Introduction
4. Data analysis and discussion
4.3. Analysis and interpretation of recorded data
4.3.3. Educational issues
In general, the interview data challenges the common belief that the English language is seen as a neutral language in South Africa, a belief that Ndebele (1994) challenged a decade ago when he said that "English is not an innocent language". In juxtaposing English with isiZulu, many interviewees emphasised the understanding of isiZulu as indigenous to South Africa. The participants further provide arguments in support of a rather primordial understanding of language, culture and identity in which isiZulu features as an agent for Zuluness. There are indications that suggest that sceptical views towards the English language are frequently linked to notions of strong ethnolinguistic identity formations based on isiZulu and a commitment to Zulu culture. The data collected from the interviews indicate a great potential for the vitality of isiZulu. This leads us to the question of the role of isiZulu and its potential as a language of education.
There is no doubt that English remains the economically most valuable language in the post-apartheid state and most South Africans logically make choices according to this knowledge.
Nonetheless, there appears to exist growing discontent about the mismatch between the practical English-only education and the theoretical multilingual language policy options. Quite a substantial number of learners and teachers criticised, for instance, the lack of implementation with respect to the African languages as medium of learning. The interviewee below illustrates this in relation to the educational language policy:
In 1999, it was stated that Black schools are going to be taught in their most comfortable tongue. I feel since South Africa is supposed to be a liberated country now they should do something about the languages and about all the things being taught in English. Since we are a Black school and we are most familiar with Zulu since this is our mother tongue they should have made an adjustment. Some of us we don't understand English. Therefore they should make provision for Zulu examination papers, so that we can choose (Vusi, 17).
It is evident, from the above comment, that awareness of the new legislation has elevated the status of isiZulu. The above-quoted participant is aware of the constitutional principles and demands 'actions' in the form of implementation that follow multilingualism. Similarly, the comment below expresses dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs.
There is something that I want to know. It is like we are still colonised, because every time in school we are told that we must always speak English, even if I go and study I must always know English, so I need a dictionary, but we don't have money to buy dictionaries. In South Africa, it is like we are not free. Who said that English must be a 'communicative' language. Even Xhosa can be a communicative language. Because it is Xhosas who like Xhosa and Zulus like Zulus.
English I think must go to England because it belongs there (Zanele, 20).
The medium of instruction issue remains a great controversy among educators. The majority of the teachers who were interviewed in the course of this study argued
197
that the learners would certainly be able to excel in school if they were able to express themselves in isiZulu.
We do find that whenever the students answer in Zulu the answer is correct. So that is where you find out that the problem is that the person does not know how to express himself in English. Sometimes we do mark it correct but we tell them not to get used to that, because they have to express in English (Zanele, 34).
See what happens, we tell them: Don't ever give me an answer in Zulu.
The whole thing ends up being very deep, and we end up confusing ourselves and confusing them as well. We do not really promote our language here in school, I must admit it. When I was still a student whenever you speak [sic] Zulu on the school ground you were punished or something, so we were forced to speak English during break and playtime and this is why I say the teachers are playing a role in discouraging the culture in our kids in one way or the other. But if they can be allowed to write their exams in isiZulu there would be 100%
passes, because like I am saying it is not like they don't know the answers they just don't know how to put them in English (Ntokozani, 29).
Several teachers voiced optimism regarding the performance of students in isiZulu.
The majority of isiZulu language teachers did not share this sentiment to the same extent, however. The township learners do not necessarily perform very well in their mother tongue, as the spoken isiZulu variety stands in sharp contrast to what is taught as 'standard' isiZulu in school. What has been emerging is a dichotomy between 'deep' and 'urban' varieties, the former referring to the relatively 'pure' African 'standard' languages, the latter to urbanised forms, which linguistically are significantly different (Slabbert and Finlayson 2002: 238). It is debatable whether learners would in fact, perform as brilliantly had they the chance to express themselves in isiZulu as expected by some educators. Further research around this issue, is no doubt, imperative.
With regard to Afrikaans, Dlamini (2001) challenges the common belief that KwaZulu-Natal Black students hate the use and study of Afrikaans. Participants of
One needs to be cautious, however, with the validity of these claims. Umlazi learners frequently have difficulties in performing well academically in isiZulu lessons, as they are not sufficiently familiar with standard isiZulu as taught in school. To this day, little data is available regarding the benefits of schooling in the mother tongue among isiZulu speaking children.
198
her study apparently used Afrikaans extensively because it provided them with alternative places of employment. In the case of Umlazi, however, Afrikaans clearly plays a marginal role and the vast majority of the youths consciously do not choose to acquire Afrikaans in school. Conversely, the perceptions of Umlazi high school learners contrast with Dlamini's argument. On the contrary, learners in Umlazi mostly show signs of indignation regarding Afrikaans as a medium of instruction and as the language used in exams. The comment below attests to such a view:
In South Africa we have 11 languages, so it will be difficult for the state or whoever to organise books and other things in Zulu, Xhosa, Sotho you see (...), English is okay, but not Afrikaans. See that is what is unfair.
They have Afrikaans, but there is no African language involved (Sbu, 18).
There is no doubt that English is strongly favoured over Afrikaans. In fact, Afrikaans is most definitely seen as a linguistic rival to isiZulu in the educational domain, whereas English is seldom perceived in this direct way. Afrikaans language teachers in the investigated township schools often struggle to find enough students to justify the teaching. The attitudes among members in one particular school class were significantly more negative than those of most other classes. This was due to a prior event that these learners had experienced: They had mistakenly been given a biology examination in which the questions were in Afrikaans instead of English, which not only astonished the learners, but also culminated in resentment among them.
As a 'substitute' English language teacher, I was asked repeatedly why in the new South Africa, Afrikaans mother-tongue speakers could still write their examinations in their mother-tongue while isiZulu speakers had to write examinations in English. Of course, the learners argued that they would receive much better marks if they were given the chance to write the biology examination in isiZulu. It must be assumed that township school learners had previously not been aware of the fact that exam scripts are still available in Afrikaans under the new dispensation. The very fact, that this is the case, while isiZulu scripts are unavailable, unsurprisingly stirred resentment. The strong reactions against this
199
type of selective multilingualism can be interpreted as a plead for the recognition of isiZulu as a language of learning on one hand, and an ethnolinguistic statement on the other.
There seems to be consensus among teachers in the investigated Umlazi schools that it is of crucial importance to teach isiZulu as a subject. Some parents proudly pointed out to me that their child receives very good grades in isiZulu. Several teachers criticise the curriculum of the multiracial schools their children attend, as there are no provisions to teach isiZulu. At the same time, however, most teachers believe that although isiZulu is important for their children, the medium of instruction in schools should be English. This is in line with Murray (2002: 138) who notes that many parents are convinced that the mother tongue is learnt sufficiently in the domestic setting and that the essential purpose of education is not only to teach English but to teach in English. Although most teachers are under the impression that students would achieve better marks if they answered questions in their mother tongue, they feel unsure whether this is - in the end - beneficial to the child. The majority of parents echo this doubt. Ultimately most educators and parents push for a consistent use of English, despite their own lack of proficiency in the language. Many learners, however, express the desire to be given a choice and several interviewees claim to prefer isiZulu by emphasising the benefit and advantage the mother tongue offers. The latter shall be explored further below.