DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS 5.1 Introduction
5.4 The choice of language in the selected textbooks
132
promote post-apartheid and post-conflict nation building and citizenship efforts through a representation of symbolism and identity.
As a result it could be said that the dominant presentation of symbolic-identity heritage coincides with the desire to promote citizenship and nation building through the identification of common heritage icons. Nation building will by extension lead to greater unity amongst the nations of the world (van Wijk, no date) and specifically in post- conflict South Africa.
133
than the pronouns, but that contribute in understanding to the nature of heritage presented in the selected textbooks.
With regards to pronouns, the textbooks mostly made use of the first person plural to describe aspects of heritage. This involves the use of lexicons such as ‘we’, ‘our’, and
‘us’. The use of such lexicons reflects the desire to present heritage as a shared and inclusive concept that must cut across societal lines, including but not limited to gender, race, and ethnicity with a purpose in South Africa to explore and understand the role of language in the kind of heritage that is represented in textbooks within the context of a post-conflict society. It also highlights the view of heritage as a universal phenomenon to be seen transcending geographical lines.
This is equally espoused in the view of van Wijk (no date) in which he attributes the increase in international interest on heritage to post Second World War Europe whereby the identification and promotion of common heritages were outlined as necessary pre requisites for post war unity in Europe. Therefore, in this study, the emphasis on the use of the first person plural pronoun could be seen to advance the quest for national unity following post apartheid transformation and efforts towards that goal, as highlighted for example in the constitution and the NCS-History.
However, in spite of the elaborate use of pronouns in the first person plural, there is evidence of some instances where pronouns are used in a context that do not suppose shared and collective heritage. An example of this is the reference to “their heritage”
referring to specialised local knowledge as the heritage of traditional healers (Bottaro et al., 2005, p. 231). Even though such cases are isolated and scarce in the textbooks, their presence nonetheless is a reflection of the apparent tension in what heritage, either as a concept or as a phenomenon should represent as a shared notion implying that not all forms of heritage are inclusive or can be shared at all times. There is heritage that belongs to certain people or groups of people making it ‘their heritage’.
Similarly, the dominant language used in the textbooks with regards to choice of pronouns is the first person plural which shows the intention of the textbooks’ stake holders to promote a shared and inclusive heritage as a means of promoting national unity and consciousness and internationalisation as seen in the literature.
134
The second category of language identified in the textbooks refers to language that is embedded in discourses of ideology other than the use of pronouns. This is seen mostly through the choice of lexicons used to refer to heritage in terms of places, people, events and names. The selection of language in these examples largely deciphers the kind of ideology portrayed in the textbooks. In the textbooks analysed for this study, this language portrays an inclination towards symbolism and identity thereby promoting symbolic-identity form of heritage. The following examples from Making history. Grade 10. Learners’ book is an illustration of this form of language in the textbooks. In the section on “What is the Day of Reconciliation?”, this particular textbook makes use of different lexicons to refer to the different military groups involved: The trekkers are referred to as the ‘commandos’ whilst the Zulus are either called ‘warriors’ or simply
‘fighters’. The British on the other hand is not given any military name as seen in this excerpt, “During the South African War of 1899-1902, fought between these Boer Republics and Britain, the day was celebrated with particular fervour as the Boer commandoes [soldiers] prayed for victory over the British” (Dugmore et al., 2005, p.
237). Moreover, in the same text the size of the Zulu army is mentioned – 10000 warriors and their death toll at the Battle of Blood River also estimated with some precision at 3000. Conversely the Boer commando force is recorded only as “a few hundred trekkers” with their number of casualties listed as only three sustaining minor injuries (Dugmore et al., 2005, p. 236).
The examples cited above are instances of knowledge that are coded through the use of language as explained by Crawford (no date), with the purpose of promoting a particular agenda or ideology. In this portrayal of the trekker military as mighty and superior over the Zulus and the British through giving them superior military connotations (commandoes) and as over emphasising their victory over the Zulus in the Battle of Blood River whilst simultaneously downplaying in the same text their defeat to the British in the South African War of 1899-1902. Engelbrecht (2008) and Polakow- Suranski (2002) refer to such language use as master symbols. They submit that these symbols in history textbooks determine the socio-cultural generalisations of a society and, as with stereotypes and mythologies, these symbols could play a central role in creating consciousness of the social hierarchy among children.
135
In conclusion, it can be said that language is universalistic. Its role is vital for this study because it is essentially a prism through which heritage is depicted in the selected