Nonkosi TYOLWANA
Convenor: Terminology and Lexicography, IsiXhosa National Language Body
1. Introduction
In the process of colonialisation, speakers of African languages lost their self-confidence, sovereignty, self-respect and the power to participate actively and consciously in the development and promotion of their languages.
There is a great challenge for the coordination and management of terminology in African languages. It demands imagination, courage, perseverance and self-control.
Language development is not about the delivery of language goods to passive citizenry, but rather about involvement, exclusivity and growing empowerment of the speakers. Sustained human development is development that regenerates environment rather than destroying it – it empowers people rather than marginalizing them. It gives priority to the poor, enlarging their choices and opportunities and providing for their participation in decisions affecting them.
The RDP seeks to promote development as a people-driven process. It recognises the aspirations and collective determination of the people of South Africa as the country’s most important resource. The commitments are therefore the elimination of structures that perpetuate exploitation and impoverishment (Liebenberg & Stewart 1997: 123).
The aim of this paper is to encourage transparency in the interaction between the
‘collectors’ of terminologies (language workers) who visit local communities and the
‘holders’ or ‘beneficiaries’ of these terminologies.
2. Sustainable human development
Our notion of sustainable human development refers to a process that is human-centred, equitable, and socially and environmentally sustainable. Sustainable human development is understood as a means for the expansion of the choice of individuals in a society. There are five aspects that define sustainable human development. They are empowerment, cooperation, equity, scarcity and security (Isata 2000: 25).
2.1. Language as sustainable human development
Local communities are “knowledge rich, but economically poor”. The search is therefore for a middle way in the development of the linkage between communities and the formal processes of terminology management and the formal processes of terminology management. This includes the development of clear strategies that are aimed at the promotion of terminologies for the African languages.
Closely connected with this is the increasing concern regarding the professional conduct of terminology researchers. In this regard, especially the tradition of always leaving local linguistic communities anonymous in publications of term lists or term banks – even if these communities have been a key in coining or divulging the key terms in specific languages – is worrisome.
Galinski & Wright (2001) provide a powerful proposal regarding the protection of the intellectual property rights when they say:
Terminologists collect information which they reserve for their own use or share with others, either gratis or for a fee. Consequently most terminology collection can be viewed as compilations in the sense of a copyright law … The protection of authors’ rights with respect to the transfer and reuse of terminological data or their use to prepare derivative works not only involves the application of the above-cited protection for intellectual property rights, but also for dreams.
The Portfolio Committee on Arts, Culture, Language, Science and Technology of the Parliament of South Africa is in the process of putting in place a legislation that is aimed at the protection of the intellectual property rights.
An important question is: “How do current linguists or terminologists unearth this knowledge so that it can shape the consciousness of language workers.” Vilakazi (1998: 12) echoes the same sentiments when he says:
European languages have had to develop new concepts, words and flexibility in order to be the means of communication for industrialization and scientific revolution. The recent development of history of Afrikaans is an example, which can now be used to teach physics, medicine, psychology and so on.
The question now is who should be involved in the development of African languages. This task should not be left solely to university-certificated language experts.
Every village can identify such individuals who are the custodians of excellence, beauty and pride of the African languages of this country. These women and men should be incorporated into the language committees of terminology experts, to work side by side with the university professors, researchers, terminologists, and language development in charting the formal development of African languages.
2.2. The role communities can play in language development
African languages remain a problem in the country’s effort to revitalise local communities. It has for example been recognised that English is valuable for international communication, but it alienates locally. The key to promote and develop terminologies that influence language development lies in knowledge deeply rooted in local communities, the majority of whom are speakers in rural and farm areas.
Terminology knowledge is characterised by being embedded in the cultural web and the history of people, including their civilisation. Terminology development and innovation systems must therefore be sustained through active support of the linguistic communities who are the keepers of these terminologies, the custodians of their
languages, their ways of life, their social organisations and the environment in which they live. This means that the terminology of African languages resides within these communities.
Terminologists are expected to serve the public in areas of their profession. The issue at stake is what the best way is to honour our ‘terminology holders’ for their valuable contribution? Who should take the initiatives and how? Who should fund such facilitation? Who should look for funding of such initiatives?
3. Action programme 3.1. General recommendations
The biggest challenge is to bring terminologists / linguists close to the centre of this vital debate. Communication among stakeholders is in a number of cases constrained by educational restrictions in the transfer of knowledge. The lack of communication skills is hampering the participatory implementation of language development at local level.
The challenges and issues at stake include the following:
• There should be enhanced support for terminology activities at local level.
• An inventory should list all terminology stakeholders, including community-based projects.
• Government in cooperation with language training institutions including NGOs and CBOs should extend and improve their training facilities for human resource development.
• There should be recognition of women as repositories of terminologies pertaining to female-related terms and so on.
• Develop a strategy for educating local communities about the benefits of African languages.
• Develop sound and ethical protocols to record ‘secret’ and ‘sacred’ terminology, and guide the research in this regard (e.g. terms related to circumcision).
3.2. Specific recommendations
1. Establishment of Language Development Centres
• Envisaged to be the historically disadvantaged universities and their primary function should be to act as collective community administrative agencies.
• Be accountable to DACST, PanSALB, language training institutions, and language NGOs and CBOs.
Their main functions would be:
• To facilitate the process of collection, distribution and dissemination of terminology-relevant term resources.
• Create and promote public awareness campaigns for and mass participation in terminology collection.
• Develop a directory of terminology inventors.
• Audit and compile a record of different language communities found in various communities in South Africa.
• Assist the custodians of these terminologies with the intention of identifying those that can be developed into business enterprises, ultimately leading to job creation.
• Build out the capacity of language students and terminology research team members in interacting with the holders of terminology.
• Train language students in terminology research methods applicable to interacting with communities.
• Involve the NLBs and PLCs in the creation of a series of language community structures and committees, and provide these structures and committees with a fair amount of work.
The following structures are proposed:
2. The National Steering Committee
This will be a supreme decision-making structure, consisting of representatives from the entire range of stakeholders, and will be responsible for funding, policy and strategy.
3. The Working Committee
This will act as an executive structure of the Steering Committee and will consists of managers from DACST, PanSALB, language training institutions, and language NGOs and CBOs.
4. The Inter-Provincial Operating Structure
This will consist of representatives of universities and provincial languages departments for the coordination of operational matters in the provinces.
5. The Technical Committee
This will consist of experts in terminology with a mandate to debate issues revolving around terminology development, management and coordination, and to make recommendations to the Steering Committee. They will also facilitate partnerships with
beneficiaries of terminology, institutions such as HSRC, CSIR, Science, Technology, Economics, Medicine, Education, etc.
4. Conclusion
The greatest challenge is to convince linguists / language workers that the public needs to know or to be involved in what is happening behind their language development walls. Unfortunately, no research has been carried out in South Africa to determine the level of interaction that linguists need to adopt with the public in order to create public understanding and support for research in language development issues. In the United Kingdom, however, the Science and Technology Select Committee of the House of Lords engaged a group of consultants to investigate this issue extensively, and to provide recommendation (cf. http://w.w.w.publications.parliament.uk/pa/Id199900/
Idselect/Idsctech/38/3801.htm).
In principle, this debate shows that language, like any other player in the public arena, ignores public attitudes and values at its peril. I feel that, by declaring the values which underpin their work, and by negotiating the values and attitudes of the public, linguists or language workers are far more likely to command public and government support.
References
Galinski, C. and S.E. Wright. 2001. Intellectual Property Rights. Copyright and Terminology. In S.E. Wright and G. Budin (eds.). Handbook of Terminology Management. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Isata, S. 2000. Good Governance: An imperative for Africa in the third millennium.
Hout Bay: Gariep Publishing Company.
Liebenberg, S. and P. Stewart. (eds.). 1997. Participatory Development Management and the RDP. Cape Town: Juta & Co. Ltd.
Report. 1998. Public Hearings on Indigenous Knowledge Systems. Portfolio Committee on Arts, Culture, Language, Science & Technology.
Vilakazi, H.W. 1998. In S. Seepe (ed.). Black Perspectives on Tertiary Institutional Transformation. Johannesburg: Vivlia Publishers.