopo and Gauteng Department of Sport, Arts, Culture and Recreation, were also involved in the study. Quota sampling was used to select all the 267 participants in the study. The study found that both Sepedi and Sesotho sa Leboa (Northern Sotho) language names are rejected by onomastic principles of naming an official language. An overwhelming majority of the participants opined that this language should be renamed, with the anticipation that the new name will bring peace, unity and solidarity to the L1 speakers of Sepedi.

show abstract

“…The Balobedu claim to speak Khelobedu, and not Sepedi. The same applies to the Amabhaça of the Eastern Cape (South Africa) who also claim to speak isiBhaça, and not isiXhosa or isiZulu (Rakgogo and Van Huyssteen 2019;Majola et al 2019;Rakgogo and Zungu 2021). Therefore, the issue of language and identity needs to be treated with caution because it is an emotive matter, and manifests various layers of coloniality; hence, this article's engagement with dialectology from a decolonial perspective.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Not on my watch: (Re)clamations of my Tshimanda, my identity, my language

Mandende,

Sebola,

Mudau

et al. 2024

SAJHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The standardisation process of a language is always a polemic undertaking, and Tshivenḓa is no exception. This article explores the Tshivenḓa dialects and the standardisation process that this language went through. The importance of language as a primary resource for an individual, social identification, and also as a means of learning and communication, cannot be overemphasised. Moreover, when different language varieties come into contact, acculturation is inevitable, i.e., linguistic and cultural elements from both sides will diffuse and “contaminate” each other’s languages and culture. However, this phenomenon is not fully researched, especially among the Tshivenḓa dialects. The lexicographers and terminographers, who are tasked with the development and maintenance of the Tshivenḓa language, seem to be “trapped” in the colonial and apartheid era, i.e., of selecting and elevating one dialect over others to represent a language. Since 1994, the year of the dawn of a democratic dispensation in South Africa, this process has proceeded at a snail’s pace. In this study, a qualitative, ethnographic approach was adopted, and data were collected through telephonic interviews, where six participants were purposefully and conveniently sampled. The findings of this study may benefit speakers of Tshivenḓa, lexicographers, terminographers, and all language practitioners, teachers, and learners. When people value their language and heritage, use it often without prejudice or hesitancy, and practice their culture and traditions, their identity, history, dignity, and heritage become preserved. Tshivenḓa, at the official level, may have many lexical items in its endeavour to carry out its function as an official language in different domains.

show abstract

A constitutional language name, lost in translation and its impact on the identity of the first language speakers

Cited by 8 publications

References 5 publications

A blatant disregard of Section 6 (1) of the Constitution of South Africa by higher education institutions and language authorities: An onomastic discrepancy

A blatant disregard of Section 6 (1) of the Constitution of South Africa by higher education institutions and language authorities: An onomastic discrepancy

The onomastic possibility of renaming the Sepedi and Sesotho sa Leboa (Northern Sotho) language names to restore peace, dignity and solidarity

Not on my watch: (Re)clamations of my Tshimanda, my identity, my language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About