The spread of urban vernaculars and their impact upon African language

policiesMaik Gibson

maik_gibson@sil.org

Africa International University, Nairobi&

SIL International

The problem

The urban vernaculars which are spreading in African cities are widely divergent from the 'standard' versions of these languages, further complicating implementation of policies which might use the student's first (or second) language.

Background factors

Primary education is best delivered in the child's first language (e.g. Bamgbose 2005, Heugh 2009), and failing that, in a variety which the child controls.

In most African countries primary education is in an ex-colonial language, or quickly switches to it.

The educational use of English etc. is more pronounced in urban environments.

Background factors “...urbanization constitutes a dramatic

change in way of life and social organization for African populations, and the results can be felt in a number of domains, including the social, political, cultural, economic, religious and linguistic arenas” McLaughlin (2009:1)

Background factors

Hence many African cities are the sites of significant language shift (e.g. Lieberson et al. (1981) & Gibson (forthcoming) for Nairobi, McLaughlin (2009:5,6) for Dakar), whether partial or complete, to a language of wider communication (LWC).

Background factors

Often, e.g in Kenya, the perception of the term 'mother tongue' is of ethnic language. Therefore Multi-lingual Education (MLE) may be seen as divisive, impractical, as the ethnic languages are not necessarily dominant in the children (e.g. Nairobi, Juba). The LWC is often ignored: pilot projects for MLE are often undertaken in the countryside.

Background factorsThe urban varieties, which evolved quickly,

are, at the very least, contact varieties, and as such tend to show significant divergence (and simplification) in comparison with the 'standard' languages.

An African phenomenon

Divergent urban varieties are found, for example, in Senegal (Dakar Wolof, McLaughlin 2001), Zambia (Town Bemba, Spitulnik 2008), South Africa (urban Xhosa, Thipa 1992, Street Setswana, Cook 2009), as well as Nairobi and Juba.

Nairobi SwahiliIs the target of most shifting in Nairobi (vs.

English).Not a commonly used phrase, but adopted

by Ud Deen (2005). Speakers will often say they do not speak Swahili well – ie Standard Swahili.

Is also often referred to as Sheng.Sheng properly refers to a youth

jargon/anti-language, but is used in opposition to Standard Swahili.

Nairobi Swahili

Differs from Standard Swahili in various respects, especially in a drastic simplification of the classifier system, reduced from around 14 to 4 classes (ie 2 genders, animate and inanimate), relative clause marking, and some verbal inflections. See Ud Deen (2005) and Bosire (2006).

The educational situation in Nairobi

English is the primary medium of instruction. Policy allows for Swahili as MoI, but this seems not to be practiced, except where Swahili is the subject.

Much Swahili teaching is focused on correcting the mistakes of pupils, especially in classifiers, rather than as a means of creative expression.

Nomenclature

Rudd (2008) and Bosire (2006) seem to call Nairobi Swahili Sheng. Rudd, along with Kiessling & Mous (2004) and Osinde & Abdulaziz (1997), claims it is a different language from Swahili, in fact a mixed language, while Bosire defines it as an example of hybridity, and Githiora (2002) as an urban dialect of Swahili.

Sheng

“Its syntax is basically Swahili, but through ingenious code-switching, it draws from the phonology, morphology and lexicon of Kenyan languages spoken in the city such as, but not restricted to, Luo, Gikũyũ

y

, Masai, Luhya...” (Githiora 2002:159)

Nairobi = Africa?

Many of the other situations in Africa appear similar to that of Nairobi (e.g Mesthrie (2008) for South African 'tsotsitaals'), with a divergent urban dialect, on which youth jargons are based.

Nairobi Western Cape (Mesthrie 2008)

Standard Standard Swahili

Standard/Rural Xhosa

Non-standard

Anti-language

Nairobi Swahili

^|||˅

Sheng

Urban Xhosa

^|||˅

(Xhosa-based) Tsotsitaal

Nairobi Swahili and ShengNairobians however seem to operate with the

terms Kiswahili and Sheng, which are lexicalised antonyms where there is no common vocabulary for the middle ground.

Prototypical Sheng is a constantly evolving jargon with rapid lexical replacement, but syntactically identical to Nairobi Swahili.

Mathri matatu (minibus) NS: matatu Kuchoka look ugly NS = be tired Idhaa time (Kikuyu) NS: saa

Nairobi SwahiliNo clear evidence of creolisation, though

the majority of speakers do have parents who spoke another language at home.

Verb, while it has some other forms, works the same as in Standard Swahili, unlike in 'Kenyan Pidgin Swahili'.

Language AttitudesEnglish is the language of formal situations,

Nairobi Swahili of informality and solidarity. Standard Swahili occupies another less customary level of formality, and is often controlled less well than English.

Sheng is used in billboard advertising and in cartoons (eg Shujaaz), but is (along with Nairobi Swahili) deemed inappropriate for formal purposes such as education.

Juba ArabicGenerally recognised as an Arabic-based

creole, rather than as a dialect of Arabic. Holes (2004:26): “Juba Arabic and (Ki)Nubi

are virtually unrecognizable as varieties of any kind of Arabic”

Ita gi amulu sunu bukura? (Logworong)You FUT do what tomorrow?e.g. unlike all varieties of Arabic, verbs are

not inflected, tense/aspect is marked by particles, person by pronouns.

Juba Arabic

First, but not ethnic, language, for many Juba-born children (Vincent 1985)

A language of identity:“Juba-Arabic is now considered as part of

the cultural heritage of the South. It has been localized, vernacularized and considered appropriate to symbolize a 'Southern identity'”. (Miller 2003: 118)

Juba ArabicJuba is the capital of autonomous Southern

Sudan, which has adopted English as the primary medium of instruction, with local languages used in rural areas, where materials are appropriate. English is not widely spoken, less than Arabic.

Juba Arabic is used in some contexts, eg in church, as a common language, and some portions of the Bible are available, in Latin script.

Language Attitudes

Serves as a marker of Southern identity Generally regarded as appropriate only for

informal contexts (except primarily orally in church), so attitudes for education not very positive.

Seen by many as a corruption of Arabic, so not a 'proper' language, but no associations with wider Arabo-Islamic identity, or any other ethnic or religious identity, beyond Southern Sudanese.

Juba vs. Nairobi

Both local varieties have significant negative attitudes towards use in education, but Juba Arabic is not mutually intelligible with either Sudanese dialect or Standard Arabic, and is usually written in a different script, such that it could, despite significant obstacles, be a suitable medium of instruction in primary education.

ConclusionsMost urban situations in Africa are more

Nairobi-like, while the normal continuum does not exist in Juba – what is clearly creolisation has taken place. The Nairobi situation in particular is problematic for the implementation of MLE, (like many other African conurbations) and this is one factor among many in the continuing hegemony of ex-colonial languages such as English.

ConclusionsLinguistic and sociolinguistic criteria can help

in making recommendations for language policies, but implementation is still deeply problematic. But a careful look is worthwhile.

Accelerated language change, such as in African cities, is a major problem for implementation of equitable language policies, though individual situations do differ.

Conclusions

The definition of language is dynamic, but necessary. Could a significant Sheng/ Nairobian/ Urban Kenyan identity arise which would support the sociolinguistic identification of Nairobi Swahili as an autonomous variety, usable, eg, in education?

ReferencesBamgbose, Ayo. (2005). Mother-tongue education. Lessons from the Yoruba Experience. In: Languages of Instruction for African

Emancipation: Focus on Postcolonial Contexts and Considerations, ed. by Birgit Brock-Utne and Rodney Kofi Hopson, 210-234. Cape Town: CASAS.

Bosire, Mokaya. 2006. Hybrid Languages: The Case of Sheng. In Selected Proceedings of the 36th Annual Conference on African Linguistics, ed. Olaoba F. Arasanyin and Michael A. Pemberton, 185-193. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. accessed online at http://www.lingref.com/cpp/acal/36/paper1423.pdf

Cook, Susan (2009). “Street Setswana vs. School Setswana: Language Policies and the Forging of Identities in South African Classrooms” in Kleifgen and Bond (eds.) The Languages of Africa and the Diaspora. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 96-118.

Heugh, Kathleen (2009). “Into the cauldron: An interplay of indigenous and globalised knowledge with strong and weak notions of literacy and language education in Ethiopia and South Africa” Language Matters: Studies in the Languages of Africa. 40:2. 166-89.

Gibson, Maik. (forthcoming). Language Shift in Nairobi. In Proceedings of the 6tth World Congress on African Linguistics. Cologne: Koeppe

Githiora, Chege. (2002). Sheng: Peer language, Swahili dialect or emerging Creole? Journal of African Cultural Studies 15, 2: 159-81.

Holes, Clive (2004). Modern Arabic: structures, functions, and varieties. Washington: Georgetown University Press

Kiessling, Roland and Maarten Mous. (2004). “Urban Youth Languages in Africa”. Anthropological Linguistics 46(3): 303-41.

Lieberson S., Dil A. and McCabe E. 1981. “Domains of Language Usage and Mother Tongue shift in Nairobi”. in Lieberson and Dil Language Diversity and Language Contact. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 249-262

McLaughlin, Fiona (2001) “Dakar Wolof and the configuration of an urban identity” Journal of African Cultural Studies 14/2, 2001, p. 153-172

ReferencesMcLaughlin, Fiona (2009). The Languages of Urban Africa. London: Continuum.

Mesthrie, Rajend (2008) “I've been speaking Tsotsitaal all my life without knowing it” Towards a unified account of Tsotsitaals in South Africa. In Meyerhoff and Nagy Social Lives in Language: socioloinguistics and multilingual speech communities. 69-95

Miller, Catherine (2002) . Juba Arabic as a Way of Expressing a Southern Sudanese Identity in Khartoum. In Contemporary Arabic Dialects. Proceedings of the 4rth Aida Meeting. A. Youssi & al. (eds.), Rabat, 2000, p. 114-122.

Osinde, K. & Abdulaziz, M. (1997). Sheng and Engsh: the development of mixed codes among the urban youth in Kenya. International Sociology of Language, vol. 125, pp 43-63

Rudd, Philip. (2008). Sheng: the mixed language of Nairobi. PhD thesis, Ball State University.

Spitulnik, Debra (1998) T he Language of the City: Town Bemba as Urban Hybridity. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 8:1: 30-59

Thipa, H.M. (1992). The difference between urban and rural Xhosa varieties. South African journal of African languages, 12 (Supplement 1)

Ud Deen, Kamil (2005). The Acquisition of Swahili. Benjamins: Amsterdam.

Vincent, George Bureng (1985) Juba Arabic from a Bari perspective. In Dihoff, Ivan Current approaches to African linguistics, Volume 1 71-92