I READ with some degree of interest Diescho’s Dictum published in the New Era Newspaper of 29th April 2014.
In his article, Diescho rightfully explains, and to some extent argues the importance of a national language. He decries the fact that Africa does not have its own national African language, instead it has adopted the language of its former colonisers.
He went on to suggest that Namibia should have a national African language of its own and that language should be Herero. He reasons that Otjiherero has the highest quota of African intellectuals in the country; those who speak it effortlessly; Otjiherero first language speakers are the most cohesive social group in independent Namibia, he claims
He also explains that for a language to grow it needs champions and eloquent users, claiming Otjiherero has that already. He strengthens this argument by citing the Founding Father as being one of the champions who speaks the language effortlessly.
He also mentions that Otjiherero as a language is a Bantu language that has bits and pieces of other dialects in its composition making it easily understood by speakers of other languages.
Lastly, Diescho mentions that Hereros have a national dress, and Otjiherero is a language with the ability to blur the existence of tribal dialect and lower the linguistic barriers that exist; as such he proposes the language (Otjiherero) as the national African language for Namibia.
Let me start by agreeing with him that the idea of a national African language is commendable, however I have misgivings in some areas of Diescho’s claims; especially with regard to his choice of what he thinks should be a Namibian national African language.
Let me state here clearly that I am an Otjiherero speaker, making comments based on my observations. In most cases we in Africa have a habit of shifting blames elsewhere – that is why our progress is mostly limited if any.
Intellectual status
Firstly when Diescho says that Otjiherero has the highest quota of intellectuals who speak it effortlessly and hence it deserves to be a national language: Is he trying to say Otjiherero speakers are the most educated people in Namibia or is he simply saying the combined intellectuals in Namibia of all languages speak Otjiherero?
He in a way adds weight to that claim by arguing that for a language to grow, it needs champions and eloquent users like the Founding Father.
Whatever he means, I highly doubt whether that is criteria enough to make one language a national language. We all know that the educated, the so-called intellectuals are usually the privileged few who in many cases have tended to disassociate themselves from their lineages in society. They make up the majority of the African “elites” that now continue to look the other way as the majority of their people wallow in poverty. They are in most cases those of us who are less African than the rest of us.
On numerous occasions these elites have even chosen to use any other language other than their own mother tongue, in a bid to escape their African-ess.
Someone might also query the claim that Otjiherero speakers have the highest quota of intellectuals and champions – how did he arrive at this figure? Has he got it statistically proven in a study or is it just hearsay by those one mostly surrounds him/herself with?
Numerical Advantage
Demographically we know that Oshiwambo speakers are the majority in this country (Namibia Statistic Agency); and honestly speaking they have quite a good number of champions, people like the Founding Father, as mentioned by him (Diescho) and a number of intellectuals too. I therefore question how he came to the conclusion that Otjiherero speakers have the highest number of champions and intellectuals in Namibia; needless to say that these are in no way any criteria to choose a language to be a national language.
On the other hand, is Diescho trying to say that Oshiwambo speakers don’t have as many intellectuals and that those who speak it are not fluent and eloquent enough in their own mother tongue?
In my view for a language to grow and become a preferred medium of communication, it has to be widely spoken by the majority of people, educated or not. This is why Mandarin spoken by Chinese has become dominant in China and other parts of the world want to learn it.
That also goes for Swahili. It is why it has been adapted by a number of Western countries as a language of broadcasting. It is the reason some colleges in Western countries have even introduced Swahili as a discipline in their syllabi. Meaning quantity not quality counts in a language’s favour to be considered the lingua franca for a people.
Take this for example. In Kenya; the Kikuyus are the dominant tribe, probably followed by the Luos. Given their number, they could be having the highest number of intellectuals in Kenya, however, it’s widely believed that the Luos, who are far less in number, have the highest number of intellectuals in Kenya, and for a good reason too. Although the two are not all Bantu, most of them speak and understand some of the other when they speak.
However, neither Luo, nor Kikuyu is the national language of Kenya, Swahili is. The same goes for Tanzania; they have the Sukuma people that make up about 16%, making it the largest tribe, followed by another tribe the Chagas that are third in terms of size.
Again, neither Kisukuma nor the Kichaga is spoken in Tanzania as the national language. Both Kenya and Tanzania have instead chosen Swahili as their national language; why, because it is the language widely spoken by all the people in the entire region. It has a great unifying factor and a better reach than any other language spoken by some selected intellectuals in either of the countries.
Socially cohesive?
The most perplexing argument Diescho puts forth for his choice of Otjiherero for a Namibian African national language is the claim that Otjihereo first language speakers, which is another way of saying those who speak Otjiherero as mother tongue, or simply Hereros, are and I quote, “… the most cohesive social group in independent Namibia…” Nothing could be further from the truth. In my more than ten years of living in Namibia, what I have learnt about the different tribes of Namibia is the complete opposite of Diescho’s claim.
The only thing I find true about this statement by Diescho is that he has very limited knowledge of Namibian people and especially their social characteristics and sense of interaction.
But I think he may be excused for that. Diescho has been a resident of South Africa for many years only returning recently, probably less than a year ago. This seems to have taken a toll on him.
My observation of my people is that they are probably the most disunited people in a post-independence Namibia. There are a number of reasons and incidences for my claim – I mention a few.
In the high court of Namibia today, if you dare go through records, you will find court cases of Hereros against Hereros; those in green verses the ones in red; but both wear German relics for attire.
In police records today, you find dates when the Namibian Police had to intervene in Herero gatherings somewhere in the country, probably Okahandja, to save Hereros from tearing each other to pieces.
Many previously oppressed and systematically abused or violated people in the world today have been formally apologised to and paid reparation. This, however, has not happened to Africans in general for slavery and other crimes including forced labour. Similarly in Namibia, any formal apology or proper reparation to the Hereros and Namas has not been forthcoming. It is exacerbated by the Hereros who want to handle the issue mostly among themselves instead of letting it be a national issue, addressed at government level.
It that way, it would have more weight and get the attention of the German government. The Hereros want this issue dealt with at a chief-government level.
It is the reason the Germans hardly listen to them. It’s the reason that when the less-government, but mostly Herero delegation went to Germany (the trip before the last) under the leadership of KK the Germans left them unattended in some low-life four-walled room without proper attention; it’s the reason the Germans have constantly ignored them, because the German government is not about to be drowned in some chief’s discussion. The chief culture long ended in Europe. To them a chief can probably meet some cultural centre curator; not government officials.
Had the Hereros fully committed the Government of the Republic of Namibia to handle this issue, I bet the outcome could have been different today.
Given this little review of what I have come to learn about the Namibian people, does Diescho still want to tell us that the Otjiherero first speakers are the most cohesive people in the country?
Other Choices
Nonetheless, there are of course certain positive and negative aspects of every tribe or race, none is perfect. This article is therefore not an attempt to entirely castigate the idea that Otjiherero could be one of the choices for a Namibian national language; it is simply to say that perhaps there could be another choice, and criteria probably widened if not changed as a method of arriving at such a language if at all it’s worth it.
Concerned Otjiherero Speaker
Private Bag 45
Khomasdal
(Real name and address provided