Language policy, linguistic hegemony and exclusion in the Zimbabwean print and broadcasting media
This article examines linguistic hegemony and linguistic exclusion in the Zimbabwean print and broadcasting media. The discussion is based on the fact that the media carry language, operate through language and contribute to language promotion and development. Therefore, this article argues that there is need for a sound and working language policy for the print and broadcasting media in Zimbabwe. The language used in information dissemination, public debates and communication can include or exclude some speech communities in the country. However, the language choices in the media in Zimbabwe demonstrate multilayered linguistic hegemonies where English is generally the dominant language, while Shona and Ndebele are hegemonic to the other languages in Zimbabwe. This situation is attributed to the fact that the broadcasting media in Zimbabwe are part of the colonial heritage; that there is a lack of a clear and consistent language policy of the media in Zimbabwe, which is reflective of the absence of a comprehensible national language policy; that the domination of the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation leaves no room for meaningful and authentic competing community radio and television stations; that the media in Zimbabwe are business and political organisations; and that the media in Zimbabwe are appendages of the global media system which favour the use of English.
Linguistic disenfranchisement, minority resistance and language revitalisation: The contributions of ethnolinguistic online communities in Zimbabwe
Abstract Zimbabwe is a multicultural nation with multiple ethnolinguistic groups. Since 1980, when the country attained its independence from colonial rule, the government has struggled to fit all linguistic and cultural representations in the public domain. This resulted in disenfranchisement and disillusionment of linguistic minorities. However, the subject of ethnicity is sensitive and is to some extent associated with undertones of regionalism and division. Against this background, the disenfranchised linguistic minorities have taken advantage of the liberative potential of social media and are regrouping in the virtual space; in the process forming vibrant ethnolinguistic online communities. This study critically analyses the motivations and purpose of ethnolinguistic online communities on Facebook. This is a netnographic study of 10 purposively selected Facebook groups of linguistic minorities in Zimbabwe. The study is grounded in the concepts such as hegemony, hidden transcripts and alternative media. The findings of the study show that ethnolinguistic online communities provide the disenfranchised linguistic minorities with space and agency for protesting against marginalisation and language shift, in the process promoting the use of their languages. This study is a significant contribution to the growing body of scholarship on the nexus between language politics and social media in Zimbabwe.
Early Missionaries and the Ethnolinguistic Factor During the ‘Invention of Tribalism’ in Zimbabwe
There is evidence from across the disciplines that at least some of the contemporary regional names of African tribes, dialects and languages are fairly recent inventions in historical terms. This article offers some evidence from Zimbabwe to show that missionary linguistic politics were an important factor in this process. The South African linguist Clement Doke was brought in to resolve conflicts about the orthography of Shona. His Report on the Unification of the Shona Dialects (1931) shows how the language politics of the Christian denominations, which were also the factions within the umbrella organization the Southern Rhodesia Missionary Conference, contributed quite significantly to the creation and promotion of Zezuru, Karanga and Manyika as the main groupings of dialects in the central area which Doke later accommodated in a unified orthography of a unified language that was given the name Shona. While vocabulary from Ndau was to be incorporated, words from the Korekore group in the north were to be discouraged, and Kalanga in the West was allowed to be subsumed under Ndebele. Writing about sixty years later, Ranger focusses more closely on the Manyika and takes his discussion to the 1940s, but he also mentions that the Rhodesian Front government of the 1960s and 1970s deliberately incited tribalism between the Shona and the Ndebele, while at the same time magnifying the differences between the regional divisions of the Shona, which were, in turn, played against one another as constituent clans. It would appear then that, for the indigenous Africans, the price of Christianity, Western education and a new perception of language unity was the creation of regional ethnic identities that were at least potentially antagonistic and open to political manipulation. Through many decades of rather unnecessary intellectual justification, and as a result of the collective colonial experience through the churches, the schools and the workplaces, these imposed identities, and the myths and sentiments that are associated with them, have become fixed in the collective mind of Africa, and the modern nation states of the continent now seem to be stuck with them. Missionaries played a very significant role in creating this scenario because they were mainly responsible for fixing the ethnolinguistic maps of the African colonies during the early phase of European occupation. To a significant degree, these maps have remained intact and have continued to influence African research scholarship.