In this discussion on the necessity of language planning I elaborate the mismatch between

language policy and practice in South Africa as claimed by Sapire and Essien (2021). In their
research they propose that the language policy in South Africa intends to support
multilingualism, but in practice it is supporting a system of multiple monolingualism. In the
classroom context multilingualism is explained as the use of various languages at the same time
in teaching and learning or in other words the use of translanguaging practices that entails the
free mixing of languages when speaking or writing (Sapire and Essien, 2021). While multiple
monolingualism is defined as the use of one language at a time, despite the fact that many
languages are used as the language of teaching and learning. Multiple monolingualism therefore
means that even though a teacher or learner may be proficient in various languages the mixing of
languages is not encouraged (Sapire and Essien, 2021).
The subordination of African languages in relation to the European languages propagated
through colonial language policies in Sub-Saharan Africa is rife (Bamgbose, 1999). These
African languages suffer low esteem and most are not well developed in terms of being reduced
to writing, the development of dictionaries and grammar and available literature resources
(Bamgbose, 1999). In South Africa instruction in the African languages continues to be seen as
inferior because it is associated with the Bantu education system implemented during Apartheid.
This system was understood to be a mechanism of limiting access to English for the non-white
population (Bamgbose, 1999). This is one of the reasons why the preservation and rebranding of
African languages is a necessity and that can only be done through the successful
implementation of research-based language policy and sound language planning. Our African
languages are unlikely to spontaneously regenerate and go through a natural phase of expansion
in a reasonable amount of time due to their downgraded status and historic marginalization
(Bamgbose, 1999). Aggressive language planning is therefore necessary. Bamgbose (1999)
makes a number of proposals describing what such language planning may entail one of which is
to combat negative attitudes towards African languages through awareness campaigns.
A possible consequence of poor language planning in South Africa could be the extinction of
African cultures and society as a whole (Bokamba, 1995). Most of the language policies on the
African continent have been imposed instead of being developed systematically and a retention
of the inherited colonial language policies threatens to preserve power dynamics and political
elitism. Bokamba (1995) notes that language planning in Africa has been hampered by
widespread multilingualism and unstable political structures in that multilingualism has often
been used as an excuse by politicians for not developing policies that are based on the promotion
of African languages. Arguments for the retention of colonial style policies as made by African
politicians include nation building, cost effectiveness and efficiency for wider communication
(Bokamba, 1995).
Sapire and Essien (2021) conducted a research study towards the end of investigating the
implementation of the South African language in Education Policy and found evidence of
multiple monolingualism options in the policy that does not fully provide for the multilingual
teachers and learners that it serves. The multilingual context in the province of Gauteng where
they focused their research is so diverse that the insistence in the policy on a single language of
teaching and learning has resulted in a situation where it is now common that neither the teacher
nor the learner is using their home language (Sapire and Essien, 2021). This finding is
particularly important as the policy in question may be one characterization of poor language
planning and translanguaging practices would most likely improve this reality.