Introduction
4. Data analysis and discussion
4.3. Analysis and interpretation of recorded data
4.3.1. Juxtaposition of isiZulu versus English in identity negotiations
In discussing the role of the African languages versus English in the expression of 'African'/'Zulu' thinking and writing, many interviewees highlighted the important role of English as a linking language and international medium of communication.
There is no need to reiterate the evident advantages of using English again, as pointed out by the interviewees, as they largely overlap with previous comments on the questionnaires. What is more important for the purpose of this study is the fact that a significant number of interviewees clearly prefer isiZulu as a medium of expression in writing. The comments below illustrate this view:
189
I think if I would write I would do it in Zulu, I am not writing for whites only... I am writing for everyone, so if the whites cannot read my literature book they must find someone to translate it. Because I am an African boy so that's why I must write in Zulu, so that every African can readit(Mdu, 19).132
If I would write I would write in Zulu, because the aim of writing is to teach and tell people about your faith. And if I want to teach an African I have to use an African language because there are many Africans who do not understand English. They may talk English but they do not understand clearly the English writing (Mlungisi, 28).
From the above sentiments one can deduce that the quoted individuals claim to be devoted to their mother tongue in terms of writing and refuse to compromise it by using another medium of expression. Furthermore, there is evidence of a certain kind of social awareness among isiZulu-speakers that suggests that there is a collective sense of decision-making among the individuals above. McKenna (2004:
198) recently argued that African students are highly concerned with social issues and Kamwangamalu (1999: 27), while discussing the concept ofubuntu, asserts that "nobody in an African context lives for himself. In line with theoretical frameworks in intercultural communication studies, members of collectivist, high- context cultures,134 such as African and Asian ones, are more likely to be defined by the group than to have an individualist sense of themselves. This sense of a collective consciousness surfaces repeatedly in the interviews and indicates that the concept of identity is widely understood in relation to other people. Hence, Umlazi isiZulu speakers' identities are grounded more strongly in the social world than in an individual sense. The choice of isiZulu as a code is frequently linked with the argument that many Umlazi residents have little or no knowledge of English.
Although it is not a central aim of this study to elicit attitudes towards English,135 the juxtaposition of English and isiZulu proved to be a useful tool in interviews in
The participants are all given pseudonyms in order to assure their anonymity.
1 Ubuntu is a multifaceted pan-African concept that represents a strong sense of collective consciousness, social awareness, and positive virtues based on mutual human respect. For more detail see, Bhengu (1996), Blankenberg (1999), Kamwangamalu (1999).
134 Members of collectivist cultures belong to in-groups and collectivities which have greater meaning than the individual and immediate family, see Hofstede (1980) and Triandis (1988).
Attitudes towards English in the South African context have been discussed in more detail in other studies (Wood (1995), Young (1995), Smit (1996)).
190
order to reveal linguistic polarisation and implicit ethnolinguistic identity formations. It was important to determine the reasons participants brought forward their perceptions of English as a unifying language versus its potential threat to the purity of isiZulu or to their identity as umZulu. Those who perceive English as a unifier argued by fore-grounding South Africa's multilingualism and the necessity of a lingua franca. The comment by Mbali (32): "I really think the ANC and English have brought liberation to South Africa," exemplifies such a view. It also demonstrates political affiliation with the ANC, which surfaced in many pro- English arguments. Furthermore, English was repeatedly termed the 'communicative language', a label that Umlazi people appear to employ more readily than 'language of liberation'.
However, a significant number of interviewees also showed reluctance to identify the role of English as a unifying one. What surfaced in this context is a direct correlation between a critical stand towards English and an either implicit or explicit notion and ethnic identity construction, hence 'Zuluness'. In other words, participants substantiated the critical standpoint by referring to the incompatibility of cultural heritage, tradition and practices with the use of the English language.
Some participants also explained that there exists a discrepancy between the Zulu value system and English language expressional power. In particular, the older participants mentioned, for instance, the decreasing value of hlonipha [respect] in this context. According to them, the use of the English language in conversation with the older generation is disrespectful. 136
With regard to the role of 'English as a language of unification' in South Africa there is clearly no consensus among the interviewees and, in fact, the group interviews reveal that it is an issue that is vehemently disputed in educated circles of the township community. The following two extracts illustrate the controversy:
I think it [English] is the language of unification, because sometimes Black people if they want to get some particular job, some managers they speak only English they are white, and the people who most communicate in English, and that's why English is the communicative language (Sfiso, 23).
The issue of hlonipha and isihlonipho received further attention in Chapter 4.4
191
I disagree with English as unifier, because I am from the Zulu culture and my child will be born in the generation of English and they won't know about my culture, because they have been disturbed by English, so I don't agree with English to be the language of African unity (Sbo, 30).
Although most interviewees stressed the important role English plays in the country, several participants also voiced a rather critical or even hostile position towards the language. English is clearly positioned ambiguously with regard to language attitudes. Not only did perceptions among the different interviewees vary to a large extent but single individuals often had contradicting views concerning the function of English. Having acquired the label as the 'language of liberation' on the one hand and the 'language of colonisation' on the other, the role of English is clearly an enigmatic one. It was recently argued that many African language speakers have a love-hate relationship with the English language (De Klerk and Gough 2002: 370). The interview data collected for this study strongly supports this claim. Several individuals, in fact, used the words love and hate in relation to English in the interviews.
Most previous studies have focused on attitudes surrounding the instrumental role of English. Smit (1996: 180) for instance, portrays English as "a high status language, a language of higher education, of personal social advancement, of international and national communication, and as a language of national unification". Unsurprisingly, in comparison with the indigenous African languages, English always appears as the favourite due to its economic power. In particular in KwaZulu-Natal, however, one has to be cautious about uncritically assuming that South Africans, i.e. isiZulu speakers, see English positively. In the next section, I argue that the attitudes of Umlazi residents point to a critical view of English and stand in conflict with an overall embrace of language.