Onze llengües oficials i més: legislació i polítiques lingüístiques a Sud-àfrica

AutorMatthias Brenzinger
CargoUniversity of Cape Town
Páginas38-54
ELEVEN OFFICIAL LANGUAGES AND MORE: LEGISLATION AND LANGUAGE
POLICIES IN SOUTH AFRICA
Matthias Brenzinger
Abstract
The South African Constitution of 1996 recognises eleven ofcial languages on an equal footing without affording
English or any of the other ten languages any special status. For half a century, the white ruling class divided people
according to their mother tongues in an Apartheid state. The non-white majority was forced to live in separate self-
governing administrative units in which their respective home languages became the “ofcial” languages of these
so-called “independent states”. The Constitution and language policies of the new South Africa intend to foster the
transformation of a previously “bilingual nation” –with Afrikaans and English as the ofcial languages– into a new
South African state in which the majority languages of its African citizens are uplifted to the same level. The legal
provisions and the language policies introduced over the last twenty years have, however, had little promoting impact
on the actual use of languages other than English and Afrikaans in ofcial spheres. This chapter discusses the challenges
experienced in the execution of the language provisions made in the Constitution. African languages, which are the key
for the improvement of the living conditions of the black majority, do not receive the attention and support from the
government that would be required to make a difference for a better future for their speakers.
Keywords: South Africa; constitution; PanSALB; ofcial languages; language legislation; language policies.
ONZE LLENGÜES OFICIALS I MÉS: LEGISLACIÓ I POLÍTIQUES LINGÜÍSTIQUES A
SUD-ÀFRICA
Resum
La Constitució de Sud-àfrica de l’any 1996 reconeix onze llengües ocials en peu d’igualtat, sense concedir a l’anglès
ni a qualsevol de les altres deu llengües un rang especial. Durant mig segle, la classe blanca dirigent va separar les
persones segons les seves llengües maternes en un estat d’apartheid. La majoria no blanca es va veure obligada a
viure en unitats administratives autònomes en què les respectives llengües natives van esdevenir llengües «ocials»
d’aquests anomenats «estats independents». La Constitució i les polítiques lingüístiques de la nova Sud-àfrica tenen
l’objectiu d’impulsar la transformació d’una «nació abans bilingüe» —amb l’afrikaans i l’anglès com a llengües o-
cials— en un nou estat sud-africà en què la major part de llengües dels ciutadans africans s’elevi al mateix nivell. Això
no obstant, les disposicions jurídiques i les polítiques lingüístiques introduïdes al llarg dels darrers vint anys han inuït
poc en l’ús real de llengües que no siguin l’anglès ni l’afrikaans en les esferes ocials. En aquest capítol s’exposen els
reptes que ha calgut abordar per executar les disposicions lingüístiques de la Constitució. Les llengües africanes, que
són la clau per a la millora de la qualitat de vida de la majoria negra, no reben l’atenció i el suport governamentals
que caldrien per canviar la situació i garantir un futur millor per als seus parlants.
Paraules clau: Sud-àfrica, Constitució, PanSALB, llengües ocials, legislació lingüística, polítiques lingüístiques.
Matthias Brenzinger, University of Cape Town, matthias.brenzinger@uct.ac.za.
Article received: 16.02.2017. Review: 19.04.2017. Final version accepted: 20.04.2017.
Recommended citation: Brenzinger, Matthias. «Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South
Africa», Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017, p. 38-54. DOI: 10.2436/rld.i67.2017.2945.
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 39
Summary
1 Ofcial languages on the African continent
2 Ofcial languages in South Africa before 1990
3 Languages in the new South African Constitution of 1996
4 Language policies at national, provincial and departmental levels
5 The performance of the new language policies
6 Conclusion
7 References
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 40
1 Ofcial languages on the African continent
An ofcial language status makes a difference in many respects not only for the languages themselves
but also for the livelihood of their speakers. Ofcial languages are commonly prioritised languages in the
allocation of state resources. Their speakers benet from that by receiving formal education in the mother
tongue, by having access to media coverage in their languages, by enjoying political participation without
linguistic barriers, by having language as an asset in job applications, etc. In addition, ofcial status comes
with government support in the promotion and development of these ofcially acknowledged languages;
their use is stipulated by the government which also provides intellectual and institutional infrastructures for
corpus planning, the production of teaching and learning materials, etc.
Language policies are political instruments and their application has far-reaching consequences for the
wellbeing of nations and their citizens. The ofcial recognition of languages may unite or divide people
within a nation; it may symbolise national unity and allow for the emancipation of marginalised people or
may result in just the opposite and lead to segmentation and discrimination of people. Some states choose
ofcial languages in a wider global or regional context, for example to demonstrate and establish resistance
against cultural and political domination by powerful neighbour states or against the global expansion of
English.
Constitutions usually grant ofcial status to languages spoken by politically, socio-economically and most
often also numerically dominant communities in states. Languages of marginalised indigenous people are
rarely considered in this ofcial position. While Arabic is the ofcial language of all North African countries,
south of the Sahara –with very few exceptions– the languages of the former colonial powers, English, French,
Portuguese or Spanish, became the ofcial languages of the independent states. To date these European
languages remain in most African nations –being spoken primarily by the educated elites– highly exclusive
“minority” languages.
In addition to these European media of communication some African nations also recognised African
languages as ofcial, such as Sesotho (together with English) in the Kingdom of Lesotho (1966) and siSwati
(together with English) in the Kingdom of Swaziland (1968). The independent Republic of Burundi had
French and Kirundi as ofcial languages (1962) and added English in 2014. The neighbouring Republic
of Rwanda had French and Kinyarwanda (1962) and added English as third ofcial language in 2003.1
The Union of the Comoros has two ofcial languages in Arabic and French, while the statement on the
status of Comorian (Shikomori) in the constitution is ambiguous; Comorian still seems to be only an ofcial
“national” language.2
There was a popular pattern with regard to granting language status when African nations gained independence
in the 1960s: a European language became the “ofcial” language, which was then seconded by an African
“ofcial national” language. The latter had in most cases a merely symbolic status and these ofcial national
languages were given very limited ofcial functions if any. For example, since independence in 1964 English
has been the ofcial language of Malawi, with Chichewa –the Nyanja dialect spoken by Dr Hastings Kamuzu
Banda, the rst president of the country– being the ofcial national language. The fact that Chichewa is
spoken by the vast majority of the citizens and its ofcial status as a national language have not challenged
the dominance of English in ofcial domains.
More recently some African states made African languages into ofcial languages, such as Kenya which
declared Swahili and English to be ofcial languages in 2010. In 2016, Algeria granted Berber (Amazigh)
ofcial status next to Arabic, while ironically French –despite the fact that Algeria is the second largest
French-speaking country in the world– has no ofcial status.
Many constitutions of African states avoid mentioning ofcial language status altogether. For example, the
Constitution of independent Eritrea of 1997 does not single out any specic language and simply states
1 Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003, Chapter 1, Article 5: “The national language is Kinyarwanda. The ofcial
languages are Kinyarwanda, French and English.”
2 Constitution of the Federal Islamic Republic of the Comoros of 1996, Title 1, Article 2: “The ofcial languages are Comorian, the
national language, French, and Arabic.”
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 41
in Article 4(3): “The equality of all Eritrean languages is guaranteed.” The Constitution of the Federal
Democratic Republic of Ethiopia of 1994 also does not use the term “ofcial languages” and Article 5
species: “(1) All Ethiopian languages shall enjoy equal state recognition. (2) Amharic shall be the working
language of the Federal government. (3) Members of the Federation may by law determine their respective
working languages.” With this Constitution, Amharic lost its former status as an ofcial language. At the
same time, while all the other constitutions of African states south of the Sahara are written in European
languages and are then –at best– translated into African languages, Article 106 of the Ethiopian Constitution
has this to say on the legal language authority: “The Amharic version of this Constitution shall have nal
legal authority.”
Thus most constitutions of African states do not have ofcial languages that are spoken by majorities of their
citizens. To date African governments have generally followed the colonial language policies approach and
ignored the vulnerable, diverse and rich language ecologies of their nations. South Africa’s language policy
since 1994 fundamentally differs from these practices. The language dispensation in the new South African
constitution that grants eleven languages equal status as ofcial languages of the state developed from the
policies of the former racially-divided Apartheid state. The previous language legislation with regard to
language status is essential for understanding present language policies and is reviewed for that reason.
2 Ofcial languages in South Africa before 1990
The Second Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902) ended in the defeat of the Boer republics and the British annexed
the Zuid-Afrikaansche Republiek (Transvaal) and the Oranje-Vrijstaat (Orange Free State). Driven by British
interests, the South Africa Act of 1910 united the Cape Colony, the Colony of Natal, the Transvaal Colony
and the Orange River Colony in the Union of South Africa. Prior to that, the South Africa Act of 1909, to
which King Edward VII gave his assent, already regulated ofcial language status for the newly unied
Union of South Africa.
137. Both the English and Dutch languages shall be ofcial languages of the Union, and shall be treated on
a footing of equality, and possess and enjoy equal freedom, rights, and privileges; all records, journals, and
proceedings of Parliament shall be kept in both languages, and all Bills, Acts, and notices of general public
importance or interest issued by the Government of the Union shall be in both languages.
(https://law.wisc.edu/gls/cbsa1.pdf)
In the Union of South Africa, Afrikaans-speaking students were taught in either English or Dutch, both
languages which they did not speak in their daily lives. Attempts by the Afrikaners to replace Dutch in the
Constitution with Afrikaans failed until the National Party joined the Pact government of the Union of South
Africa in 1924. Recognition of Afrikaans was at the top of their political agenda and the Union Act (Act No.
8 of 1925) states: “The word ‘Dutch’ in section one hundred and thirty-seven of the South Africa Act, 1909,
and wheresoever else that word occurs in the said Act, is hereby declared to include Afrikaans.” In 1961, the
newly established Republic of South Africa left the Commonwealth and the South African Constitution (Act
No. 32 of 1961) refers to the two ofcial languages as Afrikaans, including Dutch, and English. The Republic
of South Africa Constitution (Act No. 110 of 1983) nally no longer mentions Dutch. Section 89(1) states:
“English and Afrikaans shall be the ofcial languages of the Republic, and shall be treated on a footing of
equality, and possess and enjoy equal freedom, rights and privileges.”
In the 1940s, when the National Party gained more and more power they felt that Afrikaans should be
declared as “… the rst ofcial language. English will be regarded as a second or supplemental language,
which will be treated on an equal footing …” (Stultz 1974:82). Even though this provision never entered
legislation, English became de facto only a subordinate language in the Apartheid state despite the fact that
English-speaking whites continued to be in control of South Africa’s economy. The living conditions of the
great majority of South Africans were dreadful and in the following years deteriorated further.
“By the end of the 19th century, the indigenous peoples of South Africa had lost most of their political
and economic independence and the post-war systems left Black, Coloured and Indian people completely
marginalised.” (South Africa Online http://www.sahistory.org.za/article/constructing-union-south-africa-
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 42
negotiations-contestations-1902-10)
The Union had no intention whatsoever of improving the situation of the economically and politically
deprived non-white majority and the British were no longer intervening in the internal affairs of the Union.
Even more disastrous times were ahead for the marginalised majority when the National Party came to power
in 1948. The National Party embarked on institutionalising the Apartheid system with the segregation of
racial groups at its core. In 1950, the rst Group Areas Act was put into effect which imposed residential and
social segregation along racial lines on all citizens of the Union. Other laws such as the Promotion of Bantu
Self-Government Act (Act No. 46 of 1959) followed and consolidated an Apartheid state that gradually
excluded all non-white citizens from economic, political and cultural domains in the Union.
African languages were used as the main parameter for dening the distinct linguistic identities of “Bantu
populations”. Eight “national units”, namely North-Sotho, South-Sotho, Swazi, Tsonga, Tswana, Venda,
Xhosa and Zulu, were dened in the Promotion of Bantu Self-Government Act of 1959 (Act No. 46, section
2(1)(a-h)) and subsequently black South Africans were forced to live in so-called “independent self-governing
homelands”.
The Bantu Homelands Citizenship Act of 1970 (Act No. 26 of 1970; renamed the Black States Citizenship
Act of 1970 and the National States Citizenship Act of 1970) distinguished ten “Black states”. Four of
them were declared “independent states” –Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda and Ciskei between 1976
and 1981– while the others were “self-governing” homelands.3 The presumed home languages became the
medium of instruction in the Bantu Education System and these languages were made ofcial languages of
the “Bantustans”.
On 26 October 1976, the Republic of Transkei, one of these so-called “homelands”, declared its independence.
The Republic of Transkei Constitution Act (Act No. 15 of 1976, section 16) states: “Xhosa shall be the
ofcial language of the Republic of Transkei and, except as provided in section 41, Sesotho, English and
Afrikaans may also be used for legislative, judicial and administrative purposes.”
Language was the device for splitting and dividing the black people of the Union and to establish barriers so
they would not be able to engage politically and intellectually on a national level. The Bantu Education Act
of 1953 had legalised the enforcement of racially separated educational infrastructures in the “homelands”.
The Extension of University Education Act (Act No. 45 of 1959) pushed racial segregation up into the
institutions of higher education.
“The Afrikaans-medium universities –Potchefstroom, Pretoria, Orange Free State and (after Afrikaans had
become an established language) Stellenbosch– had from their foundation restricted admission to whites. Of
the English-medium universities, Rhodes was all-white and Fort Hare in practice non-white; the remaining
three, while more open, were by no means fully multi-racial. Natal admitted non-whites, but kept its classes
racially segregated. Cape Town and Witwatersrand admitted students to courses without regard to race but
applied a strict colour-bar in social and sporting events.” (Lapping 1986: 183)
Additional universities were founded for 'coloured' and Indian, as well as Zulu, Sotho-Tswana and Xhosa
students.
Concerns and care for the preservation of cultural heritage and support in the development of African
languages were foregrounded as reasons in justifying the imposition of discriminatory measures on the
non-white majority. Despite the ofcial ban on critical political movements, non-white intellectuals and
anti-Apartheid activists –at the risk of their lives– continued to vehemently oppose the segregation policy.
Kenneth Jordaan, for example, understood the dynamics of the growing race-based Apartheid system as a
mechanism by which the white ruling class tried to integrate the non-white population as a workforce into
3 Transkei (isiXhosa) “independence” 26.10.1976; Bophuthatswana (Setswana) “independence” 06.12.1977; Venda (Tshivenda)
“independence” 13.09.1979; Ciskei (isiXhosa) “independence” 04.12.1981; Lebowa (Sepedi) “self-government status” 02.10.1972;
Gazankulu (Xitsonga) “self-government status” 01.02.1973; QwaQwa (Sesotho) “self-government status” 01.11.1974; KwaZulu
(isiZulu) “self-government status” 01.12.1977; KwaNdebele (isiNdebele) “self-government status” 01.04.1984; KaNgwane (siSwati)
“self-government status” 08.08.1984. For more detailed information cf. http://www.sahistory.org.za/article/black-homeland-
citizenship-act-1970.
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 43
their capitalist system. He pointed out that notions of the traditions and languages of black people were
exploited to justify the establishment of a profoundly unjust system.
“The Nationalist-sponsored Bantu educational system … seeks to revivify and to encourage the obsolete
Bantu traits and characteristics which are the relics and the reminders of tribal past. Contrary to any demand
by the Africans, for example, the use of the Bantu vernacular in schools is being made compulsory. And by
encouraging a peculiar Bantu culture and mode of life, the ruling classes are trying to justify their special
treatment, that is, their inferior status in the South African nation.” (K.A. Jordaan 1954)
In 1974, the decision by the Apartheid regime to make Afrikaans alongside English a compulsory medium of
instruction in schools resulted in a mass mobilisation of black students who refused to be taught in Afrikaans.
On 16 June 1976 a protest march of black students in Sharpeville ended in a massacre in which schoolchildren
were shot by the police. This brutal reaction by the Apartheid state accelerated the backing and activities of
the liberation struggle within the country as well as in exile. The media coverage of the Soweto Uprising led
to widespread international support for the anti-Apartheid movements. For the following twenty-four years,
the Bantu Educational System continued with African languages as media of instruction for the rst ve
years of primary education followed by English thereafter.
With regard to African languages the Republic of South Africa Constitution of 1983 (Act No. 110 of 1983)
states in section 89 (3):
(3) … an Act of Parliament or a proclamation of the State President … whereby a Black area is
declared to be a self-governing territory in the Republic … may-
(a) provide for the recognition of one or more Black languages for any or all of the following
purposes, namely-
(i) as an additional ofcial language or as additional ofcial languages of that territory; or
(ii) for use in that territory for ofcial purposes prescribed by or under that Act or later Act or
by any such proclamation; and
(b) contain provisions authorizing the use of any such Black language outside the said territory
for such purposes connected with the affairs of that territory and subject to such conditions
as may be prescribed by or under that Act or later Act or any such proclamation.
Nine radio stations broadcasted in African languages and two TV channels for each Zulu-Xhosa and Sotho-
Tswana were established. English continued to be the dominant language in commerce, higher education and
industry, while Afrikaans was predominantly used in the civil service and government, by the army, navy and
police and in prisons (Mesthrie 2002:23).
3 Languages in the new South African Constitution of 1996
On 2 February 1990, the historic speech by President F.W. de Klerk marked the end of the Apartheid state,
and four years later Nelson Mandela was elected president. In 1994, the citizens of the new South Africa
–in fact the whole world– expected Mandela and his government to catapult the country from the previous
white minority Apartheid rule into a unied, multicultural, participatory democracy. The constitution was
designed with the intention that all South Africans would merge into a non-racial “Rainbow Nation”.
Mandela’s diplomacy of “National Reconciliation” managed to prevent a civil war, which was a very likely
scenario in the early 1990s, and he kept South Africa’s economy running. At the same time these strategies
hindered the transformation of the nation as the “democratic revolution” did not reach and did not liberate the
black majority. After more than two decades, the non-white majority of South African remains economically
marginalised and is still not fully empowered to participate in the democratic governance of their country.
“…language policy can become an instrument to unify our people instead of being the instrument of division
which, for the most part, it is today. We need to make a democratically conceived language policy an integral
part of our programme for national unity and national liberation.” (Alexander 1989:5)
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 44
Neville Alexander4 (1989) published this visionary statement just before the collapse of the Apartheid state
and in the following years, through the National Language Project (NLP) and the Project for Alternative
Education in South Africa (PRAESA), “Alexander led the national debate on language policy and planning
in South Africa” (Soudien 2016:xiv).
An Interim Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act No. 200 of 1993) was in force that structured
the rst democratic elections which took place on 27 April 1994. Chapter 1(3) of this Interim Constitution
already outlined the language legislation, which was then adopted by the Constitutional Assembly in the nal
Constitution of 1996.
The nal Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act No. 108 of 1996) was approved by the Constitutional
Court on 4 December 1996 and took effect on 4 February 1997. In line with an overall ambitious vision for
a new South Africa, the Constitution recognises eleven ofcial languages with equal status and mentions
several additional ones as being considered in future national developments.
The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa of 1996 addresses languages at globally unprecedented
length and in great detail in the founding provisions of chapter 1, section 6.
6(1) The ofcial languages of the Republic are Sepedi, Sesotho, Setswana, siSwati, Tshivenda,
Xitsonga, Afrikaans, English, isiNdebele, isiXhosa and isiZulu.
6(2) Recognising the historically diminished use and status of the indigenous languages of
our people, the state must take practical and positive measures to elevate the status and
advance the use of these languages.
6(3)(a) Municipalities must take into account the language usage and preferences of their
residents.
6(3)(b) The national government and provincial governments may use any particular ofcial
languages for the purposes of government, taking into account usage, practicality, expense,
regional circumstances and the balance of the needs and preferences of the population as
a whole or in the province concerned; but the national government and each provincial
government must use at least two ofcial languages.
6(4) The national government and provincial governments, by legislative and other measures,
must regulate and monitor their use of ofcial languages. Without detracting from the
provisions of subsection (2), all ofcial languages must enjoy parity of esteem and must
be treated equitably.
6(5) A Pan South African Language Board established by national legislation must
(a) promote, and create conditions for, the development and use of
(i) all ofcial languages;
(ii) the Khoi, Nama and San languages; and
(iii) sign language; and
(b) promote and ensure respect for
(i) all languages commonly used by communities in South Africa, including German,
Greek, Gujarati, Hindi, Portuguese, Tamil, Telegu and Urdu; and
(ii) Arabic, Hebrew, Sanskrit and other languages used for religious purposes in South
Africa.
The legally binding English constitution is translated into all the other ten ofcial languages and in addition
is published in South African Braille (English), the script used by blind South African citizens.
The new constitution no longer uses English names for African languages5 but rather adopts the writing
conventions of the orthographies of the respective languages. This leads to inconsistencies as prexes and
noun stems are merged in the Sotho group, namely Sesotho, Setswana, and Sepedi, as well as in Tshivenda
and Xitsonga, while in the languages of the Nguni group, namely isiZulu, isiXhosa, isiNdebele and siSwati,
the noun stem is marked by a capital letter and prexes are written in small letters. Due to different writing
4 Neville Alexander (22 October 1936–27 August 2012) was a political activist and scholar, a revolutionary intellectual as well as an
educationalist. While he refused all the other prizes he was offered, he made an exception by accepting the Linguapax Award in 2003.
5 Applying this to other languages would mean, for example, using ‘Deutsch’ instead of ‘German’ in English texts.
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 45
traditions, the Latin letters also represent different sounds; for example X in isiXhosa is the Nguni-spelling
convention for representing a lateral click sound /ǁ/, while in the Portuguese-based spelling of Xitsonga, X
is pronounced as /ʃ/.
The Interim Constitution (Act No. 200 of 1993), chapter 1(3)(1), correctly lists ‘Sesotho sa Leboa’ as one of
the ofcial languages, but this name was replaced for unknown reasons by ‘Sepedi’ in the nal Constitution
of 1996. Sepedi is only one of the more than ten dialects of ‘Sesotho sa Leboa’, a dialect cluster which is
also known as ‘Northern Sotho’. The initiative by the Northern Sotho National Lexicography Unit to replace
‘Sepedi’ by ‘Northern Sotho’ or ‘Sesotho sa Leboa’ in the Constitution has so far not been successful.
In the Constitution of 1996, chapter 1, section 6(5)(a)(ii), provisions are made for the development and use of
‘the Khoi, Nama and San languages’. However, this listing of presumed languages is problematic, as ‘Nama’
is in fact a language of the ‘Khoe (Khoi)’ language family.
Some distinct languages, for example Northern isiNdebele and Síphùthì, were ignored in the previous
Apartheid state and also remain unacknowledged in the Constitution. The government is reluctant to accept
any changes in or additions to the list of languages in the Constitution for the fear that this would open
Pandora’s Box.
4 Language policies at national, provincial and departmental levels
The languages listed in the Constitution correspond to the outcomes of the national census data (Census
2011, adapted from Statistics South Africa 2012:26-27).
Language Number of speakers Percentage of total population
isiZulu 11,587,374 22.7%
isiXhosa 8,154,258 16.0%
Afrikaans 6,855,082 13.5%
English 4,892,623 9.6%
Sepedi (Northern Sotho) 4,618,576 9.1%
Setswana 4,067,248 8.0%
Sesotho 3,849,563 7.6%
Xitsonga 2,277,148 4.5%
siSwati 1,297,046 2.5%
Tshivena1,209,388 2.4%
isiNdebele 1,090,223 2.1%
Sign language (SASL*) 234,655 0.5%
Other languages 828,258 1.6%
Table 1: Number of speakers and percentage of the total population (Census 2011). *6
The census also presents information about population groups (Statistics South Africa 2012:21):
Groups Numbers Percentage of total population
Black African 41,000,938 79.2%
Coloured 4,615,401 8.9%
Indian or Asian 1,286,930 2.5%
White 4,586,838 8.9%
Other 280,454 0.5%
Total 51,770,560 100%
Table 2: Members of population groups and percentage of the total population (Census 2011).
6 SASL – South African Sign Language
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 46
Based on data provided in the census (Statistics South Africa 2012:26), the percentages of speakers of English
and Afrikaans according to population groups were calculated as follows:
Language No. of speakers % in RSA Black African Coloured Indian or Asian White Other
Afrikaans 6,855,082 13.5% 8.8% 50.2% 0.9% 39.5% 0.6%
English 4,892,623 9.6% 23.9% 19.3% 22.4% 32.8% 1.7%
Table 3: Percentage of speakers of Afrikaans and English according to population groups (Census 2011).
The gures demonstrate that most Afrikaans speakers are coloured and almost 9% are black African. Only
one third of the English speakers are white, while black African, coloured and Indian/Asian account for
about 20% each. Thus neither English nor Afrikaans is a rst language predominantly spoken by white South
Africans.
For meaningful implementation of language policies that would follow the provisions made in the Constitution,
the language proles of the provinces have to be considered. The speakers of South African languages
are unevenly distributed in the nine provinces of South Africa. Data provided by Statistics South Africa
(2012:25) on the percentage of rst language speakers according to provinces is shown in the following table
(languages spoken by less than 1% are not included in this list):
Province 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th
Eastern Cape isiXhosa
(78.8%)
Afrikaans
(10.6%)
English
(5.6%)
Sesotho
(2.5%)
KwaZulu-Natal isiZulu
(77.8%)
English
(13.2%)
isiXhosa
(3.5%)
Afrikaans
(1.6%)
isiNdebele
(1.1%)
Free State Sesotho
(64.2%)
Afrikaans
(12.7%)
isiXhosa
(7.5%)
Setswana
(5.2%)
isiZulu
(4.4%)
English
(2.9%)
SASL
(1.2%)
North West Setswana
(63.4%)
Afrikaans
(9.0%)
Sesotho
(5.8%)
isiXhosa
(5.5%)
Xitsonga
(3.7%)
English
(3.5%)
isiZulu
(2.5%)
Sepedi
(2.4%)
Limpopo Sepedi
(52.9%)
Xitsonga
(17.0%)
Tshivenda
(16.7%)
Afrikaans
(2.6%)
isiNdebele
(2.0%)
Setswana
(2.0%)
English
(1.5%)
Sesotho
(1.5%)
Northern Cape Afrikaans
(53.8%)
Setswana
(33.1%)
isiXhosa
(5.3%)
English
(3.4%)
Sesotho
(1.3%)
Western Cape Afrikaans
(49.7%)
isiXhosa
(24.7%)
English
(20.3%)
Sesotho
(1.1%)
Mpumalanga siSwati
(27.7%)
isiZulu
(24.1%)
Xitsonga
(10.4%)
isiNdebele
(10.1%)
Sepedi
(9.3%)
Afrikaans
(7.2%)
Sesotho
(3.5%)
English
(3.1%)
Gauteng isiZulu
(19.8%)
English
(13.3%)
Afrikaans
(12.4%)
Sesotho
(11.6%)
Sepedi
(10.6%)
Setswana
(9.1%)
Xitsonga
(6.6%)
isiXhosa
(6.6%)
Table 4: Percentage of speakers in the nine provinces (table designed using data from the Census 2011).
The Nguni languages and the Sotho languages form two language clusters of closely related languages.
Communication among speakers of the various Nguni languages and among speakers of Sotho languages
is possible. Receptive multilingualism is widespread in that speakers use their respective languages in
communicating with each other.
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 47
The following table provides data on the national coverage of languages by considering the genetic
relationship of the languages.
Languages L1 speakers % of population Language
branch
% of population
isiZulu 11,587,374 22.7%
Nguni
languages
43.3%
isiXhosa 8,154,258 16.0%
siSwati 1,297,046 2.5%
isiNdebele 1,090,223 2.1%
Sepedi 4,618,576 9.1%
Sotho
languages
24.7%
Setswana 4,067,248 8.0%
Sesotho 3,849,563 7.6%
English 4,892,623 9.6% 9.6%
Afrikaans 6,855,082 13.5% 13.5%
Xitsonga 2,277,148 4.5% 4.5%
Tshivena1,209,388 2.4% 2.4%
Sign language 234,655 0.5% 0.5%
Other languages 828,258 1.6% 1.6%
Table 5: Language groupings and languages with numbers and percentage of speakers (table designed using data from
the Census 2011).
By using only one Nguni and one Sotho language almost 70% of the national population can be reached, and
by adding Afrikaans and English more than 90%. Rotating use of languages from the Nguni cluster and the
Sotho cluster would drastically reduce the number of translations of documents needed. At the same time it
would nurture a multilingual environment in ofcial communication in the country.
Language policies on the provincial level are required to accommodate the languages actually spoken in
the provinces. The following table compiles all speakers of Nguni languages and Sotho languages and adds
Afrikaans, Xitsonga and Tshivenda where these languages are spoken. English is an ofcial language in all
provinces.
Province 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th % of population
Eastern Cape Nguni
(79.5%)
Afrikaans
(10.6%)
English
(5.6%)
95.7%
KwaZulu-Natal Nguni
(83.4%)
English
(13.2%)
96.6%
Free State Sotho
(69.7%)
Afrikaans
(12.7%)
Nguni
(12.4%)
English
(2.9%)
97.7%
North West Sotho
(71.6%)
Nguni
(9.6%)
Afrikaans
(9.0%)
Xitsonga
(3.7%)
English
(3.5%)
97.4%
Limpopo Sotho
(56.4%)
Xitsonga
(17.0%)
Tshivenda
(16.7%)
Nguni
(4.1%)
English
(1.5%)
95.7%
Northern Cape Afrikaans
(53.8%)
Sotho
(34.6%)
Nguni
(6.7%)
English
(3.4%)
98.5%
Western Cape Afrikaans
(49.7%)
Nguni
(25.5%)
English
(20.3%)
95.5%
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 48
Mpumalanga Nguni
(63.1%)
Sotho
(14.6%)
Xitsonga
(10.4%)
Afrikaans
(7.2%)
English
(3.1%)
95.4%
Gauteng Sotho
(31.3%)
Nguni
(30.7%)
English
(13.3%)
Afrikaans
(12.4%)
Xitsonga
(6.6%)
Tshivenda
(2.3%)
96.6%
Table 6: Language groupings and languages with percentage of speakers in the provinces (table designed using data
from the Census 2011).
Table 6 demonstrates that on the provincial level the choices of languages to be made for ofcial use are
more complex. Even though the Nguni languages and Sotho languages are closely related, speakers on the
provincial level generally insist on their individual languages being recognised and used. IsiXhosa is the
rst language of 79% of people in the Eastern Cape, while 78% speak isiZulu at home in KwaZulu-Natal.
Sesotho with 64% is the most spoken language in the Free State and Setswana with 63% in North West.
About half the population in Limpopo uses Sesotho (53%) as their rst language. In addition, half of the
population in the Northern and the Western Cape speak Afrikaans as their rst language and about 10% do
so in another three provinces. In the Western Cape 20% speak English at home and more than 13% Gauteng
and KwaZulu Natal. In all other provinces English speakers constitute a small minority.
The ofcial languages of the provinces were chosen by considering not only the actual numbers of speakers
of the languages in the province. A guiding principle was to select as few languages as possible but at the
same time to make sure that each of the eleven ofcial languages is ofcial in at least one province.
Western Cape Afrikaans, isiXhosa, English
Eastern Cape: isiXhosa, Afrikaans, Sesotho, English
KwaZulu-Natal isiZulu, English, isiXhosa, Afrikaans
Free State Sesotho, Afrikaans, isiXhosa, English
North West Setswana, Afrikaans, Sesotho, English
Limpopo Sepedi, Xitsonga, Tshivenda, English
Northern Cape Afrikaans, Setswana, isiXhosa, English
Mpumalanga siSwati, isiNdebele, Afrikaans, English
Gauteng IsiZulu, Sesotho, Sepedi, English and Afrikaans
The Interim Constitution Act (Act No. 200 of 1993), chapter 1(3)(10)(a), states: “Provision shall be made
by an Act of Parliament for the establishment by the Senate of an independent Pan South African Language
Board to promote respect for the principles referred to in subsection (9) and to further the development of
the ofcial South African languages.” In accordance with the Pan South African Language Board Act (Act
No. 59 of 1995) the Pan South African Language Board (PanSALB) was established in 1995. The mandate
of PanSALB is to foster and monitor the implementation of the constitution by promoting and creating
conditions for the development and use of all eleven ofcial languages, as well as the “Khoi, Nama and San”
languages. South African Sign Language is included in this list of languages along with “heritage languages”.
PanSALB sub-committees were set up in all provinces with a mandate to draft language policies for each
province according to the National Language Framework. The Western Cape Language Committee, for
example, was established in accordance with the Western Cape Provincial Language Act (Act No. 13 of
1998). This committee drafted the Western Cape Language Policy which was implemented in 2002. It
declared “equal status and use of the three ofcial provincial languages, Afrikaans, English and isiXhosa”
with the additional mention of South African Sign Language, marginalised languages and the other ofcial
South African languages. The language policy details implementation strategies and was made available in
English, Afrikaans and isiXhosa (Western Cape Government 2013:1).
The Language Services component of the Department of Cultural Affairs and Sport consists of a Translating
and Interpreting Unit and a Language Policy Implementation Unit whose activities give effect to Western
Cape Language Policy. The outcomes of the activities of these two units are accessible on the online platform
of the Language Services at https://www.westerncape.gov.za/your_gov/102. Free downloads include
isiXhosa Terminology Development, facts about and insights into South African Sign Language as well as a
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 49
booklet “Teach yourself Nama”. The provision of the latter service is remarkable and demonstrates respect
for the Khoisan revival movement for which Nama is the core marker of identity.
In addition to the nine language policies on the provincial level, the Use of Ofcial Languages Act (Act No.
12 of 2012) further requested all “national departments; national public entities; and national enterprises”
(section 3(1)(a-c)) to adopt a language policy which must “identify at least three ofcial languages that
[they] will use for government purposes” (section 4(2)(b)). The Act further stipulates that they “must take
into account [their] obligation to take practical and positive measures to elevate the status and advance the
use of indigenous languages of historically diminished use and status in accordance with section 6(2) of the
Constitution” (section 4(3)).
The approximately fty government departments as well as museums and theatres, universities and quite a
number of other national institutions were requested to draft their own language policies to comply with the
Use of Ofcial Languages Act (Act No. 12 of 2012). These language policies have been published in the
Government Gazette of the Republic of South Africa. The members of the respective language committees in
these institutions attended short workshops in which they were instructed on how to design the policies. They
were then on their own with little guidance in drafting the language policy documents, which also include
implementation and monitoring strategies. None of them seems to focus on the promotion of multilingual
communication and English is foregrounded, with hardly any provisions being made for including other
languages in meaningful roles. Practicalities, such as the absence of language skills, the requirement of cost-
efciency and the lack of funding, are prevailing notions in all the documents.
It can be expected that the implementation of these policies will face similar problems as the ones discussed by
Nel (2014). In her PhD thesis ‘Challenges and opportunities/possibilities of implementing the Western Cape
language policy’, Jo-Mari Anne Nel concludes that the implementation of the provincial language policy is
jeopardised “by a range of factors such as widespread ignorance of the policy, the dominance of particular
languages [English, Afrikaans] in the province over others [isiXhosa], power relations within government
structures and relatively inexible language ideologies held by those charged with policy implementation at
different levels” (Nel 2014:iv).
5 The performance of the new language policies
The new South African Constitution was designed against the backdrop of accommodating the English-
speaking and, even more so, the Afrikaans-speaking white elites. At the same time the Constitution was
meant to open the doors for the historically oppressed South African majority with the aim of building
a participatory democracy for all citizens, a truly non-racial new South Africa. Despite the constitutional
provisions made for empowering the previously underprivileged African languages, English has in fact
expanded and dominates most public domains.
The report ‘Assessing the performance of the South African Constitution’ (Bilchitz et al 2016) provides
substantial feedback on achievements and failures in the performance of the constitution by reviewing the
past two decades. Albeit otherwise analytical and critical, the authors of the report do express empathy
for the poor performance of the government with regard to compliance with the constitutional request to
promote the eleven ofcial languages.
“While the recognition of 11 ofcial languages may be seen to be part of the compromises made to bring
everyone together, in effect English has become the lingua franca in the country and is used in most ofcial
documents and ceremonies. There are concrete claims that can be made for the other ofcial languages, but
de facto the state has essentially focused on the one common language, English. … full recognition of such
a large number of ofcial languages might be impractical.” (Bilchitz et al 2016:78)
As in the quote above, English is often labelled as South Africa’s lingua franca. Spoken by less than 10%
(census 2011) of South African citizens as a home language and not by the non-white majority, this term is
misleading as lingua francas are commonly languages which serve as egalitarian media in communication
among people speaking different mother tongues; English in South Africa is for most South Africans just
the opposite, namely a divisive and excluding linguistic barrier. The Constitution stipulates equality of all
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 50
eleven ofcial languages, but the lack of commitment to implementing language policies that would foster
multilingualism has in fact supported the increase of exclusively English-speaking domains. The progressive,
emancipatory decision to declare eleven ofcial languages to enhance multilingualism has given rise to just
the opposite; the hegemony of English in today’s South Africa.
The new Constitution itself provides the arguments for getting away with non-compliance with the language
provisions. In chapter 1, section 6.3(a), it is stated that: “The national government and provincial governments
may use any particular ofcial languages for the purposes of government, taking into account usage,
practicality, expense, regional circumstances and the balance of the needs and preferences of the population
as a whole or in the province concerned; but the national government and each provincial government must
use at least two ofcial languages” (author’s italics). The eleven ofcial languages are reduced to “at least
two” on provincial levels and the administration on the local level of municipalities can continue to work
in one language only. Various reasons have been provided as excuses for non-compliance with the legal
language provisions: nancial constraints, reluctance of institutions to change, practical reasons such as
availability and quality of teaching and learning materials and trained teachers, parents’ choices of media of
instruction, etc.
Demands in global economies for efcient communication makes English the default language choice in the
market-driven South African society. For South African citizens uency in English is a prerequisite for career
advancement and also an indispensable requirement for performing well in the educational system. The
improvement of English skills among the non-mother-tongue-speaking South African majority is therefore
generally considered the top priority in all levels of formal education. Many millions of South Africans,
however, are in working and living environments which do not involve communication on a global or even
national level.
The ongoing failures of improving primary and secondary education are to a great extent the result of a
lack of political will to promote and uplift the historically disadvantaged African languages. The challenges
experienced in the non-transformation of South African universities can only be adequately addressed by
the intellectualisation of the African languages (Kaschula and Maseko 2014). At the same time student
numbers in African language departments at South Africa’s universities have dramatically decreased.
Mutasa (2015:52) states that for example in the University of Limpopo and UNISA (University of South
Africa) student registration in African language studies dropped by 90% between 1997 and 2001. At UNISA
enrolment for African languages declined from 25,461 students in 1997 to 800 in 2008. Mutasa (2015:53)
observes a slight recovery in student numbers in more recent times due to the use of new teaching materials
and the adjustment of teaching methods that attract students from other departments. He concludes by stating:
“Thus, while the government and other stakeholders continue to advance the quest for justice in terms of
language policy implementation, on the ground the reality is different as negative attitudes towards the study
of indigenous languages continue unabated” (Mutasa 2015:53).
Mutasa (2015:55) conducted interviews with students and came across a crucial point, namely the double
standard of many lecturers. While they propagate the teaching and speaking of African languages, they
send their own children to English-medium schools and speak English with them at home. Thus they
“conceptualise learning and teaching in indigenous African languages with the children of the poor in mind,
and not for their own children” (Mutasa 2015:55).
Nevertheless, the fact is that poor learning outcomes in South Africa are to a great extent a result of low
language prociency among students and teachers. A new initiative in Gauteng province seems to be a
promising start. In 2017, twelve pilot schools implemented a new language policy under which all students
in Grade 1 take an African language as a second language. A report by the Department of Basic Education
(2013:6) states: “The main aims of the Policy are to: 1. improve prociency in and utility of African languages
at Home Language level, so that learners are able to use their home language prociently. 2. increase access
to languages by all learners, beyond English and Afrikaans, by requiring all non-African Home Language
speakers to learn an African language; and 3. promote social cohesion and economic empowerment and
expand opportunities for the development of African languages as a signicant way of preserving heritage
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 51
and cultures.” If this policy is expanded countrywide, all South African children will speak an African
language in the very near future.
The use of the eleven ofcial languages and other additional languages might be regarded as being impractical
and cumbersome, but there is no alternative for the indispensable transformation of a deeply unequal and
divided society. The use of African languages is at the very heart of the emancipation of the South African
majority. There will be no true transformation of the nation without the uplifting of African languages.
6 Conclusion
This volume discusses the language legislation and policies of countries from different parts of the world
which have more than one ofcial language. These case studies differ in several respects; among others, in
the basic congurations of the kind of languages which have received ofcial status. Finland’s constitution
provides equal ofcial status to the minority language Swedish, while in Malta the indigenous language of
the majority Maltese was added as an ofcial language to English, the language of the former colonisers.
Slovenian is the ofcial language of Slovenia, but the minority languages Hungarian and Italian hold ofcial
status in municipalities in which these languages are spoken. Bolivia has the highest number of ofcial
languages of all constitutions, but with Spanish and thirty-six indigenous languages, some of which are
extinct, ofcial status for most Bolivian languages is on a rather symbolic level. The constitution in fact only
demands the use of Spanish plus one of the indigenous languages for ofcial governmental use. India, one of
the linguistically richest countries in the world, has Hindi and English as ofcial languages and in addition
recognises an additional twenty-one (schedule) ofcial indigenous languages. The discussion on India in this
volume describes the functions and use of Hindi, English and the indigenous languages on different levels
and in distinct domains.
The South African Constitution of 1996 differs from the other case studies in this volume as well as from the
constitutions of the other African countries mentioned above in that it recognises eleven ofcial languages
on an equal footing without affording English or any of the other ten languages any special status. The
Constitution has been printed in all eleven ofcial languages and it categorically demands the transition from
a previously bilingual nation – with Afrikaans and English as the ofcial languages – to a new South Africa
with an additional nine ofcial African languages lined up on the same level. In addition, the South African
linguistic situation differs from the abovementioned settings fundamentally in that no common language is
spoken by a majority of its citizens. Several African languages as well as Afrikaans and English make South
Africa a linguistically rich and highly diverse nation.
The new Constitution of the post-Apartheid South Africa of 1996 addresses languages at unprecedented
length and regulates in great detail the status and anticipated use of all the languages spoken in the country
(albeit not really all as we will see). Amendments to the Constitution as well as other laws passed by the new
South African government further specify the language legislation that is in place today.
South African language policies have been drafted on national and provincial levels as well as by committees
of governmental bodies (such as government departments and national institutions). These language policies
attempt to comply with the legal provisions outlined in the Constitution. They include strategies which
regulate and aim to foster the use of the eleven ofcial as well as other additional languages in government
administration and public services.
The legal provisions and the language policies introduced over the last twenty years have had little promoting
impact on the actual use of languages other than English and Afrikaans in ofcial spheres. These policies
seem to focus on the promotion of singled-out African languages at best, while the promotion of spaces which
allow and encourage multilingual communication should have been aimed for. The non-implementation of
the language policies is felt by the black majority on all levels of society. While having to submit assignments
in English at universities is challenging for black elite South African students whose home language is not
English, not being able to explain health problems in hospitals to English-speaking or Afrikaans-speaking
doctors in townships could have fatal consequences. Despite the fact that South Africa is after Nigeria and
Egypt the third richest country on the African continent, the non-white majority remains impoverished;
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 52
South Africa is still divided along racial lines. African languages, which are the key for the improvement of
the living conditions of the black majorities, do not receive the attention and support from the government
that would be required to make a difference for a better future for their speakers.
South Africa’s past and present demonstrates that the ofcial status of languages matters. Afrikaans, once
suppressed and dominated by English, would not have grown and developed in the ways it did without its
ofcial status. In several South African universities, Afrikaans was the medium of instruction and English
was used secondarily until last year. Since 17 November 2016, all universities have language policies in
place which will make English the only medium of instruction in higher education within the next two years.
For half a century, the Afrikaans-speaking white ruling class divided people by their mother-tongues in an
Apartheid state. The non-white majority was forced to live in separate self-governing administrative units
in which their respective home languages became the “ofcial” languages of these so-called “independent
states”. The languages of black Africans were standardised and language learning and teaching materials
were developed under the Apartheid regime with the agenda to divide and rule the black majority. Thus
languages were used as a divisive device to deny the majority access to resources and political rights. With
eleven ofcial languages, the Constitution of post-Apartheid South Africa is the world champion with regard
to respecting a nation’s language diversity. The ofcial acknowledgment of such a large number of languages
deserves to be saluted as a powerful statement in recognising multilingualism. However, the large number
of ofcial languages has proven to be a major stumbling block for the development of meaningful language
policies and their efcient implementation. This has led to a rapid spread of English in all public domains.
Most problematic in legal terms is the disempowerment of PanSALB by the Pan South African Language Board
Amendment Act (Act No. 10 of 1999). The Constitution of 1996 established PanSALB as an independent
board with the mandate to foster multilingualism and to serve as a watchdog over government activities
involving language issues. Act No. 10 of 1999 amended the Constitution so that PanSALB would no longer
be nominated and dissolved by the Senate but rather by the Minister of Arts and Culture, thus stripping the
board of its independence conferred by the Constitution of 1996. The 1999 amendment immobilises the
board and leaves it as a meaningless instrument, and the Ministry of Arts and Culture without any control.
The board is no longer in a position to deliver on its mandate, which includes monitoring the Ministries. On
15 January 2016, the Minister of Arts and Culture dissolved PanSALB and no new board members have been
assigned since then (as of May 2017).
Thus three levels of challenges to the execution of the language provisions made in the Constitution can be
distinguished:
Firstly, the focus should be on establishing multilingual language usage strategies to foster a non-English
counter-hegemony. Instead of emphasising uplifting and supporting individual, selected (ofcial) African
languages, a legal framework should foreground multilingualism as practiced in communication among non-
white South African citizens. Since all Nguni languages and all Sotho languages are closely related, strategies
could be to use one language of each of the two groupings and add English, Afrikaans and Tshivenda (and
Xitsonga) in ofcial communication (cf. Alexander 1989).
Secondly, language policies would need to be designed with political and expert guidance and would need to
address existing communication needs and facilitate opportunities for multilingual spaces.
Thirdly, by granting eleven languages ofcial status, the Constitution of 1996 in fact accelerated the
hegemony of English in a country in which the great majority does not speak this language of the elites. Time
will show if the growing voices that demand transformation and decolonisation will also result in a spreading
of multilingual practices in public places and ofcial contexts.
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 53
7 References
AlexAnder, Neville 1989. Language Policy and National Unity in South Africa/Azania. Cape Town: Buchu
Books.
Beukes, Anne-Maria 2008. ‘Language policy implementation in South Africa: How Kempton Park’s great
expectations are dashed’. In Tshwane, Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics (SPIL), 38, 1-26.
Beukes, Anne-Maria 2009. ‘Language policy incongruity and African languages in post-apartheid South
Africa’. Language Matters. Studies in the languages of Africa 40(1): 35-55.
Bilchitz, David; GlAser, Daryl; konstAnt, Andrew; Du Toit, Linette; Moshikaro, Khomotso and Merle
Werbeloff 2016. Assessing the Performance of the South African Constitution. Strömsborg: International
Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.
BrenzinGer, Matthias and Patrick heinrich 2013. ‘The return of Hawaiian: Language networks of the revival
movement’. Current Issues in Language Planning 14:2, 1-17.
henrArd, Kristin 2002. Minority Protection in Post-apartheid South Africa: Human Rights, Minority Rights,
and Self-determination. Praeger.
JordAAn, K. A. 1954. ‘What are the National Groups in South Africa? A Contribution to the Symposium’,
Forum Club, Cape Town, May 1954 (Document 54). In: Allison Drew (ed.) South Africa’s Radical Tradition, a
documentary history, Volume Two 1943-1964. (http://www.sahistory.org.za/archive/document-54-k-jordaan-
what-are-national-groups-south-africa-contribution-symposium-forum-clu#sthash.eL657Ygm.dpuf).
kAschulA, Russell H. and Pamela MAseko 2014. ‘The Intellectualisation of African Languages,
Multilingualism and Education: A Research-based Approach’. Alternation Special Edition 13 (2014) 8-35.
lAppinG, Brian 1986. Apartheid: a history. London: Paladin.
Methrie, Rajend 2002. ‘South Africa: a sociolinguistic overview’. In: Rajend Mesthrie Language in South
Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MutAsA, Davie Elias 2015. ‘Language policy implementation in South African Universities vis-à-vis
the speakers of indigenous African languages’ perception’. Per Linguam 2015 31(1):46-59 http://dx.doi.
org/10.5785/31-1-631 46.
nel, Jo-Mari Anne 2014. ‘Challenges and opportunities/possibilities of implementing the Western Cape
language policy’. PhD thesis. University of the Western Cape, South Africa.
pAlMer, Vernon Valentine (ed.) 2001. Mixed Jurisdictions Worldwide: The Third Legal Family. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
repuBlic of south AfricA. 1963. Republic of South Africa Constitution Act (Act No. 110 of 1963) Pretoria:
Government Printer.
repuBlic of south AfricA. 1993. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act No. 200 of 1993). Pretoria:
Government Printer.
repuBlic of south AfricA. 1995. Pan South African Language Board Act (Act No. 59 of 1996). Pretoria:
Government Printer.
repuBlic of south AfricA. 1996. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act No. 108 of 1996). Pretoria:
Government Printer.
repuBlic of south AfricA. 1998. Western Cape Provincial Language Act (Act No. 13 of 1998). Pretoria:
Government Printer.
Matthias Brenzinger
Eleven Ofcial Languages and More: Legislation and Language Policies in South Africa
Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law, núm. 67, 2017 54
repuBlic of south AfricA. 1999. Pan South African Language Board Act Amendment Act (Act No. 10 of
1999). Pretoria: Government Printer.
repuBlic of south AfricA. 2012. Use of Ofcial Languages Act (Act No. 12 of 2012). Pretoria: Government
Printer.
repuBlic of south AfricA. Department of Basic Education. 2003. Incremental Introduction of African
Languages: Draft Policy: September 2013.
repuBlic of trAnskei. 1976. Republic of Transkei Constitution Act (Act No. 15 of 1976). Pretoria: Government
Printer.
soudien, Crain 2016. ‘Neville Alexander and the struggle for freedom and social justice’. In: Zinn, Allan
(ed.) Non-Racialism in South Africa. The life and times of Neville Alexander. Stellenbosch: SUN MeDIA.
Pp vii-xvii.
stAtistics south AfricA 2012. Census 2011: Census in brief. Pretoria: Statistics South Africa.
stultz, Newell Maynard 1974. Afrikaner Politics in South Africa, 1934-1948. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
union of south AfricA. 1953. Bantu Education Act (Act No. 47 of 1953). Pretoria: Government Printer
union of south AfricA. 1959. Promotion of Bantu Self-governing Act (Act No. 46 of 1959). Pretoria:
Government Printer.
union of south AfricA. 1959. Extension of University Education Act (Act No. 45 of 1959). Pretoria:
Government Printer.
university of the free stAte. 17.11.2016. Judgement in the Supreme Court of Appeal about UFS Language
Policy. http://www.ufs.ac.za/template/news-archive-item?news=7962
Western cApe GovernMent, Department of Cultural Affairs and Sport. 2013. The Language Policy
Implementation Unit 2013. Western Cape Language Policy. Cape Town.

VLEX utiliza cookies de inicio de sesión para aportarte una mejor experiencia de navegación. Si haces click en 'Aceptar' o continúas navegando por esta web consideramos que aceptas nuestra política de cookies. ACEPTAR