The Ambiguity of English as a Lingua Franca

Grounded in ethnography, this monograph explores the ambiguity of English

as a lingua franca by focusing on the identity politics of language and race in
contemporary South Africa. The book adopts a multidisciplinary approach
which highlights how the ways of speaking English constructs identities in a
multilingual context. Focusing primarily on isiZulu and Afrikaans speakers, it
raises critical questions around power and ideology. The study draws on lit-
erature on English as a lingua franca, raciolinguistics, and the cultural politics
of English and dialogues between these fields. It challenges long-held concepts
underpinning existing research from the global North by highlighting how they
do not transfer and apply to the identity politics of language in South Africa. It
sketches out how these struggles for belonging are reflected in marginalization
and empowerment and a vast range of local, global, and glocal identity trajec-
tories. Ultimately, it offers a first lens through which global scholarship on
English as a lingua franca can be decolonized in terms of disciplinary limita-
tions, geopolitical orientations, and a focus on the politics of race that char-
acterize the use of English as a lingua franca all over the world. This book will
be of interest to students and researchers in linguistic anthropology, socio-
linguistics, World Englishes, English as lingua franca and African studies.

Stephanie Rudwick is a linguistic anthropologist and interdisciplinarian in

African Studies/Political Science at the University of Hradec Králové, Czech
Republic and an honorary affiliate at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, South
Africa. Her research focuses primarily on the sociocultural politics of language,
race, ethnicity, and gender and she has published widely on these topics.
Routledge Studies in Linguistic Anthropology

Promoting Heritage Language in Northwest Russia

Laura Siragusa

Narratives of Conflict, Belonging, and the State

Discourse and Social Life in Post-War Ireland
Brigittine M. French

Difference and Repetition in Language Shift to a Creole

The Expression of Emotions
Maïa Ponsonnet

Narrating Migration
Intimacies of Exclusion in Northern Italy
Sabina Perrino

The Ambiguity of English as a Lingua Franca

Politics of Language and Race in South Africa
Stephanie Rudwick

Discourses of Student Success

Language, Class, and Social Personae in Italian Secondary Schools
Andrea R. Leone-Pizzighella

For more information about this series, please visit

https://www.routledge.com/Routledge-Studies-in-Linguistic-Anthropology/
book-series/RSLA
The Ambiguity of English as a
Lingua Franca
Politics of Language and Race in South
Africa

Stephanie Rudwick
First published 2022
by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
and by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2022 Taylor and Francis
The right of Stephanie Rudwick to be identified as author of this work
has been asserted by her in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced
or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means,
now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording,
or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or
registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and
explanation without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A catalog record for this title has been requested

ISBN: 978-0-367-14355-8 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-1-032-05295-3 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-0-429-03147-2 (ebk)
DOI: 10.4324/9780429031472

Typeset in Sabon
by Taylor & Francis Books
To my parents, and to
my children, but especially
to Joshua who has been my guardian angel all along
Contents

Acknowledgements viii

1 Introduction: Framing the Study 1

2 English in the World and as a Lingua Franca 17
3 The Making of English as a Lingua Franca in South Africa 36
4 Marginalization and Empowerment 49
5 Linguistic Mobility and Racial Authenticity 65
6 Cosmopolitanism and Parochialism 81
7 Gender(ed) Ambiguities 100
8 Disruption and Innovation 116
9 Positionality and Reflexivity 133
10 Conclusion: Moving the Centre 143

Bibliography 153
Index 185
Acknowledgements

This book was written in unprecedented times. The COVID-19 pandemic has
created challenges on uncharted territory for humankind, but it is also another
aspect of human existence which marked this recent period: Black Lives
Matter. Although I primarily write about language matters, racialization pro-
cesses and racism come into play on many pages of this book. In South Africa,
language and race intersect in complex ways in English lingua franca interac-
tion and to ignore race would mean to ignore socio-political injustices. In some
ways the pandemic highlighted that language is a racial justice matter, for
instance, by the extensive codeswitching from English to African languages in
official national COVID briefings by politicians. English often fails as a useful
lingua franca and this book can therefore only partially do justice to the harsh
raciolinguistic realities in the country. And yet, I hope that this monograph
offers a perspective from which we can pay increasing attention to the complex
ways in which linguistic and racial dynamics intersect and mutually constitute
each other. I have aimed to develop understandings of the ambiguous roles of
English as a putative lingua franca in South Africa through a wide ethnographic
lens. Carving out contradictions and tensions due to South African racio-
linguistic realities is what this book is about. It provides a transdisciplinary,
and an un-disciplined way of exploring language matters.
This book is the result of my profound affinity to South Africa during the past
20 years. Although I only permanently lived in the country for eight of these years,
my elective affinity and the research brought me back to the country once a year
and usually for several months. South Africa’s hybrid multilingual climate pro-
duces an exceptionally intriguing range of socio-cultural and racial politics that
are an inspiring ground for any linguistic anthropologist. The privilege I had to be
able to work in such an exhilarating climate and with people who are extremely
open, hospitable, and willing to share their experience deserves my greatest
acknowledgement and gratitude. Many South Africans contributed in significant
ways to my various projects and the book they have become, most importantly,
the participants, interviewees, and consultants in the field. After months
of ethnographic research in KwaZulu-Natal and the Western Cape, I am
deeply indebted to many extraordinary individuals in the eThekwini region,
Umlazi, KwaMashu, and Hambanathi, as well as in Stellenbosch, Cape Town,
 Acknowledgements ix
Kayamandi, Idas Valley, Somerset West, Mitchell’s Plain, and Manenberg. The
people in these places have shown me remarkable kindness, they have shared their
thoughts, ideas, and feelings with me. They spoke about their languages and their
sense of belonging, they shared thoughts about race, culture, and their views of
‘others’. It is their knowledge, their sharp memories of identity struggles, dis-
crimination, racism, exclusion, and empowerment, their ways of being in a world
in which English is ubiquitous which make this book. Many of these extra-
ordinary people also prepared meals for me, their children played with mine, they
laughed about and with me, and I stand in awe of their knowledge, and the
readiness with which they have responded to my presence and relentless ques-
tioning. Thank you.
There are also many individuals located in different corners of the world
who have both professionally and emotionally helped me in writing this book.
Very special thanks go to the many kind colleagues, friends, and consultants in
South Africa, Germany, the United States, France, Spain, and the Czech
Republic who were willing to read one and more of the chapters in this book.
Specifically, I want to thank Magda Altmann, Ntokozo and Hlengi Buthelezi,
Busi Dube, Ubah Christina Ali Farah, Fiona Grayer, Anele Hofmeyer, Bon-
ginkosi Khumalo, Michel Lafon, William Leap, Sinfree Makoni, Gerhard
Maré, Hannelie Marx, Monwabisi Mhlophe, Phindezwa Mnyaka, Christine
Du Plessis, Kholeka Shange, Tamah Sherman, and Lorryn Williams. Their
views and academic advice have informed many aspects of this book and they
all deserve my greatest thanks. All remaining shortfalls are my own.
Over the past 20 years, I have benefitted more generally from the vast knowl-
edge and experience of students, colleagues, consultants, and research assistants in
four institutions, the University of KwaZulu-Natal, the Stellenbosch Institute of
Advanced Studies, the University of Hradec Králové, and Leipzig University. Very
special thanks go to Miracle Agbele, Rose Marie Beck, Promise Biyela, Andrea
Filipi, Lloyd Hill, Hana Horáková, Thobekile Mabala, Sarifa Moola, Johan
Brink, Thabo Msibi, Dorrit Posel, Magcino Shange, Zameka Sijadu, Annelie Van
der Merve, Lorryn Williams, and Jochen Zeller for providing both academic and
emotional support. I also want to thank especially Tamah Sherman for a discus-
sion about the field of English as a lingua franca (ELF) in Prague many years ago
which sparked off much of this research. And I want to thank the Stellenbosch
Institute for Advanced Studies and all its wonderful staff for the generous fel-
lowship and support during the first half of 2020 when much of this book was
conceptualized and written. The University of Hradec Králové and my colleagues
all deserve thanks for supporting my research stay in South Africa and the pub-
lication of this book.
Finally, I want to thank my parents not only for raising me in a house filled
with books, creativity, and love but for the sense of justice I believe they instilled
in me. And I thank my children and Pavel for being my ‘home’, my sanity, and my
raison d’être. Without my family’s ability to adapt during our many extended
stays in South Africa and without their miraculous gift of being able to
x Acknowledgements
continuously sanitize my mind during the writing process there would have been
no book.
On a different note, I acknowledge permission from the publishers for allow-
ing me to use parts of two previous published texts. Parts of Chapter 5 were first
published entitled ‘Language, Class and Racial Mobility in South Africa’ in Hana
Horáková, Stephanie Rudwick, and Martin Schmiedl (Eds.), African on the
Move: Shifting Identities, Histories and Boundaries (pp. 93–110, Berlin: LIT
Verlag). Portions of Chapter 6 first appeared in 2018 in the journal Human
Affairs (28(3), 417–428) under the title ‘Englishes and Cosmopolitanisms in South
Africa’.
1 Introduction
Framing the Study

Language as such is never neutral. There is no language which unambiguously

brings peace and well-being to humankind. The choice of one particular lan-
guage over another might be considered more neutral in a given context by
certain speakers. This one language, however, could be considered a very poli-
tically loaded and biased choice in another context and by other speakers. The
English language is no exception to these social realities although its often-
unquestioned status as a global lingua franca might make it seem to be such.
English as a lingua franca (ELF) has often been portrayed as a ‘neutral’ medium
between people who speak a different first language. In South Africa, English is
far from a generally ‘neutral’ medium and this book examines precisely the
non-neutral and ambiguous nature of the way South Africans speak, hear,
write, perceive, and interpret English ways of speaking in lingua franca dis-
course. In fact, the major argument throughout this book is that ambiguity is
the least contested, most defining, and yet insufficiently acknowledged feature
of English as a lingua franca in the South African context.
Investigating ambivalence among English lingua franca users is an opportunity
to reassess how they view their linguistic and social belongings as they attempt to
make sense of an ever-changing world. For linguistic anthropologists there is a
benefit in observing these ambivalent positions and ambiguous dimensions by
paying more attention to inconsistencies and seemingly contradictory positions.
Several languages have acquired lingua franca functions throughout human his-
tory (Trudgill 2001; Knapp & Meierkord 2002) and lingua francas are utilized
not only in international and cross-cultural contexts but within national bound-
aries, such as South Africa. There are many different English lingua franca con-
texts in the world, but they are all marked by various levels of competencies in
the language among speakers. Language ideological frameworks position one
variety, most commonly the ‘Standard’ as superior and hegemonic (Silverstein
1996). The co-occurrence of such a Standard English vis-à-vis non-Standard and
lingua franca forms creates complex power dynamics which are often racialized.
It would be tantamount to “ignor[ing] reality” (Knapp 2002: 221), if an analysis
of English lingua franca discourse were to exclude interactions where mono-
lingual native speakers interact with proficient bilinguals, poor and mediocre
English speakers.1 My own conceptualization of lingua franca interaction is, to
DOI: 10.4324/9780429031472-1
2 Introduction: Framing the Study
some extent, along the lines of Knapp and Meierkord (2002): a type of commu-
nication characterized by much sociolinguistic variation which serves as the
platform of interaction by a heterogenous group of English speakers with diver-
gent levels of competencies.
This book is essentially, but not only, about power and ideology because
these concepts have a fundamental impact on the politics of language (Wodak
1989, 2001). The various contexts in which I analyse the ambiguity of the
lingua franca status of English is fundamentally based on a discourse of
unequal power relations. Much of this unequal power and politics is the simple
fact that African people have been discriminated against throughout history.
One contribution of this book is, thus, not only linguistic but also racial iden-
tity politics in its multiple guises, with a focus on English lingua franca com-
munication. Bourdieu (1991) has shown how identity politics are essentially
struggles over legitimacy and power and how these include views about lan-
guage in making and unmaking groups.
To address this topic, I have aimed to bridge the literature on English as a
lingua franca, raciolinguistics, translingual practice and the politics of language
and identity through a broad ethnographic lens. Over 12 years, the topic of
English as a (multi)lingua franca has occupied my mind and I conducted inter-
views with altogether 158 participants in the KwaZulu-Natal and Western
Cape provinces.2 Among these participants were eight consultants whom I
worked with over several years and not only for the project of this book. The
primary ethnographic data used for this study took on the form of narrative
interviews with isiZulu and Afrikaans-speakers which were conducted between
2014 and 2020. A few of the study interviewees only constituted brief encoun-
ters during my fieldwork while others were persons whom I visited in their
homes repeatedly and met their families and friends.3 My ethnographic
approach also included close relationships with a few isiZulu and Afrikaans
speakers over a number of years. Many interviews were conducted in several
languages, including English, isiZulu, isiTsotsi, Afrikaans, Kaaps, and
German. A number of interviews that were conducted in isiZulu and Afrikaans
were facilitated by my research assistants who find acknowledgement in the
Acknowledgments. Interviewees were given conversational space and I often
allowed conversations to develop in directions which were not directly related
to my own interests. There were also many encounters and interviews which
were not digitally recorded. Although I used a voice recorder or my mobile
phone when possible, some of my interviewees preferred not to be taped and, in
a few situations, I chose not to record them.4 As an ethnographer who studies
as broad a field and as ubiquitous a subject as ‘the use of the English language
as a lingua franca in South Africa’ I also collected valuable information in the
least likely situations, such as standing in a queue at the supermarket. Spending
time as an ‘every-day’ fieldworker I met interviewees while watching the soccer
training of my son, waiting at the HipHop and painting class of my daughter,
hanging out at the public pool or library, attending an environmental activists’
meeting, going to a soccer match with a friend, and an academic book launch.
 Introduction: Framing the Study 3
My theoretical approach is embedded in theories of coloniality (Mignolo
2001; Quijano 2000) which have drawn attention to the persistence of rigid
colonial systems of thinking and acting in relation to language and race.5 It is
decidedly anti-essentialist, seeing both language and race as socio-historically
constructed and fluid categories, but I have also aimed at providing a ‘realistic’
account of diverse identity politics (Blommaert & Rampton 2011: 12). The
interface of language, race, and identity constitutes a site for social justice
issues (Omoniyi 2016), and the voices I have aimed to capture might well be
rooted in strategic essentialist thinking (Spivak 1988, 1996). Some of my own
previous studies (Rudwick 2004, 2008) show that isiZulu-speakers might flag
the significance of English for academic and/or professional purposes but only
reluctantly acknowledge the influence of English in their cultural identities. The
mostly negative ‘coconut’ label employed in reference to African people who
speak Standard and/or excessive English captures one aspect of this widely
prevalent essentialist perception that an African (black) person is not ‘properly’
African if he/she speaks excessive English or does so with a Standard English
accent. South Africa is a place where both language and race are used “as a
resource for imagining and taking upon subjecthood” (Soudien 2014: 206).
One of the most distinct developments in South Africa’s multilingualism
is the “dramatic increase in the reporting of a second home language, which
has been associated particularly, although certainly not exclusively, with the
increased use of English as a second home language” (Posel & Zeller 2020:
305). More than 50 percent of South Africans reported to speak a second
language in 2011 (compared to merely 15 percent in 1996), and of these
second language speakers English was reported by 60 percent (Posel &
Zeller 2020: 305). Further support for the status of English as a lingua franca
in the country is that parallel to the increasing bilingualism which includes
English, we can observe that the number of South Africans who report
English as their first language only increased about 1 percentage point (Posel
& Zeller 2020: 305). This suggests that language shift towards English has
not been evident in the most recent censuses and that the status of English is
that of a lingua franca for many South Africans. Against these data, it is a
fruitful undertaking to examine how different South African communities
who speak a language other than English communicate in lingua franca
settings. A nuanced portrayal of how South Africans, and mostly those of
isiZulu and Afrikaans6 backgrounds, invent, deconstruct, and reconstruct
their own and other peoples’ identities in English lingua franca interaction is
the primary focus in this book.
The account I offer departs quite significantly from the majority of ‘tradi-
tional’ studies on English as a lingua franca, especially those that are associated
with the acronym ELF because mine is a linguistic anthropological study rather
than an applied linguistics one. I have not collected a particular ELF corpus,
nor do I engage with ELF linguistic principles but rather I explore the socio-
cultural and political relevance of English as a lingua franca. Gal’s (2013) short
but insightful considerations of ELF as a process rather than a bound entity or
4 Introduction: Framing the Study
a concrete thing constitutes the basis of this approach. It is conceptually,
methodologically, and geo-politically ‘different’. While ELF literature is valu-
able and continues scholarship which is fruitful on many different levels, it is
one of the aims of this book to challenge the research normativity in and of
many ELF studies as emerging in the global north. But I am not concerned with
the structural issues of English but rather with the cultural politics of its status
as a lingua franca and how this manifests specifically in the South African
context by creating new meanings from a global South setting.
Thus, one of my central aims is also to disrupt the Eurocentric epistemolo-
gical categories that have formed the basis of much of applied linguistics on
English, and ELF scholarship in particular. Many studies which engage with
identities in English lingua franca communication remain locked in a type of
‘happy English’ paradigm and issues of discrimination have not received much
attention. I am approaching English in South Africa with a background of
African language and cultural study. It is the usage of English vis-à-vis isiZulu/
isiXhosa and vis-à-vis Afrikaans/(Afri)Kaaps which is replete with social
meaning this book aims to unravel. By focusing on South Africa’s ‘loudest
tribes’, Zulu and Afrikaners and by studying the politics behind the ways
English is being used in lingua franca discourse, the book aims to highlight how
South African Englishes, isiZulu(s), and Afrikaans(s) shape a plethora of iden-
tities in South African social and political life.
South Africa has 11 official languages and can, from many perspectives, be
considered a sociolinguistic laboratory. The Constitution (Act 1996) provides,
among many democratic rights, for the linguistic and cultural rights of every
citizen and is regarded as one of the most progressive and liberal bills in the
world. It is, at least on paper, a warranty for linguistic and cultural pluralism. In
social reality, however, pluralism is often not respected and the ways in which
South Africans use ELF also puts these pluralistic aims to the test. Ways of
speaking English result in racialization processes many of which lead to dis-
crimination. Pennycook and Makoni (2020: 79) show that researchers from the
global North have too often produced “a vision of language that had little to do
with how people understood languages locally”. In line with their approach of
“engaging respectfully with diverse ideologies” (Pennycook & Makoni 2020: 79),
I have aimed at prioritizing local people’s ways of speaking and being, their
thoughts, and their emotions while reflectively analysing them. The following
pages demonstrate how different forms of English and/or isiZulu and Afrikaans
ways of speaking inform sociocultural behaviour and racialization processes in
contexts where English is employed as the primary lingua franca.
Of course, South Africa has several lingua francas, both isiZulu and Afri-
kaans are also used as lingua francas in certain areas and contexts. This extre-
mely multi and translingual environment characteristic of South Africa offers a
laboratory in which English as a lingua franca can be explored as one among
many. The majority of South Africans speak languages other than English in
both inside and outside their homes (Posel, Hunter & Rudwick 2020). ELF, and
the way it is approached here, acknowledges that being an English youth in
 Introduction: Framing the Study 5
South Africa also includes bilingualism and a multilingual mindset (Coetzee-
Van Rooy 2020). At the same time, however, there are also young first language
speakers of English who seem to have the common misconception that the
language is the only South African lingua franca, the most widely spoken lan-
guage or even the “best way to communicate” (Jeewa & Rudwick 2020). While
English is indeed dominant in education, business, commerce, and politics, it is
certainly not “the best” way to communicate in any arbitrary situation. After
all, the above-mentioned ‘higher’ settings are domains to which many, pre-
dominately black South Africans continue to have restricted access, and for this
reason English also continues to have a marginalizing and discriminatory force.
It is important to recognize that “despite its status as an apparent lingua franca,
or maybe because of its status as a lingua franca, English also acts as a barrier
to social and educational mobility”, particularly in rural communities (Van der
Walt and Evans 2018: 195). And, at the same time, the focus of this book,
English lingua franca discourse, also acts as a barrier to social cohesion and
creates realities which many South Africans experience as marginalizing.
Hence, this book tackles macro issues about the ambiguous position of English
as a lingua franca and micro questions about the social and political processes
where English is employed as a lingua franca and people speak in various
lingua franca forms.
This does not make the monograph a nice fit in the way English has been
studied as a lingua franca in the framework of the specific research paradigm
with the acronym ELF as its centre of research gravity in Europe and, to a lesser
degree, Asia. This regional or geopolitical paucity in studies specifically on the
lingua franca functions of English has been a concern. With this monograph I
offer to fill some of this gap by tackling ELF communication in South Africa in
order to address critical issues involving power, ideology, and identities. Eng-
lish has always been caught in an ambivalent social climate creating tensions
and controversies in this country. ELF discourse is reflected by dichotomized
and seemingly contradictory dynamics resulting in inclusion and exclusion,
mobility and immobility, marginalization and empowerment, and a vast range
of identity trajectories. The focus on the South African multilingual setting fits
well with Jenkins’ recent (2015, 2018a, 2018b, 2020) call to extend ELF to EMF
(English as a multilingua franca). Most significant for this study, Jenkins
(2018a, 2018b) argues that EMF reduces the extent of the significance of English
in ELF encounters and focuses to a higher degree on the multilingualism that
characterizes most ELF communicators. While the acronym has not been
widely adopted, this line of multilingual development has opened up ELF
enquiry to include scholarship on translingual practice and translanguaging
(Ou, Gu and Hult 2020).
My approach includes scholarship on English multilingualism which pre-
viously might have been seen as parallel to or even conflicting with the ELF
approach. The work of scholars such as Alistair Pennycook (2007, 2017, 2020)
Suresh Canagarajah (2000, 2006, 2013, 2018), and Sinfree Makoni (Makoni
1996, 2003; Makoni & Pennycook 2012; Pennycook & Makoni 2020) are
6 Introduction: Framing the Study
important to mention here. My approach aims at harmonizing rather than
antagonizing the distinctions of different paradigms within the study of Eng-
lish. The complex entanglements English as a lingua franca has in a multi-
lingual and multicultural African space such as South Africa benefits from a
wide range of perspectives and approaches. I foreground the non-monolithic
nature, fluidity, and multiplicity of the language complex known as English as a
lingua franca. This monograph, hence, draws from analytical tools and con-
cepts such as translingual practice (Canagarajah 2013), languaging and trans-
lang-uaging (Garcia 2009, 2010; Garcia, Johnson & Seltzer 2017; Jaspers 2018)
metrolingualism (Otsuji & Pennycook 2010; Pennycook & Otsuji 2015) as well
as epistemologies from the South (Mignolo 2001; Comaroff and Comaroff
2012; Connell 2007; Pennycook & Makoni 2020). The idea is to give a fresh
impetus to the ambiguous role English holds as a lingua franca in the world
through critical perspectives from Africa. These perspectives require some
background on the important social variables which are a vital part of the
analysis in South African English lingua franca realities.

Ethnicity, Race, and Gender (in South Africa)

As most volumes about gender start the discussion with Judith Butler, much
work on ethnicity starts with reference to Frederik Barth who focused on the
significance of boundaries in the work of ethnicity. Although ethnicity is often
characterized “by a sense of history and origin that gives coherence and legiti-
macy to the present existence of the group” (Maré 1993: 14), we also now know
that this sense of belonging is often ‘imagined’ (Anderson 1991 [1983]). This does
not mean, however, that members of ethnic groups do not construct their ethnic
identities on specific criteria. What it does mean is that commonalities and dif-
ferences between members of one ethnic group vis-à-vis another are blurry and
negotiable. Idiosyncratic and individual differences may outweigh shared pat-
terns of culture, knowledge, and tradition within one ethnic group. Ethnic iden-
tities, like other social identities, are flexible and can change throughout time and
space but there is also much intent by actors “to shape ethnic identity in a way
which suppresses potentially competing identities” (Maré 1993: 22). Zulu ethni-
cities, for example, give expression to many disparate and seemingly irreconcil-
able identities. “The social identification of ‘Zuluness’, for example, … does not
include the same set of self-descriptions for each and every member of the Zulu
ethnic group” but there might be situations where “this ‘Zuluness’ can become
the dominant identity” (Maré 1993: 9).
Against the background of an understanding that language, ethnicity, and
gender are deeply entangled in South Africa, educated isiZulu and Afrikaans
speakers might reject ethnicity as an artificial state invention. Others, however,
might regard it as a useful alternative to the linguistic and cultural practices of
groups they do not identify with. When Jacob Zuma referred to Afrikaners as
the “white tribe” of Africa in a 2009 speech in Sandton, Johannesburg he
assured Afrikaans speakers “their place” in the country and signified that
 Introduction: Framing the Study 7
7
ethnicity was a valuable source of belonging. During his rape trial (see Chap-
ter 5) ethnic and gender dynamics had skilfully been interwoven and this
entanglement distressingly seemed to have echoed across ethnic and cultural
groups in South Africa at the time. Suttner aptly identified the “commonality of
patriarchy across cultures” (2009:9) and noted that Zuma and the white Afri-
kaans judge both “deployed well-worn stereotypes of what one expects of a
woman when she was raped” (Suttner 2009: 11). Language, ethnicity, and race
formed a tripod on which the Zuma rape trial was built, and it is the intersec-
tional nature of these variables which is reflected also in the pages of this book.
Both isiZulu and Afrikaans are essentially inventions of colonial and apart-
heid linguistics (Makoni 2003; Makoni & Pennycook 2012) but today they
serve as proxies for culture, ethnicity, race, and belonging. During apartheid,
ethnicity served as a means of justifying segregation and it functioned as a dis-
criminatory political weapon (Bekker 1993; Maré 1995). Language, culture, and
ethnicity are understood as being tightly entangled in the country because these
social variables, together with the concept of race and territory, presented the
main pillars on which apartheid politics relied.8 One of the benefits of English
has always been the fact that it was widely and cross-ethnically regarded as a
relatively ‘neutral’ and de-ethnicized language (Beck 2018). However, as this
book will show, this assumed neutrality rests on shallow ground because ways
of speaking English are linked to complex identity politics which lead to many
social injustices uncharacteristic of a so-called ‘neutral’ medium.
In addressing intersectionalities of multilingual English lingua franca prac-
tices, ethnicity, race, and gender open up a complex platform on which strug-
gles for (be)longing and identity politics emerge. These intersections are by no
means static but evolve anew in every encounter and this is why this book can
only provide a selective picture of the multifaceted tensions in the country’s
raciolinguistic dynamics. The roots of intersectionality lie in the realization that
there are multiple social variables which contribute to power and identity pol-
itics and that monolithically analysed social categories do not yield sufficient
insight into the complexities of the human condition. Crenshaw (1991: 1244)
strongly emphasized that it is the intersection of race (racism) and sex/gender
(sexism) which factors “into Black women’s lives in ways that cannot be cap-
tured wholly by looking at the race or gender dimensions of those experiences
separately”. The cultural politics of language and identity are built in social
actions and they are also the products of particular historical and contextual
conditions. Linguistic anthropologists, in particular, have a history of falsely
assuming “that identities are attributes of individuals or groups rather than of
situations” (Bucholtz & Hall 2004: 376). More recently, the linguistic anthro-
pological and raciolinguistic lens has provided three primary insights into the
study of language and race. First, racialized language as produced and received
by individuals and groups is ideologically constructed, secondly, racialization
takes place discursively throughout time, space, and context, and, thirdly, race
ascriptions are embedded in sociopolitical structures (Lo & Chun 2020). Iden-
tities which are produced and performed in multilingual English lingua franca
8 Introduction: Framing the Study
communication draw heavily on context-dependency and they are also inter-
meshed in multiple social divisions (Yuval-Davis 2011). Intersectionality studies
have proliferated, and the approach has “been put to use in a wide variety of
disciplinary ad methodological traditions” (Levon & Mendes 2016: 11). In this
book, I understand intersectionality as the complex ways in which language,
ethnicity, race, and gender mutually constitute each other.
Ethnic, racial, and gender construction of identity have multiple expressions
and representations in ELF interaction, and these multifaceted dynamics need
to be interwoven with an acknowledgement of their great complexity. Macro
political dimensions of ethnicity with reference to Zulu and Afrikaner South
Africans is not the focus of this book, but variable Zuluness, Afrikanerdom,
and Afrikaans-ness are also linguistically constructed, and this is where my
focus lies. It is the politics of English as a lingua franca rather than ethnic pol-
itics which constitute the focus here. Some readers might find it problematic to
focus on two South African population groups as different as isiZulu and
Afrikaans speakers. I have a major reason, however, why I do so. In the post-
1994 academic accounts of linguistic and ethnic dynamics Afrikaans and isi-
Zulu speakers have featured prominently (see, for instance, Cornelissen &
Horstmeier 2002; Madiba 2005; Calteaux 2005; Wilmsen 2005; Orman 2009).
Arguably, these two groups have asserted their linguistic ethnicities in the post-
apartheid state to a greater degree than others. In 2009, the leader of the Inka-
tha Freedom Party (IFP), a predominately Zulu party, Mangosuthu Buthelezi
was meeting with an Afrikaner forum in Pretoria and reportedly (and rather
bizarrely) said that Afrikaner and Zulu people share a part of struggle history.
He is quoted as saying: “Just as you fought for the preservation of your cultural
identity, language, and values as we negotiated a democratic settlement, I
fought for the recognition of the Zulu kingdom and the Zulu monarchy”.9
As one of my informants in the Western Cape put it: “Afrikaners have die
taal (the language), and Zulus isiZulu”.10 I am certainly not the first scholar to
see the comparative potential of the two language groups (Engel 1997; Webb
2002; Perry 2004a, 2004b; Holmes 2018; De Vos 2012). Zulu and Afrikaners
have both been ‘loud’ about the significance of ‘their’ languages.11 When it
comes to the Internet giant Google, for instance, they have been heard. Since
2011, YouTube videos are also available with Afrikaans and isiZulu interface,
not in any other South African language, English excluded. In the year 2014 the
Webmail service Gmail also added (only) these two languages as interface
options and in 2018, Google maps introduced (only) these two South African
languages.12 The Global Language Network (GLN) has called upon specifically
Afrikaans and isiZulu speakers to apply for their Teaching Fellowship program
since 2014.13 Numerous other examples of global responses to specifically these
two language groups could be mentioned.
Race is linked in complex ways to ethnicity in South Africa. The Afrikaans
language group is multiracial, and I am not limiting my account to any particular
race group here. White but as will be seen, increasingly also brown Afrikaans
speakers and Zulu people arguably share a strong sense of what they experience
 Introduction: Framing the Study 9
as linguistic belonging to their respective ‘mother-tongues’. Previous portrayals
of the relationship between Afrikaans and Afrikanerdom have focused on the
white population, but I also draw some insights, albeit towards the end of the
book, from the majority Afrikaans speaking coloured population.14 ‘Brown’
South Africans speak a variety known as Kaaps, or in Cape Town increasingly
described as Afrikaaps. While Afrikaans speaking South Africans arguably make
up the most diverse population group, isiZulu speakers also do not constitute a
homogenous ethnolinguistic group. Frueh (2003: 25) aptly cautioned scholars not
to narrow their analysis of identity as it runs the risk of sidestepping “in-group
differences and reify[ing] actors as undifferentiated, solid things – an Afrikaner or
the Zulu people or the South African nation”.
Most linguistic anthropologists and social scientists today agree that pri-
mordial and essentialist thinking is no longer appropriate in the context of
linguistic and ethnic identity politics. Empirical findings from grassroots levels,
however, do not always coincide with academic knowledge construction.
Fishman (1999: 447), for instance, recognized that despite the fact that the pri-
mordialist approach was abandoned long ago in the social sciences, “it never-
theless remains a commonly held position in most cultures throughout the
world”. South Africa is no exception here and rigid linguistic, ethnic, and racial
classifications exist (Carton 2008: 3). For many people isiZulu and Zuluness are
monolithically bound, primordial, and fixed (Wright 2008; Rudwick 2004,
2008, 2018). Similarly, Standard Afrikaans remains among the primary markers
of a ‘fossilized’ Afrikaner ethnicity (Blaser 2007; Bosch 2000; De Kadt 2006;
Engel 1997; Kriel 2003, 2006; Webb & Kriel 2000). Indeed, one can argue con-
vincingly that neither isiZulu nor Afrikaans constitute flexible variables in
constructions of Zuluness and Afrikanerdom. For both groups it represents
one, if not the most significant, element of their identity. And coloured Afri-
kaans speakers are also increasingly reasserting their linguistic belonging as will
be seen later.
Although the points and claims I make throughout this book are often quite
specific to the South African context and this particular point in time, some of
the empirical findings of the close relationship between language, ethnicity,
race, and gender might well transfer to other post-colonial and English lingua
franca contexts. As Soudien (2014: 214) puts it:

The challenge and the opportunity that South Africa represents it seems,
are to think of how its transgressive post-apartheid experience, in the
presence of our better knowledge of the constructed nature of social
difference and especially that of race, makes possible new ways in which
one might come to understand the constituted body and to release
descriptions of the body from their biologised moorings.

Both colourism and racism are constant features of South African society and
languages play a vital role in these social processes. Against this background,
it is a rather common myth that English as a singular entity is an emblem of a
10 Introduction: Framing the Study
shared South African identity. For one thing, English is deeply racialized and
this is why much is written about race in this book. Pennycook’s (2017)
insights into Malaysian society are to some extent applicable here. He notes
(Pennycook 2017: 193) that “not only is ‘race’ taken as the primary division of
society, but ‘racial characteristics’ are posited as a primary and deterministic
explanation of social difference”. It is one of the aims of this book to find
possibilities for employing post-colonial contexts in a way that reshape rea-
lities through English (Pennycook 2017: 261).
It cannot be denied that in Africa, English has both enriched indigenous
African languages through lexical borrowings and linguistic creativity but, on
the other hand, it has also stultified and marginalized them (Mazrui &
Mazrui 1998: 79). Higgins (2009) compellingly captured the multiple ways in
which English can be seen through the concept of multivocality which “allows
for an analysis of the multiplicity of meanings constructed through English
that include aspects of linguistic imperialism and global hegemony, as well as
resistance to imperialism in the forms of appropriation and transcultural
hybridity”. While I aim to show some of these aspects in South African Eng-
lishes towards the end of this book, the focus was put elsewhere, namely on
English as a discursive act saturated with linguistic and social ideologies
(Pennycook 2007, 2010). As a result, it is about conflictual politics which are
beyond the linguistic philanthropy that ELF studies have proposed.
Many ELF and other applied linguistic scholars will perhaps feel that this
monograph ‘misses the point’ in terms of ELF. I am neither using the
broader theoretical or corpus linguistic framework common for ELF, nor do
I elicit ELF per se and as a paradigm. My approach is to study ELF com-
munication as a local practice (Pennycook 2010), a mobile tool (Blommaert
2010), and an activity type (Levinson 1992; Park & Wee 2014). More dis-
tinctly, I follow Park and Wee’s (2014: 51) proposal:

ELF interactions, we suggest, may represent a particular class of activity

types, one where the goal involves the need to communicate in a situa-
tion where none of the participants share the same L1. In such a situa-
tion, ease of understanding and shared norms of interpretation
involving the same code cannot be taken for granted. Uncertainties that
permeate such contexts may lead to complex outcomes.

The many unshared norms of interpretation and uncertainties in English as a

local practice and lingua franca is the focus of this book with reference to
South Africa and I argue that this setting and vibrant environment might well
serve as an inspiration for ‘classic’ ELF scholars. Not only the South African
perspective, but Africa more generally can be instructive for advancing what
has been known as ELF scholarship because multilingualism is pervasive and
issues of ‘accent’ inequality, race, ethnicity, and gender play a significant part
in shaping the role of English as a lingua franca on this continent. ELF studies
have rarely employed long-term, qualitative, and ethnographic data. With
 Introduction: Framing the Study 11
few exceptions (Smit 2010b; Björkman 2008; Ehrenreich 2009) and a text
‘ethnographic’ approach (Jenkins 2007), ELF studies have not drawn from
linguistic anthropological field ethnography and multidimensional methods
that put the focus on context-specific usage (Ehrenreich 2018) and reflexivity.
While identity has increasingly featured as a variable in ELF studies (e.g.
Jenkins 2007; Pölzl & Seidlhofer 2006; Virkkula & Nikula 2010), not all have
paid sufficient attention to how power and ideologies influence positionings in
an ELF context. In this book, identity is studied as the “social positioning of
self and other” (Bucholtz & Hall 2005: 586) in a diverse context in which
English takes up a lingua franca role. This approach sees identities created
and negotiated through discursive interaction on both a structural and indi-
vidual level. In much of the mainstream ELF scholarship the “ineradicable
role that the researcher’s personal subjectivity plays through the research
process” (Rampton, Maybin & Roberts 2015: 16) has been ignored. Rapport
with participants, interpersonal and individual narratives, as well as critical
engagement with the many asymmetrical power distributions of research have
therefore been a focus here. The discourse ethnographic frame (Krzyzanowski
2011) of this study aims to offer a new lens through which ELF can be
researched and understood.
My focus on ambiguities can be explained by the fact that many second-lan-
guage speakers of English are ambivalent when it comes to their English language
trajectories and how they employ English as a lingua franca. In Africa, this is
reflected in its labelling of English as a “language of liberation”, on the one hand,
and as a ‘language’ of ‘colonialism/imperialism’ or oppression, on the other hand
(Mazrui 2004: 32). Despite its colonial baggage, it has been the language most
aggressively promoted by the African elites (Ndhlovu 2015), but there have
always been mixed motives (Ridge 2000). The binary views of English as a non-
African, ‘colonial’, and ‘alien’ language, on the one hand, and English as local,
hybrid, and ‘Africanized’, on the other hand, play out in complex ways in
everyday South African reality and sometimes blur the many ‘in-betweens’. The
intersectional nature of various forms of oppression complicate any singular
perception of the politics of English in the country. What this book suggests is
that the fault lines of power dynamics in English as a lingua franca in South
African society run along racial constructions. It is the perspective of this book
that global scholarship on English as a lingua franca requires a broadening of
scope, both in terms of disciplinary location and geopolitical orientation. It needs
decolonial thinking that closely considers the matrixes of racial discrimination
(Mignolo 2007: 164). Its primary focus on Europe and the ‘developed’ nations in
Asia has delivered an unbalanced view of how English operates as a lingua
franca. It is my hope that the following pages will offer the reader a nuanced
account of how the many ways in which South Africans speak English as a
lingua franca is entangled in rigid ideologies of power. These multiple ambi-
guities of English as a lingua franca are reflected in mobility and immobility,
inclusion and exclusion, conflict and consensus, marginalization and empower-
ment, and a vast range of local, global, and glocal identity trajectories.
12 Introduction: Framing the Study
Chapter Outline
The next chapter briefly surveys important literature about English in the
world and the ELF field as a backdrop to my own more anthropological
approach. I discuss scholarship with reference to critical voices and illustrate
how individual ELF scholars have responded to this multifaceted critique.
Recently, the shift and reorientation towards multilingualism has strength-
ened ELF scholarship as a field which is cognisant of the significance of
languages other than English. This new direction also opens up possibilities
for ELF scholarship to be conducted in the ex-colonies of the British Empire
in which dynamics of power, ideology, and race strongly impact on the role
English maintains as a primary lingua franca. The chapter also discusses
raciolinguistic frameworks without which a linguistic anthropological study
of the role of English as a South African lingua franca would not be feasible.
Chapter 3 provides socio-historical background to the study of English vis-à-
vis other languages in South Africa. The story of the making of English as a
lingua franca is, first and foremost, a story of colonialism. Keeping the legacies of
English colonialism in mind when analysing the current politics of the language is
essential (Pennycook 1998, 2007). Afrikaans and isiZulu speakers fought their
own separate struggles against English language domination, but ultimately it
has been South Africa’s least questioned lingua franca. During the twentieth
century many African language speakers embraced English as a lingua franca
medium both for national and international communication because it was felt
to bridge ethnic divides and facilitate the international struggle against white
oppression. This is why it acquired the label of ‘language of liberation’ despite its
colonial status. During apartheid, English continued to be supported among
African language speakers as it was perceived as a much lesser ‘evil’ than Afri-
kaans which was the language of the apartheid state. The 1976 student protests
which became known as the ‘Soweto uprising’ further strengthened English
because protests were directed against Afrikaans as the instruction medium not
against English and, importantly, also not for African language instruction. Since
the transition to democracy it has been primarily Afrikaans and isiZulu speakers
who have asserted their languages, and although Afrikaans has failed to maintain
its privileged position, isiZulu has gained ground, even in domains such as higher
education. The chapter lays the foundation for understanding the current post-
colonial moment in South Africa where further ‘decolonialization’ is on the
horizon, not least through language and race issues.
In Chapter 4 I have aimed to carve out some of the complexities in the pro-
cesses of marginalization linked to the kind of raciolinguistics the English lingua
franca space has created. At the same time, and in line with the theme of ambi-
guity it also portrays how the defiance of the lingua franca status of English can
be used for empowerment in a specific political space. I initially focus on how the
racial and raciolinguistic ideologies of Englishes are intertwined with the dis-
crimination of black South Africans. Selected narratives of black South Africans’
experience of the housing market also show the limits of language against the
 Introduction: Framing the Study 13
power of race. Focusing on the domains of ambiguities rather than the domains
of language usage in Fishman’s (1972) sense, the discussion takes place across
contexts and settings. This chapter also shows how South Africa’s ex-president,
Jacob Zuma, defied the lingua franca status of English in the rape trial in order
to evoke cultural, linguistic identity politics. He strategically mobilized isiZulu as
a cultural weapon to fight the English Eurocentric dominance of the court.
Lastly, there is a discussion about how some segments of the Afrikaner commu-
nity have embraced the marginalization rhetoric by constructing what has been
termed ‘subaltern whiteness’ by pitching the ‘colonialization’ of English against
Afrikaner indigeneity.
Chapter 5 shows the complex entanglement of English linguistic mobility
and the ambiguities of what is perceived as racial authenticity. South Afri-
ca’s stark socio-economic disparities manifest continuously in white eco-
nomic privilege but also in an increasingly solid black middle class. Shifting
to the ‘black’ gaze in this chapter, I draw from the concepts of mobility and
authenticity to offer a raciolinguistic perspective on some black politicians’
ways of speaking English and the responses of the public. By analysing
through this raciolinguistic lens, I also aim to demonstrate how, on the one
hand, people have fixed perceptions about racial identities in relation to
English usage, and, on the other hand, there is much mobility and fluidity
when it comes to English language usage. This chapter exhibits manifesta-
tions of coloniality of language (Veronelli 2015) and discusses how the social
and racial injustices of the colonial and apartheid past simmers in the minds
of many South Africans and how this creates and recreates much coloniality
in South African people’s perceptions of how English is spoken.
Chapter 6 focuses on the ideologies of cosmopolitanism as linked to English
vis-à-vis the perceived parochialisms of local languages in relation to higher
education in South Africa. As elsewhere in the world, English has – in its
strong position as the global academic lingua franca – strong support from
local stakeholders. At the same time, Afrikaans has been constructed as the
‘language of exclusion’ by student groups which has led to it losing ground in
its previously established position in the higher education system. And yet,
calls for decolonization also interrogate the hegemonic role English holds in
South African education and the low positioning of African languages in
teaching and learning (Dube 2017). In this chapter I describe how the role of
English as an academic lingua franca has triggered a language policy change at
Stellenbosch University, and, at the same time, runs parallel to a metalan-
guage discourse in the Afrikaner community that constructs English as the
‘only’ oppressive language in the country. The objective of the chapter is to
deconstruct the binaries which arise from these contestations and shows the
parochial and ethnic identity politics resulting from this space and context.
Chapter 7 focuses on the gendered ambiguities of English in relation to
isiZulu and the tension it creates in the Zulu community. It aims to capture
some of the ‘lived realities’ in the constructions of femininities, masculinities,
and other-gendered identities through isiZulu vis-à-vis English. By doing so I
14 Introduction: Framing the Study
carefully formulate the argument that female isiZulu speakers might find it
easier to embrace so-called white English rather than strive for a black
accented or lingua franca variety.15 Zulu men, in contrast, appear to hold on
to an isiZulu inflected English which provides cultural clues about their ethnic
and racial identity. I suggest that claims of belonging are at the basis of this
dynamic. While my argument is located, to some extent, within the binaristic
thinking of previous language and gender studies in South Africa, I also aim
to dismantle some of this thinking in order to allow for a more nuanced per-
spective of isiZulu speakers by drawing on the experience of men who have
sex with other men (MSM).
The next chapter (8) challenges the conceptualizations of English as an
entity bounded by particular linguistic, social, and racial criteria. Against the
background of the previous chapters which portrayed ideological conceptions
of what English is and does to identities, this chapter provides primarily a
text analytical approach to show that what English is and does currently in
the South African landscape offers much insight into new ontologies and
epistemologies of English. I discuss the politics of belonging through the lens
of English translingual writing. Selected pieces from the Mail & Guardian
weekly newspaper, as well as song lyrics and blog writing, are analysed in
terms of their English embedded translingualism. Through their writing these
African and Afrikaans authors establish a direct relationship between an ELF
audience, diverse cultural references, and their own identities. Their texts are
representative of a new generation of South African English writers and
artists who are in the process of reclaiming their voice through innovative
translingualism and by demonstrating linguistic citizenship. English serves as
a lingua franca but it is not a bound entity anymore; rather it represents an
open platform which sources other languages in order to create a politics of
belonging for all South Africans.
In the chapter preceding the conclusion (9), I engage with and reflect on the
fieldwork and research methodology. My personal background and position-
ality as a white female German with South African residential status and an
English lingua franca speaker has contributed to how I have collected, ana-
lysed, and presented my data and arguments. Thus, I address the continuous
process of reflection, personal stories, and experiences of working with isi-
Zulu and Afrikaans speakers. It illustrates how I negotiated insecurities and
critically engaged with my own whiteness and white privilege. Drawing on
fieldnotes and reflections with participants I show that one’s status is always
unstable, fluid, and filled with dissonance. Research is replete with power
relations and certainly my position came with its own power baggage. How-
ever, while researching language, race, and other intersections, scholars can
build rapport and relationships on various different levels, not least by learn-
ing from flawed behaviour. And yet, striving to portray the social actor’s
voices in authentic ways does not suffice as portrayals are always tainted by
our own biographical subjectivity. This is also why most chapters were read
not only by colleagues to get academic advice but also by some of the
 Introduction: Framing the Study 15
participants of the research who were cited. Methodological reflexivity and
the building of dialogue between the consultants, myself, and the field meant
a permanent learning curve and this chapter summarizes the main shortfalls
and limitations of this process.
The conclusion describes one of the primary purposes of this book as to
move the centre of attention of ELF research from Europe/Asia to the African
context. My objective has been to demonstrate the complexity of its socio-
cultural and political ambiguity in this space. While this book bears witness
to the vitality and vibrancy of African languages, it still suggests that English
is likely to be one of the country’s primary lingua francas for the years to
come. The argument of this book is that ambiguity is one of the primary
features of English as a lingua franca by showing that language, race, and, to
a lesser degree, ethnic and gender identity mutually constitute each other. In
decolonizing language scholarship, and ELF in particular, Africa and its dia-
spora have important roles to play. The entanglement of ELF communication
in the processes of racialization, racial positioning, and racism requires more
attention in dismantling the whiteness of English as a lingua franca. If English
continues to develop as a multi and translingua franca not only in South
Africa but globally, it also offers a platform on which other languages and
cultures can receive recognition and this provides the potential to deconstruct
boundaries. This study does not offer any descriptive or applied framework
of how English ‘should’ ideally be used and understood in racially mixed
lingua franca communication, but it makes an appeal to break with the rigid
ideologies of what ELF ought to be by unthinking its Eurocentric root.

Notes
1 In has, in fact, been suggested that native speakers must be given closer attention
in English lingua franca communication (Carey 2010).
2 In the text, I refer to both consultants and interviewees as participants. Chapter 9
also provides further methodological information and concerns.
3 All participants of this project were informed of the nature of the research prior
to the interview. All names employed throughout the monograph are pseudo-
nyms in order to assure the anonymity of the individuals.
4 The use of analogue field notes in my moleskin was quite productive, often only after
the encounter, which meant that precise transcription of the conversation was not
feasible. Verbatim quotes employed throughout the book, however, were captured in
electronic files.
5 In South Africa, the four apartheid-based race categories (African [black], coloured,
Indian, and white) continue to serve bureaucratic purposes and are part of the every-
day discourse of most South Africans. Although reluctantly and uncomfortably, I
maintain these racial classifications here in order to demonstrate their ambiguity and
how race matters to South Africans. I do not, however, employ race and racial cate-
gories in inverted commas in order to have a more reader friendly text.
6 While I acknowledge the claim by Afrikaners that Afrikaans is indigenous to
South Africa in the sense that it is linguistically distinguishable from Dutch
which is the original ex-colonial language, I consider it meaningful in the context
of this study to label it as a South African rather than an African language.
16 Introduction: Framing the Study
7 https://www.iol.co.za/news/politics/zuma-afrikaner-only-true-white-south-african-
439000
(accessed 16 May 2020).
8 See, for instance, Alexander 1997, 2000, 2004, 2005, De Klerk 2002, Herbert 1992,
Kotzé 2000, Finlayson and Slabbert 1995, Kamwangamalu 1997, 2000, Orman 2009.
9 https://www.iol.co.za/news/politics/afrikaners-zulus-share-same-struggle-438490
(accessed 16 May 2020).
10 Linsie, 58 year-old female Afrikaner academic, Stellenbosch 3 February 2015).
11 Many white Afrikaans speakers have interpreted the post-1994 “anglicization” as
a threat to their identities but the importance of language also resonated with the
Zulu community (Perry 2004a).
12 https://www.htxt.co.za/2014/07/08/gmail-is-now-available-in-zulu-and-afrikaans
(20 Jan 2020), and https://businesstech.co.za/news/internet/234483/google-maps-
adds-afrikaans-and-zulu-language-options (accessed 20 Jan 2020).
13 www.saembassy.org/are-you-interested-in-teaching-zulu-or-afrikaans (accessed 20
Jan 2020).
14 Afrikaans speakers make up a racially heterogeneous group and the so-called
coloured population forms (with 54 percent) the majority of Afrikaans speakers
today. So-called coloured people do not claim what is known as Afrikaner iden-
tities. The term ‘coloured’ was the label employed by the apartheid government
to homogenize people into one group who had primarily a mixed-race back-
ground. Everyone who did not ‘fit’ into the dominant categories of ‘White’,
‘Black’, and ‘Indian’ became classified as ‘Coloured’. Coloured people are the
most diverse population group constructing identities through a Khoikhoi and
Malay background or racially mixed heritage. As an identity category it is more
complex than other South African identities and it is arguably more fraught with
ambiguities and contradictions (Erasmus 2001; Adhikari 2013).
15 In this book, I use terms and labels such as black/African (accented) English as well
as white English to capture terminology which the participants of this study
employed. In most instances, the racial dimension of language was foregrounded in
discussions, rather than whether a person learned English as a first language or not.
2 English in the World and as a Lingua
Franca

Introduction
English has been the most commonly employed tool for international commu-
nication for some time (Crystal 2003). World Englishes (WE) is a research field
initiated by Braj Kachru (1976), who laid the foundations for a critical
approach to the linguistic and geo-political study of varieties of Englishes
around the world. Although his Three Circle model (Kachru 1982, 1985) has
been criticized (e.g. Bruthiaux 2003, Pennycook 2017), his pioneering work in
critiquing the usefulness of the term “native speaker” and “mother tongue”1
has certainly lasted. The fundamental paradigm underlying the work of WE
scholars is that the vast spread of the English language has resulted in many
kinds of Englishes that can be formally described and presented as varieties in
their own right. Accordingly, it is also argued in WE research (and post-colo-
nial Englishes) that the so-called English ‘native-speaker’ no longer serves as the
dominant point of reference. The field of WE is vast and it is characterized by
much fluidity, as new varieties of Englishes are continuously emerging around
the world. In South Africa alone, there are a number of different Englishes,
both ‘native’ and ‘non-native’ spoken around the country.
Part of this broader research field, but also distinguishable in the WE para-
digm, is the more recent study of English as a lingua franca. Unlike most WE
researchers, however, who have focused their study on specific places and
varieties of Englishes, ELF scholars shifted their analytical lens from region to
context and focused on the strong communicative value of English spoken as a
lingua franca. Also, unlike the study of WE, ELF’s geographical focus has
centred on Europe and, to a lesser degree, Asia. It has been argued that, in the
contemporary world, “English’s primary role is to act as a lingua franca among
multilinguals for whom English is an additional language” (Kirkpatrick 2013:
13). It is from this perspective that the study of ELF has value in South Africa
but my approach to its study certainly does not fall into the traditional para-
digms of the field. For one thing, this study is located within linguistic anthro-
pology and not in applied linguistics, it portrays cultural and identity politics
and makes no recommendations as to how we ‘should’ be thinking about
English. Rather, it portrays South African people who use ways of speaking

DOI: 10.4324/9780429031472-2
18 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF)
English as a way of creating meaning in their life and making their words
become political. As Bourdieu (1990: 54) put it “politics is, essentially, a matter
of words”.
The ELF field has been evolving, there has been quite a bit of confusion
about terminology in the field focusing on the role of ELF. Dröschel (2010: 43),
for instance, called upon scholars not to conflate ELF and Lingua Franca Eng-
lish (LFE). In particular, she states that

The definition of English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) should be based on the

functional aspects the language has for its users and its social status in a
particular speech community. However, the term ‘Lingua Franca English’
should be restricted to formal properties of the language, i.e. the develop-
ment of particular varieties of English in cross-cultural communication. I
suggest that the terms ‘English as a Lingua Franca’ and ‘Lingua Franca
English’ should no longer be used indistinguishably …

However, in a recent publication Canagarajah (2018), for example, employs

the acronym LFE to refer to diverse approaches to English social/interac-
tional studies which include ELF, translingualism, English as an Interna-
tional Language (EIL), and pragmatics. Due to the proliferation in
scholarship on English there continues to be much inconsistency in the ways
acronyms for specialized fields are employed.
For the purpose of this book I will define my approach to language, and
English more specifically, as based on the human condition and therefore it is
marked by ambiguity. It is an understanding of language as a social resource
and a means of communication replete with ideological positions and socio-
political meanings. Language ideologies are basically “beliefs, feelings, and
conceptions about language structure and use” and they “often index the poli-
tical economic interests of individual speakers, ethnic and other groups, and
nation states” (Kroskrity 2010: 192). When English is used as a lingua franca in
South Africa, especially among isiZulu and Afrikaans speakers, ideologies
about ways of speaking stir complex identity politics. ELF communication as
social practice is not immune to this, in fact ELF can be understood as a mobile
communication platform through which identities are constructed. Drawing
from Gal’s (2013) linguistic anthropological approach, I also understand ELF
as a process and a dynamic rather than a ‘thing’. I concur with the opinion that
“the acronym [ELF] is handy but may sometimes be misleading. The full phrase
brings out the processual aspect of what we are studying” (Gal 2013: 179–180).
This is also why this book only makes use of the acronym occasionally, most of
the time I employ the full phrase. The participants and consultants of this book
have all learned English as a second, third, or fourth language and they employ
it primarily in conversation with other language speakers, hence it has meaning
as a lingua franca.
It is clear, from these defining efforts that the way I am making meaning
of the role of English as a lingua franca is quite radically different from the
 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) 19
way most applied linguists speak and write about ELF. While applied lin-
guistic work is valuable from a variety of perspectives, Pennycook and
Makoni (2020) have highlighted the discipline’s ‘northern’ bias in terms of
‘universal’ claims and theorizing. They note the importance of applied lin-
guistics recognizing the “complicity between ways of knowing embedded in
the field and a history of colonialism, discrimination, and unequal knowl-
edge distribution” (Pennycook & Makoni (2020: 136). They aptly point out
that “the ways these forms of knowledge are tied both to a colonial history
and a colonial present link them to violence and privilege” and they call on
scholars to work towards a redistribution of knowledge and resources so
that new forms of knowledge can reinvigorate the field (of applied linguis-
tics) (Pennycook & Makoni (2020: 136). This book aims to deliver a new
form of knowledge and a new perspective on the multiple roles of English as
a lingua franca in the world by focusing on variables thus far neglected in
this field (i.e. race) and by showing how English is caught in great socio-
cultural ambiguity in South Africa.

ELF Scholarship
The writing on English as a contact language has of course been longstanding
(e.g. Knapp 2015 [1987]; Crystal 2003; Graddol 1997, 2006; Fishman 1987) but
the field associated with the acronym ELF only established itself in the early
2000s. Jenkins’ (2000) phonological and Seidlhofer’s (2001) lexico-grammatical
studies of ELF are widely considered the first two milestones in the inaugura-
tion of ELF as a research field in its own right. There has been significant
corpus development of ELF, such as Seidlhofer’s Vienna-Oxford International
Corpus of English (VOICE) and Mauranen’s corpus of English as a Lingua
Franca in Academic Settings (ELFA), both of which have received much atten-
tion. More recently, Kirkpatrick (2010) has been working with a team of
scholars on an Asian Corpus of English (ACE). For several years there was a
focus on what is termed the Lingua Franca Core (LFC) which can be defined as
a “finite set of pronunciation features which, it is claimed, are necessary for
achieving international intelligibility in spoken English” (Deterding 2013: 7).
However, since these earlier studies and criticism, there has been much change
in ELF scholarship and a general move away from the linguistic description of
‘ELF varieties’.
There has been extensive debate about what exactly constitutes ELF inter-
actions and discourse. Today scholars at the forefront of the field (for instance,
Jenkins, Mauranen, Seidlhofer) insist that the analysis of ELF discourse must
not exclude English first language speakers, that ELF is a variable contact lan-
guage, and that a certain level of multilingualism in the environment is a pre-
requisite for ELF. Meierkord (2004: 115) characterized English as a lingua
franca as “a variety in constant flux, involving different constellations of
speakers of diverse individual Englishes in every single interaction”, hence ELF
is not a variety of English that can be “formally defined” but rather it is “a
20 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF)
variable way of using it” (Seidlhofer 2011: 77). In line with the WE philosophy,
ELF scholars argue that English spoken as a lingua franca ought to be seen as
“different rather than deficient” (Jenkins, Cogo & Dewey 2011: 284) and that
stakeholders in the educational sphere, for instance, ought to acknowledge this.
ELF has established itself as a separate research field within applied linguistics
with its own journal, an annual conference, and a prolific output of book
chapters and monographs. The recent Routledge Handbook of English as a
Lingua Franca (Jenkins, Baker & Dewey, 2018) is also strong testimony to the
fact that ELF is thriving. The political message is that as long as Englishes are
internationally intelligible they should be acknowledged as valuable academic
media. It is noteworthy that the Mouton de Gruyter Journal of English as a
Lingua Franca (JELF) states on the author’s guidelines:

While standard style sheet stipulates, under ‘Special attention’, that

authors should have their “contribution carefully checked by a native
speaker”, the editors of JELF simply expect authors to submit manu-
scripts written in an English which is intelligible to a wide international
academic audience, but it need not conform to native English norms.

While this stipulation is remarkably progressive from a general editorial per-

spective, my own African Studies Journal (Modern Africa, Politics, History and
Society) could hardly afford such a disclaimer in the author’s guidelines for a
number of reasons. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of authors in
the JELF are European and, to a lesser degree, from Asian developed countries.
Access to Standard English in education is fairly high in these geographical
regions and the majority of submissions can be assumed to be of a high level of
English (albeit European) after all. Modern Africa is a platform and outlet for
primarily African scholars or scholarship from Africa and as such the over-
whelming majority of papers are also from scholars who acquired English as a
second, third, or fourth language, hence a ‘typical ELF’ crowd. However,
access to a British or American Standard English is hard to come by in many
African public institutions. So, my point is this: as long as the global North sets
the standard for publishing, the African context cannot yet afford such a gen-
erous disclaimer as JELF offers, if we want to appeal to an international aca-
demic audience. This confronts me, as chief editor of Modern Africa with a
complex dilemma: Shall I be true to my ideological conviction that ELF should
“rule” or shall I provide a platform for African scholars to publish their work
in an internationally accepted form? For professional and academic reasons I
admit preferring the latter, facing up to my own hypocrisy and being reminded
of Jaspers’ (2018: 10) sharp observation that “we sigh with exasperation when
teachers and policy makers hesitate to embrace linguistic diversity, while we
would think twice about transforming our own journals … into multi-, if not
translingual, locations for science”.
English is, as any other language, a tool to distinguish Us from Them;
language has immediate effect and is highly political. Language purism is
 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) 21
often linked to political conservatism and, from this perspective, the ELF
paradigm is attractive. But Jaspers also remarks with reference to the bur-
geoning translanguaging literature that an uncritical propagation of fluid
and flexible language use is not without its problems as it constructs a type
of “truth regime that allows ‘good’ subjectivities and disallows ‘bad’ ones”
(Jaspers 2018: 8). European English lingua franca, the classic ELF discourse,
is marked by access to the kind of English(es) which are still pretty close to
the so-called standard. The majority of learners on the African continent
and in South Africa do not have access to this kind of English and that is
why part of this monograph is to “take a step back, to pause, to ask what
possibilities are being excluded as new ideas are put forward” (Pennycook
& Makoni 2020: 136).

Critique
ELF as a relatively young research field has currently two continental centres of
research gravity: Europe and Asia (Jenkins et al. 2011; Motschenbacher 2013).
This has led one critic to describe the “ELF movement” as “geoculturally
Eurocentric” (O’Regan 2014: 540). The focus on Europe and Asia is indeed a
bit puzzling, given that there are other multilingual regions such as Africa
where English has also been employed extensively as one of the lingua francas.
In South Africa, even in the most nuanced analysis, it has been discussed as an
“unquestioned lingua franca” (Deumert 2010: 15). While it has become clear
that the social and political realities of countries of the global South are mark-
edly different from those of the global North (Pennycook & Makoni 2020),
most current ELF research continues to focus on Europe. Without doubt,
multilingual contexts in the global South offer a very significant impetus to
reflect on existing theory making in ELF research. Colonialism and the spread
of English are inextricably linked, and the ‘transcultural’ use of English found
in ex-colonies and both its ‘fluidity’ and its ‘fixity’ (Pennycook 1998, 2007) offer
much substance for the study of ELF communication.
Given that English has been a preferred medium of the South African mul-
tilingual elite and ‘the’ academic and professional lingua franca despite its
contested role as an ex-colonial language, this geo-political focus provides a
fruitful ground on which to try to unravel the ambiguities in ELF communica-
tion. There are several reasons why ELF is relevant in Africa and Africa sig-
nificant for ELF research. One of the developments that gave rise to WE and
ELF as research fields is the recognition that in the contemporary world English
is employed as an additional language far more commonly than as a first lan-
guage. This holds even within the South African context where English is
spoken as a first language by less than 10 percent of the population. The place
of English as a South African lingua franca moves on an extremely complex,
contradictory, and shifting socio-cultural terrain and there are multiple English
varieties, or what Mauranen (2018) has started to refer to as similects. The high
variability of Englishes employed as lingua franca in African contexts (see, e.g.
22 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF)
Meierkord, Isingoma & Namyalo 2016) might actually pose some challenges to
conceptualizations of ELF as broadly intelligible even within the same national
context. While my study is not rooted in variationist sociolinguistics, nor does
it engage with the traditional ELF paradigm, it takes up the transformation of
ELF into English as a multilingual franca (EMF). In other words, it contributes
to the disinventions of English (Makoni 2003) which reject a “monolingual
provincialism and see it within prevalent multilingualism” (Ishikawa & Jenkins
2019: 6).
Further criticism has been levelled against ELF for its limited socio-cul-
tural analysis (Phillipson 2008; Modiano 2009; Rubdy & Saraceni 2006; Park
& Wee 2011) and for ignoring some of the forces in the political economy of
global Englishes. Indeed, much of ELF literature focuses on language teach-
ing in English medium institutions and lacks critical engagement with the
socio-cultural politics of English in specific places and the world more
broadly. The study of power dynamics, ideologies, and identities has only
received attention more recently (Jenkins 2014; Virkkula & Nikula 2010;
Seidlhofer 2009, 2011; Baird, Baker & Kitazawa 2014). Although ELF
research has undergone extensive changes in approach and paradigm there is
still a lack of engagement with the socio-cultural politics of English. Penny-
cook recently stated:

While the ELF approach has been able to avoid some of the problems of
the World Englishes focus on nation- and class-based varieties and can
open up a more flexible and mobile version of English, it has likewise never
engaged adequately with questions of power. While the WE approach has
framed its position as a struggle between the former colonial centre and its
postcolonial offspring, the ELF approach has located its struggle between
so-called native and nonnative speakers. Yet neither of these sites of
struggle engages with wider questions of power, inequality, class, ideology
or access.
(2017: ix)

The approach to ELF in this study engages these questions through portraying
the struggles of ordinary South Africans in diverse English lingua franca con-
texts through a broad ethnographic lens because “to take up a cultural political
project must require a battle over the meanings of English” (Pennycook 2017:
265). It is my conviction that the only universal features that characterize Eng-
lish as a lingua franca are its diverse power dynamics and its socio-cultural
ambiguity. The mere prevalence of English as a lingua franca in multilingual
settings triggers a host of inclusionary and exclusionary processes, it creates
marginalization and empowerment. While in Europe, many universities have
been confronted with increasing demands for English as a language of learning
and teaching since the Bologna process, there have been efforts in South Africa
to challenge the hegemony of English at university level. The University of
KwaZulu-Natal, for instance, has formulated a language policy which states
 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) 23
that the local language isiZulu is to be developed in order to gain the same
institutional status as English (Rudwick 2017, 2018).
The usage of English as a lingua franca presupposes that the language is
embedded in multilingualism and linguistic diversity, otherwise English would
simply shed its lingua franca status. Nonetheless, and it seems to me that this
has been neglected in some of the ELF literature due to its focus on Europe,
there are many spaces and contexts where English in its lingua franca status
also reconstitutes and reproduces social injustices. In particular in the African
context, English is prevalent only because for some interlocutors there is no
better option available. As a matter of fact, most white South Africans do not
speak an African language and, therefore, communication between black and
white people is by default in one of the ex-colonial languages, and increasingly
English. Concerns about social justice in South Africa go hand in hand with
questioning the hegemony of English in spaces of power. The African context
demands to be examined in ways where there is openness for strategies through
which African languages can cohabit intellectual spaces with English (Bokamba
1995). ELF scholars recently acknowledged that the negative aspects of ELF
communication and the uncooperative behaviour in ELF discourse have not
found sufficient attention (Jenkins et al. 2018: 3). Knapp (2002) long argued
that the type of situation in which English lingua franca communication takes
place is significant and that in competitive and contested spaces, such as uni-
versities, cooperative behaviour might not occur. The tendency among African
language speakers to remain silent in spaces where white English speakers lead
the conversation is common.
It has been argued, that English as academic lingua franca has strong com-
municative value (Mauranen 2012). From one perspective, this also holds true
in South Africa where some learners refer to English as the “communicative”
language (Rudwick 2008) but its position of English as ‘the’ academic lingua
franca in South Africa continues to be on contradictory ground. In Chapter 5
the student movement (#Open Stellenbosch) will serve as an example of how
bottom-up dynamics have triggered a university language policy change that
enacted English (as opposed to Afrikaans) as the primary academic lingua
franca but this has happened under contested circumstances. English continues
to be caught in an ambivalent climate with much tension among Afrikaners in
Stellenbosch. While recent empirical data from the South African context sug-
gest that students embrace linguistic practices in education that allow for a
combination of languages, “English-plus multilingualism” in the classroom
(Van der Walt, Klapwiyk & Klapwiyk 2016), there is a strong sense of purism
among Afrikaner people, even some of the youth. While the educational lan-
guage context of some black learners has changed in the sense that more and
more black children attend multiracial schools where they have access to so-
called Standard English, the overwhelming majority of African children con-
tinue to attend schools where, as Gough wrote in 1996, children do not have
much exposure to first language English, or varieties other than Black South
African English (BSAE). Such English second language identities (Block 2014)
24 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF)
are communicated in English lingua franca contexts and they deserve nuanced
analysis. African people have invested in English and actively employ the lan-
guage as a resource to communicate and to ‘be in the world’. English does form
part of their identities, but this did and does not always happen by choice. It
takes place because of South Africa’s colonial past and the simple fact that non-
black South Africans have failed to learn African languages. For the most part
South Africa’s multilingualism involves the speakers of Bantu languages, the
majority of white, Indian and coloured people are, at most, bilingual (Census
2011).

Reorientation towards Multilingualism

English lingua franca environments are inherently socio-linguistic diverse and
also offer great potential for research on multilingualism (House 2003; Jenkins
2015; Cogo 2018; Smit 2018). This is particularly important given that the cri-
ticism of English in Africa is often built around abstract but very emotional
concerns that local languages will be swept away in a wave of ‘westernization’
(Banda 2009). For English to have lingua franca status in Africa presupposes its
coexistence with African languages and Afrikaans. And this is precisely what
has happened for centuries. There is great natural potential for multiple lan-
guages to coexist next to each other in diverse ways, albeit often within a
hierarchical order and diglossic relations that place English either implicitly or
explicitly at the top. After all, multilingualism has long been “a fact of African
life” and, by extension, Africa’s primary lingua franca (Fardon & Furniss 1994:
4). Complex dynamics have generated multiple forms of more or less habitua-
lized multilingual practice. Since South Africa`s transition to democracy in the
early to mid-1990s the role of English as one of the country’s national lingua
francas has been strengthened on various levels but, at the same time, multi-
lingualism has continued to flourish (Census 2001, 2011). Quantitative analyses
of census data suggest that increasing bilingualism rather than a language shift
to English is occurring in South Africa (Posel & Zeller 2015). English, or rather
its various varieties, coexists with other languages within a complex and fluid
multilingual order. This social analysis of English lingua franca communication
is embedded in ‘other’ ways of speaking multilingual, understanding multi-
lingualism as a “new linguistic dispensation” (Singleton et al. 2013). In this
way, the aim is also to dis-invent language (Makoni 2003) by acknowledging its
non-bounded nature, flexibility, and multiplicity. It gives way to English(ing) as
translingual practice (Canagarajah 2013; Canagarajah & Kimura 2018),
through multivocality (Higgins 2009), metrolingual context (Otsuji & Penny-
cook 2010), and a southern gaze (Pennycook & Makoni 2020).
The focus on South Africa’s multilingualism as a basis for my analysis
meshes well with most recent developments in the fields of language studies.
Even ELF research (Jenkins 2015, 2018a, 2018b; Cogo 2018; Smit 2018) has
increasingly been framed in multilingualism. As a result of this development
ELF scholars have responded to their critiques. One scholar (O’Regan 2014)
 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) 25
in particular, had attacked the scholarship at its very core by claiming that
ELF studies reify English as a lingua franca as a fixed product based on an
idealist rationalist ideology that ignores important forces in the political
economy of global English. Indeed, early ELF scholarship showed little cri-
tical engagement with socio-political issues that arise from the simple fact
that English is the global lingua franca. However, as the field evolved, it has
received some attention (Jenkins 2014; Virkkula & Nikula 2010; Seidlhofer
2011; Baird et al. 2014). O’Regan’s (2014) criticism did not consider how
ELF research evolved and responded, at least to some extent, to the very
critique he levelled against it.
The argument that ELF scholarship has not engaged sufficiently with the
cultural politics of global English (Pennycook 2012: 140) is, however, still valid.
The mere fact that the global South has not featured much in the analysis and
that Africa and other post-colonial settings have been neglected does represent
a shortfall. Given this situation, it is perhaps not surprising that ELF remains a
controversial school of thought despite its establishment as a legitimate
research field characterized by bourgeoning volumes and monographs.2
Jenkins (2018a: 4) recently argued that greater theoretical premise ought to
be given to the multilingual repertoires ELF speakers bring to the table in
order to “gain a more nuanced understanding of ELF’s multilingual nature”.
In recent papers (Jenkins 2015, 2018a, 2018b), she expanded ELF to EMF,
English (as a) multilingual franca as part of this emphasis that English is only
one (among many) ‘bridging’ and ‘communicative’ tools in the multilingual
learning context. The acronym EMF is not generally accepted as an improved
term among ELF scholars but there are several studies (Weihua 2019; Ishi-
kawa 2020; Baker & Sangiamchit 2019) emerging that make reference to the
term. By locating English as a lingua franca in relation to other languages,
scholars might be able to escape the narrow view of ELF and the frequent
polarizations in discussions about English.
Many contributions to the debate about global English and also English as a
lingua franca have tended to be strongly ideologically grounded. Strong meta-
phors such as “lingua frankensteinia” (Phillipson 2008) invoke a picture of a
horror scenario which provide a very narrow and one-sided view. While Phil-
lipson’s (1992) Linguistic Imperialism (LI) placed the study of English in the
world within a valuable framework that highlighted the social and linguistic
inequality English contributed to, it provides little space in which to examine
how English has empowered the marginalized. As Blommaert (2004: 62) put it,
linguistic imperialism has an important political message but socio-linguisti-
cally “it needs to be approached as something that could cause more harm than
good if advocated and implemented with immediate effect”. Phillipson’s (2006)
more recent work also seems to acknowledge to a much greater degree positive
developments involving English. In South Africa, many language activists
nonetheless dwell on an uncritical linguistic human rights framework. Lan-
guage has complex socio-historical entanglements in the country and to speak
of English as ‘only’ an imperial tool yields little insight into the complexities of
26 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF)
appropriation and ownership taking place on the individual and collective
identification level. For many African language speakers in South Africa Eng-
lish has also been a tool to escape poverty and marginalization. Refiloe Lepere
writes in the Foreword to Jefferson Tshabalala’s (2018: 5) debut script Khon-
golose Khommanding Khommissars: “In the era of decolonisation it’s hard to
admit that I find the English language delicious. *Hides face*. But I do.”
The flipside of the perspective that places English as ‘only’ hegemonic and
dangerous is that the African influences on English are ignored and that verna-
cular languages might become romanticized. Language, culture, and identity are
often perceived as very closely entangled in these contexts. There are Herderian-
type of schemata which link language intrinsically and inextricably to culture,
identity, and nation and South African socio-linguistic scholarship is replete
with it, even my own earlier studies fall into the trap of essentializing these
relationships (Rudwick 2004). Scholars (Errington 2007; Bauman & Briggs
2003; Banda 2009; Makoni & Pennycook 2012) have persuasively shown that
the Herderian ideology is a legacy of colonial linguistics and quite severely mis-
represents the complexity of linguistic practices and identity trajectories as they
manifest on the ground, especially in places such as Africa. Keeping this scho-
larship in mind the aim in this monograph is to focus on the natural potential of
multiple ways of speaking English and other languages to coexist, complement
each other, but also to compete in social, political, and academic spheres.
English as a lingua franca has also been portrayed as “neutral” (House 2014),
even “bereft of collective cultural capital” (House 2003: 560). In South Africa
these associations are quite far removed from social reality. While some ELF
studies (e.g. Baker 2015, 2018) have conceptualized ‘culture’ in ELF commu-
nication more critically, there has previously been a focus on what might con-
stitute a shared culture and identity through ELF (Cogo & Dewey 2012). Much
of the current ELF literature (including the various articles in Jenkins et al.
(2018) continues to flag the benign status of ELF. Power dynamics emerging
from ELF communication in everyday social life, politics, the media, and edu-
cation have not found much attention in ELF scholarship (Prodromou 2008;
Park & Wee 2011). Park and Wee (2011: 366) note that “the ELF project needs
to be greatly more sensitive to the political consequences of formulating and
promoting” an alternative market in which a hybrid English lingua franca form
can gain authority. ELF scholars have responded to criticism and acknowl-
edged that ELF is best studied in multidisciplinary frameworks (Jenkins, Cogo
& Dewey 2011: 302). However, the field is still lacking analytical tools to
grapple with the extent of cultural politics and necessary decolonization prac-
tices (Pennycook 2020). As Joseph (2006: 9) aptly states: “The matter of who
has ‘authority’ over English is a political linguistic issue par excellence, centring
as it does on the question of who English belongs to, and what exactly are the
‘boundaries’ of a language”. To describe just how these politics of language
unfold in the South African context is the principal aim of this book.
Grounded in linguistic anthropology, the study hopes to offer an analytical
depth of power dynamics which neither WE nor ELF scholarship have
 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) 27
provided. With few exceptions (Smit 2010b; Björkman 2008; Ehrenreich 2009,
2018) long-term qualitative methods have not characterized the fields. There
is an illuminating ethnographic approach to text in one study (Jenkins 2007)
but ELF scholarship, more broadly, has barely used anthropological field
ethnography and multidimensional methodologies that put the focus on con-
text-specific usage (Ehrenreich 2018). Participant observation strategies, hol-
istic approaches to subjects and data, focus on emic categories, and thorough
critical self-reflection all deserve more attention in the field. In order to make
sense of English as a lingua franca in the lifeworlds of South Africans I focus
on reflexivity, both my own and that of my consultants and participants.
Although Baird et al. (2014) interrogated the role of the researcher in ELF
communication, there are no comprehensive studies in the socio-political
meanings inherent in the multiple identity work created in English lingua
franca contexts. Using an ‘additional’ not a first language as a medium, for
instance, has distinct implications not only for learning and teaching in South
African higher education (Smit 2010a) but also for the socio-cultural language
politics a person finds him/herself in. The ‘tactics of intersubjectivity’ which
provide a focus on the semiotics of language are helpful in the examination of
diverse linguistic and social identities (Bucholtz & Hall 2004). Putting stress
on the ‘making of identities’ in context and an approach that acknowledges
that ideologies and identities are temporary, in flux, and negotiated in rela-
tion to power, we can also come to understand more adequately the multi-
lingual realities involving English practices in South Africa. Few English
lingua franca studies focus on socio-cultural dynamics and identification
processes in discourse (e.g. Jenkins 2007; Kolocsai 2014) and only recently has
a more translingual perspective been added (Canagarajah 2018).
Hiu (1995: 26) was one of the first scholars to employ the term translingual
practice in the context of the condition of translation and “of discursive prac-
tices that ensue from initial interlingual contacts between languages”. She
defined the study of translingual practice as “the process by which new words,
meaning, discourses, and modes of representation arise, circulate, and acquire
legitimacy within the host language …” (Hiu 1995: 26). Hiu’s work was deeply
embedded in translation studies but it was pioneering in the sense that she
identified (in the mid-1990s) conceptual gaps between the ‘east’ and the ‘west’.
Later, in 2013, Canagarajah extended the concept of translingual practice and
framed it as ways of speaking in a broader theory of global citizenship and
cosmopolitan striving. Suggesting that it could potentially “provide a more
complex understanding of competence for global citizenship” (2013: 13),
Canagarajah moved the term into more mainstream applied linguistic scholar-
ship. The concept is useful as it exposes the weaknesses of the previous con-
ceptualization of English in the world. Translingualism is an inextricable part
of English lingua franca communication as it involves changing linguistic
norms and thereby paves the way for the fluid relationship and flow between
languages as an ever-changing dynamic. In South Africa, socio-linguistic scho-
lars have employed Canagarajah’s (2013) conceptualization of translingualism
28 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF)
as a transformative practice (Hibbert & Van der Walt 2014; Munro & Lemmer
2018) and this book reasserts this position. The reason for this is that the
ontological approach to language here is deeply embedded in linguistic
anthropology which links all language practices to identities. Language as such
is never only just a means of communication.

Communication vis-à-vis Identity

A division between “languages of communication” and “languages of identi-
fication” as once conceptualized (Hüllen 1992) is not useful for English lingua
franca studies (see also Fiedler 2011). English lingua franca usage cannot be
regarded as communicative in function only, as it always raises “issues of
identification and representation in relative degrees” (Canagarajah 2006: 200).
There are various and differentiated scales and levels of communicative and
identity-endowing processes in the use of English as a lingua franca in South
Africa. My earlier studies (Rudwick 2008, 2017, 2018; Parmegiani & Rudwick
2014) demonstrate that many Zulu people, for instance, highlight the impor-
tance of English for (academic and socio-economic) communication in their
lives but they only reluctantly acknowledge English influence in their cultural
and ethnic identities. In most lingua franca contexts, individual socio-cultural
background, communicative goals, and speakers’ competence influence the
encounter (Meierkord 2002: 129). African language speakers might well con-
struct distinct boundaries between an English and an African cultural iden-
tity, but this does not mean that African identities do not also find extensive
expression in and through English ways of speaking and writing.
Language remains one of the most pervasive resources in identity politics and
it is often flexibly employed among people to form loyalties and alliances, on
the one hand, and to construct difference and boundaries, on the other. This
flexibility is a source of ambiguity in particular in English lingua franca dis-
course where different ways of speaking English have different currencies in
different contexts. While it could be argued that few languages in the world
have triggered loyalties beyond specific cultures, nations, or territories to the
extent that English has, the English language is far from being culturally ‘neu-
tral’. It is helpful to adopt an epistemological orientation to language politics
around English as a lingua franca that exposes the significance of power and
ideology in metalinguistic discourse. Putting language ideologies and the ways
they intersect with constructions of identity at the centre stage I aim to con-
tribute to a better understanding of the current conceptual struggles in the
broader field of English in the world. Language ideological frameworks (Sil-
verstein 1979, Blommaert 1999; Simpson 1993; Woolard & Schieffelin 1994;
Woolard 1994, 2010, 2016; Kroskrity 2004, 2010) shed light on the ways in
which “language ideologies are productively used in the creation and repre-
sentation of various social and cultural identities” (Kroskrity 2004: 509). Piller
(2015) has carved out the reciprocal and dialectical nature of language and
social behaviours and argues that while undergirding language use language
 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) 29
ideologies are also influenced by linguistic behaviour. Language ideologies are
based on beliefs and feelings which manifest in value judgements and these
judgements intersect with ethnicity, race, and gender. In South Africa, essenti-
alist views associated with language, culture, ethnic, and racial identity feature
prominently and they are often an “ontological claim in the service of ideolo-
gical contestation and identity politics” (Van der Waal 2008: 54).
One could argue that ELF communication, as defined earlier in this chapter,
might have the potential to unite South Africans but this view would grossly
ignore how ways of speaking English regiment power relations and racism in
the country. ELF scholars often highlight the communicative value of ELF
interactions. Erasmus students, for instance, have been documented as
describing their English lingua franca usage and experience as highly mutually
intelligible, creative, and fun and they are documented as having little concern
about ‘mistakes’ in terms of Standard English (Kolocsai 2009). IsiZulu speakers
often call English a ‘communicative’ language but that does not mean that they
easily communicate in it (Rudwick 2006). It cannot be denied that, adherence to
the standard language ideology (Milroy & Milroy 1999) is prevalent, in the
academic setting particularly. Jenkins (2014) shows that in higher education
institutions and universities especially those who regard themselves as ‘inter-
national’ are strongholds for the native speaker ideology.
A nuanced analysis of English lingua franca communication includes the
constellations where monolingual native speakers, proficient bilinguals, med-
iocre or low proficiency English speakers interact. It also needs to be carefully
contextualized in place and time. Knapp (2002) has shown that the type of
situation in which English is used as a lingua franca influences power dynamics
significantly. The often-reported cooperation and convergence in ELF dis-
course3 does not necessarily hold in more competitive and contested spaces
where actors fight for their personal success (Knapp 2002). Higher educational
institutions, for example, are highly competitive spaces and, especially in
Africa, they are also elitist places, and the multiple dynamics of inclusion and
exclusion in classroom interactions require ‘thick description’ in order to eval-
uate their impact on socio-cultural processes. My own teaching experience
(2002–2009) at the University of KwaZulu-Natal supports Knapp’s (2002)
descriptions of the “fading-out” of the non-native speaker. The tendency
among African language speaking students to remain silent in higher education
classroom discussions has not been sufficiently documented.
English lingua franca forms of speaking are not necessarily linked to a
particular social, ethnic, or racial group. While certain accents might have
immediate associations with a certain racial or ethnic group, there are also
many exceptions. Increasingly, in South Africa, due to spatial desegregation
and more and more African children attending previously white, so-called
ex-Model C schools4 more and more African language speakers are profi-
cient in an English that was previously associated with white people. In a
meticulous socio-phonetic analysis it was shown that a growing number of
African middle-class youth speak a variety of South African Standard
30 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF)
English, as opposed to BSAE and this is particularly noteworthy among
women (Mesthrie 2017a). Mesthrie suggests that these white accents are
contributing to deracialization dynamics in the country (Mesthrie 2017a,
2017b). While one can indeed argue that the South African Standard English
accents blur the boundaries of the inherited relationship between race and
language in South Africa, this book also aims to demonstrate that this is
only one perspective on the social development and cultural politics involved
in South African Englishes. It can also be argued, as I will do later, that due
to the increasing divergence of accents among African language speakers,
there is also more linguistic boundary work which results in complex racial
identity politics.
South Africa offers an abundance of linguistic and social hybridities to argue
that any one-to-one associations of English ways of speaking and speakers’
identities is not tenable. Due to multiracial schooling, there are many disrup-
tions to the previous raciolinguistic order. In KwaZulu-Natal, for example, an
increasing number of Zulu children are attending schools in areas that are
predominately Indian. Some of these African children grow up speaking a
variety of so-called Indian South African English rather than South African
Standard English. The study of the socio-cultural politics and identity dynamics
involved in English lingua franca discourse in South Africa calls for theories
and methods that can cope with indeterminacy and heterogeneity. Language
scholars working in and about Africa have started to theorize how space and
mobility play significant roles in the analysis of contemporary socio-linguistic
dynamics. Blommaert (2010) has provided conceptual tools in order to practise
a “sociolinguistics of globalization” that understands language as a fragmented
and mobile resource. Examining the ways of speaking English as a lingua
franca as an African mobile resource can give rise to questioning macro socio-
linguistic processes that polarize European and African languages.
Pennycook has wondered how far lingua franca communication is indeed
based on mutual understanding and harmonious interaction. He suggests a
change of perspective, one I found most helpful in making sense of what hap-
pens on the ground in ELF communication in South Africa. English might not
promise ‘harmonious’ interaction, it might simply be the only option available.
But who decides whether English is to be spoken as a lingua franca rather than
Afrikaans or isiZulu? And what does it mean in terms of the identities of
speakers when English is chosen rather than another language, or when lan-
guages merge with English? Clarifying “whether the advance of English repre-
sents lingua franca rather than lingua frankensteinia trends” (Phillipson 2008:
265) might be framing an analysis in terms that are far too polarizing. Lin-
guistic and social ecologies of South African vernaculars are so multifaceted
that they do not neatly fall into an only positive or only negative scenario.
Phillipson’s theories only partially relate to South Africa where colonial and
apartheid policies contributed to English establishing itself as the main aca-
demic language franca and primary medium of instruction. However, Brutt-
Griffler (2002) has shown through impressive archival evidence and literature
 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) 31
from the early twentieth century that the language educational politics of Brit-
ish colonialists in Southern Africa were not aimed at spreading English profi-
ciency among African people more broadly. In fact, the racist imperialists
feared the intellectual sophistication of the “Black Englishman” emerging from
missionary schooling and, as a result, apartheid Bantu Education restricted
black children’s access to English until a higher school grade (Dunjwa-Blajberg
1980).
This is not to say that many isiZulu and Afrikaans speakers do not
experience English as an oppressive language in South Africa today. The
Afrikaans press has been replete with pieces portraying English as a killer
language. And Sbu, a 40-year-old Zulu choreographer remarked bluntly
during one of our informal gatherings in Durban in October 2019: “English
keeps me small. If it was for me, it [English] should fxxx off”. Language is an
extremely emotional issue in South Africa and because of its intersections
with ethnicity and race it is also very political. It was long argued that Eng-
lish, if used as a lingua franca among African people, was “typically restricted
to formal communicative situations” (Gough 1996: 54). But there are only few
articles in which English is discussed specifically in terms of its lingua franca
role. In the early 2000s Balfour (2003) illustrated the debate waging between
supporters of South African Standard English (SASE) versus Black South
African English (BSAE) with regard to which English variety better represents
a South African lingua franca and which ‘should be’ the educational norm.
He (Balfour 2003: 00) ends his article with the following statement:

English in South Africa seems to be entering a phase described best as

its post-colonial twilight; a period of political instability and ambiva-
lence where its ‘international allure’ and ‘local inaccessibility’ is both
the cause and consequence of an ‘imperialism’ of our own creation.

In the Oxford English Dictionary “twilight” is defined as “a period or state of

obscurity, ambiguity, or gradual decline”. Although Balfour wrote this article
17 years ago, it does not seem that English in South African has yet quite left
the phase described as post-colonial twilight when it comes to ambiguity. Van
der Walt and Evans’ (2018) chapter in the Routledge Handbook of English as a
Lingua Franca shows how ambivalent sociolinguists feel about the space Eng-
lish inhabits as a lingua franca in the country.
WE scholars have been doing remarkable work and BSAE has been exam-
ined for several decades. Scholars (Schmied 1991; De Klerk & Gough 2002;
Gough 1996; Lanham 1996; Mesthrie 2006; Makalela 2004; Smit 1996; Van
Rooy 2004; Wade 1996) have shown both the linguistic features characterizing
BSAE varieties as well as social factors contributing to its prevalence. Chick
and Wade noted as far back as the late 1990s on the basis of research conducted
in KwaZulu-Natal that BSAE signals “social identity and prestige” (1997: 279).
Due to the increasing socio-economic mobility of BSAE speakers during the
1990s and early 2000s, scholars have argued that the variety was increasingly
32 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF)
seen in a positive light among African language speakers (Wade 1996; Lanham
1996; De Klerk & Gough 2002). Given these studies one might assume that in
English lingua franca communication African ways of speaking English feature
as an overall valued South African form of English. While this is indeed so in
certain contexts it is not so in others. Due to the fact that BSAE is a proxy for
race it is a way of speaking that attracts racialization processes and, as Chapter
4 will show, racist behaviours in various guises. While granting ELF a linguistic
philanthropy, Holliday (2009: 27) warns that political aspects of discrimination
in English lingua franca communication have been neglected and, although not
explicitly, he alludes to aspects of raciolinguistics. Juxtaposing the ideological
dimensions of the native/non-native speaker distinction among English lan-
guage instructors and users, he illustrates how categorizations of native/non-
native do not solely have a linguistic basis but also racial dimensions. Employ-
ing the metaphor of centre versus periphery, he aptly reminds us of the extent
of the discrimination taking place through raciolinguistic criteria in the English
learning industry.
This book does not focus on English learning and does not concern itself
with the applied linguistics distinctions of native versus non-native English.
However, Holliday’s (2009) study is instructive for my work in ways that
highlight the socio-political rather than the linguistic aspect of English as a
lingua franca. Ways of using English both in lingua franca discourse and more
generally are inextricably linked to racial ideologies in South Africa and it is
precisely for these reasons that this study pays close attention to ethnicity and
race-constructed identity categories that South Africans claim, assign, con-
test, and subvert in multiple ways.

Racializing English as a Lingua Franca

When analysing the cultural politics of English as a lingua franca in South
Africa, race is nowhere, and race is everywhere. While WE scholarship has
happily labelled varieties along the lines of race and ethnicity, ELF scholarship
exhibits a conspicuous avoidance of race as an analytical category. It is, for
instance, remarkable that the Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua
Franca contains the term “race” precisely three times. Once, in a chapter on
intercultural communication (Baker 2018), then in Kirkpatrick’s (2018) con-
tribution about ELF and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN),
and one more time, but only in the context of the “entire human race” (Wang
2018). Traditional ELF scholarship has thus far not paid attention to race as an
analytical category, which seems surprising given the prevalence of racism in
Europe. Race contributes to a large extent to the cultural politics of English as a
lingua franca not only in South Africa but also elsewhere in the world. Hence,
ELF scholarship more generally seems to be in need of racialization. Only when
race no longer contributes to discrimination and marginalization can we refrain
from examining race as a category. As Chaplin and Jablonski argue “today
still, racism is real even if races are not” (2020: 152).
 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) 33
The relationship between social variables such as language, race, ethnicity,5
and gender is complicated in any society but South Africa’s multilingual, multi-
ethnic, and multi-racial realities combined with the colonial and apartheid his-
tory inject further complexity.6 The intersections of language, culture, race, and
ethnicity constituted the main socio-political pillars on which the apartheid
system relied (Alexander 1997; De Klerk 2002; Herbert 1992; Niedrig 1999;
Kamwangamalu 2000b; Kotzé 2000). The link between language and ethnicity
has been shown to be quite strong by some scholars (Fishman 1977, 1989, 1996;
Garcia 2010), while others focused on linguistic and ethnic instability in ethnic
identity constructions (Le Page and Tabouret-Keller 1985; Pavlenko & Black-
ledge 2004). Post-structural studies on power and language (Bourdieu 1991)
have helped to conceptualize language politics in society. Language as a socio-
cultural and political tool shapes subjectivities discursively, constructs social
and ethnic belonging, and is entangled in complex power relations. The work
of post-colonial scholars has influenced scholarship on ethnicities and the
hybridity that characterize them (Hall 1990, 1996, 1997; Bhabha 1994, 1990).
Language in its various ontological representations seems to be a tenacious
feature of understandings of ethnicities, especially in Africa. While in current
contexts, urban Zulu and Afrikaner people might well see ‘culture’ and ‘identity’
as social variables that are constructed, flexible, and variable, the component
language (isiZulu/Afrikaans) and ethnic belonging (Zuluness/Afrikanerness) are
mostly regarded as being tied inextricably. IsiZulu and Afrikaans are, hence, not
contingent markers of these ethnicities but rather perceived as one of their pri-
mary factors. As May (2012: 12) argues, “in theory, language may be just one of
many markers of identity but in practice, it is often much more than that”.
Anderson (1991) ascribed language a primary role in the imagination of the
ethnic group and he has shown how the mere symbolic commitment to language
can contribute to the persistence of an ethnic group and culture.7
Given, first, that the conditions of modernity have not done away with ethni-
city in people’s sense of belonging and, secondly, that the social construction of
race and racial difference might be the most divisive factor in contemporary global
society, it is fruitful to explore their significance in relation to the dominant global
and South African lingua franca: English. It is through a broad theoretic lens of
ethnicity and race that I examine how language practices in South Africa wax and
wane throughout time, space, and context. English lingua franca usage has been
part and parcel of the country’s language practices for a long period of time and
despite its often alleged ethnic ‘neutrality’, it constructs ethnicities throughout
different contexts, times, and space.
Makoni et al. (2003) long pointed out the importance of ‘race’ as a category
in language scholarship in their volume Black Linguistics. In 2015, Flores and
Rosa first employed the term ‘raciolinguistics’ in a seminal paper of the Har-
vard Educational Review. I make use of the term as meaning to encompass all
scholarship concerned with language and race. A number of volumes have been
published now which focus on this intersection and it can be argued that
raciolinguistics has become a research field in its own right (Alim &
34 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF)
Smitherman 2012; Alim, Rickford & Ball 2016; Alim, Reyes & Kroskrity 2020).
Raciolinguistic perspectives provide a space in which the racism in dominant
language ideologies can be unmasked (Flores & Rosa 2015: 154). Although this
theoretical framework has been applied mostly to the US American context so
far, studies are beginning to emerge with reference to South Africa (Williams
2016a; Ndhlovu 2019; Kerfoot 2019). The careful study of the link between
language and race can show how current debates about raciolinguistic authen-
ticity are constructed “in relation to colonial logics” (Rosa & Flores 2017: 6).
There are five key components which Rosa and Flores (2017) have identified as
marking a raciolinguistic perspective which are considered throughout this
book: 1) historical and contemporary colonial co-naturalization of race and
language; 2) perception of racial and linguistic difference, 3 regimentation of
racial and linguistic categories; 4) racial and linguistic intersections and assem-
blage; and 4) contestation of racial and linguistic power formations.
These perspectives, if dialogued across disciplines, can expand our knowl-
edge about linguistic and racial injustices in significant ways. Indeed, “racio-
linguistics can be more than just an academic field of enquiry but also a critical,
progressive linguistic movement that exposes how language is used as a means
of social, political, and economic oppression” (Alim 2016: 27). But in order to
become such a movement it is necessary to provide detailed case studies that
show how language shapes our ideas about race. The South African context
where a complex matrix of linguistic, racial, and economic injustices obstruct
social cohesion is a productive and profitable research space. Learning to adopt
a raciolinguistic lens in relation to English language usage in South Africa has
meant, first, acknowledging that English lingua franca dynamics continue to be
replete with coloniality, secondly, exploring the social and cultural politics
involved in English as a lingua franca, and thirdly, aiming at uncovering social
injustices in relation to diverse English usage, processes of racialism, and
racism. But before considering these current issues, we must explore the his-
torical trajectory of the English language in the country.

Notes
1 For an excellent discussion of the problematic nature of concepts such as “native
speaker” and “mother tongue”, see Love and Ansaldo (2010).
2 See, for instance, Jenkins (2007, 2014; Jenkins and Mauranen 2019, Prodromou
2008, Kirkpatrick 2010, Smit 2010b, Cogo and Dewey 2012, Deterding 2013,
Mauranen 2012, Motschenbacher 2013, Jenkins et al. 2018, Seidlhofer 2011,
Kolocsai 2014, Hynninen 2016, Guido 2018, Konakahara and Tsuchiya 2020).
3 When used in this book discourse refers broadly to produced speech or text which is
understood as socio-historically and politically influenced and collectively shared.
4 In South Africa, the term ‘Model C’ (school) is widely associated with formerly white
English-medium schools which are dominated by a white learning environment.
5 Barth’s (1969) seminal study on ethnicity broadened our understanding of ethni-
city as a social process and ethnic boundaries as negotiated. For the sake of suc-
cinctness, I define ethnicity, drawing from the work of Edwards (2009), as
 English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) 35
allegiance and collective identification among the members of a social group that
believe to share ancestral links, cultural ties, and have a sense of group boundary.
6 Language and ethnic identity dynamics have been studied in relation to ‘culture’ as an
important variable because ethnic differences are often framed and communicated as or
alongside cultural issues (Fishman 1999). Although it is now acknowledged as pri-
mordialism, the influence of the German Romanticists (Herder, Humboldt, and Fichte)
is widely recognized in the study of the link between language, culture, identity, and
nation within the concept of Weltanschauung [worldview] (see Heeschen 1977).
7 Anderson’s (1991) conceptualization of communities as imagined units inspired
extensive scholarship in sociolinguistics (Norton 2000, 2001, 2010; Pavlenko &
Norton 2007).
3 The Making of English as a Lingua
Franca in South Africa

The story of the making of English as a lingua franca in South Africa is, first and
foremost, a story of colonialism. And “one must understand South Africa’s colo-
nial history” in order to make sense of the current language dynamics (Kamwan-
gamalu 2013: 238). Because this book has an ethnographic focus on isiZulu and
Afrikaans speakers’ relations to English, my historical discussion also centres on
these two language groups. Imperialism in South Africa manifested itself much as
it did elsewhere in the world, with English being imposed on local communities
through administration, education, and churches (Pennycook 2017). But English
missionaries, in particular, also promoted and invented the African languages as
bounded discrete units (Makoni 2003). The historical roles played by both English
speakers and Dutch/Afrikaans speakers created a fundamentally unjust power
base which still lingers in complex ways in South Africa. Language ideologies,
attitudes, practices, and behaviour still largely reflect the hierarchies of the past
and the resulting language politics have influenced how language identity politics
are constituted. During colonialism and apartheid, language laws were designed
to suit (only) the white minority and excluded African language speakers. An
African language was then quite unambiguously a black language. Today, it is
argued that both Afrikaans and English are able to claim African status to some
degree, but the ambiguities of these claims will be discussed later in the book.
There are many languages which have had lingua franca functions in the
world. The term ‘lingua franca’ was first used with reference to a pidgin spoken
along the Mediterranean coast between the fifteenth and nineteenth century
(Meierkord and Knapp 2002: 9). Lingua francas emerge as a form of commu-
nication among people with different language backgrounds. They are complex
linguistic tools with heterogenous characteristics, and they can be conceptualized
in multiple ways.1 In South Africa, English is only one of several lingua francas,
such as Afrikaans, isiZulu, and urban mixed languages. English is extensively
employed among African language speakers and there has been a continuous
growth in the number of second language (L2) English speakers (Posel & Zeller
2015). However, recent quantitative data also show that less than 10 percent of
African people report speaking English “as their main language outside the
household” which is evidence of the vitality of the African languages (Posel,
Hunter & Rudwick 2020).
DOI: 10.4324/9780429031472-3
 The Making of ELF in South Africa 37
The history of South Africa’s language and identity politics is a history of
discrimination and exclusion. This chapter is mainly about English but with a
focus on its intersection with other languages, in particular Afrikaans, as the
early history of South Africa is dominated by the history of the white invaders
who subjugated the native population. Apparently, an English captain sug-
gested to the Imperial Government as early as 1620 that the Cape should be
annexed, but at the time he found no hearing (Thomson 2001: 32). More than
30 years later, in 1652, Jan van Riebeck and the Dutch East India Company
(DEIC) claimed the Cape and colonial authorities determined that ‘natives’
(mostly Khoisan communities) had to learn Dutch. The first missionary insti-
tutions where learning took place in Dutch were arguably “the first conscious,
intervention in the sphere of language policy in a multilingual South African
polity” (Alexander 1989: 13). The language contact between native people,
slaves, traders, and soldiers created a Dutch-based pidgin which was initially
known as Kaapse Hollands (Cape Dutch) and some natives and Dutch house-
holds adopted these ways of speaking as their primary language as early as the
late seventeenth century (McCormick 2006; Hendricks 2018).
British settlement and the presence of the English language dates only from
1795, but in the early nineteenth century imperial expansion began to take over
many Dutch areas into British administration. This can be regarded as marking
the first colonial language struggle between English and Dutch (only later did
Afrikaans enter the struggle) (Christie 1985: 33). In 1822, Lord Charles Somer-
set declared English was to be the only official language in the colonial area
with the result that English was used as a medium of instruction in schools
(Hartshorne 1992, 1995). In many ways this development was symptomatic of
the aggressiveness of colonial expansion and British imperial power. A mere
three decades after the British invasion English was the ‘only’ official language
in the Cape colony (Lanham 1978: 21). In what has been described as a policy
of Anglicization, the British largely substituted Dutch with English (Kamwan-
gamalu 2002).
Throughout the early nineteenth century the Dutch settlers saw their influ-
ence dwindle under the British and “although English was a foreign language
for the Afrikaner population, by the 1830s it alone was authorized for use in
government offices, law courts, and public schools” (Thompson 2001: 95). The
Dutch embarked on a major exodus, known as the Great Trek (1835–1846), to
escape the domination of the English. Towards the end of the century and
triggered by the discovery of gold, the Anglo-Boer War (1899–1902) took place
(Ndhlovu and Siziba 2018). Prior to this, in 1875, the Dutch-turned Afrikaner
population formed the Genootskap van Regte Afrikaners (GRA) (Union of
‘True’ Afrikaners) in Paarl to fight for the recognition of Afrikaans, rather than
Dutch, as the mother tongue of the Afrikaner.2
The early nineteenth century also saw the area of contemporary KwaZulu-
Natal (KZN) brought under the single political authority of the Zulu by
Shaka kaSenzangakhona, who became king of Zululand. It is common
knowledge that he extended his power substantially by forcefully assimilating
38 The Making of ELF in South Africa
other clans into his kingdom that spoke similar languages.3 By 1819, Shaka
was in control of the mightiest kingdom in south-east Africa, and isiZulu
became the dominant language among African ethnic groups in the area
(Maartens 1998: 28). According to Zungu (1998: 37), Shaka was very con-
scious of the ‘purity’ of the isiZulu spoken by his people and did not tolerate
people who departed from this way of speaking. Wright (1991: 4), however,
maintains that “the common notion that Zulu ethnic consciousness can be
traced back to the time of Shaka in the 1820s is quite wrong”. When the
colonizers built the first settlement (Port Natal) in the area that is now KZN,
they opened communication with Shaka and recognized his overlordship in
order to gain permission to occupy land and to trade (Ballard 1989: 118).
Shaka was murdered in 1828 by two of his half-brothers, Mhlangana and
Dingane. The latter then became king and reigned for over a decade.4 Due to
neither Shaka nor his successor (Dingane) allowing Zulu people in the king-
dom from entering into direct trade relations with the white settlers, the
influence of the colonizers was limited at that time.
During this period, however, missionaries started to document ‘vernaculars’
and in a sense ‘invented’ the orthographies of the African languages as they
currently exist (Makoni 2003). The nine Bantu languages which are part of the
official eleven languages of the South African constitution today are, therefore,
a legacy of colonial linguistics. Prior to colonial intervention the boundaries
between African languages are thought to have been much more fluid. Mis-
sionaries arbitrarily made distinctions between African ways of speaking and
“subsequently awarded academic credibility through grammatical descrip-
tions” (Makoni 2003: 137). In the case of isiZulu, Zulu ethnic consciousness
was stimulated and this coincided with an increased interest in isiZulu, which
was led ironically by Western missionaries and ideas based on German
Romanticism (Nyembezi 1961; Makoni 2003). Arguably, the influence of the
vernacular languages in religious and other life experiences had an effect on the
identity trajectories of isiZulu and other African language speakers. The
orthographies provided African language speakers with “potent literary sources
for the imagining of ethnic history and culture” (Berman, Eyoh & Kymlicka
2004: 5).
Only a few African language speakers received education in mission schools;
the vast majority of the African population could speak neither English nor
Dutch/Afrikaans. Initially, the medium of instruction was mainly English, but
there were schools in the area of contemporary KwaZulu-Natal where isiZulu
was used as the medium of instruction as early as 1885 (Hartshorne 1992: 193).
The learning of the English language was believed to be a privilege, and the few
African language speaking learners attending English missionary schools
developed into a small English-speaking elite, referred to as ‘Black Englishmen’
in the literature (see Dunjwa-Blajberg 1980). The colonial history of the 1800s
is characterized by an entanglement between the English language and Chris-
tianity (De Kock 1996). At the turn of the century and in the early twentieth
century, the new ‘class’ of African language speakers were English proficient,
 The Making of ELF in South Africa 39
had accepted English names, wore Western clothes, and absorbed Christian
values. Amakholwa were Christian converts in the area known as KwaZulu-
Natal today and they were alienated from the rest of traditional Zulu society.
But amakholwa by no means abandoned their mother tongue, in fact, they
were characterized by a high level of bilingualism and many also developed
their isiZulu literacy skills. In 1903 they established an isiZulu newspaper,
Ilanga Lase Natali, which played a significant role in Zulu people’s struggle
against colonization and apartheid (Buthelezi 2019: 67).
The late nineteenth century also marked an important time in the devel-
opment of Afrikaans with nationalist strivings and in the establishment of the
language as an essential symbol of the Afrikaner people. The Anglo-Boer War
(1899–1902) contributed to much hatred towards the English and the rift
between the two language groups became so entrenched that their differences
became what has been termed “untranslatable” (Steyn 2005). Van der Waal
(2012: 450) reminds us that “Afrikaans was used to mobilise Afrikaners
around an anti-English and white ethno-nationalist identity – it became the
main symbol of being an Afrikaner socially, culturally and politically …”. But
Afrikaans was not thought of as an ‘African’ language as such. Giliomee
(2003a: 11) traced how the first claims of a ‘white man’s language’ were
established in the early writing of the Afrikaans poet and activist C.J. Lan-
genhoven. That also meant that coloured people and other non-white Afri-
kaans speakers were excluded from the discourse around and claim to
Afrikanerdom and this persisted throughout the twentieth century. As far as a
lingua franca goes, however, Afrikaans established itself as a lingua franca in
the Cape at the turn of the nineteenth century (Thompson 2001) and it
retained this role throughout most of the twentieth century, not least because
Afrikaners vehemently promoted their language. There were great regional
differences when it came to language usage but both English and Dutch set-
tlers promoted their language through the gospel and their missionaries.
The English-only politics of British imperialists triggered strong resistance
from Dutch settlers and Afrikaners during the early twentieth century.
Between 1908 and 1909 National Conventions were held in various parts of
the country which aimed at reconciling the conflicting linguistic interests of
the two colonizers. In 1910, English and Dutch (not yet Afrikaans) became
the two official languages of the Union of South Africa but in the early
twentieth century Afrikaner cultural nationalism grew, and Afrikaans (die
taal) became a central pillar on which Afrikanerdom was built (Hofmeyr
1987). In 1925 Afrikaans replaced Dutch as the official language alongside
English. English dominance ended in 1948 when Afrikaner Nationalists
gained power and enforced what has been termed an ‘Afrikanerization’
(Kamwangamalu 2002). It has been argued, however, that “the dominance
of the view that the late colonial state (apartheid) is essentially an Afrikaner
project enables English liberals [sic.] thin out affinal ties between the English
and colonial racial oppression in South Africa” (Lushaba 2016: 198). While
Afrikaans was politically promoted to a greater extent than English during
40 The Making of ELF in South Africa
apartheid, the latter can still be described as “the master code in the colonial
epistemic violence” (Lushaba 2016: 198).
There is a sizeable body of literature which connects Afrikaans and Afrika-
ner ethnicity. Many studies discuss the role of the Afrikaans language in rela-
tion to ‘Afrikanerdom’ in apartheid and post-1994 South Africa (Bosch 2000;
Davies 2009; Giliomee 2003a; Orman 2009; Webb and Kriel 2000; Kriel 2006).
Language, ethnicity, race, and territory became deeply intertwined during the
twentieth century. Although the British Government had already established
‘reserves’ to separate the white population from African people by the middle
of the nineteenth century through the government’s ‘divide and rule’ policy,
under apartheid this strategy became further developed as an elaborate system
of ethnic, racial, and linguistic separation. There were ten so-called ‘Bantu-
stans’ or homelands for the black population, one of which was home to isi-
Zulu speakers, the KwaZulu homeland (which is part of the province of
KwaZulu-Natal today). Linguistic and ethnic boundaries between groups were
maintained through geographic divisions. Although the Nguni language cluster
comprises of several mutually intelligible languages, the four which make up
the cluster (isiZulu, isiXhosa Siswati, isiNdebele) are today representative of
distinct cultural or ethnic groupings. Ironically, much of the conceptual basis
for such separate ethnolinguistic thinking is still intact today, not least because
languages (and by default ethnicities) are enshrined in the conceptualization of
South Africa’s 11 official language policy (Makoni 2003).
Although the English language was dominant in many areas, Afrikaans
was also introduced as a medium of instruction in schools in 1914, and as the
political power of Afrikaners grew throughout the early twentieth century, an
authorized committee in the education department advised that both English
and Afrikaans were to be introduced mandatorily in all schools (Hartshorne
1992: 194). When the National Party (NP) came to power in 1948 the policy of
Christian National Education (CNE) was adopted, which introduced the
principle of mother-tongue education for every child. This change in para-
digm in the historical language treatment became “a bone of contention in the
apartheid era” (Maartens 1998: 39). Originally missionaries and politicians
were of the opinion that the indigenous African population needed to become
‘civilized’ and that this could only be achieved through the medium of a Eur-
opean language. This idea, however, changed with the commencement of
institutional apartheid. It is assumed that this paradigm shift was at least
partly based on the fear that the majority of the black population could
become as educated as the ‘Black Englishmen’ mentioned earlier, which
would result in a loss of the manual work force which could be exploited
(Alexander & Helbig 1988; Dunjwa-Blajberg 1980).
With a few exceptional periods and places, imperial Britain was not sup-
portive of having the indigenous populations taught in English. Whether for
white supremacist, racist, or other reasons, it has been documented by several
scholars that African people in South Africa and other British colonies only
had restricted access to learning English (Joseph 2006, Mazrui & Mazrui
 The Making of ELF in South Africa 41
1998; Brutt-Griffler 2002). The limited access to English “provided a means of
social control over the working classes” (Brutt-Griffler 2002: x). Contrary to
what was argued in some decolonial debates, English was not forcefully
imposed on the African population, it was not a common good for black
people during apartheid. Rather, the education system for most African stu-
dents was intended to systematically disadvantage them (Hammond-Tooke
1997: 68) and this strategy included only providing restricted access to Eng-
lish. The Bantu Education Act of 1953 is argued to have had the objective of
“miseducat[ing] the Africans so that their academic certificates became irre-
levant for the labour market” (Hlatshwayo 2000: 65). Linked to Bantu Edu-
cation was also the policy of ‘retribalization’ and ‘divide and rule’ which
fostered the separate development of the diverse ethnolinguistic groups
(Davenport 1991; Chidester 1992, 1996). Language-in-education policies were
“part of the larger social-engineering project that would ensure the segrega-
tion of different racial groups and the hierarchical organisation of South
African society, with Black South Africans in the lowest rung of an exploited
workforce” (G. De Klerk 2002: 33). As the apartheid state only empowered a
few black people who were proficient in either English or Afrikaans, mother-
tongue instruction was regarded as an additional oppressive tool during
apartheid. Gugushe (1978: 215), for instance, argues that Africans lacked
motivation to study their mother tongues because English and Afrikaans were
the “bread-and-butter” languages.
Human ‘Othering’ was a paramount strategy of official colonial and apart-
heid politics. While race became the primary discriminatory factor during
apartheid, language served to distinguish between the racially constructed
groups. Afrikaner Nationalists aggressively promoted the Afrikaans language
throughout the twentieth century and the language became closely entangled
with identity. Van der Waal (2012: 450) explains:

The creation of the Akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns (Academy for

Science and Arts) in 1909 and the standardisation of Afrikaans was
celebrated in the Taalfees (Language Festival) of 1959 with the image of
a fire as the visual symbol of the ‘miracle’ language. In 1975, this
enthusiasm for the Afrikaans language was expressed by the creation of
the huge monolithic monument at Paarl. The myth of Afrikaans as a
white language, in association with the political mobilisation of white
Afrikaans-speakers, was strengthened by the institutionalisation of
Afrikaans in various organisations that were given the role to protect
and standardize the language.

All this suggests that Afrikaners succeeded through the apartheid ideology that
Afrikaans and Afrikaner culture became elevated to occupy equal status to
English. Needless to say, African languages were not given any such support,
the history of African languages – or rather their speakers – is one of systematic
discrimination and subjugation. In 1972, the Bantu Education Advisory Board
42 The Making of ELF in South Africa
recommended that only the initial six years of schooling should entail mother-
tongue education, and thereafter instruction should be in either Afrikaans or
English, but preferably not in both languages (Maartens 1998: 32). Despite this
recommendation, the National Party Government decided to maintain a dual-
medium policy and essentially forced African children to learn in Afrikaans.
When stakeholders in the African education system became aware that gov-
ernment was not going to change the 50 percent Afrikaans-50 percent English
school language policy that enforced Afrikaans as an equal medium of
instruction, they knew they had to do something to initiate change. By 1976
teachers’ associations, principals, and students had lost their patience with the
department, and boycotts, strikes, and violence erupted, initially and most
heavily in the Soweto township. During the Soweto uprising of June 16 many
African students and teachers lost their lives through ruthless police interven-
tion (Hartshorne 1992: 203). A photograph featuring a small boy, named
Hector Pieterson, dying in the arms of an older student shocked the world. The
protests of education stakeholders were not confined to Soweto and spread to
many other areas in the country, an estimated 1,260 people died (Perry 2004a:
113).
The fact that the uprising was a protest against the use of Afrikaans in edu-
cation is relevant here because it also profoundly affected the role English
played as a ‘chosen’ lingua franca in education. The events of 1976, today
marked as Youth Day on 16 June, are an important reminder of how sensitive
and emotional language matters are for most South Africans. Seeing that hun-
dreds of black learners lost their lives in a struggle that had language at its core,
it is not surprising that language continues to be a deeply emotional and highly
politicized issue. Arguably, the Soweto uprising marked one of the primary
instances which firmly established English as South Africa’s academic lingua
franca as the protests were directed against Afrikaans and for English (Hirson
1979). It happened in this way, however, not because African language speakers
did not culturally value their mother tongues. It happened because the system
(both nationally and globally) already had the English language established as a
powerful tool through which apartheid could be fought (inside and outside the
country). Afrikaans largely shielded English from the stigma of a colonial lan-
guage at that time and throughout apartheid.
The National Education Crisis Committee (NECC) was established as a
civil society movement in order to address the persistent protests and to find
solutions for the ongoing crisis in the African education system. Subsequent
to its first conference at the end of 1985, a second conference was held in
March 1986 where two institutions were established: 1) a People’s History
Commission and, 2), a People’s English Commission (Norton Peirce 1989:
410). One of the ideas was to make English more accessible to African
people but when the NECC called for a third conference it was banned.
Afrikaner Nationalists worked against the promotion of English. Further-
more, the Apartheid Government invoked the so-called Public Safety Act
which put a prohibition on non-approved education materials and
 The Making of ELF in South Africa 43
interrupted all the activities of the NECC. The state was afraid of the
NECC’s activities because People’s English represented a type of “pedagogy
of possibility for the majority of South Africans and consequently a threat to
minority rule” (Norton Peirce 1989: 410).
In the KwaZulu homeland, the controversial Mangosutho Buthelezi, who
was chief of the Bantustan, stirred Zulu ethnic nationalism by reviving ‘tradi-
tional’ symbols and customs through Inkatha and later the Inkatha Freedom
Party (IFP).5 From about the mid-1970s, Zuluness was politically mobilized but
the language, isiZulu, did not play an explicit role, perhaps because it was the
most obvious characteristic that the KwaZulu constituency already had in
common (Maré 1992; Marks 2004). Arguably, isiZulu was simply too ubiqui-
tous for it to be mobilized as a cultural tool and symbol at the time. This is not
to say that metalanguage discourse was not significant or that social power
dynamics involving geographic and socio-political variation did not exist. It is,
for instance, documented that during the 1990s, some Inkatha ‘warriors’ iden-
tified enemies by their ‘impure’ isiZulu, apparently because amaqabane (Afri-
can National Congress (ANC) supporters) spoke more urban varieties of the
language (Marks 2004: 192). But Dlamini (2001: 201) argued that Inkatha
“claimed ownership of Zulu symbolic resources, including language, which
then made it difficult for other organisations to use the symbols in pursuing
their aims”.
During this period, Afrikaans and its elaborate development into a ‘high
standard’ language became further and yet more inextricably linked with
Afrikaner nationalism, and white-exclusive Afrikanerdom. Apartheid, Afri-
kaans, and its white minority rule “served as an operationalisation of Afrikaner
nationalism” (Van der Westhuizen 2016: 1). It is against this background that,
despite its imperialist history, English acquired the label of the “language of
liberation” from the mid-twentieth century onwards. Vilakazi (1958: 351)
wrote in dramatic terms that many Africans refused to “worship at the shrine
of the mother tongue” and preferred to employ English as a perceived de-eth-
nified medium. At the official level, English was chosen as the primary language
of the liberation movement, the ANC, first, to facilitate internal communica-
tions between members of different ethno-linguistic groups, and, second, to
have an international voice in the fight against apartheid. The ANC chose
English as the language in which the Freedom Charter was drafted, and inter-
national communication took place. Nonetheless, one can safely assume that
much of the internal communication among ANC comrades took place in
African languages. The armed wing of the ANC, for instance, also carried an
official Nguni name: Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation). It has been
argued that English was the language used for ANC protest (Mesthrie 1995)
but the ANC struggle slogan amandla ngawethu (power to the people) seems to
have been used extensively. And, remarkably, this slogan is used in South
Africa to this day at any kind of protest action as it works exceptionally well in
dialogue where a leader of the protest calls amandla and the protesters will
respond ngawethu. Ironically, this struggle slogan is now used in protest
44 The Making of ELF in South Africa
against the ANC Government about service delivery and other civil society
grievances. Still, during apartheid, ANC members who shared the same African
home language can be assumed to have spoken English only when absolutely
necessary. English was, of course, essential in gaining international visibility
and in fighting apartheid from outside the country.
Arguably there are many distinct varieties of Englishes that are spoken in
South Africa. According to Ndhlovu and Siziba (2018) there are five ethnically
distinguished varieties, i.e. Black South African English, Coloured South Afri-
can English, South African Indian English, Afrikaans English, and White South
African English. The division between Afrikaans and English-speaking white
people continued to be marked in the 1990s. As Mazrui (2004: 7) writes, “lan-
guage had ‘tribalized’ the White population of South Africa”, and Afrikaner
people employed the parochialism of Afrikaans as an argument for its apparent
indigenous status. When Nelson Mandela was released from prison in 1992 and
‘official’ apartheid could slowly come to an end, language became “a terrain of
struggle, a struggle over the basic human right to express oneself in one’s
mother tongue” (De Klerk 1996: 8). Moreover, it was “about self-worth and
belonging” and it was “underpinned by power: economic interest, political
muscle and cultural concerns” (De Klerk 1996: 8). Members of the ANC
reluctantly supported multilingualism; English had established itself firmly as
an internal communication tool. Indirectly, this also implied that English
would function as the dominant language of parliamentary negotiation in the
1990s and beyond. The NP and Afrikaner politicians were supportive of a
multilingual dispensation because their objective was to maintain Afrikaans as
an official language. The multilingual dispensation was interpreted as a “last-
ditch compromise to retain the status of Afrikaans, and not out of a commit-
ment to linguistic rights” (Ricento 2002: 50). Not maintaining Afrikaans as an
official language would have been seen as lack of recognition of Afrikaners as a
volk (people) (Alexander & Heugh 2001: 28). These identity politics, as will be
seen later, continue to play out in current times.
Language, culture, race, and ethnicity had, at this point, become deeply
entangled through a toxic mix of colonial linguistics and apartheid socio-
linguistic engineering with particular reference to Standard Afrikaans and
Afrikanerdom. In 1995, a group of language specialists, such as Neville Alex-
ander, was commissioned by the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and
Technology (DACST) to advise on the development of a future language
policy. The report testifies that colonial and apartheid language policies were
part of the larger political policy which “gave rise to a hierarchy of unequal
languages which reflected the structures of racial and class inequalities”
(LANGTAG 1996: 14). As Ndhlovu and Siziba (2018: 81) put it “language
policies can determine who gets ahead and who gets left behind”. Social injus-
tices were systematically created because only English and Afrikaans were lan-
guages of socio-economic power. Although it was alleged that the language
experts chosen for the group came with ideological baggage (Harnischfeger
1999), the LANGTAG Report indisputably provided the background and basis
 The Making of ELF in South Africa 45
for a democratically just language policy solution which emphasized the per-
spective of language as a resource (Alexander & Heugh 2001: 31). At least on
paper. The first two points of the language clause of the South African Con-
stitution (1996) read as follows:

6.(1) The official languages of the Republic are Sepedi, Sesotho, Sets-
wana, siSwati, Tshivenda, Xitsonga, Afrikaans, English, isiNdebele,
isiXhosa, and isiZulu;
(2) recognising the historically diminished use and status of the indi-
genous languages of our people, the state must take practical and positive
measures to elevate the status and advance the use of these languages;

Additionally, the Pan South African Language Board (PanSALB) was estab-
lished as an independent statutory body, taking on the role of a ‘watchdog’
over language politics. Although its significance for post-1996 language pol-
itics is widely acknowledged, its instrumental and legislative power has been
questioned (Alexander & Heugh 2001; Perry 2004a, 2004b). Afrikaner com-
plaints dominated the platform to a large extent during the first years of its
existence (Perry 2004a, 2004b). The government has not given particular
support to PanSALB, which also “comports with the ANC’s historical pre-
ference for English” (Perry 2004b: 511).
The apparently very positive attitudes of African language speakers (and
ANC members) towards English must be understood against the background
that proficiency in the language was key to liberation, economic advancement,
and success (Dunjwa-Blajberg 1980: 31). It was not the instrumental benefit
alone that was sought but its emerging role as a global lingua franca and
international medium to fight apartheid. In some instances, English has also
been framed as “neutral” (Perry 2004a, 2004b) while the African languages are
linked to a particular ethnic allegiance. However, this consolidating role of
English in terms of ethnicities is not the only association many South Africans
have with the language. In fact, the position of English must be assumed to
have always been a paradoxical one that saw it as the ‘language of the coloni-
zer’, on the one hand, and the ‘language of the liberation’, on the other. Such
opposing and controversial associations with English still linger in the everyday
life experience of many South Africans and later chapters will provide some
empirical substance for this. South African scholars have long argued that there
was something of a “dangerous power of English” (De Kadt 1993) and that
African people have a love-hate relationship with the language (De Klerk &
Gough 2002).
During the first years of democracy, there was much societal support for
English from the general public in South Africa, but socio-linguistic scholars
lamented the dominance of the language in many domains (Heugh 2000b;
Kamwangamalu 2001b, 2003; Webb 1996; Wright 1996; Webb 1996).
McLean and McCormick (1996: 329) argued that the multilingual, 11-official
language policy was often “perceived as a symbolic statement” and that for
46 The Making of ELF in South Africa
instrumental and functional reasons English was “the dominant language in
South African public life”. Kamwangamalu (2000a: 50) described a “three-
tier, triglossic system, one in which English is at the top, Afrikaans is in the
middle and the African languages are at the bottom”. And yet, scholars were
also aware of the vitality of African languages. The English language was
not considered a useful tool of communication for the majority of the South
African population (Gough 1996, Wright 1996). However, its powerful eco-
nomic lingua franca status became even more entrenched post-1994.
This is not to say that African vernaculars showed no language vitality at
the end of apartheid. Quite the contrary, the last three censuses (Census
1996, 2001, 2011) showed that there was very little indication of a language
shift in African households towards English. In KwaZulu-Natal, Campbell,
Maré and Walker (1995) concluded a qualitative study in a township where
informants had no sense of isiZulu being under threat because of English or
any other language. While some sources (De Klerk 2000a; Kamwangamalu,
2001b, 2003; Reagan 2001) suggested a language shift from indigenous
African languages to English in certain urban environments, the numbers
were rather low. Census data has consistently provided evidence for the
vitality of the African languages. African languages and Afrikaans always
have and continue to coexist with English in the daily lives of many South
Africans (Slabbert & Finlayson 2000).
Some of the socio-linguistic literature might have overstated the role of English
in the country, but more recent studies (Posel & Zeller 2015) point instead to a
rapid growth in African/English language bilingualism. This bilingualism is not,
however, pointing to a language shift, rather it demonstrates the increasing role
English plays as a lingua franca in the country. Numerous scholars have referred
to English as South Africa’s main lingua franca (e.g. Deumert 2010, Swanepoel
2013) and arguably this role might have become further entrenched in the years
immediately post 1994. In recent years, however, there have been various dis-
ruptions to the English hegemony in the higher domains6 of language usage, and
the next chapters will provide some empirical evidence for this.
The historical trajectory of English in South Africa is significant for the
analysis of its lingua franca status today. Keeping the legacies of English colo-
nialism in mind when analysing the current politics of the language as a global
and local lingua franca is essential (Pennycook 1998, 2007). One has to be
conscious of the perceived superiority English carries in almost all South Afri-
can communities. The power of English influences the speakers of the African
languages in the way they see themselves and their languages. Mazrui and
Mazrui (1998: 79) argued:

The huge imperial prestige enjoyed by the English language distorted edu-
cational opportunities, diverted resources from indigenous cultures towards
giving pre-eminence, and diluted the esteem in which indigenous African
languages were held. The psychological damage to the colonised African
was immense.
 The Making of ELF in South Africa 47
While this book is not located within the study of psychology, I want to take
cognisance of the psychological trauma African language speakers have
endured due to English dominance. English has been held in such high regard
among South Africans that English proficiency among African language
speakers and a so-called Standard English accent is regularly (and often mis-
takenly) associated with intelligence. Also, there are African parents who are
willing to risk home language attrition or even language shift among their
children by not speaking an African language in the home. Speaking Standard
English clearly symbolizes socio-economic mobility and professionalism, but it
also smacks of elitism in some situations (where the majority of speakers share
another South African language). There are many paradoxes involved in atti-
tudes towards English and metalanguage discourse that takes place. One of the
paradoxes is, for instance, that even African intellectuals and academics who
vehemently oppose the dominant position of the English language at an ideo-
logical level, end up sending their children to schools that are known for their
excellent English tuition (Harnischfeger 1999). But English is not entirely
unchallenged as a lingua franca in South Africa.
In 2020 while this book was being finalized, South African society struggled
with the rest of the world through the COVID-19 pandemic. While watching the
official addresses of politicians and policy-makers during the pandemic, one
noticed extensive use of code-switching into African languages during official
COVID-19 briefings among politicians. This use of multilingual resources marks
another change in the acceptance of English as an unquestioned lingua franca in
official politics. Even though South Africans speak English and other languages in
lingua franca situations, there is also a variety of ways in which English is
accepted or rejected on a metalanguage level. South Africans have taken owner-
ship of English to varying degrees, and many have appropriated it to suit their
needs. There is no single manner in which English is spoken in South Africa but
multiple ways, and the multiple ways in which it is spoken also have variable
levels of intelligibility. Many African identities are constructed through English
(Kamwangamalu 2019), but this chapter showed that English assumed a hege-
monic and oppressive status to Africans and Afrikaans speakers from the early
years of British invasion. It also demonstrated that its current status is heavily
influenced by the fact that African people largely consider Afrikaans a greater
evil than English. Although the prevalence of English currently does not seem to
significantly threaten the vitality of African languages (Posel et al. 2020), it
nonetheless triggers the forces of discrimination against and marginalization of
African language speakers and some of these will be explored in the next chapter.

Notes
1 Meierkord and Knapp’s (2002) seminal volume on lingua franca communication
demonstrates the complexity of the topic. The volume also raises the “question to
what extent the degree of competence in the shared language should be considered in
conceptualizations of lingua franca communication” (Meierkord & Knapp 2002: 19).
48 The Making of ELF in South Africa
In this study, I carefully aimed to consider this question, as in South Africa much
English lingua franca communication involves English home language speakers
whose level of proficiency is accordingly higher and creates complex power dynamics.
2 The town remains significant to Afrikaner people today as it features the massive
Taalmonument (Afrikaans language monument) built in 1975 to celebrate the
centenary of Afrikaans/Afrikaner linguistic nationalism.
3 Shaka was trained in Dingiswayo’s army, who, as chief of the Mthethwa, built up a
remarkable army to confront Zwide, chief of the Ndwandwe (Maartens 1998: 28).
4 For more historical detail, please see Colenbrander 1989, Guy 1979, Laband 1992.
5 The authenticity of this ethnic revival has been widely questioned. According to
Chidester (1992: 211), the Zulu king himself had not worn traditional royal cos-
tumes, such as leopard skin, feathers, and beads, until Buthelezi motivated for it
for the annual ‘Shaka Day’ celebration.
6 Fishman’s (1972) conceptualization of domains of language usage distinguished between
‘low’ domains, e.g. the family/social setting, and ‘high’ domains, e.g. education,
government.
4 Marginalization and Empowerment

Introduction
It was in 2004, during my ethnographic research in the Umlazi township, that
Bonkhosi and I first met. He was teaching English and isiZulu at a school called
Mziwamandla High in M-section of the township. Bonkhosi – obviously a
pseudonym – is a proud Zulu man who loves to use isiZulu idioms and pro-
verbs and took great joy in teaching me the language. Unlike most of his col-
leagues at Mziwamandla, he consciously decided to send his 8-year-old
daughter to a nearby township school where he felt her isiZulu could be fos-
tered. One of his colleagues at the time voiced great disapproval to me about
this because she felt that he wasn’t doing what was best for his child (which in
her view would have been to send her to a so-called ex-Model C school outside
of the township where English was the only medium of instruction and teachers
were likely to be English mother tongue speakers). While Bonkhosi spoke
English with a strong African accent, he was fully proficient in the language. A
few years later, in 2007, Bonkhosi and I found ourselves flat hunting in Durban
and because we had a similar budget but very different living preferences, we
exchanged the numbers of agents several times. In numerous instances, Bon-
khosi told me that the agent said the flat was no longer available despite him
phoning immediately after I had viewed it. After this happened the third time,
my suspicion grew and to discount for a potential gender bias, I asked a male
white colleague to phone. He was welcome to view the flat. Bongz was not. It
was then that I realized that racism was rearing its ugly head through linguistic
profiling. It was clear: Bonkhosi was denied access to these flats on the basis of
his accent because his accent gave away his race. When we reflected on this
injustice a few years later, Bonkhosi mentioned that his daughter was no longer
going to the township school. He laconically remarked: “Perhaps it isn’t too
late yet, she might still learn not to speak as black as me”.

This vignette speaks for itself. I chose to start this chapter with it because it
highlights in many ways the limits of empowerment through English and the
systemic forces of marginalization due to racialized perceptions and stereotyp-
ing about the ways South Africans speak English. This chapter aims to tackle

DOI: 10.4324/9780429031472-4
50 Marginalization & Empowerment
the dynamics of marginalization and empowerment as connected to racial
identity politics in South African society through a twofold lens. I start this
chapter by illustrating how: 1) different ways of speaking English results in
dynamics of inclusion and exclusion which are taken out of ‘everyday’ life
stories of black South Africans; and 2) I shift my focus to how marginalization
and empowerment is enacted through meta-language choices, e.g. choosing a
language other than English in a context that is conventionally perceived to be
an English lingua franca space, such as a South African court room or a par-
liamentary debate. While the next pages bring to the fore intersections of lan-
guage, ethnicity, and race I also highlight the ambiguities of those concepts and
their relationship with each other.
By doing so, I am inspired by Jaspers and Madsen’s (2018) volume which
shows how linguistic and social processes that appear to be on opposite sides of
the coin, like fluidity and fixity, are also mutually presupposing and influence
each other. And so, it is in respect of language practices that involve English as
a lingua franca, as well as other languages, such as Afrikaans and isiZulu. This
chapter aims to explore some of the complexities in the processes of margin-
alization and racialization which the English lingua franca space creates. At the
same time, and in line with my main theme of ambiguity, it also portrays how
the defiance of the lingua franca status of English can be used to gain empow-
erment in a specific political space. It critically engages with the dichotomized
nature of these processes in the context of the racial politics of belonging and
shows the close proximity between empowerment and marginalization, on the
one hand, and the distance between these social processes, on the other hand.
In order to illustrate this complexity, it is necessary to analyse across domains
and social contexts but to consider as the one common denominator the ‘fal-
sely’ presumed stability of English as a lingua franca.
The ways in which many, in particular older generation white, South Afri-
cans make use of English continues to carry much fixity of neo-apartheid
thinking. Upon my arrival at a guesthouse in Stellenbosch in early 2020, the
female manager of the establishment came to greet me enthusiastically.
Andrietta was a 53-year-old Afrikaner woman1 who, from my perspective,
spoke English with native-like proficiency and no trace of an Afrikaans accent.
She showed me and my children the apartment and then invited me to come
back with her into the main house for coffee where I had the opportunity to
meet Esihle, a young 27-year-old Zulu woman, and Babalwa, a middle-aged (40
+) Xhosa lady, who were employed as caretakers and cleaning staff at the
guesthouse. Andrietta’s way of introducing the two of them took me aback:
“Come, meet my girls”. I instantly remembered a compelling autobiographic
piece by Ngcoya (2015: 39) where he frames what he calls ‘hyperapartheid’ by
recounting a similar situation while being a tourist in St Lucia in 2014. His
reflections on the use of Alex’s use of “my girls” are worth quoting at length:

My girls? This possessive pronoun ‘my’ and the racialized ‘girls’ shock me.
The ‘girls’ are Thobi (in her mid-thirties, I supposed) and Mama Duma
 Marginalization & Empowerment 51
(certainly over 50). Judging by the dates of the BMX biking awards he [the
guesthouse owner] has proudly displayed on the walls, Alex must be is in
his late twenties. My girls. I cringe. But I say nothing. I don’t know why.
Was I too embarrassed? Or was this one of my little acts of cowardice? Or
have I simply come to terms with the fact that whites like Alex will cele-
brate Mandela’s legacy while simultaneously guarding and enjoying the
racialized privileges of apartheid?

Indeed, how is it possible that aging Zulu men who work as landscapers in the
garden of wealthy white people continue to be referred to as ‘garden boys’ in
contemporary South Africa? In his analysis Ngcoya (2015) invoked the dis-
course of slavery where possessive and paternalistic language characterized
relationships between masters and slaves. It matters that lingua franca com-
munication between African people and white people has always taken place
almost exclusively in an ex-colonial language and that the way it is spoken still
carries much apartheid thinking. Very few, if any, African people have not had
intimate experience of marginalization due to the ways English is spoken to
them. Apartheid remnants in English lingua franca usage are symptomatic of a
lack of transformation in, mostly white people’s, ways of thinking and being.
The flawed assumption that people happily chose English as a lingua franca
which characterizes much of the applied linguistics literature on ELF in the
global North, does often not apply in the South African context. Although
dated, De Kadt’s (1998) study of inequality in black-white communication
patterns, resonates still 20 years later. Communication between white and
African people continues to take place mostly in English rather than in an
African language. This has consequences for the study of English as a lingua
franca in the country. Although Seidlhofer (2011), who is considered to be at
the forefront of ELF scholarship, has shown in great detail how ELF commu-
nication is characterized by great linguistic creativity, the focus has mainly been
grammatical or lexical innovations rather than metalanguage decisions. When,
where, and why English fails as a lingua franca in a conventional ELF space
also requires attention. For most Zulu people and Afrikaners, English is only
reluctantly chosen as a lingua because there is often no better option available.
To return to the vignette above: Bonkhosi didn’t even try to speak in isi-
Zulu to the white flat agent, he spoke in English, the so-called language of
power. However, the kind of English that he spoke or rather the way it was
received by his interlocutor still excluded him from what he desired. His ways
of speaking English landed him ultimately in a marginalized space because the
fault line was constructed along race. This English lingua franca space which
creates discriminatory processes due to the currency/associations linked to
different ways of speaking English constitutes an everyday reality for black
South Africans who speak in a variety of BSAE. Having different first lan-
guages, Bonkhosi and I both spoke English with an accent that departs from
so-called ‘native-speaker’ English, but mine (German and white accented)
English brought me inclusion where his (African black accented) English
52 Marginalization & Empowerment
excluded him. Raciolinguistic profiling which is precisely what happened in
the above vignette “can have devastating consequences” for those who are
perceived to speak with an “undesirable accent or dialect” (Baugh 2003: 155).
As will be seen below, so-called Standard English continues to be associated
with whiteness and it comes precisely with that racial privilege. In interviews
with a male isiZulu-speaker2 who works in a Cape Town translation agency,
he repeatedly referred to how his ‘’Model C’ accent was responsible for get-
ting him the job in that company. He asserted that this accent fitted the ‘type
of blackness’ the agency employed. There are many faces of inclusion and
exclusion, but language plays a very significant role not only in the “persis-
tence of race” (Jablonski 2020) but in the persistence of blatant racism. There
is a part of societal and structural racism that concentrates to a large extent
on physicality, but language is fundamentally entangled in this physicality.
The situation described in the vignette above is by no means an isolated or
dated event, I have collected 34 narratives in which isiZulu-speakers recounted
their struggles to find a flat in Durban and Cape Town. There is a great deal of
systemic racism but there are also individuals in the accommodation/real estate
industry, as well as in the hotel/restaurant businesses who racialize and dis-
criminate against people with African accents. And not all African accents are the
same, some accents, such as Nigerian Pidgin English,3 for example, might receive
more discrimination than others. A great deal of racism occurs via the telephone,
for instance, by not getting access to a flat viewing, not being able to book a table
at a fancy restaurant, or not being provided with whatever service one might
require. One of my Zulu consultants4 in Cape Town explained with irritation
that her friends always expect her to make the restaurant reservations because of
her “Model C accent”. At Stellenbosch University, a student from Durban spoke
about how an administrator claimed to not understand ‘his kind’ of English.5
Although the above vignette was from KwaZulu-Natal, it is well known
among African language speakers that the housing market in the Western Cape
is particularly racialized and discrimination is rampant.6 There are countless
dimensions to linguistic profiling resulting in racial profiling and subsequent
exclusion. Baugh’s (2003, 2020) work on raciolinguistic profiling practices in
the USA is useful here. ‘Racial profiling’ is defined as based on visual input that
results in designating a person’s racial background, while “’linguistic profiling’
is based upon auditory cues that may include racial identification, but which
can also be used to identify other linguistic subgroups within a given speech
community” (Baugh 2003: 158).7 Although “sociolinguistics provided a great
deal of research that had either direct or indirect relevance to exposing combi-
nations of racial and class disparities that continue to exist” (Baugh 2020: 63), a
systematic focus on the interplay between linguistic and racial discrimination
has only more recently been triggered through the emergence of the field of
raciolinguistics (Rosa and Flores 2015).
In much English lingua franca communication in South Africa the English
people speak is evaluated and judged and there has been very little work
done on racist practices that involve languages which are outside of the
 Marginalization & Empowerment 53
education system. While the above vignette illustrates the limits of empow-
erment through English, the next example shows how ‘linguistic profiling’ in
an English lingua franca space might also be (initially) empowering but
ultimately lead to re-racialization This is because in many instances percep-
tions of race ultimately override language as a determinant of access in cer-
tain situations. In other words, no matter how well a black person might
speak the English language, perceptions of his/her race might still disem-
power him/her. The next encounter serves as an example.
Nqobile,8 who also, at times, calls herself Bridget from her white school days
in an ex-mission school in Madadeni, KwaZulu-Natal was one of my con-
sultants in Durban from early September until December 2019. She is 32 years
old and her double-named background is one of the relics of colonial education
in South Africa. Accordingly, the common practice, not only in mission schools,
but among white teachers in general was to give African learners additional
English names. This was mostly done because teachers were either incapable or
unwilling to pronounce the African names properly (Suzman 1994; Ngubane &
Thabethe 2013). Nqobile, alias Bridget, recounted the following scenario from
her 2017 flat hunting time in Cape Town in a narrative interview:

So the problem is this: I sound white, so when I introduce myself as

Bridget, white people will be nice and invite me to look at the place. But
then I see their face when I show up, how they are just like “oh shit” …
and then they are like “Oh – you are Bridget you look different”. You
know for me those are the instances where you see how slimy English
is. Sometimes they [the flat owners/agents] would still let you look at
the place. Those are the kind ones. Other people would just say “Oh
sorry, the place was just taken”. But how could the place have been
taken if you had an appointment to view it, that’s mad.

Nqobile’s account is compelling because it poignantly illustrates the insidiously

double-dealing nature of Englishes in relation to race. Her description of what
she calls the “slimy” nature of English encapsulates the fact that there is
something inherently fake about the power English is supposed to give African
language speakers. It shows how her way of speaking English was initially
providing inclusion because she was perceived as white. Being ‘caught out’ or
not corresponding with this racial identity and as a result being rejected leaves
one with what she called “a great betrayal”. There is surprisingly no systematic
research available on this topic in South Africa, but there are an increasing
number of studies which flag that language must be studied as a social and
racial justice issue (e.g. Mayaba, Ralarala & Angu 2018; McKinney 2015, 2017;
Hurst & Mona 2017). But these studies are mostly within the educational
sphere and they do not relate to the everyday linguistic practices which result in
racial discrimination and Othering of ordinary South Africans. South Africa
offers a wealth of examples of “uneasy communication” due to English (Dimi-
triu 2010: 13) and the disempowering features of its position as a lingua franca.
54 Marginalization & Empowerment
While we know that English accents continue to represent powerful devices in
the creation of educational boundaries (Rudwick 2008; McKinney 2015;
Hunter 2019) we know very little about how much of South African reality
reflects that language has its limits because ultimately it is race which is the
fault line which determines access to particular resources.
Alexander (2002) once warned that the power of English could undermine
South Africa’s democracy. But to be clear, all languages (not only English) play a
role in discrimination and subjugation – all ways of speaking have the potential
to contribute to marginalization and empowerment. In the next section I would
like to demonstrate how a language which is positioned in a marginalized space
can be mobilized in order to empower. Esch suggests that “empowerment begins
when we become aware that language is a symbolic tool for the exercise of
power and influence” (2009: 2). Understanding the ambiguity of English in South
Africa’s multilingual settings requires us to pay attention to fuzzy lines between
marginalization and empowerment and, also, the possible entanglement of the
two. In the next section I aim to demonstrate how the fine lines and, at times,
crossings between English linguistic marginalization and empowerment played
out during one of the most controversial trials in the post-1994 history of South
Africa.

Marginalization Mobilized for Empowerment

Much has been written about the 2006 rape trial of South Africa’s ex-pre-
sident Jacob Zuma, not only in media outlets at the time, but also in aca-
demic scholarship in the years that followed. The majority of studies drew
attention to the highly problematic culture and gender discourse, which was
prevalent throughout the trial, very few studies took an interest in specific
aspects of the language and discourse that emerged in the course of the trial
(see e.g. Reddy & Potgieter 2006). This is surprising because the language
choices and socio-cultural behaviour of Zuma during his trial marked, from
my perspective, a beginning of the end of English as the unquestioned public
lingua franca in South African politics.
Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma, also known by his clan name Msholozi, was
accused of raping the daughter of an ANC comrade who was half his age and
known to be an HIV-positive AIDS activist. As part of his political strategy
Jacob Zuma defied the English lingua franca communication common in
court by refusing to make use of the language and by heavily emphasizing his
Zulu ethnolinguistic background. In claiming, inter alia, that Kwezi (‘star’,
which was the name gender activists gave the accuser) was wearing an outfit
(a kanga) which signalled to him – as a Zulu man – the expectation to have
sex he invoked his own creation of Zulu culture and masculinity. Zuma self-
ishly employed the cultural and linguistic marginalization of Zulu people in
order to mobilize his support and ultimately be acquitted. Although every
South African has the constitutional right to speak in his/her mother tongue
in court, by doing so Zuma was entangling himself in the cultural politics of
 Marginalization & Empowerment 55
English, its associations with colonialism, and its failure to represent Africa-
ness, or more specifically Zuluness. By speaking only in his first language,
isiZulu, and by asking for the translations of all questions directed at him,
Zuma spoke from a marginalized position, but by doing so he was also able
to empower himself through the mobilization of Zulu ethnicity. The court
proceedings were buzzing with ambiguities and it is not without irony that in
several instances Zuma ended up correcting the translator’s use of English.
While the trial brought out a very problematic discourse about culture,
gender, and sexuality the metalanguage decisions of Zuma also disrupted
English as an established lingua franca in court. Zuma capitalized on his
knowledge of ‘deep’ isiZulu signalling his embeddedness in ‘traditional’
Zuluness (Prinsloo 2009). Although the trial showed “how culture can be
misappropriated and misused in the cause of selfish interests” (Sesanti 2008:
365), it also set the stage for a linguistic rebellion against English as the
common lingua franca (in court). The speaking of only isiZulu invoked cul-
tural and ethnic belonging but Zuma’s linguistic and socio-cultural behaviour
also drew attention to the fact that the courtroom was “a specific (as well as
adversarial) cultural space, with Anglophone traditions, European legal ori-
gins and [in the case of this trial] an Afrikaans-speaking judge …” (Waetjen
and Maré 2009: 64).
Zuma is English proficient and, at the time of writing during COVID-19 in
May 2020, was in an elaborate English Zoom conversation with his own son
Duduzane to boost his image (Zooming with the Zumas9). English was stra-
tegically chosen as a lingua franca in this conversation between two Zulu men
to appeal to a potentially worldwide audience. Zumas’ decision to suspend
his English skills, for the duration of the trial in 2006, was an equally con-
scious choice. By speaking only isiZulu he successfully fabricated his own
linguistic culture which, at the time, excluded English as a lingua franca
because of its digression from Zuma/Zulu culture. Zuma also waited for all
questions posed to him to be translated into isiZulu during the trial. By doing
so he defied a taken-for-granted hierarchy of language which sees English
on the top and other languages lower down. This “indexical iconicity” (Sil-
verstein 2003) greatly appealed to rural Zulu people. The weekly Mail &
Guardian newspaper, arguably one of South Africa’s most respectable media
outlets, offered a nuanced discussion of the language used during the trial.
The journalist commented on the fact that Zuma was not just speaking isi-
Zulu, he was embracing an isiZulu esijulile (deep/traditional Zulu])spoken
mostly in rural areas of KwaZulu-Natal, which is “the type of language that
would have had him laughed at by KwaMashu [Durban township] youth”
(Moyo 2006: 4). The kind of isiZulu Zuma used was laden with hlonipha
(respect), one of the most significant linguistic and cultural codes of beha-
viour in Zulu society. Zuma spoke in idioms and he strategically addressed
the judge respectfully as nkosi yenkantolo (literally translated as ‘king/chief of
court’). He also employed elements of hlonipha language in order to respect-
fully and ‘traditionally’ speak about a woman’s genitals: isibhaya sika baba
56 Marginalization & Empowerment
wakhe (literally translated as her father’s kraal). While his knowledge of isi-
Zulu was strategically feeding his ‘100% Zulu boy’ imagine, he also found
ways to (re)define what constitutes certain elements and aspects of Zulu cul-
ture and gendered behaviour for his own benefit. His construction of Zulu
masculinity included the assertion that “there are expectations in Zulu culture
that demand a man to fulfil the desires of a woman if a man interprets her
being aroused” (Suttner 2009: 226). This claim lead to widespread discussions
about the constituents of Zulu culture with many experts arguing that his
behaviour was based on “Zuma culture” rather than “Zulu culture” (Robins
2008: 423).
What is significant in the context of this study is the fact that language
became a cultural weapon to fight Eurocentric dominance which was per-
ceived as being carried in English. Mondli Makhanya (2006) who wrote for
the Sunday Times during the trial (now chief editor of the City Press) com-
pared Zuma to Buthelezi in the way that he was mobilizing ethnicity by
validating Zulu language and culture throughout the trial process. The judge
in the trial, Willem van der Merwe, himself an Afrikaner, made some
remarks in isiZulu in closing the trial. While this could be read as a type of
solidary performance (of Zuluness), it could also be read as a claim to also
“know ‘Zuluness’” (Graham 2013: 31) given the essentialist entanglements in
the discourse of language-culture and identity during the trial. In a discus-
sion about his personal responsibilities towards the accuser, the topic of
bridewealth (ilobolo) also featured. Ilobolo is argued to be one of the most
sacrosanct traditions in Zulu society (Posel & Rudwick 2014; Rudwick &
Posel 2015). Zuma acknowledged his awareness of his responsibility as a
‘Zulu man’ by suggesting that “he had his cows ready” and by saying that
he valorized (his version of) ‘traditional’ Zulu masculinity in order to “nor-
malise and redeem his sexual behaviour” (Robins 2008: 422).
Zuma’s spectacle was about racial, cultural, and linguistic identity politics.
Through an analysis of comments made on the “Friends of Jacob Zuma”
webpage at the time of the trial, it has been shown how several of his “friends”
refer to South Africa’s racist past and the pains of the history of apartheid
(Waetjen & Maré 2009). Zuma has revealed his ability to flag his fluency in the
cultural world of ‘traditional’ Zulu people. Rural Zulu people believe that
Zuma, “as a traditionalist from a poor, rural background with little education,
[he] will sympathize with their suffering and do something to ameliorate it”
(Hickel 2015: 190). The trial was as much about the present as it was about the
past, and it showed how claims to culture and language can signify a protest
against white domination of which English is perceived to be a part. Zuma
insisted on his constitutional right to speak in the official language of his choice
and by doing so while being English proficient he made a conscious move to
defy the structures of English power.
IsiZulu was ubiquitous during the trial not only inside but also outside the
court room. There were masses of both male and female Zuma supporters
outside the Johannesburg High Court buildings, some in traditional Zulu
 Marginalization & Empowerment 57
regalia (including ibheshu (loin skirt of leopard skin) or isicoco (traditional
head ring)), others wearing T-shirts bearing Zuma’s face or “100% Zulu
boy” written on them. Zuma’s signature song, “Lethu umshini wami” (Give
me my machine gun) was chanted and danced to, there were vuvuzelas 10
heard and impepho (ritualistic incense to communicate with ancestors) burnt.
When Zuma exited the court, he paused his departure to dance with the
masses. It was a cultural spectacle and street theatre. The trial was deeply
troubling in terms of the ethnic chauvinism exposed and the entrenched cross-
racial patriarchy. It ultimately constituted a “set-back for gender equality and
democratic debate” (Suttner 2009: 234), but it also fanned the flames of the
politics of language, ethnicity, and race in South African politics. Culture and
ethnic identity of which language is widely believed to be an essential part
was made a site of struggle. Zuma chose to strategically testify only in isiZulu
feeding his ‘100% Zuluboy’ image and by doing so, he also defied the status
of English as a common political lingua franca in the country.
In this example another language, i.e. isiZulu, was employed to politically
empower an individual, Jacob Zuma. Although in the years that followed
Zuma did not make much use of isiZulu during his public address, recent years
have seen an increase in African language usage in parliament. Some Afrikaans-
speaking ministers of parliament (MPs) have always made use of their con-
stitutional right to speak in their language but only recently have African lan-
guage speakers, especially isiZulu speakers, started to explore this option as
well. Among the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), for instance, most notably
MP Makoti Sibongile Khawua (also known as MaKhawula) has made a point
of persistently speaking in isiZulu. In a recent interview she explained that she
has promised her constituency (in KwaZulu-Natal) that she will only speak the
language of the people.11 At the time of writing during COVID-19, several
ministers delivered some of the public briefings by making use of code-switch-
ing into African languages, primarily isiZulu. These addresses12 have shown
that there is a shift in the politics of language which give recognition to the fact
that language is a social justice issue in the country.13
Although English is widely assumed to be a common South African lingua
franca, a recent study argues that the dominance of English has to be dis-
tinguished from its prevalence (Posel et al. 2020). Data drawn from the 2017/
2018 South African General Household Surveys shows that only a minority of
African language speakers report English as the most frequently spoken lan-
guage outside their home. In this multilingual context, defying English in its
status as a lingua franca can generate empowerment. Arguably, there is no
other ethnic group in South Africa who has been trying to defy English to the
same extent as Afrikaners have in the post-apartheid period. In the next sec-
tion I will therefore discuss how Afrikaner people have also created a plat-
form in which they have positioned themselves as a marginalized group of
people in need of being empowered, not least also by questioning the unpro-
blematic lingua franca status of English in South Africa.
58 Marginalization & Empowerment
The Claim of Afrikaner Marginalization: English, the “Oppressor”
Language
Various studies have portrayed (Steyn 2004; Blaser & van der Westhuizen
2012; Van der Westhuizen 2013; Marx Knoetze 2020) how Afrikaners have
experienced a sense of marginalization in post-1994 South Africa. Chapter 3
showed how, historically, white Afrikaans speakers have always felt a sense
of oppression by the Anglo ethnicity and English as a language. The transi-
tion to democracy after 1994, however, posed a further challenge to Afri-
kaners. While they were able to maintain most of their socio-economic
privileges, they lost their political power. Focusing on this loss rather than
the continuous benefits, many Afrikaners constructed themselves as “victims
of marginalisation” which resulted, on the one hand, in a form of a retreat,
described as an inwaartse migrasie (inward migration) (Blaser and van der
Westhuizen 2012: 386).
Afrikaners also construct what has been termed ‘subaltern whiteness’
through the claim that they have suffered and continue to suffer oppression
under the English, and their language. This discourse on subaltern whiteness
finds expression in much of the Afrikaans press. For most Afrikaners English
fails as a lingua franca because they come from a privileged history in which
their own language was a common (and at times enforced) lingua franca. I will
illustrate this point by using an extract from a recent parliamentary debate in
South Africa. It is surprising that relatively little research is available about
current and quotidian language use in government (Hansson 2018: 337). And
yet, MPs offer a wide and diverse spectrum of South Africans. In a nutshell they
embody a politically and ideologically heterogenous group who represents a
vast range of different ethnic, cultural, and linguistic identities.
In July 2019, a parliamentary discussion brought the anti-English and the
claim to a so-called subaltern whiteness to the fore.14 The extract is worth
quoting at length (see below). It commences with a Freedom Front Plus (FFP)
female MP, Heloise Denner, delivering her maiden speech in Afrikaans. The
content is quite irrelevant to the point I am trying to make here, suffice it to
say that her speech is held in Standard Afrikaans and that she is interrupted
with a point of order by Makoti Sibongile Khawula (also known as MaKha-
wula), a member of the EFF. Her translation device, which is supposed to
deliver the speech in isiZulu, is evidently not functioning. She says (in rough
transcription):

Ngibonge we mhlonyishwa, lapho ngaphambili. Iqalile futhi again,

inkathazo. Asikho isiZulu la, alukho ulimi lomuntu omnyama la. YiA-
frikaans ne English, Afrikaans ne English. Senze njani ke manje {audi-
ence murmur} Alukho ngisho UK hozi [FM] la ngisho neGagasi, no no
no …
I thank you, boss, there in the front. Trouble has started again.
There is no isiZulu here, there is no language that belongs to a black
 Marginalization & Empowerment 59
person here. It’s Afrikaans and English Afrikaans and English. What
should we do now? There’s no Khozi FM here not even Gagasi FM,
no no no, no …

At this point, Pieter Groenewald, the leader of the FFP, asks for a point of
order. He evidently did not understand the concern of MP Khawula because
instead of engaging with the problem that only English, not an isiZulu trans-
lation, is provided, he says:

Op‘n punt van orde. [On a point of order]. I understand that there are
people in South Africa who is [sic] still in love with the colonial lan-
guage and they are very fond of English, it’s their constitutional right.
Can I ask you …, to allow the honorable member to keep on with her
process, decolonizing South Africa, to speak her indigenous language of
Afrikaans, thank you.

The parliamentary extract represents an apt example of the perceived

failure of the lingua franca status of English in parliament. Groenewald’s
comment is problematic for at least three reasons. First, he completely
ignores the fact that the previous point of order was about isiZulu
translation and not praising the role of English. Second, Groenewald
assigns English the status of the “only” colonial language and hence,
aims to dislodge Afrikaans from colonialism. And third, he boldly sug-
gests that a general process of decolonization can occur by an Afrikaner
woman speaking Standard Afrikaans in parliament while black listeners
are unable to receive interpreting services in their African languages.
Groenewald is victimizing Afrikaans which, in this context, is highly
problematic and I frame this behaviour and metalanguage talk as socio-
linguistic amnesia.

Socio-linguistic Amnesia
A person suffers from amnesia when he/she is no longer able to memorize
information from the past, or to extend the definition, when he/she only has a
selective memory of historical events. Scholarship (Kriel 2006; Van der Waal
2012) has shown in great detail that the establishment of current, so-called
Standard Afrikaans (which is precisely the way Groenewald and his female
colleague speak) is inextricably linked to Afrikaner ethno-nationalism as col-
lective racial (white) identity. This nationalism developed in the early twen-
tieth century and has always excluded people of colour (see Chapter 3). From
this perspective, the debate about Afrikaans as an African or indigenous lan-
guage, which has been a common cause for Afrikaner linguists since 1994, has
already become tedious but it is symptomatic of the identity politics Afrika-
ners have been stirring up in the post-apartheid state. Groenewald takes this
discourse of Afrikaans as an African language one step further by claiming an
60 Marginalization & Empowerment
Afrikaner woman could contribute to a decolonization process by speaking in
Standard Afrikaans. Not only is there long-term amnesia referred to before,
there is also a short-term socio-linguistic amnesia at work here. Only a few
years prior to this interaction the #OpenStellenbosch collective, as well as
other #AfrikaansMustFall movements demanded English tuition in line with
what they perceived to be decolonial actions. Afrikaans, in this context, is
perceived as a neo-colonial exclusion device rather than a decolonization tool.
Against this background, there is a level of absurdity in Groenewald’s claim.
It would be virtually impossible to find African language speakers in South
Africa who would unreservedly express their support for decolonization
strategies that foster the promotion of Standard Afrikaans. I am writing cur-
rent Standard Afrikaans because this is the variety white South Africans speak
rather than the Kaaps forms of Afrikaans spoken by the coloured community.
Given the background of the struggle against Afrikaans and the hundreds of
African youth who died during the Soweto uprisings in 1976, the argument to
decolonize South Africa by speaking ‘Afrikaner Afrikaans’ flies in the face of
most black South Africans. The association of Afrikaans with apartheid and
oppression is very deeply anchored in the black community and this has cer-
tainly strengthened the role of English. As Makoni and Makoni (2009) aptly
write, African people wanted to learn English because it was not Afrikaans. But
this discussion is also about the kind of Afrikaans that most Afrikaners speak.
For example, English interference in white Afrikaans circles is often not
appreciated by many Afrikaners who have a purist approach to language.
While the Afrikaner urban youth might think otherwise there are also strong
Afrikaans student associations, such as the AdamTas society at Stellenbosch
University, which aim to preserve Afrikaans as a medium of instruction.15
However, purist approaches to language cannot usefully be employed from a
decolonizing perspective given the invented nature of (African) languages
(Makoni 2003; Makoni & Pennycook 2012).
As already mentioned above, the strategy Groenewald employed is known
in the South African literature as the discourse of subaltern whiteness. Steyn
(2004: 148) argues that Afrikaner identity politics have an affinity with sub-
altern whiteness, in that “the constellation of the victim has been highly sali-
ent in the discourses of Afrikaner whiteness” in that they always struggled
against the more powerful British Empire. Afrikaners “saw themselves as
besieged, having to fight for the ‘right’ to their own brand of white supre-
macy” and part and parcel of this undertaking was the oppression of the
black majority (Steyn 2004: 148). So one might ask whether and, if so, when
whiteness in South Africa can be subaltern at all? The compounding of the
term subaltern and whiteness in the context of Afrikanerdom has been per-
ceived as highly problematic and quite offensive to some African scholars
(see, for instance, Kaunda 2017).
In post-colonial theory the subaltern is employed with reference to those
who are exploited and suppressed – those who are at the bottom of the socio-
political and economic power hierarchy. Acknowledging European relations
 Marginalization & Empowerment 61
with Africa and African people as violent subjugation means marking whites as
historically non-subaltern. As Snyman (2015: 287) aptly argues in the context of
South African identities, “without putting race on the table, and the role of
coloniality, any discussion remains futile and impotent”. Indeed, it is not
without irony that an ethnic group that has been documented (see, e.g. Jansen
2009; Ntombana & Bubulu 2017) as showing extreme pride and a sense of
superiority over other social and ethnolinguistic groups should claim such an
underdog status for its members. In the context of South African identity poli-
tics white subalterness is strategic essentialism in its most controversial form.
By focusing on the history of British hegemony in order to claim oppression
Afrikaners ignore all the atrocities committed by themselves against the majority
black population. This “highjacking” of the concept of subalterness (Kaunda
2017: 8) is an example of the “need to preserve the invulnerable self” (Gibson
2011: 320). Through the “refusal to recognize” the full historical context one is
ignorant about race (as Groenwald is in the extract) and this “facilitates an
ignorant preservation of white privilege, which is simultaneously a way of
remaining ignorant about oneself and one’s share in that history” (Gibson 2011:
320). It is also an extreme case of white fragility (DiAngelo 2017) that often
manifests itself in racist behaviour. Current Standard Afrikaans received extra-
ordinary socio-political, cultural, financial, and educational support from the
oppressive apartheid government, and this is the reason why the language
became the ‘high Standard’ form it is today. This happened precisely because
African languages (and by extension their speakers) were relegated to a very low
status, just good enough for some primary education, but not developed to serve
higher domain purposes. Rather than providing a decolonial alternative, Afri-
kaans as spoken and represented by Groenewald here must be seen as replete
with coloniality. The concept of coloniality exposes the entanglement of Africa
and other ex-colonies in the continuously present colonial matrix of power
which manifests itself, among other things, in the hierarchization of race (Qui-
jano 2000; Mignolo 2007, 2010). It draws attention to the fact that there con-
tinues to be a systemic and unequal distribution of power that has its legacy in
colonialism and apartheid (Mignolo 2007; Ndlovu-Gatsheni 2013). The idea of
socio-linguistic amnesia captures the deficit memory some white South Africans
(in particular Afrikaner people) appear to have when it comes to the coloniality
of sociolinguistics in South Africa and apartheid language policies.
Mashau (2018) has made the criticism that some white people employ
Africanness and indigeneity conveniently in self-identification when a situa-
tion lends itself as such or if it personally suits them. The issue of who can
claim to be an ‘African’ has been a heated debate in South Africa for many
years and language has played a significant role in these profoundly contested
identity politics (e.g. Matthews 2011; Rudwick 2015). Groenewald might
have convinced himself that his roots reflect indigeneity and we might well be
ready to accept that. Among socio-linguists in South Africa, in fact, it is
widely accepted that Afrikaans should be acknowledged as an African lan-
guage but arguably this is due not least to the influential nature of Afrikaner
62 Marginalization & Empowerment
socio-linguists or, as some might want to call it, “the ideological positioning
of our [the South African] education system which privileges the voices of
white academics over and above black thinkers and academics”.16
Because of the politically elevated status of Afrikaans during apartheid, it
was possible for other language speakers to empower themselves by speak-
ing the language. Then it was much more of an established lingua franca
than it is now. Since the fall of apartheid and the persistent depiction of
Afrikaans as the previous ‘language of the oppressor’ using Afrikaans as a
medium of communication in a multilingual or lingua franca space has
become controversial. In most such settings, English is perceived as the
lesser of two evils. Especially the younger generations of African language
speakers react in an irritated fashion when spoken to in Afrikaans. As one
of my consultants17 in Cape Town remarked:

So – you know the Afrikaners in my office, they still often take it for
granted to switch into Afrikaans when they feel like it. Even when we who
are mostly isiXhosa and isiZulu speakers are there. In one meeting when
one of them went on this rant in Afrikaans, I totally switched off. When I
was then asked what I think I started speaking in isiZulu. OK, I had been
absent minded but that was also because he spoke in Afrikaans. I guess it
was a bit of an identity thing as well, but it came as a defence somehow …

Drawing on this defensive strategy, Pitolindo positions herself as someone who,

just like any other South African, has a right to make use of her mother tongue –
even in a business context. The example illustrates the way that certain meta-
language choices can also emerge as a response to the linguistic behaviour of an
interactional partner. Afrikaans used to enjoy great institutional recognition in
South Africa but most of its prestige has faded in the post-apartheid context.
Pitolindo explained that she only chose to speak isiZulu as a reaction to her col-
league who spoke in Afrikaans. According to her own reflections she would not
have made this language choice had everyone spoken in English. Afrikaans, if
spoken by white South Africans, continues to be widely perceived by black people
as representing a conservative Afrikanerdom. It is not (or is no longer) accepted as
a lingua franca in urban professional spaces. Tsedu (2018) recalls an incident at
work in the office of the City Press newspaper, an English publication outlet,
where his colleague Khatu Mamaila contributed a comment in an Afrikaans dis-
cussion about his white colleagues in his own mother tongue, Venda. He said
“Well … English is also not my language, but I’ve done my 50 per cent. So, if you
are not even going to do yours, I’ll stand here, and you stand there and let’s see
how far we get” (Tsedu (2018: 88).
The examples above aptly illustrate that, pitted against Afrikaans, English is a
reasonably accepted lingua franca among African language speakers. They also
show how “language ideologies are productively used in the creation and repre-
sentation of social and cultural identities” (Kroskrity 2004: 509). Pitolindo and
Khatu speak in their own language (in an Afrikaans communication) in the spirit
 Marginalization & Empowerment 63
of the constitutionally anchored ideology that all South African languages are
equal and have the potential to be employed in all contexts. In reality, however,
English remains the most powerful lingua franca in the country, and it carries
with it a history of the marginalization of other languages and their speakers.
People can only empower themselves through the language of power if they are
given proper access to it. Access to Standard English is certainly not equal in South
Africa and this inequitable distribution of linguistic resources has consequences
for social justice and democracy. One of the greatest ambiguities which char-
acterizes the role of English as a lingua franca in South Africa is the fact that
English proficiency empowers individuals but, at the same time, marginalizes
entire communities.
At the same time, many of those who are English proficient have a blind spot
regarding the prevalence and significance of languages other than English in the
country and believe that “English is the best way to communicate” (Jeewa &
Rudwick 2020). This perpetuates a “dangerous power of English” (DeKadt 1993)
which continues to create multiple situations in which non-English speakers are
disempowered, hence a constant questioning of the current status quo is neces-
sary. Some scholars have drawn attention to the paradoxical nature of English
promotion vis-à-vis rejection. During the student movements in 2015–2016, Eng-
lish was often cushioned from protest because compared to Afrikaans it was
considered a tool of decolonization at former Afrikaans universities. Against the
background that the #RhodesMustFall protest initiated the call for decoloniza-
tion, Dube (2017: 19) aptly remarks that the demand to replace Afrikaans with
English is quite ironic

in the sense that Rhodes, who is a symbol of everything colonial in South

Africa, and whom the students would like to obliterate from history, is an
iconic figure of the English culture in the whole of Southern Africa – a
culture whose language is English.

The role of English as a lingua franca is likely to continue to generate processes

of inclusion and exclusion, as well as empowerment and marginalization. As
long as South Africans who make use of English primarily as a communicative
tool, and not as a first language, feel that their first language is an “important
and constitutive factor of their individual, and at times, collective identities”
(May 2005: 330), the role of English as a common lingua franca will be a socio-
politically ambiguous one. Gal (2013: 179) argued that a focus away from
English grammar and lexicon in English lingua franca research to meta-com-
municative questions is likely to provide empirical evidence about complex
social patterns and expose the hierarchy or equality of speakers and, for this
reason, it is necessary to look at ELF “as a process rather than a thing” (Gal
2013: 179, emphasis in original), and consequently the next chapter engages
with mobility as a procedural form of identity construction.
64 Marginalization & Empowerment
Notes
1 Stellenbosch, 14 January 2020 .
2 Kaya, 28-year-old translation professional, Cape Town, 26 March 2020.
3 Nigerians in South Africa are stereotypically believed to be involved in the drug trade
and other crime. I would like to thank Michel Lafon for making me aware of this
point.
4 Pitolindo, 37-year-old, self-identified ‘urban (health) professional’, Cape Town,
20 January 2020.
5 Bheki, 21-year-old male Sociology student, Stellenbosch, 17 January 2020.
6 Many more examples could be mentioned from my ethnographic research in the
Western Cape, the media has also picked up on it: https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-
africa/western-cape/to-let-but-not-if-youre-black-1610775 (accessed 15 April 2020).
7 In the United States, there is a 1–800x hotline from the Department of Housing and
Urban Development one can phone if unfair treatment and discrimination is sus-
pected. To the best of my knowledge, no such organisation is in place in South
Africa despite the fact that raciolinguistic profiling continues to be rampant.
8 Nqobile, 34-year-old Zulu student, Durban, 14 November 2019.
9 The Zoom conversation is in seven parts, the first and following episodes can be found
at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKYwEnh1cRU. Accessed 10 May 2020.
10 The vuvuzela is a plastic horn which is about 60cm long and is most commonly
used at football matches in South Africa.
11 https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/meet-the-eff-mp-who-refuses-to-spea
k-english-in-parliament-20151222 (accessed 24 May 2020) or https://www.econom
icfreedomfighters.org/news/index.php/en/news/video/ff-plus-apologize-to-mamkha
wula-over-language-problem (accessed 27 February 2020).
12 Blade Nzimande:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MssCbiM5Hk&t=554s
Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gyE5nlm8W8.
13 The elderly in African communities, who are particularly susceptible to the virus,
are often still monolingual in African languages (Census 2011). Not all South
Africans, however, understand this reality. In reactions and comments on You-
tube pages of COVID addresses, linguistic ignorance and racist comments are no
rarity. It is not unusual to find someone stating that “everyone in South Africa
understands English” or that the minister should be fired from her job for failing
to speak English.
14 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ3wCZjpsj8 (accessed 3 April 2020)
15 www.sun.ac.za/english/students/student-societies/cultural-hobby-societies/adam-tas
(accessed 13 April 2020).
16 This citation is copied from a letter addressed to the President of South Africa in
mid-2019 which was signed by several black academics who cannot all be men-
tioned. It can be found at: https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/amandla/pages/
2272/attachments/original/1563792411/Letter_to_uMongameli_18July2019_%281%
29.pdf?1563792411 (accessed 11 April 2020).
17 Pitolindo, 37-year-old, self-identified, ‘urban (health) professional’, Skype, 25
April 2020.
5 Linguistic Mobility and Racial
Authenticity

Introduction
The writing of Franz Fanon and Steve Biko has gained great currency among
black students and the young middle class in South Africa. Fanon wrote that
the speaking of a European language is linked to the appropriation of “its
world and culture” and that one who “wants to be white will succeed, since he
will have adopted the cultural tool of language” (Fanon [1952] 2008: 21).
Fanon’s words encapsulate the idea that through language one might be able to
alter one’s racial identity, or, to be more precise, he suggests that by speaking a
European language an African person can ‘become’ white. In many ways,
Fanon’s mid-twentieth-century writing continues to resonate with black South
Africans. African people who make a total shift to English as their main
medium of communication are often seen as ‘coconuts’, dark-skinned indivi-
duals who are seen as exhibiting mental whiteness (Rudwick 2008). And white
racial identity continues to be linked to power and privilege. If African people
adopt “beliefs or behaviours consistent with whiteness”, they are often “seen as
sell-outs and race traitors” (Canham & Williams 2017: 39). Class certainly
features as a significant category in the construction of racial boundaries among
African people but my focus here is on language.1 In isiZulu the term umlungu
which is translated as ‘white person’ is commonly employed to refer to some-
one who is a boss and holds professional powers. This does not mean that this
person would be seen commonly as racially white but that he/she is perceived
as white because of his/her position of power.
In the processes of racialization, constructions of blackness and whiteness
and how it is experienced in the broader politics of identity are fundamentally
linked to language usage. Examining the complexity of these processes can
reveal the “contestability, instability, and mutability of ways in which language
ideologies and identities are linked to relations of power and political arrange-
ments in communities and societies” (Pavlenko & Blackledge 2004: 10). Chap-
ter 4 showed how the ‘white gaze’ in English lingua franca communication
disadvantages African language speakers. In this chapter I aim to shift the focus
onto the ‘black gaze’ in relation to English as a lingua franca and by doing so I
intend to show how mobility and authenticity are useful conceptual metaphors

DOI: 10.4324/9780429031472-5
66 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity
in the exploration of the racial identity politics linked to English language
practices. As Späti (2018: 11) argues, “language appears to play an important
role in identity politics” and this “expresses itself in politics of recognition and
misrecognition, in which language is used as an expression of sameness and of
difference, of belonging and of dissociation”.
Mobility here is thought of as a conceptual metaphor and social process
where people and their identities move. Through such encounters with others,
“mobile people are constantly having to navigate, negotiate, accommodate or
reject difference (in things, ideas, practices and relations) in an open-ended
manner that makes of them a permanent work in progress” (Nyamnjoh 2020:
1). This chapter illustrates some of this “permanent work in progress” in rela-
tion to English lingua franca communication in South African identity politics.
Both language and race are conceptualized as theoretically mobile categories
here. It also needs to be said, however, that for most African language speakers
race and their own blackness are not seen as a mobile category. Due to the
persistent racism in South African society, this is completely understandable.
However, in this chapter I aim to deviate somewhat from the experience of
racial immobility in discriminatory practices as shown in the previous chapter
in order to push the boundaries of race as an ontological category.

Language as a Mobile Tool

Leading scholars in sociolinguistics have increasingly started to study language
as a mobile tool (Coupland 2007; Heller 2007; Blommaert 2010; Pennycook
2010). The focus has shifted from studying linguistic features in a bound lan-
guage entity to language practices in motion, as processes, and as enacting
various trajectories of space, time, and context. African studies scholars have
also increasingly recognized that socio-cultural, economic, and socio-political
mobility are core categories in the analysis of communication and discourse in
Africa. Blommaert (2010) provides us with useful conceptual tools to practise
what he has termed a sociolinguistics of mobility, drawing from the pioneering
work of Hymes (1996). Understanding language as a dynamic and mobile
resource is “a sociolinguistics of ‘speech’, of actual language resources deployed
in real sociocultural, historical and political contexts” (Blommaert 2010: 5).
Authenticity has been a longstanding concept in sociolinguistics (Bucholtz
2003; Coupland 2003; Blommaert & Varis 2001; Lacoste, Leimgruber & Breyer
2014) and this study takes authenticity as an ideological construct (Bucholtz
2003). Canagarajah and Dovchin (2019) offered a comprehensive study of how
multiple social meanings of authenticity are expressed in English language
usage on the Internet, I aim to show in this chapter how ideologies of both
authenticity and mobility impact on identity politics in English lingua franca
communication in the South African setting. For most young and urban South
Africans, a vital part of their repertoire is a form of English, but for the over-
whelming majority of black South Africans English constitutes an additional
language. If we think of language as a mobile tool, we ascribe to it agency to
 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity 67
provide social movement. The term mobility can be seen as a moving trajectory
in which language provides indexical identity categories for people (Blommaert
2010: 6). The ‘trajectory’ is an important analytical category here because lan-
guage practices, especially translingual ones, require analysis in terms of tem-
poral, spatial, and contextual movement (Blommaert 2010: 6). This perspective
allows scholars to frame Africa in a more holistic way and as deeply embedded
in the poly and translingual lifeworlds of people. Linguistic identification tools
are never only mobile or immobile, rather they are located along moving scales
(Blommaert 2010: 6).
Polycentric contexts offer a diversity of different opportunities for speakers
to navigate through life (Pietkäinen 2010: 80). An individual’s ways of nego-
tiating sociolinguistic complexities in multilingual spaces are turbulent (Stroud
2015: 207) but they are also characterized by systematic creativity. Different
types of situations in which English is spoken as a lingua franca can ‘Other’ and
exclude different language speakers depending on the desired identity trajectory
of the individual and the group. Conceptualizing English as a lingua franca as a
mobile resource sees it operating along different scales and indexical orders.
Race is located as one significant category along these scales and indexical
orders and to focus on it provides insights into “what people actually do with
language, what language does to them, and what language means to them, in
what particular ways it matters to them” (Blommaert 2010: 188).

Racial Mobility. Really?

Race can be seen as a social process in which people try to make sense of
others and the world around them (Maré 2014). While variations in skin
colour might be biologically rooted, the concept of race, or rather the idea
that humans can be racially distinguished according to concrete criteria, is
based on socio-political grounds. In South Africa, given the relatively short
period since apartheid, it is not surprising that race continues to matter
acutely, in particular in the struggle to decolonize the country. From a social-
constructivist perspective race and racialization are embedded in processes,
they are permanently in the making. From this perspective, the concept of
racial mobility also makes some sense. Perceptions of blackness and views
about whiteness are mobile and they are often not (only) linked to skin colour
but to power, privilege, and, not least, language. Multiple factors intersect in
ideologies about language and race and it is their complex intersections which
create ambiguities. On the one hand, African urban spaces are polycentric,
multivocal, translingual, and hybrid. On the other hand, however, individuals
hold rigid ideologies about the nature of social identities and raciolinguistic
belonging and these fixed ideologies continue to contribute to contestations
and identity politics. Identities are not only self-ascribed but also other
ascribed, but the ascriptions of others might be restrictive and constraining,
in particular for African people (Nyamnjoh & Fuh 2014: 55). After all, it has
been the global North and whiteness that have been imposed as a global
68 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity
hegemonic standard from politics to culture and most constituents of social
life. This global injustice is also reflected in South Africa where whiteness and
blackness continue to shape quotidian social realities (Pierre 2012).
During apartheid, African people were extremely limited in terms of
movement and mobility. There were complex restrictions on where one could
live, how, and to which place one could travel, and there was an obligation to
carry a pass that provided information about permitted movement. While it is
not this kind of physical immobility I am focusing on here, historical back-
ground is significant. Apartheid created for black people the lack of access to
resources including the restricted access to so-called Standard English and this
is why until today South African Standard English is associated with white-
ness. Using mobility as a conceptual framework for how linguistic and racial
fluidity can be studied in settings where English is spoken as a lingua franca
can show how essentialized constructs of language and race are located in the
colonial/apartheid past and contribute to contemporary inequalities. In the
analysis, I focus on how linguistic and racial mobility is ascribed, negotiated,
and rejected on the basis of particular linguistic and social behaviours. The
concepts of linguistic and racial mobility offer, if employed with caution, a
way of exposing the fact that ‘white privilege’ remains a national and global
reality (Madonsela 2019).
Increasingly, but only in the last few years, a number of sociologists and
legal studies scholars, mostly located in the USA, have examined race as a
mobile identity category. Racial mobility might sound like an oxymoron to
people who still hold on to a view of race as biologically grounded (Saper-
stein 2017). It might also feel like a slap in the face to the many African
people who experience racial discrimination on a daily basis. It could,
however, also expose ways in which African people who feel trapped in a
system of systemic racial oppression aim to find ways to free themselves.
Given that the biological basis of race is refuted and that current science sees
race as an identity category that is socio-culturally and politically con-
structed, the concept of mobility in relation to race makes sense and is
timely. Penner and Saperstein (2008) provided a seminal study in which they
traced changes in ideologies of racial classification throughout a longitudinal
dataset. Their findings suggest that “race is not a fixed characteristic, but
rather a flexible marker of social status” (Penner & Saperstein (2008: 19628).
Similarly, the Afro-American legal sociologist Camille Gear Rich has argued
(2012, 2014) that the concept of race can legitimately represent an elective
self-identifying category. Her studies are “supportive of the current cultural
trend encouraging greater respect for individuals’ racial self-identification
decisions” (Gear Rich 2012: 4). The “elective-race framework” she provides
is an analytical tool to gain a nuanced understanding of the contradictions
in perceptions about race in legal processes. Her framework also draws
attention to social injustices as it represents a descriptive framework to
make better sense of the frequent injuries racialized individuals suffer (Gear
Rich 2014).
 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity 69
As mentioned, it has been primarily US researchers who have worked with
ideas of mobility in relation to race, and not all their findings are applicable to
the South African context, in which black racial oppression was in fact legally
sanctioned until recently. The assigning of a racial category is never straight-
forward as far as physical characteristics go (Saperstein 2017: 27), but in
South Africa it was precisely this ascription which the Apartheid Government
had focused on doing. The categories of black (African), white (European),
coloured (mixed-race), and Asian (Indian) were constructed as ‘defined’,
measurable, and clear-cut. Even for individuals who did not fit neatly in any
of the ‘invented’ racial categories, there were further ‘exams’, such as the
infamous ‘pencil-test’2 which were believed to be tools for the objective
racialization of individuals. It is not surprising that hair has become a highly
political issue even in the post-apartheid state (Nyamnjoh & Fuh 2014;
Hunter 2019).
Race looms in the perceptions of most South Africans and this is typically
done through discursive practices (Distiller & Steyn 2004; Matthews 2011).
Race constructions, i.e. whiteness versus blackness, are not static, they are
profoundly contextual, variously located on slippery grounds and all too
often characterized by fuzzy and potentially controversial boundaries. But it
is this ambiguity which makes the concept metaphor of mobility useful. When
analysing racial classifications as socially mobile in English lingua franca
discourse, we can construct a fruitful ground on which to unravel social
injustices. There is, arguably, no country in the world in which people have
been and are concerned with race to the extent that South Africans are.3
Given the tenacious socio-economic effects of colonialism and apartheid, race
cannot and must not be seen as irrelevant. Individuals who refuse to pay
attention to other people’s ‘race’ and aim at being ‘colour-blind’ as many
white liberals claim to do in South Africa, they do so, with the best of inten-
tions, from their privileged (white) position. While it is desirable to head
towards a world without ‘race-thinking’, it is not realistic as long as white-
ness continues to be hegemonic and oppressive. Social inequality continues to
be profoundly marked by race and that is why it is by no means surprising
that, as Friedman (2019a, 2019b) puts it, race continues to be South African
society’s main fault line. While it might be desirable to have the category of
“race transformed from common sense to nonsense” (Jablonski 2020: 8) it
requires much more ‘undoing’ of the racial injustices prevalent in the hege-
monic white system of the world.
Saperstein (2017: 2) sees race “as a system of status categories people can move
into and out of at different points in their lives, which also have implications for
their mobility along other dimensions of social status”. She argues that

assigning someone a racial classification … continues to be, in part, a

judgment about where they stand …, into how they are likely to be
perceived and treated by others. Only by asking what predicts racial
mobility in particular directions can we begin to assess the role that
70 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity
social status has played, and continues to play, in shaping racial cate-
gorization and maintaining racial inequality.
(Saperstein 2017: 28)

This idea that socio-economic status shapes ideas of race (Penner & Sapertein
2008) will be illustrated in some examples below. Anyone who has spent
extended periods of time in South Africa knows that upward socio-economic
mobility frequently comes with English language skills.4 One of the legacies of
colonization in Africa is that most professional jobs are simply not accessible to
people who do not speak the dominant European language of the country
(Mazrui & Mazrui 1998: 65). The South African education system hegemonizes
English (Makubalo 2007; McKinney 2015, 2017) and studies show that English
skills and access to professional job opportunities are linked (Posel & Zeller
2015). Standard English or ‘white tone’ (Hunter 2019), in particular, retains
authority, not only in the education domain,5 but also in many other domains
of life. While African language speakers increasingly have access to prestigious
English schools, which might challenge racial disadvantage to some extent,
English consolidates the power of “whiteness” through the perceived link
between “good English” and “whiteness” (Hunter & Hachimi 2013). Ulti-
mately, racialization processes often influence social-class identity politics and,
due to apartheid, race prevails as arguably the most volatile social variable.
One way of speaking English (rather than another) in an English lingua franca
communication might provide a South African with various degrees of social
and racial mobility, the example of Nqobile passing as white on the phone in
the previous chapter is a case in point. Speaking so-called Standard English
might ascribe whiteness to an African person, but at the same time this type of
racial mobility is deeply Janus-faced.
While the entanglement of language, race, class, and social inequality calls for
detailed analyses, it must be assumed that the overwhelming majority of people
in South Africa would not accept race as a ‘mobile category’. The physicality of
race, i.e. colourism, and the persistence of racism renders the term ‘mobile’ in
relation to race somewhat provocative. In many instances, class and socio-eco-
nomic status do not transcend the ‘reality’ of race. Again, Nqobile’s account of
the flat hunt in Cape Town and the experience of outright racial discrimination –
not on the basis of her English language skills, education, or socio-economic
status but simply due to colourism – has illustrated this. While the white gaze
results in much racism, the black gaze is also not free of racialization.
Thabile,6 a Linguistics student at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, descri-
bed English as “snaky” to me because, on the one hand, it bestows her with a
privilege associated primarily with white people (through her ex-Model C
school accent), but, on the other hand, the language (alone) is not sufficiently
powerful to shelter her from racial othering.

We (ex-Model C school children) have some privileges because of the

way we speak English but we also have our own struggles – because of
 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity 71
that [the kind of English she speaks] I permanently have to fight for my
Africanness. For some I am just a coconut (white inside) and they make
me feel like I have betrayed my roots.

Her account shows how her ways of speaking English are perceived as
moving her racial identity to one that is white and no longer black ‘enough’.
These socio-politics manifest because in South Africa English accents have
political and class capital (Canham & Williams 2017). Ironically, however,
even people who do not like to be classified themselves in terms of their
accents, often classify others: “I don’t like our [South Africans] obsession
with race and I think of myself as just a human being. But then again you get
these arrogant coconuts with their twang …”, said Kagiso,7 a successful Zulu
artist. When I asked him to elaborate on this coconuttiness further there were
limits to the language aspects of the description. Rather than continuing to
speak about the “twang” and language more generally, Kagiso elaborated on
socio-economic issues and complained about conspicuous consumption and
status symbols. Whiteness is linked to power, privilege, and elitism (Distiller
& Steyn 2004) and black people who are seen as distancing themselves from
what is perceived to be a black lifestyle by embracing linguistic and social
behaviours associated with white people are regarded as race traitors
(Canham & Williams 2017: 39). I illustrate this further below.

“Speak English like an African”

In 2015, during a parliamentary debate in the South African House of
Assembly an African Democratic Alliance Party (DA) representative criti-
cized members of the EFF on account of child maintenance charges laid
against them. Zakhele Mbhele spoke Standard English in an arguably high-
brow fashion without a trace of an African language accent which would be
widely perceived as elitist. There was substantial noise and commotion in
the room, a number of disruptions and in the middle of the MP’s speech, an
EFF member, Thembinkosi Rawula, stood up on a point of order and said:

“Can the honourable member speak English like a black man please?”

The parliamentary house chair appeared puzzled, called for order, and asked
the EFF member repeatedly whether an interpretation was available. It is
not quite clear whether the chair was indeed not aware of what had been
said in terms of its racializing content or whether he might have wanted to
detract from what evidently could have caused flames of conflictual identity
politics to flare up in parliament. From the perspective of the communicative
value of English as a lingua franca flagged in much of the ELF literature, this
interaction quite obviously fails the script. The chair, for one, misinterprets
much of the English lingua franca communication going on between parlia-
mentary members.
72 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity
The example illustrates how the way an African person speaks English in
an English lingua franca communication is associated with a range of
meanings for others. Secondly, it demonstrates that raciolinguistic profiling
through English is part of the black gaze in South African sociolinguistic
reality. It has been argued that “contemporary raciolinguistic ideologies
must be situated within colonial histories that have shaped the co-natur-
alization of language and race as part of the project of modernity” (Rosa &
Flores 2017: 3). Rawula asking: “Can the honourable member speak English
like a black man please?” echoes the coloniality of Standard English as a
white English in South Africa. By fixing a specific kind of English language
usage to a certain racial identity, one from which Zakhele Mbhele, in his
view, departs, Rawula ironically gives expression to the coloniality of Eng-
lish language usage in South Africa.
Social-psychological research (Giles, Bourhis & Taylor 1977: 338), although
dated by now, had identified a strategy termed redefinition of negative char-
acteristics which a person who was previously oppressed might adopt.
Accordingly, it is argued that members of a group may start to redefine their
ethnic or ethnolinguistic identity by turning away from devaluing their ethnic
accent or specific speech style. In this context “pride is suddenly evidenced in
the maintenance of the ethnic tongue and dialect” (Giles et al. 1977: 338). One
could argue that there is a sense of pride inherent in Rawula’s point of order.
The assertion that Mbhele’s way of speaking English is un-African questions
his authenticity in this political contested space. In this particular instance,
“identity politics is also based on reified notions of authenticity and romanti-
cized understandings of community” (Besnier 2009: 168).
What transpires from Rawula’s comment is an ideology of linguistic and
racial authenticity that entails the idea that a person ‘should’ speak English in
a particular way if this person wants to claim belonging to a certain racial
group. Such raciolinguistic perceptions about ‘authenticity’ might drift into
dangerous identity politics, nativism, and racism (Heller & McElhinny 2017).
While such essentialism can be said to be an “ontological claim in the service
of ideological contestation and identity politics” (Van der Waal 2008: 54), it
also draws attention to the coloniality of the English language. Standard
English retains authority in educated spaces and other powerful domains. A
number of scholars have demonstrated the multiple ways in which beliefs
about language (for example, about authentic ways of speaking) are linked to
relations of power and positioning (Blommaert 1999; Gal 1998; Irvine & Gal,
2000; Kroskrity 2010; Woolard 1994, 2010). Kroskrity (2020) also pointed,
with reference to the theorizing of linguistic racism, to the fact that social
diversity constitutes an engine of language ideological diversity, raciolinguis-
tic realities, contestation, and potentially conflict.
Authenticity plays out in multiple forms in the examples I have given.
African identity making in South African politics is intertwined with ideol-
ogies about racial authenticity. The DA politician in the last example, for
instance, also responded to a comment in isiZulu from the audience by
 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity 73
saying in isiZulu ‘Angikuzwa wena’ (I can’t hear you). He tried to re-
authenticate himself as an African language speaker and, by extension, an
African, more generally, by the usage of an African language. Similarly, in
an altercation with Willie Madisha in a 2017 parliamentary debate Naledi
Pandor,8 went to great lengths to authenticate herself by speaking in both
Sesotho and isiZulu saying “Motho oe tsi sintle hore ke boa sesotho kemo-
heta. Uyayazi ukuba ndithetha isiXhosa, ndisikhuluma nesiZulu” (This
person [Madisha] knows well that I speak Sesotho. You know that I speak
isiXhosa and I speak isiZulu). But claiming authenticity by using an African
language does not necessarily shelter an African person from ridicule
because of a perceived white English language usage. In 2009, Julius
Malema, then still leader of the African National Congress Youth Language
(ANCYL), caused a furore by speaking about Naledi Pandor, then Minister
of Education, at Tshwane University of Technology (TUT) saying, “She
must use that fake accent and address our problems”.9 Accusing something
of being fake is taking issue with its authenticity.
There has also been widespread criticism regarding the English language
practices of the former leader of the DA, Mmusi Maimane.10 His persona
serves as an apt example of a South African political personality who has
been affected by language ideological frameworks of ideas about race. There
are numerous instances in parliamentary debates where other black politi-
cians take issue with the way Mmusi Maimane communicates in English. The
ex-president Jacob Zuma, for example, once told Maimane, “Do not feed me
your English from London” (Methope 2017). Furthermore, there was an
incident from the state of the nation debate in February 2017 where Bongani
Mkongi referred to Maimane as “a white man in a black skin”.
The ex-leader of the DA has widely been seen as not appealing to the
majority black population because he has been framed as “white owned”
(Dawjee 2015). Maimane has repeatedly been accused of “putting on an
accent for whites” (Madia 2016). In the words of one of my interviewees,11 “it
is totally undermining when Mmusi switches from his proper English to black
English”. While discussing Maimane’s politics, an academic colleague in
Durban said to me in late 2019, “it [the accent switching] makes one want to
cringe”.12 Social media platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook are also
replete with comments where the politician is ridiculed for his English lan-
guage practices and his different accents. One Twitter user, for instance,
stated: “the only thing more ambiguous than the ANC’s economic policies is
Mmusi Maimane’s accents”.13 On one of South Africa’s major media outlets,
Mathabo Sekhonyana discussed the politics of language and racial identity
and said Maimane’s accent serves as an example of an inauthentic black
person who is wanting to please whites. Her considerations are given below:

Everyone knows that white people-ing while black is an extreme sport. I

often think of the many times I have left parts of myself in the drafts
folder trying to be the better black, trying to get ahead, trying
74 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity
desperately to be accepted. As time has gone on and I have engaged
with my blackness I am more and more ashamed of the person who
chose to call herself Priscilla and not Mmathabo and why she made that
choice. It is with the same shame and grandmother’s shake of the head
that Mmathabo looks at Mmusi Maimane and each and every one of
his accents. The evolution of blackness and trying desperately to kick
down doors and get a seat at the table often means compromising our-
selves. It means playing the “better black” character, not taking the
problematic jokes too seriously, biting your tongue and, for some, like
Maimane, changing your accent.
(Sekhonyana 2018)

While Sekhonyana highlights the very real struggle of black people to gain
recognition and upward mobility in a white privileged world, she does not
consider the possibility that individuals might have more than one language
variety available to express who they are. It is evident that many African
people see in Maimane’s switching of accents an example for a person with
a colonized mind who is not authentic. The quote below serves to illustrate
this point further:

We all mock DA leader Mmusi Maimane’s many accents, but the way he
switches from one to another speaks to the racist way we have been judged
for how we speak. This leads to our being psychologically wired to believe
that our accents influence the perception of others of our intelligence.
(Marshall 2018)

Indeed, there is a widespread erroneous assumption in South Africa that

people who speak Standard English are competent or intelligent. Maimane’s
English language critics, however, do not consider that the switching of
accents need not necessarily entail a lack of authenticity. People might be
authentic by speaking in various different ways. But for Maimane, who is
the former leader of a mostly white party, and who is married to a white
woman, it seems difficult to assert authentic blackness. After all, the DA is
widely perceived to be white and while it is, in fact, not reflective of the
country’s demography, it is also significant that several influential leaders in
the party have been criticized for their racist comments in the past. Conse-
quently it is not surprising that few African people seem to believe in the
party’s commitment to transformation in South Africa.
However, when it comes to language, who can really judge other than
Maimane himself whether or not he feels ‘at home’ with both African and
white spaces and communities, as might be the case when he is speaking dif-
ferent kinds of Englishes? The perception of language practices being inex-
tricably linked to certain identities is one of the major inheritances of colonial
linguistics (Rudwick & Bing 2019) and they enforce ethnolinguistic assump-
tions (Blommaert et al. 2012). In this context, it is believed that people speak
 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity 75
in certain ways because of their social/ethnic background and it is this back-
ground that people negotiate in identity politics. But this does not take into
account the fact that one might want to change one’s ways of speaking Eng-
lish for a variety of reasons. Individuals are not necessarily inauthentic
because they flag one particular identity of themselves. People embrace all
kinds of linguistic innovations in discourse to (de)construct identities (Lacoste
et al. 2014). What Coupland called “the discursive construction of authenti-
city and inauthenticity” (2010: 6) constitutes the basis for such ambiguous
linguistic and racial identity dynamics. Authenticity must not be understood
as a condition but rather a creation of social meaning (Coupland 2007: 26)
and in English lingua franca discursive contexts speakers and listeners create
this meaning in dialogue. If a local linguistic variety stands to index an
authentic local or racial identity, the “lack of control of such a variety can
indicate that one does not share an essential identity (Woolard 2016: 24).
Maimane’s ethnolinguistic identity trajectory is likely to be a complex mix of
cross-racial, multicultural, and polylingual belongings. In the eyes of many
black South Africans, however, his accent switching between what is con-
sidered to be white English and what is perceived to be an African variety of
the language is considered non-genuine. Maimane’s attempt to authenticate
blackness has failed dismally if one observes the social media outrage. The
fact that Maimane apparently speaks several African languages14 and is a
‘kasi-boy’ [from the township] has not saved him from criticism about the
ways he changes his ways of speaking English. A News24 reporter (Mbind-
wane 2016)15 even called Maimane’s changing of English accents as an
embarrassment.
Woolard (2016: 23) argued that:

it is within this logic of authenticity that the acquisition of a second

language is so often imagined necessitating the loss of a first, so that the
speaker’s desired identity won’t be contaminated and spoiled by lin-
guistic traces of another identity.

While this holds true in many language acquisition contexts, in South Africa
and in relation to English the logic of authenticity also operates in an
oppositional fashion. As described above, a black speaker whose English has
no longer any linguistic trace of an African way of speaking is questioned in
terms of his authentic blackness. Authenticity, it seems, is a matter of per-
spective, influenced by personal intent and subject to individual evaluation.
There is a disturbing essentialism underlying the thinking that one accent
stands for one identity. In such a view, language and identity are viewed as
fixed social categories: ‘black people speak black English’ and ‘white people
speak white English’. What transpires from this is an ideology of linguistic
and racial authenticity which entails the idea that a person has to speak
English in a particular way if he/she wants to claim membership of a certain
group. International scholarship offers much insight into the concept of
76 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity
linguistic authenticity (Bucholtz 2003; Bucholtz & Hall 2004; Blommaert
2007, 2010; Coupland 2003; Lacoste et al. 2014; Woolard 2016) but, to the
best of my knowledge, this has hardly been linked to racial dynamics and
certainly not in the South African context. This is surprising as in Africa
particularly there is a “competitive market” of English accents that contests
normative perceptions of accent in the production of authenticity (Blom-
maert 2010: 48).
The politics of who can claim to be ‘African’ are profoundly contested
(Rudwick 2015, 2018). A columnist for the Daily Maverick remarked recently
that “in a political climate where race continues to loom hauntingly, questions
about who is or isn’t African can appear as a divisive exercise in race-baiting”
(Zulu 2019). Canham and Williams (2017) argue that racialized discourse is
marked by a white and a black gaze, both of which pay close attention to the
ways African people use language and, in particular, how they speak English.
The “white gaze controls and inferiorises, [and] it simultaneously denies and
protects white privilege” (Canham & Williams 2017: 28). The black gaze, in
contrast, is a “form of surveillance and disciplining that seeks to marshal cer-
tain forms of blackness” (Canham & Williams 2017: 29). Both gazes are mobile
and can construct different scales of linguistic and racial authenticity.
An ethnographic anecdote might further illustrate the points I am trying to
make here. During the teaching of a sociolinguistics module at the University
of KwaZulu-Natal in 2013, we discussed the status and politics of language,
dialects, and sociolects. While making examples of specific linguistic features
of BSAE, two Zulu students started giggling. Another black student who was
seated next to the two amused ones, got visibly annoyed about the giggling
and a discussion emerged about the actual varieties of English students bring
to class. It was an exhilarating debate in which students, regardless of race
and home language, engaged. Essentially, two quite polarized lobbies formed
of which one, most simply described, was making an argument in favour of
the importance of Standard English, while the other student group took on
the World Englishes/ELF paradigm and argued for the legitimacy of African
forms of English. At some stage, the derogatory label ‘coconut’ was thrown
into the discussion and one male Zulu student turned to another male student
who happened to be from Zimbabwe, saying, “Hayi wena [Oh you], if you
think Zunglish is so great, why do you talk so white then?”.
Here, a racial identity category was assigned to the English language usage
of the Zimbabwean student. And in this case, a paradox emerged: the student
who made the remark about Zunglish spoke a Zulu variety of BSAE and he
took issue with the fact that someone who himself spoke a variety much
closer to Standard English argues in favour of African varieties of English.
But it is not surprising that such complex raciolinguistic identity dynamics
continue to emerge in South Africa. During apartheid the variables language,
ethnicity, and race served as the primary identifiers in a fundamentally
warped and oppressive political system. People were ascribed and prescribed
certain identities in order to serve the injustices of the system. Saperstein
 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity 77
(2017: 20) suggests that people “have shared scripts for what an ‘authentic’
racial performance looks like” and the use of articulate Standard English by a
black South African seems to fail the script for authenticity in certain con-
texts. The ways in which English is spoken as a lingua franca carves out
conceptual spaces where both the fixity and the fluidity of language manifest.
And it is indeed significant that Othering, as it takes place and unfolds here,
occurs among members of the same racial group, i.e. black South Africans.
This situation is deeply troubling; it constitutes an instance of how the black
gaze surveils and disciplines (Canham & Williams 2017: 29).
The examples above also illustrate the significance of the concept of
coloniality again. Through the propagation of a static view of the relation-
ship between language, culture, ethnicity, and race, colonialism and apart-
heid colonized the minds of South Africans (Herbert 1992; Makoni 1996),
and, as a result, many people continue to have essentialized ideas of racio-
linguistic belonging. The neutrality of English in lingua franca situations
that scholars have flagged in some of the ELF literature (e.g. House 2014)
does not hold in the South African context. Neutral attitudes in which
English features “without ethnolinguistic sentiments” (Blommaert 2010: 98)
stand in contrast to the racial identity politics described above.
There is a further irony to this context. It has recently been suggested that
the increasing adoption of Standard English by black South Africans has
created de-racializing dynamics among black youths in South Africa (Mes-
thrie 2017a, 2017b). While this is one way of looking at the relationship
between linguistic forms and race from a formal linguistic perspective, a
more socially grounded view allows for different interpretations. The oppo-
site, in fact, could be said as well. Rather than de-racializing each other,
black South Africans are re-racializing each other by perceiving English
language usage as white or black African. In other words, Standard English
rather than an African language inflected English in lingua franca interac-
tions can be seen as a hermeneutic as well as a social barrier to mutual
understanding of what it means to be black and African. The crucial point
to be made here is that the ambiguous nature of English as a lingua franca
creates multiple racial meanings in South Africa and mobility and authenti-
city are useful concept metaphors through which people’s raciolinguistic
realities might be better understood. There are people who might be per-
ceived as (im)mobile or in(authentic) from one perspective and in one con-
text and as the opposite in another (Salazar & Smart 2011). The ways in
which identities of whiteness and blackness are variously constructed in
English lingua franca discourse are often based on fuzzy linguistic boundary
work. Race and language thinking is fundamentally entangled with thinking
about socio-economic and educational status and perceptions of privilege or
disadvantage.
Seekings and Nattrass (2005: 369) showed that “new patterns of stratification
(in terms of opportunities for mobility as well as current position) only slowly
led to the emergence of social attitudes or political responses that were clearly
78 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity
differentiated along class rather than racial lines”. After all, it is only a small
proportion of African people who have been able to become socially upwardly
mobile to the extent that they now constitute members of an upper class
(Seekings & Nattrass 2005: 369). English language usage is often perceived as a
proxy for race and class, but these intersections are never static, they move
around on platforms of identity politics. In order to understand their shifting
meanings, we need to think of language and race as characterized by move-
ment. One Zulu interviewee explained to me that “there is nothing wrong with
being rich, that alone does not make you white, but it is what you do with your
wealth”.16 Engaging with linguistic and racial (im)mobility as conceptual
metaphors might advance our thinking about how all social identification pro-
cesses are on the move and how they change throughout time and space. Gear
Rich (2014: 1571) even suggests that what is needed is “a broader philosophical
discussion about what it means, as a normative matter, to recognize autonomy
and privacy interests related to race”. For many individuals it is harmful to be
racially labelled, particularly if the racial label does not overlap with one’s self-
identification. The concept of mobility allows a focus on fluidity, ambiguity,
and context-dependability of perceptions about language and race and it might
assist in thinking beyond pregiven and institutionalized categories.
While the above examples have illustrated much fixity in people’s thinking
about English in lingua franca interactions and has shown how interlocutors
evaluate other people’s English along a grid of ideological perceptions, at the
same time, fluid English language practices also show perceptions of racial
ambiguity. In certain instances, racial identities are being perceived along
quite essentialist lines, in other circumstances identities are hybrid and nego-
tiated. Importantly also, some of the examples demonstrate that there are
certainly spaces when African accented English is perceived to have socio-
political currency. If a person fails to come across as authentic in a perceived
African way of speaking English, the authentication of blackness fails (as in
the narrated case of Zakhele Mbhele and Mmusi Maimane). English language
usage in lingua franca interaction can function as a powerful exclusionary
device and this can be affected by the white gaze as well as by a black gaze.

Concluding Thoughts
The legacies of English imperialism continue to haunt African people in
multiple and complex ways (Pennycook 1998; Kadenge & Nkomo 2011).
Through a critical analysis of how the different ways in which English is
spoken in various South African lingua franca contexts we can see how lin-
guistic and racial identity politics manifest. It is fundamental to acknowl-
edge the discrepancies between our own theorizing and the voices of people
we are writing about. Even if, as scholars, we detest essentialism and argue
that views about language as bound and fixed are flawed, we still need to
acknowledge and aim to understand where such views come from. If we fail
to give agency to the people we study and want to empower it would imply
 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity 79
that “we know what is best for them, and that they do not” (Parmegiani
2008: 112). Language ideological frameworks and ideas about authenticity
can show how in South Africa people’s realities are marked by racialized
subjectivities that have linguistic aspects. Aiming to think beyond race
(Maré 2014; Turner 2019) remains desirable but is encumbered by the fact
that social inequality continues to be profoundly marked by race in the
country as is the case elsewhere in the world.
While the initial part of the previous chapter illustrated how the white gaze
discriminates against black people in South Africa, this chapter has shown how
the black gaze can also exclude those who are not considered black enough.
There is an ironic twist when it comes to the relationship between language
and race which is in between the lines here. While in the process of white
gazing there are limits to language when it comes to the power of race. Nqo-
bile’s rejection on site after previous acceptance on the phone illustrated this
dynamic in the previous chapter. Within the processes of black gazing, how-
ever, race at times subsides and yields to the power of language where a black
person has to reassert his/her blackness by speaking in what is perceived to be
an African way. As Canham and Williams (2017: 39) aptly put it: “the use of
the correct lingo and linguistic code-switching required in different spaces
accomplishes a number of tasks including the need to authenticate blackness in
ways that pigmentation alone can no longer accomplish”. Such “correct lingo”
is also the various ways in which English is spoken in lingua franca interaction.
And yet, English as such and at a meta-pragmatic level provides an access
no other language in the country renders possible. In the higher education
sphere, for example, English has gained substantial ground since the end of
apartheid and the increasing abandonment of Afrikaans. In the next chapter
I explore a particular university town in South Africa, and a space which is
delightful and horrifying at the same time: Stellenbosch. It is in this town
and its surroundings that I couch the ambiguity examined in the next chap-
ter: Cosmopolitanism vis-à-vis parochialism.

Notes
1 While for reasons of scope I cannot focus on class in this chapter, I would like to refer
to a recent anthology edited by Niq Mhlongo (2019). Black Tax – Burden or Ubuntu?
provides insights into the difficulties of navigating a middle or upper-middle-class
lifestyle for black people in face of the financial struggles of extended family members
and close friends.
2 A pencil was placed in a person’s hair, and if it fell out, he/she was classified as
white. If it stayed put, the person was regarded as black.
3 In her paper, Horáková (2018) argues that rather than a deracialization process
taking place, there is increasing racialized political discourse in South Africa.
4 While it is not impossible to be wealthy in South Africa without knowledge of
the English language, it is safe to say that this constitutes an exception.
5 In higher education, Standard English rather than other English varieties, such as
South African Indian English, is seen as a desired norm (Wiebesiek, Rudwick &
Zeller 2011).
80 Linguistic Mobility & Racial Authenticity
6 Thabile, 24-year-old, female Linguistics student, Durban, 29 November 2019.
7 Kagiso, 42-year-old female Zulu artist, KwaMashu, 3 January 2018.
8 Pondor, Naledi (2017). https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=94RGsTvipXs&feature=
youtu.be (accessed 12 April 2020).
9 https://mg.co.za/article/2009-02-17-malema-to-meet-pandor-following-fake-a
ccent-spat (accessed 8 January 2020).
10 Alim and Smitherman (2012) have shown how the combination of Barak Obama’s
skilful white ways of speaking and black cultural articulations provided much appeal
to the American people. In South Africa, such style shifting seems to be regarded in a
more negative light.
11 Thuli, 23-year-old female isiZulu-speaking Linguistics student, Durban, 5 Octo-
ber 2019.
12 Dumisani, 46-year-old male Zulu lecturer at the University of KwaZulu-Natal,
28 September 2019.
13 https://twitter.com/chestermissing/status/524906832075436032?ref_src=twsrc%
5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E524906832075436032&ref_
url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedailyvox.co.za%2Fmmusi-maimane-on-our-
broken-country-that-accent-and-being-obamalite%2F.
14 See https://www.politicsweb.co.za/iservice/about-mmusi-maimane (accessed 30 Jan-
uary 2020).
15 https://www.news24.com/xArchive/Voices/maimanes-multiple-accents-20180719
(accessed 10 January 2020).
16 Brian, 46-year-old Zulu journalist, Durban, 24 November 2019.
6 Cosmopolitanism and Parochialism

Introduction
In early March 2017, a young Xhosa student who was one of the leaders in the
#OpenStellenbosch (OS) student movement at Stellenbosch University (SU) was
interviewed for my project and in talking about English he said, “Well … Eng-
lish, of course, has colonial baggage but English also provides access to the entire
world, it is the cosmopolitan tongue”.1 The comment echoes sentiments many
young black South Africans would share. English as the academic and global
lingua franca and ideas about cosmopolitanism are often seen as synonymous. In
South Africa, the term cosmopolitan and its derivative Afropolitan play a sig-
nificant role in public discourse and there is often some sort of association with
English. At the same time, calls for decolonization also interrogate the hegemonic
role English holds in the country, especially in education, and the resulting low
positioning of African languages in teaching and learning (Dube 2017). In this
chapter I aim to describe how a shift towards English as the primary academic
lingua franca has been associated with cosmopolitanism at Stellenbosch Uni-
versity, and how, on the other hand, this development has run parallel to a local
metalanguage discourse that constructs English as an oppressive language. It has
been argued that “policies of language and education are inherently political, but
nowhere more so than in South Africa where language has been closely bound up
in the system of ethnic and racial division” (Murray 2002: 435). As I explore how
certain linguistic and ethnic politics are deployed to produce cosmopolitan and
parochial identities, racial divisions also come to the fore. The discussion I offer
here does not claim to describe in any comprehensive manner the taalstreyd
(language battle) or all the ways in which language and ethnic politics play out in
a town such as Stellenbosch. Instead, it aims to describe how the ambiguities of
English as a lingua franca trigger specific strategies that are used to produce
particular forms of politics of language, ethnicity, and race.

Is English Cosmopolitan?
It is arguably not necessary to speak English in order to be a cosmopolitan
person. Conversely, many English speakers are far from having cosmopolitan

DOI: 10.4324/9780429031472-6
82 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism
identities. It is the context in which English is a lingua franca which frequently
marks its status as cosmopolitan because it is assumed that it fosters commu-
nication between people with different backgrounds. Appiah (1997: 639)
suggests:

the cosmopolitan will remind us that what we share with others is not
always an ethno-national culture: sometimes it will just be that you and
I a Peruvian and a Slovak-both like to fish, or have read and admired
Goethe in translation … That is, so to speak, the anglophone voice of
cosmopolitanism.

Although Appiah’s more recent work critically extended the concept of

cosmopolitanism, I found this extract valuable for its specific reference to
the English language as defining the described context as an anglophone
cosmopolitanism.2 Arguably, the dual status of English as the ‘global/inter-
national language’ and one that is spoken by far more people as an addi-
tional language than a first language marks it as somewhat prototypically
cosmopolitan. And this is precisely one of the platforms on which many –
not all –ELF scholars have positioned themselves. However, if cosmopoli-
tanism is primarily reflecting the extension of “oneself to the other, … about
reflecting the heterogeneity of the universe in the small spaces we occupy”
(Ramanathan 2012: 79), then any kind of language could qualify as a cos-
mopolitan tongue because openness is not about any particular language.3
Eze (2017) appeals for an empathetic cosmopolitanism through universally
shared ethics and, with specific reference to South Africa, by drawing from the
legacy of Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu (Eze 2018). Of course, the open-
ness and respectfulness towards the “Other” which is inherent in cosmopolitan-
ism also must be combined with the struggle for socio-economic justice, and this
is where the status of English becomes problematic. Its global spread as a lingua
franca and so-called cosmopolitan tongue has been linked to Anglo-American
dominance which brings profound social injustices (Phillipson 1992). Holliday
(2009: 28) warned that ELF scholarship could fall in the ‘global cosmopolitan
trap’ which fails to see these global injustices and cultural politics of English. This
is, indeed, a crucial point to consider in the South African context, as romanti-
cized ideas about cosmopolitanism as linked to English can lead to an irrespon-
sible apathy that runs the danger of allowing the ‘Centre’ to project a world in
which injustice and inequality are non-existent (Canagarajah, 1999, 2013). Argu-
ably, there has been a tendency to portray the benign status of cosmopolitanism in
the literature, or rather there has been a refusal to see the “danger of fusing the
ideal with the real” (Beck & Sznaider 2006: 384). This benignity has also often
been assigned to English but as Ives (2010: 530) aptly states “a ‘global language’
like English can never fulfil the role cosmopolitanism sets for it, that of helping
those marginalised and oppressed by ‘globalisation’ to be heard”.
The issue is that cosmopolitan ideals are often trapped in a ‘bubble’
(Petriglieri 2016, Stornaiuolo & Nichols 2019). This is equally applicable to
 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism 83
English as a lingua franca or English as a global language. Jenkins (2015)
has reflected on the ‘ELF bubble’ and sees a multilingual reorientation of
ELF as a ‘way out’. Acknowledging multiple languages in English lingua
franca discourse is an important step but other social variables also demand
consideration. Holliday (2009: 21), for instance, cautioned that “although it
[ELF] searches for a cosmopolitan solution to the hegemony of ‘native
speaker’ English” the call for tolerance in linguistic diversity is not sufficient
to counteract discrimination. ELF scholarship does not adequately consider
realities such as racialization processes, which characterize the experiences
of so-called ‘non-native speaker’ English educators. Employing Centre vis-à-
vis Periphery similarly to how other scholars employ the notions of global
North vis-à-vis the global South, Holliday compellingly shows how ‘non-
native’ speakers and educators might not want to embrace ELF as a ‘norm’
for themselves for socio-political reasons. He also shows the dangerously
racializing patterns of the way people’s English is perceived. While ELF
researchers embrace diversity in ways of speaking English and propagate
acceptance of these various forms in which English is spoken as a lingua
franca, a paradigmatic shift in the ways English ‘competence’ and ‘profi-
ciency’ is perceived in most parts of the world has not happened. The asso-
ciation between Standard English and whiteness continue to be inextricable.
As I have tried to demonstrate in Chapter 4, there are limits to the power of
language in relation to race. Language sadly does not have the power to
dispose of racism.
In the South African context, Afropolitanism rather than cosmopolitanism
has become a common concept which has been thoroughly commercialized
with a magazine bearing its name.4 In the academic literature, Afropolitanism
proposes an ‘interweaving of worlds’ (Mbembe 2007: 28) and it understands
the conditions of (South) African (urban) life and identities as fluid, hetero-
geneous, and hybrid. Afropolitan thinking includes “The Ability to Recognise
One’s Face in That of a Foreigner and make the most of the traces of remote-
ness in closeness, to domesticate the unfamiliar, to work with what seem to be
opposites …” (Mbembe 2007: 27). Evoking Bhabha (1994), an Afropolitan
could be characterized as “that human being on the African continent or of
African descent who has realized that her identity can no longer be explained in
purist, essentialist, and oppositional terms or by reference only to Africa” (Eze,
2014: 240, emphasis added). Taken from the opposite perspective, an Afropo-
litan is a cosmopolitan who has some sort of grounding in Africa or at least an
emotional affinity to the continent. However, the term has received quite
extensive criticism in recent years, in particular by African literature scholars
who see the dominant understanding of Afropolitanism as problematic due to
its promotion of “Western ideology by holding in high esteem the experiences
of cultural hybridity, immigration and mobility in the West” (Gourgem 2017:
293). In 2017, numerous scholars evaluated the vitality of the concept of
‘Afropolitan’ while aiming to offer alternative ways to the advancement of
African and Afrodiasporic studies in a special issue of the European Journal of
84 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism
English Studies (Durán-Almarza, Kabir & González, 2017). It is, from my
perspective, not without irony that an English Studies journal in the global
North served as the platform for the discussion of Afropolitanism and not, for
instance, English in Africa or an African Studies journal.
The large body of scholarship engaging with cosmopolitanism or Afro-
politanism in Africa (Appiah 2006; Balakrishnan 2017; Eze 2014, 2015, 2016,
2017; Bentley & Habib 2008; Mbembe 2007; Mbembe & Balakrishan 2016)
provides conceptual tools for embracing diversity and difference. While these
are valuable given the prevalence of essentialist thought and “nativism” in
South Africa (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2009), they often operate alongside idealized
ideas of society. In the context of studies on ELF its cosmopolitan status has
often been implicit, and some ELF studies (House 2003, 2014) have also
operated along idealized ideas of English as ‘neutral’ in lingua franca com-
munication. It is, of course, preposterous to think that knowledge of English
per se is synonymous with a cosmopolitan life or identity. Many people who
are proficient in English are far from being (able to be) cosmopolitans. For
someone whose first language is English it might be easier to have access to
cosmopolitan thoughts and lifeworlds, but to assume that a person neces-
sarily embraces cosmopolitan values just because he/she speaks English is, of
course, fundamentally flawed. One has only to think of the English paroles
of xenophobic British hooligans or the racist rants of US white supremacists
which could not be further from the description of cosmopolitan citizens.
However, the fact that English is the lingua franca of the world, privileges
English speakers, to some extent, in a quest for cosmopolitanism. Piller
(2001), for instance, has shown how in German advertisements, English is
employed to link the product with cosmopolitan values implying that one
could become a member of the global (elitist) community by buying the
item. In the German context, it has also been shown, however, that cosmo-
politanism and a strong sense of local belonging are by no means exclusive.5
In South Africa one of the prime factors that distinguishes English lingua
franca spaces from those in the global North is the fact that in many con-
texts, and mostly those that involve white (and Indian/coloured) people,
African language speakers employ English not because it is their choice but
because it is a necessity. Part of the legacy of apartheid and one of the con-
tinuous institutional sociolinguistic ironies is that the overwhelming major-
ity of white (and Indian/coloured) people have not become proficient in an
African language. As a result of the failure of non-African people to learn
African languages it is primarily English which is the common lingua franca
during communication involving white people.6 The use of English is
therefore functional, it is employed for lack of other communicative possi-
bilities. This, however, is not to say that in some contexts English might be
a choice. An isiZulu-speaker, for instance, might want to flag a particular
urban, educated, and/or socially mobile persona in a certain context. Eng-
lish is linked to a certain prestige in most language communities. Due to its
high status as both a national and a global lingua franca there are multiple
 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism 85
associations between Standard English and elitism and those run deep and
through practically all communities in South Africa. The language ideolo-
gies of English are seated in the widespread perception of its superior status
and these sentiments cut across class and race. Whether one speaks an
African language as a first language, Kaaps, or Afrikaans, excessive use of
English, especially Standard English, in a predominantly other language
context, will in many instances be regarded as ‘snobbish’. These perceptions
are often based on essentialist notions that such a person believes him/her-
self to be ‘better than others’.
As a global process English has increasingly been promoted in higher edu-
cation under the auspices of strategic cosmopolitan ambitions in the sense that
a shared academic lingua franca provides for shared knowledge production and
dissemination. I will discuss the ambiguity of these ideas by illustrating devel-
opments in South African higher education. The University of Cape Town
(UCT) popularized its institutional culture and mission as Afropolitanism in
2011 under the chancellorship of Max Price.7 While this notion of ‘Afropolita-
ness’ at UCT aimed at acknowledging that excellent scholarship is produced in
Africa by African people, there was also a clear orientation towards the world,
especially the global North.8 While officially and on paper UCT’s vision might
have appeared progressive (Banda & Mafofo 2016), the #RhodesMustFall9
campaign unfolding in early 2015 pointed to a different reality for black stu-
dents and staff. As the statue of Rhodes was removed from the premises of
UCT, it became clear that most black students and staff have felt ‘out of place’
and alienated for a long time at UCT (Kapp & Bangeni 2011).
While student protests were initiated at UCT, they quickly gained support
from various sides and stimulated further protests across the country’s uni-
versities. At Stellenbosch University10 the protests had language matters as
one of their core concerns. Language politics have a long and complicated
history at the university, and I can only provide a glimpse into these for the
purpose of this book. Although the institution that preceded the current SU
was an English college, it developed into a solidly Afrikaans university
which was inextricably linked toAfrikaner nationalism and white racist-
supremacist politics in the twentieth century. From 1930, the institution
virtually represented the academic engine behind much of Afrikaner apart-
heid ideology and some of the most ruthless leaders of the apartheid state
are alumni of SU. Between 1919 and 1978 each South African prime minister
had been involved with SU, the list includes Jan Smuts, J.B.M. Herzog, D.F.
Malan, J.G. Strijdom, H.F. Verwoerd, and B.J. Vorster.
SU did not open its doors to all South African students until the early
1990s (when it was forced to).11 Afrikaans continued to be the default lan-
guage in the university and its ‘pretty’ town both of which had seen massive
financial investment by Afrikaners over the decades. Although English was
made a second language of instruction (Giliomee 2001, 2003a; Giliomee &
Schlemmer 2006), Afrikaans remained dominant on and around the campus,
as well as in the town. On 29 May 1997, the South African Minister of
86 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism
Education Dr Sibusiso Bengu stated that SU could not persist in being an
exclusively Afrikaans medium university, particularly given new governance
on inclusivity across tertiary education.12 Importantly also, white Afrikaans
and Afrikaner culture (not Kaaps/Afrikaaps) remained pervasive as the
modus vivendi at the university and in the town, which made for a racially
problematic climate. In the early 2000s, however, and more markedly from
2002 when Christopher Brink took over as vice-chancellor of SU, the largely
monolingual institution started to transform into one that also offered
extensive English tuition.13 It was during those years that what became
known as the first taalstreyd (language battle) unfolded. A protest petition
fighting to protect Afrikaans against English at the institution signed by
3,500 SU staff and students, as well as a letter signed by 143 prominent
Afrikaans authors, was presented to the SU Council in 2005 in an attempt to
safeguard the language. Afrikaans became the symbol of Afrikaner identity
politics in the still ‘fresh’ new South Africa and Stellenbosch was arguably
its most contested battleground. Afrikaans speaking people have, more than
any other ethnolinguistics group in South Africa, complained about the lack
of support for their language in the press, to PanSALB and on various other
platforms (Orman 2008). The renowned historian Herman Giliomee has
used dramatic metaphors such as the ‘lamb’ (Afrikaans) being eaten by the
‘lion’ (English) (2009) in one of his media pieces. Many other Afrikaners
saw the loss of Afrikaans as the primary medium at SU not only as a sign of
the demise of the Afrikaans language in higher education but as a direct
attack on their identities. As Bosch put it succinctly: Afrikaans “acts as a
creator and definer” of Afrikanerdom (Bosch 2000: 52).
In 2007, the university was led, for the first time, by a coloured Afrikaans-
speaking vice-chancellor. The reconciliatory Russel Botman tried mediating
between the polarized lobbies within the institution and beyond and SU’s lan-
guage policy revisions under his leadership showed an emphasis on multi-
lingualism with a clause that stipulated that Afrikaans would be ‘safeguarded’.
Despite this clause, conservative Afrikaners and the so-called taalstreyders
(language fighters) regarded the language policy developments as having a fur-
ther negative impact on Afrikaans. Botman tragically died in 2014, and it has
been alleged in the media that emotional and psychological pressure (not least
due to the polarized language and racial politics at the university) might have
contributed to his untimely and sad death.14 In the absence of hard evidence
relating to Botman’s passing we can only make assumptions about the devas-
tating nature of the taalstreyd on Botman’s life. Language is a sensitive issue for
most South Africans, but it is an exceptionally emotive issue for many Afrika-
ners who see a threat to their language as a threat to their very existence.

#OpenStellenbosch Student Movement

In 2015, during the wake of the #RhodesMustFall campaign, a student move-
ment called #OpenStellenbosch (OS) was formed at SU. The student body of
 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism 87
SU had diversified since the early 2000s, with increasing numbers of isiXhosa,
Kaaps, English, and other language speaking students attending the institution.
In late February the following year (2016) my fieldwork took me to the Western
Cape for several months and over a period of six weeks I interviewed a number
of students who had made a name for themselves in the wake of the protests at
SU and UCT. On 3 March 2016, a meeting organized by the South African
Student Council Organization (SASCO) took place in one of the largest lecture
halls at SU and a large number of students and some staff members attended.
There were very few white, coloured, and Indian students in the audience and
not a single non-black individual on the podium. Initiating the meeting, one of
the student leaders said:

Black children are brought here [to the University of Stellenbosch] to be

educated, coming with the dreams of their families, so that they can have a
good education, but when they get here, there are obstacles in their way.
Those obstacles, first and foremost, is being taught in a language that they
do not understand. But let’s get this clear, we never said that we hate or
dislike Afrikaans, it is one of the languages of this country, but never must
a language be enforced onto people. Never in this country.
(Emphasis added)

The emphatic speech evidently resonated with the crowd of students who
cheered loudly in response. The student’s message and the broader South
African sociolinguistic realities inherent in it also resonated with me. Why
would students have to study in a third language when they had already com-
promised to learn in a second (English)? The speech contained a twofold mes-
sage: first, Afrikaans, unlike English (which was the language in which the
speech was delivered), is not widely understood by African (at SU mostly
isiXhosa) students and, secondly, it is seen as politically illegitimate to force
students to learn (in) Afrikaans or any other language for that matter. Implicit
in the comment was also the overall complaint of the OS collective: Afrikaans
was used as a ‘tool of exclusion’.
In the press, the #OpenStellenbosch student group was sometimes portrayed
as radical, but neither the interviews I conducted nor the public statements of
the group seemed to justify these portrayals. For instance, the Open Stellen-
bosch Memorandum of Demands 15 published on 13 May 2015 read as follows:

1 All classes must be available in English.

2 The use of translators and translation-devices must be discontinued, as
they are ineffective, inaudible and highlight the place of non-Afrikaans
speaking students at Stellenbosch as those who do not belong.
3 All official and unofficial communication from management, faculty and
university departments must be available in English. This includes com-
munication between faculty and staff, and not simply the communique
from management.
88 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism
4 All residence, faculty, departmental and administrative meetings and
correspondence must be conducted in English.
5 Afrikaans must not be a requirement for employment or appointment to
leadership positions.
6 The University must stop using isiXhosa as a front for multilingualism
when it has clearly invested minimal resources in its development on
campus. Alternatively, significant investment must be directed at devel-
oping isiXhosa on campus.
7 All signage on campus must be available in English.

Ironically, shortly after the collective was formed, the University management
came under further pressure in August 2015. A student documentary portraying
the racially charged climate and discriminatory practices at SU went viral on
social networks. Based on very personal interviews, Luister 16 (Listen) provided
a shocking account of racist-linguistic discriminatory and oppressive practices
that black students were experiencing in Stellenbosch. As Stroud and Williams
(2017: 173, emphasis in original) state, the documentary “highlights the subtle
and complex ways in which language ‘produces’ black bodies in white spaces
for whites, forming the racialised experience of black students who suffer under
the white oppression with epidermal differentiation”. It rightly outraged not
only South Africans but international viewers. While much of the film’s narra-
tive is not about language but violent racism of a diverse nature, some students
describe specifically how Afrikaans is “killing”17 African students at SU
because they cannot follow the lectures. One student, in particular, provides a
powerful narrative about how the language remains the “language of the
oppressor” for him. Many sentiments brought forward in the film echo what
Mabokela (2001: 72) had argued more than a decade prior to Luister: that “for
African students, using Afrikaans as a medium of instruction is like pouring
salt into an open wound”. The video reflected a “construct of multilingualism
typical of a colonial governmentality” in which immense pain is inflicted on
black bodies through a systematic hierarchization of languages (Stroud &
Williams 2017: 184).
Between early 2015 and midway through 2016, the #Open Stellenbosch
group organized several demonstrations and demanded, inter alia, a change in
the language policy from Afrikaans medium to English medium. Over a period
of more than a year, the language coalition of the OS group met repeatedly
with the acting vice-chancellor and various university executive members. As a
result of the Luister documentary and the concrete demands of #Open-
Stellenbosch, the University executive knew that concessions were necessary to
pacify the toxic raciolinguistic climate that had spread in the institution. In
mid-2016, the executive management agreed that a new language policy would
be drafted, one in which English (and not Afrikaans) would become the pri-
mary language of learning and teaching. Given the stigma of Afrikaans as a
“language of the oppressor”, its perceived status as a “language of exclusion”
and the strong international value of English, it was, after all, not surprising
 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism 89
that Afrikaans could not be maintained as the dominant medium of instruction
at Stellenbosch.18 And yet, it is not without irony that one ex-colonial language
replaced another.
On 22 June 2016, the US council approved a new language policy reflecting a
change in the role of Afrikaans at the institution. While the 2014 language
policy had stated that “the University is committed to the use and sustained
development of Afrikaans as an academic language in a multilingual context
…”, this passage was entirely omitted in the revised 2016 version. Instead, the
new document reads: “we commit ourselves to multilingualism by using the
province’s three official languages, namely Afrikaans, English and isiXhosa”.
Importantly also, the revised Stellenbosch University Language Policy states:
“During each lecture, all information is conveyed at least in English and sum-
maries or emphasis of content are also repeated in Afrikaans”. Virtually all
clauses referring exclusively to Afrikaans in the 2014 Language Policy docu-
ment are omitted or include English and isiXhosa in the 2016 version. The
lobby group Gelyke Kanse (Equal Opportunities) went to the High Court to
dispute the legitimacy of the 2016 language policy but on 10 October 2019, the
Constitutional Court judgement ruled in favour of SU. As a result, three con-
vocation members (alumni of SU) resigned, including the president of the con-
vocation, advocate Jan Heunis – who had represented Gelyke Kanse in the
court case against the SU language policy.19 Arguably, this victory over Afri-
kaans at the public University of Stellenbosch can be seen as a victory over
‘linguo-ethnified’ university language politics (Beck 2018).
Ironically, however, the process also perpetuated an artificially depoliticized
perspective of English (Painter 2015) and the “assumption that English is an
innocent and benign language” (Dube 2017: 19). Indeed, English emerged and
positioned itself as the common and cosmopolitan lingua franca. There was no
cosmopolitan value attached to Afrikaans and the local/parochial politics
associated with it worked against it. One of my #OpenStellenbosch consultants
poignantly remarked in an informal talk in 2016: “English is simply the lesser
one of the two evils”.20
Throughout the twentieth century and especially in the post-1994 period, the
role of English as the academic lingua franca in South African higher education
not only prevailed but strengthened. The late Neville Alexander, who was, first
and foremost, a promoter of multilingualism, emphasized the value of English
as a linking language in the country. However, Alexander (2013: 84) also cau-
tioned that “the use of English as a language of tuition at tertiary level because
of its lingua franca function … is no guarantee of educational equity”. At the
University of KwaZulu-Natal this statement resonated with Zulu students who
felt they were at a disadvantage compared to the mostly white and Indian
English L1 speaking students (Rudwick & Parmegiani 2013, Parmegiani &
Rudwick 2014). At SU, however, where the majority of students are Afrikaans
or isiXhosa speaking, English is a compromise, a second language (rather than
a first) for most students. This suggests that vibrant multilingualism is a fruitful
ground for a ‘healthy’ English lingua franca set-up.
90 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism
Interestingly, on an academic online platform on which South African lan-
guage politics were discussed, one white female academic called the demands of
the #OpenStellenbosch collective “short-sighted” as it is not supportive of
multilingualism. However, one has to acknowledge that until isiXhosa is
established as a language of learning and teaching at SU, multilingualism
effectively means English/Afrikaans bilingualism. Several members of the
#OpenStellenbosch group said in interviews that the University’s Afrikaans/
English bilingualism had posed unjustly as multilingualism.21 When, in 2016, I
also interviewed two managerial staff members, and a translator in SU’s Taal-
sentrum [Language Centre], I learned that only two staff members at the
Center were isiXhosa speaking, while 10 out of 14 staff at the Centre were
Afrikaans speakers. These figures speak for themselves. The lack of Xhosa staff
and translators was symptomatic of the kind of ‘multilingualism’ the institu-
tion had fostered.
It is problematic when those who claim to be for the preservation of multi-
lingualism are “trapped within the bounds of their own Enlightenment epis-
temologies” (De Souza 2017: 206). Pennycook and Makoni (2020: 80)
emphasize the importance of examining single contexts and how “different
relations of language exist locally and how they relate to economic opportu-
nities”. Clearly, for Xhosa students English was and continues to be key to
economic opportunities and it would be absurd to discourage them from
concentrating on it. Besides, when it came to teaching and learning, the OS
members prioritized access to a language of learning they understood.
Afrikaans was no such language and isiXhosa was and is (not yet) estab-
lished as a medium at SU.22 The discussion showed that SU has provided a
fruitful climate in which the academic lingua franca status of English and its
associations with cosmopolitanism could strive. There is an abundance of
multilingual practices and usage of localized Englishes at the institution, as
is the case elsewhere in urban South Africa. Multifaceted ELF discourse in
which Kaaps, Afrikaans, Afrikaaps, isiXhosa, and other language inter-
ference takes place on a daily basis is arguably conducive to a linguistically
dynamic cosmopolitan climate. However, there are ambiguities in the fact
that English has gained this position and the socio-cultural politics and
identity endowing processes that have been at work in Stellenbosch reflect
this. English, as I keep reiterating, does not have a ‘benign’ status as a lingua
franca, either in Stellenbosch or elsewhere in the country. Ethno and racio-
linguistic identity politics bedevil English and they continue to loom parti-
cularly high in a place such as Stellenbosch.

Ethnolinguistic Politics and Parochialism

Many Afrikaners (white Afrikaans speakers) have felt disillusioned about the
increasing status of English vis-à-vis their language in the post-1994 period, and
this pertains in particular to its position in higher education. The melodramatic
article referred to earlier and written by the prominent Afrikaner historian and
 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism 91
23
Stellenbosch resident, Herman Giliomee in which he likened Afrikaans to a
lamb which was eaten by the lion (English) was symptomatic of the kind of
ethnolinguistic politics which were at play. Many taalstreyders who are
involved in the language debate at Stellenbosch, see English as a predator that is
killing the Afrikaans language. As a response to Giliomee, several academics
from SU wrote a nuanced article which argued against Afrikaner ethnolinguis-
tic identity politics and makes a point about the internationalization of the
institution implicitly voting for English.24 Afrikaners have been the most vocal
in their complaints about what has been perceived as the demise of their lan-
guage. English certainly does not represent a ‘neutral’ lingua franca for most
Afrikaners. When I interviewed Herman Giliomee in early 2015, he was fatal-
istic about the future of Afrikaans but was still committed to his own linguistic
nationalism. By referring to an Afrikaner friend in Stellenbosch who originally
made a conscious decision to send his children to an English school but then
later regretted his decision, he flagged the importance of ethnic identity.
Apparently, his friend’s son “never developed any sort of ethnic identity” and
his friend felt that ultimately this was working against his son. “If you don’t
have an ethnic identity, just this sort of cosmopolitan identity, you are lacking
something, you lose your moorings to some extent”. Afrikaans represents what
Giliomee referred to as “a social commitment” and he sees coloured people as
being included in this commitment.
During an interview with a young female Afrikaner student25 in early 2016,
at the time when Open Stellenbosch was pressuring the University to change its
language policy, she recounted a most embarrassing situation with her father.
They had gone for dinner at a prominent Afrikaner restaurant in Stellenbosch
and Nadine’s father spoke in Afrikaans with the black waitress. When she
responded in English that she couldn’t speak Afrikaans, her father apparently
bristled with indignation and demanded to be served by someone who was
Afrikaans speaking. Nadine recounted that a middle-aged male Afrikaner
manager came to explain – in Afrikaans – that the table was assigned to the
waitress who was already serving them and that a change would complicate the
store management. Nadine recollected the anger in her father’s eyes. He got up
from his chair and stormed out of the restaurant. Apparently, her father had
often said in a joking manner “My geld praat Afrikaans” (My money speaks
Afrikaans), but in this instance he was proven wrong. Although Nadine seemed
to feel embarrassed about the incident, she also expressed sympathy for her
father’s reaction: “he felt as if he was robbed of his home ground”, she said.
The link to territory in this comment shows that the town continues to be
conceived as the ‘home’ of Afrikaners. A similar type of loss of privilege was
expressed by Francois,26 a coffee entrepreneur who I coincidently met during
the COVID lockdown in Stellenbosch: Ek moet nou heeltyd Engels praat, want
die Xhosas wil nou nie meer Afrikaans praat nie (I now have to speak English
with Xhosa people all the time because they don’t like speaking Afrikaans
anymore). Although in the past African language speakers who could speak
92 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism
Afrikaans accommodated Afrikaners by using their language as a lingua franca,
this is decreasingly the case.
The examples above suggest that English is not acknowledged as a ‘neutral’
lingua franca by the Afrikaners referred to above but rather as a language
which pushed aside Afrikaans as a potential lingua franca. During a different
interview, Johan27 described how his mother got annoyed with an employee
who refused to speak Afrikaans at a drugstore in the Eikestad mall located next
to the campus of the university. He showed, however, little sympathy for his
own mother as he frustratingly declared: “the worst is you know that her
English is perfect”. Many young white Afrikaans students whom I met during
the fieldwork in Stellenbosch felt that the type of ethnolinguistic identity poli-
tics described above were not a part of their own social agenda.28 And yet,
there were some29 who did voice annoyance that according to them some
people now refuse to speak Afrikaans even though they are proficient in the
language. A few male Afrikaner students30 also expressed regret for the fading
status of Afrikaans. A Stellenbosch shop owner31 in his late twenties who used
to work in a corporation said in an interview: “Die irriterende ding is dat vyf-
en-twintig Afrikaners en‚ enkele Engels persoon, ons nog steeds na Engels moet
oorskakel. Dit lei tot frustrasie”. (The annoying thing is that if there are 25
Afrikaners and just one single English person, we still have to switch to Eng-
lish. It leads to frustration.) A retired teacher32 reflected on the situation at SU
in fatalistic terms by saying, “You see, it’s hard when all of the sudden your
language and your place is taken away from you”.
To critically situate these comments is to recount how white South Africans
occupied a highly privileged, socio-political, and institutional structural posi-
tion in the country’s past. The post-1994 period triggered Afrikaans-Afrikaner
ethnolinguistic politics of alleged marginalization. Narratives of victimhood
among Afrikaners are nothing new (Jansen 2009; Steyn 2004), they manifest
also through popular Afrikaans cultural expression and social media (Marx
Knoetze 2020). While there are generational differences and much diversity
generally among Afrikaners today and Afrikaans certainly is not equally
important to everyone, it is remarkable that within the white Afrikaans-
speaking population there has been no shift from Afrikaans to English, but
rather a strengthening of the language (see Posel & Zeller 2015 for census
data). There are multiple “ways of being” white and Afrikaans speaking and
there are many, especially young, Afrikaners who have certainly “moved
beyond the ethnic and nationalist mobilisation which supported Afrikaner
nationalism and the apartheid state” (Blaser 2012: 18). And yet some Afrikaner
ethnolinguistic nationalism has been exclusionary and deep-seated (Kriel 2006).
This has not worked in favour of Afrikaans post-1994. A retired Afrikaans-
speaking Stellenbosch academic33 expressed frustration about what she termed
Afrikaner parochialism. She explained that it was not uncommon among Afri-
kaner nationalists to link the demise of Afrikaans at SU to a demise of stan-
dards. Many Afrikaner nationalists also do not accept that (Afri)Kaaps is as
valuable a variety as is current Standard Afrikaans and some ridicule
 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism 93
suggestions to restandardize for educational purposes. (Afri)Kaaps continues to
be widely constructed as inferior dialects ‘appropriate only for certain situa-
tions’, or in an Adam Small poem.34
Qualitative research has shown (Van der Westhuizen 2013) that, for
instance, middle-aged Afrikaner women embrace Afrikaans as one way of
asserting their belonging and their ways of being. One interviewee (Nerina) in
this study spoke about her mother in the following way: “My mom [says]
‘Afrikaans is our language and … if somebody can’t help you, they should go
and find someone that’s Afrikaans because we have a right to be here” (Van
der Westhuizen 2013: 178). It is argued that demonstrating direct opposition
to English continues to have “intergenerational significance” and that it
brings with it a sense of entitlement after having fought against English
oppression throughout history. The insistence on speaking Afrikaans is a
rejection of English as representing “an existential attack” (Van der Wes-
thuizen 2013: 179). The “right to be here” is a common sentiment to claim
space and belonging in the post-apartheid dispensation and language is one of
the most immediate and powerful tools through which this claim can be
observed in the behaviour of some Afrikaners. Van der Westhuizen (2013:
178) writes how some of her female Afrikaner interviewees “resist concession
of space, reporting ‘anger’, with the source of the resistance” against “the dis-
placement of Afrikaans by English identity”.
Similarly, a male interviewee in my study, a 56-year-old self-identified
female Afrikaner professional35 said, “Ek praat Afrikaans (I speak Afrikaans)
and, you know – I sometimes make it a conscious point not to speak English,
for example on the phone. I have a right to be here.” This right to be here, as
native citizens of South Africa, features particularly strongly in a place such
as Stellenbosch where Afrikaner wealth and capital is ubiquitous. Another
young male Afrikaner,36 who I interviewed in early 2018 in a fashionable
Stellenbosch café, spoke about a generational shift which distinguished him
from his parents. In his narrative, perceptions about race featured in quite
essentialist terms but when it came to language usage, his attitude was more
flexible. He was, in his own claim “100% bilingual”, equally comfortable in
Afrikaans and English. But because he recently started dating a woman who,
in his own words, was of “solid Afrikaner” background, he spoke more
Afrikaans than English at home. He continued saying that “in restaurants,
mostly I speak English, even here [in Stellenbosch], but Elize [his girlfriend]
insists on Afrikaans. And when we are with the ‘old folks’ [parents] – you
know, we only ever use Afrikaans …”.
During my many months of fieldwork in Stellenbosch between 2014 and
2020, there were numerous encounters which I interpreted as parochial think-
ing, ethnolinguistic identity politics, and racist incidences. A father of one of
the children who played in the soccer club with my son told me during a prac-
tice lesson: “We were always oppressed by the English, but black people think
they were the only ones who were oppressed”.37 Similarly, another parent
claimed that “Afrikaners are pushed to the periphery in South Africa now and
94 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism
that’s why we try to stay among our people here in Stellenbosch”.38 The refer-
ence to “our people” implied ‘only’ the Afrikaner community and was elabo-
rated on in further detail, explaining how coloured people had a different
culture. Individual Afrikaners are engaged with the deeply parochial politics of
identity which feeds on the feeling of marginality expressed in the previous
chapter. How might we explain the parochialism evident in places such as
Stellenbosch? One way might be to draw from critical whiteness studies (Dis-
tiller and Steyn 2004; Verwey and Quayle 2012; Van der Westhuizen 2013,
2016) which have argued that ‘traditional’ Afrikaner identity is largely con-
structed, first as a racial identity and, secondly, as a linguistic identity. Within
the logic of subaltern whiteness (Chapter 4) both blackness and Englishness are
seen as tools which exclude and oppress. Although many of the Afrikaner
interviewees in Stellenbosch acknowledged their socio-economic privilege, they
perceived it as well deserved and several of them felt a sense of strong dis-
satisfaction with their overall position in the country.
And yet, in Stellenbosch, Afrikaans continues to serve, to a certain extent,
as the default language in the town. Afrikaners continue to be able to con-
test the power of English in various spaces in Stellenbosch. At the same
time, however, as the student interviews above illustrate, Afrikaans seems
to be decreasingly able to disrupt the hegemony of English as a lingua franca
in the country. Unlike pre-1994, there are only certain domains in which
Afrikaans can maintain itself as a common lingua franca. A strong senti-
ment of entitlement to speaking Afrikaans persists, especially among the
older generation, and this leads to parochial identity politics. And these are
partly the reason why Stellenbosch remains a rather hostile place for many
black people. Afrikaner coloniality lingers as a material and psychological
legacy in the life experience of people in this town. As one of my consultants
put it bluntly: “this is not a place for black people”.39 A Xhosa student40
described how he was attacked by a neighbour’s dog in one of the most
expensive neighbourhoods of the town and how the owner, an elderly
Afrikaner woman, only reluctantly apologized for the incident. Justifying
her dog’s misbehaviour, she suggested that there were “many black thugs”
around and her own position was very vulnerable. The Luister documentary
provides ample examples of the racist abuse and exclusion black students
experience. Although five years have passed since it was made, several of my
black and coloured interviewees provided narratives which were replete
with experiences of racial discrimination. The scope of this monograph does
not allow for a more detailed discussion of the racial and linguistic politics
at SU and its town. The literature on the topic is extensive and an analysis
of the media publications in the Afrikaans press alone could make for an
entire monograph with a focus on subaltern whiteness. My focus remains
English and suffice it to say here that even in a place such as Stellenbosch,
which continues to be a stronghold of Afrikaans and Afrikaner culture,
English is receiving both recognition and disruption as a common lingua
franca.
 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism 95
Among the diverse coloured communities around Stellenbosch, linguistic
identity politics in relation to English are constituted in very different ways
from those among Afrikaners. Not that English might not also contribute to a
feeling of marginalization, but the language does not seem to carry the
‘oppressor’ stigma it is tainted with in some segments of the Afrikaner com-
munity. Kim, the coloured student consultant41 whom I worked with over a
period of five years, was adamant that it is mostly the “Afrikaners [who] have a
problem with English”. Several other coloured interviewees echoed a similar
statement, Loraine42 and Riana43 both indicated that they would rather opt for
an English medium school for their potential future child than a white Afri-
kaans school. Kim, who is now registered for PhD studies at SU, emphatically
stated: “if, as a coloured you speak with ‘that’ [white/Afrikaner] accent, you’re
gonna be a sellout”. The comment suggests that speaking what is perceived as
white Afrikaans creates a social boundary in the coloured community, analo-
gue to the boundaries that Standard English creates in African language
speaking communities. But this is not to say that the ‘wrong’ English might not
also create power dynamics in the coloured community. In the words of Kim
again, “having ownership of English is much more acceptable [in the coloured
community] than speaking with a white Afrikaans accent”. According to her,
“that just does not go down well”. Speaking in what is perceived as white
Afrikaans is associated with elitist behaviour. But so-called white Afrikaans is
not the only language perceived as elitist: Kim also reflected on a recent situa-
tion in which she herself was called out among peers in her hometown for
speaking excessive English. She self-reflectively conceded that she must have
come across as ‘snobbish’ among the friends and acquaintances in her home-
town George. It must have been received, she explained, as just “way more
English than necessary”. The role English carries as a lingua franca in urban
environments of the Western Cape is quite different from that in rural areas of
the province and country and Chapter 8 will deal in further detail with lan-
guage matters in the coloured community.
Departing from understandings of language inextricably linked to a com-
munity or place is useful in reorientating towards a more cosmopolitan outlook
(Canagarajah 2013).44 By referring to Neville Alexander and Adam Small, Van
der Waal (2012: 446) argues that “their [Small’s and Alexander’s] support of
Afrikaans/Kaaps was based on a commitment to empowerment, far removed
from the ethno-nationalism so apparent in the contestation about Afrikaans in
higher education”. Coloured varieties of Afrikaans have been stigmatized
across nearly all social domains related to power and upward mobility (Wil-
liams 2016a, 2016b). Kaaps has been “tainted with historically produced class
and race-based associations that intersect with powerful language ideologies”
(Cooper 2018: 31). Indeed, a dominant feature of the Afrikaans language
development was the “seamless connection between Standard Afrikaans and
the racist hubris of the ‘white’ man” (Alexander 2004: 116). As a result, the
coloured Afrikaans community has continued to be marginalized in efforts to
develop Afrikaans. If Afrikaans is to contribute to decolonization in South
96 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism
Africa then Kaaps, the variety of the language spoken by the coloured com-
munity, has to gain a more powerful linguistic, cultural, and political influence.
If “commonalities between the speakers of Afrikaans in formal and informal
communication” can be found, there could be a way “towards a more cosmo-
politanism-orientated South African society” (Van der Waal 2012: 460). Afri-
kaans can only rid itself of its stigma (as language of oppression) by being
inclusive of all influences.
Until this happens, however, Afrikaans is likely not to shed its stigma. It is
also for these reasons that I have chosen in this monograph not to include
Afrikaans as an ‘African’ language, but to refer to it as one of the two ex-
colonial ones. One (assumedly) Afrikaner reviewer criticized and took issue
with my usage of ‘African languages’ including only the nine official Sintu
languages in South Africa (and therefore excluding Afrikaans) in a recent
publication for a prestigious outlet. I felt compelled to write to the editor
explaining that the ideological nature of this issue needed to be recognized
and, that my own ontological perspective is one where I distinguish between
the ‘African’ nature of African languages and that of Afrikaans. Definitions of
what a language is largely depends on socio- and cultural politics, and Wein-
reich’s overquoted statement that “a language is a dialect with an army and a
navy” is an apt reminder of the fact that what we understand a language to be
is largely dependent on politics. To recognize a language with West Germanic
roots and a brutal social history of development as an African language
means it must have had an army and a navy in place. One could also argue
that the claim to African status is symptomatic of the influence of Afrikaner
linguists. If the argument is substantiated on linguistic grounds as is often the
case for Afrikaans (by tracing Khoi roots, for example), one could also argue
that South African English deserves the same recognition. Kamwangamalu
(2019) makes the case for English as a “naturalized African language” by
identifying several linguistic (phonetic, syntactic, semantic, lexical) features
from African languages which English has adopted in South Africa as a result
of the long and intense multilingual contact situation. But again, this is not to
say that black South Africans are necessarily comfortably referring to English
as a “naturalized African language”. One of the University of KwaZulu-Natal
Zulu students in my Honours class in 2019, for instance, said emphatically,
“hell no, it’s not an African language”.

Concluding Thoughts
The construction of vernaculars and local languages as ‘parochial’ and linked
to insularity and backwardness, and English as ‘worldly’, ‘sophisticated’, and
‘cosmopolitan’ is a problematic simplistic binary (Ramanathan 2012). And
yet, within the higher education system of South Africa, English is widely
perceived as the cosmopolitan tongue while Afrikaans is seen as the ethnic
language. At the same time, and following my focus on ambiguity, the above
discussion demonstrated that English is not necessarily accepted as the only
 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism 97
academic lingua franca in South Africa. There are now several universities in
the country that have formulated language policies that promote African
languages as languages of learning and teaching. The University of KwaZulu-
Natal, for instance, has implemented a mandatory isiZulu module for all
undergraduate students and lecturers and tutors make increasing usage of
isiZulu in class. But there are practical and ideological challenges involved in
the language policy. As I have argued elsewhere (Rudwick 2017, 2018), the
compulsory learning of isiZulu in higher education is not uncontroversial and
has contributed to problematic identity politics at UKZN.45 The ambiguity of
English as an academic lingua franca in Zulu society deserves further atten-
tion in future studies but for the purpose of this book, I have chosen to give
attention to the role of gender in the complex interplay between isiZulu and
English in Zulu society. Thus, the next chapter provides an exploration of the
role of English as a gendered lingua franca in Zulu society.

Notes
1 Sphandle, 23-year-old male student, Stellenbosch, 5 December 2017
2 More generally, scholars such as Gilroy (2000, 2005) and Appiah (1997, 2006)
have conceptualized people’s humanity as the glue to construct a better and more
just world, a socio-political philosophy of a common cosmopolitanism or global
humanism.
3 Ramanathan (2012) has demonstrated in the Indian context how this binarism
can easily be questioned by the constant flux of power in multilingual situations
and contexts.
4 For more detail, see www.afropolitan.co.za.
5 Helbling and Teney (2015) illustrate that some of the cosmopolitan elite in Ger-
many are even more grounded in locality than ordinary citizens.
6 Afrikaans also serves as a lingua franca in certain parts of South Africa but in
most urban spaces it is English which is predominant.
7 https://www.news.uct.ac.za/article/-2012-03-26-afropolitanism-ndash-naturally
(accessed 6 April 2020).
8 The aim of internationalization was put under the responsibility of Professor
Thandabantu Nhlapo, https://www.news.uct.ac.za/article/-2011-06-06-synergies-
between-afropolitanism-and-ucts-strategic-theme (accessed 5 June 2020).
9 Initiated at the University of Cape Town, the year 2015 marked a watershed in
South African higher education history. Predominantly black student movements all
over the country emerged in order to decolonize the higher education sector. In
October 2015 the “Fees Must Fall” campaign closed several campuses and achieved
its primary objective – a government commitment to a 0 percent fee increment at all
South African universities in 2016. This was a campaign unprecedented in South
Africa’s recent history of social movements and service delivery protests.
10 On the current webpage of SU there is explicit reference to cosmopolitanism. On
the Timeline, for instance, it reads “Stellenbosch University today is home to 10
faculties, a vibrant and cosmopolitan community of more than 30,000 students
and 3,000 staff members, spread over five campuses”. For more detail, see:
www0.sun.ac.za/100/en/timeline (accessed 5 June 2020).
11 This involved a whole range of complicated socio-political dynamics that for
reasons of scope cannot be elaborated on here (for more detail, see Giliomee
2001, 2003a).
98 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism
12 https://www.sahistory.org.za/dated-event/education-minister-sibusiso-bengu-warns-
stellenbosch-university-it-cant-be-0.
13 All South African universities that were so-called ‘Afrikaans universities’ converted,
more or less, into bilingual models during the first decade or two after apartheid,
implementing English as the second Language of Learning and Teaching (Du Plessis
2003, 2006; Webb 2010).
14 https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2014-07-02-revealed-professor-botmans-tor
rid-final-week/#.WvqtbS-B1Bw (accessed 3 April 2019).
15 www.sun.ac.za/english/management/wim-de-villiers/Documents/Open%20Stellen
bosch%20Memo%2020150513.pdf.
16 The documentary is a compelling and quite personal account of 32 students and
one lecturer at SU, available online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
sF3rTBQTQk4 (accessed 17 March 2020).
17 Quote from one of the interviewees featured in the Luister video.
18 SU was not the only institution at which protests against Afrikaans as the
medium of instruction took place and which revised their language policies
towards more bilingualism or English-only instruction. Afriforum, an Afrikaans
interest group, filed a court case against these language policy changes, but “on
29 December 2017 the Constitutional Court ruled in favour of the University of
the Free State’s decision to shift to English” (Hill 2019).
19 https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-12-13-stellenbosch-university-rock
ed-by-disputes-over-language-policy (accessed 3 October 2020).
20 Nandi, 25-year-old Master’s student, Stellenbosch University, 7 March 2016.
21 The issue also came up in several interviews with #OpenStellenbosch members in
2016. There was consensus that until 2015, the promotion of multilingualism was a de
facto promotion of Afrikaans. While it has to be acknowledged that some isiXhosa
development had taken place, the Language Centre at SU had been primarily staffed by
Afrikaans speakers. In January 2015, I also interviewed two individuals in the Centre.
22 Besides, a focus on the promotion of African languages is not uncontroversial
either. It draws rejection from at least two lobbies: those who regard English as
the future and see vernacular promotion counter-productive to national progress
and those who object to the involvement of non-Africans in African language and
cultural matters (Makoni & Makoni 2009: 116).
23 https://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/mail-guardian/20091002/281685430895853.
(accessed 17 October 2020).
24 https://mg.co.za/article/2009-10-13-language-of-division-and-diversion (accessed 17
October 2020).
25 Nadine, a 27-year-old male Afrikaner Sociology student, Stellenbosch, 4 March 2016.
26 Francois, a 53-year-old male Afrikaner coffee entrepreneur, Stellenbosch, 6 April
2020.
27 Johan, a 28-year-old male Chemistry student, Stellenbosch University, 3 February
2020.
28 Several interviewees also referred to Steve Hofmeyer as a counter-example to
their own Afrikaans identities.
29 Stellenbosch students, informal group interview, Stellenbosch, 20 January 2015.
30 Stellenbosch students, 16 February 2020.
31 Dennis, 29-year-old Afrikaner shop owner, Stellenbosch, 26 February 2020.
32 Theodor, 72-year-old retired teacher, Stellenbosch, 20 January 2015.
33 69-year-old Afrikaner academic, Stellenbosch, March 2016.
34 https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2019-07-07-decolonise-education-by-in
cluding-afrikaans (accessed 1 March 2020).
35 Johan, 56-year-old self-identified “proud” Afrikaner, 4 May 2020.
36 Tom, 36-year-old self-identified “modern Afrikaner”, 10 May 2020.
37 Karl, 40+-year-old Afrikaans farmer and entrepreneur, Stellenbosch, 1 February 2020.
 Cosmopolitanism & Parochialism 99
38 Luise, 53-year-old Afrikaans shop owner, Stellenbosch, 6 March 2016.
39 Cynthia, 43-year-old black female academic from Kenya, Stellenbosch, 1 March 2020.
40 Aphiwe, 26-year-old Zulu student, Stellenbosch, 4 June 2020.
41 Kim, 27year-old coloured consultant, Stellenbosch, 2014–2020.
42 Loraine, 26-year-old coloured student, Stellenbosch, 16 January 2018.
43 Riana, 30+-year=old hotel receptionist, Stellenbosch, 5 March 2016.
44 Bamgbose (1991, 2003) has long argued that the ‘one-language-one nation’
model, for instance, has no relevance in the African context.
45 It has also been argued that African language learning (also per decree) makes
sense at primary and secondary level and would contribute to social justice
(Lafon 2008, 2010). It is an ironic twist that the majority of white and Indian
learners currently enrolled in KwaZulu-Natal schools choose Afrikaans over isi-
Zulu as a first additional language.
7 Gender(ed) Ambiguities

Introduction
Language has been recognized as one of the primary markers of ethnicity and
one of the most powerful means of signifying and expressing ethnic belonging.
My focus on Afrikaans and isiZulu speakers is the result of tracing this entan-
glement ethnographically over many years and in relation to English as a lingua
franca. When it comes to gender and gendered linguistic choices, however, I
can only draw with confidence from ethnographic findings in KwaZulu-Natal
and with reference to Zulu society. One of my colleagues from the University
of Zululand, once took me aside at a discussion forum about the status of
English as academic lingua franca. Mr Shezi said, “You know Stephanie, if
Soweto had not been Soweto but Umlazi, we would not have given into English
as quick as they did there”. While I was still trying to make sense of what he
had said, he continued, “We all speak Zulu here, in Soweto they speak all kinds
of languages, for us it would have been easy to choose Zulu”. Years later, what
he said often resonated with me in interviews with other people, especially
Zulu men. The province of KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) is more homogenous than
all the other South African provinces when it comes to African languages as
almost 80 percent of the residents speak isiZulu as a first language (Census
2011). This background is significant for this chapter as I aim to capture some
of the lived realities of the constructions and performances of femininities,
masculinities, and other-gendered identities through juxtaposing isiZulu and
English more broadly, and Standard English vis-à-vis a lingua franca form of
English. In doing so, I carefully formulate the argument that female isiZulu
speakers find it easier to embrace English and to aim not for an ELF variety but
rather for a more native-like proficiency in English while Zulu males appear to
hold on to an isiZulu inflected English. While my argument is located, to some
extent, within the binaristic thinking of previous language and gender studies in
South Africa, I also aim to dismantle much of this thinking in order to allow
for a more nuanced perspective of isiZulu speakers by drawing on the experi-
ence of men who have sex with other men (MSM).
The gendering of English vis-à-vis isiZulu has epistemological consequences
as it also affects how we think of the relationship between language and gender

DOI: 10.4324/9780429031472-7
 Gender(ed) Ambiguities 101
more generally in African society. In fact, “women worldwide continue to
suffer the consequences of long-standing power disparities that are frequently
reflected in language usage” (Baugh 2020: 64) and, if anything, this is even more
pronounced in Zulu society. Patriarchy is a feature all South Africans, irre-
spective of race, class, and culture, are affected by (Sachs 1993). Moreover, the
interrelated structures of heteronormativity, patriarchy, and sexism play out in
complex ways through language, but this chapter will only be able to discuss
one facet of this matrix. The study of African ways of being is essential in order
to make sense of how gender plays an active role in the ambiguities of English
as a lingua franca among African language speakers, and in Zulu society more
specifically. I demonstrate this by discussing how a politeness regime in isiZulu,
i.e. the linguistic and social custom1 of hlonipha fundamentally influences the
relationship of male/female isiZulu speakers with English and how this is fur-
ther complicated by dichotomized power relations between ideas of what con-
stitutes ‘urban’ vis-à-vis ‘rural’ and ‘modern’ vis-à-vis ‘traditional’ identities. As
in previous chapters I draw on these binaries and polarities only to deconstruct
them again and to show that there is also much fluidity, fuzziness, and move-
ment between seemingly contradictory poles.
Zulu people have a reputation for being proud ethnic people and many
other African language speakers see them as the dominant ethnic group in
the country. IsiZulu is, after all, the most widely spoken language with the
majority of speakers living in the province of KwaZulu-Natal. A study by
Posel et al. (2020) shows that isiZulu speakers are the least likely among all
African language speakers to speak a language other than their home lan-
guage outside the home. Further, it shows that, after English, isiZulu is the
most widely spoken language outside of the home in South Africa.2 This
also suggests that isiZulu not only stands as a proxy for identification with
the Zulu ethnic group but that the language acts as one of South Africa’s
primary lingua francas.
While language and ethnicity are entangled in complex ways in African
societies, some educated African language speakers tend to reject ethnicity as a
colonial import and artificial construction to divide Africans, whereas others
see it as a welcome and positive alternative to what is perceived as white cul-
ture. My many years of ethnographic fieldwork in KwaZulu-Natal lead me to
argue that the latter scenario is more common among Zulu people. To say the
least, ethnic identities continue to have socio-political saliency in the country
and the following reflections from fieldwork in 2019/2020 serve to illustrate this
point. In November 2019, the South African rugby team, led by the isiXhosa-
speaking captain Siya Kolisi, won the World Cup. Subsequent to the victory, a
satirical text went viral on social media which had the heading: “An open letter
‘from the Xhosa people to the nation’” which also made it into the mainstream
media. One part of the letter read: “We as the Xhosa people would like to state
that we’re tired of carrying this country on our backs. Year by year we work
tirelessly for this country, while the rest of the nation relaxes …”. Although the
text was arguably satirical, several media outlets lamented an “ethnic rivalry”
102 Gender(ed) Ambiguities
triggered by the victory. Cebelihle Bhengu, for instance, entitled his article in
the TimesLIVE3 “Tribalism and ‘bitterness’ mar Springboks’ Rugby World
Cup Victory”. Needless to say, the social media was replete with verbal ethnic
warfare. One of my Zulu colleagues at the University of KwaZulu-Natal
commented with irritation, “Xhosas always think they are the clever ones”.4
Several months later, when attending a poetry slam event in Khayamandi
Township near Stellenbosch, I was reminded of the issue of ethnicity once
again. One of the poets made his theme the linguistic versatility of Xhosa
people. Switching comfortably back and forth between isiXhosa, English,
township codes, and isiZulu he compellingly referred to numerous situations
which, from his perspective, demonstrated the potent multilingualism of isiX-
hosa speakers vis-à-vis the non-accommodating nature of isiZulu and English
speakers. According to him, isiXhosa people were linguistically flexible and
able to understand and even speak isiZulu while the opposite was simply not
the case. I recalled a now rather dated article by Finlayson and Slabbert (1997)
showing conversational data in a Gauteng township setting where most inter-
locutors met each other ‘half-way’ in terms of language, except for male isiZulu
speakers, many of whom were found to be reluctant to accommodate other
African language speakers.
English is, as mentioned earlier, often portrayed as ‘neutral’ and its lingua
franca status flagged. However, as I show below, it is not always perceived as a
‘neutrally’ useful and communicative tool in Zulu society, and gender plays a
complex role in the divisive nature the language carries at times.

Women and ‘Prestigious’ Language

Gal’s (1979) seminal study laid the foundation for a sociolinguistic argument
that young women might play a greater role than men in cases of language
shift. In Gal’s study Hungarian women were the initiators of adopting
German as the socio-economically powerful language representative of
‘modernity’ at the time. Further sociolinguistic research (Trudgill 1972;
Cameron 1992) reasserted an argument that women tend to be more likely to
embrace or even adopt prestigious ways of speaking than men.
In South African Zulu society, the situation seems yet more complicated,
however, as previous studies also show contradictory developments in
urban and rural communities (compare, for instance, Appalraju 1999,
Appalraju & de Kadt 2002; Ige & de Kadt 2002; de Kadt 2004). English,
both as a lingua franca and primary medium, plays a much more sig-
nificant role in urban communities than in rural ones as there is far more
cultural heterogeneity in terms of linguistic and social criteria. Interest-
ingly, Appalraju & de Kadt (2002) observed in a rural KwaZulu-Natal
setting that “females are expected to continue speaking predominantly in
Zulu” because there was a dominant expectation that they would stay in
the community as agriculturists and caretakers of children (Appalraju &
de Kadt 2002: 143). This was in contrast to men, who wanted to be mobile
 Gender(ed) Ambiguities 103
and speak English for employment purposes. In contrast to this rural
study, de Kadt’s (2004) further research at the University of KwaZulu-
Natal suggested that there was a common perception among her student
interviewees, both male and female, that isiZulu speaking women students
made “much more” use of English than men.
In most of the English lingua franca literature, it seems, gender has not
been studied as a significant variable. The Routledge Handbook (Jenkins et
al. 2018) includes not a single chapter on how gender might affect English
lingua franca communication in different contexts or throughout space and
time. The global spread of English and the fact that it is the first foreign lan-
guage choice of most students in Europe have resulted in the argument that it
is relatively ‘gender neutral’ (Dörnyei & Clement 2001; Dörnyei, Csizér &
Németh 2006). Similarly, in the US context, it has been argued that students
from Asia contribute to the development of English as a gender-neutral lan-
guage (Brutt-Griffler & Kim 2018). From the perspective of linguistic
anthropology and aiming to contribute to decolonizing language studies in
Africa, one cannot regard any linguistic tool as neutral in terms of the con-
structions and performances of any social identity, and certainly not gender.
Language as a non-neutral medium is the paradigmatic basis on which lin-
guistic anthropology rests (Duranti 2011). The social dynamics of language
are far too complex to align any language with an ‘objectivity’ that indexes
‘neutrality’ and the argument that English acts as a gender-neutral lingua
franca is, hence, in itself heavily ideologically grounded. In South Africa, both
linguistic and gender inequalities manifest themselves in various ways (Par-
megiani 2008, 2017), the latter being influenced by the often toxic combina-
tion of colonial and apartheid legacies, racism, ethnic chauvinism, and
patriarchy.
As written earlier (Chapter 3), colonial linguistics has shown how mis-
sionaries and linguists constructed rather than ‘objectively’ described linguis-
tic forms in the colonies. The literature repeatedly demonstrates that ideas
about language were fundamentally shaped by colonialists’ ideas about what
constituted a language, a nation, race and ethnicity, and, not least gender(ed)
behaviour (Bauman & Briggs 2003; Makoni 2003; Errington 2007; Irvine &
Gal 2000). European ideas about manhood, womanhood, gender roles, and
relations pervade colonial descriptions about language and gender in Africa.
Coloniality continues to influence Western ways of thinking as they are fun-
damentally based on an unequal distribution of power which, to a large
extent, has its legacy in colonialism and a patriarchal world order (Connell
2007; Grosfoguel 2011; Mignolo 2007). The global North bias in language
studies (Smakman & Heinrich 2015; Pennycook & Makoni 2020) calls for an
epistemological shift by drawing attention to the ontologies and theories
generated in the global South. African gender dynamics cannot be captured by
mainstream sociolinguistic paradigms (Atanga et al. 2013), they point to a
need to generate theories based on African experiences. It is an ironic twist
that given that the orthographies of the African languages are colonial
104 Gender(ed) Ambiguities
‘inventions’, African language speakers have often linked ‘modernity’ pri-
marily to the proficiency in ex-colonial languages, e.g. English, which also
have gender(ed) aspects. For instance, in Tsitsi Dangarembga’s (1988) com-
pelling novel Nervous Condition the monolithic construct of English as
modern and emancipatory is captured and deconstructed at the same time.
More recent studies on language and gender in South Africa (Parmegiani
2017, Mesthrie 2017a, 2017b) suggest that when it comes to students at South
Africa’s elite tertiary institutions, it seems to be women who are at the fore-
front of adopting English ‘native-like’ proficiency and embracing what has
been termed an ‘anglo-normativity’ (McKinney 2017). ‘Excessive’ usage of
English might also lead to language attrition in isiZulu and this has an impact
on the role of English as a lingua franca as a potential language shift would
obviously destroy its lingua franca status. Currently, however, census and
other quantitative data sources (Census 2011; General Household Data 2017,
20185) do not suggest a language shift from South African indigenous lan-
guages to English.6
There are power disparities between Zulu women and men, and some of
these have been codified by various forms of linguistic behaviour. The con-
cept of style is rather useful in this regard. Coupland (2007) showed how
variationist research was “successful in revealing broad patterns of linguis-
tic diversity and change”, but it has “not encouraged us to understand what
people meaningfully achieve through linguistic variation” (Coupland 2007:
5). Style as performed discursive practice raises two primary questions in
relation to ELF in South Africa and with reference to Zulu society more
specifically. How and when do gendered styles impact African English
lingua franca communication, and how do styles of ELF communication
index, project, and (de)construct gendered subjectivities? As Coupland
reminds us “discursive social action is where culture and identities ‘live’ and
where we can see them taking shape. The styling of social identities and
‘collective memories’ is the heart of the process” (2007: 108). The concept of
style, as a “Multidimensional Resource for Shared Identity Creation”
(Moore 2004) can be fruitfully applied to gender(ed) identities which are in
themselves plural, multifaceted, flexible, and very context bound. Speakers
have agency in the sense that they have the ability “to control what they do
[with language] and to make conscious choices” (Van Herk 2012: 85). Zulu
men and women’s choices of English vis-à-vis isiZulu, their complex ways
of speaking, and their relationship with English as a lingua franca is entan-
gled with gender as something, they ‘do’ as will be seen below.
When Judith Butler (1990) laid the foundation for understanding the
behaviour that creates gender as ‘performatively constituted’, femininities
and masculinities began to be studied not as ‘existing’ but as constructed
and performed. The ‘post-modern’ shift in language and gender research
further guaranteed that both variables and their relationships began to be
studied as something in motion, fluid, and context dependent. Rigid binaries
and essentialism are deconstructed and there is an opening of the field to the
 Gender(ed) Ambiguities 105
flexibilities between male, female, ‘gay’, or other gendered ways of speaking
and their link to masculinities, femininities, queerness, and various forms of
sexual or gendered otherness. In South Africa, the study of language and
gender has received some attention (see Dubbeld, de Kadt & Reddy 2006)
but it has not been an area of primary interest among sociolinguists. As
mentioned, de Kadt undertook a number of studies into language and
gender in Zulu society during the early 2000s in both urban and rural con-
texts. Her study drawn from the KwaZulu-Natal University context claims
that by selecting English as a common lingua franca, women tended “to
signal that they are no longer willing to accept the patriarchal gender rela-
tions associated with Zulu language and Zulu culture” (de Kadt 2004: 520).
English has socio-economic empowering functions and against this back-
ground it is not surprising that African women who desire to be indepen-
dent from men aim for high proficiency in it (Appalraju & de Kadt 2002;
Ige & de Kadt 2002; de Kadt 2004). However, the relationship between the
lingua franca status of English and the perception of isiZulu as the language
of culture and belonging is substantially more complex. To understand at
least some of these complexities I will draw from selected narratives col-
lected among Zulu women and men in the eThekwini region of KwaZulu-
Natal.
Thobeka,7 who was in her mid-twenties when we first met in Durban in
2012, had successfully graduated with a BA degree in Drama and Dance from
the University of KwaZulu-Natal. When we met in 2016 again, she explained
that her mother had sent her to an ‘ex-Model C’8 school outside the township
despite great financial difficulties because she felt that her child’s future
greatly depended on the type of schooling she received. When I visited Tho-
beka a couple of years later at her mother’s house, she complained that she
found it difficult to find a partner: “I am just too clever for them”, she said.
“Seriously, I don’t fit the grid of Zulu men’s desires”, she frustratingly pro-
claimed. When I spoke to her mother, MaKhumalo, alone later, she told me
she felt that “too much of English” as she put it, had made her daughter
intimidating to many Zulu men. But MaKhumalo9 also felt certain that
Thobeka would eventually find “the right man” to marry. And then the good
education Thobeka had received would ultimately “pay out” as she put it,
referring to the likelihood of receiving a high ilobolo 10 (bridewealth). Ilobolo
is considered one of the most integral and sacrosanct Zulu traditions, deliv-
ered from the prospective groom to the family of the bride, increasingly in
goods or cash rather than cattle. It is initiated before the wedding and often
continues to be paid for many years throughout the marriage, whether based
on a customary, church, or civil union. There is a perceived interrelation
between a Zulu woman’s virtue and personal qualities and the size of the
ilobolo which results in some believing that the better the education, the
better the ilobolo (Posel & Rudwick 2014, Rudwick & Posel 2015). And high
educational status and socio-economic mobility is inextricably linked to a
high proficiency in English.
106 Gender(ed) Ambiguities
One might assume that a woman who spoke what is perceived to be
excellent English and was highly educated and independent would make a
desirable marriage partner in Zulu society.11 However, this is not necessarily
the case, as sought after and desired Zulu femininity is linked to the beha-
vioural codex of hlonipha (respect) rather than what is perceived as English
ways of being. In Zulu society, one of the most integral symbols of femininity
remains women showing linguistic as well as social submissiveness. Literally
translated, the noun inhlonipho means ‘respect’ in isiZulu. The verb ukuhlo-
nipha (to respect) implies specific social behaviour which incorporates a
rather complex value system based on age, status, and gender. Hlonipha reg-
ulates linguistic and social actions, it can manifest in controlled posture, ges-
ture, a certain dress code, and other behavioural patterns, but it also closely
aligns with status-based privileges of a material nature. Raum’s (1973) study
is arguably the most detailed account of the hlonipha custom in Zulu society
but a number of other studies appeared much later with specific reference to
the linguistic aspect of hlonipha. IsiHlonipho, 12 also termed the ‘language of
respect’ is essentially based on verbal taboo and forms of linguistic avoidance.
It has been researched primarily with reference to Xhosa (Finlayson (1978,
1995, 2002; Dowling 1988) and Zulu women (Zungu 1995; Rudwick &
Shange 2006; Rudwick 2009) and to some extent in Sotho society (Fandrych
2012; Thetela 2003).
Male linguistic hlonipha practices have been neglected in sociolinguistic
studies which Irvine and Gal (2000) aptly relate to the semiotic process of
erasure. This “erasure occurred when some European observers, writing
about hlonipha after the precolonial kingdoms and chiefdoms had declined,
describing it as ‘women’s speech’ – ignoring its political dimension and its
use by men” (Irvine & Gal 2000: 47). Indeed, several of the above cited
studies focus on women only despite the fact that hlonipha is a more general
cultural tradition in Zulu society. Social practices and cultural customs in
Zulu societies are based on persistent patriarchy and seniority principles
and women are expected to perform a deferential role in hlonipha practice
in most situations. Specific ways of speaking isiZulu, avoiding direct
address and names, and language practice more generally are all integral to
social gender dynamics. There is a perceived link between the English lan-
guage or communication in English and lack of hlonipha (disrespect). So,
the ambiguity in English as a lingua franca vis-à-vis isiZulu (and hlonipha
forms of the language) manifests itself in the status of both languages as
tools of empowerment and disempowerment. A Zulu woman can assert her
high educational status and empower herself through English. At the same
time, however, “too much of English” in MaKhumalo’s words “scares men
away”.
Ongezwa,13 who was 34 and a widow when I interviewed her on several
occasions during 2015/2016, lived with her 9-year-old daughter Mbali and her
14-year-old son Mbusu in an umjondolo (informal settlement) in the north of
eThekwini. Despite having been employed as a domestic worker by a Durban
 Gender(ed) Ambiguities 107
family for 12 years at the time we met, she had had been having great diffi-
culty in making ends meet on her meagre salary. However, when we met, her
financial situation had improved due to her employer offering to pay the
school fees for her children at the ‘good’, predominately ‘Indian’ school,
which her children were attending. She told me that her deceased partner and
father of the children would have never allowed this to happen because the
‘Indian’ school did not offer anything in terms of Zulu cultural knowledge.
Knowing that this school was offering a better education than the badly
resourced township schools many Zulu children attend, I was puzzled and
asked her why. Her response is worth quoting at length:

Mina [I] want what’s best for my children. Even if they school with
Indians and learn only English, still good English. Ubaba [the father] hayi
[no way], he [would have] never agreed. He tell me [sic. would have told
me] there is no respect in English, abantwana lapha abafundi ukuhlonipha
[children who go to these schools, they don’t know how to hlonipha].

When I saw Ongezwa again in 2019, she had moved into an RDP14 house,
Mbusu had already moved out and was studying at Rhodes University in the
Eastern Cape. Mbali was attending Grade 11 and while we were sitting outside
the house sharing some scones and tea, chatting along in both English and isi-
Zulu, I realized that Mbali – unlike her mother – was fully proficient in English
and that she spoke with quite a distinct Indian South African English accent.15
Reflecting on this later, when Ongezwa and I were on our own, she once again
referred to her deceased partner and said, “It’s good he doesn’t see this”. She
explained to me that ‘their English’ would have alienated him from his children,
also his English proficiency had been very poor. But then she continued speaking
about the benefits of ‘good English’ and how her daughter had embraced the
language to a higher degree than her son, who has now signed up for isiXhosa as
a subject at Rhodes University. Towards the end of our conversation Ongezwa
conceded that she didn’t mind raising her children alone, she said, “my own
way” unlike, for example her sister, Nomusa. Implicit in her statement was a
sense of freedom in terms of unilateral decision-making which many married
women would not have.
Nomusa16 had always been able to live a much more financially comfor-
table life with her husband Sipho,17 who owns a small but well-run logistics
company in the area of Newlands about 20km from Durban. Despite their
more middle-class life style and financial access to multi-racial English-
dominant schools, Nomusa and Sipho’s son Thabo went to a nearby govern-
ment school where isiZulu was the first language of pupils and teachers.
When I visited this family in late 2015, Thabo had just graduated, and I
enquired about his future plans. He told me that he wanted to study but that
he was worried that his English would not be good enough. He referred to his
cousins saying that for some people switching to university was much easier
because they were what he called “more English”, i.e. they had attended ‘ex-
108 Gender(ed) Ambiguities
Model C’ schools. Watching Nomusa while he said this, I sensed some dis-
comfort. Thabo quickly conceded, however, that he was happy about the
school he attended. When I was leaving, Thabo showed me to the door
and said (as if to make sure that I understood), “It’s good we can also
speak English, your Zulu is not so great. But I am happy I speak English
like an African – for me it is still better that I grew up in Zulu tradi-
tion.” Speaking at a later date with Nomusa I enquired further about the
issue of schooling and she admitted to me that there had been a heated
debate in the family. She would have liked to see her son going to an ex-
Model C school but her husband was strictly against it and put his foot
down. At the same time, there are many Zulu fathers who pay exorbi-
tant fees for their children’s English schooling in order for them to have
native-like proficiency in the language. But there is clearly also value
attached to retaining an African way of speaking English, a Zulu ethno-
linguistic marker.
Driving away from Newlands that hot and sweaty Durban day in 2015, I
remembered situations from my doctoral research in 2005 when I regularly
took over as a substitute teacher at an Umlazi township school in M-section,
surrounded by amajondolo (informal settlements). In English class, I often
discussed with Grade 11 and 12s the potential role of “English as a unifier”
among South African people. Although many learners were then in agreement
that English played an important role in the country, boys in particular had
very critical attitudes towards the language and highlighted the significant role
of isiZulu in the maintenance of their culture and spirituality (Rudwick 2004).
Many referred to their parents and grandparents as non-English speakers,
others spoke of the importance of language for the maintenance of their tradi-
tion and what they perceived as the ‘evils’ of English Westernization and the
impossibility of communicating with amadlozi (ancestors) in English (Rudwick
2004).18 And I encountered similar sentiments among students at the University
of KwaZulu-Natal. Jabu19, for example, said, “English has been forced down
my throat – how can I love it?” Many young Zulu men seemed to feel strongly
about their ethnolinguistic belonging. And yet, older Zulu interviewees in my
research often lamented that the younger generations do not know ‘their cul-
ture’ and no longer upheld the traditions. Zulu society is largely based on
strong seniority principles and the youth are expected not to disagree with
older family members. Among older interviewees I encountered feelings of loss
of respect among children and a sense of nostalgia, as is not uncommon with
the elderly. In Jacob Dlamini’s (2009) Native Nostalgia, this feeling is articu-
lated as “Akusenamthetho. Abantu bazenzel umathanda” (there is no order
anymore. People do as they please)” (Dlamini 2009: 6). Part of this perceived
‘chaos’ is that old(er) and, in particular, more rural Zulu people often lament
the fact that youths speak what was seen as “too much of English” or an
impure and English replete isiZulu. To say the least, to speak ‘unaccented’ or
so-called Standard English can certainly trigger negative responses within their
own community (Rudwick 2008).20
 Gender(ed) Ambiguities 109
Several of my consultants, not only the elderly and certainly not only
males, have expressed the opinion that excessive use of English brings “too
much of white culture” and is disloyal to isiZulu, Zulu culture, heritage, and
tradition. Decrying the decreasing value of hlonipha in the context of ‘angli-
cization’ was much more pronounced among male interviewees than among
females. While, as a linguistic anthropologist, I struggle to conceptually
accept the often very rigidly expressed essentialism inherent in much of the
ethnographic data, I also try to recognize that the essentialist ethnic notions
about a discrepancy between the Zulu value systems and the expressive power
of the English language is very real to Zulu people and men in particular.
While the motives and reasons for choosing isiZulu and/or English in the
Zulu community are complex and multifaceted, the increasing support for
isiZulu among men in contrast to women’s embracing of English has already
been noted in several studies (Dlamini 2005; Rudwick & Shange 2006; 2009;
Parmegiani 2017; Hunter 2019), and this study reasserts these findings.
Parmegiani’s study on language ownership at the University of KwaZulu-
Natal suggests that there was a distinct gender difference when it came to
English. He argued that female Zulu students appeared to speak more exten-
sive English than Zulu male students as they used isiZulu in conversations
with each other to a much greater extent on and around the campus (Parme-
giani 2017). His findings also confirm de Kadt’s earlier studies and what she
referred to as an “immediate consensus” about the “fact” that urban Zulu
women students employ more English than male students. To an extent, this is
also linked to an argument recently put forward by Mesthrie (2017a, 2017b)
that there is a tendency among African females to adopt speaking English in a
less African language accented way than men. This suggests that it is not only
about the extent of English and it being chosen on a meta-language level in
different situations, but also about the type of English being spoken. The
native-like proficiency among female speakers in particular adds a new dimen-
sion. There must be a space here to the South African English lingua franca
context where, arguably, those who speak an African language inflected Eng-
lish which could be seen as an ELF variety, reassert also their Africanness
(Chapter 5). As the narrative about Thobeka above suggests, women who
adopt English as one of their main communication tools, not only for lingua
franca communication but for internal conversations among Zulu people, can
run the risk of being perceived as what she termed “too clever” or disrespectful.
While both English as a lingua franca and as primary medium of com-
munication might well be embraced by Zulu women to a greater extent than
men, there are further subjectivities which complicate any strong claims in
terms of gendered dynamics. By speaking in a particular way, a man can
comport himself as a model of male/masculine identity and by doing so his
way of speaking can become a symbol of masculinity. An example of this
kind of masculine way of speaking in South Africa is a cluster of urban
mixed languages which are considered part of African Urban Youth Lan-
guages (AUYLs) spoken in South Africa (Rudwick 2005; Hurst 2009; Hurst
110 Gender(ed) Ambiguities
& Buthelezi 2014). As has been argued, the majority of AUYL speakers
remain “primarily male – and define themselves in the sense of a particular
masculinity” (Hurst 2009: 250). At another level, however, these multiple
AUYL varieties can also be thought of as lingua francas or contributing to
the lingua franca status of English because, as will be shown in Chapter 8,
they seem to be playing an increasingly important role in media texts where
English is employed as a lingua franca . English is always a significant lexi-
fier of South African urban youth varieties, but the extent of African lan-
guage usage and/or Afrikaans varies greatly from one geographical area to
another.
In Zulu society and in KwaZulu-Natal townships, isiTsotsi, which is how
these linguistic tools are referred to there (Rudwick 2005, Hurst & Buthelezi
2014), is based on isiZulu but it includes many recontextualized English lexical
items and, only to a marginal extent, Afrikaans. Because these forms of
speaking are employed primarily by men and they are associated with an urban
hip streetwise masculine identity and ‘coolness’, their appropriation among
Zulu women is interpreted as a counter-normative language choice (Rudwick
2013).21 Young Zulu women who consciously choose to make use of isiTsotsi
do so as a subtle act of rebellion against patriarchy and they index an urban
Zulu womanhood associated with a rejection of what is perceived as ‘tradi-
tional’ hlonipha behaviour and Zulu submissiveness towards men ((Rudwick
2013).22 But English induced isiTsotsi can also be a linguistic tool to negotiate
‘new’ Zulu femininities that are breaking out of a patriarchal order. While
doing language and gender in this way, young Zulu women empower them-
selves in (urban hip) contexts. At the same time, however, women in Zulu
society who make extensive use of isiTsotsi might diminish their ‘value’ as
potential wives and disadvantage themselves in traditional contexts.
Sfiso23 was 21 when we met in 2012 and my attempt to speak in isiZulu was
discouraged by him. He responded to me after our first meeting “I am not
THAT kind of isiZulu speaker. I love English”. He was also, according to
him, a “perfect” isiTsotsi speaker and he talked in an interview about an
increasing number of girls who want to speak this urban mixed-code: “there
are many of them now”. He conceded that several of his friends were not in
favour of ‘this’ development but claimed that he found it to be a rather plea-
sant trend because he enjoyed the presence of women, even “those types”
who, in his opinion and those of his friends, were not the ‘girlfriend types’.
Sfiso picked up on my bewilderment at his comment and he quickly added,
“Well you know I could never take someone like that home”. He said his
parents would expect a more ‘proper’ Zulu woman. Hence, the female usage
of the urban mixed-code isiTsotsi evokes ambivalent feelings in Zulu men:
young men might respect a woman for her street-wisdom and ‘cool-ness’ and
accept her as an equal in some settings, however, they might regard her lin-
guistic and social behaviour as ‘improper’ in another (Rudwick 2013).
Many of the ‘rules’ for African gendered ways of being and sexualities
were ‘invented’ by colonialists and missionaries and this is the root of the
 Gender(ed) Ambiguities 111
myth that homosexuality is un-African (Sigamoney & Epprecht 2013). This
whole field needs disinventing and decolonizing, and some South African
scholars (most notably Msibi 2013) have already started to expose the defi-
ciencies in European views on African gender and sexuality. For example,
the phrase ‘men who have sex with men’ or the acronym MSM, is mostly
utilized in South African LGBT studies because English language concepts
such as ‘homosexual’ and ‘gay’ do not necessarily resonate with African
people, or might have specific localized meanings (Msibi 2013, Sigamoney &
Epprecht 2013).
Nonkhuleleko24 (Nkule) was a 28-year-old MSM who lived in the Durban
CBD area in December 2014 when we first met. One of my University of
KwaZulu-Natal students had referred me to him as he was in that student’s
estimation “very English” and “super-modern”. Nkule came from a middle-
class family where both parents were teachers and lived in a suburban, pre-
dominately white, upmarket area of Durban, he had travelled to both Europe
and the USA and he had received a number of artist’s awards by the time we
met. When I went to visit him as a stranger and for the first time, he was
exceptionally welcoming and immediately opened a bottle of red wine to
celebrate our acquaintance although it was only 11am. Nkule was one of the
few Zulu creatives that I got to know in Durban who was able to make a
living from his art and I was fascinated by the ease with which he spoke about
his multiple identities. At one stage, we spoke about how travelling had
changed us and how it shaped our current ideas and ways of being. He was
articulate by any type of English standard and he spoke a great deal about
love and the open relationship he had with an ‘English guy’. It didn’t take
long to figure out that this person was from the UK and not a South African
of English stock. Sipping on his wine, he dreamt about spending time in
London with this person. He later emphatically announced:

I need to get away from here again, yes, I am Zulu but you know,
English is so much more who I really am, I feel free when I speak Eng-
lish – I am queer – most Zulus don’t even know what that means.

Nkule wet on to tell me that he was repeatedly negatively approached or even

reprimanded by isiZulu speakers for his manner of speaking which was per-
ceived as ‘coconutty’ English. Some people had used expletives and called him
names that indicated either his sexual orientation (e.g. istabane) or perceived
‘non-Africanness’ (e.g. coconut, cheeseboy). When I asked him whether this
was not hurtful and disappointing to him, Nkule brushed it off as a lack of
education. He saw English as a distinct empowerment tool for himself and
was critical of his own ethnolinguistic background. The black gaze often
positioned him as Other, not only because of his ways of speaking English but
also because of his sexual identity. He embraced English not only as a lingua
franca but as a language which could better express his personal identity than
the language he learned first in life, isiZulu. But Nkule is not representative of
112 Gender(ed) Ambiguities
the majority of Zulu men who engage in same sex relations. His socio-eco-
nomic status, education, and well-travelled trajectory render him as someone
who has privileges which the vast majority of Zulu people are deprived of.
Consider Lebo below.
Lebo25 was only 21 years old when I visited him together with Mluleki26 on a
hot summer day in the small township of Hambanathi in the north of Durban
in 2012. They lived with their mother and two sisters in a small brick house and
identified as skesana.27 Lebo’s excitement about my visit was palpable, appar-
ently, I was the first umlungu (white person) to come to the house and my
white privilege started to make me feel uncomfortable when Mluleki started
asking Lebo about ‘his’ family, ‘his’ mom, and the absence of another male.
Lebo was quick to correct him about his assertion that he was male by saying,
“I am a girl sweetie”. Her mother and sisters also referred to her as a “girl”.
Lebo never met her father but feels that the close relationship to her mother
and sisters provided sufficient family bond. MaDlamini,28 her mother, was
present in the house and catching bits of our conversation, she chipped in a
comment which strongly resonated with Lebo’s narrative: “She is always been
my sweetest girl” she said and there was a twinkle in her her eyes. We spoke
about the forthcoming weekend, and Lebo said she would do what she always
does on Saturday night which is meet her skesana friends and together going to
nightclubs, mostly in the Durban CBD. It is mostly in conversations with
whites and Indians that she makes use of English as a lingua franca but she and
her Zulu friends also speak isiNgqumo29 which, in her opinion, she uses elo-
quently, “We love to gossip, you know”, and she went on to say how talking
about a “straight” man worked very well in isiNgqumo because, even if he is
Zulu, he would probably not understand what it meant. Although isiNgqumo
has mostly been characterized by an archaic isiZulu lexicon,30 the younger
generation also coins new lexical items or recontextualizes English terms to
give them new meanings. For example, Nkule referred to windela which he
says is borrowed from the English ‘window’ and ukuwindela as a verb meaning
to “window shop [men]”, i.e. to look at men with the intention of observing
but not pursuing. To windela, she explained, was one of her “best pastime
activities”. When asked about hlonipha, Lebo asserted that without showing
hlonipha towards her partners, she would not be able to “score”: “They [the
kind of men she dates] like to be served, you know, so we do everything to
please them”, she said and giggled. Lebo claimed to only speak English with
white guys and that she had only dated a non-Zulu man once.
Mluleki31, who had introduced me to Lebo, had been a student of mine
and we are still in contact today. When we met in a Durban restaurant in
October 2019, he told me how Lebo had undergone a gender reassignment.
The three of us ended up meeting again a couple of weeks later. While I was
talking about my current research and the ambiguities of English as a lingua
franca in the country, Lebo interrupted me and said excitedly that now that
she was a “proper girl” it was “so much easier now to get away with speak-
ing English”. When I asked to explain what she meant, she went into great
 Gender(ed) Ambiguities 113
detail. Mluleki felt that Zulu masculinity is tied to isiZulu in the sense that
the language also indexes authority, authenticity, and pride. Mluleki’s gender
reassignment provided her with a ‘normal’ gender that allowed her to be a
“full woman” as she expressed it. According to her, speaking English was
considered more ‘normal’ among Zulu women than men. In a number of
interviews I conducted at the University of KwaZulu-Natal in 2014, several
male Zulu students had voiced the stereotype that Zulu guys who spoke
English around campus were “mostly gay”. In a literary analysis of Zulu’s
novel Bengithi lizokuna (I said it would rain), there is a description of how a
young Zulu man comes out to his father. Despite normally conversing in isi-
Zulu with him, he makes his announcement in English: “I am gay”. Zulu
(2016: 45) suggests that had the announcement been in isiZulu it “would
perhaps have been even more painful and difficult”. English can provide a
distance between isiZulu speakers in ways that isiZulu doesn’t. The English
term ‘gay’ also provides a more positive term while the isiZulu term used
commonly when referring to homosexuals (istabane) has a derogatory
meaning.

Concluding Thoughts
At the beginning of this chapter I wondered how and when gender and gen-
dered styles impact on the role of English as a lingua franca and ELF com-
munication more generally. My research supports previous findings that some
urban Zulu women embrace English, not only as lingua franca communica-
tion but also as a primary medium of expression while men retain isiZulu to a
large extent. The study also confirms the common stereotyping of excessive
use of English by Zulu people as a ‘feminine’ or ‘gay’ characteristic. Zulu
masculinity is largely constructed through isiZulu and other masculine per-
formed speech styles such as isiTsotsi. Research in this field requires much
further attention, ideally by African language speaking female scholars. There
is an urgent need for African scholars to reflect upon their own experiences.
There is a need to problematize the dangers of the ‘single story’32 and find
ways of talking about women, men, and people of other genders in their
complex linguistic and social ways (Makama et al. 2019). Despite the binary
construction it entails, I suggest in line with previous sociolinguistic research
that Zulu women appear to aim for a high and ‘native-like’ standard of Eng-
lish in ELF communication. Several ways of speaking English and isiZulu
play a role in gendered and sexual dynamics and there is much scope for
future research.
The above is not to say that the use of Standard English and other lan-
guages cannot take place simultaneously. In the next chapter, I illustrate how
a young Zulu woman carves out a space for translingual writing practices
among other artists. Translingual choices function as boundary work in order
to challenge normative and conventional writing in ‘traditional’ English set-
tings. The text provided is representative of a new generation of African
114 Gender(ed) Ambiguities
English writers who reclaim their voice through innovative translingualism
and by demonstrating linguistic citizenship (Stroud 2001; Stroud & Kerfoot
2020) seen as transformative action for epistemic justice. The status of Stan-
dard English in South African English lingua franca discourse is further con-
tested here.

Notes
1 Hlonipha or a variant of the custom is not an exclusively Zulu tradition but
prevalent in most Nguni and Sotho-speaking communities in Southern Africa.
2 For more detailed discussion, see Posel et al. 2020.
3 https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2019-11-04-tribalism-and-bitter
ness-mar-springboks-rugby-world-cup-victory (accessed 4 November 2019).
4 During Mandela’s and Mbeki’s presidencies, the political dominance of Xhosa
people was accused by some of being characterized by nepotism which was
referred to as Xhosa Nostra.
5 www.statssa.gov.za/?p=12180.
6 Also, see Posel and Zeller (2015, 2020) for a comprehensive discussion of recent
dynamics of language shift and bilingualism in South Africa.
7 Thobeka, consultant in Durban, from November 2012–January 2018.
8 The so-called ‘ex-Model C’ schools were white-only schools during the apartheid
era, and they continued to be state schools with high resources post-1994.
9 53-year-old domestic worker, Umlazi, 17 November 2016.
10 The practice of ilobolo (bridewealth) has been widely researched recently (Posel
& Rudwick 2014).
11 Of course, however, contemporary Zulu society is highly heterogenous and there are
many educated Zulu women with a high proficiency in English who are married to
men who are less educated and less articulate in English than themselves.
12 IsiHlonipho is a term coined by Herbert (1990a, 1990b) who used it in conjunction
with sabafazi (women): IsiHlonipho sabafazi (women’s language of respect)]. This
conjunction is, however, to some extent, misleading as hlonipha linguistic practice
also takes place extensively among males.
13 Ongezwa, 34-year-old female isiZulu-speaking domestic worker, Kwa-Mashu, 9
January 2016.
14 RDP stands for Reconstruction and Development Programme. These houses are
subsidized by the government for low-income families.
15 For a succinct early overview on the variety of South African Indian English, see
Mesthrie 1995.
16 Newlands, 17 December 2016.
17 Newlands, 17 December 2016.
18 Interestingly, even in the US and diaspora context, African migrants have been
shown to give similar reasons for learning African languages (Makoni 2018).
19 Linguistics student, November 2014.
20 This dynamic is nicely captured in humorous ways by Trevor Noah who is a
South African of Xhosa-Swiss/German descent and has been the host of the US
American The Daily Show since 2015. In one of the 2019 ‘behind the scenes’, he
spoke about the different accents and proficiency in English that African language
speakers have who attended so-called ex-Model C schools which had previously
been reserved for white people and where Standard English was taught. The
African English accent is italicized below. He said: “So, your parents were happy
to send you there – that was the funny thing – so they were like you must go to
that school and you must learn to speak good English. Then you go to the school
 Gender(ed) Ambiguities 115
and then you’ll learn the English and then you’ll come home and then you would
be sitting with your parents, like watching TV or something and then your dad
would be like: “Put volume, put volume” and you’ll be like “Ahem, you mean
increase the volume?”, and your dad would be like “Hey…I’ll increase or
decrease your life, don’t act smart here, put volume!” (see at about minute 9:15:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldZJx5irpiQ&t=608s).
21 One of the common stereotypes of Zulu women who make use of extensive
isiTsotsi is that they are lesbians (Rudwick, Shange & Nkomo 2006) but
although black male youth talk is employed (Maribe & Brookes 2014) it cannot
be said to be characteristic of most lesbians.
22 The social styles and identity performances of isiTsotsi speaking women resem-
ble, to some extent, those of macha women in Latina youth gangs, see Mendoza-
Denton (2008) for more detail.
23 Student in Development Studies, Durban, 10 January 2012.
24 Durban CBD, 5 December 2014.
25 A part of Lebo’s narrative has also been recounted in Msibi and Rudwick 2015,
November 2014, Hambanathi.
26 Mluleki is a self-identified Zulu gay man who worked with me, on and off, as a
research assistant between 2008–2013.
27 A skesana identity is constructed on the basis of ‘fixed’ femininity (McLean &
Ngcobo 1995: 164) but more recent work (Msibi & Rudwick 2015) shows that
besides this fixity there is also fluidity and debunking of gender categories.
28 MaDlamini, Lebo’s mother, 47-year-old domestic lady, November 2014,
Hambanathi.
29 IsiNgqumo is a socio and genderlect employed by men who have sex with men,
primarily in the KwaZulu-Natal region. It is a strong in-group marker among
township effeminate men (Msibi & Rudwick 2015, Rudwick & Msibi 2016).
30 For more detail on the lexicon of isiNgqumo, see Rudwick and Ntuli 2008 or
Msibi and Rudwick 2015
31 Nov 2010–January 2015.
32 Adichie Chimamanda Ngozi (2009) ‘The Danger of a Single Story’ [Video file],
available at: https://www.ted.com/talks/ chimamanda_adichie_the_danger_of_a_
single_ story?language=en (accessed 10 February 2020).
8 Disruption and Innovation

Introduction
Contemporary South Africa offers many examples of where English is dis-
rupted in its lingua franca status. Whether it is the increasing usage of isiZulu
in the higher domains, such as at the University of KwaZulu-Natal (Rudwick
2017, 2018), in official meetings held in isiZulu at the eThekwini Municipality,1
or in recent COVID-19 briefings by the South African Government (Rudwick,
Sijadu & Turner 2021). There is evidence that African language speakers have
increasingly asserted their right to speak in their first language and have dis-
rupted the putative lingua franca status of English in powerful domains.
Sometimes this has led to an actual shift from English to another language,
such as isiZulu, but at other times this is characterized by an English lingua
franca communication which is heavily intersected by the first languages of
users. What South Africans do with language in English lingua franca discourse
is extremely innovative and practices shift throughout interactions and con-
texts. Ordinary black South Africans are able to access a wide range of diverse
linguistic codes, varieties, genres, registers, accents, and styles and English is
only one of many of these sources. This chapter gives examples of where lan-
guage choices create disruption, and other languages demand recognition and
disrupt the coloniality of language in South Africa.
The fundamental paradigm underlying this chapter is that all language and
linguistic practices are complex, hybrid, multi-scaled, and unpredictable (Blom-
maert 2015). South African lingua franca English is, as has been seen, replete
with ambiguity where fixed and fluid imaginations create a tension between the
local, global, glocal, and the many in-betweens. As a result, there are many
processes in such encounters which lead to racialization, discrimination, and
toxic identity politics. As previous chapters have shown, language politics in the
South Africa society frequently offers rather polarized perceptions of English as
primarily an imperial and oppressive tool, on the one hand, and the perception
of it as both a local/global empowerment and expressive tool, on the other hand.
As a lingua franca and not a language that replaces other languages but coexists
as an option in a multilingual environment, English has significant potential to
blur the lines between this dualism and binary thinking. This is the case

DOI: 10.4324/9780429031472-8
 Disruption & Innovation 117
especially within the paradigmatic frame of ELF because it represents the con-
scious attempts to depart from the Standard versions of the English language
towards greater recognition of hybrid and multilingual versions of the language.
ELF studies (Pölzl & Seidlhofer 2006; Cogo & Dewey 2012; Pitzl 2012) have
demonstrated that the ELF platform provides insight into multiple identities
being formed between first languages and Englishes.
While I have considered the examination of conflict-ridden identity politics
with reference to English and race as productive because it can encourage
deeper understanding and foster conversations around racial injustices, I aim
to provide a different lens in this chapter by focusing on English as a trans-
lingual practice (Canagarajah 2018) with its own potential to contribute to
decolonial thought. I aim to pay tribute to the creativity of English lingua
franca translingualism in the South African cultural context by showing that
this translingualism does not rely “on linguistic norms to account for com-
municative success”, rather it “considers the ways in which linguistic differ-
ences and multimodality might contribute to meaning making endeavors”
(Canagarajah 2018: 297). To this end, I draw from translingual English lingua
franca sources in the arts to demonstrate an “ontological refashioning”
(Soudien 2014). Also, I intend to show how this ontological refashioning is
non-binary, non-dualistic, non-fixed but fluid, hybrid, and always in the
making. Thirdly, I argue that English as a multi and translingua franca sear-
ches, either by virtue of its multiple-language make-up or its content, for
more social and racial justice and might have the potential to provide a lin-
guistic tool that can contribute to more non-racialism and decolonization.
In mid-2020, the Oxford English Dictionary (OED)2 included 29 Nigerian
English terms as acknowledgement of English as a global language. The
overwhelming majority of first and international English speakers are not
familiar with these terms but they are certainly encouraged to learn them to
understand more about English in the world. As a result of English having
been spoken as a lingua franca in South Africa for multiple generations and
by many different ethnolinguistic groups, the OED also includes a wealth of
lexical items from South African languages. Such South African examples
include babelaas/ibhabhalazi (from isiZulu, meaning hangover), and dorp
(from Afrikaans, meaning village).3 In much of the colonial and apartheid
writing in English, African terms, such as, for instance, isangoma, were
translated in bigoted and racist fashion, as in the case of ‘witch doctor’.
Today, however, South Africans are familiar with the traditional healing
persona whom a sangoma represents and hence the term largely remains
untranslated in most sources. And if it is necessary to translate for a non-
South African audience the translation ‘traditional healer’ is used.
The extent to which Englishes have been nativized or even ‘naturalized’
(Kamwangamalu 2019) in South Africa has focused to a great extent on lin-
guistic processes, such as lexical and syntactic transfers. But there are also
social African forms of knowledge which have enriched Englishes all over
Africa. As multilingua franca users of English, African artists and writers
118 Disruption & Innovation
have a fruitful linguistic repertoire at hand with which to express their crea-
tivity. The African literature scene offers many examples of English which
distinctly differs from any standard usage, both in the present and in the past.
But writing in English as an African person has always been a tightrope
endeavour. One of the pioneers of an Africanized and lingua franca textual
form of English, Amos Tutuola, was both celebrated and criticized. The Palm
Wine Drinkard (Tutuola 1952), published halfway through the twentieth
century, ironically was dismissed by many of the Nigerian elite; even seen as
an “embarrassment to the Nigerian intellectual establishment” at the time due
to its non-Standard English form of writing (Tobias 1999: 66). Authors such
as Chinua Achebe, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, Tsitsi Dangaremgba, Buchi
Emecheta, Zakes Mda, Niq Mhlongo, Gcina Mhlophe, Es’kia Mphahlele,
Wole Soyinka, Amos Tutuola and Makhosazana Xaba, and the list could go
on – can all be considered ambassadors of African English multilingua franca
forms, either by drawing from African oral tradition, idiom, and lifeworlds
or by injecting their English writing with the terminology or grammatical
constructions of their African languages. In the next pages I will illustrate
how recent South African English multilingua franca work is constituted and
how African artists (poets, writers, and musicians) demonstrate English as a
lingua franca in African making. I ignore, for the purpose of this book, Eng-
lish language purists, by quoting the powerful lines in Nyamnjoh’s (2017: 78)
recent tribute to Amos Tutuola’s work:

insistence on complete mastery of English to qualify for poetic license in

the language disqualifies any creativity short of that by the colonised or
postcolonial elite whose anglophilia is not in question or to be questioned.
It denies the unlettered incomplete masses any pretensions to the colonial
language as a lingua franca on their own terms, even as they are claimed by
that colonial language and its elected elite speakers and writers.

English multilingua franca ways of speaking and writing which are addres-
sed to South Africans of various backgrounds find expression on multiple
platforms and, for the purposes of this chapter, I select three which draw
from a multitude of linguistic, cultural, and racial associations. These mul-
tilingua franca forms are not addressed to just one ethnolinguistic group but
rather represent language forms which implicitly address all South Africans
and ask them to learn from each other and each other’s languages. The first
example is an English lingua franca conversation between a Sesotho and
isiZulu speaker. Such types of conversations are nothing special, but part
and parcel of African urban living and they have been documented in the
code-switching and translanguaging literature, but they have found little
analysis in terms of their English lingua franca constitution. The second
example is a type of journalistic translingual English writing form in a tra-
ditional English-only journalistic outlet, and the third draws from a devel-
opment in the Afrikaans language community, the Afrikaaps movement.
 Disruption & Innovation 119
Given the fact that African English lingua franca speakers mostly have
several other languages at their disposal, their linguistic creativity is argu-
ably more sophisticated than that of their monolingual English counterparts.
We recently argued (Rudwick & Makoni 2021) that what is known as
English might no longer provide the necessary flexibility to meaningfully
participate in metropolitan English lingua franca communication in (South)
Africa. The language usage among young urban Africans is fluid and hybrid
so that English monolinguals would be unlikely to understand. In order to
successfully communicate in such contexts, access to multilingual sources is
necessary. The short extract below shows a conversation embedded in Eng-
lish as a lingua franca with extensive lexical borrowing and switches from
English to isiZulu and Tsotsitaal. In this conversation, knowledge of only
international Standard English does not provide mobility and comprehensi-
bility. Rather it is a skilful translingualism, a mixing and switching to other
linguistic resources, and the knowledge of English recontextualized lexical
items which create the mobility here:4

1 JP: Have you been to Table Mountain?

2 BONGZ: Yes.
3 JP: Ah cool, you actually went and saw the whole …?
4 BONGZ: Yey [chuckles] … went to Table Mountain, but I didn’t take a
ride of, icable work (cable car).
6 JP: Oh ok, but you went up Table Mountain?
7 BONGZ: Yey mfowethu [brother].
8 JP: Cool man.
9 BONGZ: Ye …. levels [the high/good life].
10 JP: [chuckles] Amalevels ayi ngiyabona amalevels [I can see that(the good
life) with you].
11 BONGZ: Sure man, thatha leflight urelaxe ubemnandi [Sure, you take the
flight and relax – it’s nice].

In this short extract, recorded in a Durban private residence, the con-

versation between JP and Bongz begins entirely in English but after an initial
exchange of sentences Bongz and JP engage in translingual practice. Bongz
responds by saying “Ye, … levels”. The term levels or amalevels is an English
lexical borrowing but it is recontextualized among African language speakers
as meaning ‘high/good life’. Among urban African language speakers this
term is relatively widely known but among English first language speakers
this is not the case. As seen above, employing “levels” triggered JP to continue
speaking in isiZulu. Multiple more similar conversational extracts could be
offered, but for reasons of space this will suffice. The point I am trying to
make is that this short extract illustrates that a conversation in which there is
English, isiZulu, and urban mixed language, also known as Tsotsitaal and the
ways in which English is employed in this conversation renders it embedded
in the young urban African linguistic lifestyle to which most monolingual
120 Disruption & Innovation
English people would not have access. In oral communication code-switching
and translanguaging have long been the norm in African urban communica-
tion, but there is a change to literacy forms which are linguistically con-
stituted in ways which I will illustrate below.
What is significant is that the ways in which some traditional English ‘only’
outlets are read by diverse English lingua franca readers in South Africa are
beginning to move towards a more translingual literacy form which crosses
both linguistic and cultural boundaries. African female artists and writers, In
particular, have championed this path for many years. Makhosazana Xaba
clarifies her experience as an African user of English as a lingua franca in her
writing with powerful words. Her deliberations are worth quoting at length
(Xaba & du Preez 2005: 137):

I wrote this sentence in a short story: “She was so angry she didn’t care,
she told the whole story right there, during the people,” an editor whose
mother-tongue and only language of fluency is English would most likely
tell me to change this sentence with a comment on grammar; the gram-
matically correct version for “during the people” being “in front of every-
one”. If, however, you know enough about your characters using the
language, “during the people” would not only make the point, it would
likely induce a smile on the readers whose positionality you enter and
portray as a writer. There is a fascinating dynamic that unfolds when
embracing a second language and depending on and because of one’s first
language. As a writer, you need to understand this well enough and/or
research it extensively if you are to write stories on such characters and
render them believable.

It is the lived reality of African lifeworlds which advances writing in English

as a multilingua franca and these Africanized forms of the language also
represent a political stance, one that gives substance to African identities as
culturally complex and linguistically hybrid. Notions of ideology, power, and
hierarchy need to be considered together with variables such as race and
gender in interpreting the language choices of a text (Wodak & Meyer, 2001).
Even those who do not think of their writing as explicitly political, move
into the realm of politics by using English in particular African or idiosyn-
cratic ways.5 In 2020, a doctoral candidate in Historical Science at Witwa-
tersrand University, Kholeka Shange6 wrote three articles for the Mail &
Guardian, a weekly English outlet in South Africa founded in 1985 which is
considered part of the country’s “elite news media” (Worthington 2010).
Arguably, this weekly newspaper is one of the most intellectual outlets in the
South African media landscape, and it has been strictly English only. And yet,
all three of Shange’s texts are laced with complex translingualism: a) Sixosh’
abathakathi: Ukuthwebula and the photographic image; b) Thath’i sgubhu
usfak’ es’ketchini: (Re)making theatre with Jefferson Tshabalala; and c)
Ngibambeni, ngibambeni bomama refiguring princess magogo. As the titles
 Disruption & Innovation 121
already show Shange’s English writing is replete with African language ter-
minology drawn mostly from isiZulu and urban-mixed languages and
expresses concepts and ideas which are difficult or perhaps impossible to
describe in English. In some sentences, there is translation into English, in
others she allows just the African language terms and titles to resonate with
the reader. The extract below serves as an example for this:

In consideration of Peterson’s reflection on the pathologisation of kwaito in

the early 1990s, it becomes critical to politicise this assertion by KingTha
found in Bongo Maffin’s acclaimed single Thath’ iSgubhu (from the album
The Concerto), “Ubekad’ engayazi ukuthi ishaywa kanjani lengoma.
Ubekad’ engayazi ukuthi ishaywa ngebhes’… ngesgubhu … Thath’ isgubhu,
isgubhu us’fak’ ezozweni.” In the universe created by Bongo Maffin and their
kwaito contemporaries, isgubhu is not solely “into esamphongolo evalwe
ngezikhumba nxazombili” [a cylindrical object enclosed in hide on either
end] – as seen in Sibusiso Nyembezi and O. E. H. Nxumalo’s book, Inqolo-
bane YeSizwe – but it may also be understood as resonant sound that hits
you in the gut as you are seated in the back of a thunderous Zola Budd. It is in
this same space that kwaito is at the centre. It is here that Bongo Maffin
orientates the listener and locates them right inside izozo – a place that epi-
tomises the day-to-day struggles of Black, working-class people in South
Africa. And it is in this marginalised place where isgubhu and ingoma meet.

The extract above demonstrates how references to a particular isiZulu song

and literary work are employed to explain a very particular Zulu cultural space
that resonates with marginalized African people – in both isiZulu and English
multilingua franca. For reasons of scope, I refrain from a detailed analysis here,
I am merely using it as an example to make my point. All three of Shange’s
(2020) articles are representative of an innovative type of Africanized English
lingua franca journalistic writing which challenges the normative, conven-
tional, and monoglottal English style of the ‘usually’ English-only traditional
journalistic outlet Mail & Guardian. Explaining her hybrid language usage,
Shange said in a presentation at Rhodes University: “I use concepts from isi-
Zulu because they are imbued with particularities and context that English
does not have”.7 Through these translingual and multivocal (Higgins 2009)
texts, Shange is forging a multilingua franca English which carries diverse lin-
guistic and cultural cues and this allows for “the turbulent emergence of a
‘hybrid’ language” (Williams & Stroud 2017: 178)
There is disruption to the norm, complex multivocality, and translingualism in
Shange’s texts and it is significant that they are published in a traditional English-
only outlet. It shows that spaces and platforms which might count as English,
colonial, linguistically Western, and culturally hegemonic are increasingly trans-
gressed through the creative means of African languages. At a socio-political
level, these steps disrupt the coloniality of language and they also put the issue of
race on the table. Mazrui and Mazrui (1998: 29) long argued that Africanizing
122 Disruption & Innovation
English “must definitely include the deracialization of English”. The translingual
character of the English Shange employs has the potential to do this because her
writing could be regarded as transracial. At the same time, there remains the
question, how does English become Africanized and trans or non-racial in a
society where the vast majority of non-Africans have not (yet) made an effort to
learn African languages? Indeed, readers who do not have any knowledge of
Nguni languages will struggle to understand the texts. Shange communicates her
positionality and establishes a relationship between her own identity, expressed
in English, African languages, and Tsotsitaal(s), multiple cultural and linguistic
references and other urban (South) African identities of her potential readers.
Her texts stand for a new generation of African English writers and readers who
have reclaimed their voices and their audiences through innovative translingual-
ism and by showing a multilingual linguistic citizenship (Stroud 2001, Stroud &
Kerfoot 2020).
In a telephone interview during the COVID-19 lockdown in South Africa,
Shange reflected on her writing with me. The politics of voice, African languages,
urban forms, and English, as well the topic of ‘belonging’ dominated much of our
conversation. When asked whether she thinks that her writing can be understood
by the average Mail & Guardian reader, Shange replied that she wasn’t certain
but that she received a lot of positive feedback after publication of these texts. She
also added quite emphatically: “If you don’t understand my writing, I am prob-
ably not writing for you”. These words are to some extent reminiscent of Biko’s I
write what I like but unlike in Biko’s case they refer not merely to the content, but
the actual language use and linguistic choices with which the story is being told. It
is the kind of English lingua franca discourse and text which appeals to the
establishment of sociolinguistic justice by multi and translingualizing English.
Shange insists that no italics are to be used for the isiZulu words employed in the
English text which makes the translinguality of the texts even more real. Such
writing also implicitly urges South Africans to learn each other’s languages, or,
perhaps more specifically, it should inspire non-African language speakers to
embrace the learning of an African language.
Shange’s writing is also an apt illustration of the multilingua franca status
of the English language in South Africa. Kamwangamalu (2007: 273) argued
that “the identities that the black community assigns to English are a pro-
duct of the social history and political changes experienced by South Africa
over the past four centuries”. The current decolonial turn allows ‘new
identities’ to be assigned to the English language in its function as a multi-
lingua franca. In the next section, I turn to a rap poem which also capita-
lizes on the lingua franca status of English but merely by using it as a
platform for the promotion of another language, in this case Afrikaaps.

Reclaiming Linguistic Belonging – in English but for Afrikaaps

English, it seems, has a significant role to play in the moving away from the
current version of a pure Standard Afrikaans. The process of Afrikaner
 Disruption & Innovation 123
linguistic ethno-nationalism constructed not only a boundary between Afri-
kaans and oppressively perceived English, but also formed a racial boundary
between different Afrikaans speakers (Van der Waal 2012). Illusionary mono-
lithic ‘one language – one culture – one identity’ perceptions were enforced
through a ‘pure’ language in which anglisismes (English lexical borrowings into
Afrikaans) were unwelcome. Kriel’s work (2006) shows how a ‘pure’ Standard
Afrikaans, “uncontaminated” by English, became the main and most immedi-
ate ethnic identity marker of Afrikaners during the twentieth century. The
Afrikaans of the white population had always been designated the Standard
while coloured people’s varieties of the language were constructed as merely
dialectal (Hendricks 2016; Dyers 2008, 2016; Alexander 2013). While a restan-
dardization could help Afrikaans out of its stigmatized position, many white
Afrikaans stakeholders do not appear to be ready for such a move. While there
is an increasing emphasis on the creole roots of Afrikaans, the Afrikaner white
elite also persistently prescribe their ‘standard variety’ (Van der Waal 2012). It
is in the educational domain in particular that a persistent hierarchization of
Standard Afrikaans versus Kaaps varieties is prevalent. A recent article
demonstrates how the current Standard Afrikaans continues to be seen as
“pure, high, proper and real” as opposed to the “low, deficient and slang”
nature of Kaaps Afrikaans varieties in education (Cooper 2018: 30).
Research in the South African coloured community (Dyers 2004, 2008) has
long argued that Kaaps is a strong marker of identity. At the same time, it has
been argued that Afrikaans-English code-switching and English usage has con-
tinuously and steadily increased in the young Afrikaans-speaking community in
general and among coloured people in particular (Stell 2010). It has also been
argued that it does not carry as disaffiliated a function in the coloured com-
munity as it does in the white community where Suiwer Afrikaans (pure Afri-
kaans) is still valued by many people ((Stell 2010). The term Afrikaaps, as a
particular style of Kaaps, which includes a great deal of English has been
popularized through an iconic protest theatre (termed a hiphopera) and doc-
umentary. The play constitutes a musical tribute to the valorization of local
Kaaps varieties and deconstructs the idea that white Afrikaans is better. It
“recaptures the voices of the excluded, re-immerses, and entangles those voices,
and generates a representation of language associated to pride and confidence”
(Stroud & William 2017: 177). It also demonstrates precisely what Erasmus and
Pieterse argued more than two decades ago (1999: 184): “that more open-ended
and empowering conceptualisations of coloured identities are possible”. The
play and documentary stand for a reclaiming of coloured Afrikaans ways of
speaking and being and they demonstrate the cultural vibrancy outside the
Standard Afrikaans public sphere (Van Heerden 2016). But not only do they
show the linguistic and cultural vibrancy of the coloured Afrikaans ways of
speaking, they dismantle Standard, so-called white Afrikaans as a superior
variety and at the same time embrace English as an additional lingua franca.
Rap and hip hop are two of the genres in popular culture that are char-
acterized by hybrid and multivocal forms of language which are dominated
124 Disruption & Innovation
by the use of English and other local inflections (Alim & Pennycook 2009).
In South Africa, hip hop is also characterized by extensive use of English (as a
common lingua franca) and diverse local languages depending on which com-
munity the artist belongs to. Late in 2019, a rap poem entitled ‘R.I.P.’.8 Kaaps
went viral on social media, in this case R.I.P. does not stand for ‘Rest in Peace’
but ‘Rise in Power’, and the poem is indeed an extraordinary and quite pow-
erfully crafted rap accompanied by dramatic violin playing which pays tribute
to the love and passion for (Afri)Kaaps among brown/coloured South Africans,
but it does so through English as a multilingua franca. It is quoted in its entirety
below because it raises a number of issues which are relevant to this chapter, i.
e. the ambiguity of disruption and innovation. I would like to urge the reader to
take the time to listen to the rap9 as it can best be appreciated in its multimodal
form. The poem provides examples of specific words which highlight the dif-
ference between Standard Afrikaans and (Afri)Kaaps and it includes specific
Kaaps expressions which are culturally rooted in Cape coloured life. It was
posted on YouTube by the company Vannie Kaap in early 2019.

1 Afrikaaps is not slang, Afrikaaps is not broken,

2 Afrikaaps is not a lesser version of anything spoken
3 It’s rich in history, it’s diverse in structure, it’s the linguistic identity of
an entire culture
4 It apologizes to no one, it stands up to anyone, it’s a mix of words
5 But it’s a mix of everyone
6 It’s always evolving, it’s always intriguing, it’s the heart of a slave
7 Whose heart is still beating
8 (You see) I spoke it at home, but not in the classroom
9 I still speak it at home, now not in the boardroom
10 Yet – I was raised by Kaaps
11 I was loved by Kaaps
12 I felt free in Kaaps
13 I found me in Kaaps
14 But I stabbed Kaaps in the back when I became ashamed of Kaaps
15 So Saloot to Adam Small who in voice stood tall
16 Saloot Youngster CPP, globalising you and me
17 Ekse Bruin ou, bruin vrou [I am a brown man, a brown woman]
18 Getuig Saam, Met my nou [Testify together, with me now]
19 Kombuis? [Kitchen?]
20 Watse Kombuis? [What kitchen?]
21 Dji’tie Hele Blerrie HuisGebou! [The whole house was built]
22 Elf tale en joune is gek? [Eleven languages and yours is a joke?]
23 Rek oep jou bek [Open your mouth and be vocal]
24 En wie vou jou lag, se … [And to whoever laughs at you, say …]
25 Tsek [Get lost/fxxx off]
26 Jy – djy [You]
27 Rerig – rerag [Really]
 Disruption & Innovation 125
28 Wiet nie – wietie [Not knowing]
29 Middag – mirrag [Noon]
30 Serit sou it is – mean is soes djy lis [Say it like it is and mean it like you
want to]
31 Muslim of Kris [Muslim or Christian]
32 Osse taal is oek wie os is [Our language is also how we are]
33 Miniete vi boet en saartjie [Disregard of Boetie and Saartjie 10]
34 Ek het gelee war ekkie vestaanie [I learned but I did not understand]
35 Marit Baatie ek raak kwaadie [But it doesn’t matter if I get angry]
36 Kwaad raakens Speel Mossie Saamie [Getting mad isn’t a part of the
game]
37 (So) whether you are overseas or live in the Cape Flats
38 Support the Springboks – or support the All Blacks
39 Whether you work in an office – or work in a factory
40 Travel by train – or travel by taxi
41 Whether you’re bietjie gham [a bit ghetto] – or a bietjie sturvy [a bit
bourgeois]
42 Whether you are lekker maer [nicely skinny] – or lekker curvy [nicely
curvaceous]
43 Whether you like gatsbys [a sandwich] – or smaak breyani [a spicy rice
dish]
44 Whether you live off SAASA (South African Social Support grant)
45 Or live like a laanie [rich guy, or business person/employer]
46 Whether you are a bossie kop or have glade hare [afro – or straight hair]
47 Whether you are a bleskop or have grys hare [bald – grey hair]
48 Whether you’re Liverpool or support Man U
49 Skud in dubs [Drive a Volkswagen] – Hondas or BMWs
50 Whether you Jazz to Boucher (reference to Judy Boucher – the Car-
ibbean singer)
51 Or jol to Beyonce
52 Vote ANC, DA – or just vote no way
53 Whether your nickname is – Koeppe, Boere, Pang or Lange
54 Or your nicknames Lippe, Tanee, Holle or Wange
55 Whether you fit in by changing your accent to suit your work
56 or by changing your actions to suit your worth
57 Understand one thing
58 If it’s RIP to Kaaps, it is not rest in peace to Kaaps
59 If it’s RIP to Kaaps, it’s rise in power to Kaaps
60 Rise in power – to Kaaps

The poem captures much of the oppressive language politics around Afri-
kaans and Kaaps. It skillfully juxtaposes so-called Standard Afrikaans lexical
items with Kaaps ones and it gives voice to a struggle and the desire to rectify
the language politics of oppression and it does so by using English as a mul-
tilingua franca. If one understands texts as the products of discourse and also
126 Disruption & Innovation
defines texts “as materially durable products of linguistic actions” (Wodak
2001: 66), then this poem acts as a manifestation of both the love for Afri-
kaaps and an appreciation of English as a lingua franca. The first 16 lines of the
poem are in English only, but its content very much captures that of In Praise of
the Beloved Language (Fishman 1996). Although expressed in English the com-
mitment to Afrikaans is embedded in emotive word choices and suggests a
mutually constituting relationship between language, i.e. Afrikaans, and belong-
ing to the coloured community. The first two lines directly engage with the mis-
conception that Kaaps is less of a language than so-called Standard Afrikaans.
The lines capture an emotionally charged commitment to the language. The next
20 lines are in Afrikaaps; lines 17 to 25 have strong interpellative functions in the
way that the artist establishes his own identity and calls upon his in-group
(brown/coloured people) to be vocal and reject any negative perceptions of
Kaaps. From line 26 to line 29, Afrikaaps lexical items are contrasted with
Standard Afrikaans ones, re-evaluated and emphasized as perfectly legitimate.
Lines 30–32 are again strongly interpellative, as the artist writes in line 32, Osse
taal is oek wie os is [our language is also how we are], which evokes a type of
strategic essentialism (Spivak 1988, 1996) which gives voice to the significance of
Kaaps in the construction of coloured cultural identities. Lines 33/34 refer to an
apartheid school textbook that all Afrikaans children had to read entitled Boetie
and Saartjie. This book narrates normative white Afrikaner life which had little
relevance to coloured children: Ek het gelee war ekkie vestaanie (I learned but I
did not understand). In lines 38–60, the poem is again primarily in English but
fluid usage and translanguaging continues in the sense that Afrikaaps lexical
items are merged into the otherwise English text. Between line 38 and line 56, the
artist invokes the diversity in the coloured community in terms of socio-
economic standing and multiple lifestyles but aims at stressing the common
denominator Kaaps as uniting coloured identity. The message is conveyed,
however, in English, capitalizing on the fact that it is one of South Africa’s
primary lingua francas.
During my fieldwork in 2020 in the Cape I discussed the lyrics and language
choices of the poem and, more broadly, the situation of Kaaps/Afrikaaps/English
with various people in the coloured communities. Several individuals whom
I played the poem to had never heard it before and they were visibly moved.
In one instance the recording brought tears to the eyes of a young male Muizen-
berg resident.11 Several of my coloured interviewees12 pointed out, however, that
the poem cannot claim to resonate with all coloured people, simply because
not all have access to English. The choice of English as the main language of
the poem is ideologically driven and value laden. This is an important point to
consider. While increased usage of English as a multi and translingua franca
arguably has the potential to transform power relations between standard
and multivocal forms and to contribute to decolonization, it also has its limits.
Not all South Africans have unrestricted access to acquiring English skills. In
many remote areas of the country, e.g. the Karoo or northern areas of the Wes-
tern Cape, the influence of English is marginal. When I interviewed a young
 Disruption & Innovation 127
13
coloured woman in a Graaff-Reinett guesthouse in January 2020, she did not
understand the English I spoke to her. She explained to me in Kaaps that she only
learned English for a couple of years in school and never really made use of it. A
recent census-based study shows that in the Western Cape, in particular, there is
“a larger increase in Afrikaans–English bilingualism” (Posel & Zeller 2020: 306)
than in the rest of the country. So again, English as a lingua franca acts not only
as a tool through which disruption and innovation can take place; it is also, once
again, a mean device that marginalizes.
The primary message of the rap poem is that Afrikaaps is “not a lesser ver-
sion of anything” but the fact that the message is conveyed primarily in English
does not reach all Afrikaans speakers in the brown/coloured community.
Although this poem is a strong manifestation of Kaaps being reclaimed by
Cape coloured people it is paradoxical that its message is primarily in English.
The poem might not even resonate with all the coloured people in the Cape
who are less upwardly mobile.14 Some might even argue that the mere fact that
the poem is in English works against it to a certain extent. When interviewing
two coloured families15 in their Mitchell’s Plain homes a few days before the
South African COVID-19 lockdown in March 2020, all of the interviewees,
across three generations, appeared to identify to some extent with the message
of the poem. And yet, one older interviewee,16 pointed out that she believed her
generation (60+) cannot relate to the message the same way that the younger
population can because “English is much more important to them [the younger
people]”. In March 2020, Kim, my coloured consultant, and I met with two
well-known coloured hip hop artists (one of whom had featured in the doc-
umentary Afrikaaps mentioned above). Hendrik17 spoke about how most Cape
coloured people today move comfortably between Kaaps and English with no
sense of purism attached to either language but a new sense of pride in Kaaps.
When I raised the issue that the poem was primarily in English and not in
Kaaps, Hendrik spoke at length about the power attached to English through
its prevalence in the white, Indian, and upwardly mobile black community. “As
an artist you do want to have this exposure,” he said, “but it won’t be a clean
English, it will be full of Kaaps and our world.” These words are, to some
extent, reminiscent of Achebe’s (1965: 349) famous statement that, for him,
English can “carry the weight” of his “African experience” but that it “will
have to be a new English, still in full communion with its ancestral home but
altered to suit its new African surroundings”.
The way Hendrick and DJMac spoke of their use of English mixed with
Kaaps suggested that for these hip hop artists English’s multilingual and
translingual franca status offers a more creative platform than just their first
languages. Not only are multiple languages including urban mixed speech
forms employed but there is also much transfer between the languages which is
what marks its multivocality. This multivocality, translanguaging, and trans-
lingual practices are vital in maintaining what are considered authentic iden-
tities among young, urban, African, and coloured people. But it is also not
considered wise for a coloured hip hop artist to employ so-called Standard
128 Disruption & Innovation
English only because to embrace only English “at the expense of local languages
and styles—can cause an emcee to lose a freestyle rap battle” (Williams 2016a:
113). Hendrik also spoke more broadly about English in the Cape coloured
community, and he explained to me, “When upper-class [coloured] people shift
to English at home, and no longer Kaaps, there are many of us who shake
heads, they are often just snobs”. As is the case in most South African com-
munities in which English is not the first language, a shift towards English as
the language of the home is associated with an elitism that alienates ‘ordinary’
people. Hendrick’s comment also recaptured what has been said before in this
book with reference to isiZulu speakers: that the total shift to English as pri-
mary language smacks of a renunciation of cultural values and traditions. In
other words, it is the loss of the lingua franca status of English and the adop-
tion of it as the primary and only medium which triggers a strong Othering
from the members of one’s in-group. There is little doubt that Kaaps is seen as
a significant part of the culture among coloured people. Dyers (2008: 55), has
long argued that Kaaps might be “the main marker of a ‘Cape Coloured’
identity, particularly in the absence of a clear group culture and identity”
(emphasis in original).
While some scholars have observed a language shift from Kaaps to English in
some sections of the coloured community (Anthonissen 2009, 2013; Stell 2010), a
recent quantitative study drawing from nationally representative data does not
support these findings (Posel & Zeller 2020). Analysing the 1996, 2001, and 2011
censuses, it is argued that the trend “is a dramatic increase in the reporting of a
second home language” which is mostly, but not exclusively, English. Hence, it is
English as an additional language rather than a language which replaces Kaaps/
Afrikaans which marks South African sociolinguistic reality. During a lengthy
interview with four female coloured women aged between 22 and 27 in Idas
Valley at the end of February 2020, there was consensus among the ladies that
Kaaps was an important element of how belonging in the Western Cape
coloured community was constructed.18 DJMac19 also commented on the
vibrancy of Kaaps and what he called the “sterk [strong] emotional attachment”
coloured people have to their ways of speaking, even those who choose to speak,
in their professional lives, Standard Afrikaans/English. The poem captures this in
line 14, where the poet speaks about stabbing Kaaps in the back by not speaking
it in the boardroom. According to Bernie Fabing, who is the owner of the brand
Vannie Kaap, there has been a waka (wake-up) moment in the coloured com-
munity.20 Coloured people, especially the young, in metropolitan areas increas-
ingly embrace their mixed heritage and repertoires and with Kaaps they create a
“new convivial community with transformative implications for the dignity, vis-
ibility, and material benefit of its speakers” (Stroud & Kerfoot 2020: 22). But
Afrikaaps seems to be based more on the Cape variety of Kaaps, and although
Faber claims in a recent interview that the language snippets on his products
and his brand more broadly are representative of the coloured community, it has
to be said: 1) that not all coloured people feel as comfortable in English as those
in Cape Town and other urban centres; and 2) that many coloured people simply
 Disruption & Innovation 129
21
cannot afford the company’s products. Skimming through the product range in
the e-shop, one is not only struck by the extent of English in the memes written
on cups, T-shirts, hats, and other accessories but also by their price which only
middle-class people could afford.
Two coloured doctoral student interviewees22 reflected critically on the ways
‘good’ English was linked to class in their communities, but they themselves also
asserted they were totally comfortable with the language, as long as it did not
replace Kaaps. A coloured student at Stellenbosch University who has worked
with me for a number of years, once suggested that when English is spoken in the
Cape coloured community it usually has an Afrikaaps filter put over it in order to
get the message across. And also in order “not to appear too snobby”.23
Although feelings of ownership of English vary greatly among members of the
coloured community, middle-class people seem to prefer the language when
communicating with white people. I collected several powerful stories of how
English was perceived as the ‘better’ medium when speaking to Afrikaners,
because my interviewees felt that Kaaps ‘inferior-ized’ and racialized coloured
people in ways that English did not. Narratives about these matters often became
quickly replete with discourses about “we/us” versus “they/them” (brown/
coloured Kaaps speakers vis-à-vis Afrikaners) which indicates the rift between
white and coloured Afrikaans speakers highlighted in other studies (e.g. Stell
2010). Among the majority of coloured students whom I interviewed, there was
definitely a sense of the waka moment Fabing referred to in his interview. There
was a confident dismissal of the alleged superiority of white Afrikaans and a
critical engagement with educational standards. The translingualism and multi-
vocality of the ‘R.I.P. Afrikaaps’ poem is representative of the polycentric and
translingual practices among coloured hip hop artists discussed in a series of
recent papers (Williams & Stroud 2010, 2013, 2014).
And yet, sociolinguistic reality suggests that ideologies of language purism
and language hierarchies are nonetheless persistent, in particular when it comes
to Afrikaans speakers. In a group interview with three coloured domestic
ladies24 in the Stellenbosch area of Idas Valley, one lady also devalued her own
ways of speaking Afrikaans and explained how she wants her child to learn to
speak “proper”. Highly educated coloured individuals, while speaking Kaaps as
a home language, are often reluctant to speak in Kaaps to white Afrikaans
speakers precisely for the reason that Kaaps is not on equal terms with Stan-
dard Afrikaans. Even 25 years after apartheid, there are many Afrikaner people
who look down on the ways Afrikaans is spoken in the coloured community.
During an interviewee with a middle-aged Afrikaner woman at an upmarket
café on the outskirts of Stellenbosch in early 2020, she said, “the way they
[coloured people] speak it’s just not proper, they drop syllables and do strange
things to our [Afrikaner] language, it’s just a lazy way of speaking”.25 This
comment is reminiscent of what Veronelli (2015: 119) described as “coloniality
of language” where the colonizers “came to think linguistically and expressively
of colonized peoples as inferior beings, and of their languages as inferior lan-
guages …”. In and around Stellenbosch much of this coloniality persists.
130 Disruption & Innovation
Concluding Thoughts
Makoni & Pennycook (2012: 447) have described lingua franca multilingualism
as the intertwining of various languages to a degree where it becomes difficult
“to determine any boundaries that may indicate that there are different lan-
guages involved”. The fluid ways in which English and Kaaps are entangled in
Afrikaaps ways of speaking suggests there is a possibility that South African
multilingua franca English to reach such a point in the future. There is disrup-
tion to conventional English usage, a forging of a new notion of ‘language’, and
the potential for ‘secondary’ language learning. This kind of English multi-
lingua franca communication is multivocal (Higgins 2009) and it creates and
recreates new meanings across different communicative situations (Canagar-
ajah 2006). This chapter showed how African language and Afrikaaps
speakers employ English as a lingua franca in order to get themselves and
their cultures and identities heard. Nevertheless, young, urban, black, and
coloured South Africans have a degree of ownership of English which
allows them to use the language in combination with their first languages.
Through extensive innovations derived from their first languages and urban
mixed-codes, English as a multi and translingua franca comes to the fore.
Although it has been shown that much colonial logic persists in the minds of
South Africans there are also disruptions to this logic and the artistic
translingualism described above bears witness to this. An Africanized ver-
sion of lingua franca English can also allow the relationship between lan-
guage and race to get disrupted and become more turbulent. The linguistic,
social, and cultural creativity of multilingual English users, writers, artists,
and musicians can make progress in conversations in which the colonial
logics of language and race can be dismantled.
Stroud and Williams (2017) have argued that the Afrikaaps ‘movement’
might provide spaces for non-racial identities to be refashioned. From my
perspective, these practices might at least open up a space where race can
mean freedom and creative existence rather than burden. If multilingualism
starts constituting the fundamental basis of ELF/EMF communications in
South Africa and multiple languages can permanently interfere with English,
then we might also be able to create English communication as a platform
upon which colonial logic and unequal power dynamics are troubled. In
such a space one can work on dismantling the dynamics of coloniality and
contribute to new linguistic and racial encounters where the common
denominator could become human multilingualism and cultural hybridity
rather than the significance of one’s first language, ethnicity, culture, or race.
Looking at ELF as a one-dimensional, e.g. only ‘communicative’, entity does
not provide a fruitful ground on which to push the epistemological and
ontological aspects of ELF studies. English lingua franca dynamics shift and
turn, they are created in relation to non-linguistic variables such as ethnicity,
race, and gender, and they are negotiated, deconstructed, and reconstructed
by actors in the lingua franca space. In hybrid urban South African contexts
 Disruption & Innovation 131
many ideas that have already emerged from the British Cultural Studies
paradigms, such as the notion of hybridity and the “in-between” spaces
(Hall 1990, 1996; Bhabha 1994) continue to find much resonance. Some
scholars (Kecskes 2007; Fiedler 2011) have conceptualized the English lingua
franca context as a “third space” invoking the work of Homi Bhabha. This
provides some impetus for seeing non-standard ways of using hybrid English
to disrupt artificial dichotomies and allow much greater acceptance of lin-
guistic, social, and cultural ‘deviations’. At the same time, however, one
needs to remember that languages live in hierarchical spaces and that even
‘third’ and ‘in-between’ spaces are characterized by unequal racial power
relations.
In the South African context this is characterized predominantly by the
fact that access to what is widely considered as ‘good’ English is restricted
by class for most African learners (Hunter 2019). This means that narrow
conceptualizations based on the ‘positive’, ‘communicative’, and ‘hybrid’
nature of English lingua franca communication can also lead to the simpli-
fied conception that actors in this imagined “third space” are horizontally
related. In a chapter entitled “Translingual practice and ELF”, Canagarajah
(2018: 295) argues that in the move “beyond the notion of multilingualism
as a collection of discrete language systems, the translingual orientation
offers a more integrated and nuanced way of understanding how people
communicate”. One of the shared theoretical premises of ELF and translin-
gual practice studies is their reliance on multilingualism, and South Africa
offers a plethora of multilingual communication patterns in which ELF and
translingual communication overlap. It also offers a multifaceted platform
of ideological constructions which involve English as a lingua franca as well
as translingualism. If English can become the second language of all South
Africans and African language and Kaaps speakers continue to find ways of
using English to suit their African surrounding (to invoke Achebe), there
can be a flux between African lifeworlds and the English medium. But much
work remains to be done, as most conservative English speakers and outlets
simply are not ready for the kind of English translingualism that was
illustrated above by Shange’s pieces. But as long as speakers continue to
transgress the mainstream monoglottal English and push the linguistic
boundaries of acceptance, there will be a future for translingual ways of
using the English language in the creation of multiple local, global, glocal,
and in-between spaces and identities. South Africa and, by extension, Africa
can be considered an ontological laboratory for the doing and undoing of
linguistic and racial identity politics and a trans-racialized form of English
lingua franca discourse.

Notes
1 Devarashi, 46-year-old, Indian South African woman, and Richard, 53-year-old,
male English South African are non-Zulu speaking employees at the eThekwini
132 Disruption & Innovation
Municipality. They indicated to me in Skype interviews that staff meetings with
higher officials were increasingly conducted in isiZulu. Apparently Devarashi filed a
complaint about this matter in 2018 as she felt English should be maintained as the
official lingua franca. Subsequently, it was agreed that the Minutes of Meetings were
to be written and sent around in English but that participants in the meeting were
free to speak isiZulu if they preferred to do so.
2 https://qz.com/africa/1789168/nigerian-english-words-added-to-oxford-dictionary
3 For a more comprehensive list of lexical items from African languages and Afri-
kaans into English, see Khokhlova (2015). Elmes (2001: 85) went as far as to
claim that about half of the words in the South African English lexicon are bor-
rowed from Afrikaans.
4 Naturally occurring conversation, 24 September 2019, Durban Glenwood.
5 Xaba (2018) recently published an anthology of the writings of specifically women
poets (Our Words, Our Worlds) which “disrupt the shattering silence that threatens
to erase their [the women’s] many dynamic lived experiences”. https://ilisozine.wix
site.com/ilisomagazine/post/a-reflection-on-our-words-our-worlds-writing-on-black-
south-african-women-poets-2000-2018?fbclid=IwAR03FYEVtMs_UGavvKoSZ2_
8zpasPK6OAsUK7y-pZ1O103MVIYXW7Hh2koY
(accessed 30 March 2020).
6 https://mg.co.za/author/kholeka-shange.
7 https://ms-my.facebook.com/PoliticalAndInternationalStudies/videos/kholeka-shange-
zwakala-umntwana-umagogo-commonly-known-as-princess-magogo-kadinu/8303469
54119120 (accessed 23 April 2021).
8 I am grateful to Lorryn Williams for making me not only aware of the Afrikaans
movement but also for her excellent research assistance and help with translation.
9 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5R7IySRXHo.
10 Boetie and Saartjie was a prescribed Afrikaans novel in South African schools
during apartheid which described normative white Afrikaans life which few
coloured people could identify with.
11 Piet, 26-year–old fisherman, Muizenberg, 8 January 2020.
12 Stella, 60-year-old coloured domestic cleaner, 10 March Stellenbosch, 10 March
2020, Karen, 43-year-old academic, Stellenbosch, 25 April 2020, Herbert, 66-year-
old writer, Stellenbosch, 2020.
13 Sofie, 27-year-old coloured domestic lady, Graaf-Reinette, 4 January 2020.
14 Many thanks to Lorryn Williams again for stressing this point to me.
15 Mitchell’s Plain, two interviews.
16 Grandmother, 61-year-old retired pre-school teacher, Mitchell’s Plain.
17 Hendrik, 31-year-old self-identified “brown” hip-hop artist, 10 March 2020.
18 Claire, Susan, Margie, and Cloe, Idas Valley.
19 DJ Mac, HipHop artist, Stellenbosch, 10 March 2020.
20 https://omny.fm/shows/midmorning/trailblazer-vannie-kaaps-bernie-fabing.
21 The Vannie Kaap brand can be regarded as an example of the potential economic
power of Kaaps. For a recent discussion of the economic empowerment through
Kaaps see van der Rheede 2016.
22 Frederike, 24-year-old female, and Jo, 27-year-old male, PhD students, Stellen-
bosch, 4 March 2020..
23 Josie, 24-year-old coloured student, Stellenbosch, 8 March 2016.
24 Susan, 36-years, Magda, 27 years, and Lorryn, 25 years old, Idas Valley, 19 Jan-
uary 2015..
25 Reinette, 58-year-old self-identified female “Afrikaner professional”, 7 February 2020.
9 Positionality and Reflexivity

In a volume which carries the beautiful alliteration Chronicles of Complexity as

a subtitle the late Jan Blommaert (2013: 114) wrote about the many ambiguities
of the linguistic landscape in his own neighbourhood. He showed that there is no
single position, and positionality one can hold which yields a “definite picture” in
a sense that it can claim to know completely “whatever there is to be known”,
even at one time at one space. The meaning or rather the construction of ‘truth’,
especially in global North scholarship has too often been based on a premise that
‘truth’ is universally applicable and constitutes globally relevant knowledge.
Realizing that linguistic and social realities as well as perceived truths vary sig-
nificantly from one place to another, from one person to another, and also from
one communicative context to another has implications of what precisely we see
as constituting empirical ‘data’ and ‘evidence’ in anthropological linguistics. I
have followed Blommaert’s suggestion to capture “the logic of change instead of
the ‘laws’ of the system” (Blommaert (2013: 114) by exploring how racialized
language ideologies are located “within the processes by which power is pro-
duced, naturalized and challenged” (Briggs 1992: 388). Reflecting on how chan-
ging logics of language and identity politics are constituted in relation to English
as a lingua franca in South Africa must include considerations of how my own
background and professional position impacted on the research process.
Although self-reflexive analysis has been an integral part of anthropological and
social research for many decades, it has only more recently featured as an
important concern in language studies. Bourdieu’s (1989) epistemic reflexivity
urges scholars to critically look at their own background and positioning, “to
develop an epistemological take” on our relationship to the subject and object of
our study (Salö 2018: 25). In linguistics and scholarship on language some scho-
lars (Byrd Clark & Dervin 2014) called for a reflective turn. Hence, this chapter
engages with my positionality and provides more detail about methodological
and analytical concerns.
Growing up in Germany in the 1970s and 80s only speaking my native lan-
guage, German, was a very far cry from the reality in which my own multilingual
children grow up today. But spending a year in Canada at the age of 17 made me
become, after some initial difficulties, a fairly proficient English speaker, albeit
with a strong Canadian ‘youth’ accent which English teachers in Germany later
DOI: 10.4324/9780429031472-9
134 Positionality & Reflexivity
lamented. This bilingualism was an advantage when doing my master’s in
anthropology in Germany where, although classes were in German, the majority
of texts were in English. It provided me with a privilege that many German stu-
dents did not have at the time and probably worked in my favour when receiving
a DAAD (German Academic Exchange Service) scholarship to South Africa at
the end of my master’s. So, in 2001, my South African journey began and when I
arrived at the University of KwaZulu-Natal (then still only Natal) in Durban, the
medium of instruction was English only. In 2003, I started teaching a course
entitled Academic Learning in English (ALE) which was a mandatory
module for all second language speakers of English who were predominately
isiZulu speaking. Many of my students struggled with English academic
literacy. These students felt alienated not only on linguistic grounds but also
because of the white academic culture and staff body of the institution at the
time. While much of this has changed, in particular at the University of
KwaZulu-Natal which is considered one of the most “transformed” insti-
tutions in the country, African language speaking students continue to
experience alienation and marginalization in universities (Bangeni & Kapp
2007; Kessi & Cornell 2015; Rudwick & Parmegiani 2013). The close
entanglement of language and race continues to produce many injustices in
South African universities. Recent findings from a report produced by the
Human Science Research Council (HSRC) demonstrate that “language is
used as a tool of discrimination and frequently heightens racial tension” in
universities (Swartz et al. 2018).1 I am indebted to my students at the Uni-
versity of KwaZulu-Natal, and some of my consultants, especially isiZulu-
speakers, for pointing out how flawed my own linguistic and racial beha-
viour has been at times. This ranged from the presumption that my English
‘second’ language identity could easily compare to those of black South
Africans, to a previous failure to engage sufficiently with my own white
privilege. Teaching and coordinating the ALE course between 2003–2006
sensitized me to the linguistic, socio-cultural, and academic difficulties
African students experienced and it also fostered my own awareness of
European vis-à-vis South African whiteness(es) and privileged backgrounds.
Combined with my own struggles in writing my doctoral thesis in English,
this trajectory influenced my perspective on the language. When my super-
visor, Nkonko Kamwangamalu, returned the first draft chapter of my
thesis,2 he had a stern look on his face and said that the content of my
writing was fine, but the language was awful. How was this possible? I felt
disheartened. For most of my life I had thought of English as a kind of lib-
erating and empowerment tool, it gave me access to information, places,
people, and situations which I wouldn’t have had access to as a German-
only speaker. And yet, I realized that English also disempowered me. Living
in South Africa made me more acutely aware of the many social injustices
which were due to the power of English. Accepting my own white privilege
and simultaneously navigating my way through my personal rite of passage
as an English writer and ethnographer characterized most of my first years
 Positionality & Reflexivity 135
in South Africa. Like many of the consultants in this study I started to
experience English as oppressive on the one hand and empowering on the
other. I had a ‘love-hate relationship’ with the English language, as report-
edly do African language speakers in South Africa (De Klerk & Gough
2002), and it is this relationship that triggered the writing of this monograph.
So, this book, in one way, draws from my experience in South Africa over a
period that spans almost twenty years. While living permanently in South Africa
between 2001 and 2009, I became a proficient English speaker and an isiZulu
student. I have held permanent residency in the country since 2003 but, ironically,
research on the ambiguous roles English holds as a lingua franca in the country
only started more systematically when I moved from South Africa back to
Europe in early 2009. To some extent it was the distance that allowed me to
reflect on some of my previous research which had mostly focused on Zulu lan-
guage and culture in relation to identity. In November that year, I returned to
South Africa with my five-month-old daughter, stayed for four months, and then
continued to return in each of the subsequent ten years, except for two. While
several research projects were conducted on the side, the role of English was
never insignificant. This book project draws from the fieldwork conducted in
two primary locations, KwaZulu-Natal and the Western Cape. The longest and
most recent fieldwork period was from September 2019 till June 2020, four
months in KwaZulu-Natal and half a year in the Western Cape.
Through this multi-sited ethnography, my objective was to understand how
South Africans in different parts of the country think about and use English as a
lingua franca. It involved extensive “hanging out” with primarily isiZulu and
Afrikaans speakers in order to observe how they respond to linguistic and
social situations. I spent many days talking to South Africans about what
English meant in their life while also learning to interpret these meanings in a
broader lingua franca context. When positionality and reflexivity are translated
into ethnographic fieldwork, they manifest in various situations of everyday life
and actions. It influenced the way I approached someone and asked for an
interview, where to go, what to do, which languages to speak, what to say and
how to be. My consultants, who were ‘insiders’ of the language and racial
groups I studied and the conversations we had with each other, instructed
much of my persona as an ethnographer. But also, the everyday triviality of my
encounters, language choices, relationships, and positions have shaped how I
elicited and analysed the data. Although, as stated earlier, I would place this
book within linguistic anthropology its otherwise multidisciplinary nature
makes it methodologically rather eclectic, sourcing across disciplines and
alongside a broad conceptual frame. While the literature on ELF has been
instructive in many regards, applied linguistics texts alone could not have pro-
vided sufficient explanatory tools to navigate through the turbulence of South
Africa’s rich raciolinguistic realities.
It was helpful in my ethnographic approach to be guided by the views of the
participants and consultants in my undertaking to collect narrative and dis-
cursive data. Sometimes this also meant staying in the background and
136 Positionality & Reflexivity
allowing participants to create meanings amongst themselves, other times I was
an active participant and in yet other instances, I was an assistant to my con-
sultant and able to step in as an active discussant. Many of the interviews
unfolded through snowball and respondent-driven sampling but I also met
several of my interviewees simply through quotidian experiences. Throughout
the many years of data collection, I always aimed to check, double-check, and
cross-check consultants’ interpretations with my own and those of other par-
ticipants. Luckily, I have had the good fortune to meet a number of excep-
tionally bright students, consultants, and research assistants who guided me in
understanding the complexities of the ambivalent feelings English triggered.
They also assisted me in understanding that contradictions can make sense and
that feelings of shame, disadvantage, uncertainty, self-consciousness, and
worry can run parallel to a sense of empowerment, pride, and advantage in
English lingua franca situations. This profoundly ambiguous space is instruc-
tive in the study of the politics of language. The world is replete with contra-
diction, so we might as well embrace it rather than deny it.
Some scholars (Kuo 2006; Holliday 2009) have argued that it is problematic
that ELF scholarship developed in Europe and as such is located in the ‘centre’
and in a privileged and predominately white space while often speaking for
the ‘periphery’. While my own positionality is that of the centre in terms of
my personal background (white European), this book recaptures my time in
the periphery. I do not aim to speak ‘for’ the periphery, I merely capture
voices of the periphery and frame them through socio-political and historical
context. Holliday (2009: 23) suggested within the ELF context that “one has
to live the ideas and emotions of the periphery condition” in order to under-
stand it. Linked to that is also the hierarchy between so-called ‘native’ and
‘non-native’ speakers of English which the ELF paradigm intends to disrupt
but which nonetheless continues to have currency in English language studies
and academia more generally. But the relationship between language and
privilege is never straightforward and it might not always be useful to
dichotomize geopolitically between the global South and the global North
(Byrd Clark and Dervin 2014: 8). At the same time, speaking English, in par-
ticular an English that is close to what is considered to be Standard, puts one
in a privileged position. Throughout the writing of this monograph, I have
aimed to show that personal biographies and narratives illuminate the
understanding of language experienced by ordinary people. Hence, this
monograph carries many ‘stories’, and yet the narratives found here are only
a fraction of the many narratives I have collected over the past ten or more
years. Stories are powerful tools in human interaction. I believe, like Eze
(2018: 170), that “stories about other people bring them closer to us”. Build-
ing a rapport with South Africans from various backgrounds over a number
of years, I focused on observing closely people’s own understandings of the
meaning of English in their life. The result was an application of a broad
range of methods, both formal and informal. This combination included
participant and ethnographic observation, interviews, discussions, reflexive
 Positionality & Reflexivity 137
analyses, as well as the analysis of the extracts of parliamentary debate and
artistic materials discussed in the previous chapter. The result is a multimodal
portrayal of English social practices and identity formations among isiZulu
and Afrikaans speakers.
As mentioned earlier, during the many years of research for this book, I
conducted 158 interviews and worked more closely with eight consultants,
three of whom also worked as research assistants during some of the project. In
all English lingua franca encounters, individual cultural and linguistic back-
ground, communicative goals, and speaker’s competence influence the com-
munication (Meierkord 2002: 129). This also affected my position as an
ethnographer in encounters. My own positioning differed significantly in rela-
tion to isiZulu speakers and Afrikaans speakers. I was obviously a racially
Other for isiZulu and coloured Afrikaans speakers, but because of my Eur-
opean roots I was also constructed as an ‘ethnically’ Other by many Afrikaners
who have a strong sense of belonging as (South) African. It was the experience
of English as a second language that we shared and felt various degrees of
ambivalence about. While it was the experience of using English as a lingua
franca which created some common ground, it was also, and perhaps more
importantly, our first languages which made us share understandings of lan-
guage as human condition. When using English in interview encounters it was
not always a ‘happy’ ELF communication but one where, for instance, one
interlocutor felt disadvantaged or another frustrated because he/she couldn’t
say just what he/she wanted to say – in English. It is for these reasons that
much of the data I collected was in isiZulu or Afrikaans. Only a person who
has experienced the struggle to become proficient in another language, who has
embarrassed themself by stammering and making ‘mistakes’ can relate to the
real discomfort felt when one has to operate in powerful domains without
one’s ‘strong’ language, which more often than not is people’s ‘mother tongue’.
It is an ironic twist that it is primarily English only language speakers who do
not have this experience, many of whom belong to the most powerful elite in
the world.
Different types of sociolinguistic and meta-language data were elicited, the
former through the broad ethnographic frame, the latter through media and
text analysis. Language and modalities were analysed within specific contexts,
time, and space as much as the scope of this monograph allowed (which
admittedly might not have always been sufficient). The systematic observa-
tion of English lingua franca interactions across various domains and hier-
archies triggered many questions regarding the ideologies and power relations
inherent in the ways of speaking English as a lingua franca. Being from Ger-
many and not from an Anglo-American country helped my position in the
field for at least two reasons. First, and as mentioned earlier, it was beneficial
that my mother tongue was not English, but that English was a second lan-
guage and lingua franca for me. While this created a certain feeling of soli-
darity between consultants, interviewees, and myself, it was also helpful from
the perspective that some isiZulu and Afrikaans speakers are more timid
138 Positionality & Reflexivity
about speaking in English in the presence of first language English speakers.
The second reason was that my ‘outsider’ status, and in particular my Eur-
opean background, gave rise to curiosity in some of my encounters and sev-
eral interviewees were also equipped with a catalogue of questions for me.
This mutual interest in each other’s culture and society contributed to an
extremely productive atmosphere for my research. Reinharz (1997) makes a
distinction between three main categories of ‘selves’ in the field which I found
instructive. The research-based self, for instance in my case, a person who is
interested in English and other languages; the brought-self, for instance a
white, female European; and, lastly, the situationally created self, for exam-
ple, a hip hop fan, a substitute English teacher in the township, a mother, a
visitor, an acquaintance of a friend, etc. One can slip into various different
roles depending on the circumstances and situations and my ‘outsiderness’
could sometimes benefit from aspects of ‘insiderness’, whether it was my
efforts to speak isiZulu or Afrikaans, my speaking out about white privilege,
or a shared experience of the politics of English. The positions I inhabited
were never fixed and static and I was never “fully outside or inside the ‘com-
munity’”, my position was “constantly being negotiated and renegotiated”
(Naples 1997: 71).
Empirical research is always replete with power relation and my white
female European identity came with its own power baggage. In one reflective
session with some of the UKZN student interviewees3 in Durban in December
2016, we discussed accents and students commented on the “unfairness” that
my European accent was perceived as ‘nice’ while African accents were often
devaluated by people. This raciolinguistic discussion showed how difficult it
is to disentangle a person’s racial positioning from their specific English lan-
guage usage (Rosa & Flores 2017). One of the Durban consultants, Nqobile,
also reflected on her annoyance that white people often commented on how
‘great’ she spoke English as an African person. One of her retrospections is
worth quoting. She said: “So there was this white, middle-aged guy who
stood next to me in the Glenwood Bakery and he said ‘Wow … your English
…, I am just so surprised … you look so African but speak such good Eng-
lish’”. When I asked how she responded, she said: “You know what I wanted
to say but didn’t was ‘“yeah – colonisation is a bitch’”. It was important that
my consultant and participants benefitted in an intellectual way from this
research and Nqobile wrote her own research paper which had been pub-
lished by the time this manuscript was submitted. One of my Afrikaans con-
sultants told me towards the end of our work in late 2019 that the best thing
she took away from this project was a critical awareness of her own posi-
tioning. From the very beginning, I was constantly aware of Smith’s (2012)
warnings not to coerce research participants into anything. Research that
involves individuals from the periphery does not necessarily need to subscribe
to the norms and conditions of research conventions stipulated in the global
North. The methodologies I employed allowed for ‘stories’ to be told as
narratives, and I tried to give those I studied the leading position which often
 Positionality & Reflexivity 139
meant me stepping back. In many instances, it also meant close relationships
with consultants in the study, many of whom I have known for more than ten
years now.
Spaces and contexts constitute their own legitimacies through various power
dynamics that are beyond the control of local actors and the researcher. It was
also an important objective to see and determine linguistic and cultural mod-
alities which are linked to macro powers in society. The intersectional per-
spective provided the insight that lived experiences are fundamentally shaped
through a dialectic between systemic macro factors such as race, class, gender,
etc., and individual ‘micro’ positions and circumstances.4 While observing,
tracking, transcribing, reflecting, and interpreting the English lingua franca
space, the most divisive social variable was the issue of ‘race’. Working in
South Africa has shaped my understanding of racial politics and identities in a
way that is significantly different from my previous European views on how
race and racial identities are constituted. My decision to analyse linguistic and
racial politics in South Africa as a white German woman was not uncon-
troversial. The detailed self-reflections offered here are in part intended to
highlight the limitations of my own interpretations and conclusions.
In early 2015, I spent an afternoon in Durban Mitchell’s park talking for
several hours with Ayanda, a then 26-year-old, very gifted Zulu poet/writer
who was working for a small NGO. After she had told me about her frustra-
tion at writing up a report about a rural empowerment project for KwaZulu-
Natal bead workers, I offered to help her. She looked me up and down rather
provocatively and then said full of indignation: “Why? You think my English is
not good enough for that?” My initial reaction was defensive, I had meant well.
But Ayanda was right to reject my proposal in the way she did, it was both
presumptuous and intrusive. How dare I think my ‘academic’ English and
rather limited isiZulu necessarily equipped me ‘better’ to write this report
about work on a local art form of rural elderly Zulu women, many of whom
spoke almost no English at all. Our conversation continued with a discussion
about ‘white benevolence’ being misplaced and connected to white anxieties
and fragility.5 This incident with Ayanda and other useful criticisms I received
were extremely helpful in terms of engaging my positionality and self-aware-
ness as a white academic and non-native South African. Ayanda remained my
consultant for a long time and the many ensuing conversations we had
reshaped much of my thinking about the privileges of whiteness.
Many pages in this book have discussed how discrimination on the basis of
language has racial dimensions. Having been in Stellenbosch for the annual
Woordfees three times made me realize that there are still Afrikaners who
continue to think, for instance, that the Woordfees is ‘their’ artistic play-
ground. This white hubris resonates throughout some events in the festival.
Lizette, an Afrikaner woman in her 60s,6 who was introduced to me during
the festival in 2020, told me that she found it “a little annoying” that “they”
(coloured people) also participated in the Woordfees now. Meeting her in the
idyllic setting of Stellenbosch Botanical Gardens during the festival, I assured
140 Positionality & Reflexivity
her that her conversation would remain anonymous but I struggled to main-
tain my composure. Lizette chatted along in her bigoted ways, saying: “They
don’t belong here, I really don’t understand why they don’t make their own
festival”. Inherent and implicit in her comment was a firm (white suprema-
cist) belief in a matrix of power exclusive to her own in-group, white Afri-
kaners. Her ideas were reminiscent of Bourdieu’s (1977) conceptualization
of the ‘legitimate’ versus the ‘illegitimate’ speaker/person. Clearly, she con-
sidered coloured Afrikaans speakers as illegitimate in the context of the
Woordfees. Linguistic and racial identity are seen as mutually constituting
one another in this instance, and this tight inter-dependency was employed
to justify exclusion, analogous to the incident described in Chapter 4.
Regrettably, on numerous other occasions during my five months stay in
Stellenbosch, white Afrikaans speakers, when broadly talking about the
nature of language and society in South Africa, made comments similar to
those of Lizette. Another multimodal reflection about the Woordsfees deserves
mentioning here.
Also in early March 2020, not long before COVID-19 restrictions hit the
country, I went to a multilingual (English, Afrikaans, Xhosa, and Somali)
performance which was part of the festival programme with my daughter
and an isiXhosa-speaking friend of mine. The play was entitled What the
Water Remembers and it took place in the Adam Small Theatre. A dance
performance took place prior to the play on the pavement at the entrance to
the theatre. I was familiar with the work because of the Durban-born
choreographer Sbonakaliso Ndaba. In the Woordfees programme her work
Abakhulu is described as “a moving dance work that uses African rhythms
and neo-classical sounds to explore how our youth relates to the concept of
respect as it is expressed in the initiation process in African culture”
(Woordfees Program 2020: 179). The dancers were all African, dressed in
white and they moved beautifully in a choreographically harmonious com-
position. It was a powerful performance but the theatre event inside finished
whilst the dance was taking place outside, and many people started to leave
the building. A seemingly exclusive white crowd came down the steps at the
entrance to the theatre, some individuals completely ignored the dance per-
formance, others turned their heads away from the dancing, while others
stopped to watch for a few moments only to turn away. A few white ladies
aged 50+ trespassed right onto the space demarcated for the performance
(lined by chalk on the asphalt) while chatting away, possibly unintentionally
but also totally unapologetic. The behaviour could have been entirely acci-
dental but from my perspective (and those of my daughter and my Xhosa
companion) there was a distinct element of disrespect at play here. While
completely non-verbal their behaviour communicated disregard for the
‘black bodies’ who were performing the dance. In my view, the disturbing
kinesthetics of this incident merit mention here in order to show the multi-
modality (Kress 2010) of social and racial practices. I should also mention
that during my fieldwork in Stellenbosch, I encountered several white
 Positionality & Reflexivity 141
Afrikaans speakers whose inability to grapple with their own racist beliefs
led them to take on a type of recalcitrant position. In some instances, this
was also linked to a refusal to speak in English, despite, for instance, the
presence of European foreigners with no knowledge of Afrikaans.7
Methodological reflexivity and the building of a dialogue between the con-
sultants, myself, and the field meant a permanent learning process including
many wobbles. Although my rapport with consultants and interviewees bene-
fitted the research in various ways, I also often felt that it was the spontaneous
encounters which provided much authentic data. While the aim of the field-
work was to systematically document how linguistic and cultural choices shape
narratives my interpretations were often guided more significantly by the mul-
tilingualism and other languages, mostly isiZulu or Afrikaans, of the con-
sultants. A multidisciplinary discourse perspective (Wodak & Meyer 2001)
means that multiple interpretations of the roles of English as a lingua franca
and the various other languages that entered the conversation were possible.
English as a multi and translingua franca is a complex phenomenon not con-
fined and restricted to any single social understanding. My ethnography offers
many narratives and stories from people who look at English in various differ-
ent ways in the same situation. While I also used some insights from critical
discourse/text analysis (Fairclough & Wodak 1997; Wodak & Meyer 2001;
Blommaert 2013) to analyse how power and inequality manifest and how
ideologies are represented through language, ethnography was my primary
methodological tool. The English lingua franca context was approached as a
multi-layered and multilingual performative platform which sees interlocutors
co-construct, de-construct, and re-construct identities through multiple lan-
guages in spaces where English was the putative lingua franca. In the many
informal conversations that made up part of the data for this project, I shared
some of my own experiences to give something back to my participants. At the
same time, there were plenty of situations where my consultants and inter-
viewees challenged my views and interpretations. In particular, two of my male
isiZulu speaking consultants and one of my female coloured research assistants
‘corrected’ my interpretations of certain interviews and events and I am deeply
grateful to them for this learning curve. In trying to interpret people’s thoughts
and understand the importance of languages in their lives I never thought I
could arrive at a complete picture but accepted that ideas were shaped,
unshaped, and reshaped in a continuous manner. In many ways, I have tried to
follow what Mignolo & Walsh (2018: 3) describe as a “pluriversal and inter-
versal decoloniality”, an entangling of local subjectivities, narratives, and
struggles to belong. On reflection I have also tried to move away from any
universal signifiers and one-dimensional views that give in to the logic of colo-
niality. By providing the participants of this study with agency and by allowing
their perspectives to penetrate not just the data presentations but also the ana-
lysis I hope to have been able to give fairer, more balanced, and more mean-
ingful portrayals of language matters involving English as a lingua franca in
South Africa.
142 Positionality & Reflexivity
Notes
1 Racial tensions have also been observed elsewhere (see e.g. Horákova 2018; Swartz et al.
2020).
2 My doctoral research (2001–2006) focused on the link between isiZulu and identity/
ethnicity in a Zulu township community. Only a few days into the fieldwork it
dawned on me that exploring the role of isiZulu as the one (and only) language in
identity and ethnicity construction made no sense because the English language was
ubiquitous in the educational township setting. Although in these township schools
almost every learner and teacher spoke isiZulu as a first language, the ‘official’
medium of learning and teaching was English.
3 IsiZulu-speaking student interviewees, Durban, 20 December 2016.
4 It has been stressed that the language choices of speakers, identity politics, and
language management require the consideration of both macro and micro factors
(Nekvápil & Sherman 2015).
5 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/16/racial-inequality-niceness-
white-people.
6 Lizette, 51-year-old Afrikaner professional, 12 March 2020.
7 Van der Westhuizen (2013: 179) suggested that resistance to the English language has
“intergenerational existential significance” and is often linked to an ethnolinguistic
mobilization which aims at claiming space for Afrikaans and Afrikaners. Although
her younger respondents (32–35-years-old) did not claim the “existential investment”
in Afrikaans the way the older participants did, they also asserted their “right to be
there” (Van der Westhuizen 2013: 179).
10 Conclusion
Moving the Centre

The subtitle of this last chapter is borrowed from Ngu-gı-’s (1993) wonderful
collection of essays, which appeals to a pluralistic world order of languages,
cultures, and people. Although I did not write about an African (Bantu) lan-
guage as a lingua franca for contemporary South Africa, in the same way that
Ngu-gı- replaced English in his writing with Gikuju, I hope to be forgiven for
borrowing his compelling phrase here for my purpose. With this book I have
tried to move the centre of attention to English (as a) lingua franca research
from Europe to Africa in order to show its sociocultural and political ambi-
guity in this context. After all, it has to be acknowledged that “the realities of
the Global South are very different from those of the North, and unless applied
linguists can learn to see from the South, the frameworks for understanding
will never be bridged” (Pennycook & Makoni 2020: 137). My intention has
been to contribute to decolonizing the field of ELF by portraying a southern
perspective and by arguing that Africa should play a role in the advancement of
theoretical and empirical studies that involve English as a lingua franca.1 A field
of study which reserves for itself the acronym ELF for the general phrase of
English as a lingua franca cannot, from my perspective, close itself to post-
colonial African realities and interdisciplinary2 perspectives, even if it might
shake some of its foundational principles. Crucially important as well, English
lingua franca studies ought to consider to a greater extent how ELF encounters
are entangled in processes of racialization, racial positioning, and racism. Lin-
guistic racism manifests itself in multiple diverse ways in English lingua franca
communication and while research in the educational domain already offers
many insights into how this is operationalized, especially in South Africa and
the USA, it is the quotidian English lingua franca racism experienced by people
in various domains which has not received sufficient attention.
When Pennycook (1998, 2017) laid the larger foundations for our under-
standing of the politics of the global spread of English, he considered in depth
the inextricability of imperial exploitation with the persistent inequalities per-
petuated by neoliberal and white ideologies. This approach sees English in
relation to both historical and contemporary power dynamics, discrimination,
and cultural identity politics. Pennycook also urged us to make sense of the
global spread of English by developing detailed and nuanced understandings of
DOI: 10.4324/9780429031472-10
144 Conclusion: Moving the Centre
the multiple social realities in which English operates on local levels (Penny-
cook 1998, 2017) because only in those specific circumstances can we unravel
the many intricacies of its power. This book aimed to do just that with refer-
ence to the lingua franca status of the language in South Africa and by focusing
primarily on two different language groups who have strongly embedded lin-
guistic identities, isiZulu and Afrikaans speakers. I have tried to provide at
least some preliminary answers to the question of how sociocultural complex-
ities of English as a lingua franca are reflected in linguistic, ethnic, racial, and
gender ideologies and how these impact on identity politics in the country.
There are many local specificities which have been narrated but globally rele-
vant issues have also emerged.
One of these issues is the fundamental socio-cultural and political ambi-
guity of English lingua franca communication which can never be considered
‘neutral’. All too often, and in both academic as well as public discourse,
English has been portrayed as the valued intercultural, communicative, and
global lingua franca in rather romantic terms. This book echoes Duranti’s
(2011) perspective that language practice can never be neutral. Consequently
the paradigm upon which this book rests is in contrast to some of what has
been written on the topic of English as a lingua franca (especially studies that
can be regarded as mainstream ELF scholarship). This monograph is satu-
rated with narratives of South Africans who speak English as a second or
third language, mostly in lingua franca settings, and do not consider ELF
practice as neutral. These individuals’ experiences of multiple levels of mar-
ginalization and empowerment, mobility and immobility, inclusion and
exclusion due to their usage of English as a lingua franca or that of others
have filled the pages of this book. Their voices, their frustrations about
raciolinguistic profiling, ‘Othering’, and discrimination evoke the ‘guilty’
character of the English language that Njabulo Ndebele (1986) spoke of many
years ago. Colonial frameworks continue to harm African English speakers in
South Africa on a daily basis and some of these facets of coloniality were
portrayed in this book. But the story of English as a lingua franca in South
Africa is only partially told here, leaving space for much further examination.
There are several arguments which constitute the vital core of this book.
One is located on a meta-pragmatic level and concerns the question of the
extent to which English in fact constitutes a useful lingua franca, what kind of
lingua franca status the language has, and whether or not its lingua franca
status is stable in South Africa. Several scholars have analysed language data
collected by the South African statistics institute (Deumert 2010; Posel &
Casale 2011; Posel & Zeller 2011, 2015, 2020; Bekker & Hill 2016). When it
comes to English proficiency, the last three censuses show a steady growth in
the number of South Africans who claim to speak English as a second lan-
guage (Posel & Zeller 2015, 2020). At the same time, the share of Africans
who reported English as their first home language only increased by about 2.5
percentage points over a 15-year period: from 0.35 percent in 1996 to 2.89
percent in 2011 (Posel, Hunter & Rudwick 2020). These statistics provide
 Conclusion: Moving the Centre 145
some evidence of the vitality of African languages and Afrikaans and very
little indication of a significant language shift to English as a first language.
More generally in Africa, it has been shown that the influence of European
languages on its linguistic vitality and multilingualism has been limited (Vig-
ourou & Mufwene 2008; Dyers 2008). In fact, language death seems to be
“less dramatic on the African continent than in other parts of the world”
(Dimmendaal & Voelz 2007: 598). What many pages in this book highlight is
that there are many sides to this reality and while English lingua franca
communication and by extension ELF ways of speaking can be seen as bridges
between different language groups, it can also be rejected as a legitimate and
fair way of communication. A few years ago, one of the EFF ministers of the
South African parliament Makoti Sibongile Khawula (also known as
MaKhawula) vowed only to use the language of her KwaZulu-Natal con-
stituency, isiZulu. Here English is rejected as the sole lingua franca of the
South African parliament.
The strong instrumental value English holds for second language speaking
communities is entangled with the equally significant cultural value home
languages hold (Bangeni & Kapp 2007; Rudwick 2004, 2008; Rudwick &
Parmigiani 2013; Anthonissen 2013; Coetzee-Van Rooy 2021; McKinney
2015, 2017). In other words, English does not seem to be replacing African
languages or Afrikaans to any significant degree, but it might well be
strengthening its lingua franca position. The increasing functions of English
as a second/third language and a seemingly robust African language/English
bilingualism (Posel & Zeller 2015, 2020; Posel et al. 2020) suggest that English
is likely to remain one of the country’s primary lingua francas for years to
come. And yet, it has to be remembered that many poor and rural black
South Africans cannot be considered proficient in English. Van der Walt and
Evans (2018: 186) rightly argue in their recent contribution to the Routledge
Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca that in South Africa “in reality
there is a disjuncture between the perceived status of English and its actual
grassroots usage with several other viable contenders for the position of
lingua franca”. IsiZulu is certainly a strong contender for the position of a
national lingua franca. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted that at a
national level politicians realized that English usage would not suffice in the
official information briefings to the South Africa public. Extensive code-
switching into African languages, primarily isiZulu, sometimes ad hoc and
other times systematic and scripted, could be observed (Rudwick, Sijadu &
Turner 2021).
One of the core arguments of this book is that ambiguity is one of the pri-
mary and yet insufficiently acknowledged characteristic of the roles English
assumes as a lingua franca. Although I demonstrated this only with reference to
South Africa3 by discussing how and where its lingua franca status is being
questioned, contested, yielded, or disrupted, there are some broader epistemo-
logical issues which emerge for the study of English as a lingua franca more
broadly. There are several reasons why ELF is relevant in South Africa, and
146 Conclusion: Moving the Centre
Africa is relevant to ELF. For instance, ELF has tried to disrupt the constructed
polarity between so-called ‘native speaker’ (NSs) and ‘non-native speakers’
(NNSs) in English lingua franca communication.4 However, the reality facing
NNSs of English, in particular teachers, suggests that even “after nearly a
quarter of a century of discourse on the NS/NNS inequity” little has been
achieved in attempting to disrupt “the insidious structure of inequality” which
marks the power dynamic of global English (Kumaravadivelu 2016: 82). There
seems to be a disconnect between theory and praxis in some ELF research and a
need to put more emphasis on inequality and injustices through systematic
empirical studies. The African continent offers a wealth of empirical data to
complicate and diffuse the distinction between native and non-native English
speakers. The concept of the mother tongue has been contested for many dec-
ades; most African children simply grow up speaking more than one or two
languages and they have native-like competencies in several of them. In most
instances, English is only one of many linguistic tools African children have
access to, and its influence on their daily lives is often limited. And even for the
overwhelming majority of African adults, English usage remains restricted to
lingua franca settings which are often professional domains only. While ELF as
a research field has recently shifted in a direction that takes increased cogni-
sance of multilingualism as the basis of communication in which English fea-
tures as a lingua franca (e.g. Cogo 2016, 2018; Jenkins 2015, 2018), the acronym
EMF for English as a multilingua franca, coined by Jenkins has only found
little resonance. Exceptions to this are some studies emerging with reference to
the Asian context (Weihua 2019, Ishikawa & Jenkins 2019, 2020, Baker &
Sangiamchit 2019).5
This monograph has also aimed to advance an understanding of English as a
translingua franca, as envisaged by Pennycook (2010), that transfers linguistic
and cultural elements of various ethnicities and nationalities. Such a “translin-
gual approach to meaning making evokes a decolonial lens with its focus on the
ideologies implicit” in language and any other tool chosen for meaning making
(Cushman 2016: 236). Race is a vital category of this meaning making, not only
in South Africa but also in the world beyond. Makoni et al. (2003) pioneered
the study of race as an important category in language studies and this has also
been addressed systematically recently through the field of raciolinguistics in
the USA (Nelson and Rosa 2015; Rosa and Nelson 2017; Alim et al. 2016; Alim,
Reyes & Kroskrity 2020). Developments in this field, however, have had a US
focus and their applicability to South Africa requires the consideration of
additional aspects. The status of English as one of South Africa’s primary
lingua francas is inextricably linked to colonial and apartheid legacies. Hutton
argued that linguistics is “both the parent and child of race theory” (1998: 3)
and given the history of English imperialism (Phillipson 1992) and its global
cultural politics (Pennycook 2007), it becomes clear that the study of whiteness
as linked to English cannot be ignored. This is especially so because “whiteness
is wily: white supremacy is so embedded in our psyches that we end up doing it
even while we claim (and believe) it is what we oppose” (Phipps 2020: 4).
 Conclusion: Moving the Centre 147
Language usage, arguably, can never be completely dislodged from the sig-
nificance of race. This book demonstrates how English contributes as a lingua
franca to the trouble South Africans find themselves in when it comes to racial
identity politics (Stroud & Williams 2017; Durrheim, Mtose & Brown 2011;
Erasmus 2017).
Although, pitted against the other colonial language Afrikaans, English has
emerged as the lesser of the two colonial evils, it is far from being socio-politi-
cally neutral. The ways of speaking English largely depend on one’s education
and class, as the privilege of speaking of what is viewed as so-called Standard or
‘un-accented’ English is linked inextricably to fee-charging quality schools few
African language speakers have access to. Therefore, coloniality, English, and
race intersect in complex ways and it is quite obvious that the “claims of global
English’s neutrality belie the historic colonial inequalities, which created the
conditions for its existence” (Hsu 2015: 125). There are countless ways in which
race matters in the study of English as a lingua franca and there are many
“political aspects of discrimination” involving English which continuously
requires more attention by scholars in the field (Holliday 2009: 27). One of the
seminal scholars of ELF, Jenkins, regards the consideration of race as “very
important”6 and one of her current projects examines ELF and disempowerment,
with race constituting one of the key focus areas. ELF as a research field has
developed greatly since the seminal publications in the early 2000s (Jenkins 2000;
Seidlhofer 2001; Mauranen 2003) which focused on phonological and lexical
descriptions and corpus development, and as a paradigm it has undergone several
phases.7 ELF studies have much to offer in terms of empirical, theoretical,
and pedagogical advances in English language teaching and communication
strategies, but its impact on more general thinking about the ontologies and
epistemologies of English lingua franca practices, in particular in terms of their
socio-political and cultural importance, demands much further attention.
English is currently the primary language of power in the world which
creates multiple injustices and as English users we are – more or less – com-
plicit in its power. Boundaries are constructed on the basis of different ways
in which English is used as a lingua franca. But boundaries are mostly only
pertinent when people struggle for power and feel excluded (Mbembe 2017).
If English continues to develop as a multi and translingua franca and if it
increasingly offers a platform upon which other languages can be utilized and
given recognition, then these boundaries might lose pertinence. English lingua
franca spaces are likely to continue to show how norms of conventional English
practices can be disrupted. Race and its ubiquity in the communication pro-
cesses in which English serves as a lingua franca provides an opportunity “to
reflect more carefully on how and when different kind of racial concepts may be
useful, useless or dangerous” (James 2010: 10).
If more weight is given to non-native and, importantly, non-white English
speakers in the ‘natural’ development of the language, which is what some ELF
scholars have been proposing for decades, then English might develop further
potential to decolonize not only in the ex-British colonies but also on a world
148 Conclusion: Moving the Centre
language level. South Africa’s multilingualism “offers an as yet untapped
potential for connecting the project of human mutuality to that of non-racial-
ism” (Stroud and William 2017:168).8 But for this to happen the ways in which
we think about English have to change and the historical relationships between
languages and racialization have to be disrupted. Chinua Achebe wrote as far
back as in 1965 that he felt that the English language could “carry the weight”
of (his) African experience but he also conceded that this English “will have to
be a new English, still in full communion with its ancestral home but altered to
suit its new African surroundings” (Achebe 1965: 349). In South Africa such a
new English is not the dominant variety yet, because Standard English main-
tains a privileged position in society. And there are cultural assumptions which
are locked in coloniality, such as the view of language as a bound entity, which
have not been abandoned in mainstream thinking. English lingua franca com-
munication needs to be seen as a multiple communicative platform that can
foster ‘solidarity’ among various language speakers (Martinez 2017) through
mutual language learning.
This study does not aim to provide any descriptive framework of how English
‘should’ ideally be used and understood in racially mixed lingua franca commu-
nication but the core feature of English lingua franca discourse which, from my
perspective, deserves greater recognition is its relentless socio-political ambiguity.
Some ELF studies have fallen into the trap of bounded language thinking and
prescriptivism. Park and Wee (2011: 44) phrased it aptly: “To privilege one par-
ticular mode of interaction or group of speakers as more authentically repre-
senting ELF than others is clearly an unsatisfactory conceptualisation, as it
ignores the complex and polymorphous way in which English is used in the
world”. In contemporary South Africa, African language speakers are often more
or less forced to speak English when they communicate with non-African lan-
guage speakers. Due to lack of African language knowledge among non-African
population groups, there is much coloniality which continues to characterize
interracial encounters. While African language speakers might choose to use
English as a multilingua franca in conversation with each other, these ways of
speaking English are very different and, in most cases, highly translingual. Pen-
nycook (2020: 10) suggested that a project of redistribution does not need to “be
limited to, or be dependent on, the redistribution of traditionally material goods,
but can also include the redistribution of linguistic resources, agentive actions,
cognitive processes and forms of identity”. There is no doubt that especially
among non-Africans there is much potential to explore such redistributive pro-
cesses. South Africa could be a more equal and a more socio-politically and
‘racially’ equitable place if all South Africans independent of their background
were fluent in at least one African language. There is a great need to learn not
only African languages but also from the linguistic experiences of African lan-
guage speakers (McIntosh 2018). Self-reflective whiteness can draw from the
notion of epistemic vulnerability which captures an openness to be affected and
shaped by others (Gibson 2011; Snyman 2015). Through such an approach the
epistemologies of ignorance can be broken down so that one can start working
 Conclusion: Moving the Centre 149
towards deliberately unthinking one’s own covert Eurocentricity (Snyman 2015:
270). Such a disposition includes greater awareness of the significance and
knowledge of not just African languages but African lifeworlds.
Over the past few decades, critical scholarship on the various roles of
English in the world has consistently pointed to the need to rethink Western
discourse on English which masks as universal. Blommaert’s (2010: 23)
concept of peripheral normativity captures much of the English lingua
franca communication in South Africa as, in particular in urban mixed
areas, English usage is based on non-Standard English varieties and other
languages. Language use is indexical for cultural meanings (Silverstein 2003,
Blommaert 2015) and English lingua franca contexts are often those in
which the periphery is the cultural norm. Translingual English can manifest
as a resistance practice in some instances (Canagarajah & Dovchin 2019),
but it can also continue to marginalize the speakers of minority languages in
English dominant settings (Flores & Rosa, 2015). The complexity of what
African language speakers do with languages, the extent and nature of their
multi and translingualism, and their culturally and socio-politically embed-
ded language choices make Africa a vital site for knowledge production on
English as a lingua franca. The dialogue between African lifeworlds and the
doing and undoing of ELF communication demonstrates how the South can
inform the North (Comaroff & Comaroff 2012; Connell 2007) and how
African theorizing can forge new ways of being in the world.
The multi and translingual development of English as a lingua franca in South
Africa suggests that a certain amount of African multilingual skills will have to
be acquired in the future in order to communicate successfully in South African
ELF encounters. It has been established in the ELF literature that first language
English speakers may have better access to a wider range of styles and commu-
nication strategies, but they might not be able to accommodate in English lingua
franca discourse in the way that multilinguals do (Sweeney & Hua 2010). From a
South African perspective, first language speakers of English who do not have
some level of proficiency in an African language have a ‘handicap’ in urban
interracial ELF encounters. Second language English varieties certainly have cur-
rency in the country. The analysis of the parliamentary debate in Chapter 5
served as an example of the fact that the value of what is perceived as white
English is contested by African language speakers. At the same time, however,
strongly accented African Englishes are not valued in many domains of power.
Hunter (2019) showed how the education system largely elevates “white tone”
(and hence, not African Englishes) as the desirable educational variety and how
this situation contributes to complex racialization processes. Due to the fact that
African Englishes in English lingua franca communication are a proxy for race
they also constitute a platform that attracts racialization processes and, unfortu-
nately, racist behaviours.
All ways of speaking are embedded in socio-economic, political, and cultural
systems (Pavlenko & Blackledge 2004) and this also applies to English as a
lingua franca. For many African language speakers English continues to
150 Conclusion: Moving the Centre
represent coloniality, whiteness, and frustration. Negative perceptions stem
from the sentiment and valid opinion that English has no ‘natural’ presence in
Africa but was imposed as one of many other colonial impositions. It is
important that these sentiments are respected and that we take cognisance of
the fact that what “we come to know cannot be separated from what we feel
and who we are” (Fecho 2004: 153). At the same time, the hybridity prevalent
in the type of Englishes exemplified above combined with the extent to which
African people have made the language their own (Higgins 2007; Smit 1996;
Parmegiani 2008, 2017) allows for much agency among lingua franca users. But
to take ownership of English, adapt it, and recreate it is not synonymous with
understanding its status and position in Africa as ‘naturalized’. On an emo-
tional level, sociolinguistic perceptions are a reflection of socio-political reali-
ties. After all, English is one of the most immediate gatekeepers of success in
the country, moreover, all over Africa “the mere choice of using English is seen
as a signal of upper-class status” (Banda 2020: 10).
Branford (1996: 48) suggested in the early days of South Africa’s democracy
that “an intelligent respect for one another’s ‘Englishes’ is one of the many
tolerances that must be learned and practised in a future South Africa”. It
appears, however, that identity politics surrounding English usage is still an
incessant feature of the country’s realities. The language is firmly entangled in
socio-political ambiguity, understood as a “colonial language” on the one hand,
as “language of liberation” and an (inter)national lingua franca on the other.
Depending on the eye of the beholder English will either be perceived as ‘de-
ethnicized’ and relatively ‘neutral’ or white and ‘oppressive’. English is far from
an “innocent language” (Ndebele 1986) and its power remains pervasive and
for these reasons its position in society needs to be continuously monitored.
Ideologically grounded arguments for and against the use of English as opposed
to an African language or Afrikaans are informed by the atrocities of colonial-
ism and apartheid but they are also based on the idea that these languages are
bound entities. Looking at language as infinite ways of speaking and as multi-
faceted social practice renders all language ontologically heterogenous. This
also means that the names of languages and labelling of ways of speaking are
multiple and that the distinctions between seemingly solid units are fluid.
Conceiving of language as a heterogenous set of various ontological practices
entails questioning whether or not single conceptual and analytic categories can
have the capacity to define language (Demuru and Gurney 2021). How we
think about English as a lingua franca therefore has to broaden in scope and it
is my hope that it will become more and more African.
The language which most educated South Africans take for granted as a
primary medium of public life in the country will continue to hold a contested
position in society. It engenders multiple powers and disempowerments,
inclusion and exclusion, and complex racialization processes. If, as has been
suggested in the ELF literature (e.g. Seidlhofer 2009), the issue of social iden-
tities is central to ELF (and by extension WE), then racial identity politics
such as the ones described in this book have to be given space in the fields. All
 Conclusion: Moving the Centre 151
over the world, language and race serve as tools of discrimination and English
as a lingua franca is no exception to this. The concept of coloniality is not
only useful but necessary in the context of lingua franca English because it
draws attention to the historical unequal distribution of power due to English
which finds global resonance. “Resisting the coloniality of English” (Hsu
2017) and at the same time contributing to a less romanticized view of English
as a lingua franca might provide some space for more social justice. In order
to decolonize the field of ELF, some more ‘undisciplined’ (Milani 2019) per-
spectives are necessary to expose the good and the bad in “how English is
entangled in everyday, simultaneous activities and material encounters”
(Pennycook 2020: 11).
Studies of language have had a Northern and Anglo-American bias (Smack-
man & Heinrich 2015; Pennycook & Makoni 2020; Makoni et al. 2019; Piller,
Zhang & Li 2020) and the ELF field is certainly no exception to this. The
“complicity between ways of knowing embedded in the field” and ignorance
about the history of unjust knowledge distribution (Pennycook & Makoni
2020: 136) obstruct the search for social justice in language scholarship. Studies
on English as a lingua franca need to unreservedly and unapologetically address
the colonial legacies and the perpetuated privilege of whiteness. As scholars we
need to work towards a redistribution of resources in order for new forms of
knowledge to emerge which can reinvigorate the study of language in society
(Rudwick & Makoni 2021). There is no language that unambiguously brings
justice and well-being to humankind and there is no language sociologist who is
free of ideology. With this book I hope to have offered an initial platform upon
which we can open new debates about the role of English as a lingua franca in
South Africa and in the world.

Notes
1 While I have only focused on South Africa, I think that many socio-political dynam-
ics which involve the role of English as a lingua franca, in particular in the academic
domain, are very comparable to other African countries. By having focused on South
Africa, I did not mean to show that it is exceptional but simply that this has been my
ethnographic focus. However I concede that when it comes to race South Africa
represents a different playing field than most other African countries.
2 Jenkins never intended EMF to replace ELF, but her recent work has advanced the field
in a direction where the work of multilingualism scholars and findings from ex-colonial
settings are considered (personal communication). A current interdisciplinary volume
(Grazzi 2020) emerging from a project where ELF and plurilingualism were examined
as constituting each other also offers inspiration for future research.
3 While there have been previous studies on the South African English lingua franca
situation, there has been no comprehensive study like the one at hand (McLean &
McCormick 1996; Balfour 2003; Van der Walt & Evans 2018, Khokhlova 2015; Smit
2010a).
4 The question of “whose” English “should” be the international communication
medium constitutes one of the foundations of ELF research and Anglo-centric
attitudes have long been criticized (Seidlhofer 2012)
5 Personal correspondence with Jennifer Jenkins, 8 September 2020.
152 Conclusion: Moving the Centre
6 Private communication with Jennifer Jenkins, 8 September 2020.
7 For more detail on this, see Jenkins 2015.
8 Non-racialism aims to transcend race thinking through creative self-reflective
ways in order to relate to one another only as human beings.
Bibliography

Achebe, Chinua (1965) English and the African writer. Transition 4 (18), 26–30.
Adhikari, Mohamed (Ed.). (2013) Burdened by Race: Coloured Identities in South
Africa. Cape Town: UCT Press.
Alcoff, Linda M. (1991) The problem of speaking for others. Cultural Critique 20, 5–32.
Alexander, Neville (1989) Language Policy and National Unity in South Africa
Azania. Cape Town: Buchu.
Alexander, Neville (1997) Language policy and planning in the New South Africa.
African Sociological Review 1 (1), 82–92.
Alexander, Neville (2000) English unassailable but unattainable: The dilemma of
language policy in South African education. PRAESA Occasional Papers 3. Avail-
able online: https://www.sahistory.org.za/sites/default/files/1999-english-unassaila
ble.pdf. Accessed 28 April 2021.
Alexander, Neville (2002) An Ordinary Country. Issues in the Transition from Apart-
heid to Democracy in South Africa. Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press.
Alexander, Neville (2004) The politics of language planning in post-apartheid South
Africa. Language Problems and Language Planning 28, 113–130.
Alexander, Neville (2005) Linguistic diversity, harmonization and sub-national iden-
tities in post-apartheid South Africa. In Rosalie Finlayson and Sarah Slabbert
(Eds.), Language and Identities in a Postcolony: Southern African Perspectives, pp.
147–160. Frankfurt: Peter Lang Verlag.
Alexander, Neville (2013) Thoughts on the New South Africa. Johannesburg: Jacana.
Alexander, Neville and Ludwig Helbig (1988) Schule und Erziehung gegen Apartheid.
Befreiungspädagogik in Südafrika. Frankfurt am Main: ISP.
Alexander, Neville and Kathleen Heugh (2001) Language policy in the New South
Africa. In Robert Kriger and Abebe Zegeye (Eds.), Culture in the New South
Africa, pp. 15–39. Cape Town: Kwela.
Alim, H. Samy (2016) Introducing raciolinguistics. Racing language and languaging
race in hyperracial times. In H. Samy Alim, John R. Rickford and Arnetha F. Ball,
Raciolinguistics. How Language Shapes Our Ideas about Race, pp. 1–30. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Alim, H. Samy, Angela Reyes and Paul Kroskrity (2020) The field of Language and
Race: A linguistic Anthropological Approach Race, Racism and racialization. In
H. Samy Alim, Angela Reyes and Paul Kroskrity (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of
Language and Race, pp. 1–23. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
154 Bibliography
Alim, H. Samy, John R. Rickford and Arnetha F.Ball (Eds.). (2016) Raciolinguistics.
How language shaped our ideas about race. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alim, H. Samy and Geneva Smitherman (2012) Articulate while Black: Barack
Obama, language, and race in the US. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alim, Ibrahim and Alastair Pennycook (Eds.) (2009) Global Linguistic Flows: Hip Hop
Cultures, Youth Identities, and the Politics of Language. New York: Routledge.
Anderson, Benedict (1991 [1983]) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins
and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.
Anthonissen, Christine (2009) Bilingualism and language shift in Western Cape
communities. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics 38, 61–76.
Anthonissen, Christine (2013) ‘With English the world is more open to you’: lan-
guage shift as marker of social transformation, English Today 113, 28–35.
Appalraju, Dhalialutchmee (1999) Gender aspects of bilingualism: language choice
patterns of black Zulu-speaking male and female pupils living in Murchison.
Unpublished MA thesis submitted at the University of Natal, Durban.
Appalraju, Dhalialutchmee and Elizabeth de Kadt (2002) Gender aspects of bilingu-
alism: language choice patterns of Zulu-speaking rural youth. Southern African
Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 20, 135–145.
Appiah, Kwame Anthony (1997) Cosmopolitan patriots. Critical Inquiry 23 (3), 617–639.
Appiah, Kwame Anthony (2006) Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers.
New York: Norton.
Atanga, Lilian Lem, Sibonile Edith Ellece, Lia Litosseliti and Jane Sunderland (Eds.) (2013)
Gender and Language in Sub-Saharan Africa. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John
Benjamins.
Baird Robert, WillBaker and Mariko Kitazawa (2014) The complexity of ELF.
Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 3 (1), 171–196.
Baker-Bell, April (2020) Dismantling anti-black linguistic racism in English language
arts classrooms: towards an anti-racist black language pedagogy. Theory into
Practice 59 (1), 8–21.
Baker, Will (2015) Culture and Identity through English as a Lingua Franca:
Rethinking Concepts and Goals in Intercultural Communication. New York:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Baker, Will (2018) English as a lingua franca and intercultural communication. In
Jennifer Jenkins, WillBaker and Martin Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook
of English as a Lingua Franca, pp. 25–36. London/New York: Routledge.
Baker, Will and Chittima Sangiamchit (2019) Transcultural communication: lan-
guage, communication and culture through English as a lingua franca in a
social network community. Language and Intercultural Communication 19 (6),
471–487.
Balakrishnan, Sarah (2017). The Afropolitan idea: new perspectives on cosmopoli-
tanism in African studies. History Compass 15 (2), 2–11.
Balfour, Robert (2003) Post-colonial twilight: English as a failed lingua franca. The
English Academy Review 30 (1), 20–32.
Ballard, Charles (1989) Traders, trekkers and colonists. In Andrew Duminy and Bill
Guest (Eds.), Natal and Zululand. From Earliest Times to 1920. A New History,
pp. 116–145. Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press.
Bamgbose, Ayo (1991) Language and the Nation: The Language Question in Sub-
Saharan Africa. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
 Bibliography 155
Bamgbose, Ayo (2003) Language and the African Renaissance: lessons from the South
African experience. In H. Ekkehard Wolff (Ed.), Tied Tongues, pp. 39–60. Münster:
LiT Verlag.
Banda, Felix (2009) Critical perspectives on language planning and policy in Africa:
accounting for the notion of multilingualism. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics
PLUS 38, 1–11.
Banda, Felix (2020) Sociolinguistics and modes of social class signalling. Journal of
Sociolinguistics 24, 3–15.
Banda, Felix and Lynn Mafofo (2016) Commodification of transformation discourses
and post-apartheid institutional identities at three South African universities. Cri-
tical Discourse Studies. doi:10.1080/17405904.2015.1074593.
Bangeni, Bongi and Rochelle Kapp (2007) Shifting language attitudes in a linguisti-
cally diverse learning environment in South Africa, Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development 28, 253–269.
Barth, Frederic (1969) Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. London: Allen and Unwin.
Baugh, John (2003) Linguistic profiling. In Sinfree Makoni, Geneva Smitherman, Arne-
tha F. Ball and Arthur K. Spears (Eds.), Black Linguistics, pp. 155–168. London/New
York: Routledge.
Baugh, John (2020) Sociolinguistic evaluations of inequality. International Journal of
the Sociology of Language 263, 59–66.
Bauman, Richard and Charles L.Briggs (2003) Voices of Modernity: Language
Ideologies and the Politics of Inequality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Beck, Rose Marie (2018) Language as apparatus: entanglements of language, culture and
territory and the invention of nation and ethnicity. Postcolonial Studies 21 (2), 231–253.
Beck, Ulrich and Natan Sznaider (2006) Unpacking cosmopolitanism for the Social
Sciences. The British Journal of Sociology 57 (1), 381–403.
Bekker, Simon (1993) Ethnicity in Focus: The South African Case. Pietermaritzburg/
Durban: Centre of Social and Development Studies, University of Natal.
Bekker, Simon and Lloyd Hill (2016). Household language, residential segregation
and social mobility: continuity and change in the eThekwini, South Africa. Afri-
can Population Studies 30(2), 2255–2274.
Bentley, Kristina and Adam Habib (2008) (Eds.) Racial Redress and Citizenship in Post-
Apartheid South Africa, pp. 3–32. Pretoria: Human Science Research Council.
Berg, Ulla D. (2017) Mobile Selves. Race, Migration and Belonging in Peru and the
U.S. New York/London: New York University Press.
Berman, Bruce, Dickson Eyoh and Will Kymlicka (2004) Introduction: ethnicity and
politics of democratic nation-building in Africa. In Bruce Berman, Dickson Eyoh and
Will Kymlicka (Eds.), Ethnicity and Democracy in Africa, pp. 1–21. Oxford: James
Curry.
Besnier, Niko (2009) Communities and identities. fraught categories and identities. In
Angela Reyes and Adrienne Lo (Eds.), Beyond Yellow English. Towards a Lin-
guistics Anthropology of Asian Specific America, pp. 167–171. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Bhabha, Homi (1990) The third space [interview with Homi Bhabha]. In J. Ruther-
ford (Ed.), Identity. Community, Culture, Difference, pp. 217–221. London:
Lawrence and Wishart.
Bhabha, Homi (1994) The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.
Björkman, Beyza (2008) ‘So where we are?’ Spoken lingua franca English at a tech-
nical university in Sweden, English Today, 94, 35–41.
156 Bibliography
Blaser, Thomas M. (2007) Afrikaner Identity after Nationalism: Young Afrikaners
and the ‘new’ South Africa. Unpublished doctoral thesis submitted at University of
the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
Blaser, Thomas M. (2012) ‘I don’t know what I am’: the end of Afrikaner national-
ism in post-apartheid South Africa. Transformation 80, 1–21.
Blaser, Thomas M. and Christi van der Westhuizen (2012): Introduction: the para-
dox of post-apartheid ‘Afrikaner’ identity: deployments of ethnicity and neo-lib-
eralism, African Studies, 71 (3), 380–390.
Block, David (2014) Second Language Identities. London/New York: Bloomsbury
Academic.
Blommaert, Jan (Ed.) (1999) Language Ideological Debates. Berlin/New York:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Blommaert, Jan (2004) Language rights in places: comments on linguistics rights and
wrong. In Jane Freeland and Donna Patrick (Eds.), Language Rights and Language
Survival. Sociolinguistic and Sociocultural Perspectives, pp. 55–66. Manchester: St
Jerome.
Blommaert, Jan (2005) Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Blommaert, Jan (2007) Sociolinguistics and discourse analysis: orders of indexicality
and polycentricity. Journal of Multicultural Discourses 2 (2), 115–130.
Blommaert, Jan (2008) Language, asylum and the national order. Working Papers in
Urban Language and Literacies 50, 1–21.
Blommaert, Jan (2010) Sociolinguistics of Globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Blommaert, Jan (2013) Ethnography, Superdiversity and Linguistic Landscapes:
Chronicles of Complexity. Bristol/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
Blommaert, Jan (2015a) Chronotopes, Scales and Complexity I the Study of Lan-
guage in Society. Annual Review of Anthropology 44, 105–116.
Blommaert, Jan (2015b) Commentary: Superdiversity old and new. Language and
Communication 44, 82–88.
Blommaert, Jan, Sirpa Leppänen and Massimiliano Spotti (2012)Endangering multi-
lingualism. In J. Blommaert, S. Leppänen, P. Pahtaand T. Räisänen(Eds.), Dan-
gerous Multilingualism: Northern Perspectives on Order, Purity and Normality
(pp. 1–24). Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan.
Blommaert, Jan and Ben Rampton (2011) Language and superdiversity: a position
paper. Working Papers in Urban Language and Literacy 70.
Blommaert, Jan and Piia Varis (2001) Enough is enough: the heuristics of authenti-
city in superdiversity. Working Papers in Urban Language and Literacies 76.
Bokamba, Eyamba G. (1995) The politics of language planning in Africa: critical
choices for the 21st century. In Martin Pütz (Ed.), Discrimination through Lan-
guage in Africa? Perspectives on the Namibian Experience, pp. 11–27. Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Bosch, Barbara (2000) Ethnicity markers in Afrikaans. International Journal of the
Sociology of Language 144, 51–68.
Bourdieu, Pierre( 1977)The economics of linguistic exchanges. Social Science Infor-
mation 16 (6), 645–668.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1989) Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory 7 (1), 14–25.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1990) In Other Words. Essays Towards a Reflexive Sociology.
Cambridge: Polity.
 Bibliography 157
Bourdieu, Pierre (1991) Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity.
Branford, Bill (1996) English in South Africa: a preliminary overview. In Vivian de
Klerk (Ed.), Focus on South Africa, Vol. 15: Varieties of English around the
World), pp. 35–51. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Briggs, Charles (1992) Linguistic ideologies and naturalization of power in Warao
discourse. In Paul Kroskrity, Barbara Schieffelin and Kathleen Woolard (Eds.),
Language Ideologies. Pragmatics 2 (Special issue), 235–453.
Bruthiaux, Paul (2003) Squaring the circles: issues in modelling English world-wide.
International Journal of Applied Linguistics 13 (2), 159–177.
Brutt-Griffler, Janina (2002) World English: A Study of Its Development. Clevedon/
Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.
Brutt-Griffler, Janina and Sumi Kim (2018) In their own voices: development of
English in a gender-neutral language. English Today 34 (1), 12–19.
Bucholtz, Mary (2003) Sociolinguistic nostalgia and the authentication of identity.
Journal of Sociolinguistics 7 (3), 398–416.
Bucholtz, Mary and Kira Hall (2004) Language and identity. In Alessandro Duranti
(Ed.), A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology, pp. 269–289. London: Blackwell.
Bucholtz, Mary and Kira Hall (2005) Identity and interaction. a sociocultural lin-
guistic approach. Discourse Studies 7 (4/5), 585–614.
Buthelezi, Thabisile (2019) IsiZulu language and the Ilanga newspaper as catalyst for
participatory democracy in South Africa. In Abiodun Salawu and Monica B. Chi-
bita (Eds.), Indigenous Language Media, Language Politics and Democracy in
Africa, pp. 59–86. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Butler, Judith (1990) Gender Trouble. London: Routledge.
Byrd Clark, Julie S. and Fred Dervin (2014) Reflexivity in Language and Multicultural
Education: Rethinking Multilingualism and Interculturality. London/New York:
Routledge.
Callagham, Jane (2003) Exploring South African psychology: township and identity
in women students’ talk about professional training. Agenda 57, 34–44.
Calteaux, Karen (2005) I am … – I said … language planning for identity. In Rosalie
Finlayson and Sarah Slabbert (Eds.), Language and Identities in a Postcolony:
Southern African Perspectives, pp. 195–228. Frankfurt: Peter Lang Verlag.
Cameron, Deborah (1992) Feminism and Linguistic Theory. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Campbell, Catherine, Gerhard Maré and Cherryl Walker (1995) Evidence for an
ethnic identity in the life histories of Zulu-speaking Durban township residents.
Journal of Southern African Studies 21 (2), 287–301.
Canagarajah, Suresh (1999) Resisting Linguistic Imperialism in English Language
Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Canagarajah, Suresh (2000) Negotiating ideologies through English. Strategies from
the periphery. In Thomas Ricento (Ed.), Ideologies, Politics and Language Policies,
pp. 121–132. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Canagarajah, Suresh (2006) Negotiating the local in English as a lingua franca.
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 26, 197–218.
Canagarajah, Suresh (2013) Translingual Practice: Global Englishes and Cosmopoli-
tan Relations. Abingdon: Routledge.
Canagarajah, Suresh (2018) The unit and focus of analysis in lingua franca English
interactions: in search of a method. International Journal of Bilingual Education
and Bilingualism. doi:10.1080/13670050.2018.1474850.
158 Bibliography
Canagarajah, Suresh and Daisuke Kimura (2018) Translingual practice and ELF. In
Jennifer Jenkins, WillBaker and Martin Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook
of English as a Lingua Franca, pp. 295–308. London/New York: Routledge.
Canagarajah, Suresh and Sender Dovchin (2019) The everyday politics of translingual-
ism as a resistant practice. International Journal of Multilingualism 16 (2), 127–144.
Canham, Hugo and Rejane Williams (2017) Being black, middle class and the object
of two gazes. Ethnicities 17 (1), 23–46.
Carey, Ray (2010) Hard to ignore: English native speakers in ELF research. Helsinki
English Studies 6, 88–101.
Carton, Benedict (2008) Zuluness in the post-and neo-worlds. In Benedict Carton,
JohnLaband and Jabulani Sithole (Eds.), Zulu Identities. Being Zulu, Past and
Present, pp. 3–22. Scottsville: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press.
Carton, Benedict, John Laband and Jabulani Sithole (Eds.) (2008) Zulu Identities.
Being Zulu, Past and Present. Scottsville: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press.
Census (1996) Statistics South Africa. Available online: http://www.statssa.gov.za.
Census (2001) Statistics South Africa. Available online: http://www.statssa.gov.za.
Census (2011) Statistics South Africa. Available online: http://www.statssa.gov.za.
Chaplin , George and Nina G. Jablonski (2020) Semantics in the Philosophy of Race.
In Nina Jablonski (Ed.) Persistence of Race, pp. 143–154. Stellenbosch: African
Sun Media.
Chick, Keith and Rodrik Wade (1997) Restandardisation in the direction of a new
English: implications for access and equity. Journal of Multilingual and Multi-
cultural Development 18 (4), 271–284.
Chidester, David (1992) Religions of South Africa. London/New York: Routledge.
Chidester, David (1996) Savage Systems. Colonialism and Comparative Religion in
Southern Africa. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.
Christie, Pam (1985) The Right to Learn. The Struggle for Education in South Africa.
Johannesburg: Ravan Press.
Coetzee-Van Rooy, Susan (2013) Afrikaans in contact with English: endangered lan-
guage or case of exceptional bilingualism. International Journal of the Sociology
of Language 224, 179–207.
Coetzee-Van Rooy, Susan (2021) Being English in Multilingual South Africa. World
Englishes 40, 98–120.
Cogo, Alessia (2016) “They all take the risk and make the effort”: Intercultural
accommodation and multilingualism in a BELF community of practice. In Lucilla
Lopriore and Enrico Grazzi (Eds.), Intercultural Communication: New Perspec-
tives from ELF Publisher, pp. 365–384. Rome: Tre Press.
Cogo, Alessia (2018) ELF and multilingualism. In Jennifer Jenkins, WillBaker and
Martin Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca,
pp. 357–368. London/New York: Routledge.
Cogo, Alessia and Martin Dewey (2012) Analysing English as a Lingua Franca: A
Corpus-based Investigation. London: Continuum.
Colenbrander, Peter (1989) The Zulu kingdom, 1828–79. In Andrew Duminy and Bill
Guest (Eds.), Natal and Zululand. From Earliest Times to 1910. A New History,
pp. 83–115. Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press.
Comaroff, John and Jean Comaroff (2012) Theory from the South or, How Euro-
America is Evolving toward Africa. Stellenbosch: SUN Media.
Connell, Raewyn (2007) Southern Theory. The Global Dynamics of Knowledge in
Social Science. Cambridge: Polity Press.
 Bibliography 159
Cooper, Adam (2018) “You can’t write in Kaapse Afrikaans in your question paper …
the terms must be right”: race- and class-infused language ideologies in educational
places on the Cape Flats. Education Research for Social Change, 7 (1), 30–45.
Cornelissen, Scarlett and Steffen Horstmeier (2002) The social and political con-
struction of identities in the New South Africa: an analysis of the Western Cape
Province. Journal of Modern African Studies 40 (1), 55–82.
Coupland, Nikolas (2003) Sociolinguistic authenticities. Journal of Sociolinguistics 7
(3), 417–439.
Coupland, Nikolas (2007) Style: Language Variation and Identity. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Coupland, Nikolas (2007) The authentic speaker and the speech community. In
Carmen Llamas and Dominic Watts (Eds.), Language and Identities. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
Crenshaw, Kimberlé (1991) Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics
and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review 43 (6), 1241–1299.
Crystal, David (2003) English as a Global Language (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Cushman, Ellen (2016) Translingual and decolonial approaches to meaning making.
College English 78 (3), 234–242.
Dangarembga, Tsitsi (1988) Nervous Condition. London: The Women’s Press.
Davenport, Thomas Rodney H. (1991) South Africa, a Modern History. London:
Macmillan.
Davies, Rebecca (2009) Afrikaners in the New South Africa: Identity Politics in a
Globalised Economy. London: Tauris Academic Studies.
Dawjee, Haji Mohamed (2015) Mmusi Maimane: Black leader white saviour? Mail
& Guardian, 13 May. Available online: https://mg.co.za/article/2015-05-13-look-
what-the-das-got-itself-black-leader-white-saviour. Accessed 27 July 2019.
De Kadt, Elizabeth (1993) The dangerous power of English. In D. Young (Ed.),
Proceedings of the English Academy of Southern Africa Conference Held at the
University of Cape Town 1–3 July, 1992. Cape Town: English Academy.
De Kadt, Elizabeth (1998) Keeping the kitchen clean: towards an analysis of English-
medium interaction between black people and white people in post-apartheid
South Africa. Multilingua 17 (2/3), 249–276.
De Kadt, Elizabeth (2004) Gender aspects of the use of English on a South African
university campus. World Englishes 23, 515–554.
De Kadt, Julia (2006) Language development in South Africa – past and present. In
Victor Webb and Theo Du Plessis (Eds.), The Politics of Language in South
Africa, pp. 40–56. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
De Klerk, Gerda (2002) Mother tongue education in South Africa: the weight of
history. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 154, 29–46.
De Klerk, Vivian (Ed.) (1996) Focus on South Africa, Vol. 15: Varieties of English
around the World. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
De Klerk, Vivian (2000a) Language shift in Grahamstown: a case study of selected
Xhosa-speakers. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 146, 87–110.
De Klerk, Vivian (2000b) To be Xhosa or not to be Xhosa: that is the question.
Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 21 (3), 198–215.
De Klerk, Vivian and David Gough (2002) Black South African English. In Rajend
Mesthrie (Ed.), Language in South Africa, pp. 356–380. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
160 Bibliography
De Kock, Leon (1996) Civilising Barbarians: Missionary Narrative and African Tex-
tual Response in Nineteenth Century South Africa. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand
University Press.
Demuru Eugenia and Laura Gurney (2021) Languages/Languaging as World-making:
the ontological bases of language. Language Science 8, 1–13.
De Souza, Lynn Mario (2017) Epistemic diversity, lazy reason, and ethical translation
in post-colonial contexts. The case of Indigenous educational policy in Brazil. In
Caroline Kerfoot and Kenneth Hyltenstam (Eds.), Entangled Discourses: South-
North Orders of Visibility, pp. 189–208. New York: Routledge.
Deterding, David (2013) Misunderstandings in English as a Lingua Franca: An Ana-
lysis of ELF Interactions in South-East Asia. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Deumert, Ana (2010) Tracking the demographics of (urban) language shift – an
analysis of South African census data. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development 31 (1), 13–35.
De Vos, Pierre (2012) A note on Afrikaners and tribalism. Constitutionally Speaking.
Available online: http://constitutionallyspeaking.co.za/a-note-on-afrikaners-and-triba
lism. Accessed 14 August 2012.
DiAngelo, Robin (2017) White Fragility. Boston: Beacon Press.
Dimitriu, Ileana (2010) A “translated” discipline. English as intercultural commu-
nication. Journal of Literacy Studies 26 (2), 12–32.
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. and F.K. Erhard Voeltz (2007). Endangered languages of
Africa and the Middle East. In Chris Moseley (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of the World’s
Endangered Languages, pp. 579–634. London: Routledge.
Distiller Natascha and Melissa E.Steyn (2004) Introduction: under construction. In
Natasha Distiller and Melissa E.Steyn (Eds.), Under Construction: “Race” and
Identity in South Africa Today, pp. 1–11. Johannesburg: Heinemann.
Dlamini, Jacob (2009) Native Nostalgia. Johannesburg: Jacana Media.
Dlamini, Sibusiswe Nombusu (2001) The construction, meaning and negotiation of
ethnic identities in KZN. In Abebe Zegeye (Ed.), Social Identities in the New
South Africa, pp. 195–222. Cape Town: Kwela.
Dlamini, Sibusiswe Nombusu (2005) Youths and Identity Politics in South Africa.
Toronto: Toronto University Press.
Dörnyei, Zoltán and R. Clément (2001) Motivational characteristics of learning dif-
ferent target languages: results of a nationwide survey. In Zoltán Dörnyei and
Richard Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and Second Language Acquisition, pp. 399–
432. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Dörnyei, Zoltán, KataCsizér and Nora Németh (2006) Motivation, Language Atti-
tudes and Globalisation: A Hungarian Perspective. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Dowling, Tessa (1988) The Xhosa women’s language of respect – the oral transmis-
sion of sexism?Catching Winged Words: Oral Tradition and Education, pp. 177–
181. Durban: Oral Documentation and Research Centre, University of Natal.
Dröschel, Yvonne (2010) Lingua Franca English. The Role of Simplification and
Transfer. Bern: Peter Lang.
Dubbeld, Catherine, Elizabeth de Kadt and Vasu Reddy (2006) A preliminary bib-
liography of language and gender. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Lan-
guage Studies 24 (4), 553–557.
Dube, Bevelyn (2017) Afrikaans must fall and English must rise: ironies and con-
tradictions in protests by South African university students. Africa Insight 42 (2),
13–27.
 Bibliography 161
Duchêne, Alexandre and Monika Heller (2012) Pride and profit: changing discourses
of language, capital and nation states. In Alexandre Duchêne and Monika Heller
(Eds.), Language in Late Capitalism: Pride and Profit, pp. 1–21. New York:
Routledge.
Dunjwa-Blajberg, Jennifer (1980) Sprache und Politik in Südafrika. Stellung und
Funktion der Sprachen unter dem Apartheidsystem. Bonn: Informationsstelle
Südliches Afrika.
Du Plessis, Theo (2003) Taalbeleid aan Universiteite in Suid-Afrika. Acta Academics
Supplementum 2, 58–82.
Du Plessis, Theo (2006) From monolingual to bilingual higher education: the reposi-
tioning of historically Afrikaans-medium universities in South Africa. Language
Policy 5 (1), 87–113.
Durán-Almarza, Emilia María, AnanyaKabir and CarlaRodríguez González ( 2017)
Introduction: Debating the Afropolitan. European Journal of English Studies 21
(2), 107–114.
Duranti, Alessandro (2011) Linguistic anthropology. language as a non-neutral
medium. In Rajend Mesthrie (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Sociolinguistics.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 28–46.
Durrheim, Kevin, Xoliswa Mtose and Lindsay Brown (2011) Race Trouble: Race,
Identity and Inequality in Post-Apartheid South Africa. Pietermaritzburg: Kwa-
Zulu-Natal Press.
Dyers, Charlyn (2004) Ten years of democracy: attitudes and identity among some
South African school children, Per Linguam 20 (1), 22–35.
Dyers, Charlyn (2008) Language shift or maintenance? Factors determining the use of
Afrikaans among township youth in South Africa, Stellenbosch Papers in Lin-
guistics 38, 49–72.
Dyers, Charlyn (2016). The conceptual evolution in linguistics. Implications for the
study of Kaaps. Multilingual Margins 3 (2), 62–72.
Eddo-Lodge, Reni (2018) Why I am No Longer Talking to White People about Race.
London: Bloomsbury.
Edwards, John (2009) Language and Ethnicity. Key Topics in Sociolinguistics. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ehrenreich, Susan (2009) English as a lingua franca in multinational corporations –
exploring business communities of practice. In Anna Mauranen and Elina Ranta
(Eds.), English as a Lingua Franca: Studies and Findings, pp. 126–151. Newcastle
upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Ehrenreich, Susan (2018) Communities of practice and English as a lingua franca. In
Jennifer Jenkins, WillBaker and Martin Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook
of English as a Lingua Franca, pp. 37–50. London/New York:Routledge.
Elmes, Simon (2001) The Routes of English. London: BBC Adult Learning.
Engel, Ulf (1997) Ethnische Konflikte und politischer Neubeginn in Südafrika. Afrika
Spectrum 32 (1), 25–47.
Erasmus, Zimitriu (Ed.) (2001) Coloured by History, Shaped by Place: New Per-
spectives on Coloured Identities in Cape Town. Cape Town: Kwela Books.
Erasmus, Zimitriu (2017) Race Otherwise: Forging a New Humanism for South
Africa. Johannesburg: Wits University Press.
Erasmus, Zimitri and Edgar Pieterse (1999) Conceptualizing coloured identity in the
Western Cape Province of South Africa. In Mai Palmberg (Ed.), National Identity
and Democracy in Africa, pp. 167–186. Uppsala: Nordic Africa Institute.
162 Bibliography
Errington, Josef J. (2007) Linguistics in a Colonial World. A Story of Language,
Meaning, and Power. Malden/Cambridge: Blackwell.
Esch, Edith (2009) English and empowerment: potential, issues, way forward. In
Nasreen Hussain, AzraAhmed and Mohammad Zafar (Eds.), English and
Empowerment in the Developing World. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars
Publishing.
Eze, Chielozona (2014) Rethinking African culture and identity: the Afropolitan
model. Journal of African Cultural Studies 26 (2), 234–247.
Eze, Chielozona (2015) Transcultural affinity: thoughts on the emergent cosmopolitan
imagination in South Africa. Journal of African Cultural Studies 27 (2), 216–228.
Eze, Chielozona (2016) We, Afropolitans. Journal of African Cultural Studies 28 (1),
114–119.
Eze, Chielozona (2017) Empathetic cosmopolitanism: South Africa and the quest for
global citizenship. Strategic Review for Southern Africa 39 (1), 236–255.
Eze, Chielozona (2018) Race, Decolonization, and Global Citizenship in South
Africa. Rochester: University of Rochester Press.
Fairclough, Norman and Ruth Wodak (1997) Critical discourse analysis. In Teun A.
Van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as Social Interaction: Discourse Studies, Vol. 2, pp.
258–284. London: Sage.
Fandrych, Ingrid (2012). Between tradition and the requirements of modern life.
Hlonipha in South African Bantu societies, with special reference to Lesotho.
Journal of Language and Culture 3 (4): 67–73.
Fanon, Franz (2008) [1952]. Black Skin, White Mask. New York: Grove Press.
Fardon, Richard and Graham Furniss (Eds.) (1994) African Languages, Development
and the State. New York: Routledge.
Fecho, Bob (2004) Race, Language and Culture in the Classroom. New York/
London: Columbia University Press.
Fiedler, Sabine (2011) English as a lingua franca – a native-culture-free code? Lan-
guage of communication vs. language of identification. Apples – Journal of
Applied Language Studies 5 (3), 79–97.
Finlayson, Rosalie (1978) A preliminary survey of hlonipha among the Xhosa. Taal-
fasette, 24 (2), 48–63.
Finlayson, Rosalie (1995) Women’s language of respect: ‘isihlonipho sabafazi’. In
Rajend Mesthrie (Ed.), Language and Social History, pp. 140–154. Cape Town/
Johannesburg: David Philip.
Finlayson, Rosalie and Sarah Slabbert (Eds.) (1995) Language and Identities in a
Postcolony: Southern African Perspectives. Berlin: Peter Lang.
Finlayson, Roslaie and Sarah Slabbert (1997) ‘I’ll meet you halfway with language’:
code-switching within a South African urban context. In Martin Pütz (Ed.), Lan-
guages Choices: Conditions, Constraints and Consequences, pp. 381–421.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Fishman, Joshua A. (1972) Domains and the relationship between micro-and macro-
sociolinguistics. In John Gumperz and Dell Hymes (Eds.), Directions in Socio-
linguistics, pp. 435–453. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Fishman, Joshua A. (1977) Language and ethnicity. In Howard Giles (Ed.), Lan-
guage, Ethnicity and Intergroup Relations, pp. 16–57. London: Academic Press.
Fishman, Joshua A. (1987) English: neutral tool or ideological protagonist? A 19th
century East-Central European Jewish intellectual views English from afar. Eng-
lish World-Wide 8 (1), 1–10.
 Bibliography 163
Fishman, Joshua A. (1989) Language and Ethnicity in Minority Sociolinguistic Per-
spective 45, Clevedon/Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
Fishman, Joshua A. (1996) In Praise of the Beloved Language. The Hague, Nether-
lands: Mouton de Gruyter.
Fishman, Joshua A. (Ed.) (1999) Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Flores, Nelson and Jonathan Rosa (2015) Undoing appropriateness: raciolinguistic ideol-
ogies ad language diversity in education. Harvard Educational Review 85 (2), 149–201.
Friedman, Steve (2019a) Beyond race or class: the politics of identity and inequality.
Transformation 100 (1), 78–102.
Friedman, Steve (2019b) The more things change … South Africa’s democracy and the
burden of the past. Social Research: An International Quarterly 86 (1), 279–303.
Frueh, Jamie (2003) Political Identity and Social Change. The Remaking of the South
African Social Order. Albany: New York Press.
Gal, Susan (1979) Language Shift: Social Determinants of Linguistic Change in
Bilingual Austria. New York: Academic Press.
Gal, Susan (1998) Multiplicity and contestation among linguistic ideologies. In K.
Woolard and B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Language Ideologies: Practice and Theory (pp.
317–331). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gal, Susan (2013) A linguistic anthropologist looks at English as a Lingua Franca.
Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 2 (1), 177–183.
Garcia, Ofelia (2009) Bilingual Education in the 21st Century: A Global Perspective.
Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Garcia, Ofelia (2010) Languaging and ethnifying. In Joshua Fishman and Ofelia
Garcia (Eds.), Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity. Vol. 1: Disciplinary
and Regional Perspectives, pp. 519–534. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
García, Ofelia, Susana Ibarra Johnson and Kate Seltzer (2017) The Translanguaging
Classroom. Leveraging Student Bilingualism for Learning. Philadelphia: Caslon.
Gear Rich, Camille G. (2012) Racial commodification in the era of elective race:
affirmative action and the lesson of Elizabeth Warren. USC Gould Legal Studies
Research Paper Series 12 (5), 12–19.
Gear Rich, Camille G. (2014) Elective race: recognizing race discrimination in the era
of racial self-identification. Georgetown Law Journal 102, 1501–1572.
Gibson, Erinn (2011) Vulnerability, ignorance, and oppression. Hypatia 26 (2), 308–332.
Giles, H., R.Y.Bourhis and D.M.Taylor ( 1977)Towards a theory of language in
ethnic intergroup relations. In H.Giles (Ed.), Language, Ethnicity and Intergroup
Relations(pp. 307–348). London:Academic Press.
Giliomee, Hermann (2001) Die Taal- an Kulturele Uitdagigs van die Historiese
Afrikaanse Universiteite in Suid-Afrika. DF Malherbe – Gedenklesing 20. Acta
Varia 1, 1–46.
Giliomee, Hermann (2003a) The Rise and Possible Demise of Afrikaans as a Public
Language. Cape Town: PRAESA.
Giliomee, Hermann (2003b) The Afrikaners: Biography of a People. Cape Town:
Tafelberg.
Giliomee, Hermann (2009) The deadly war on languages. Weekly Mail & Guardian, 5
October. Available online: https:// mg.co.za/article/2009-10-05-a-deadly-war-on-langua
ges. Accessed 20 April 2021.
Giliomee, Hermann and Lawrence Schlemmer (2006) ‘N vaste plek vir Afrikaans.
Taaluitdagings op Kampus. Stellenbosch: SUN Press.
164 Bibliography
Gilroy, Paul (2000) Against Race: Imagining Political Culture Beyond the Color Line.
Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard.
Gilroy, Paul (2005) A new cosmopolitanism, Interventions: International Journal of
Postcolonial Studies 7 (3), 287–292.
Gough, David (1996) Black English in South Africa. In Vivian De Klerk (Ed.), Focus
on South Africa, Vol. 15: Varieties of English around the World, pp. 53–77.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gourgem, Hicham (2017) Afropolitanism: the other side of the coin. Transnational
Social Review 7 (3), 287–299.
Graddol, David (1997) The Future of English?London: The British Council.
Graddol, David (2006) English Next. London: The British Council.
Graham, Lucie Valerie (2013) The importance of confronting a colonial patriarchal
and racist past in addressing post-apartheid violence. African Safety Promotion
Journal 11 (2), 28–37.
Grazzi, Enrico (2020) An interdisciplinary approach to English as a lingua franca.
Status Quaestionis, Language, Text, Culture 19, 5–8.
Grosfoguel, Ramon (2011) Decolonizing post-colonial studies and paradigms of
political-economy: transmodernity, decolonial thinking, and global coloniality.
TRANSMODERNITY: Journal of Peripheral Cultural Production of the Luso-
Hispanic World, 1 (1). Available online: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/21k6t3fq.
Accessed 4 April 2020.
Gugushe, R.N. (1978) The teaching of Bantu languages in Black schools. In L.W.
Lanham and K.P. Prinsloo (Eds.), Language and Communication Studies in South
Africa, 215–232. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
Guido, Maria Grazia (2018) English as a Lingua Franca in Migrants’ Trauma Nar-
ratives. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Guy, Jeff (1979) The Destruction of the Zulu Kingdom. London: Longman.
Hall, Stuart (1990) Cultural identity and diaspora. In J. Rutherford (Ed.), Identity:
Community, Culture, Difference, pp. 222–237. London: Lawrence & Wishart.
Hall, Stuart (1996) New ethnicities. In D. Morley and K.H. Cheng (Eds.), Stuart Hall.
Critical Dialogues in Cultural Studies, 442–451. London/New York: Routledge.
Hall, Stuart (1997) Representation. Cultural Representation and Signifying Practices.
London: Sage.
Hammond-Tooke, W.D. (1997) Imperfect Interpreters. South Africa´s Anthro-
pologists 1920–1999. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.
Hansson, Sten (2018) Government communication. In Ruth Wodak and Bernhard
Forchtner (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Language and Politics, pp. 326–341.
London/New York: Routledge.
Harnischfeger, Johannes (1999) Sprachpolitik und Afrikanisierung im neuen Süda-
frika. Afrika Forum 35 (1), 85–97.
Hartshorne, Ken B. (1992) Crisis and Challenge. Black Education 1910–1990. Cape
Town: Oxford University Press.
Hartshorne, Ken B. (1995) Language policy in African education, a background to
the future. In Rajend Mesthrie (Ed.), Language and Social History: Studies in
South African Sociolinguistics, pp. 306–318. Cape Town: David Philip.
Heath, Shirley B. and Brian V.Street (2008) On Ethnography. Approaches to Lan-
guage and Literacy. Amsterdam: Teachers College Press.
Heeschen, V. (1977) Weltansicht-Reflexionen. Über einen Begriff Wilhelm von Hum-
boldts. Historiographia Linguistica 4 (2), 159–190.
 Bibliography 165
Helbling, Monika and Céline Teney (2015) The cosmopolitan elite in Germany:
transnationalism and postmaterialism. Global Networks 15 (4), 446–468.
Heller, Monika (2003) Crosswords: Language, Education and Ethnicity in French
Ontario. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Heller, Monika (2007) Bilingualism: A Social Approach. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Heller Monika and Bonnie McElhinney (2017) Language Capitalism Colonialism.
Toward a Critical History. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Hendricks, Frank (2016) The nature and context of Kaaps: a contemporary, past and
future perspective. Multilingual Margins 3 (2), 6–39.
Herbert, Robert K. (1990a) The sociohistory of clicks in Southern Bantu. Anthro-
pological Linguistics 32 (3/4), 295–315.
Herbert, Robert K. (1990b) Hlonipha and the ambiguous woman. Anthropos 85,
455–473.
Herbert, Robert K. 1992. Language and Society in Africa. The Theory and Practice
of Sociolinguistics. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.
Herbert, Robert K. (2002) The political economy of language shift: language and
gendered ethnicity in a Thonga community. In Rajend Mesthrie (Ed.), Language in
South Africa, pp. 316–335. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heugh, K. (2000b) Multilingual voices: isolation and the crumbling of bridges.
Agenda 46, 21–32.
Hibbert, Liesl and Christa van der Walt (Eds.) (2014) Multilingual Universities in
South Africa. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Hickel, Jason (2015) Democracy as Death. The Moral Oder of Anti-Liberal Politics
in South Africa. Oakland: University of California Press.
Higgins, Christina (2009) English as a Local Language. Post-colonial Identities and
Multilingual Practice. Bristol/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
Hill, Lloyd. 2019. Language, ethnonationalism and the South African University.
Modern Africa 7 (1), 41–79.
Hirson, B. (1979) Year of Fire, Year of Ash. The Soweto Revolt: Roots of a Revo-
lution?London: Zed Press.
Hiu, Lydia H. (1995) Translingual Practice: Literature, National Culture, and
Translated Modernity. China 1900–1937. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Hlatshwayo, S. (2000) Education and Independence: Education in South Africa,
1658–1988. London: Greenwood Press.
Hofmeyer, Isabell (1987) Building a nation from words. Afrikaans language, litera-
ture, and ethnic identity, 1902–1924. In Shula Marks and Stanley Trapido (Eds.),
The Politics of Race, Class and Nationalism in 20th Century South Africa, pp. 95–
123. London: Longman.
Holliday, A. (2009) English as a lingua franca, ‘non-native speakers’ and cosmopolitan
realities. In Farzad Sharifian (Ed.), English as an International Language. Perspectives
and Pedagogical Issues, pp. 21–33. Bristol/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
Holmes, Carolyn E. (2018) Marikana in Translation. Print nationalism in South
Africa’s multilingual press. African Affairs 114 (455), 271–294.
Horáková, Hana (2018) Challenges to political cosmopolitanism. The impact of
racialised discourses in post-apartheid South Africa. Modern Africa 6 (2), 95–118.
Hornberger, Nancy and Viniti Vaish (2009) Multilingual language policy and school
linguistic practice: globalization and English‐language teaching in India, Singapore
and South Africa. Compare 39 (3), 305–320.
166 Bibliography
House, Juliane (2003) English as a lingua franca: A threat to multilingualism? Jour-
nal of Sociolinguistics 7 (4), 556–578.
House, Juliane (2014) English as a global lingua franca: a threat to multilingual
communication and translation. Language Teaching 47 (3), 363–376.
Hsu, Funie (2015) the coloniality of neoliberal English: the enduring structures of
American colonial English instruction in the Philippines and Puerto Rico. L2
Journal 7 (3), 123–145.
Hsu, Funie (2017) Resisting the coloniality of English: a research review of strategies.
The CATESOL Journal 29 (1), 11–132.
Hüllen, Werner (1992) Identifikationssprache und Kommunikationssprache. Über
Probleme der Mehrsprachlichkeit. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 20 (3),
298–317.
Hunter, Mark (2019) Race for Education. Gender, White Tone and Schooling in
South Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hunter, Mark and Atiqa Hachimi (2013) Talking class, talking race: language, class,
and race in the call center industry in South Africa. Social & Cultural Geography,
13 (6), 551–566.
Hurst, Ellen (2009) Tsotsitaal, global culture and local style: identity and recontex-
tualisation in twenty-first century South African townships. Social Dynamics 35, 2,
244–257.
Hurst, Ellen and Mthuli Buthelezi (2014) A visual and linguistic comparison of fea-
tures of Durban and Cape Town Tsotsitaals. South African Linguistics of Applied
Language Studies 32 (2), 185–197.
Hurst, Ellen and Msakha Mona (2017) “Translanguaging” as a socially just peda-
gogy. Education as Change 21 (2), 126–148.
Hutton, Christopher (1998) Linguistics and the Third Reich: Mother-tongue Fascism,
Race and Science of Language. London: Routledge.
Hymes, Dell (1996) Ethnography, Linguistics, Narrative Inequality: Towards an
Understanding of Voice. London: Taylor & Francis.
Hynninen, Nina. (2016) Language Regulation in English as a Lingua Franca. Focus
on Academic Spoken Discourse. Boston/Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Ige , Busayo and Elisabeth de Kadt (2002) Gendering politeness: Zulu-speakers
identities at the University of Natal, Durban. Southern African Linguistics and
Applied Language Studies 20 (3), 147–160.
Irvine, Judith T. (2008) Subjected words: African linguistics and the colonial
encounter. Language and Communication 28, 323–343.
Irvine, Judith T. and Susan Gal (2000) Language ideology and linguistic differentia-
tion. In Paul V. Kroskrity (Ed.), Regimes of Language: Ideologies, Politics and
Identities, pp. 35–85. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.
Irvine, Judith T. and Liz Gunner (2018) With Respect to Zulu: Revisiting ukuHlo-
nipha. Anthropological Quarterly 91 (1), 173–207.
Ishikawa, Tomokazu (2020) Complexity of English as a multilingua franca: place of
monolingual standard English. In M. Konakahara and K. Tsuchiya (Eds.), English
as a Lingua Franca in Japan, pp. 91–109. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ishikawa, Tomokazu and Jennifer Jenkins (2019) What is ELF? Introductory ques-
tions and answers for ELT professionals. The Center for English as a Lingua
Franca 5, 1–10.
Ives, Peter (2010) Cosmopolitanism and global English: language politics in globali-
sation debates. Political Studies 58, 516–535.
 Bibliography 167
Jablonski, Nina G. (Ed.) (2020) Persistence of Race. Stellenbosch: African Sun
Media.
James, Michael (2010) The political ontology of race. Paper presented at the Amer-
ican Political Science Association Conference, 2–5 September. Available online:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1643755. Accessed on 27 May
2020.
Jansen, Jonathan (2009) Knowledge in the Blood. Confronting Race and the Apart-
heid Past. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Jaspers, Jürgen (2018) The transformative limits of translanguaging. Language and
Communciation 58, 1–10.
Jaspers, Jürgen and Lian Malai Madsen (2018) Critical Perspectives on Linguistic
Fixity and Fluidity Languagised Lives. London/New York: Routledge.
Jeewa, Sana and Stephanie Rudwick (2020)“English is the best way to commu-
nicate” – South African Indian students’ blind spot towards the relevance of Zulu.
Sociolinguistica 34 (1), 155–171.
Jenkins, Jennifer (2000) The Phonology of English as an International Language.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jenkins, Jennifer (2007) English as a Lingua Franca: Attitude and Identity. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Jenkins, Jennifer (2014). English as a Lingua Franca at the International University:
The Politics of Academic English Language Policy. London/New York: Routledge.
Jenkins, Jennifer (2015) Repositioning English and multilingualism in English as a
lingua franca. Englishes in Practice 2 (3), 49–85.
Jenkins, Jennifer (2018a) Not English but English-within-multilingualism. In Simon
Coffee and Ursula Wingate (Eds.), New Directions for Research in Foreign Lan-
guage Education. London/New York: Routledge.
Jenkins, Jennifer (2018b) The future of English as a lingua franca. In Jennifer Jen-
kins, WillBaker and Martin Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English as
a Lingua Franca, pp. 594–605. London/New York: Routledge.
Jenkins, Jennifer (2020) Mediating communication – ELF and flexible multi-
lingualism perspectives on the Common European Framework of Reference for
Languages. Applied Linguistics 3 (1), 26–41.
Jenkins, Jennifer, Will Baker and Martin Dewey (Eds.) (2018) The Routledge Hand-
book of English as a Lingua Franca. London/New York: Routledge.
Jenkins, Jennifer, Alessia Cogo and Martin Dewey (2011) State-of-the-art-article.
Language Teaching 43 (3), 281–315.
Jenkins, Jennifer and Anna Mauranen (2019) Linguistic Diversity on the EMI
Campus. London/New York: Routledge.
Joseph, John (2006) Language and Politics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Kachru, Braj (1976) Models for English for the third world: white man’s linguistic
burden or language pragmatics. TESOL Quarterly 1 (2), 221–239.
Kachru, Braj (Ed.) (1982) The Other Tongue. English across Cultures. Urbana/Chi-
cago: University of Illinois Press.
Kachru, Braj (1985) Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: the English
language in the outer circle. In Randolph Quirk and Henry G.Widdowson (Eds.),
English in the World: Teaching and Learning the Language and Literatures (pp.
11–30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kadenge, Maxwell and Dion Nkomo. (2011) The politics of the English language in
Zimbabwe. Language Matters 42 (2), 248–263.
168 Bibliography
Kamwangamalu, Nkonko M. (1997) Multilingualism and education policy in post-
apartheid South Africa. Language Problems and Language Planning, 21 (3), 234–253.
Kamwangamalu, Nkonko M. (2000a) A new language policy, old language practices:
status planning for African languages in a multilingual South Africa. South Afri-
can Journal of African Languages 20 (1), 50–60.
Kamwangamalu, Nkonko M. (2000b) Introduction. International Journal of the
Sociology of Language 144, 1–6.
Kamwangamalu, Nkonko M. (2001a) Ethnicity and language crossing in post-apart-
heid South Africa. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 152, 75–95.
Kamwangamalu, Nkonko M. (2001b) The language planning situation in South
Africa. Current Issues in Language Planning 2 (4), 361–445.
Kamwangamlu, Nkonko M. (2002) The social history of English in South Africa.
World Englishes 21 (1), 1–8.
Kamwangamalu, Nkonko M. (2003) Social change and language shift: South Africa.
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 23, 225–242.
Kamwangamalu, Nkonko M. (2007) One language, multi-layered identities: English
in a society in transition, South Africa. World Englishes, 26, 3, 263–275.
Kamwangamalu, Nkonko M. (2013) Effects on policy of English-medium instruction
in Africa. World Englishes 32 (3), 325–337.
Kamwangamalu, Nkonko M. (2019) English as a naturalized African language.
World English 38 (1/2), 114–127.
Kapp, Rochelle and Bongi Bangeni (2011) A longitudinal study of students’ negotia-
tion of language, literacy and identity. Southern African Linguistics and Applied
Language Studies 29 (2), 197–208.
Kaunda, Chammah K. (2017) Highjacking subaltern’s history (broken bodies, broken
voices): decolonial critique of ‘subaltern whiteness’ in South Africa. Theological
Studies 73 (3), 1–9.
Kecskes, Istvan (2007) Formulaic language in English lingua franca. In Istvan Kecskes
and Laurence Horn (Eds.), Explorations in Pragmatics: Linguistic, Cognitive and
Intercultural Aspects, pp. 191–218. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.
Kerfoot, Caroline (2019) Languaging race and ethnicity: reconstructing raciolinguistic
orders in post-apartheid schools. Paper presented at the 20th International Con-
gress of Linguistics, 4 July, Cape Town.
Kessi, Shose and Josephine Cornell (2015) Coming to UCT: black students, trans-
formation and discourses of race. Journal of Student Affairs in Africa 3 (2), 1–16.
Khokhlova, Irina (2015) Lingua franca English of South Africa. Procedia: Social and
Behaviourial Sciences 214, 983–991.
Kirkpatrick, Andy (2010) English as a Lingua Franca in ASEAN. A Multilingual
Model. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Kirkpatrick, Andy (2013) The lingua franca approach to the teaching of English. A
possible pathway to genuine multilingualism in local languages and English. In
Hamish Mcllwraith (Ed.), Multilingual Education in Africa: Lessons from the
Juba Language-in-Education Conference, pp. 11–15. London: British Council.
Kirkpatrick, Andy (2014) Researching English as a lingua franca in Asia: the Asian
Corpus of English (ACE) project. Asian Englishes 13 (1), 4–18.
Kirkpatrick, Andy (2018) The development of English as a lingua franca in ASEAN.
In Jennifer Jenkins, WillBaker and Martin Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge Hand-
book of English as a Lingua Franca, pp. 138–149. London/New York: Routledge.
 Bibliography 169
Knapp, Karlfried (2002) The fading out of the non-native speaker. Native speaker
dominance in lingua-franca-situation. In Karlfried Knapp and Christiane Meier-
kord (Eds.), Lingua Franca Communication, pp. 217–244. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Knapp, Karlfried (2015 [1987]) English as an international lingua franca and the
teaching of intercultural communication. Reprinted in Journal of English as a
Lingua Franca 4 (1), 173–189.
Knapp, Karlfried and Christiane Meierkord (Eds.) (2002) Lingua Franca Commu-
nication. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Kolocsai, Karolina (2009) Erasmus – exchange students: A -behind-the-scene view into
an ELF community of practice. Journal of Applied Language Studies 3 (1), 25–49.
Kolocsai, Karolina (2014) Communities of Practice and English as a lingua franca.
Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Konakahara Maju and Tsuchiya, Keiko (Eds.) (2020) English as a Lingua Franca in
Japan. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kotzé, Ernst F. (2000) Socio-cultural and linguistic corollaries of ethnicity in South
Africa. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 144, 7–18.
Kress, Gunther (2010) Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary
Communication. London: Routledge.
Kriel, Mariana (2003) Approaches to multilingualism in language planning and
identity politics: a critique. Society in Transition 34 (1): 159–177.
Kriel, Mariana (2006) Fools, philologists and philosophers: Afrikaans and the politics
of cultural nationalism. Politikon 33 (1), 45–70.
Kroskrity, Paul V. (2004) Language ideologies. In Alessandro Duranti (Ed.), A Compa-
nion to Linguistic Anthropology, pp. 496–517. Malden/Oxford/Victoria: Blackwell.
Kroskrity, Paul V. (2010) Language ideologies: evolving perspectives. In Jürgen Jas-
pers, Jan-OlaÖstman and Jef Verschueren (Eds.), Society and Language, 192–211.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kroskrity, Paul V. (2020) Theorizing linguistic racism from a language ideological
perspective. In Samy H.Alim. AngelaReyes, and Paul. V. Kroskrity (Eds.), pp. 68–
89. The Oxford Handbook of Language and Race, pp.-68–69. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Krzyzanowski, Michael (2011) Ethnography and critical discourse analysis: towards a
problem-orientated research dialogue. Critical Discourse Studies 8 (4), 231–238.
Kumaravadivelu, Bala (2016) The decolonial option in English teaching: can the
subaltern act? TESOL Quarterly 50 (1), 55–85.
Kuo, I-Chun (2006) Addressing the issue of teaching English as a lingua franca. ELT
Journal 60 (3), 213–221.
Laband, John (1992) Kingdom in Crisis. The Zulu Response to the British Invasion
of (1979). Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press.
Lacoste, Véronique, Jakob Leimgruber and Thiemo Breyer (2014) Authenticity: a
view from inside and outside sociolinguistics. In Véronique Lacoste, Jakob Leim-
gruber and Thiemo Breyer (Eds.), Indexing Authenticity: Sociolinguistic Perspec-
tives, pp. 1–13. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.
Lafon, Michel (2008) Asikhulume! African languages for all, a powerful strategy for
spearheading transformation and improvement of the South African education
system. IFAS Working Paper Series 11: 35–59.
Lafon, Michel (2010) Promoting social cum racial integration in South Africa by
making an African language a national senior certificate pass requirement. Alter-
nation 17 (1), 417–442.
170 Bibliography
LANGTAG (1996) Towards a National Language Plan for South Africa. Final Report
of the Language Plan Task Group. Pretoria: Department of Arts and Culture.
Lanham, Len W. (1978) An outline history of the languages of Southern Africa. In
Len W.Lanham and Karel P.Prinsloo (Eds.), Language and Communication Stu-
dies in South Africa, pp. 13–28. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
Lanham, Len W. (1996) A history of English in South Africa. In Vivian De Klerk
(Ed.), Focus on South Africa, pp. 19–34. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Le Page, R.B. and Andrée Tabouret-Keller (1985) Acts of Identity: Creole-based
Approaches to Language and Ethnicity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Levinson, Stephen (1992) Activity types and language. In Paul Drew and John Heri-
tage (Eds.), Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, pp. 66–100. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Levon, Erez and Ronald Beline Mendes (Eds.) (2016) Language, Sexuality and Power.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lo, Adreienn and Elaine Chun (2020) Language, Arce and Reflexivity: A view from lin-
guistics anthropology. In Samy H.Alim. AngelaReyes and Paul. V. Kroskrity (Eds.),
The Oxford Handbook of Language and Race. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Love, Nigel and Umberto Ansaldo (2010) The native speaker and the mother tongue.
Language Sciences 32, 589–593.
Lushaba, Suyabonga Lwazi (2016) Theoretical reflections on the epistemic production of
colonial difference. Doctoral thesis submitted at the University of Witwatersrand.
Available online: http://wiredspace.wits.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10539/19853/Lwazi-
Theoretical%20Reflections%20on%20the%20Epistemic%20Production%20of.pdf?
sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Accessed 27 May 2020.
Maartens , Jeanne (1998) Multilingualism and language policy in South Africa. In
Guus Extra and Jeanne Maartens (Eds.), Multilingualism in a Multicultural Con-
text. Studies in Multilingualism, pp. 15–36. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.
Mabokela, Reitumetse O. (2001) Selective inclusion: transformation and language
policy at the University of Stellenbosch. In O. Mabokela Reitumetse and Kimberly
L. King (Eds.), Apartheid No More: Case Studies of Southern African Universities
in the Process of Transformation, pp. 59–72. Westport: Praeger.
Madia, Tshidi (2016) Msimang is not putting on an accent for whites like Mmusi.
News24, 17 August. Available online: https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/
News/quotes-julius-malema-on-coalitions-20160817. Accessed 19 February 2019.
Madiba, Mbulungeni (2005) Integration and national identity in South Africa: a
dilemma for linguistic minorities. In Rosalie Finlayson and Sarah Slabbert (Eds.),
Language and Identities in a Postcolony: Southern African Perspectives, pp. 175–
194. Frankfurt: Peter Lang Verlag.
Madonsela, Thuli (2019) What is the South Africa we want supposed to look like? City
Press, 4 June. Available online: https://city-press.news24.com/Voices/thuli-madonsela-
what-is-the-south-africa-we-want-supposed-to-look-like-20190604. Accessed 5 June
2019.
Maimane, Mmusi (2017) On race and identity. Politicsweb, 19 February 2014.
Makalela, Leketi (2004) Making sense of BSAE for linguistic democracy in South
Africa. World Englishes 23 (3), 355–366.
Makama, Refiloe, Rebecca Helman, NeziswaTiti and Sarah Day (2019) The danger
of a single feminist narrative. African centred colonial feminism for black men.
Agenda. doi:10.1080/10130950.2019.1667736.
 Bibliography 171
Makhanya, Mondli (2006, 9 April). Zuma needs to stop himself being seen as a
latter-day Buthelezi. The Sunday Times.
Makoni, Busi (2018) Beyond country of birth: heritage language learning and the
discursive construction of identities of resistance. Heritage Language Journal 15
(1), 73–96.
Makoni, Sinfree (1996) Language and identities in Southern Africa. In Louise de la
Gorgendiere, Kenneth King and Sarah Vaughan (Eds.), Ethnicity in Africa. Roots,
Meanings and Implications, pp. 261–274. Edinburgh: Centre of African Studies,
University of Edinburgh.
Makoni, Sinfree (1998) African languages as European scripts the shaping of communal
memory. In Sarah Nuttall and Carli Cotzee (Eds.), Negotiating the Past. The Making
of Memory in South Africa, pp. 242–248. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
Makoni, Sinfree (2003) From misinvention to disinvention of language: multi-
lingualism and the South African Constitution. In Sinfree Makoni, Geneva Smi-
therman, Arnetha F. Ball and Arthur K. Spears (Eds.), Black Linguistics, pp. 132–
151. London/New York: Routledge.
Makoni, Sinfree and Busi Makoni (2009) English and education in Anglophone
Africa: historical and current realities. In Mary Shepard Wong and Suresh Cana-
garajah (Eds.), Christian and Critical English Language Educators in Dialogie.
Pedagogical and Ethical Dilemmas, pp. 106–119. London/New York: Routledge.
Makoni, Sinfree and Alastair Pennycook (2012) Disinventing multilingualism: from
monological multilingualism to multilingual francas. In Marilyn Martin-Jones,
Adrian Blackledge and Angela Creese (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Multi-
lingualism, pp. 439–453. London/New York: Routledge.
Makoni, Sinfree, Geneva Smitherman, Arnetha F.Ball and Arthur K.Spears (2003)
Introduction: towards black linguistics. In Sinfree Makoni, Geneva Smitherman,
Arnetha F. Ball and Arthur K. Spears (Eds), Black Linguistics, pp. 1–17. London/
New York: Routledge.
Makubalo, George (2007) “I don’t know … it contradicts”: identity construction and
the use of English by learners in a desegregated school space. English Academy
Review 24 (2), 25–41.
Maré, Gerhard (1992) Brothers Born of Warrior Blood. Politics and Ethnicity in
South Africa. Johannesburg: Ravan Press.
Maré, Gerhard (1993) Ethnicity and Politics in South Africa. London: Zed Books.
Maré, Gerhard (1995) Ethnicity as identity and ethnicity politically mobilised: sym-
bols of mobilisation in Inkatha. Unpublished doctoral thesis submitted at the
University of Natal, Durban.
Maré, Gerhard (2014) Declassified. Moving beyond the Dead End of Race in South
Africa. Jacana: Auckland Park.
Maribe, Tebogo and Heather Brookes (2014). Mal youth talk in the construction of
black lesbian identities. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Stu-
dies 32(2), 199–214.
Marks, Shula (2004) ‘The dog that did not bark, or why Natal did not take off’:
ethnicity and democracy in South Africa – KZN. In Bruce Berman, DicksonEyoh
and Will Kymlicka (Eds.), Ethnicity and Democracy in Africa, pp. 183–199.
Oxford: James Curry.
Marshall, Rhode (2018) My accent is my identity, don’t stigmatise it. Available
online: https://city-press.news24.com/Voices/my-accent-is-my-identity-dont-stigma
tise-it-20180209. Accessed 19 February 2019.
172 Bibliography
Martinez, Danny C. (2017) Imagining a language of solidarity for Black and Latinx
youth in English language arts classrooms. English Education 49, 179–196.
Marx Knoetze, Hannelie (2020) Romanticizing the “Boer”: narratives of white victim-
hood in South African Popular Culture. Journal of Literary Studies 36 (4), 48–69.
Mashau, Thinandavha (2018) Unshackling the chains of coloniality: reimagining
decoloniality, Africanisation and reformation for a non-racial South Africa.
Theological Studies 74 (3), 1–8.
Matthews, Sally (2011) Becoming African: debating post-apartheid white South
African identity. African Identities 9 (1), 1–17.
Mauranen , Anna (2003) The corpus of English as a lingua franca in academic set-
tings. TESOL Quarterly 22 (4), 513–527.
Mauranen, Anna (2018) Conceptualising ELF. In Jennifer Jenkins, WillBaker and
Martin Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca,
pp. 7–24. London/New York: Routledge.
Mauranen, Anna. (2012) Exploring ELF in Academia. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
May, Stephen (2005) Language rights. Journal of Sociolinguistics 9, 319–347.
May, Stephen (2012) Language and Minority Rights: Ethnicity, Nationalism and the
Politics of Language (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Mayaba, Nokhanyo N., Monwabisi K.Ralarala and Pinethe Angu (2018) Student
voice: perspectives on language and critical pedagogy in South African higher
education. Educational Research for Social Change 7 (1), 1–12.
Mazrui, Alamin M. (2004) English in Africa. After the Cold War. Clevedon/Buffalo/
Toronto/Sydney: Multilingual Matters.
Mazrui, Ali A. and Alamin M.Mazrui (1998) The Power of Babel: Language and
Governance in the African Experience. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mbembe, Achille (2007) Afropolitanism. In Njami Simon and Lucy Durán (Eds.),
Africa Remix: Contemporary Art of a Continent, pp. 26–30. Johannesburg:
Johannesburg Art Gallery.
Mbembe, Achille (2017) Critique of Black Reason. Durham/London: Duke University
Press.
Mbembe, Achille and Sarah Balakrishan (2016) Pan-African legacies, Afropolitan
futures. Transition 120, 28–37.
McCormick, Kay (2006) Language in Cape Town’s District Six. New York: Oxford
University Press.
McIntosh, Janet (2018) Listening versus Lingwashing: Promise, peril and Structural
oblivion when white South Africans learn indigenous African languages. Sign and
Society 6 (3), 475–503.
McKinney, Carolyn (2007) “If I speak English does it make me less black anyway?”
‘Race’ and English in South African desegregated schools. English Academy
Review 24 (2), 6–24.
McKinney, Carolyn (2015) What counts as language in South African schooling?
AILA Review 28, 103–126.
McKinney, Carolyn (2017) Language and Power in Post-Colonial Schooling: Ideolo-
gies in Practice. London/New York: Routledge.
McLean, Daryland and Kay McCormick (1996) English in South Africa: 1940–1996.
In J. Fishman (Ed.), A Post Imperial English: Status Change in Former British and
American Colonies 1940–1990, 303–337. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
 Bibliography 173
McLean, Hugh and Linda Ngcobo (1995) ‘Abangibhamayo bathi ngimnandi’ (Those
who fuck me say I’m tasty): gay sexuality in reef townships. In Mark Gevisser and
Edward Cameron (Eds.), Defiant Desire: Gay and Lesbian Lives in South Africa,
pp. 158–185. London/New York: Routledge.
Meierkord, Christiane (2002) ‘Language stripped bare’ or ‘linguistic masala’. Culture
in lingua franca communication. In Karlfried Knapp and Christiane Meierkord
(Eds.), Lingua Franca Communication, pp. 109–133. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Meierkord, Christiane (2004) Syntactic variation in interactions across international
Englishes. English World-Wide, 25(1), 109–132.
Meierkord, Christiane, Bebwa Isingoma and Saudah Namyalo (Eds.) (2016) Ugandan
English. Its Sociolinguistics, Structure, and Uses in a Globalising Post-Protecto-
rate. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Meierkord, Christiane and Karlfried Knapp (2002) Approaching lingua franca com-
munication. In Karlfried Knapp and Christiane Meierkord (Eds.), Lingua Franca
Communication, pp. 9–28. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Mesthrie, Rajend (Ed.) (1995) Language and Social History. Cape Town/ Johannes-
burg: David Philip.
Mesthrie, Rajend (2006) Anti-deletions in an L2 grammar: a study of Black South
African English mesolect. English World Wide 27 (2), 111–145.
Mesthrie, Rajend (2017a) Class, gender, and substrate erasure in sociolinguistic
change: a sociophonetic study of schwa in deracializing South African English.
Language 93 (2), 314–346.
Mesthrie, Rajend. (2017b) ‘Urban Cool!’: social bridging in language. In Christopher
Ballantine, MichaelChapman, Kira Erwin and Gerhard Maré (Eds.), Living Toge-
ther, Living Apart? Social Cohesion in a Future South Africa, pp. 101–109. Pie-
termaritzburg: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press.
Methope, Gosebo. (2017) Don’t feed me your English from London. Zuma tells
Maimane. The Citizen. Available online: https://citizen.co.za/news/south-africa/
1549359/dont-feed-me-your-english-from-london-zuma-tells-maimane. Accessed 27
July 2019.
Mhlongo, Niq (2019) Black Tax – Burden or Ubuntu?Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball
Publishers.
Mignolo, Walter D. (2001) Coloniality of power and subalternity. In Ileana Rodri-
guez and Maria Milagros López (Eds.), The Latin American Subaltern Studies
Reader, pp. 424–444. Durham: Duke University Press.
Mignolo, Walter D. (2007) ‘Introduction: coloniality of power and de-colonial
thinking’. Cultural Studies 21 (2/3), 155–167.
Mignolo, Walter D. (2012) Local Histories/Global Design. Coloniality, Subaltern
Knowledges, and Border Thinking. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Mignolo, Walter D. and Katherine Walsh (2018) On Decoloniality. Concepts, Ana-
lytics and Praxis. Durham/London: Duke University Press.
Milani, Tommaso (2019) Southern perspectives on race/gender/sexuality – undisci-
plined applied linguistics. Cadernos Discursivos, Catalão-GO 1 (1), 8–28.
Milroy, J.and L.Milroy ( 1999) Authority in Language: Investigating Language Pre-
scription and Standardisation. London:Routledge.
Modiano, M. (2009) Inclusive/Exclusive? English as a lingua franca in the European
Union. World Englishes 28 (2), 208–223.
Moore, Emma (2004) Sociolinguistic style: a multidimensional resource for shared
identity creation. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 49 (3/4), 375–396.
174 Bibliography
Motschenbacher, Heiko (2013) New Perspectives on English as a European Lingua
Franca. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Banjamins.
Moyo, F.( 2006, 7–12 April). 100% Zuluboy. Mail & Guardian, p. 4.
Msibi, Thabo (2013) Homophobic language and linguistic resistance in KwaZulu-
Natal, South Africa. In Lilian Lem Atanga, Sibonile Edith Ellece, Lia Litosseliti
and Jane Sunderland (Eds.), Gender and Language in Sub-Saharan Africa, pp.
253–274. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Msibi, Thabo and Stephanie Rudwick (2015) Intersections of two isiZulu genderlects
and the construction of skesana identities. Stellenbosch Paper in Linguistics Plus 46,
51–66.
Munro, Martha and Karina Lemmer (2018) Multilingual theater voice training in
South Africa: our translingual attempt employing Lessac kinesensics. Voice and
Speech Review 13 (2), 173–187.
Murray, Sarah (2002) Language issues in South African education: an overview. In
Rajend Mesthrie (Ed.), Language in South Africa, pp. 434–448. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Naples, Nancy A. (1997) A feminist revisiting of the insider/outsider debate: the
‘outsider phenomenon’ in rural Iowa. In Rosanna Hertz (Ed.), Reflexivity and
Voice, pp. 70–94. London: Sage.
Ndebele, Njabulo (1986) South African Literature and Culture. Rediscovery of the
Ordinary. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Ndhlovu, Finex (2015) Hegemony and Language Politics in Southern Africa. New-
castle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Ndhlovu, Finex (2019) South African social transformation policies: raciolinguis-
tic ideologies and neoliberal rhetoric. Journal of Multicultural Discourse 14 (2),
131–151.
Ndhlovu, Finex and Liqhwa Siziba (2018) English in Southern Africa. In T. Kamu-
sella and F. Ndhlovu (Eds.), The Social and Political History of Southern Africa’s
Languages, pp. 65–92. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ndlovu-Gatsheni, Sabelo J. (2013) Empire, Global Coloniality and African Sub-
jectivity. New York: Berghahn Books.
Ndlovu-Gatsheni, Sabelo J. (2009) Africa for Africans or Africa for ‘natives’ only?
New nationalism and nativism in Zimbabwe and South Africa. Africa Spectrum
44 (1), 61–78.
Nekvápil, Jiři and Tamah Sherman (2015) An introduction: Language Management
Theory in language policy and planning. International Journal of the Sociology of
Language 232, 1–12.
Ngcoya, Mvuselelo (2015) Hyperapartheid. Journal of Narrative Politics 2 (1), 37–46.
Ngubane, Sihawukele and Nompumelelo Thabethe (2013) Shifts and continuities in
Zulu personal naming practices. Liberator: Journal of Literary Criticism, Com-
parative Linguistics and Literary Studies 34 (1), 1–7.
Ngu-gı-, wa Thiong’o (1986) Decolonising the Mind. The Politics of Language in
African Literature. London: James Curry.
Ngu-gı-, wa Thiong’o (1993) Moving the Centre: The Struggle for Cultural Freedoms.
London: James Curry.
Niedrig, H. (1999) Sprache-Macht-Kultur. Multilinguale Erziehung im Post-Apart-
heid-Südafrika. Münster: Waxmann.
Norton, Bonny (2000) Identity and Language Learning; Gender, Ethnicity and Edu-
cational Change. London: Pearson Education.
 Bibliography 175
Norton, Bonny (2001) Non-participation, imagined communities, and the language
classroom. In Michael P.Breen (Ed.), Learner Contributions to Language Learning:
New Directions in Research, pp. 159–171. London: Pearson Education.
Norton, Bonny (2010) Identity, literacy and English-language teaching. TESL Canada
Journal 28 (1), 1–13.
Norton Peirce, Bronwyn (1989) Toward a pedagogy of possibility in the teaching of
English internationally: people’s English in South Africa. TESOL Quarterly 23 (3),
401–420.
Ntombana, Luvuyo and Thandiwe Bubulu (2017) Shifting boundaries of racial space
in post-apartheid South Africa: the case of Afrikaner youths in East London. The
Journal of Transdisciplinary Research in South Africa 13 (1).
Nyamnjoh, Francis B. (2017) Drinking from the Cosmic Gourd. Cape Town: African
Books Collective.
Nyamnjoh, Francis B. (2020) Amos Tutuola as a quest hero for endogenous Africa:
actively anglicising the Yoruba language and yorubanizing the English language.
Acta Acdemica 52 (1), 1–11. doi:10.18820/24150479/ aa52i1.1.
Nyamnjoh, Francis B. and Divine Fuh (2014) Africans consuming hair, Africans
consumed by hair. Africa Insight 44 (1), 52–68.
Nyembezi, Cyril LincolnSibusiso (1961) A Review of Zulu Literature. Pietermaritz-
burg: University of Natal Press.
Omoniyi, Tope. (2016) Language, race and identity. In Siân Preece (Ed.), The Routledge
Handbook of Language and Identity, pp. 146–162. London/New York: Routledge.
O’Regan, John P. (2014) English as a lingua franca: an immanent critique. Applied
Linguistics 35 (5), 533–552.
Orman, J. (2008) Language Policies and Nation-Building in Post-Apartheid South
Africa. Vienna: Springer.
Otsuji, Emi and Alastair Pennycook. (2010) Metrolingualism: fixity, fluidity and
language in flux. International Journal of Multilingualism 7 (3), 240–254.
Painter, Desmond (2015) Monolingualism, not Afrikaans must fall. Opinion piece.
Available online: https://www.litnet.co.za/monolingualism-not-afrikaans-must-fall.
Accessed 10 May 2020.
Park, Joseph Sung-Yul and Lionel Wee (2011) A practice/based critique of English as
a lingua franca. World Englishes 30 (3), 360–374.
Parmegiani, Andrea (2008) Language ownership in multilingual settings: exploring
attitudes among students entering the University of KwaZulu-Natal Access pro-
gram. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics 38, 107–124.
Parmegiani, Andrea (2017) Gender and the ownership of English in South Africa.
World Englishes 36 (1), 42–59.
Parmegiani, Andrea and Stephanie Rudwick (2014) IsiZulu-English Bilingualisation
at the University of KwaZulu-Natal: an exploration of students’ attitudes. In Liesl
Hibbert and Christa van der Walt (Eds.), Multilingual Universities in South
Africa, pp. 107–122. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Pavlenko, Aneta and Adrian Blackledge (2004) Introduction: new theoretical
approaches to the study of negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts. In
Anna Pavlenko and Adrian Blackledge (Eds.), Negotiation of Identity in Multi-
lingual Contexts, pp. 1–33. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Pavlenko, Aneta and Bonny Norton (2007) Imagined communities, identity, and
English language teaching. In Jim Cummins and Chris Davison (Eds.), Interna-
tional Handbook of English Language Teaching. New York: Springer.
176 Bibliography
Penner, Andrew M. and Aliya Saperstein (2008) How social status shapes race. In
Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, PNAS 105 (50), 19628–19630.
Pennycook, Alastair (1998) English and the Discourses of Colonialism. London:
Routledge.
Pennycook, Alastair (2007) Global English and Transcultural Flows. London/New
York: Routledge.
Pennycook, Alastair (2010) The future of Englishes: one, many or none? In Andy
Kirkpatrick (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of World Englishes, pp. 673–688.
London/New York: Routledge.
Pennycook, Alastair (2017) The Cultural Politics of English as an International Lan-
guage. London/New York: Routledge.
Pennycook, Alastair (2020) Translingual entanglements of English. World Englishe
39 (2), 222–235. doi:10.1111/weng.12456.
Pennycook, Alastair and Sinfree Makoni (2020) Innovations and Challenges in
Applied Linguistics from the Global South. London/New York: Routledge.
Pennycook, Alastair and Emi Otsuji (2015) Metrolingualism. Language in the City.
London/New York: Routledge.
Pennycook, Alastair, Rosane R.Pessoa and Viviane P.V.Silvestre (2016) Reflections on
critical applied linguistics: a conversation with Alastair Pennycook. Signótica, 613–632.
Available online: https://www.revistas.ufg.br/sig/article/view/44708/24983. Accessed 28
April 2021.
Perry, Timothy (2004a) Language rights, ethnic politics. A critique of the Pan South
African Language Board. PRAESA Occasional Papers No 13.
Perry, Timothy (2004b) The case of a toothless watchdog: language rights and ethnic
mobilisation in South Africa. Ethnicities 4 (4), 501–521.
Petriglieri, Gianpiero (2016) In defense of cosmopolitanism. Harvard Business
ReviewDecember 15. Available online: https://hbr.org/2016/12/in-defense-of-cosm
opolitanism. Accessed 17 June 2018.
Phillipson, Robert (1992) Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Phillipson, Robert (2006) English, a cuckoo in the European higher education nest of
languages? European Journal of English Studies 10 (1), 13–32.
Phillipson, Robert (2008) Lingua franca or lingua frankensteinia? English in Eur-
opean integration and globalization. World Englishes 27 (2), 250–267.
Phipps, Alison (2020) Me, and Not You. The Trouble with Mainstream Feminism.
Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Pierre, Jemima (2012) The Predicament of Blackness. Postcolonial Ghana and the
Politics of Race. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Pietkäinen, Sari (2010) Sámi language mobility: scales and discourses of multi-
lingualism in a polycentric environment. International Journal of the Sociology of
Language 202, 79–101.
Piller, Ingrid (2001) Identity constructions in multilingual advertising. Language and
Society, 30, 153–186.
Piller, Ingrid (2015) Language ideology. In Karen Tracy, CorneliaIlie and Todd
Sandel (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction,
pp. 917–927. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Piller, Ingrid, Jie Zhang and Jia Li (2020) Linguistics diversity in a time of crisis.
Language challenges of the COVID-10 pandemic. Multilingua 39 (5), 503–515.
Pitzl, Marie-Luise (2012) Creativity meets convention: idiom variation and re-meta-
phorization in ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 1 (1), 27–55.
 Bibliography 177
Podesva, Robert J. (2016) Stance as a Window into the Language-Race Connection:
Evidence from African American and White Speakers in Washington, DC. In Samy
H. Alim, Angela Reyes and Paul V. Kroskrity (Eds.), Raciolinguistics. How Language
Shaped Our Ideas about Race, pp. 203–220. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pölzl, Ulrieke and Barabara Seidlhofer (2006) In and on their own terms: the ‘habitat
factor’ in English as lingua franca interactions. International Journal of the
Sociology of Language 177, 151–176.
Posel, Dorrit and Daniela Casale (2011) Language proficiency and language policy in
South Africa: findings from new data. International Journal of Educational
Development 31, 443–451.
Posel, Dorrit, Mark Hunter and Stephanie Rudwick (2020) ‘Revisiting the prevalence
of English: language use outside the home in South Africa’. Journal of Multi-
lingual and Multicultural Development. doi:10.1080/01434632.2020.1778707.
Posel, Dorrit and Stephanie Rudwick (2014) Marriage and ilobolo in contemporary
Zulu society. African Studies Review 57(2), 51–72.
Posel, Dorrit and Jochen Zeller (2011) Home language and English language ability
in South Africa: insights from new data. Southern African Linguistics and Applied
Language Studies 29 (2), 115–126.
Posel, Dorrit and Jochen Zeller (2015) Language shift or increased bilingualism in
South Africa? Evidence from census data. Journal of Multilingual and Multi-
cultural Development 37 (4), 357–370.
Posel, Dorrit and Jochen Zeller (2020) Language use and language shift in post-
apartheid South Africa. In Raymond Hickey (Ed.), English in Multilingual South
Africa. The Linguistics of Contact and Change, pp. 288–309. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Prinsloo, Jeanne (2009) Theorising news mediations of the Zuma rape trial – citizens
and subjects in collision. Critical Discourse Studies 6 (2), 81–96.
Prodromou, Luke (2008) English as a Lingua Franca. London/New York:
Continuum.
Quijano, Anibal (2000) Coloniality of power, Eurocentrism, and Latin America
(translated by Michael Ennis). Napantla: Views from the South 1 (3), 533–580.
Ramanathan, Vaidehi (2012) Rethinking discourses around the “English-cosmopolitan”
correlation: scenes from formal and informal multilingual educational contexts. In
Marilyn Martin-Jones, AdrianBlackledge and Angela Creese (Eds.), The Routledge
Handbook of Multilingualism, pp. 66–82. London/New York: Routledge.
Rampton, Ben, Janet Maybin and Celia Roberts (2015) Theory and method in lin-
guistic ethnography. In Fiona Copland, SaraShaw and Julia Snell (Eds.), Linguistic
Ethnography. Interdisciplinary Explorations, pp. 14–50. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Raum, Otto F. (1973) The Social Functions of Avoidances and Taboos Among the
Zulu. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Reagan, Timothy (2001) The promotion of linguistic diversity in multilingual set-
tings: policy and reality in post-apartheid South Africa. Language Problems and
Language Planning 25, 51–72.
Reddy, Vasu and Cheryl Potgieter (2006) ‘Real men stand up for the truth’: dis-
cursive meanings in the Jacob Zuma rape trial, Southern African Linguistics and
Applied Language Studies 24 (4), 511–521.
Reinharz, Shulamit (1997) Who am I? The need for a variety of selves in the field. In
Rosanna Hertz (Ed.), Reflexivity and Voice, pp. 3–20. London: Sage.
178 Bibliography
Ricento, Thomas (2002) Introduction. International Journal of the Sociology of
Language 154, 1–9.
Ridge, Stanley G.M. (2000) Mixed motives. Ideological elements in the support of
English in South Africa. In Thomas Ricento (Ed.), Ideologies, Politics and Lan-
guage Policies, pp. 151–172. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Robins, Steven (2008) Sexual politics and the Zuma Rape Trial. Journal of Southern
African Studies, 34 (2), 411–427.
Rosa, Jonathan (2016) From mock Spanish to inverted Spanglish: language ideologies
and the racialization of Mexican and Puerto Rican youth in the United States. In
Samy A.Alim, John R.Rickford and Arnetha F.Ball (Eds.), Raciolinguistics. How
Language Shapes Our Ideas about Race, pp. 65–80. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rosa, Jonathan and Nelson Flores. (2015) Unsettling race and language: towards a
raciolinguistic perspective. Language in Society, 12–27. doi:10.1017/
S0047404517000562.
Rubdy, Rani and Mario Saraceni (2006) Introduction. In Rani Rubdy and Mario
Saraceni (Eds.), English in the World: Global Rules, Global Roles, pp. 5–17.
London: Continuum.
Rudwick, Stephanie (2004) ‘Zulu – we need [it] for our culture’: Umlazi adolescents
in the post-apartheid state. South African Linguistics and Applied Language Stu-
dies 22 (3), 159–172.
Rudwick, Stephanie (2005) Township language dynamics: isiTsotsi and isiZulu in
Umlazi. South African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 23 (3), 301–317.
Rudwick, Stephanie (2006) Language, identity and ethnicity in post-apartheid South
Africa: the case of the Umlazi Township Community. Unpublished doctoral thesis
submitted at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban.
Rudwick, Stephanie (2008) Coconuts and Oreos: English-speaking Zulu people in a
South African township? World Englishes 27 (1), 101–116.
Rudwick, Stephanie (2009). Shifting norms of linguistic and cultural respect: Hybrid
sociolinguistic Zulu identities. Nordic Journal of African Studies 17(2), 152–174.
Rudwick, Stephanie (2013) Gendered linguistic choices among isiZulu-speaking
women in contemporary South Africa. In Lilian Lem Atanga, Sibonile Edith
Ellece, Lia Litosseliti and Jane Sunderland (Eds.), Gender and Language in Sub-
Saharan Africa, pp. 233–252. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Rudwick, Stephanie (2015) To be or not to be ‘African’: Discursive race politics in a
South African Online Forum. In Mima Dedaic (Ed.), Singing Speaking, and Writ-
ing Politics. South African Political Discourse, pp. 67–86. Amsterdam/Philadel-
phia: John Benjamins.
Rudwick, Stephanie (2017) Compulsory African language learning at a South African
tertiary institution. Language Problems and Language Planning 41 (2),116–137.
Rudwick, Stephanie (2018) Language, Africanisation and identity politics in South
African tertiary education. Language, Identity and Education 17 (4), 255–269.
Rudwick Stephanie and Natascha Bing (2019) Doing language, ethnicity and nation.
Modern Africa 7 (1), 5–9.
Rudwick, Stephanie and Sinfree Makoni (2021). Southernizing and decolonizing the
sociology of language: African scholarship matters. International Journal of the
Sociology of Language 267/268, 259–263.
Rudwick, Stephanie and Thabo Msibi (2016) Social and linguistic representations of
South African same-sex relations. In Erez Levon and Ronald Beline Mendes (Eds.),
Language, Sexuality and Power, pp. 39–59. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
 Bibliography 179
Rudwick, S. and M. Ntuli (2008). IsiNgqumo: introducing a gay black South African
linguistic variety’. South African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 26 (4),
445–465.
Rudwick, Stephanie and A. Parmegiani (2013) Divided loyalties: vis-à-vis English at
the University of KwaZulu-Natal. Language Matters 44 (3), 85–104.
Rudwick Stephanie and Dorrit Posel (2014) Contemporary functions of ilobolo in
urban South African Zulu society. Journal of Contemporary African Studies 32
(1), 118–136.
Rudwick, Stephanie and Dorrit Posel (2015) Zulu bridewealth (ilobolo) and
womanhood in South Africa. Social Dynamics 41 (2), 289–306.
Rudwick, Stephanie and Magcino Shange (2006) Sociolinguistic oppression or
expression of ‘Zuluness’? ‘IsiHlonipho’ among isiZulu-speaking females. South
African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 24 (4), 473–482.
Rudwick, Stephanie and Magcino Shange (2009) Hlonipha and rural Zulu women.
Agenda 82, 66–75.
Rudwick, Stephanie, Magcino Shange and Khatala Nkomo (2006). ‘Ulimi lwenkulu-
leko’: Township ‘women’s language of empowerment’. Agenda 67, 57–65.
Rudwick, Stephanie, Zameka Sijadu and Irina Turner (2021). Politics of language in
Covid-19: multilingual perspectives from South Africa. Politikon 48(2), 242–259.
Sachs, Albie (1993) Preparing ourselves for power. Southern African Report 9 (2), 13.
Salazar, Noel B. and Alan Smart (2011). Anthropological takes on (im)mobility,
identities. Global Studies in Culture and Power 18 (6), i–ix.
Salö, Linus (2018) Seeing the point from which you see what you see: an essay on
epistemic reflexivity in language research. Multilingual Margins 5 (1), 24–39.
Saperstein, Aliya (2017) Making the sense for racial mobility. HAL Archives-
ouvertes. Available online: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01592895. Accessed
28 May 2019.
Saperstein, Aliya and Andrew M.Penner (2012) Racial fluidity and inequality in the
United States. American Journal of Sociology 118 (3), 676–727.
Schmied, Josef (1991) English in Africa. An Introduction. London: Longman.
Seekings, Jeremy and Nicola Nattrass (2005). Class, Race and Inequality in South
Africa. London: Yale University Press.
Seidlhofer, Barbara (2001) Closing a conceptual gap: the case for a description of
English as a lingua franca. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 11 (2),
133–158.
Seidlhofer, Barbara (2009) Common ground and different realities world Englishes
and English as a lingua franca. World Englishes 28 (2), 236–245.
Seidlhofer, Barbara (2011) Understanding English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Seidlhofer, Barbara (2012) Anglophone-centric attitudes and the globalization of
English. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 1 (1): 393–407.
Sekhonyana, Mathabo (2018) Mmusi Maimane and the politics of accent. Available online:
https://www.power987.co.za/news/politics/column-mmusi-maimane-and-the-politics-
of-accents. Accessed 19 February 2019.
Sesanti, Simphiwe (2008) The media and the Zuma/Zulu culture: an Afrocentric
perspective. In Adrian Hadland, Eric Louw, Simphiwe Sesanti and Herman Was-
serman (Eds.), Power, Politics and Identity in South African Media, pp. 364–377.
Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council.
180 Bibliography
Sherman, Tamah (2018) ELF and the EU/wider Europe. In Jennifer Jenkins, Will-
Baker and Martin Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua
Franca, pp. 115–125. London/New York: Routledge.
Sigamoney, Veronica and Mark Epprecht. (2013) Meanings of homosexuality, same-sex
sexuality, and African-ness in two South African townships: an evidence-based
approach for rethinking same-sex prejudice. African Studies Review 56 (2): 83–107.
Silverstein, Michael (1979) Language structure and linguistic ideology. In Paul R.Clyne,
William F.Hanks and Carol L.Hofbauer (Eds.), The Elements: A Parasession on
Linguistic Units and Levels, pp. 193–248. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Silverstein, Michael (1996) Monoglot ‘standard’ in America: standardization and
metaphors of linguistic hegemony. In Donald Brenneis and Ronald K.S. Macaulay
(Eds.), The Matrix of Language: Contemporary Linguistic Anthropology, pp. 284–
305. Boulder: Westview Press.
Silverstein, Michael. (2003) Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life.
Language & Communication 23, 193–229.
Simpson, P. (1993) Language ideology and Point of View. London: Routledge.
Singleton, David, Joshua A.Fishman, LarissaAronin and Muiris Ó Laoire (Eds.)
(2013) Current Multilingualism: A New Linguistic Dispensation. Boston/Berlin:
De Gruyter Mouton.
Slabbert, Sarah and Rosalie Finlayson (2000) ‘I’m a cleva!’: linguistic makeup of
identity in a South African urban environment. International Journal of the
Sociology of Language 144, 119–136.
Slabbert, Sarah and Rosalie Finlayson (2002) Code-switching in South African
townships. In Rajend Mesthrie (Ed.), Language in South Africa, pp. 235–257.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Smakman, Dickand Patrick Heinrich (2015) Globalising in Sociolinguistics. Challen-
ging and Expanding Theory. London/New York:Routledge.
Smit, Ute (1996) A New English for a New South Africa? Language Attitudes, Lan-
guage Planning and Education. Vienna: Braumüller.
Smit, Ute (2010a) Conceptualizing English as a lingua franca (ELF) as a tertiary
classroom language. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics 39, 59–74.
Smit, Ute (2010b) English as a Lingua Franca in Higher Education: A Longitudinal
Study of Classroom Discourse. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Smit, Ute (2018) Beyond monolingualism in higher education: a language policy account.
In Jennifer Jenkins, WillBaker and Martin Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook
of English as a Lingua Franca, pp. 37–50. London/New York: Routledge.
Smith, Linda Tuhiwai (2012) Decolonizing Methodologies. Research and Indigenous
Peoples. London/New York: Zed Books.
Snyman, Gerrie F. (2015,) Responding to the decolonial turn: epistemic vulnerability.
Missionalia 43 (3), 266–291.
Soudien, Crain A. (2014) Bodies of language and languages of bodies: South African puz-
zles and opportunities. In Mastin Prinsloo and Christopher Stroud (Eds.), Educating for
Language and Literacy Diversity: Mobile Selves, pp. 206–215. London: Palgrave.
Späti, Christina (2018) Language and the rise of identity politics. an introduction. In
C. Späti (Ed.), Language and Identity Politics. A Cross-Atlantic Perspective, pp. 1–
13. Oxford/New York: Berghahn Books.
Spivak, Gayatri (1988) “Can the Subaltern Speak?” In Larry Grossberg and Cary
Nelson (Eds.), Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, pp. 66–111. Basing-
stoke: Macmillan.
 Bibliography 181
Spivak, Gayatri (1996) Subaltern studies: deconstructing historiography? In Donna
Landry and Gerald MacLean (Eds.), The Spivak Reader, pp. 203–237. London:
Routledge.
Stell, Gerald (2010) Ethnicity in linguistic variation: White and Coloured identities in
Afrikaans English code-switching. Pragmatics 20 (3), 425–447.
Steyn, Melissa E. (2004) Rehabilitating whiteness disgraced: Afrikaner white talk in
post- apartheid South Africa, Communication Quarterly 52 (2), 143–169.
Steyn, Melissa E. (2005) ‘White talk’: white South Africans and the management of
diasporic whiteness. In Alfred J.Lopez (Ed.), Post-colonial Whiteness: A Critical
Reader on Race and Empire, pp. 119–135. New York: SUNY Press.
Stornaiuolo, Amy and T. Phillip Nichols (2019) Cosmopolitanism and Education.
Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.252.
Stroud, Christopher (2001) African mother-tongue programmes and the politics of
language: linguistic citizenship versus linguistic human rights. Journal of Multi-
lingual and Multicultural Development, 22 (4), 339–355.
Stroud, Christopher (2015) Afterword. Turbulent reflections. In Christopher Stroud
and Mastin Prinsloo (Eds.), Language Literacy and Diversity. Moving Words, pp.
206–215. New York/London: Routledge.
Stroud, Christopher and Caroline Kerfoot (2020) Decolonizing higher education:
multilingualism, linguistic citizenship and epistemic justice. In Zannie Bock and
Christopher Stroud (Eds.), Languages and Literacies in Higher Education:
Reclaiming Voices from the South. London: Bloomsbury.
Stroud, Christopher and Quentin Williams (2017) Multilingualism as Utopia: fash-
ioning non-racial selves. AILA Review 30, 167–188.
Suttner, Raymond (2009) The Jacob Zuma Rape Trial: Power and African National
Congress (ANC) Masculinities, NORA. – Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender
Research, 17 (3), 222–236.
Suzman, Susan M. (1994) Names as pointers: Zulu personal naming practices. Lan-
guage in Society 23 (2), 253–272.
Swanepoel, Christiaan (2013) African languages and the identity question in the 21st
century. South African Journal of African Languages 33 (1), 19–28.
Swartz, Sharlene, Alude Mahali, Relebohile Moletsane, Emma Arogundad, Nene
Ernst Khalema, Adam Cooper, Candice Groenewald (Eds) (2018) Studying While
Black. Race, Education and Emancipation in South Africa. Cape Town: HSRC.
Swartz, Sharlene, Anye-Nkwenti Nyamnjoh, Benjamin Roberts and Steven Gordon
(2020) The ‘fuck white people’ phenomenon in South Africa: a discursive and
statistical analysis. Politikon 47 (2), 136–158.
Sweeney, Emma and Zhu Hua (2010). Accommodating toward your audience. Jour-
nal of Business Communication 47 (4), 477–504.
Thetela, Hanong P. (2003) Sex discourses and gender constructions in Southern
Sotho: a case study of police interviews of rape/sexual assault victims. South
African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 20(3), 177–189.
Thompson, Leonard (2001) A History of South Africa (3rd ed.). New Haven/
London: Yale University Press.
Tobias, Steven M. (1999). Amos Tutuola and the colonial carneval. Research in
African Literatures 30 (2), 66–74.
Trudgill, Peter (1972) Sex, covert prestige and linguistic change in the urban British
English of Norwich. Language in Society 1, 179–195.
182 Bibliography
Trudgill, Peter (2001) Weltsprache Englisch. In Richard J. Watts and Heather
Murray (Eds.), Die fünfte Landessprache? Englisch in der Schweiz, pp. 27–34.
Zurich: Hochschulverlag.
Tsedu, Mathatha (2018) The world of ideas: the place of Afrikaans. In Joel Net-
shitenzhe, Christopher Merrett and Barry Gilder (Eds.), Whiteness, Afrikaans,
Afrikaners. Addressing Post-Apartheid Legacies, Privileges and Burdens, pp. 87–
89. Johannesburg: MISTRA.
Tshabalala, Jefferson Bobs (2018) Khongolose Khommanding Khomissars. Enner-
dale: Diartkonageng.
Turner, Irina (2019) Axing the rainbow: does Fallism reconfigure post-apartheid
nationhood in South Africa? Modern Africa 7 (1), 81–108.
Tutuoloa, Amos (1952). The Palm-Wine Drinkard. London: Faber & Faber.
Van der Rheede, Christo (2016) Economic empowerment through Kaaps. Multi-
lingual Margins 3 (2), 117–126.
Van der Waal, Kees (2008) Essentialism in a South Africa discussion of language and
culture. In Adrin Hadland, Eric Louw, Simphiwe Sesanti and Herman Wasserman
(Eds.), Power: Politics and Identity in South African Media, pp. 52–72. Cape
Town: Human Sciences Research Council.
Van der Waal, Kees (2012) Creolisation and purity: Afrikaans language politics in
post- apartheid times. African Studies 71, 447–453.
Van der Walt, Christa and Rinelle Evans (2018) Is English the lingua franca of South
Africa? In Jennifer Jenkins, WillBaker and Martin Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge
Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca, pp. 186–198. London/New York: Routledge.
Van der Walt, ChristaKlapwijk and Nadja Klapwijk (2016) English-plus multi-
lingualism as the new linguistic capital? Implications of university students’ atti-
tudes towards languages of instruction in a multilingual environment. Journal of
Language, Identity and Education 15 (2), 67–82.
Van der Westhuizen, Christi (2013) Identities at the intersections of race, gender, sexuality
and class in liberalising, democratizing South Africa: the reconstitution of “the Afrika-
ner woman”. Unpublished PhD thesis submitted at the University of Cape Town.
Van der Westhuizen, Christie (2016) Afrikaners in post-apartheid South Africa:
inward migration and enclave nationalism. Theological Studies 72 (1), 1–9.
Van Heerden, Menán (2016) Afrikaaps: a celebratory protest against the racialised
hegemony of ‘pure’ Afrikaans. Unpublished Master’s thesis submitted at the Uni-
versity of Stellenbosch.
Van Rooy, Bertus (2004) Black South African English: phonology. In Bernd Kort-
mann, Kate Burridge, Rajend Mesthrie, Edgar W. Schneider and Clive Upton
(Eds.), A Handbook of Varieties of English, Vol. 1: Phonology, pp. 943–952.
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Veronelli, Gabriela A. (2015) The coloniality of language: race, expressivity, power
and the darker side of modernity. Wagadu: A Journal of Transnational Women
and Gender Studies 13, 108–134.
Verwey , Cornel and Michael Quayle (2012) Whiteness, racism and Afrikaner iden-
tity in post-apartheid South Africa. African Affairs 111 (445), 551–575.
Vigouroux, Cecile B. and Salikoko S. Mufwene (Eds.) (2008) Globalization and
Language Vitality: Perspectives from Africa. New York: Continuum.
Vilakazi, Absolom (1958) Zulu social structure and its dynamic today: a study of the
Zulu of the Valley of the Thousand Hills under conditions of culture contact.
Unpublished PhD thesis submitted at the University of Natal, Durban.
 Bibliography 183
Virkkula, Tina and Tarja Nikula (2010) Identity constructions in ELF contexts: a
case study of Finnish engineering students working in Germany. International
Journal of Applied Linguistics 20 (2), 251–273.
Wade, Rodrik (1996) An investigation of the putative restandardisation of South
African English in the direction of a ‘new’ English, Black South African English.
Unpublished MA thesis submitted at the University of Natal, Durban.
Waetjen, Thembisa and Gerry Maré (2009) Tradition’s desire: the politics of culture
in the rape trial of Jacob Zuma. Theoria 56 (118), 63–81.
Wang, Ying (2018) Chinese English as a lingua franca. In Jennifer Jenkins, Will
Baker and Martin Dewey, The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua
Franca, pp. 151–164. London/New York: Routledge.
Wanyu Amy Ou, Mingyue, MichelleGu and Francis M. Hult (2020) Translanguaging
for intercultural communication in international higher education: transcending
English as a lingua franca. International Journal of Multilingualism. https://doi.
org/10.1080/14790718.2020.1856113.
Webb, Vic (1996) English and language planning in South Africa: the flip-side. In:
Vivian De Klerk (Ed.), Focus on South Africa, Vol. 15: Varieties of English around
the World, pp. 175–191. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Webb, Vic (2002) Language in South Africa. The Role of Language in National
Transformation, Reconstruction and Development. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Webb, Vic (2010) Afrikaans in higher education in South Africa. Alternation 17 (1),
355–381.
Webb, Vic and M. Kriel (2000) Afrikaans and Afrikaner nationalism. International
Journal of the Sociology of Language 144, 19–50.
Weihua, Zhu ( 2019) Interaction in Mandarin Chinese and English as a Multilingua
Franca. Context, Practice and Perception. New York:Routledge.
Wiebesiek, Lisa, Stephanie Rudwick and Jochen Zeller (2011) South African Indian
English: a qualitative study of attitudes. World Englishes 30 (2), 251–268.
Williams, Quentin E. (2016a) Ethnicity and extreme locality in South Africa’s multi-
lingual hip hop ciphas. In Samy A. Alim, John R. Rickford and Arnetha F. Ball
(Eds.), Raciolinguistics. How Language Shaped Our Ideas about Race, pp. 113–
134. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Williams, Quentin E. (2016b) Youth’s multilingualism in South Africa’s hip-hop
culture: a metapragmatic analysis. Sociolinguistics Studies 10 (1/2), 109–133.
Williams, Quentin E. and Christopher Stroud (2010) Performing rap ciphas in late-
modern Cape Town: extreme locality and multilingual citizenship. Afrika Focus
23 (2), 39–59.
Williams, Quentin E. and Christopher Stroud (2013) Multilingualism remixed: sam-
pling texts, braggadocio and the politics of voice in Cape Town hip-hop. Stellen-
bosch Papers in Linguistics 42, 15–36.
Williams, Quentin E. and Christopher Stroud (2014) Battling race: stylizing language
and the coproduction of whiteness and colouredness in a freestyle rap battle.
Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 24 (3), 277–293.
Wilmsen, Edwin N. (2005) Preface. In Rosalie Finlayson and Sarah Slabbert (Eds.),
Language and Identities in a Postcolony: Southern African Perspectives, pp. 7–12.
Frankfurt: Peter Lang Verlag.
Wodak, Ruth (1989) Language, Power and Ideology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John
Benjamins.
184 Bibliography
Wodak, Ruth (2001) The discourse-historical approach. In Ruth Wodak and Michael
Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, pp. 63–94. London: Sage.
Wodak, Ruth and Michael Meyer (Eds.) (2001) Methods of Critical Discourse Ana-
lysis. London: Sage.
Wolff, Ekkehard H. (2010) The African Predicament and the “Language Factor”:
unidentified, under-researched, underrated. In A.O. Agwuele, U.M. Nwankwo and
O. Akinwumi (Eds.), Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Overcoming the African
Predicament, 348–361. Berlin: Mediateam IT Educational Publishers.
Woolard, Kathryn A. and B.B. Schieffelin (1994) Language ideology. Annual Review
of Anthropology, 23, 55–82.
Woolard, Kathryn A. (2010) Language ideologies: issues and approaches. Pragmatics
2 (3): 235–249.
Woolard, Kathryn A. (2016) Singular and Plural. Ideologies of Linguistic Authority
in 21st Century Catalonia. New York: Oxford University Press.
Woordfees Program (2020) Available online: https://www.litnet.co.za/wp-content/up
loads/2019/11/WOORDFEES-2020-program_lo-res.pdf. Accessed 27 April 2021.
Worthington, Nancy (2010) Of conspiracies and kangas: Mail and Guardian Online’s
construction of the Jacob Zuma rape trial. Journalism 11 (5), 607–623.
Wright, John (1991) Ethnicity and History: Towards a Discussion of the Zulu Case.
Discussion paper for Critical Studies Group Seminar, University of Natal, Durban.
Wright, John (2008) Reflections on the politics of being “Zulu’. In Benedict Carton,
John Laband and Jabulani Sithole (Eds.), Zulu Identities. Being Zulu, Past and
Present, pp. 35–43. Scottsville: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press.
Wright, Laurence (1996) The standardisation question in black South African Eng-
lish. In Vivian De Klerk (Ed.), Focus on South Africa, Vol. 15: Varieties of English
around the World, pp. 149–162. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Xaba, Makhosazana (2018) Our Words, Our Worlds. Writing on Black South African
Women Poets, 200–2018. Pietermaritzburg: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press.
Xaba, Makhosazana and Jenny Bozena du Preez (2017) Tongues of their mothers:
the language of writing. Tydskrif vir Letetrkunde 54 (2), 136–145.
Yuval-Davis, Nira (2011) The Politics of Belonging: Intersectional Contestations.
London: Sage.
Zulu, Andile (2019) A complex question of identity. Daily Maverick31 July. Avail-
able online: https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2019-07-31-a-complex-
question-of-identity. Accessed 31 July 2019.
Zulu, Nakanjani S. (2016) A textual analysis of male gayness in Nakanjani Sibiya’s
novel, Bengithi lizokuna. South African Journal of African Languages 36 (1), 43–44.
Zungu, Phyllis J. (1995) A study of hlonipha terms amongst Zulu. Essay submitted at
the Department of Zulu, the University of Natal, Durban.
Zungu, Phyllis J. (1998) The status of Zulu in KZN. In G. Extra and J. Maartens
(Eds.), Multilingualism in a Multicultural Context. Case Studies on South Africa
and Western Europe, 37–49. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.
Index

Academic Learning in English (ALE) 134 ANCYL (African National Congress

accents 7, 14, 29–30, 52, 71, 73–74, Youth Language) 73
75–76, 138 Anderson, Benedict 6, 33, 35n7
ACE (Asian Corpus of English) 19 Anglicization 37
Achebe, Chinua 118, 127, 148 Anglo-Boer War (1899–1902) 37, 39
Adichie, Chimamanda Ngozi 118 apartheid 7, 31, 33, 36, 39–45, 50–51,
African/English language bilingualism 46 60–62, 68–70, 79, 85
African National Congress (ANC) apartheid thinking 50–51
43–44, 45 Appalraju, Dhalialutchmee 102–103
African National Congress Youth Appiah, Kwame Anthony 82, 97n2
Language (ANCYL) 73 ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian
African Urban Youth Languages Nations) 32
(AUYLs) 109–110 Asian Corpus of English (ACE) 19
Afrikaans 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 15n6; and authenticity 66, 72–73, 75–76, 78
Afrikaner ethnicity 40; attitudes AUYLs (African Urban Youth
towards 47, 90–96, 122–123; vs. Languages) 109–110
Dutch 37; vs. English 31;
ethno-nationalism 33, 59–60; Baird, Robert et al. 27
historical discussion 36, 39, 41;as Baker, Will 32
lingua franca 39; and marginalization Balfour, Robert 31
58–59, 141; as official language 39–40, Banda, Felix 24, 150
41–42, 43, 44, 62, 84; population Bantu Education 31, 41
16n14; Standard Afrikaans 44, 59–60, Bantu Education Advisory Board 42
61; ‘subaltern whiteness’ 58–59, Bantu languages 24, 38
60–61; Suiwer Afrikaans 123 ‘Bantustans’ 40
Afrikaans English 44 Barth, Frederik 6, 35n5
#AfrikaansMustFall 60 Baugh, John 52, 101
Afrikaaps 9, 90, 118, 122, 123–126, 128 Beck, Rose Marie 89
see also Kaaps Beck, Ulrich 82
Afrikanerdom 8, 9, 40, 43, 44 Bengu, Sibusiso 86
Afrikanerization 39 Berman, Bruce et al. 38
Afrikanerness 8, 33 Besnier, Niko 72
Afropolitanism 81, 83–84, 85 Bhabha, Homi 83, 131
Alexander, Neville 37, 40, 44, 45, 54, 89, Bhengu, Cebelihle 102
95, 123 Biko, Steve 65, 122
Alim, H. Samy 34, 80n10 bilingualism 46, 134
Amakholwa (Christian converts) 39 Black South African English (BSAE) 24,
amandla ngawethu 43–44 30, 31–32, 44, 76
ANC see African National Congress Blackledge, Adrian 65
186 Index
Blaser, Thomas, M. 92
Blommaert, Jan et al. 10, 25, 30, 66, 67,
74–75, 76, 77, 133, 148
Boetie and Saartjie 126
Bosch, Barbara 86
Botman, Russel 86
Bourdieu, Pierre 2, 18, 133, 140
Bozena du Preez, Jenny 120
Branford, Bill 150
Briggs, Charles 133
Brink, Christopher 86
British Cultural Studies 131
British Government 40
brought-self 138
Brutt-Griffler, Janina 31, 41
BSAE see Black South African English
Bucholtz, Mary 7, 11
Buthelezi, Mangosuthu 8, 43, 48n5, 56
Butler, Judith 6, 104
Campbell, Catherine et al. 46
Canagarajah, Suresh 5, 18, 27–28, 66,
117, 131
Canham, Hugo 65, 76, 79
census data 3, 24, 46, 100, 104, 127,
128, 144
Chaplin, George 33
chapter outlines 12–15
Chick, Keith 32
Chidester, David 48n5
Christian National Education (CNE) 40
City Press (newspaper) 62
Clément, R. 103
‘coconuts’ 3, 65, 71, 76, 111
code-switching 47, 57, 71–75, 119–120,
123, 145
colonialism 12, 36, 37, 46, 103
coloniality 129, 130, 144; concept 3, 34,
61, 77, 103, 151; of English language
72, 149–150, 151; inequality 147; of
language 121, 144, 148
coloured people: and language 39, 84,
123–129; and racial discrimination
94, 95–96; terminology 15n5,
16n14, 69
Coloured South African English 44
colourism 9–10, 70
communication vis-à-vis identity 28–32
Constitution (Act 1996) 4, 45
Cooper, Adam 95, 123
cosmopolitanism and parochialism 13, 81,
97n10; ethnolinguistic politics and
parochialism 90–96; is English
cosmopolitan? 81–86;
#OpenStellenbosch (OS) 86–90;
concluding thoughts 96–97
Coupland, Nikolas 75, 104
COVID-19 pandemic 47, 55, 57, 64n13,
122, 145
Crenshaw, Kimberlé 7
Cushman, Ellen 146
DA (Democratic Alliance Party) 71
Daily Maverick 76
Dangarembga, Tsitsi 104, 118
Dawjee, Haji Mohamed 73
De Kadt, Elizabeth 45, 51, 63, 102–103,
105, 109
De Klerk, Gerda 41
De Klerk, Vivian 44
De Souza, Lynn Mario 90
decolonialization 11, 12, 41, 60, 117,
122, 142
DEIC (Dutch East India Company) 37
Democratic Alliance Party (DA) 71
Denner, Heloise 58–59
Department of Arts, Culture, Science
and Technology (DACST) 44
Deterding, David 19
Deumert, Ana 21, 46, 154
DiAngelo, Robin 61
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. 145
Dingane 38
disruption and innovation 14, 116–122;
reclaiming linguistic belonging
122–129; concluding thoughts
130–131
‘divide and rule’ 41
DJMac 127, 128
Dlamini, Jacob 108
Dlamini, Sibusiswe Nombusu 43
Dörnyei, Zoltán 103
Dovchin, Sender 66
Dröschel, Yvonne 18
Dube, Bevelyn 63, 89
Durán-Almarza, Emilia María et al. 83–84
Duranti, Alessandro 144
Dutch East India Company (DEIC) 37
Dutch language: Cape Dutch 37; as
official language 37, 39
Dyers, Charlyn 123, 128
Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) 57, 71
education in South Africa: higher edu-
cation 85; status of English 5, 23–24,
29, 31, 38, 40–43, 70, 149
Edwards, John 35n5
ELF see English as a lingua franca
 Index 187
ELFA (English as a Lingua Franca in Fardon, Richard 24
Academic Settings) 18 Fecho, Bob 150
Elmes, Simon 132n3 Finlayson, Rosalie 102
EMF see English as a multilingua franca Fishman, Joshua A. 9, 48n6, 126
English: vs. Afrikaans 31; coloniality of Flores, Nelson 34, 72
72, 149–150, 151; dominance vs. framing the study 1–6; chapter outlines
prevalence 57; is it cosmopolitan? 12–15; ethnicity, race, and gender (in
81–86; and Kaaps 127; as “language South Africa) 6–11
of liberation” 43, 45; multivocality Freedom Charter 43
10; as official language 39; restricted Freedom Front Plus (FFP) 58–59
access to learning of 41; in South Friedman, Steve 69
Africa 46, 149–151; status of 62, 70; Frueh, Jamie 9
varieties of 44; and whiteness 52, 70, Furniss, Graham 24
83, 146
English as a lingua franca (ELF): ambi- Gal, Susan 3–4, 18, 63–64, 102, 106
guities 11, 84, 144, 145; communica- Gear Rich, Camille G. 68, 78
tion vis-à-vis identity 28–32; context gender: and English as a lingua franca
12, 17–19; critique 21–24; discourse 103, 105, 109; ilobolo (bridewealth)
29, 35n3; and disempowerment 147; 105; in South Africa 6–11
and gender 103, 105, 109; identity 11, gender(ed) ambiguities 13–14, 100–102;
63; politics of 8; as a process 63–64; homosexuality 111–113, 115n30; style
racializing English as lingua franca 104–105;
10, 32–34; reorientation towards women and ‘prestigious’ language
multilingualism 24–28; scholarship 102–113; concluding thoughts
19–21; in South Africa 1–2, 3–6, 113–114
10–11, 12, 37–47, 144–146 General Household Survey 18 101
English as a Lingua Franca in Academic Genootskap van Regte Afrikaners
Settings (ELFA) 18 (GRA) 37
English as a multilingua franca (EMF) Gibson, Erinn 61
5–6, 22, 25, 117–119, 146, 151n2 Giles, H. et al. 72
English as a translingua franca 146, 148 Giliomee, Hermann 39, 59, 86, 91
epistemic reflexivity 133 Gilroy, Paul 97n2
epistemic vulnerability 148 Global Language Network (GLN) 8
Erasmus, Zimitriu 123 Global North 4, 20, 21, 51, 67–68, 84,
Erasmus students 29 85, 103, 133, 136, 139, 143
Esch, Edith 54 Global South 4, 21, 25, 103, 136, 143
essentialist thinking 9, 72, 75, 85 globalization 30
eThekwini Municipality 116, 131–132n1 Gmail 8
ethnicity 33, 35n5; and culture 35n6; Google 8
defined 35n5; and language 33, 35n6, Gough, David 24, 31
101–103; race and gender 6–11 Gourgem, Hicham 83
ethno-nationalism 59–60 Graham, Lucie Valerie 56
ethnographic data 2–3, 27 Great Trek (1835–1846) 37
ethnographic fieldwork 135–136 Groenewald, Pieter 59, 60, 61, 62
ethnolinguistic assumptions 74–75 Gugushe, R.N. 41
ethnolinguistic politics and parochialism
90–96 Hachimi, Atiqa 70
European Journal of English Studies 83–84 Hall, Kira 7, 11
Evans, Rinelle 5, 31, 145 Harvard Educational Review 34
exclusion see inclusion and exclusion Helbling, Monika 97n5
Eze, Chielozona 82, 83, 136 Heller, Monika 72
Herbert, Robert K. 114n13
Fabing, Bernie 128 Herzog, J.B.M. 85
Fanon, Franz 65 Heunis, Jan 89
188 Index
Hickel, Jason 56 Jablonski, Nina G. 33, 52, 69
Higgins, Christina 10 James, Michael 147
Hill, Lloyd 98n18 Jaspers, Jürgen 20, 21, 50
hip hop 123–124 Jeewa, Sana 5, 63
history 37 Jenkins, Jennifer 5, 19, 20, 22, 25, 27,
Hiu, Lydia H. 27 29, 83, 103, 143, 146, 147
Hlatshwayo, S. 41 Joseph, John 26–27
hlonipha (respect) 101, 106, 107, 109, Journal of English as a Lingua Franca
112, 114n1 (JELF) 20
Holliday, A. 32, 82, 83, 136 justice and injustices 134, 151; linguistic
home languages 3 injustice 7, 122, 146, 147; racial
homosexuality 111–113, 115n30 injustice 34, 49, 53, 117; social justice
Horáková, Hana 79n3 3, 7, 23, 44–45, 57, 63, 68–69, 82, 117,
House, Juliane 26 134, 151
Hsu, Funie 147, 151
Hüllen, Werner 28 Kaaps 9, 60, 92–93, 95, 123, 124–128 see
Human Science Research Council also Afrikaaps
(HSRC) 134 Kachru, Braj 17
Hunter, Mark 70, 149 Kamwangamalu, Nkonko M. 17, 36, 39,
Hurst, Ellen 110 46, 96, 122, 134
Hutton, Christopher 146 Kaunda, Chammah K. 61
Hymes, Dell 66 Kerfoot, Caroline 128
Khawula, Makoti Sibongile 57, 58–59, 145
identity politics 2, 3, 7–8, 11, 18, 37, 63, Kirkpatrick, Andy 19, 32
66, 67–78, 120, 150 Knapp, Karlfried 1, 2, 23, 29, 48n1
identity vis-à-vis communication 28–32 Kolisi, Siya 101
ideology 2 Kriel, Mariana 123
Ilanga Lase Natali (newspaper) 39 Kroskrity, Paul V. 18, 29, 63, 72
ilobolo (bridewealth) 105 KwaZulu homeland 43
inclusion and exclusion 5, 11, 22, 29, 50, KwaZulu-Natal (KZN): history 37, 39,
52–53, 63, 144, 150 40; isiZulu 40, 46, 100, 101; language
Indian South African English 30, 107 and gender 30, 102–103, 105
Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) 8, 43
interdisciplinary perspectives 143, 151n2 Langenhoven, C.J. 39
intersectionality 7–8, 11, 139 LANGTAG Report (1996) 44, 45
Irvine, Judith T. 106 language: and ethnicity 33, 35n6,
Ishikawa, Tomokazu 22 101–103; as a mobile tool 66–67;
isiHlonipho 106, 114n13 and racial identity 71–78; style
isiNdebele 40 104; see also gender(ed)
isiNgqumo 112, 115n30–115n31 ambiguities
isiTsotsi 110, 115n22, 115n23 language death 144–145
isiXhosa 4–5, 40, 87, 88, 89, 90, 101 language ideologies 18, 28–29, 63
isiZulu: historical discussion 36, 38, 39, language-in-education policies 41
40, 43; and identity/ethnicity 3, 6, 7, language policy 13, 23, 37, 40, 44–46
9, 33, 62, 142n2; and Jacob Zuma languages 2, 4, 36–38
54–57; in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) 40, Lepere, Refiloe 26
46, 100, 101; as lingua franca 145; Levinson, Stephen 10
prevalence 101, 102, 116, 120–121, Levon, Eres 8
131–132n1; status of 23, 29; and Lingua Franca Core (LFC) 19
translingualism 120–121; use in par- Lingua Franca English (LFE) 18
liament 57; see also gender(ed) lingua franca multilingualism 129
ambiguities lingua francas 1; Afrikaans 39; defined
Ives, Peter 82 36, 48n1; history of 36; isiZulu 145;
 Index 189
in South Africa 4–5, 36; see also Mbhele, Zakhele 71, 72, 78
English as a lingua franca (ELF) Meierkord, Christiane 2, 19, 48n1
linguistic anthropology 7, 103 Mendes, Ronald Beline 8
linguistic human rights 26 Mesthrie, Rajend 30, 109
linguistic imperialism (LI) 25 Methope, Gosebo 73
linguistic injustice 7, 122, 146, 147 Mhlangana 38
linguistic mobility and racial authenticity Mhlongo, Niq 79n1, 118
13, 65–66; language as a mobile tool Mignolo, Walter D. 142
66–67; racial mobility - really? 67–71; missionaries 37, 38–39, 40
“speak English like an African” 71–78; Mkongi, Bongani 73
concluding thoughts 78–79 Model C schools 30, 35n4
linguistic racism 143 Modern Africa, Politics, History and
Lushaba, Suyabonga Lwazi 39–40 Society 20
Moore, Emma 104
Maartens, Jeanne 40 mother tongue 9, 17, 39, 146; Afrikaans
Mabokela, Reitumetse O. 88 vs. Dutch 37; education 40, 41, 42; vs.
McCormick, Kay 46 English 43–44; rights 62;
McElhinny, Bonnie 72 use in court 55
McKinney, Carolyn 104 multilingualism 24, 44, 89, 90, 148
McLean, Daryland 46 multivocality 10, 24, 67, 121, 123–124,
Madia, Tshidi 73 126, 127, 130
Madisha, Willie 73 Murray, Sarah 81
Madonsela, Thuli 68
Madsen, Lian Malai 50 Naples, Nancy A. 138
Mail & Guardian 55, 120, 122 National Conventions 39
Maimane, Mmusi 73, 74, 75, 78 National Education Crisis Committee
Makhanya, Mondli 56 (NECC) 42–43
MaKhawula see Khawua, Makoti National Party (NP) 40, 42
Sibongile ‘native speaker’ English 17, 51–52
Makoni, Busi 60 Nattrass, Nicola 77–78
Makoni, Sinfree et al. 4, 5, 19, 21, 34, Ndaba, Sbonakaliso 140
38, 60, 90, 130, 143, 146, 151 Ndebele, Njabulo 144, 150
Malan, D.F. 85 Ndhlovu, Finex 44
Malaysia 10 Ngcoya, Mvuselelo 50–51
Malema, Julius 73 Ngozi, Adichie Chimamanda 113
Mamaila, Khatu 62, 63 Ngūgī, wa Thiong’o 143
Mandela, Nelson 44, 82, 114n5 Nguni languages 40, 122
Maré, Gerhard 6, 55 Nhlapo, Thandabantu 97n8
marginalization and empowerment Nigerian English 117
12–13, 49–54; Afrikaans 58–59, 141; Nigerian Pidgin English 52, 64n3
English, the “oppressor” language Noah, Trevor 114–115n21
58–59; non-racialism 148, 152n8
marginalization mobilized for empower- Norton Peirce, Bronwyn 43
ment 54–58; socio-linguistic amnesia NP see National Party
59–64 Nyamnjoh, Francis B. 66, 118
Marshall, Rhode 74
Mashau, Thinandavha 61 Obama, Barack 80n10
Mauranen, Anna 19, 22 #OpenStellenbosch (OS) 23, 60, 81,
May, Stephen 33, 63 86–90; Luister (Listen; documentary)
Mazrui, Alamin M. 11, 44, 46–47, 88, 94; Memorandum of Demands
121–122 87–88
Mazrui, Ali A. 46–47, 121–122 O’Regan, John P. 21, 25
Mbeki, Thabo 114n5 Othering 41, 77
Mbembe, Achille 83 Oxford English Dictionary (OED) 31, 117
190 Index
Pan South African Language Board
(PanSALB) 45
Pandor, Naledi 73
Park, Joseph Sung-Yul 26, 148
Park Wee 14 10
Parmegiani, Andrea 79, 109
parochialism see cosmopolitanism and
parochialism
Pavlenko, Aneta 65
Penner, Andrew M. 68
Pennycook, Alastair 4, 5, 10, 19, 21,
22, 30, 90, 130, 143–144, 146,
148, 151
peripheral normativity 149
Perry, Timothy 45
Phillipson, Robert 25, 30–31
Phipps, Alison 146
Pieterse, Edgar 123
Pieterson, Hector 42
Piller, Ingrid 29, 84
Posel, Dorrit et al. 3, 57, 101, 114n7, 127
positionality and reflexivity 14–15, 122,
133–142
power and ideology 2
power and language 33, 72, 101
power relations 138
Price, Max 85
primordial thinking 9
privilege 19; of Afrikaners 58, 94; of
apartheid 51; of bilingualism 134; and
hlonipha 106; of learning English 38,
147; and Standard English 84, 91, 147,
148; white privilege 61–62, 65–71, 74,
76, 77, 84, 92, 112, 134–136, 138,
139, 151
psychological trauma 47
Public Safety Act 43
race 6–11, 34, 41, 139, 146–147
racial authenticity 13, 65, 66
racial classifications 3, 15n5, 69–70
racial discrimination 94, 95–96
racial identity 2, 65–66, 71–78, 139, 147,
150–151
racial injustice 34, 49, 53, 117
racial mobility 67–70; during apartheid
68; “elective-race framework” 68; and
socio-economic status 70–71
racialization 7, 53–54, 70
racialized language 7
racializing English as a lingua franca 10,
32–34
raciolinguistic profiling 49, 51–54, 64n7,
72, 78
raciolinguistics 32, 34, 146
racism 9–10, 32–33, 49, 52,
83, 143
Ramanathan, Vaidehi 82, 97n3
Rampton, Ben et al. 11
rap 123–129
Raum, Otto F. 106
Rawula, Thembinkosi 71, 72
redefinition of negative characteristics 72
reflective turn 133
reflexivity 27, 133, 135
Reinharz, Shulamit 138
research-based self 138
respect see hlonipha (respect)
‘retribalization’ 41
#RhodesMustFall campaign 63, 86,
97n9
Ricento, Thomas 44
R.I.P. Afrikaaps (poem) 124–129
Robins, Steven 56
Rosa, Jonathan 34, 72
Routledge Handbook of English as a
Lingua Franca 20, 31, 32
Rudwick, Stephanie 5, 28, 63
Salö, Linus 133
Saperstein, Aliya 68, 69–70, 77
SASCO (South African Student Council
Organization) 87
SASE see South African Standard
English
Seekings, Jeremy 77–78
Seidlhofer, Barbara 19–20, 51, 151n4
Sekhonyana, Mathabo 73–74
‘selves’ in the field 138
Sesanti, Simphiwe 55
Shaka kaSenzangakhona 37–38, 48n3
Shange, Kholeka 120–122, 131
Silverstein, Michael 55
similects 22
Singleton, David et al. 24
Siswati 40
situationally created self 138
Siziba, Liqhwa 44
Slabbert, Sarah 102
Small, Adam 93, 95
Smith, Linda Tuhiwai 139
Smitherman, Geneva 80n10
Smuts, Jan 85
Snyman, Gerrie F. 61
social diversity 72
social justice 3, 7, 23, 44–45, 57, 63,
68–69, 82, 117, 134, 151
social media 73, 75
 Index 191
socio-economic status 70–71, 131, 150 Tutu, Desmond 82
socio-linguistic amnesia 59–64 Tutuola, Amos 118
sociohistorical background 12,
36–37 umlungu 65
sociolinguistics 30, 61, 66, 76 University of Cape Town (UCT) 85
Somerset, Lord Charles 37 University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN)
Soudien, Crain A. 3, 9, 117 23, 29, 89, 96, 97, 102, 103, 108;
South African General Household Academic Learning in English
Surveys 57 (ALE) 134; language ownership 109
South African Indian English 44
South African Standard English (SASE) Van der Merwe, Willem 56
30, 31, 68, 96 Van der Waal, Kees 29, 39, 41, 72, 95,
South African Student Council 96, 123
Organization (SASCO) 87 Van der Walt, Christa 5, 31, 145
Soweto uprisings (1976) 42, 60 Van der Westhuizen, Christi 43, 93
Soyinka, Wole 118 Van Herk (2012) 104
Späti, Christina 66 Venda 62
Standard Afrikaans 44, 59–60, 61 Veronelli, Gabriela A. 128
Standard English 1: and elitism 47, 63, Verwoerd, H.F. 85
70, 85, 147; in higher education 80n5; Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of
and privilege 84, 91, 147, 148; and English (VOICE) 18
racial identity 76, 77; and whiteness Vilakazi, Absolom 43
52, 70, 83, 146 Voelz, F.K. Erhard 145
standard language ideology 29 Vorster, B.J. 85
Stellenbosch University (SU) 97n10;
AdamTas society 60; Afrikaans Wade, Rodrik 32
85–86, 87, 88–89; cosmopolitanism Waetjen, Thembisa 55
13; English 52, 85, 86, 89; isiXhosa Walsh, Katherine 142
87, 88, 89, 90; languages 87; Wang, Ying 33
Woordfees 140–141; see also WE see World Englishes
#OpenStellenbosch (OS) Wee, Lionel 26, 148
Steyn, Melissa E. 39, 60 Weinreich, Max 96
Strijdom, J.G. 85 Weltanschauung 35n6
Stroud, Christopher 88, 121, 123, 128, Western Cape 52
130, 148 White South African English 44
‘subaltern whiteness’ 58–59, 60–61 Williams, Quentin E. 88, 121, 123, 128,
subjectivities 11, 14, 21, 27, 33, 79, 104, 130, 148
109, 142 Williams, Rejane 65, 76, 79
Suiwer Afrikaans 123 Wodak, Ruth 125
Suttner, Raymond 7, 56, 57 women: power and language usage 30,
Swartz, Sharlene et al. 134 101; and ‘prestigious’ language
Sznaider, Natan 102–103 102–113;
Woolard, Kathryn A. 75
Teney, Céline 97n5 World Englishes (WE) 17, 22, 31,
terminology 16n14, 16n15 32, 76
The Citizen 73 Wright, John 38
Thompson, Leonard 37
Tobias, Steven M. 118 Xaba, Makhosazana 120, 132n5
translanguaging 21, 119–121 Xhosa people 101–102, 114n5
translation 27
translingualism 27–28, 117–121, 131 YouTube 8
Tsedu, Mathatha 62
Tshabalala, Jefferson Bobs 26 Zeller, Jochen 3, 114n7, 127
Tsotsitaal 119–120 Zulu, Andile 76
192 Index
Zulu, Nakanjani, S. 113 isiHlonipho 106, 114n13; see also
Zulu ethnicities 6, 101 isiZulu
Zuluness 8, 33, 38, 43, 48n5, 56, 108; Zuma, Jacob Gedleyihlekisa 6–7,
hlonipha (respect) 101, 106, 107, 112, 54–57, 73
114n1; ilobolo (bridewealth) 105; Zungu, Phyllis J. 38