The University of Dodoma University of Dodoma Institutional Repository http://repository.udom.ac.tz
Humanities Master Dissertations
2018 Assesment of the ethnic language endangerment in Tanzania: The case of Safwa language
Sijawe, Savery
The University of Dodoma
Sijawe, S. (2018). Assesment of the ethnic language endangerment in Tanzania: The case of Safwa language. (Master's dissertation). The University of Dodoma, Dodoma. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12661/882 Downloaded from UDOM Institutional Repository at The University of Dodoma, an open access institutional repository. ASSESMENT OF ETHNIC LANGUAGE
ENDANGERMENT IN TANZANIA: THE CASE OF
SAFWA LANGUAGE
SAVERY SIWAJE
MASTER OF ARTS IN LINGUISTICS
THE UNIVERSITY OF DODOMA
OCTOBER, 2018 ASSESMENT OF ETHNIC LANGUAGE
ENDANGERMENT IN TANZANIA: THE CASE OF
SAFWA LANGUAGE
BY
SAVERY SIWAJE
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN
LINGUISTICS
THE UNIVERSITY OF DODOMA
OCTOBER, 2018
DECLARATION
AND
COPYRIGHT
I, Savery Siwaje, declare that this dissertation is my own original work and that it has not been presented to any other University for a similar or any other degree award.
Signature…………………………….
No part of this Dissertation may be reproduced, stored in any retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior written permission of the author or the University of Dodoma. If transformed for publication in any other format shall be acknowledged that, this work has been submitted for degree award at the University of
Dodoma”.
i CERTIFICATION
The undersigned certifies that he has read hereby recommends for acceptance by the
University of Dodoma dissertation entitled: “Assessment of Ethnic Language
Endangerment in Tanzania: The case of Safwa Language” in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Linguistics of the University of Dodoma.
Dr. Adronis Selestino
Signature:………………………………………Date:……………………………....
(SUPERVISOR)
ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Firstly, if there is one and only being worthy of my millions thanks is the almighty GOD for every single good thing he does to me, I have gone all this far because of him and he never abandons me, his love to me is absolutely beyond measure.
Secondly, I owe so much thanks to Dr. Adronis Selestino from the Department of foreign language and literature of the University of Dodoma for his support, patience and valuable advice as the supervisor of my Dissertation. He was always there for me whenever I needed his help and guide. May God bless him abundantly?
I „am also grateful to all Lecturers of the University of Dodoma especially from the department of foreign language and literature for their invaluable support throughout my studies. They have altogether taught, modeled and mentored me wonderfully.
I would also like to express my sincere gratitude to Safwa speakers in Mbeya for their wonderful cooperation they gave to me during the period of data collection. They have performed a tremendous job to help this study reach this point.
Finally, I will be quite unfair if I don‟t give a special mention to my friends, classmates and family for their invaluable support to me throughout my study.
iii DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to my beloved brother Joseph Siwaje Mwandabale
iv ABSTRACT
The disaster of language endangerment is understood by many to be among the most significant concerns confronting humankind today, presenting ethical and logical issues of tremendous extents. A risked language is that in danger of phasing out, or one anticipated stopping to be the methods for human correspondence for a particular society or social gathering. At the point when speakers of a language move to other languages and surrender their own, incredible learning of their way of life is lost. An expansive number of the world's languages are jeopardized, and it is in this feeling humankind faces an disaster.
The study at hand focused on assessing the status of endangerment of Safwa language mainly spoken in Mbeya region. This study employed questionnaires, interviews as well as participatory observation for collecting data. It has been found that the attitude of Safwa speakers towards their language is negative; this has led to poor intergenerational language transmission and highly reduced the domains of use of the language. The study revealed that the language is not used in any new domain and media. According to UNESCO this situation is sufficient to label that Kisafwa is one of the endangered languages in
Tanzania. Conversely Kiswahili, which is the dominant language in the region is taking advantages of negative attitude of the Safwa people towards their own language to expand its dominance and consequently becoming a more prestigious language ever. Kiswahili is the killer of many ethnic community languages in Tanzania.
v TABLE OF CONTENT
DECLARATION ...... i COPYRIGHT ...... i CERTIFICATION ...... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...... iii DEDICATION ...... iv ABSTRACT ...... v TABLE OF CONTENT ...... vi LIST OF BAR GRAPHS ...... x LIST OF PIE CHARTS ...... xi LIST OF AREA GRAPHS ...... xii LIST OF ABBRIVATIONS ...... xiv CHAPTER ONE ...... 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION TO THE STUDY ...... 1 1.1 Introduction ...... 1 1.2 Background Information to the Study ...... 1 1.3 Statement of the Problem ...... 4 1.4 Objectives of the Study ...... 5 1.5 Research Questions ...... 5 1.6 Significance of the Study ...... 5 1.7 The Scope of the Study ...... 6 1.8 Definition of Key Terms ...... 6 CHAPTER TWO ...... 8 LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...... 8 2.1 Introduction ...... 8 2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 8 2.2.1 The Concept of language Endangerment ...... 8 2.2.2 Causes of Language Endangerment ...... 9 2.2.3 Indicators of an Endangered Language ...... 10 2.2.4 Contribution of Attitude of Speakers to an Endangered Language ...... 12 2.2.5 Intergenerational Language Transmission ...... 14 2.2.6 Domain of the Use of Language ...... 15 2.2.7 Response to New Domains and Media ...... 16 2.3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...... 16
vi 2.3.1 LVE Theoretical Framework Developed by UNESCO ...... 17 2.3.2 Ethnolinguistic Vitality Approach Developed by Fishman ...... 27 2.4 Research Gap ...... 30 2.5 Chapter Conclusion ...... 31 CHAPTER THREE ...... 32 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...... 32 3.1 Introduction ...... 32 3.2 Research Approach ...... 32 3.3 Research Design ...... 32 3.4 Pilot Study ...... 33 3.5 Area of the Study and the Targeted Population ...... 33 3.6 Sampling Technique and Sample Size ...... 34 3.7 Methods of Data Collection ...... 36 3.7.1 Questionnaires ...... 37 3.7.2 Interview ...... 37 3.7.3 Observation ...... 37 3.8 Validity and Reliability of Data ...... 38 3.9 Ethical Consideration ...... 38 3.9.1 Obtain Permission for Conducting the Study ...... 38 3.9.2 Informed Consent ...... 38 3.9.3 Confidentiality and Anonymity ...... 38 3.10 Data Analysis and Presentation Plan ...... 39 3.10.1 Coding ...... 39 3.10.2 Editing ...... 39 3.10.3 Analysis of Data from Questionnaires ...... 39 3.10.4 Analysis of Data from Observation and Interviews ...... 39 3.10.5 Data Presentation ...... 40 3.11 Chapter Conclusion ...... 40 CHAPTER FOUR ...... 41 DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS ...... 41 4. 1 Introduction ...... 41 4.2 Examining the Attitude of Safwa language Speakers toward their Language ...... 41 4.2.1 Development of Negative Attitude towards one‟s own Language ...... 41 4.2.2 Feeling Proud of the Language ...... 45
vii 4.2.3 The most Important Language to the Speaker ...... 47 4.2.4 Assignment of Traditional Safwa Names by Parents to their Children ...... 48 4.2.5 Discussion ...... 49 4.3 Evaluation of the Trend of Safwa Language Acquisition among Safwa Children (Intergeneration Language Acquisition) ...... 51 4.3.1 Language used by all Age Groups including Children ...... 51 4.3.2 Language Competency and Proficiency among Safwa Children ...... 52 4.3.3 Existence of Exogamous Marriage and its Effects on Language Acquisition to Exogamous Children ...... 54 4.3.5 Language used to Communicate with Peers among Safwa Children ...... 57 4.3.6 Discussion ...... 58 4.4 Investigation of the Domain of Use of Safwa Language in Safwa Community ...... 59 4.4.1 Examining the Use of Safwa Language at Home Domain ...... 59 4.4.2 Language used in Village Meetings ...... 63 4.4.3 The Language Used in Traditional Activities (Ritual activities) ...... 65 4.4.4 Language used at Market Places ...... 67 4.4.5 Language Used in Religious Domain ...... 68 4.4.6 Discussion ...... 68 4.5 Assessment of the Response of Safwa Language to new Domains and Media ...... 69 4.5.1 Discussion ...... 70 4.6 Chapter Summary and Conclusion ...... 70 4.6.1 Chapter Summary ...... 70 4. 6. 2 Chapter Conclusion ...... 71 CHAPTER FIVE ...... 72 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ...... 72 5.1 Introduction ...... 72 5.2 Summary ...... 72 5.3 Conclusion ...... 73 5.4 Recommendations ...... 73 5.5 Suggestions for Further Studies ...... 74 5.6 Chapter Conclusion ...... 74 REFERENCES ...... 75 APPENDICES ...... 79
viii LIST OF TABLES Table 2. 1: Common Indicators of an Endangered Language ...... 11 Table 2. 2: Intergenerational Language Transmissions ...... 18 Table 2. 3: Proportion of Speakers within the Total Population ...... 19 Table 2. 4: Shift and Domain of Language use ...... 19 Table 2. 5: Responses to New Domains and Media ...... 21 Table 2. 6: Materials for Language Education and Literacy ...... 22 Table 2. 7: Governmental and Institutional Language Attitudes and Policies, including Official Status and Use...... 23 Table 2. 8: Community Members‟ Attitude towards Language ...... 24 Table 2. 9: Type and Quality of Documentation ...... 25 Table 2. 10: Fishman‟s Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale (GIDS) ...... 28 Table 2.10. 1: The Adapted Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale ...... 29 Table 3. 1: The Sex Ratio of Respondents from Questionnaires in the Sample ...... 34 Table 3. 2: The Sampled Respondents‟ Composition by Age ...... 35 Table 3. 3: Educational Level of the Sampled Respondents ...... 35 Table 3. 4: Professional Qualification of the Respondents ...... 36 Table 4. I: Summary of Findings ...... 70
ix LIST OF BAR GRAPHS
Bar Graph 4. 1: Language used by all Age groups ...... 52 Bar Graph 4. 2: Extent to which Safwa Speakers use Kisafwa to Communicate with Parents ...... 56 Bar Graph 4. 3: Language used to Communicate with Peers ...... 58 Bar Graph 4. 4: Language used in Village Meetings ...... 64 Bar Graph 4. 5: Language used in Traditional Rituals ...... 66 Bar Graph 4. 6: Language used at Market Places ...... 68
x LIST OF PIE CHARTS
Pie chart 4. 1: Feeling Proud of the Language ...... 46 Pie chart 4. 2: Parents who Gave Traditional Safwa Names to their Children ...... 49 Pie chart 4. 3: Language that was Spoken in Pre-school Age among Safwa Children ...... 53 Pie chart 4. 4: Existence of Exogamous Marriage ...... 55 Pie chart 4. 5: Language Used at Home Domain among Family Members ...... 60
xi LIST OF AREA GRAPHS
Area Graph 4. 1: The most Important Language to the Respondents ...... 47
xii LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix i (a): Questionnaire (English) ...... 79
Appendix ii: (a) Interview‟s Guideline with the Safwa Speaker (English) ...... 83
Kiambatanisho I (b) (Kiswahili) ...... 85
Kiambatanisho ii: (b) (Kiswahili) ...... 88
Appendix iii: Permission Letter from the University of Dodoma ...... 90
xiii LIST OF ABBRIVATIONS
ECLs Ethnic Community languages
GIDS Graded Intergenerational, Science and Technology
L1 First Language
L2 Second Language
LAD Language Acquisition Device
UNESCO The United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization
xiv CHAPTER ONE
BACKGROUND INFORMATION TO THE STUDY
1.1 Introduction
This section focuses on giving introduction to the study at hand through discussing its background, statement of the problem, objectives of the study, research questions, significance of the study and scope of the study.
1.2 Background Information to the Study
Tanzania is a multiethnic nation. It is home for numerous ethnic community languages, as a result, multi-lingual nation. This reality is mirrored in the presence of about one hundred and twenty ethnic community languages according to the population census of 1967
(Tanzania 1971). The latest version of Ethnologue (Gordon 2005) records 128 languages.
This number as of late developed significantly greater when the aftereffects of a nationwide review under the support of LOT were discharged (LOT 2006). Along these lines, the overview added roughly 80 more glossonyms to the current records distributed by, for insvtance, Polomé and Hill (1980) and Ethnologue. Lewis (2009) also affirms that
Tanzania is a multilingual country with around 128 ECLs.
The casual and formal spread of Kiswahili as a second language (L2) of more extensive dispersion/most widely used language (the national and co-official language), has progressively restricted the utilization of all other Tanzanian languages (L1s). Indeed, in most official settings Kiswahili is overwhelming. The conspicuous job of Kiswahili is predominantly the aftereffect of its official status, which has been bolstered by huge language arrangement choices after 1961 until as of late, when in 1997 the social strategy report "Sera ya Utamaduni" (Tanzania 1997) was popularized (Legère, 2007: 51)
The over whelming effect of L2 wherever in the nation and its overwhelming impact on the utilization of ECLs in Tanzania Mainland specifically is a common phenomenon. Data
1 about the proceeding with underestimation of ECLs were examined in different areas of the nation and distributed in various contextual analyses wrote by scientists like Mekacha
(1993) for the Nata territory, Stegen (2003) among Rangi speakers of Kondoa District,
Wedin (2004) for North West Tanzania, Msanjila (2003), Mkude (2001, 2003), or at the
2004 LOT gathering "Lugha za Tanzania" (Legère, 2007:51).
Many of ethnic community languages in Tanzania are in the endangerment zone. As indicated by UNESCO (2003); a language is jeopardized when it is on the way towards elimination. A language is in threat when its speakers stop to utilize it or utilize it in an inexorably lessened number of informative spaces, and stop to pass it on starting with one age then onto the next. That is, there are no new speakers, either grown-ups or kids. This is to state that a jeopardized language is one that is at a danger of dropping out of utilization as indicated by UNESCO (2003), a language is jeopardized when it is on the way towards elimination. This is to state that a jeopardized language is one that is at a danger of dropping out of utilization. In the event that a language loses all its local speakers, it turns into a dead language. Krauss (2007) says that a language is imperiled if there is no transmission of it to youthful age. He anticipates that if children won't talk in a language in 100 years, at that point such a language is imperiled.
On the reasons for language peril, UNESCO (2003) sets that it might be the consequence of outer powers, for example, military, financial, religious, social or instructive enslavement, or it might be caused by inward powers, for example, a network's negative state of mind towards its own language. Inside weights regularly have their source in outside ones, and both stop the intergenerational transmission of phonetic and social customs. Furthermore, UNESCO clarify that numerous indigenous individuals, connecting their hindered social position with their way of life come to trust that their language are not worth holding. Such individuals relinquish their language and culture with the
2 expectation of defeating separation, to anchor a vocation, and improve social flexibility, or to familiarize to the worldwide commercial center (UNESCO 2003; Batibo, 2005). On the world stage, it is evaluated that 3,000 of the current 6,000 languages will die in the coming century; another 2,400 will come to close elimination leaving just 600 languages in the safe classification (Grenoble and Whaley 1998).
Batibo (2005) out that a predetermined number of speakers or the apparently doomed condition of the language is certifiably not an essential, but rather an ideal condition for language risk. Further, a rule whereupon a specific language's level of danger is estimated is recommended by Batibo (2005). Language portrayed as exceedingly jeopardized are those which are as of now esteemed to be most helpless based on the accompanying markers: The number of speakers as of now utilizing the language, a language with speakers less than 5000 is considered exceptionally imperiled. The level of bilingualism in the language community; normally, any minority language whose speakers are very bilingual in an overwhelming language is named threatened and its speakers are probably going to move to the prevailing language, Socio-economic disadvantage of the minority language is a factor that imperils the concerned language and brings about the prevalence of negative attitude towards the minority language. Here, the speakers see no value in their language thus shifting to the dominant language which the speakers are positively inclined.
This study focused on the endangerment of the Safwa language, an ethnic community language spoken in Mbeya region particularly in Mbeya rural, Mbeya urban, Chunya and
Poroto mountain ranges. The Safwa language is a member of the larger Niger-congo language family group and is classified in zone M, Mbeya, Safwa (M.25), (Guthrie, 1971).
The dialects of Safwa language are; Guruka (Guluxa, Kiguluka), Mbwila (Uleenje,
Ulenje), Poroto (Kiporoto, Polooto), Songwe (Kisongwe, Soongwe), Central Safwa as it
3 was cited by Guthrie (1987). The language had its population of over 160000 speakers.
However there are no up to date figures on the number of Safwa speakers since even the latest population census of 2002 and 2012 done by the government of The United
Republic of Tanzania did not consider aspects of ethnic belongingness and language, hence so far, for the sake of time difference, it is undoubtedly the figure has changed.
1.3 Statement of the Problem
According to Batibo (2005:155), approximately 74.8 of the African dialects are either decently or seriously imperiled and 9.4% are wiped out or almost terminated.
With respect to Tanzania, the cultural policy document (Tanzania 1997) guarantees no space for ECL‟s to blossom. The policy does not have any visible supportive role for the
ECL‟s in Tanzanian societies (Legère 2007:51). With this policy, ECL‟s or L1‟s (in this case Kisafwa) are not used in formal settings like schools, judiciary, social and political rallies, business and administrations and there is no plan to use them either irrespective of the UNESCO (2003c) recommendations. According to UNESCO (2003) this sociolinguistics situation tells a lot that Kisafwa falls in endangerment category as other
ECL‟s. Following this policy the projection can be that the today‟s generation of Safwa people whose language behaviors are molded by national policy which decides which language to be used as a medium of instruction in schools and which language to be used in official matters are developing negative attitude over their language by reason of external factors. The speakers‟ attitudes depend heavily on the status and prestige of their language (Smieja, 2003:63). With this case, Kiswahili wins the higher status in comparison to Kisafwa. Another factor of language endangerment and shift as identified by Fishman (1991) is the extent to which the language is passed on from one generation to the next. This means that if the community ceases to pass the language to the next generation the language will soon die out.
4 In this view, it is an undisputable reality that Kisafwa which is one of these ECL‟s of
Tanzania is as no safer as the rest. This study therefore intends to examine the extent to which external factors (language related factors) endanger Kisafwa and subsequently suggest ways in which the hostile situation for Kisafwa can be rectified for the purpose of restoring the language from its threat of extinction.
1.4 Objectives of the Study
The general objective of the study was to assess the trend of Safwa language endangerment and was guided by the following specific objectives;
I. To examine the attitude of Safwa language speakers towards their language
II. To evaluate the trend of Safwa language acquisition among Safwa children
III. To investigate the domain of the use of Safwa language in the Safwa community
IV. To assess the response of Safwa language to new domains and media
1.5 Research Questions
This study intended to provide answers for the following questions;
I. What is the attitude of Safwa speakers toward their language?
II. What is the trend of Safwa acquisition among Safwa children?
III. To what extent is Safwa language used in various domain of use in the Safwa
community?
IV. To what extent does Safwa language respond to new domains and media?
1.6 Significance of the Study
UNESCO, (2003) catches the significance of saving endangered languages by
pronouncing that the annihilation of a language results in the irretrievable loss of one of a
kind social, authentic and biological information. Basing on this threat the study intends
to substantially create awareness to linguists interested in undertaking studies on Safwa
5 endangerment in particular and those who wish to deal with endangerment of any human
language in general as all are driven by one common goal of rescuing them. This in turn
will lead to documentation and preservation of the Kisafwa. The study will also help to
provide or add to the existing records on the corpus of linguistics data relating to
endangerment that can further be referred to by other researchers.
Numerous socio-linguists convincingly contend that endangered language studies can add
to the support of dialects, especially if the investigation of the language peril is taken up
sufficiently early. This research is such a study.
1.7 The Scope of the Study
The study was conducted in ten villages of Mbeya District; Nsenga, Mantanji, Nsongwi,
Swaya, Iziwa, Mwasanga, Inyala, Nshoho, Mwasenkwa and Galijembe due to the fact
that are among the villages that are dominantly resided by Safwa community which is the
targeted community and the researcher thought that data relating to the subject under
study would easily be available there. Based on the focus of the study, the researcher
concentrated much on factors related to attitudes of the speakers towards their language,
domain of use of language in the respective community, the intergenerational
transmission of language and the response to new domains and media.
1.8 Definition of Key Terms
Language endangerment, the language is viewed as endangered when its speakers stop to utilize it, utilize it in progressively decreased number of every day‟s communication hence stop to pass it to the people to come (UNESCO, 2003).
Language shift is the procedure by which a speech community in a contact circumstance step by step relinquishes one dialect for another which is utilized for more extensive correspondence either eagerly or under strain (Batibo, 2005).
6 Glossonyms refer to language varieties which are commonly clear with those talked principally by neighboring ethnic gatherings or nationalities (Legère, 2007).
Language death refers to the condition of dialect eradication in sense that dialect is never again utilized as a medium for communication or socialization (Batibo, 2005).
Language maintenance is the situation where a language ensures its vitality even when it is under pressure of giving up from the dominant or language of wider communication
(Batibo, 2005).
1.9 Chapter Conclusion
This chapter has provided details on the background information of the study, statement of the problem, objectives of the study, research questions, and significance of the study, scope of the study which pointed out the area chosen for the study and then ended up with definition of various key terms used in this dissertation.
7 CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses related literatures to the study as well as the theoretical framework.
On both aspects the focus is on the relativity with the four objectives of the study. Two theoretical frame works that mirrors the research at hand are discussed which are (LVE) theoretical frame work developed by UNESCO and Fishman‟s graded intergenerational disruption scale (GIDS).
2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW
This section discusses the review of various studies done by other scholars in relation to the objectives of this study, it is all about reviews of information related to language endangerments: attitudes of speakers towards their language in connection to endangerment, intergeneration transmission of language, domain of use of the language under threat of extinction and response of the language to new domains and media. It also discusses the research gap unfilled by other researchers.
2.2.1 The Concept of language Endangerment
According to UNESCO (2003) the language is said to be endangered when it is on the way towards termination. Cahill (1999) states it essentially enough by that a language is in danger "when it is in genuinely impending peril of vanishing." Cahill states two different ways to rapidly perceive when a language is in route to death. One is the point at which the children in the community are not talking the dialect of their folks, and the other is when there are just few individuals left in the ethnolinguistic network: "The language dies out on the grounds that the entire people group dies " This is the second reason.
According to Wurm (1998:192) a language is moribund when it is never again being educated by children as their primary language. Nettle and Romaine (2000:39) say that
8 "Many languages are endangered that are not yet moribund." Crystal's definition (2000:20) is more comprehensive than Wurm's: "spoken by enough people to make survival a possibility, but only in favourable circumstances and with a growth in a community support".
Krauss (1992) Says a language is endangered in the event that it is not transmitted to more youthful ages. His definition is yet more comprehensive: that all languages with less than 10,000 speakers are jeopardized. That is 52% of the world's languages, spoken by just
0.3% of the total population. Just 600 of the world's language (under 10%) are considered as "sheltered" from annihilation, characterized as those as yet being educated by young generation (Sampat 2001). Grimes (2001:45) recorded 450 languages talked today "that are small to the point that they are in the last phases of getting to be wiped out, with just a couple of elderly speakers left in every one."
2.2.2 Causes of Language Endangerment
The reasons for language danger can be isolated into four primary classes:
1. Regular calamities, starvation, ailment: for instance, Malol, Papua New Guinea (quake);
Andaman Islands (tidal wave)
2. War and decimation, for instance, Tasmania (massacre by pioneers); Brazilian indigenous people groups (disagreements regarding area and asset); El Salvador (common war)
3. Obvious constraint, e.g. for 'national solidarity' (counting persuasive resettlement): for instance, Kurdish, Welsh, and Native American dialects
4. Social/political/monetary predominance, for instance, Ainu, Manx, Sorbian, Quechua and numerous others. (Integrated from Nettle and Romaine 2000; Crystal, 2000). Anyway these variables regularly cover or happen together.
9 According to Sallabank (2010:56) causes of language endangerment can be additionally subdivided into five regular components:
- Economic: for instance, country poverty prompts relocation to urban areas and further abroad. On the off chance that the neighborhood economy enhances, tourism may bring speakers of a majority language
- Cultural strength by the majority community, for instance, training and writing through the larger major language, indigenous languages and culture may move toward becoming
'folklorized'
- Political: for instance, training arrangements which overlook or bar nearby languages, absence of acknowledgment or political portrayal, bans on the utilization of minority languages in broad daylight life
- Historical: for instance, colonization, limit question, the ascent of one gathering and their language assortment to political and social strength
- Attitudinal: for instance, minority languages move toward becoming related with destitution, absence of education and hardship, while the prevailing language is related with advancement/escape
2.2.3 Indicators of an Endangered Language
The term endangered language signifies a language that is debilitated by eradication. The danger may come in light of the fact that the pool of speakers is declining quickly to little numbers, on the grounds that the more youthful ages are not learning how to speak it, or on the grounds that the domain in which the language is utilized have contracted so much that it isn't utilized routinely in the language community (Batibo, 2005: 62).
10 Batibo (ibid) posits that there are several indicators of an endangered language, which may be divided into three categories. The first category is attitude-related in that the speakers of a language develop a negative attitude to it and therefore become ambivalent in their loyalty and indifferent about teaching the language to their children. The second category of indicators is language use-related in that not only does transmission of the language become inactive but also the language is used in very few, mainly primary, domains.
Moreover, the number of speakers diminishes progressively as they shift to the dominant language. Finally, the third category is language structure-related in that the language becomes considerably limited in its stylistic variation and the structure is drastically eroded or simplified. At the same time there is substantial lexical reduction, so that the language can no longer be used effectively in any discourse. Table 2.1 below summarises this.
Table 2. 1: Common Indicators of an Endangered Language
Indicator type Common indicators Attitude-related • Development of negative attitudes towards own language • Ambivalent language loyalty • Indifference about language transfer to children • Association of mother tongue with low economic and social status Language-use related • Inactive transmission of language to children • Reduction in domains of use • Diminishing number of speakers Language-structure related • Limited stylistic variation • Structural erosion and simplification • Lexical reduction
Source: Batibo (2005: 65)
11 However studies shows that albeit there are three (3) types of indicators to an endangered language, altitude-related indicator is the most noticeable preceding the language-use related indicator while the language-structure related indicator do appear at the very last stage of language extinction.
2.2.4 Contribution of Attitude of Speakers to an Endangered Language
An attitude is a response or reaction towards a thought, idea or concept (Batibo, 2005:97).
As indicated by Baker (1992: 12), a state of mind has three parts: the cognitive, including thought and convictions; the effective, concerned with emotion and feelings; and the connotative, concerned with the ability to act. Where language are concerned, every one of the three segments is included as an attitude to a language could be portrayed as comprising of a psychological disposition, a passionate inclination and a response. Such feeling could be positive, negative or impassive. Language attitudes, usually, follow the socio-economic hierarchy. The more prestigious a language, the more positive the speakers‟ attitude is towards it and the less prestigious a language, the more negative the attitudes are (Batibo, 2005).
Socio-economic factors affect speakers‟ attitude towards their language (Bradley, 2002).
Bradley argues that this situation may lead to the worst situation of endangerment to their language. The attitudes, regardless of whether positive or negative, will regularly rely upon the level of representativeness or financial regard showed by every language. The job of attitude in language upkeep has been described by various researchers, including
Adegbija (1998), Batibo (1992, 1997, and 1998), Chebanne and Nthapelelang (2000) and
Smieja (1999, 2003). Batibo (1992) points out that, even though the speech community has more than 2000 ethnic members yet the language can be endangered as it co- exists with another dominant languages, he exemplifies Kizaramo and Kibondei spoken in areas where it is the centre of Kiswahili that they are endangered.
12 Petzell ( 2012 : 21) claims that individuals' attitude to their language will decide the fate of the language, since the parents and guardians' language attitude and also their language tendencies (that is what language they speak) will be passed on to the young generation.
He goes additionally saying that if young generation discovers that their language has a low status, either through gossip, peers, or in light of the fact that the guardians or parents won't talk it to them, they are very improbable to bear on talking the dialect themselves.
Various studies on language endangerment assessing attitudes of speakers towards their language have been carried out. They include the followings:
Fink (2005) examines the language attitude of Kenyans to the different languages in the country. The study is an investigation into the patterns of language choice in Nairobi. He finds out that there is a significant difference in the language choice patterns of the youths and the older generation. The study reveals that the mother tongue is no longer the first language of choice. He discloses that although the English language is the choice among young Kenyans, the emergence of a hybrid language, „Sheng‟ is also identified. He further points out that this positive attitude to Sheng may signify a great danger and can be considered a symptom of gradual death of the local languages.
Akere (1982) investigated language use and attitude in Ikorodu. The Ijebu Remo and the
Eko dialects of Yoruba language was his focus. His investigations revealed that the Ijebu-
Remo dialect speakers display a negative attitude towards their dialect but depict a favourable disposition towards the Eko dialect which enhances their socio-economic advancement towards Lagos.
Batibo (1998) carried out an investigation on the attitude of the Khoesan people towards their own language relative to other languages like Setswana. He found that they have developed a solid attitude towards Setswana, the lingua franca and generally most spoken language, on expense of their native language. Their inclination for Setswana originates
13 from its numerous charms, for example, being the language of more extensive communicative domains in the nation, being the sole language used in primary education, being the language of oral government business and town organization and being used in neighborhood gatherings (Kgotla) and social communication. It is likewise the language heard on the radio, TV and the one used by public figures, for example, government employees, legislators and dealers. The implication is that khoesan have developed positive language on others‟ language on the expense of their own tongue.
Generally, Language endangerment and death have a direct relation with language attitudes. In situation where the language users are have negative perception about their languages, are thought to have no successful incentive as far as symbolic or socio- economic gain is concerned. In contrast to the fact that that in case they see such values, they consider it as a linguistic opportunity and they fast become attached to them hence developing positive attitude towards it.
2.2.5 Intergenerational Language Transmission
In the map and list of languages which are endangered in the world, intergenerational language transmission appears mainly to be the main pointer of the level of danger of the language (Moseley 2010). Fishman (1991) graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale
(GIDS) focused on the key job of intergenerational transmission in the preservation of a language. He contends that if children don't take learn the language from their folks, there is little chance that they will thus have the capacity to pass the dialect onto their children.
According to Krauss (1992: 4), “Languages which are no longer being learned as a mother language by children are moribund.” As argued by these scholars, language learning or acquisition among children of a particular community is of paramount importance as far as language‟s maintenance is concerned.
14 2.2.6 Domain of the Use of Language
A domain of use of a language is the scene in which a language is utilized in the public arena, the person who communicates in that language and the extent of the themes examined with the language (Xu, Tao, and Xie 1997).
Most instances of language misfortune begin with the loss of the areas of use. When family domain is disrupted, normal intergenerational language transmission is hindered and the language ends up jeopardized in its future survival unless transmission is reestablished (Suhua, 2010:1).
Schmidt-Rohr (1933) set nine domains of language use: The family, game field, the neighborhood, the school, the church, literature, daily papers and productions, the armed force, and government organization.
Fishman (1972) exposed five areas of language use which are families, friends, religion, education, work and the media. Nevertheless it is claimed that these domains are much associated with everyday lives of the people. Crystal(2000) discovers that, at times, individuals finds that they have less chance to use their language since its use in the general public is underestimated and not found in authority spaces, for example, in the nearby workplaces like courts.. Based on these notions, a language with limited domain of use in the community is exposed to threat of disappearance since it will automatically loose its prestige as people will always switch to another language that seems to occupy a greater area of use. For Kisafwa specifically it is assumed that it is not used in many domains although some noticeable efforts have been observed by some stakeholders in religious field like Wycliffe Bible translators who have recently translated the Bible into
Kisafwa. This is the most common available literature found about the language although much has to be done by different stakeholders including linguists and religious books translators to ensure that the language is used in many domains like churches. From
15 religious point of view, there is a great excitement among the community and church leaders to have scripture in their own language (Wycliffe, 2017).
2.2.7 Response to New Domains and Media
New domains that consistently develop in the present worldwide life require new vocabulary and methods for communicating things from the language. In the event that a minority language does not address these difficulties of innovation, it turns out to be progressively denounced and belittled (Ström, 2009:240).
According to UNESCO, (2003: 12) new areas such as employment, education, or the media, need to be collectively thought of when weighing response by speakers to the threatened language. As UNESCO suggests, if the language is not used in any new domain it means it is inactive hence endangered.
2.3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
This study was guided by two theoretical frameworks which are; Language vitality (LVE) theoretical frame work developed by UNESCO (2003) which is worth using as a framework to assess a language‟s profile at all stages. And ethnolinguistic vitality approach developed by Fishman (1991).The rationale behind using two theoretical frameworks in this study is the fact that the important role of external factors such as wars, disease and climate change in wiping out languages is not formalised as a UNESCO endangerment criterion which is the prominent model used in assessing language endangerment, albeit it has been mentioned in the literature (Crystal 2000; Nettle &
Romaine 2000). Therefore basing much on UNESCO factors all alone it would mean other external factors like Exogamous marriage patterns, multilingualism situation just to mention few have little or no role to play in threatening the language at hand, which is not necessarily true. Even though the researcher focused much on using the four UNESCO factors that reflect the research objectives, this should not in any way mean that other
16 external factors were abandoned but rather they were as well given a reasonable weight considerably where it was necessary. It should also be born in mind that in Africa, the danger of a language environment being disturbed or significantly changed due to outside causes is to a great degree high, paying little mind to vast outright speaker numbers. Then again, multilingualism is fundamentally seen as unfriendly by the standard danger factors, regardless of its perceived role in maintaining, not destroying linguistic ecologies (Sentif,
2015: 79).
2.3.1 LVE Theoretical Framework Developed by UNESCO
This approach was developed by an Ad hoc group of experts comprising of linguist from various regions in the year 2000 to 2002 and embraced by an international meeting for shielding imperiled language held at the headquarter of UNESCO in 2003. The framework has been revised in the latest editions of the UNESCO atlas of the world language‟s change of 2009 and 2011. The framework highlights a set of nine (9) factors of “Language
Vitality and Endangerment” that can be used to assess the trend of endangerment of any human language. These factors are;
Factor 1: intergenerational language transmission (scale), factor 2: Absolute number of
speakers (real numbers), Factor 3: proportion of speakers within the total population
(scale) Factor 4: trends in existing language domains (scale), factor 5: response to new
domains and media (scale), factor 6: Materials for language education and literacy (scale),
factor 7: governmental and institutional language attitudes and policies, including official
status and use (scale), factor 8: community members‟ attitudes toward their own language
(scale) and factor 9: amount and quality of documentation (scale) (UNESCO 2003b).
Factor one (1): Intergenerational Language Transmission
17 It is a one amongst the most normally used factor in assessing language vitality, it is regardless of whether it is being transmitted starting with one age then onto the next
(Fishman, 1991). Risk can be positioned on a continuum from solidness to elimination.
Definitely, even the 'safe state' as depicted by UNESCO in the level of degree of a language endangerment does not ensure language vitality, in light of the fact that whenever speakers may stop to pass on their dialect to the people to come. UNESCO portrayed degrees of language endangerment as summarized in the table below:
Table 2. 2: Intergenerational Language Transmissions
Degree of Grade Speaker population endangerment Safe 5 The language is used by all age groups, including children. Unsafe 4 The language is used by some children in all domains; it is used by all children in limited domains. Definitely endangered 3 The language is used mostly by the parental generation and upwards Severely endangered 2 The language is used mostly by the grandparental generation and upwards Critically endangered 1 The language is known to very few speakers, of great-grandparental generation. Extinct 0 There is no speaker left.
Source: UNESCO (2009)
Factor two (2): Absolute Number of Speakers
A small speech community is dependably in danger. A small population is substantially
more helpless against annihilation for instance by illness, fighting, or cataclysmic event
18 than a bigger one. A small speech community may likewise effortlessly converge with a
neighboring group and surrender its very own language and culture (UNESCO, 2009).
Factor three (3): Proportion of Speakers within the Total Population
The number of speakers of the language relative to the total population in the speech
community is an important indicator of language vitality and endangerment. The table
below summarizes the degree of endangerment:
Table 2. 3: Proportion of Speakers within the Total Population
Degree of Endangerment Grade Proportion of Speakers within the Total Reference Population Safe 5 All speak the language Unsafe 4 Nearly all speak the language Definitely endangered 3 A majority speak the language Severely endangered 2 A minority speak the language Critically endangered 1 Very few speak the language Extinct 0 None speak the language
Source: UNESCO (2009)
Factor four (4): Trends in existing language domains
Depending with where and with whom a language is used and the scope of topic speakers can address by the particular language directly affects the transmission to the next generation.
19 Table 2. 4: Shift and Domain of Language use
Degree of Grade Domain and functions endangerment Universal use 5 The language is used in all domains and for all functions. Multilingual 4 Two or more languages may be in most social parity domains and for most functions; the ancestral language usually is rare in the public domains. Dwindling 3 The ancestral language is used in home domains and domain for many functions but the dominant language begins to penetrate home domains. Limited or formal 2 The language is used in limited social domains and for domain several functions. Highly limited 1 The language is used in only in very restricted domain domains and for a very few functions. Extinct 0 The language is not used in any domain at all.
Source: UNESCO (2009)
Factor five (5): Response to new domains and media
New domains of a language use like schools, internet, radio, Televisions, new working place have significant impact in whether or not endanger the language. If the language is used in new language domain it means it is safe from threat while if the language has no room in new domain then it is an obvious case that the language is in threat and will die out in the future.
20 Table 2. 5: Responses to New Domains and Media
Degree of Grade New Domains and Media Accepted by the
Endangerment Endangered Language
Dynamic 5 The language is used in all new domains
Robust/ active 4 The language is used in most new domains
Receptive 3 The language is used in many domains
Coping 2 The language is used in some new domains
Minimal 1 The language is used in only a few new
domains
Inactive 0 The language is not used in any new domains
Source: UNESCO (2003)
Factor six (6): Materials for Language Education and Literacy.
The existence of written materials for a language education is essential for protecting the language from threat to be extinct. Materials such as Books, publications articles about a particular language are enough to put the language in safe zone conversely, where the is no materials for language learning the prediction is that the language is on the way to phase out as the table below summarizes.
21 Table 2. 6: Materials for Language Education and Literacy
Grade Accessibility of Written Materials 5 There is an established orthography and literacy tradition with fiction and non-fiction and everyday media. The language is used in administration and education. 4 Written materials exist and at school children are developing literacy in the language. The language is not used in written form in the administration. 3 Written materials exist and children may be exposed to the written form at school. Literacy is not promoted through print media. 2 Written materials exist but they may be useful only for some members of the community; for others, they may have a symbolic significance. Literacy education in the language is not a part of the school curriculum. 1 A practical orthography is known to the community and some material is being written. 0 No orthography is available to the community.
Source: UNESCO (2003)
Factor seven (7): Governmental and Institutional Language Attitudes and Policies, including Official Status and Use.
A certain country may adopt certain policies that restrict the use of a certain language in public institutions but favour the other. The favoured one blooms and become stable hence safe from threat of extinction whereas the stigmatized one will become weaker and eventually will die. The table below summarizes the trend of this situation:
22 Table 2. 7: Governmental and Institutional Language Attitudes and Policies,
including Official Status and Use.
Degree of Support Grade Official attitudes towards Language Equal support 5 All languages are protected. Differentiated 4 Non-dominant languages are protected primarily as the support language of the private domain. The use of the non- dominant language is prestigious Passive 3 No explicit policy exists for minority languages; the assimilation dominant language prevails in the public domain. Active assimilation 2 Government encourages assimilation to the dominant language. There is no protection for minority languages. Force assimilation 1 The dominant language is the sole official language, while non-dominant languages are neither recognized nor protected. Prohibition 0 Minority languages are prohibited.
Source: UNESCO (2003)
Factor eight (8): community members‟ attitude towards their own language
In the situation whereby an individual see their language as an obstruction for economic prosperity, they may create negative attitude towards it. However when individuals' mentalities towards their language are positive, the language might be viewed as the key image of their character. Community members' attitude towards their own dialect might be surveyed on the accompanying scale in the table below:
23 Table 2. 8: Community Members’ Attitude towards Language
Grade Community Members’ Attitudes towards language. 5 All members value their language and wish to see it promoted. 4 Most members support language maintenance. 3 Many members support language maintenance; many others are indifferent or may even support language shift. 2 Some members support language maintenance; some are indifferent or may even support language shift. 1 Only a few members support language maintenance; many are indifferent or support language shift. 0 No one cares if the language is given up; all prefer to use a dominant language.
Source: UNESCO (2009)
Factor nine (9): Type and Quality of Documentation
Information about the type and quality of documentation in a particular language can tell a lot about the state of language endangerment the language is. The table below summarizes this case:
24 Table 2. 9: Type and Quality of Documentation
Nature of Grade Language Documentation Documentation
Superlative 5 There are comprehensive grammars and dictionaries, extensive texts and a constant flow of language materials. Abundant annotated high quality audio and video recordings exist.
Good 4 There is at least one good grammar, a few dictionaries, texts, literature, and everyday media; adequate annotated high-quality audio and video recordings.
Fair 3 There may be an adequate grammar, some dictionaries, and texts, but no everyday media; audio and video recordings may exist in varying quality or degree of annotation.
Fragmentary 2 There are some grammatical sketches, wordlists, and texts useful for limited linguistic research but with inadequate coverage. Audio and video recordings may exist in varying quality, with or without any annotation.
Inadequate 1 Only a few grammatical sketches, short wordlists, and fragmentary texts exist. Audio and video recordings do not exist, are of unusable quality, or are completely unannotated.
Undocumented 0 No material exists.
Source: UNESCO (2009)
It has been suggested that there is no single factor that is sufficient in itself, therefore researchers are reminded to not rely on one factor in assessing language‟s endangerment
25 but rather using more than one factors will help a researcher to come out with more valid and reliable findings.
Several researchers have studied endangerment situation of various languages using different factors. Some used all 9 factors to assess language endangerment while others used few of them. Such studies are like;
Norris (2010) utilizes LVE Factor 1 (intergeneration transmission) to decide the level of endangerment native language in Canada. She points out that intergenerational transmission is a central point for this sort of transmission.
According to Villalón (UNESCO, 2003). LVE can be applied to more than one language for camparative purpose “establish priorities for action” where various languages exist together. Villalón gives a table where various dialects exist together. Villalón gives a table evaluating and contrasting three indigenous dialects of Venezuela, in light of the nine (9)
LVE factors and contrasting three indigenous languages of Venezuela, in light of the nine
LVE factors.
Lewis (2005) made a study of 100 languages by using nine factors. His target is to examine their relevance when used in studying endangerment of numerous languages. He also clearly detailed on the relationship of the nine factors to one another.
Maffi (2005) discusses the relevance of LVE to biodiversity-related research. According to Maffi, LVE provides researchers with “a set of recommendations for the assessment of linguistic vitality (……), which should provide useful guidance (…..) for the development of linguistics diversity indicators” (Maffi, 2005: 610-11).
Brenzinger et al. (2007) emphasized on the necessity of using nine factors for full assessment of language endangerment.
26 Austin (2008) describes LVE and singles out Factor 1 (intergenerational transmission) as
“the most critical factor in language vitality: for a language to remain healthy, it must be spoken by children” (p. 217).
In this study the researcher embraced four factors among nine (9) UNESCO factors to
assess the level of endangerment of Safwa language, they are; factor 1 which is
intergenerational language transmission, factor 4, that is trends in existing language
domain, factor 5 which is response to new domains and media and factor 8 that is
community member‟s attitude towards their own language. These factors have been
chosen in consideration with the objectives of the study since they seem to be more
relevant as far as the study itself is concerned.
2.3.2 Ethnolinguistic Vitality Approach Developed by Fishman
Fishman (1991) develops a scale of 8 phases for evaluating language adversity or endangerment, and with which to direct any arrangement of activity that would prompt pivoting the destiny of a threatened language. The scale is adjusted so that stage 8 shows close complete eradication while stage one demonstrates the minimum disruption as the table below demonstrates.
27 Table 2. 10: Fishman’s Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale (GIDS)
Stage 8 Most vestigial users of X are socially isolated old folks Stage 7 Most users of X are socially integrated and ethnolinguistically active but beyond child-bearing age Stage 6 Attainment of intergenerational informal oralcy in X and its demographic concentration and institutional reinforcement Stage 5 X literacy in home, school and community Stage 4 X in the lower work sphere, involving interaction between speakers of X and Y Stage 3 Use of X in the lower work sphere, involving interaction between speakers of X and Y Stage 2 Use of X in lower government services and mass media but not in the higher sphere of either Stage 1 Some use of X in higher level education, occupational, government and efforts
Source: Fishman, (2001)
According to Fishman, a transition from stage 8 to 1 is an important step in keeping any endangered language alive. He prefers that revivalist efforts proceed from the bottom up, depending on where along the scale a language might fall. In assessing the endangerment or vitality state of any given language, the descriptive levels are hoped to provide the basis. This model was adopted by Lewis and Simons (2009).
28 Table 2.10. 1: The Adapted Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale
GIDS LEVELS DESCRIPTION 1 The language is used in education, work, mass media, government at the nationwide level 2 The language is used for local and regional mass media and governmental services 3 The language is used for local and regional work by both insiders and outsiders 4 Literacy in the language is transmitted through education 5 The language is used orally by all generations and is effectively used in written form throughout the community 6 The language is used orally by all generations and is being learned by children as their first language 7 The child-bearing generation knows the language well enough to use it with their elders but is not transmitting it to their children 8 The only remaining speakers of the language are members of the grandparent generation
Source: Lewis and Simon (2009)
The grounds behind using this approach along with UNESCO one is deeply rooted in the sense that the ethno linguistic vitality is a multidimensional approach i.e. uses both linguistic and social-economic factors such as the status (in terms of economic, socio- historical and the language itself). The approach presupposes that an ethnic group which has low group vitality will eventually disappear as a distinct group. Conversely, the more vitality a linguistic group possess, the more likely it will survive as a collective entity in an intergroup context.
However it suffices to say that most of the factors used for assessing language endangerment in each individual approach are in one way or another overlapping with
29 factors in the rest approaches. Nevertheless in compliance with the objectives of this study the four selected UNESCO factors bore the greatest weight in assessing the level of endangerment to the languages‟ case at hand because according to this study they seem to be more relevant to the language in sight.
2.4 Research Gap
A great number of scholars have in distinct ways dealt with endangerment situations in many languages all over the world from continental level, regional level, and national level all the way to a particular ethnic community. Despite using similar factors of the nine adopted from UNESCO yet the findings are different. Other researchers employed all nine factors in assessing the level of endangerment of a particular language while some merely chose few of them basing on the linguistic situation of a particular language, apart from many numerous studies.
Making a case in Kisafwa in its specialty, endangerment is due to the fact that the language in particular has little literature done to help restore it from threat of dying, for example in religion domain the most lately noticeable effort is observed to the Wycliffe
Bible translators (2017) who have translated the Bible into Kisafwa. Many studies have been basing on the already known small languages irrespective of the awareness that almost half of languages in the earth are perishing due to loss of speakers (UNESCO,
2003) .This gives a gap for a researcher in this study to assess the level of endangerment of Kisafwa language using four LVE factors approach by UNESCO (2003) to evaluate its threat as accelerated by Kiswahili, the language which seems to be its threat.
30 2.5 Chapter Conclusion
In this chapter various literatures have been reviewed that reflect the concept of language endangerment, causes of language endangerment, indicators of an endangered language as well as reviewing literature relating to the specific objectives of the study. Likewise two theoretical frameworks i.e. LVE theoretical framework developed by UNESCO (2003) and Fishman‟s Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale (GIDS) and then the chapter ended up with pointing out the research gap of the study.
31 CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This chapter gives information on the materials and methodology that were employed in this research. It contains details on research design that was used and the grounds behind selecting them are well explained. Moreover, it gives the details about the specific research approaches that were used of and the validation for selection is provided. In this chapter also pilot study, area or location of the study, sampling technique and sample size, methods of data collection, validity and reliability of data, ethical consideration, procedures and approaches for data analysis are clearly explained.
3.2 Research Approach
According to Kothari (2003: 5), there are two basic approaches to research which are quantitative and qualitative. The study at hand employed a mixed approach i.e both quantitative and qualitative approach in collecting, analyzing and presenting data.
Quantitative was employed to collect data through administering questionnaires and qualitative was used in collecting data by the use of interview and observation. This study used mixed approaches due to the nature of instruments of data collection that were used which are as well both quantitative (questionnaire) and qualitative (interview and observation).
3.3 Research Design
According to Kothari (2003) research design refers to the plan for the accumulation, estimation and examination of information. It is the plan used to produce answers to investigated disputes (Orodho, 2003). The study at hand used both descriptive research design and case study design. This is because it is suitable when collecting information about people‟s attitude, opinions, and habits on any social issues (Orodho and Combo,
32 2002). This design suits well in this study because the study aimed as well at collecting data about attitude of Safwa speakers towards their language. Moreover the option to use case study design along with descriptive design is because the study intended to investigate the language endangerment situation of Kisafwa spoken in Mbeya region of
Tanzania as the case study.
3.4 Pilot Study
Prior to the actual study the researcher undertook a small pilot study in two villages of
Nsenga and Swaya of Mbeya rural, the pilot study used questionnaires and intervews to gather information. The data was then analyzed. The ground for carrying out this pilot study was to predetermine any limitation that could affect the study so as to find out the means to overcome it before the actual study.
3.5 Area of the Study and the Targeted Population
The study was carried out in ten (10) villages of Mbeya District: Nsenga, Mantanji,
Nsongwi, Swaya, Iziwa, Mwasanga, Inyala, Nshoho, Mwasenkwa and Galijembe.
Kisafwa is spoken in many villages in Mbeya region particularly in Mbeya district however the choice of these few was based on the fact that the district is the heart of
Safwa speakers. All informants for this study were native speakers of Kisafwa both male and female i.e those who were born and raised in Safwa speaking community. Informants came from all social and economic classes like peasants, builders, tailors, carpenters, small business owners as well as secondary students and primary school pupils especially of standard six and seven, professionals such as teachers, nurses and Doctors. The age of the informants ranged between 10 and 70+ whose age group distribution were 10-18 years,
19-35 years, 36-55 years, 56-70 years and 70+ (above 70 years).
33 3.6 Sampling Technique and Sample Size
The study used purposive sampling where Safwa speakers and school children in the
Safwa community especially those who were born and raised in the Safwa community were chosen as informants. A sample of 128 school children from both secondary schools and primary schools (standard six and seven) found in the respective villages were deliberately selected to fill in questionnaires. Also a sample of 62 respondents from the rest of Safwa speakers was purposively chosen for filling in questionnaires. Purposive sampling was employed because the numbers of speakers from different social, economic and political classes, with different ages were involved. The researcher decided how many informants from each group, with respect to the ratio of each group in the community, was to be included. Concerning interviews, 20 people from all age groups i.e two interviewees from each village basing on their social, economic and political classes, were purposely selected and interviewed. For that reason the study comprised a total of
210 informants (190 questionnaires filler and 20 interviewees).
Table 3. 1: The Sex Ratio of Respondents from Questionnaires in the Sample
Cumulative Sex Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Male 96 50.5 50.5 50.5 Female 94 49.5 49.5 100.0 Total 190 100.0 100.0
Sources: Field Survey February (2018)
With reference to table 3.1 above the sex ratio is that 50.5% (96) respondents who gave their information on questionnaires were male. On the other hand female were 49.5% (94).
Thus in this study male informants exceeds female by 1% difference. Although the researcher targeted a 50 to 50 ratio however it couldn‟t go as planned due to reluctance of some of respondents to fill in the questionnaires.
34 Table 3. 2: The Sampled Respondents’ Composition by Age
Cumulative Age group Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent 10-18 131 68.9 68.9 68.9 19-35 32 16.8 16.8 85.8 36-55 25 13.2 13.2 98.9 56-70 2 1.1 1.1 100.0 Total 190 100.0 100.0
Sources: Field Survey February (2018)
Concerning the age of respondents as table 3.2 shows, the age of respondents ranged from
10-70 with age groups of 10-18 who were 68.9% (131), 19-35 were 16.8% (32), 36-55 were 13.2% (25) and 56-70 were 1.1% (2) of all respondents. The data indicate that most of respondents were teenagers; the most crucial group when it comes to language endangerment. Findings from this group are considered more realistic in giving present information and to predict the endangerment situation of languages in near future.
Table 3. 3: Educational Level of the Sampled Respondents
Cumulative Education level Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Both Primary school 97 51.1 51.1 51.1 Students and Leavers Both Secondary school 82 43.2 43.2 94.2 students and Leavers Certificate 4 2.1 2.1 96.3 Diploma 2 1.1 1.1 97.4 Degree 2 1.1 1.1 98.4 Illiterate 3 1.6 1.6 100.0 Total 190 100.0 100.0
Sources: Field Survey February (2018)
35 With respect to education qualification of the sampled respondents the data depict that both primary schools‟ students and leavers were 51.1% (97), both secondary schools‟ students and leavers were 43.2% (82), 2.1% ( 4) had certificate level, 1.1% (2) were diploma holders similar to degree holders while 1.6% (3) were illiterate as table 3.3 above shows.
Table 3. 4: Professional Qualification of the Respondents
Cumulative Status Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Peasant 50 26.3 26.3 26.3 Builder 4 2.1 2.1 28.4 Student 128 67.4 67.4 95.8 Teacher 1 0.5 0.5 96.3 Nurse 1 0.5 0.5 96.8 Business 5 2.6 2.6 99.5 Tailor 1 0.5 0.5 100.0 Total 190 100.0 100.0
Sources: Field Survey (February 2018)
As the table 3.4 above shows, questionnaires were administered to different professional respondents, 26.3% (50) respondents were peasants, 2.1% (4) were Builders, 67.4% (128) were Students, 0.5% (1) was a teacher, 0.5% (1) was a nurse, 0.5% (1) was a tailor and the rest 2.6% (5) were Business persons. Students and peasants dominated in this study because they are the native Safwa speakers.
3.7 Methods of Data Collection
The study used tools of data collection which are: questionnaires, interviews and observation for collecting both quantitative and qualitative data. The rationale behind using multiple tools was to obtain more valid data that would lead to acceptable findings on the endangerment situation of the Safwa language.
36 3.7.1 Questionnaires
The researcher used a list of printed/ typed questions that were administered to adult
Safwa speakers and school children especially those of secondary schools. The researcher also used standard six and seven primary schools‟ pupils since they were considered to be relatively more matured than others of lower classes. They were assumed to be able to give sensible answers relating to their views on attitude towards their language, the intergenerational transmission of language and Domains of use of the language and. A total of 190 people filled in questionnaires. Questionnaires comprised of both closed items and open –ended items. Closed items (yes/no questions and multiple choice items) were meant for collecting quantitative data whereas open-ended items were for collecting qualitative data both reflecting the four objectives of the study at hand.
3.7.2 Interview
The researcher used semi- structured interviews. The reason for using semi-structured interview is because it is flexible. The interview consisted of both open-ended and closed ended questions since both are useful for obtaining in depth information. The researcher interviewed twenty (20) interviewees from ten (10) centres / villages chosen as specified earlier. In each village, the researcher interviewed two interviewees. The interviews‟ question reflected all the four objectives of the research. The interviewees were the Safwa speakers of age ranging between ten (10) and above seventy (70+) years whose age group distribution were 10-18 years, 19-35 years, 36-55 years, 56-70 years and 70+ (above 70 years).
3.7.3 Observation
The researcher employed both participatory and non-participatory methods to get supplementary information about the domain of use of language, speaker‟s attitude to their language, intergenerational transmission of the language and the response of language to
37 new domains such as on internets, radio and Television broadcastings. He visited various families, attended various social activities like funerals, village meetings, traditional ceremonies, churches and weddings to find out which language was mostly used in those occasions and as well as how they felt when speaking the language.
3.8 Validity and Reliability of Data
To safeguard validity and reliability of data collected the researcher used a mixture of three techniques which are questionnaires, interviews and observation. The expectation was if the three techniques would come out with related data then the data would be valid and reliable.
3.9 Ethical Consideration
To put into consideration ethical issues the researcher planned to do the followings;
3.9.1 Obtain Permission for Conducting the Study
The researcher collected the letter from The University of Dodoma introducing him to various authorities in Mbeya region where the study was taken.
3.9.2 Informed Consent
The researcher did not in any way collect information through any of the techniques explained unless the respondents or the people from whom data was collected were willing to give the data under no influence of intimidation, cheating or bribe of any kind.
Data was collected from only voluntary respondents.
3.9.3 Confidentiality and Anonymity
The researcher informed respondents that they shouldn‟t write their names on questionnaires and where it happened that the names were written the researcher assured them that they would not appear when presenting the findings.
38 3.10 Data Analysis and Presentation Plan
Analysis means the calculation of specific measures alongside hunting down relationship that exist among information gathered (Kothari, 1990). In consequence of the fact that this research is mixed in nature after data collection‟s exercise was accomplished what followed was data analysis procedures.
3.10.1 Coding
Coding alludes to the way towards appointing numbers or different images to answers with the goal that reactions can be put into a predetermined number of classifications
(Kothari, 1990: 123). The collected data were openly coded and then numeralized i.e. in terms of frequency and percentage.
3.10.2 Editing
Data editing refers to an act of analyzing the gathered crude information to identify mistakes and exclusions and to adjust these when conceivable (Kothari, 1990: 122). In ensuring this the collected data were edited before analysis.
3.10.3 Analysis of Data from Questionnaires
The quantitative data from questionnaires were openly coded i.e. they were broken down, examined and compared so that to easy interpretation process and data analyses exercise that was carried out by using statistical packages for social science (SPSS) software version 20 and Microsoft excel 2007. The reason behind using these programs is that they are quick and automated in the sense that once data are coded, one by a mere command, can analyse all items in the data instantly and logically hence easily compared . On the other hand qualitative data from questionnaires were analysed qualitatively. They were broken down into themes and grouped then compared.
3.10.4 Analysis of Data from Observation and Interviews
39 Since data obtained through observation and interview were qualitative in nature they had to be analyzed descriptively because they had to be described, elaborated, explained and finally interpreted.
3.10.5 Data Presentation
In this study the analyzed data were presented by using tables, pie charts and bar graphs.
3.11 Chapter Conclusion
In this chapter, the discussion has centered much on research approach, research design, pilot study, area of the study and the targeted population, sampling technique and sample size, methods of data collection, validity and reliability of data, ethical consideration, data analysis and ended up with presentation plan.
40 CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
4. 1 Introduction
This chapter presents data analysis and discusses the findings on the endangerment of
Safwa language as guided by the four specific objectives of this study. These objectives are: to examine the attitude of Safwa language speakers toward their language, to assess the trend of Safwa language acquisition among Safwa community, to investigate the domain of use of Safwa language in the Safwa community and to assess the response of
Safwa language to new domains and media.
4.2 Examining the Attitude of Safwa language Speakers toward their Language
In this objective the researcher targeted to assess whether Safwa speakers have negative attitude towards their language. The data on the “attitude of speakers towards their language” revealed the following:
4.2.1 Development of Negative Attitude towards one’s own Language
Negative attitude of speakers towards their language is substantially one of the factors that have direct or subtle effect on the underdevelopment of the language which in long run leads to language extinction. Among Safwa speakers as it is always the case across
Tanzania, Kiswahili (L2) is the language of higher status and the more favoured language in the communities, Kiswahili takes over at the expenses of ECLs since community members no more feel proud of their own mother tongues.
For the case of Kisafwa the research found that, 17 (85%) out of 20 interviewees who were interviewed had a negative attitude towards their language because they said they don‟t see the importance of the language in the society. Most of them preferred to use
Kiswahili in their everyday communication. Apart from that, parents also admitted that they don‟t teach their children Kisafwa because according to them it has no use as far as
41 their daily communication is concern, Kiswahili is more favoured as it is the language of higher status in relation to Kisafwa.
On the other hand only 3 interviewees (15%) out of 20 especially elders of the community representing the old generation pointed out that they love their language and had a wish that if it were their will they would make Kisafwa the national language because to them
Kisafwa is the language that carries their true identity and cultural values. Therefore the research revealed that only 15% of the interviewed population had positive attitude towards their language.
Sampled response from interview;
In Kiswahili “ Mwanagu katika maisha haya ya siku hizi ukikazana kuzungumza
Kisafwa watu watakuona hauna maana na mkabila kabisa tena ulie pitwa na
wakati na hata ukienda mjini kutafuta kazi kama huwezi zungumza Kiswahili
huwezi pata kazi ndio maana mimi kwangu nimepiga marufuku wanangu
kuzungumza kisafwa, kwa utandawazi wa siku hizi kijana wangu lazima watoto
uwafundishe lugha watakayoitumia katika maisha yao ya kilka siku, si unaona
mwanangu wageni wanavokuja saa izi mpaka sasa kijiji kina wahondya (any
person who doesn‟t belong to Safwa Community) wengi sana na mji unakua”.
„My son, in today‟s life if you prefer to speak Kisafwa, you will be thought of as an
outdated tribalist, by the way once you go to town to look for a job and you are not
speaking Kiswahili you can‟t get it that is why I have restricted my children to not
speak Kisafwa. Bearing in mind this globalization issue my son, you must teach
your children the language they will use in their daily life. Don‟t you see my son,
strangers are coming in the village and so far the village is inhabited by so many
none Kisafwa speakers and the village is growing.‟ (Researcher‟s translation).
42 Another interviewee when asked if she gives traditional names to her sons and daughters, question number 9 (appendix II). She ended up laughing and then said;
In Kiswahili “Mwanangu, mimi ni mkristo na wanangu wote wamebatizwa hivyo
wanatumia majina ya ubatizo na ndio hayo majina yao siku zote, japokuwa babu
na bibi zao yaani wakwe zangu waliwapa, majina ya kiasili. Joseph ambae ni wa
kwanza walimwita Malongo, na Emmy wakamwita Nshilanye na ni majina ya
kurithi kutoka kwao wenyewe lakini sisi kama wakristo hatuwaiti kwa majina hayo
hata wao pia hawayapendi mana ni majina yanayo ambatana na matukio
yaliyotokea siku wanazaliwa kimila, lakini samahani sitokwambia maana yake”
„My son, I‟ am a Christian and all my children are baptized for that reason they
use baptism‟s names all the time. Although their grandfather and mother or rather
my mother and father in-law gave them traditional names. Joseph who is the first
born was named Malongo and Emmy was named Nshilanye and both names are
inherited directly from them. But to us as Christians we hardly call them with those
names and even children themselves don‟t like them since they are names that
reminds of the events that occurred on their birthdays, I „am sorry I won‟t tell you
their meaning‟ ( Researcher‟s translation).
However the researcher through his observation in the villages noted some instances though few where some people had both traditional and Christian names, in such cases these individuals still preferred being called by their Christian names other than traditional ones. Despite the fact that most of Kisafwa speakers do not value their language, there are few among them who clearly depicted a sense of favour to their language hence advocating for it to be promoted and protected. They wished to see one day their language being used throughout the nation, this is evidenced by some interviewees especially of old generation for example one of them said;
43 “Unajua mjukuu wangu miaka ile ya 60 ilikuwa ukimkuta mtu anazungumza
Kiswahili vijijini watu walikua wanamtenga kwa kua alionekana nikama mtu mwenye dharau na ma mwene ( chiefs) walikuwa wanatangaza wazi kuwa ni mwiko kuongea na watu wageni kwa lugha yeyote ile tofauti na kisafwa na iliaminika mtu akikiuka basi angeweza dhurika na mizimu. Kwa hiyo watu walikuwa na nidhamu sana na kisafwa na hata ulinzi ulikua mzuri sana katika vijiji vyetu. Wageni wengi walikuwa wakitaka kufika vijijini nilazima wajifunze kisafwa kwanza, siku hizi si umejionea mwenyewe msibani hapo kwa Ndele leo,
Mwene anatoa matangazo kwa Kiswahili, watu wamesahau miiko yetu. Mjukuu wangu mimi natamani sana turudi miaka ile, haya mambo ya watoto wadogo mnatusalimia eti shikamoo tena mkiwa mmesimama vimeletwa na waswahili. Mimi mjukuu wangu hata kwangu nimalufuku mwanangu, mjukuu kunisalimia kwa
Kiswahili, ukinisalimia siitikii, ningeweza ningerudisha siku nyuma muone jinsi
Kisafwa kilivyokua kinatuunganisha siyo nyie mnaona aibu kuzungumza lugha yenu eti mtaonekana mmepitwa na wakati”
My grandson you know in 1960‟s once you could find someone speaking Kiswahili people would stigmatize him/her because he/she was considered as contemptuous.
Local chiefs openly were proclaiming that it was a serious taboo to communicate with strangers in other languages except in Kisafwa and it was believed that if one would violate it he/she would be harmed by the spirit of ancestors. So people were very disciplined and even the village‟s security was highly ensured by this conduct.
Many strangers whenever needed to visit the villages they were compelled to learn
Kisafwa beforehand. Now days as you have seen by your eyes the Ndele‟s funeral today even chiefs make advertisements in Kiswahili. People have forgotten their taboos. My grandson I wish we could go back to those years. These things you
44 greet us „shikamoo‟ worse enough when standing have been brought up by
Waswahili. To me even at my home it is strictly not allowed to my sons/daughters,
grandsons/granddaughters to greet me in Kiswahili. If you greet me in Kiswahili I
don‟t respond. If I could I would turn back the hands of time so as you see how
unifying Kisafwa was to us contrary to you who feel shy to speak your tongues by a
mere fear of being laughed at as outdated ( Researcher‟s translation).
The researcher, through his observation noticed, that many Safwa speakers particularly of present generation feel shy of speaking their language in public. Although most of them are competent in both Kisafwa and Kiswahili. In other words, they are bilingual but
Kiswahili is more prestigious to them. For instance, the researcher observed two brothers quarrelling over the borders of their pieces of land in Swahili. Their father tried to speak to them in Kisafwa with very kind tone but they shouted furiously in Swahili to one another despite their father‟s effort to try to mediate them with Kisafwa tone. The point is that in
Safwa communities, it is the tradition that sensitive issues like family issues or conflicts are settled by the discussion done in Kisafwa to portray a sense of seriousness and sensitivity of the matter at hand of which the two brothers failed and neglected their tradition. For that reason it was more likely to find competent Safwa speakers speaking
Kiswahili in many occasions. Kiswahili being the national language has in many ways contributed to suppress many ECLs in Tanzania, Kisafwa being one of them.
4.2.2 Feeling Proud of the Language
In this aspect the researcher intended to assess the pride of Kisafwa speakers towards their language. Being proud over one‟s own language means the speakers are happy and comfortable with it. They have positive attitude towards their language. On the other hand if speakers do not feel proud of their language obviously they will feel shy to speak it.
This implies that they have negative attitude towards it.
45 The data collected by questionnaires (question number 7) about the language they felt proud of when they spoke either Kisafwa or Kiswahili revealed the findings presented in the pie chart below.
Pie chart 4. 1: Feeling Proud of the Language
17.9%
Kisafwa Kiswahili 82.1%
Source: Field Survey (February 2018)
In reference to the pie chart 4.1 above, the questionnaires‟ findings form question 7
reveal that 17.9 % (34) respondents of the 190 respondents were proud of their
Kisafwa. The respondents were required to give reasons for their answers. The
respondents claimed to feel proud of their language because to them it is the
reflection of their culture. It harmonizes the feeling of oneness among Kisafwa
speakers. It is their basic identity. Therefore these had positive attitude towards their
language.
46 However, 82.1 % (156) respondents of 190 respondents had negative attitude towards their language and on giving their reasons they said they don‟t feel proud of the language because it is used only in their local domain, so comparing to Kiswahili
(national language), to them Kiswahili is their best language. They feel proud of wherever they are.
4.2.3 The most Important Language to the Speaker
The way the speaker of the language perceive or value his/her language basing on its importance to him/her may tell a lot about his/her attitude towards it. The language considered to be important to him/her will automatically be embraced positively while the one considered less important will be stigmatized since speakers will clearly have negative attitude towards it.
The data collected by questionnaires (question number 13) about the most important language to the speaker between Kisafwa and Kiswahili revealed the findings presented in the graph below.
Area Graph 4. 1: The most Important Language to the Respondents
100% 90% 26.8% 80% 70% 60% 50% Kisafwa 40% Kiswahili 72.6% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0.0 1 2
Source: Field Survey (February 2018)
47 From the graph 4.1 above the data revealed that 26.8% (51) respondents of 189 respondents said to them the most important language was Kisafwa. Conversely the rest
72.6% (138) respondents said it is Kiswahili which is the most important language to them. Those who rated Kiswahili as the most important language supported their choice saying that Kiswahili is the language of the majority of Tanzanians; besides, it is a national language unlike Kisafwa which is a mere ethnic community language.
4.2.4 Assignment of Traditional Safwa Names by Parents to their Children
Assigning of traditional names to the children that embrace the language reflects a lot how still significant the language is to the speakers since traditional names in most cases have meanings that are depicted by the language itself. Therefore the existence of these names in a certain community apparently means that the users of that language have positive attitude towards their language. Contrary to that i.e. if there are no traditional names assigned to children it implies that the language users have developed negative attitude towards their own language.
The data collected by questionnaires (question number 15) about whether the parents assigned traditional Safwa names to their children revealed the findings presented in the pie chart below.
48 Pie chart 4. 2: Parents who Gave Traditional Safwa Names to their Children
27.8%
Yes No 72.1%
Source: Field survey (February 2018)
As the pie chart 4.2 indicates, the findings reveal that only 27.9% (19) respondents of the 68 respondents said yes, that is, they gave traditional Safwa names to their children.
They supported their answer by saying that it was because they liked their language since it is their identity while 72.1% (49) respondents said no. They didn‟t give traditional names to their children and they backed up their answers by saying that they were Christians. According to them, Christians are baptized and once they are baptized they are given Christian names. Some didn‟t give any reason irrespective of the fact that they said they don‟t give traditional Safwa names to their children.
4.2.5 Discussion
The aspect of attitude towards language is critical. A negative attitude towards one‟s own language inescapably hampers intergenerational transmission of the language. Learning or acquiring a language to children is of paramount importance if the language is to survive from fading out. As the data show the case is worse with the Kisafwa speakers because they show that many of them have negative attitude towards their language. Only few of them have positive attitude towards the language, however, even these few are ambivalent
49 to their language as far as identity is concerned. Kiswahili which is the national and the lingua franca of Tanzania wins the odd on expenses of other ECLs like Kisafwa.
By observing the UNESCO factor number eight (8) the case of Kisafwa relates to Grade 2.
Some members support language maintenance; some are indifferent or may even support language shift.
The findings on this aspect of the community‟s attitude towards their language compares to the case study in Eastern Botswana, about the attitude of khoesan people towards their language undertaken by Batibo (2005). His findings revealed that the Khoesan people have cultivated a strong positive attitude towards Setswana which is an official language and negative attitude towards their own language. It is the same case with the situation between Kiswahili (national language) and Kisafwa (an ECL). Kisafwa speakers like
Khoesan speakers, in this regard have developed negative attitudes towards their language.
Akere (1982) also investigated language use and attitude in Ikorodu. The Ijebu Remo and the Eko dialects of Yoruba language was his focus. His investigations revealed that the
Ijebu-Remo dialect speakers display a negative attitude towards their dialect but depict a favourable disposition towards the Eko dialect which enhances their socio-economic advancement towards Lagos. To some extent this situation as discovered by the researcher echoes to the Kisafwa-Kiswahili situation. The only difference is that the Ijebu-Remo and
Eko languages are dialects of the same Yoruba language while Kisafwa and Kiswahili are two independent Bantu languages.
Another instance similar to negative attitude of Kisafwa speakers towards their language is discovered by Ström (2009) when he studied the endangered status of the Ndengeleko language. He exposed that Ndengeleko have developed negative attitude towards their own language.
50 Generally for that matter Safwa speakers have negative attitude towards their language and this is attributed largely by language contact and shift whereby Safwa speakers forsake using their language in favor of Kiswahili, the most dominant and prestigious language in Tanzania, Kiswahili is the main reason for the endangerment of many ECLs in
Tanzania.
4.3 Evaluation of the Trend of Safwa Language Acquisition among Safwa Children
(Intergeneration Language Acquisition)
Language acquisition is a subconscious natural phenomenon that encompasses all stages a child goes through to pick up the language he or she is exposed to since childhood. From innativisim linguistic point of view, all human beings are born with the language acquisition device (LAD). It is this device that gives the character to every born child to have a natural ability of acquiring the language. In this study the focus is to assess whether
Safwa children either acquire Kisafwa as their first language or Swahili which marks the so called intergeneration transmission of a language; one of the factors for assessing language endangerment and vitality by UNESCO. With this objective, the target was to spot whether Safwa children had good proficiency and competence on Kisafwa as well as testing if parental and grandparental generation were transmitting the language to their children and grandchildren.
4.3.1 Language used by all Age Groups including Children
According to UNESCO (2009) factor 1, the language is safe (grade 5) if it is used by all age groups within the community, meaning to say: by children, teenagers (youth), adults
(parents) and old people (grandparents). On contrary, if one generation particularly children are not speaking the language, the fact is that language transmission between one generation and the next is problematic. From the researcher‟s observation and data obtained from the questionnaire (question14) the following findings were obtained;
51 Bar Graph 4. 1: Language used by all Age groups
80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 72.6% 30.0 20.0 24.2% 10.0 2.6% 0.0 Kiswahili Kisafwa Both
Source: Field Survey (February 2018)
As the bar graph 4.1 above shows, in most instances the researcher as he was observing, he encountered with the situation whereby almost all generations were using Kiswahili in their communication. However, the researcher found some limited cases whereby Kisafwa was used but in this case Kisafwa was regularly used by the parental generation and upwards. The data obtained from the questionnaire have proved this to be true as seen in the chart above where 72.6% (138) respondents of
189 said that Kiswahili is the language commonly used by all age groups while
24.2% (46) respondents commented that Kisafwa is used by all age groups unlike the expectations and 2.6% (5) respondents said that both languages are used by all age groups. This fact shows that Kisafwa language intergenerational transmission is in challenging state.
4.3.2 Language Competency and Proficiency among Safwa Children
If children of one generation acquire the language from their parental as well as their grandparental generation and speak it competently, it is quite obvious that the language is inherited to young generation. Consequently, children of the current generation will pass it to their following generations too. Conversely,
52 Once the children are not competent in their language, the guarantee is that their
coming generation of their sons and daughters or grandsons and granddaughters will
not inherit the language of their parents, grandparents, or great grandparents.
Regarding Kisafwa, the data collected by questionnaires (question number 8) which
were administered among Safwa children of age 10-18 years who were primary
schools and secondary schools students. The aim was to find out which language
they spoke before starting school i.e. the language they spoke before they began
standard one.
Pie chart 4. 3: Language that was Spoken in Pre-school Age among Safwa Children
3% 24%
Kiswahili 73% Kisafwa Both
Source: Field survey (February 2018)
As the pie chart above depicts, it is without doubt that the number of students who acquired Kiswahili at early childhood or before going to school is compared to those who acquired Kisafwa and those who acquired both. As the data shows 73% (93) respondents of the 128 respondents said that they were speaking Kiswahili even before commencing their primary school education while 24% (31) said that they were speaking Kisafwa and only a handful 3% (4) of them said that they were speaking both languages. 53 Kiswahili is becoming the first language among many Safwa communities since it is the
Language acquired first by many children. Therefore, it is an undisputable fact that
Kisafwa is definitely endangered because it is not passed on from one generation to another sufficiently, especially, when compared to Kiswahili. However, the language is, although limited, widely used by parental generation.
4.3.3 Existence of Exogamous Marriage and its Effects on Language Acquisition to
Exogamous Children
If there is one way a language can easily be acquired is at family level. The type of marriage in a particular family can hugely promote or hinder language learning and acquisition among children born. Once the marriage is endogamous then children have a better chance of retaining their language. Contrary to that an exogamous marriage is a threat to language learning and acquisition (Saarela, 2015: 1).
Therefore exogamous marriage is an ethnically mixed marriage. The family is the the best place of language preservation (Pauwels 2005, Schwartz 2008).The practice of intermarriages (exogamy) has been on a steady rise in Tanzania due to increasing urbanization, social mobility and religious activities. Increased interethnic contacts have led to a decline of mono-ethnic marriages. In spite of the growing appeal of intermarriages in the country, the linguistic consequences of such marriages as well as their effects on language acquisition patterns of children are significant.
Following the significant role exogamous marriage play to language endangerment in particular, especially on pattern of intergenerational transmission of the language, the researcher devised question number 18 which aimed first to find out if there were exogamous marriages in the communities then to see whether exogamous children could speak Kisafwa fluently and 184 respondents answered this question. The findings are presented as following;
54 Pie chart 4. 4: Existence of Exogamous Marriage
3.2%
Yes No
96.8%
Source: Field Survey (February 2018)
As the pie chart 4.4 above displays, 96.8% (178) respondents of 184 said that there were exogamous families in their communities while only 3.2 % (6) respondents said that there were no exogamous marriages. However, another section of the same
Question was specifically meant to be responded by exogamous children to check which language they were speaking fluently. 184 respondents answered the question in this section. The findings revealed that 90% (165) respondents of them were speaking Kiswahili fluently and 7% (14) respondents said that they were speaking both of them fluently i.e. bilingual in nature whereas 3% (5) respondents said that they were speaking Kisafwa. These findings, plainly, indicate that exogamous marriage assuredly hinder intergenerational transmission of language hence in one way or another has substantially contributed to endanger Kisafwa.
4.3.4 The Extent to which Safwa Speakers use Kisafwa to Communicate with
Parents
How frequent the speakers of a particular language especially children communicate with their parents is significant to inform if intergenerational transmission of the 55 language is progressive or not. Once parents and children do frequently and fluently communicate using their own language, intergenerational transmission is automatically ensured hence the language‟s survival in the next generations will be guaranteed.
The data collected by questionnaires (question number 16) from 190 respondents about the level at which Kisafwa was used to communicate with parents exposed the findings presented in the bar graph below.
Bar Graph 4. 2: Extent to which Safwa Speakers use Kisafwa to Communicate with Parents
90 42.1% 80
70 33.2% 60
50 24.7%
40
30
20
10
0 High Moderate Low
Source: Field Survey (February 2018)
56 From the bar graph 4.2 above the findings revealed that 33.2% (63) respondents of them said that they were highly using Kisafwa to interact with their parents: This group, from the researcher‟s observation was a parental generation whose parents were still alive
(grandparents of their children). This generation still holds their language; however, they can hardly avoid blame on them for not transmitting the language to their descendants. On the other hand 42.1% (80) respondents of 190 commented that they moderately use
Kisafwa to communicate with their parents while 24.7% (47) of them were lowly communicating with their parents. As from the observation the researcher carried out this group of respondents is that of children and teenagers of age (10-18) years. Their number is significant when it comes to language endangerment.
The data reveal that Safwa parental and grandparental generations do not pass on the language sufficiently to their descendants.
4.3.5 Language used to Communicate with Peers among Safwa Children
The researcher‟s participatory observation has found that very, infrequently, Children in
Safwa communities were communicating to each other in Kisafwa. Some, although least in number, were mixing both Kiswahili and Kisafwa. However, Kiswahili was dominating in many cases. Not only had, Kiswahili dominated in formal settings like schools, which is an obvious case, since communication through ECLs in all formal settings is not allowed in Tanzania but even after schools, in streets or homes, Kiswahili still dominated. The prediction is that children grow knowing nothing about their language. The point is even worse when they grow up as adults and own their families; the threat is that they will have nothing they know concerning their language to transmit to their children. In this manner, the extent of Kisafwa endangerment will become even worse.
The data collected by questionnaires (Question number 17) about the language used to communicate with peers among Safwa children revealed the following findings:
57 Bar Graph 4. 3: Language used to Communicate with Peers
72.6% 80 70 60 50 23.7% 40 30 20 3.7% 10 0 Kisafwa Kiswahili Both
Source: Field Survey (February 2018)
From the bar graph 4.3 as presented, 23.7% (45) respondents of 190 respondents said that they were communicating to one another in Kisafwa while majorities 72.6% (138) respondents of them said that they were communicating in Kiswahili and 3.7% (7) respondents commented that they were using both Kisafwa and Kiswahili. Those who responded in favour of Kiswahili justified their answers by commenting that they were communicating in Kiswahili because some of their friends both Safwa and non Safwa ones couldn‟t speak Kisafwa and many of them added, “after all Kiswahili is the national language”.
4.3.6 Discussion
According to Fishman‟s (1991) “Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale,” Kisafwa matches with stages 6 and 7 (generation 2 and generation 3) and upwards. The youngest
Kisafwa speakers are the adults (generation 3), who are not speaking Kisafwa to their children. Kisafwa is basically spoken by older speakers. However, they always use
58 Kiswahili with younger generations (generation 3 and generation 4), who know nothing or little about Kisafwa. Speakers from generation 3 use Kisafwa or Kiswahili with older ones. However in many cases Kiswahili still prevail. Hence the language is moribund.
Referring to UNESCO factor 1, intergenerational language transmission, Kisafwa can be placed as in Grade 3 which signify that the language is jeopordized.
4.4 Investigation of the Domain of Use of Safwa Language in Safwa Community
Domain of use means the place where a language is used in the community. It includes both the number of individuals using the language and the the topics discussed (Xu, Tao, and Xie 1997).
UNESCO, (2009) argues that the domain of use of a particular language may predict how safe or endangered the language is. If the language is used in many domains within the community then the language is safe. The opposite of it means that the language will be subjected to endangerment.
4.4.1 Examining the Use of Safwa Language at Home Domain
Home is only one place where the child can acquire a language. Home is the source of language inputs where the child gets exposure to the language spoken frequently around home among family members like parents, brothers, sisters, relatives and gradually begins to develop simple speeches which as she/he grows become automatic.
If home domains are interfered by dominant languages, new born children will not inherit their ancestors‟ language. Home domains are of paramount importance for language learning and acquisition (Suhua, 2010:1).
Owing to the significance of home domain, the data collected by questionnaires
(question number 9) from 190 respondents about the language commonly spoken in the
59 home domain among Safwa community revealed the findings presented on the pie chart below.
Pie chart 4. 5: Language Used at Home Domain among Family Members
12.1%
Kisafwa 56.3% 31.6% Kiswahili Both
Source: Field survey (February 2018)
60 From the pie chart 4.5 above, 56.3% (107) of the respondents of them claimed that both languages i.e. Kiswahili and Kisafwa were equally dominating the home domain when family members were communicating to each other while 31.6% (60) respondents said that Kiswahili was dominantly used. The least 12.1% (23) of the respondents were those who said that Kisafwa was dominating. It is evident from the chart that Kisafwa is not safe from endangerment. Although the language is still used in homes for some functions, the fact that Kiswahili is sharply penetrating is significant. The findings revealed by the data are enough to justify that Kisafwa is endangered.
In addition to that, the researcher as was participatorily carrying out observation by visiting various homes he realized that Kisafwa was used similarly as Kiswahili in many cases, even in cases when Kisafwa was seemingly solely used, code mixing and code switching were common. For instance the researcher noted down the following utterance from one of the native speakers of Kisafwa.
“Ama suala ge mafuto ni ya wote gauhusu kila muntu, hatuwezi muachia mtu
mmoja eti kisa ni kiongozi, bhashi bhagosi? yangaji ngeyanga lilenga”.
In Kiswahili “Masuala ya misiba ni ya wote, yanamhusu kila mtu, hatuwezi
muachia mtu mmoja eti kisa ni kiongozi, eti wakubwa? semeni kama nazungumza
uongo.” (Researcher‟s translation).
In English “Funeral issues concern every one of us, we can‟t burden them to just
one person only with the excuse that he‟s a leader, isn‟t it elders? Speak it out if
I‟m lying.” (Researcher‟s translation).
The utterance is full of code mixing and switching from Kisafwa to Kiswahili and then back to Kisafwa which is a result of bilingualism as conforming to 56% speakers of both languages from the findings. According to Batibo, (2015: 69) The languages that are
61 endangered are the one that are susceptible depending on set of indicators which were used in his survey. These indicators according to him included bilingualism which is the case for Kisafwa speaking community. Others are:
• The number of speakers currently using the language. In this survey, all minority languages spoken by fewer than 5000 people were considered to be endangered, particularly if other factors were involved.
• The degree of bilingualism in the dominant language. Usually, any minority language whose speakers were highly bilingual in a dominant language was classified as endangered as its speakers are likely to shift to the dominant language.
• The prevalence of socio-political factors that put pressure on the minority language. In some cases historical or political factors may exert pressure or place the minority language speakers in a state of dependence, inducing a shift to the dominant language.
• Socio-economic disadvantage of the minority language speakers. Where these were socio-economically vulnerable or dependent on the dominant language speakers, it was assumed that the former will be attracted to the language of the more powerful group.
• The popularity of negative attitudes towards their ECLs. Where RCLs speaker do not worth their own ECLs, it was taken as an indicator of language endangerment
• Non-transmission of the ECLs to the younger generation. Where parents no longer taught their children ECLs but instead encouraged them to learn the dominant language, this was taken as a clear indicator of language endangerment.
From this reality revealed, it is obvious that Safwa children hardly will ever acquire
Kisafwa as their mother tongue language because the only place where they could acquire
62 it is at home where bilingualism and Kiswahili become dominant. So there is no room for
Kisafwa to escape the threat of fading out.
4.4.2 Language used in Village Meetings
Various formal village meetings in Safwa community are held under the village chairpersons and Village executive officers. In most of these meetings, the main agenda is developmental issues and other burning social issues. The researcher attended several village meetings to observe the language that they were using. Through observation the researcher pin pointed many cases where Kiswahili was mostly used; there were only few instances where Kisafwa was used especially for emphatic function.
The data collected by questionnaires (question 11) about the language used in village meetings among Safwa community revealed the findings presented on the bar graph below.
63 Bar Graph 4. 4: Language used in Village Meetings
90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 86.3% 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 13.7% 0.0 Kisafwa Kiswahili
Source: Field Survey (February 2018)
According to the bar graph 4.4, the data revealed that 86.3% (164) respondents of
190 respondents said that nowadays Kiswahili is dominantly used in village meetings while 33.3% (26) respondents reported that Kisafwa is used though it faces stiff competitions from Kiswahili.
The data collected by interview (see appendix II, interview‟s guideline question 12) about the language used in village meetings among Safwa community revealed the findings which are presented as follows; Most of the interviewees pointed out that they were using Kiswahili because it is the national language and the language of the government in all official settings. For that matter, government official matters, as they begin at village level and chaired by village chairpersons or village executive officers, apparently, every one would expect to see Kiswahili the only language to be used. As they were interviewed one of them said,
64 “Mdogo wangu ivi katika dunia ya sasa unaanzaje kutumia Kisafwa katika vikao
na mikutano ya kijiji wakati mwenyekiti ni kiongozi wa serikali na lugha ya
serikali ni Kiswahili”. lakini pia si unamuona huyu Afisa mtendaji wetu, huyu ni
mnyakyusa, kaletwa na serikali. Sasa na mikutano ya kijiji iko chini yao,
utatumiaje kisafwa wakati kiongozi hakijui na pia si lugha ya taifa? Mimi
nakipenda kisafwa lakini nakipenda zaidi Kiswahili kwa kua ni lugha ya taifa ndio
maana tunaitumia katika mikutano yetu yote”.
“In English “My young brother, in today‟s world, how can you dare to speak
Kisafwa in village meetings bearing in mind that the chairperson is a government
leader and the government‟s language is Kiswahili?. By the way you can see our
village executive officer is a Nyakyusa, he has been brought here by the
government. Now the village‟s meeting are led by them, how can you use Kisafwa
amidst the fact that the leader doesn‟t know the language and besides it is not the
national language? Personally, I like Kisafwa but I like Kiswahili more because is
a national language that‟s why we use it in all village meetings.” (Researcher‟s
translation).
Owing to this situation, Kisafwa has found itself being used in very limited domain. It is not used in any formal domain; one of the proofs that Kisafwa is one among endangered languages in Tanzania as they are being suppressed by Kiswahili.
4.4.3 The Language Used in Traditional Activities (Ritual activities)
Safwa community has a tendency of performing ritual activities as it is the case for many
African communities. For non-Christians, in the community, traditional rituals are inseparable with ancestor worshiping. In Kisafwa this is known as “apute azimu”. These worshiping activities are conducted in the bushes known as „Maganjo” (old cemetery) and
65 are led by “Mwene” Chiefs. They worship ancestors who died and were buried many years ago though believed to still exist despite their death.
The data collected by questionnaires (question 12) about the language used in traditional rituals among Safwa community revealed the findings presented on the bar graph below.
Bar Graph 4. 5: Language used in Traditional Rituals
56.3% 60 50 35.8% 40 30 6.8% 20 10 0 Kisafwa Kiswahili Both
Source: Field Survey (February2018)
As the bar graph 4.5 above shows Safwa people were found to be mostly using their own language (Kisafwa) in ritual activities. 56.3% (107) respondents of 188 respondents marked that Kisafwa was dominant in this particular case. However, still, there are a significant number of them who marked that Kiswahili was used i.e.
6.8% (13) and 35.8% (68) respondents who said that both languages were used simultaneously. This number in its totality is a sign of the coming great threat to the destiny of Safwa culture in the nearest future. In some days ahead the language together with its traditional ritual activities are going to perish. All of these are caused by Kiswahili which is interfering with almost every domain. 66 4.4.4 Language used at Market Places
Markets are one of meeting places where people interact as they are doing various business transactions. There is no interaction without language. Therefore market places are very important for evaluating various functions of a language that is why the researcher included this domain in this study.
The data collected by interview (see appendix II, interview‟s guideline question 10) about which language they were using at market places to sell and buy goods revealed the following findings: most of them said that they were using Kiswahili. The common reason they gave when asked why they were using Kiswahili their answer was that in the markets they meet with sellers and buyers from different ethnic groups and it is only Kiswahili which is the national language for them to be used in such areas. One interviewee noted,
“Nioongee Kisafwa sokoni! ivi nitamuuzia nani?, labda kama unataka mboga
zikudodee”
In English “Speaking Kisafwa in markets! To whom will I sell?. Unless you want
your vegetables to remain unsold”. (researcher‟s translation).
The data collected by questionnaires (question 10) about the language used at markets among Safwa community revealed the findings presented on the bar graph below.
67 Bar Graph 4. 6: Language used at Market Places
84.7% 100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0 15.3% 20.0
0.0 Kisafwa Kiswahili Source: Field Survey (February 2018)
From the Bar graph 4.6 above it is evident that the language used in market places in this community is Kiswahili. Kisafwa has no place in the markets since only 15.3%
(29) of 190 respondents responded in favour of it while on the other side 84.7%
(161) respondents were in favour of Kiswahili.
4.4.5 Language Used in Religious Domain
Religion is the language-use domain. It is according to which the researcher had a participatory observation and visited many churches. Even in this domain the observation revealed that Kiswahili was dominant, this is another evident how
Kisafwa is endangered.
4.4.6 Discussion
Considering UNESCO factor 4: Trends in existing language domain Kisafwa matches Grade 4 (Two or more languages may be used in most social domains and for most functions; the ancestral language (Kisafwa in this case) usually is rare in the public domain), dwindling domain Grade 3 (The ancestral language (Kisafwa) is used in home domains and for many functions, but the dominant language begins to penetrate home domains) and limited or formal domain Grade 2 68 (The language is used in limited social domains and for several functions).
4.5 Assessment of the Response of Safwa Language to new Domains and Media
According to UNESCO (2003), new emerging social media, new career atmospheres, broadcasting organs like radio and televisions companies, Schools and Internet, promote the growth of dominant languages by costing all other languages. The type and use of these new domains will vary according to the local context. One example of the possible use of this criterion is that an endangered language enjoys one new domain, broadcast media, including radio and television, but only for a half-hour a week. Though the availability of these media gives the language a potentially high ranking, the extreme time limitation results in limited exposure to the language, which thus would rank only a 2 or 3.
Inevitably, there will be different levels of achievement in different media.
Though Krauss (1992) referred to television as “cultural nerve gas,” television and radio can also be useful in enhancing the prestige of a language. If programmes can be broadcast in an indigenous language, the speakers will not only have more opportunities to hear their language, but they will be hearing it in a context often associated with higher economic and social standing. Use of indigenous languages where normally only a majority language would be used shows that minority languages can be just as viable in today‟s modern world.
In this research the researcher interviewed Kisafwa speakers question 12 (see appendix II) to find out if there were cases in local televisions or radios‟ broadcast that were run in
Kisafwa. The findings from all interviewed Kisafwa speakers revealed that the Language is not at all used in any television or radio broadcast. Therefore the language‟s prestige is deteriorating day after day unlike its hostile Kiswahili.
69 Furthermore the researcher‟s observation revealed the like i.e. the language was not found being used in broadcastings even in local TV and radio stations. This is another area proving the fact that Kisafwa is an endangered language.
4.5.1 Discussion
Referring to UNESCO factor 5 the language matches Grade 0 (inactive); the language is not used in any new domain. Given that Kisafwa is restricted to a single domain (casual conversation); it comes as no surprise that it is not used in new domains. Kisafwa is therefore an endangered language.
4.6 Chapter Summary and Conclusion
This section presents the summary of findings and conclusion
4.6.1 Chapter Summary
The following table summarizes the findings and the previous discussion in this chapter:
Table 4. I: Summary of Findings
Factors Rating Comments F8: Attitude 2 Some members support language maintenance; others are indifferent; they support language shift. F1: Transmission 3 The language is used mostly by the parental generation and upward F4: Language domain 4,3 and 2 Two or more languages may be used in most social domains and for most functions; Kisafwa language usually is rare in the public domains; Kisafwa language is used in home domains and for casual functions; Kiswahili, the dominant language, begins to penetrate home domains and limit Kisafwa. F5: New domain 0 The language is inactive, not used in any new domains.
Source: Researcher‟s Findings (April 2018)
70 4. 6. 2 Chapter Conclusion
This chapter has presented, analyzed and discussed findings as guided by the objectives.
The findings have revealed that Safwa speakers have negative attitude towards their language. In this aspect Kisafwa is rated scale two (2) of the UNESCO factor eight (8) that is some members support language maintenance; others are indifferent; they support language shift. Concerning intergenerational language acquisition (transmission) the findings have revealed that the language matches with scale (3) of the UNESCO factor one (1) that is the language is used mostly by the parental generation and upward. About the domain of use of Kisafwa in Safwa community that is UNESCO factor four (4), the findings revealed that the language is rated scale 4, 3 and 2; two or more languages may be used in most social domains and for most functions; Kisafwa usually is rare in the public domains; it is used in home domains and for casual functions; Kiswahili, the dominant language, begins to penetrate home domains and limit Kisafwa. On the other hand, the findings have as well revealed that on UNESCO factor five (5) the language is rated scale (0); since the language is hardly used in any new domain.
In a nutshell, from UNESCO point of view Kisafwa is definitely endangered since attitude of Safwa speakers towards their language is negative, the language‟s intergenerational transmission is as well problematic and is used in very limited domain and the language is absolutely not used in any television and radio broadcast. All these happen because majority of Kisafwa speakers value Kiswahili more than their own tongue. Therefore,
Kisafwa is endangered.
71 CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the summary of the study, conclusion, recommendations and suggestions for further studies.
5.2 Summary
This study investigated the status of endangerment of Safwa language, an ECL spoken in
Mbeya region. The study paid much attention on four UNESCO factors for assessing endangerment of any language in the world. It focused much on examining the attitude of
Safwa language speakers on their language, assessing the intergeneration language transmission among safwa speakers by examining the trend of Safwa language acquisition among Safwa children, investigating on the domain of use of Safwa language in the Safwa community and assessing the response of the language to the new domains and media.
It was revealed that Safwa language is, definitely, endangered. Endangerment, for this language in particular, has been triggered largely by negative attitude of Safwa speakers themselves towards their language, they have shifted from using their language to
Kiswahili which is more prestigious among many Tanzanian communities. The negative attitude of Kisafwa speaker has lowered the transmission of the language to the next generations and is used in very limited domain like home, mostly, by parental generation.
Moreover the language is not at all used in any new domain like television and radio broadcast.
Swahili is supplanting indigenous languages in Tanzania. The process of Swahili supplanting other Tanzanian languages is one that includes few phases of bilingualism, which continuously topples to Swahili strength and in the long run restricts competence in the first language (Batibo 1992). Specifically, individuals moving to the urban areas tend
72 to change and abandon using their languages and shift to Kiswahili. Kiswahili is killing numerous ECLs including Kisafwa.
5.3 Conclusion
The higher status of Kiswahili over other ECLs is the typical cause to the dying of these languages. In additional to that, rapid urbanization in many regions in Tanzania contribute to the endangerment of ECLs like Kisafwa. Kisafwa in particular is the victim of urbanization since is mostly spoken in Mbeya city and Mbeya rural which surrounds the city hence Safwa speakers automatically find themselves either encircled by the city‟s expansion or shifting to the city from rural areas and on arriving in the city they abandon speaking their language.
Also due to the expansion of Mbeya city, intermarriages among Safwa speakers is nowadays very common, Safwa speakers are massively getting married to people with different ethnic background who speak different vernacular languages. So, Kiswahili is always taking advantage of this situation and become the lingual franca as it is always the case in Tanzania. This inhibits intergenerational language transmission to children born in these families.
5.4 Recommendations
Following endangerment of Kisafwa, firstly, the study recommends that Safwa speakers should be encouraged to value their language for their cultural identity. Secondly, the study recommends also that linguists, the government, researchers and international organization should collectively stand as one unity in advocating for the survival of these languages that are under threat to die in the future.
73 5.5 Suggestions for Further Studies
This research has assessed the endangerment of Kisafwa basing on four UNESCO factors which are attitude related factor (attitude of Kisafwa speakers towards their language), trend of language acquisition (intergenerational transmission) among Kisafwa speakers, the domains of the use of Kisafwa and the response of Kisafwa to new domain and media.
Since the study has employed four UNESCO factors, therefore, the study encourages further studies by others to be conducted to assess the endangerment of other ECL‟s in
Tanzania including Kisafwa especially basing on language-structure related factors of language endangerment (linguistics factors) like limited stylistic variation, structural erosion and simplification and lexical reduction So as to find out how critical the languages are in relation to endangerment in this aspect too.
Besides, the study suggests that ECL‟s should be continually under study every after few years at least tenfold to assess the level of endangerment of them so that necessary measures to battle the situation should be taken as earlier as possible for as always the earlier is the better.
5.6 Chapter Conclusion
In this chapter the study has presented the summary of the study, conclusion, recommendations and the suggestions for further studies. The study concluded that
Kisafwa is definitely endangered. Following this problematic situation for the language it was recommended that collective measures by various stake holders like government and linguists corroboratively need to be taken to protect not only Kisafwa but other ECL‟s which are in similar threat. Through these measures the languages will be safeguarded and documentation on all ECL‟s will be promoted and in return the languages‟ threat will be minimized or even absolutely eradicated.
74 REFERENCES
Austin, P. (2008). One Thousand Languages: Living, Endangered and Lost. University of California.
Adegbija, E. (1994). Language Attitude in Sub-Saharan African: A Sociolinguistic overview. Cleredon: Multilingual Matters.
Akere, F. (2002). Linguistic assimilation in socio-historical dimension in urban and sub- urban Lagos. Adefuye, A. et al (eds.). History of the people of Lagos State. Lagos: Lantern books.
Baker, C. (1992). Attitude and Language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Batibo, H.M (1992). The fate of Ethnic Languages in Tanzania. In Brenzinger (eds). Language Death: Factual and Theoretical Exploratory with Special references to East Africa. 85-98. Berlin :Mouton de Gruyter.
Batibo, H.M. (1998). The Unlamentable Loss: The Role of Attitude in Language Shift and Death in : Karsten legere (eds). And Sandra Fitchart. Talking Freedom: Language and Democratization in the SADC region. 42-53. Windo hoek: Gramsberg Macmillan.
Batibo, H.M (1998). The fate of the Khoesan languages of Botswana. Brenzinger, M. (ed) Endangered languages in Africa pp. 267-284. Koeln: Ruediger Koepper Verlag
Batibo, H. M. (2005). Language Decline and Death in Africa : Causes, consequences, and challenges .Clevedon :Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Brenzinger, M. (2007). Indicators for Assessing Language Vitality. In M. Brenziger (Ed), Language Endangerment Throughout the World ( PP. IX-XII). Berlin: Walte Gruyter.
Cahill, M. (1999). From Endangered to Less Endangered: Case Histories from Brazil and Papua New Guinea. SILEWP 1999-006.
Crystal, D. (2000). Language Death. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Gordon, R. G., Jr. (ed.). (2005). Ethnologue: Languages of the World. Fifteenth edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Online version: http://www.ethnologue.com/.
Grimes, B. F. (2001). Global Language Viability. In Endangered Languages of the Pacific Rim, Lectures on Endangered Languages: 2, from Kyoto Conference 2000. Osahito Miyaoka, ed. Pp. 45– 61.
Fink, T. (2005). Attitudes towards language in Nairobi. M.A. Project. University of Pittsburgh
Fishman, J. (1991). Revising Language Shift. Theoretical and Empirical Foundation of Assistance to Threatened Languages. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
75 Fishman, J. (2001). From theory to practice (and vice versa). In Can Threatened Languages be Saved?, Fishman J. (ed.), 451–83. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters
Guthrie, M. (1971). Comparative Bantu: An Introduction to the Comparative Linguistics and pre History of the Bantu Languages, Vol.2 London : Gregg International.
Grenoble, L. A. & Whaley, L. J. (2006). Saving Languages: An Introduction to Language Revitalization. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.
Grenoble, L. and Whaley, L. (ed). (1998). Endangered Language. Current Issues and Future Prospects. Cambridge University press.
Guérin, V. (2008). Writing an Endangered Language. Language Documentation and
Conservation, vol. 2/1 47-67
Kothari, C.R. (2003). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. Vishwaprakashan: New Delhi.
Krauss, M. (1992). The World‟s Language in Crisis. Language, 18(1), 1-42.
Legere, K. (2007). “Vidunda (G38) as an Endangered Language?” In selected proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference on African Linguistics ed.Doris L.Payne and Jaime pena, 43- 54. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Poject.
Lewis, P.M., and Simons, G.F. (2009). Assessing Endangerment: Expanding Fishman's Gids. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique. SIL International. Dallas. Pp1–30
Lewis, P. & Gary, S. (2010). Assessing Endangerment: Expanding Fishman‟s GIDS Revue Roumaine de linguistique, 55(2). 103–120. Online version.
Maffi, L. (2005). Linguistic, Cultural, and Biological Diversity. Annual Review of Anthro pology, vol. 34, 599‐617.
Mochiwa, Z.S.M. (1993). The impact of Kiswahili on Ethnic Languages: A case from Handen District. (M.A dissertation): Department of Kiswahili, University of Dar es salaam.
Msanjila, Y. P. (2003). Kushuka kwa hadhi ya lugha za Jamii nchini Tanzania. Nordic Nettle, Daniel & Romaine, Suzanne. (2000), Vanishing Voices: The Extinction of the World‟s Languages. Oxford: OUP. Journal of African Studies 12 (3). 296– 309.
Norris, M.J. (2010). Canada and Greeland. In C, Moseley (ed), Atlas of the World‟s Languages in Danger. Paris: UNESCO Publications.
Orodho, A.J. and Kombo, D.K. (2002). Research Methods. Nairobi: Kenyatta University, Institute of Open Learning.
Orodho, A.J. (2003). Essentials of Education and Social sciences Research Methods.Nairobi: Masola Publishers.
76 Pauwels, A. (2005). Maintaining the community language in Australia: Challenges and roles for families. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 8(2 and 3): 124–131.
Petzell, M. (2012). The under-described languages of Morogoro: A sociolinguistic survey, South African Journal of African Languages, 32:1, 17-26.
Polomé, E. C. and C. P. Hill. (eds). (1980). Language in Tanzania. London: International African Institute by Oxford University Press.
Saalare, J. (2015). Exogamy. University of Helsinki, Finland and Åbo Akademi University, Finland.
Sampat, P. (2001). Last Words. World Watch [magazine]. May/June 2001, pp. 34–37, 40
Sentif, G. (2015). Language Documentation and endangerment in Africa. Amsterdam Philadephia. Vol 17. 15-36.
Suhua, H. (2010). Assesment of the Social Functions and Vitality of the Yi Language from the perspective of its Domain of Use: Minzu University of China.
Schmidt, G. (1933). Mutter Sprache – Vom Amt der Sprache bei der Volkwerdung. Jena: Eugen Diederichs,.
Smieja, B. (1998). Language Shift, Cultural Identity and Language Loyalty in Botswana.
Smieja, B. ( 2003). Plurarism in Botswana: Hope or Hurdle? Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Ström, E.M. (2009). The Situation of Ndengeleko: A Coastal Tanzanian Language (P10). In Selected Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference on African Linguistics, ed. Masangu Matondo, Fiona Mc Laughlin, and Eric Potsdam, 229-241. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project
Schwartz, M. (2008). Exploring the relationship between family language policy and heritage language knowledge among generation Russian-Jewish immigrants in Israel. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 29(5): 400–418.
Tanzania (=Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania. Wizara ya Elimu na Utamaduni). (1997), Sera ya Utamaduni. Dar es Salaam: Wizara ya Elimu na Utamaduni.
UNESCO. 2003a. International Expert Meeting on UNESCO Programme Safeguarding of Endangered Languages, Paris, 10 – 12 March 2003. Recommendations for Action Plans.Paris: UNESCO, ms.
UNESCO (=UNESCO Ad Hoc Expert Group on Endangered Languages). 2003b. Language Vitality and Endangerment. Document submitted to the International Expert Meeting on UNESCO Programme Safeguarding of Endangered Language. Paris, 10–12 March 2003. Paris. (ms.)
UNESCO, (2009). UNESCO Atlas of the World‟s Language in Danger, UNESCO, htt: //www.unesco.org./culture/ich/index,php?pg-00139. Visited on 10/ 08/ 2017.
77 Villalón, M. E. (2003). Appendix 1. Language Vitality Assessment: An Example from Ven ezuela. In UNESCO Ad Hoc Expert Group on Endangered Languages, Language Vitality and endangerment, UNESCO 2003 (pp.24).
Wurm, S. A. (1998). Methods of Language Maintenance and Revival. In Studies in Endangered Languages, Kazuto Matsumura, ed. Pp. 191–211. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.
Wycliffe Bible Translators, (2017). Scripture for the Safwa. Retrieved from https://www.wycliffe.org on 07/01/ 2018.
Xu D., Tao H., Xie T. (1997). Contemporary Sociolinguistics (ed.). Social Sciences Press. China.
78 APPENDICES
Appendix i (a): Questionnaire (English) My name is SIWAJE SAVERY from the University of Dodoma. The study at hand intends to collect information about the status of endangerment of Safwa language.
Therefore as a Safwa speaker your position is to provide compelling information that will make this study successful, for that matter I kindly request you to respond to all questions by ticking to the space of correct answer and where needed to give extra information by filling in the space provided. I kindly assure you that the information you give will be confidential and will by no means be used in other ways other than the research, so please be free.
1. Sex: Male……………………… Female…………………………….
2. In which group does your age ranges? (a) 10-18…… (b) 19-35………(c) 36-
55…………… (d) 56-70…… (e) 71+……
3. Your educational level (a) Primary……………. (b) Secondary…………(c)
Certificate ……… (d)Diproma…. (e)Degree… (f) Others……(g) I have never
gone to school
4. Your occupation ………………………………………………….
5. Marital status (a) Single……... (b) Married…..…(e) Divorced………..
6. Which language do you speak fluently? (a) Kisafwa ………(b)Kiswahili……….
7. Which language do you feel proud of when you speak? (a) Kisafwa…….
(b)Kiswahili…………..(give reasons)
8. Which language were you speaking before starting school? (a) Kiswahili
…………(b) Kisafwa…………
9. Which language do you speak at home? (a) Kisafwa…….. (b) Kiswahili……(c)
Both. If the language you spoke was not Kisafwa, state why?
79 ………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………
10. Which language do you speak at the markets? (a) Kisafwa…….. (b) Kiswahili….
why...... ……………………………………………
11. Which language do you speak when holding village meetings? (a) Kisafwa……..
(b) Kiswahili…..why?……...... …………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………….
12. Which language do you use in traditional rituals? (a) Kisafwa…….. (b)
Kiswahili…………(c) Both of them……..(d) If not Kisafwa state why? …...
...... …………
……………………………………………………………………………
13. Wchich is your most important language to you? (a) Kisafwa…….. (b)
Kiswahili……….., if not Kisafwa state why? ……………………………….…..
......
......
.………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………
14. In your opinion, which language is spoken by all age groups in your community
(a) Kiswahili (b) Kisafwa
80 (This section is to be filled by a parent or any adult)
15. Do you give your children Traditional Safwa names? (a) Yes…… (b) No………
State why?…......
16. At what level is Kisafwa used to communicate with your parents (a)High……..
(b)Moderate……..(c)Low……..,state why? ……. .. ..……………
17. Which language do you use when communicating with peers (a)
Kisafwa…..(b)Kiswahili…. State why?
18. Do you have people in your society who are married to other ethnic groups? (a)
Yes……(b)…….., If you are a child from this type of family, can you speak
Kisafwa fluently?
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COOPERATION,
81 Appendix ii: (a) Interview’s Guideline with the Safwa Speaker (English) These questions are the guideline for eliciting information on the interview with the Safwa speaker so as they give their views about their understanding concerning the study at hand i.e. if or not Safwa language is endangered.
INTRODUCTORY INFORMATION
i. Age
ii. Marital status
iii. Occupation
iv. Educational level
QUESTIONS
1. How many languages do you speak?
2. Mention them
3. To what extent can you speak Kisafwa fluently? Highly fluent, moderately fluent
or Lowly fluent.
4. To what extent can you speak Kiswahili fluently? Highly fluent, moderately fluent
or you can‟t speak.
5. Do you feel proud to introduce yourself as a Safwa or as a Tanzanian?
6. Can you speak Kisafwa when in the middle of mass or you just feel shy of it?
7. Do you feel proud when speaking Kisafwa?
8. Which language did you speak in your pre-school era if you can remember?
9. Do you assign traditional Safwa names to your children?
10. Which language do you speak at markets?
11. Which language do you use in various village meetings?
83 12. Have you ever encountered any TV or radio station broadcasting in Kisafwa
13. Which language do you use in churches/mosques
84 Kiambatanisho I (b) (Kiswahili) Dodoso
Jina langu naitwa SIWAJE SAVERY kutoka chuo kikuu cha Dodoma. Utafiti huu unalenga kujua au kupata taarifa juu ya kiwango cha mazingira ya uhatarishi wa lugha ya Kisafwa.
Tafadhali ninakuomba ujaze dodoso hili kadiri ya ufahamu wako na ujazapo uwe huru kwa kuwa taarifa zote utakazozitoa zitatumika kitaaluma tu na si vinginevo. Tafadhali jaza dodoso hili kwa kuweka tiki mbele ya jibu utakalolichagua na toa maelezo mahali panapohitajika kufanya hivyo.
1. Jinsia: Me……………………… Ke…………………………….
2. Umri wako kati ya (a) 10-18…… (b) 19-35………(c) 36-55…………… (d) 56-
70…… (e) 71+……
3. Kiwango chako cha elimu (a) Elimu ya msingi……………. (b) Elimu ya
Sekondari…………(c) Astashahada ……… (d ) stashahada………………….
(e)Shahada………………………….(f) Elimu nyinginezo………(g) Sikwenda
shule…….
4. Kazi yako……………………………………………………………………….
5. Hali ya ndoa (a) Sijaolewa…. (b) Nimeolewa…… (c) Nimeoa… (d)
Nimeolewa………. (e) Nimeachika………..
6. Ni lugha ipi au zipi unaziongea kwa ufasaha? (a) Kisafwa
………(b)Kiswahili……….
7. Ni lugha ipi unaipenda sana na hata kujisikia fahari uizungumzapo? (a) Kisafwa…….
(b)Kiswahili…………..,Toa sababu
8. Ni lugha ipi ulijifunza awali kabla hujaanza shule? (a) Kisafwa…….. (b)
Kiswahili…………
85 9. Ni lugha ipi unaitumia sana ukiwa mazingira ya nyumbani? (a) Kisafwa…….. (b)
Kiswahili……(c) zote mbili…… kama lugha unayoitumia sio Kisafwa, toa maelezo
ni kwa nini unatumia lugha hiyo.
…………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………
10. Ni lugha ipi unaitumia ukiwa sokoni au gulioni? (a) Kisafwa…….. (b)
Kiswahili……..,kwa nini unatumia ligha hiyo?......
11. Ni lugha ipi unaitumia kwenye mikutano ya kijiji? (a) Kisafwa…….. (b)
Kiswahili…….., Kama siyo Kisafwa eleza kwanini unatumia lugha
hiyo?......
……………………………………………………………………………………
12. Ni lugha ipi unaitumia kwenye matambiko? (a) Kisafwa…….. (b)
Kiswahili…………(c) zote mbili……..(d) Kama siyo Kisafwa kwa nini unatumia
lugha hiyo
...... ……………
……………………………………………...……………………………………
13. Ni lugha ipi ni ya thamani sana katika jamii yako? (a) Kisafwa…….. (b)
Kiswahili………..,kama sio Kisafwa eleza kwa nini unaithamini lugha
hiyo?......
……………………………………………………………………………………
14. Ni lugha ipi kwa mtazamo wako inazumgumzwa na karibu watu wote, wa rika zote
katika jamii yako? (a) Kiswahili (b) Kisafwa (c) Zote mbili
(Sehemu hii ijazwe na mzazi au mtu mzima yeyote)
15. Je, umewapa wanao majina ya Kisafwa ?(a) Ndiyo…… (b) Hapana………,Toa
maelezo kutetea hoja yako......
86 16. Kwa kiwango kipi Kisafwa kinatumika kuwasiliana na wazazi wako? (a) kiwango cha
juu………………..(b)kiwango cha kati …………………..(c) kiwango cha
chini……………
17. Ni lugha ipi unaitumia katika mawasiliano na rafiki zako? (a) Kisafwa…….. (b)
Kiswahili……., kama sio Kisafwa eleza kwa nini unatumia lugha hiyo?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………
18. Je, katika jamii yenu kuna wasafwa walio oa au kuolewa na makabila mengne? (a)
Ndiyo…… (b) Hapana………, Kama wapo je wanaweza kuzungumza Kisafwa?
...... , Kama wewe ni mtoto kutoka katika familia hizo , je unaweza
kuzungumza Kisafwa kwa ufasaha?
NASHUKURU SANA KWA USHIRIKIANO WAKO
87 Kiambatanisho II: (b) (Kiswahili) Muongozo wa Mahojiano na Mzungumzaji wa Kisafwa
Maswali haya ni muongozo wa kuchochea maongezi na wazungumzaji wa lugha ya Kisafwa katika hali halisi ili waongee kile wanacho kifikiria na kikifahamu ili kupata taaririfa kama lugha ya Kisafwa ipo katika hali hatarishi kupotea.
Taarifa za Awali
i. Umri wake
ii. Hali ya ndoa iii. Kazi yake iv. Kiwango cha elimu
Maswali
1. Unazungumza lugha ngapi?
2. Zitaje
3. Uwezo wako katika kuzungumza Kisafwa ni wa kiwango gani? Cha juu sana, cha kati
au cha chini?
4. Uwezo wako katika kuzungumza Kiswahili ni wa kiwango gani? Cha juu sana, cha
kati au cha chini, sikijui?
5. Je, unajisikia vizuri kujitambukisha kama Msafwa au Mtanzania?
6. Unaweza kuzungumza kisafwa ukiwa sehemu zenye watu mchanganyiko au unaaona
aibu?
7. Je, unahisi ufahari kuzungumza Kisafwa?
8. Je, ni Lugha ipi ulikua unazungumza kabla ya kuanza shule?
9. Je unawapa wanao majina ya kisafwa?
10. Ivi ukienda sokoni unatumiaga lugha gani hasa?
11. Ivi katika matambiko (Asaye mmaganjo) wanatumiaga lugha gani?
88 12. Ivi katika mikutano yenu ya kijiji kuzungumzia mambo mbalimbali huwa mnatumia
lugha gani?
13. Ni lugha ipi mnaitumia Kanisani/ Msikitini?
89 Appendix iii: Permission Letter from the University of Dodoma
90