 |
KAHENDI'S BLOG
Can censoring indigenous languages prevent ethnic hatred?
|
Today, a status update on the Facebook fan page of the Daily Nation has clarified the guidelines that users are expected to follow. The rationale behind the guidelines is to promote spirited discussions that remain within the bounds of decency and the law. This is not surprising at all. January 23rd 2012 is an important day in Kenyan history. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has finally made the ruling that four Kenyan men will stand trial for allegedly committing crimes against humanity during the 2007-2008 Post Election Violence (PEV). The four men are William Ruto, Uhuru Kenyatta, Francis Muthaura and Joshua Arap Sang.
Many Kenyans have heaved a huge sigh of relief at the ICC’s ruling. They would like to see justice for those who were killed, maimed and terrorized during the PEV, and realize that this would be next to impossible in a Kenyan court of law. Of course the ICC’s ruling is not an indication that any of the men is guilty by law. They still have to go to trial for that to be established or disproven. Furthermore, some have pointed out that it took more than four people to engineer the bloody events of 2007 and 2008 and that, consequently, any justice achieved at the end of the day is unlikely to be complete. Regardless of the outcome of the trial, Kenyans can rest assured that the trial will force them to come to terms with the underbelly of Kenyan political culture.
This brings us back to the Daily Nation’s Facebook fan page, where various Kenyan critics and supporters of the four men have expressed their respective elation and anger at the ruling. In response to the inciting language used by some, the moderator of the page has seen fit to reiterate the guidelines for posting on the page. Some of the guidelines entail basic internet courtesy. They ask fans to be courteous, to avoid posting in ALL CAPS and to refrain from personal attacks against each other. Others are targeted at more serious forms of offensive speech. Defamation, hate speech, sexism, tribalism and racism in posts are forbidden.
The guidelines outlined thus far sound reasonable. However, the third guideline, concerning the use of language, is curious. It states, “Since participants in the forums are from mixed backgrounds, English shall be the primary language of conversation. Some widely "accepted" slang and pidgin - Sheng -might also be permitted.” This is a curious statement for two primary reasons. One is the fact that Swahili, Kenya’s national language is completely dismissed in a forum predominantly frequented by Kenyan speakers of Swahili. The second is the fact that Kenya’s other indigenous languages are dismissed with a simple flourish. The latter can be justified as a temporary measure to keep the discussion open and minimally-polarized but there is no legitimate reason to disallow the use of Swahili on the forum.
Considering that the Nation Media Group publishes Taifa Leo, the national Swahili-language newspaper, and makes regular media broadcasts in eloquent Swahili, disallowing the use of Swahili on the Facebook page makes absolutely no sense. I am not even going to pretend to understand the reasoning behind it. I hope that when the number of people complaining about that ‘oversight’ reaches critical mass, the moderator of the page will correct it. I will, however, spend some time discussing the connection between the guideline and Kenyans’ conflicted relationships with their indigenous languages. While Swahili is an indigenous language, it is also the national language of Kenya, more widely spoken than English and understood by most Kenyans. Thus some of my statements about indigenous languages below may not apply to Swahili.
For the record, I don’t think that banning the use of Kenya’s indigenous languages in ‘Kenyan’ virtual space will neutralize the hateful sentiments felt by many Kenyans about their fellow Kenyans. Any person determined to post in hateful language will do so, even in English or Sheng’. However, I understand the reasons behind this decision on the part of the moderator of this Facebook page.
Some Kenyans resort to the use of their indigenous languages when they want to express hateful sentiments about other ethnic groups. The indigenous language has become, for them, a code to unite ‘insiders’ and to mark them as unique and different from the hated ‘outsiders.’They post divisive and inciting statements in their respective languages, often using objectifying code words to refer to the ‘other.’ Interestingly, the average person that does this seems to be of the opinion that speaking in his or her indigenous language offers protection from public scrutiny. The person erroneously believes that members of other ethnic groups will not understand these statements and that all members of his or her ethnic group will sympathize with them.
People who have been following the ICC hearings will point out that media broadcasts and speeches by public personalities in indigenous languages were characterized by the same problems and ultimately played a significant role in fracturing Kenyan society and inciting the different sides to violence in 2007-2008. Others will point out that various Kenyan discussion boards and blogs allowed the same kind of unmoderated hate speech in indigenous languages, and consequently made the situation worse. It is this history of the misuse of Kenya’s indigenous languages that makes any Kenyan entity that maintains an interactive forum online or in the mass media wary about allowing indigenous language contributions. It is not surprising that some of them would opt to completely do away with Kenyan indigenous languages and the logistical complications of trying to moderate comments in these languages.
Kenyan indigenous languages have clearly earned a terrible reputation, particularly in recent years. But is this reputation fair? Are these languages primarily the vehicles for the expression of hatred? Of course the reputation is unfair. Indigenous languages are not primarily used to express hatred and create divisiveness. Indigenous languages are vehicles for the expression of every aspect of culture- the good, the bad and the ugly. So is English, and so is Sheng’. In fact, many Kenyans who spend time online will attest that tribalism, racism and other forms of hatred are predominantly articulated in English on Kenyan forums.
Hatred is not brought into being by indigenous languages. In reality, many Kenyans live in cosmopolitan communities and are, consequently, multilingual. They worship together, go to school together, do business together, often intermarry and learn each other’s languages. So Kenya’s indigenous languages are the collective heritage of the Kenyan people. Banning the use of these languages in cosmopolitan forums is not a long-term solution for anything.
That said I cannot blame the NMG for trying to keep things simple on their Facebook page. Disallowing the use of Kenya’s indigenous languages is probably a wise move in the short term: it will make the page relatively easy to moderate in a time of heightened sensitivities. However, they will eventually have to come up with a sustainable approach to moderating comments that does not involve the censorship of entire languages.
This work is licensed to R. Kahendi under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License.
|
|
| January 23, 2012 | 7:05 PM |
|
|
|
Teaching through humiliation: Tough love or cruelty?
|
Today a popular East African radio show host received a message from one of her fans, an aspiring writer who was seeking advice about how to get published. The young writer made the mistake of sending the radio show host a message ridden with grammatical errors and typos. How did the radio show host respond? She posted the young writer’s message, complete with her name, age and alma mater on her Facebook wall, with a statement to the effect that nobody would take a self-proclaimed writer seriously if she couldn’t be bothered to write her message properly.
The radio show host had a point about the importance of such details as grammar and spelling in letters of inquiry about jobs and about opportunities for publication. Hiring managers routinely disqualify candidates who send them documents that are full of errors. In their experience, people who don’t pay attention to detail in their formal communication are bound to carry the same casual attitude into the job. This is especially the case in the writing professions, where the correct use of language is necessary for clear communication. It is important for those in the know to convey this information to aspiring professionals as they would otherwise continually sabotage their efforts to find decent jobs and opportunities.
The radio show host was likely thinking along these lines when she set out to show her fan “tough love” on her page. However, she went overboard. Her attempt to shame her fan ended up overshadowing any lessons she might have imparted and probably earned her a huge chunk of ill will.
Now, it is not the role of an entertainer to teach her fans the finer points of English grammar or to connect them to professional opportunities. So the radio show host would have been entirely within her rights to ignore her fan’s letter. However, she did choose to respond, and she did so in her professional capacity. So she should have taken the time to do it properly: she should have sent a private response to her fan, answering her question, and pointing out the flaws in her approach. Then, if she felt inclined to turn it into a teachable moment for her other fans, she should have written a note on the subject without singling out the fan and sharing the specific contents of her letter.
Radio entertainers may not view themselves as journalists, but they do have a public platform, and the capacity to reach and affect hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of listeners with their words. Their profession brings with it great responsibility. More so if they take it upon themselves to inform or educate their fans on matters that fall outside their immediate purview. Belittling their fans for lacking sophistication in professional etiquette is unprofessional. It is also a wasted opportunity to make a meaningful difference.
|
|
| December 20, 2011 | 6:53 PM |
|
|
|
A response to the article “Kiswahili Tech Projects are falling apart, why?”
Related to country: Kenya
available in: (original) |
|
I have enjoyed reading Kachwanya’s 2009 article, “Kiswahili Tech Projects are falling apart, why?” because I think it addresses an important subject. The article makes it evident that there are different levels of language use and that, while a given population may find it natural to speak in one language, the same population might prefer to use technology or engage in professional writing/ speech in a completely different language. As contradictory as such a situation might seem, it reflects the linguistic complexity of our everyday experiences. I must mention that the article does have one significant shortfall. In my opinion, an article that makes claims this strong about Kiswahili technology projects should be based on more than the writer’s personal experience. Frankly, I was expecting the writer to have interviewed a wide range of people outside his/ her immediate circle and to have actual data from Facebook, Microsoft and others about the long-term success of their Kiswahili projects.
Having read the article, I’m interested in understanding, first of all, whether the alleged unpopularity of the Kiswahili versions of Facebook, Microsoft Office etc. among Kenyans constitutes a problem. I personally think that it is not a crisis. I imagine the popularity and accessibility of these forms will increase over time. Let’s give the average user of technology time to get used to the features of the Kiswahili version of Facebook. Let’s also give the translators time to expand and stabilize the Kiswahili lexicon as they adapt various words for use in technological contexts. These are processes that take time and they will (hopefully) catch on.
I also think that there is a significant difference between the use of language in everyday conversational contexts and the use of the same language in technical contexts. I would be more concerned if the average Kenyan was unable to use Kiswahili in the former context than in the latter one. It is a bit premature to sound the alarm bells over the latter. Kenya is not Tanzania. The two nations have adopted English and Swahili in different ways for different reasons. So one cannot properly compare the two without examining why they adopted their specific language policies and why they continue to reinforce those policies. Tanzania’s language policy may have done wonders for Tanzanian nationalism and for the development of Kiswahili as a regional lingua franca, but there are also associated negative implications for the average Tanzanian when it comes to transitioning from the use of Kiswahili at the lower levels of education to the use of English at the higher levels. There are also implications for international trade.
When the writer discusses his/ her inability to understand Dr. Naomi Shaban’s contributions to a parliamentary debate without consulting a dictionary, he/ she illustrates his/ her own inability to understand the language well when the speaker employs specialized vocabulary. That is only natural. I admit to not understanding half of what goes on in the US Congress even though I speak English pretty well. So, like I said before, the writer’s dilemma is not a crisis. I imagine that if he/ she wants to address that issue, he/ she is already on the right track: reading and listening to technical Kiswahili and consulting a dictionary when confused will help significantly. That is part of the learning process and it is commendable too.
400 Bad request
Your browser sent an invalid request.
Automatically translated into Swedish thanks to WorldLingo
|
|
|
|
|
Proposed University a Potential Threat to World Heritage Site?
Related to country: Kenya
available in: (original) |
|
http://www.the-star.co.ke/local/coast/28631-museums-body-against-coast-university-plans
Museums body against Coast university plans
Monday, 20 June 2011 00:06 BY MAUREEN MUDI
Sharp divisions have emerged over the planned establishment of a university near a World Heritage site in Coast province. The university is to be established near Kaya Fungo, which is a World Heritage site. It is feared that some local leaders may have been ‘compromised’ to accept the project, which according to Heritage experts, may affect the values and setting of the site.
The official said the scale and type of development would have a disastrous effect on the Kaya rural setting and its environs and will affect its status. He added, “Besides, there is plenty of land available in the general Mariakani area including the one adjacent to the Mariakani/Kaloleni road, which is currently being tarmacked,” Githitho said NMK should move swiftly to discourage the university from the idea using formal and informal means to set up the campus.
400 Bad request
Your browser sent an invalid request.
Automatically translated into Swedish thanks to WorldLingo
|
|
| April 24, 2011 | 12:24 PM |
|
Latest Posts
Photo Posts
View All Photos
Monthly Archive
Change Language
Tags Archive
aborigines africa anglican awareness bookreview christian conference/forum discrimination eastafrica ethnicviolence filmreview hiv/aids jobseekers kenya kiswahili language languagepolicy luo luoafricanilosaharanmaat media misrepresentation motherlanguageday peaceandconflict professionalism racism radio senses/ability stigma swahili translation
Links
160350 views
|
|
