Table Of Content

COPYRIGHT AND CITATION CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS THESIS/ DISSERTATION Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if o changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes. o ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your o contributions under the same license as the original. How to cite this thesis Surname, Initial(s). (2012) Title of the thesis or dissertation. PhD. (Chemistry)/ M.Sc. (Physics)/ M.A. (Philosophy)/M.Com. (Finance) etc. [Unpublished]: University of Johannesburg. Retrieved from: https://ujdigispace.uj.ac.za (Accessed: Date). o'\01'\ =.:~»'-,l,-,,q' I \iO V' ' LINGUISTIC VARIATIONS AND THE QUESTION OF STANDARDIZATION IN SETSWANA by MAPHUTSHE HELLEN EVELYN KHOALI sumbmitted in the fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of PHILOSOPHIAE DOCTOR rAo<..:;R..:..;TI:..:;:U~M~ .., VISTA UNIVEPSlTY 17AUG 2lJllO in the L1BRrlnl SOWETO CAMPUS DEPARTMENT OF SOTHO LANGUAGES at VISTA UNIVERSITY SUPERVISOR: PROFESSOR R.S. CHAPHOLE JANUARY 1998 II/~~1111111/~ml/~/m,I~III~ I111 * * 0 4 0 2 3 0 6 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to send my sincere appreciationto my supervisor, Professor R.S. Chaphole, Dean of the Faculty of Arts, Vista University, for his understanding, guidance and encouragementthroughout the writing of this thesis. I must alsoacknowledgethe help I receivedfrom the followinglibrarians, Mrs M. Moloko and Ms N. Kuzwayo; reproductionofficers, Mr M.C. Mafisa and Mrs M. Leolo. I cannot forget Mrs A. Sithole, Ms S. Makete, and Ms S. Hlabedi for doing the initial typing, Mrs M.D. MhIongofor her excellentwork in making the final typing and settingof the manuscript and Ms N. Motswagae for her great assistance in the final printing of the research. I am also thankful to Vista University for an ad hoc grant which enabled me to do my research. My gratitude is also due to all those people who helped me in one way or another, in the field, during the course of my research. They are too many to mention all by their names here. I must, however, record the following: Mr M.R. Maotwe of Mabopane whoworked at the then Radio Setswana now Motsweding F.M. from 1967 to 1980 as a programme compiler and joined Radio Bophuthatswana in 1980; only to rejoin Radio Setswana in 1981. He terminated his service in July 1997. Reverend A.S. Phiri of Mabopane, who worked at the then Radio Setswana and now Motsweding F.M., from 1974until July 1997; Mrs V. Makapan, the chiefs wife, at Ga Mosetlha, who has a good knowledgeof Setswanadialects in Pretoria and the surrounding areas and also those at Mafikeng and the surrounding areas; Mr T.D. Ranamane of University of South Africa; Professor R.M. Malope of University of North West; Dr N.J. Manyaka of Vista University; Mr W. Manana of Vista University, Mr J. Shole of Taung College of Education; Dr G.K. Schuring, of H.S.R.C; Dr J. Tsonope of Botswana University; Mr L.Z. S. Moalusi, a lawyer at Rustenburg, Mr M.A. Zirnba, the principal of Moletsane High School, in Soweto; Mrs M. Kgarurne, the Setswanahead of department, Nchaupe High School, in GaMosetlha; Mr M. Letsholo, Setswana head of department, D.A.B. WatsonPrimary School in Soweto. I am also grateful to my children: Dihlonamo, Koro, Thato and Nthatisi; to my sisters and brothers, Lettie, Mpopo, Setlogane, Motsei, Sebaibaiand Kealeboga, for bearing with me throughout the duration of this study, and always being there for me when there was need for help. Finally, I am thankful to Godfor granting me stre :p.~6IDPtete-this study. . . I::> IA 'UNI'''-y 17Av. tWU ltbH,,-,,. SOWETO CAMPUS DECLARATION "I declare that: LINGUISTIC VARIATIONS AND THE QUESTION OF STANDARDIZATION IN SETSWANA, is my own work, that all the sources used or quoted have been indicated and acknowledged by means ofcomplete references, andthat this thesis was not previously submitted by me for a degree at another university. M.H.E. KROALI SUMMARY The main concern of this study has to do with the investigation of linguistic variation and standardization in Setswana. We are of the ideathat linguisticvariation and standardization occur as a result of both internal and external factors. Focus of thisstudy was both onsomeofthoseareas inhabitedby Batswanaboth inBotswana and South Africa. An investigation has been made on the different orthographies used in these countries. Although their orthographies presently differ, they were initially the same. They separated after the revision of the 1937 orthography version by the then Tswana LanguageCommittee in SouthAfrica. But, however, SetswanaStandard Orthography 1981 (1981) in Botswana, is the same as Tswana Terminology and Orthography No.3 (1972) in South Africa. This similarity was caused by the great influence and presence of Professor E.S. Moloto. Botswanadependency onSouthAfrica during thattime, on languageplanningmayhave been because 'South Africa has more speakers of Setswana, has had larger total resources in moneyand manpower, and thusrather naturally took the leadand Botswanaended following suit' (JansonandTsonope, 1991:78). During that time, SouthAfrican policies were directed by the ideology of the apartheid system. So, 'to ignore linguistic developments in South Africa was impossible, but to accept them has often been unpalatable and maybe irnponent' (Janson and Tsonope, 1991:78). Data collected bear testimony that standard language is what Botswanapeople really want to be taught at schools and tertiary institutions. Most of them do not really understand why their children are expected to use standardized language as formal style. The reason behind all these is that they were never involved in language planning. Therefore, there is great need to involve people from different sectors where Setswana is involved. The language policy for the new South Africa in the future should be written in all official languages not just in English and Afrikaans only (refer to Government Gazette, 9 May 1997). Publication inthe former two languages give the impressionthat all people in SouthAfrica are expected (v) to be bilingual or monolingual although neither of these languages was ever declared as a national language. This research presents what is prevailing in those areas where Batswana people are located. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Title page (i) Acknowledgements (ii) Declaration (iii) Summary (iv) CHAPTER 1 1.0 Linguistic variations and the question of standardization 1 in Setswana CHAPTER 2 2.0 A theoretical framework 37 CHAPTER 3 3.0 Variation in real time and apparent time and linguistic variation 74 caused by internal factors in Setswana CHAPTER 4 4.0 Linguistic variation and external factors in Setswana 111 CHAPTERS 5.0 Standardization in written Setswana 171 CHAPTER 6 6.0 Summary, contributions, recommendations and possible 212 future directions BIDLIOGRAPHY 225 APPENDIX 243 PAGE CHAPTER 1 1.0 Linguistic variations and the question of standardization 1 in Setswana 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Motivation 3 1.3 Scope of study 4 1.4 Definitions and explanations ofconcepts 5 1.4.1 Speech community 6 1.4.2 Borrowing 8 1.4.3 Bilingualism 10 1.4.4 Code-switching and code-mixing 13 1.4.5 Dialect(s) 21 1.4.6 Linguistic repertoires 24 1.5 Data collection 26 1.5.1 Introduction 26 1.5.2 Variation across age level in apparent time 27 1.5.3 Linguistic variation in Setswana 31 1.6 Literature review 33 1.6.1 Literature review in Setswana 33 1.6.2 Literature review in other African Languages 34 VISTA UNIV~QSITY 17AUG 2DOO lfBH4n SOWETO CAMPUS CHAPTERl 1.0 LINGUISTIC VARIATIONS ANDTHE QUESTION OFSTANDARDIZATION INSETSWANA 1.1 INTRODUCTION This studyintends to make a thorough investigationon linguisticvariations and the question of standardization in Setswana. The term variety of language as Hudson (1980:24) puts it, can beusedto refer to various manifestationsof it. Onevariety of languageisdifferent from the other because of the linguistic items it includes. Hudson (1980:24) goes on to defme a variety of language as a set of linguistic items with similar social distribution. We may here consider Setswana which is a form of language variety used by a group of people called Batswana who belong to the same social distributions. Theterm 'variety' therefore includeswhatwenormally call languages;dialects and registers. Setswana, the languageunder investigation, is a member of the Sintugroup of Benue-Congo languages. The term Sintu was used byKhumalo I.S.M. in his doctoral thesis in 1987. He used the term Sintu because the term Bantu is offensive to most South African Blacks. Chaphole R.S. also used the term Sintu in his doctoral thesis in 1988. He used this term 2 because Bleek's internationally used term Bantu has acquired very unpleasant connotations in SouthAfrica. Setswana is spokeninmanydialectsbyBatswanaliving in SouthAfrica and Botswana. In Botswana, Setswana is both an official language and a national language. Setswana is an official languagealong withEnglish. Amongst Batswanaof Botswana, there are people who use Setswana as a second language. Inclusive are the San, Hambukushu, Ovaherero, Bakgalagadi, Bakalanga, Basarwa, Bayeyi and Basubiya. In South Africa Setswana is one of the eleven official languages at national level namely Sesotho, Sepedi, IsiZulu, IsiXhosa, Siswati, Sindebele, Tshivenda, Xitsonga, English and Afrikaans. Setswana is also a provincial language in the North-West Region because according to South Africa's New Language Policy: The facts (nd: 5-6): A province may, by a two-thirds majority vote, declare any of the national languages a provincial official language for the whole province or a part thereof. Every language that was an official language somewhere in South Africa up to April 1994 retains its official status there since the Constitutionprovides that language rights and statuses may not be diminished (Section 3 (2) and (5».