The imprtance of language

Firstly, language is a medium of communication, mirrors ones identity and is an integral part of culture. Language as the soul of culture. language is a means of expression and allows a person to participate in community activities. It can be used as a medium of fostering a democratic culture. In this sense, language policy plays a vital role in the process of democratic transition. The African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights convincingly succinctly captured the first and second points when it argued that Language is an integral part of the structure of culture; it in fact constitutes its pillar and means of expression par excellence. Its usage enriches the individual and enables him to take an active part in the community and its activities. To deprive a man of such participation amounts to depriving him of his identity. In the meeting of experts in language teaching in a bi-or plurilingual and mulicultural environment organised by Unesco (19-23 December 1977), it was noted that the three main trends which bind these otherwise divergent countries of Africa and Asia such as rediscovery of the importance of indigenous languages, understanding the importance of mother tounges for equal access to education forr everybody, and promotion of unity of the polity comprising a large number of heterogenous ethnolinguistic groups by selection and deveopment of a national language. On the other hand, selection and subsequent promotion of national languages was considered essential, because the access language serves as one of the main unifying factors in the national intergration and it becomes the symbol of national pride. It is also a means of national identity, and it serves as the medium of interethnic and intercultural communication (Srivastava, 1988 : 669) Language can also be a source of power, social mobility and opportunities. The linguistic situation of a countrys society usually reflects its power structure, as language is an effective instrument of societal control. Discursive and cultural processes, such as language standardization, constitute forms of power that change how groups view and value language. These form of modern power result in particular desires, beliefs, and goals being promoted or resisted. As we willsee, the oness ability to access valued material and smbolic resources that serve ones interest often derives directly or indirectly from political and economic sources. We will also see how dominant forms of power, particularly in colonial and other oppressive social processes are maintained and legitimized through ideology and other discursive means. Relations of power also intersect with ethnic, gender, class, and other social relations and

shape personal and cultural identities. Ethnicities are constructed on the basis of shared histiries, traditions, and social and environmental relations, and the people use language to talk about these things (Patrick, 1986: 5-6).

Fifth, linguistic loss is sometimes seen as a symbol of a more general crisis of biodiversity, especially indigenous languages that are seen as containing within them a wealth of ecological information that will be lost as the language is lost. This ecolinguistic school of thought regards saving endangered languages as an important part of the larger challenge of preserving biodiversity. According to Keebe the loss of a language is the permanent, irrevocable loss of a certain vision of the world, comparable to the loss of an animal or a plant[13]. Nettle and Romaine buttress this argument by emphasizing that Losing a language, irrespective of the number of speakers of that language, deprives humanity of a part of our universal human heritage insofar as the language embodies a unique worldview and knowledge of local ecosystems[14]. The biodiversity analogy has engendered the use of metaphors such as language survival, and death[15] and even more emotively, killer languages and linguistic genocide. Makoni and Trudell argue convincingly that this terminology highlights an ethical judgement that language loss is morally wrong, regardless of the particular conditions of its social uses, and that linguistic diversity is inherently good[16]. Sixth, language has served both as a reason (or pretext) for brutal conflict, and as a touchstone of tolerance. Language can serve, in all spheres of social life, to bring people together or to divide them. Language rights can serve to unite societies, whereas violations of language rights can trigger and inflame conflict. There is, therefore, every reason to clarify the position of language rights in various African states and in international human rights law, and to analyse the experience of the management of multilingualism in diverse societies. This dissertation becomes useful in this regard. [1] 1986 Decolonizing the mind, the politics of language in African literature, Nairobi: Heinemann.

[2] Isaac Mumpande; Silent Voices: Indigenous languages in Zimbabwe, page 1. [3] In the article Complementary and conflicting discourses of linguistic diversity: Implications for Language Planning in Per Linguam 2006 22(2): 14-28 at page 21. [4] 2000. African voices. Oxford: Oxford University Press [5] Serpell, R. 1993 The significance of schooling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [6] Note 13 above [7] Grin F and Daftary F 2003 Nation Building, Ethnicity and Language Politics in Transition Countries Budapest: Open Society Institute, LGI. [8] Malawi African Association and Others v Mauritania (2000) AHRLR 149. [9] http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php accessed on 18 May 2007. [10] Literacy and Bilingualism, London: Longman 1990. [11] Note 13 above [12] Note 3 above at page 368 [13] Keebe, D. 2003. Language policy and linguistic theory. In J Marais and M Morris (eds), Languages in a globalising world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press page 47-58 [14] Note 4 above [15] Crystal, DAVID. 2000. Language death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [16] Note 13 above http://www.mazwi.net/essays/the-importance-of-language This language is not just a symbol of ethnicity and culturally, but also politically, historically, and economically. Some social environments are more politically chared than others, but in general, minority language situations where national identities are being constructed and promoted by the states are are sites in which language becomes a major element in the construction of differenceboth within and between countries... (Grillo, 1989: 2). By viewing language as a site of political struggle, we become aware of the social context of minority language practices, the connection between linguistics interactions in institutions and

those in the community, and the power relations embedded in the social reality of community members. We also come to recognize the connection between individual and community attitudes toward language and the language policy of regional administrations (Ibid: 16).