Abstract

DU PLESSIS, Theodorus. Post-2023 language planning in South Africa: Implications for the historically marginalised indigenous languages, South African Sign Language and Afrikaans. Tydskr. geesteswet. [online]. 2025, vol.65, n.1, pp.188-212. ISSN 2224-7912.  https://doi.org/10.17159/2224-7912/2025/v65n1a9.

This article critically reflects on the prospects for language planning in South Africa following the addition in 2023 of South African Sign Language (SASL) as the 12th official language to the list of official languages named in section 6(1) of the Constitution, 1996. This assessment is made in the light of a remark made in 2024 by a senior government official that the government is not ready to put into operation the Constitution Eighteenth Amendment Act, 2023, which provides for the adoption of SASL as South Africa's twelfth official language. Furthermore, the official stated that the commencement of the Act would yield the same unsatisfactory result as the adoption in the Constitution, 1996, of the nine historically marginalised indigenous languages as official languages (HMIOLs). The study focuses on the key role that language legislation plays in language planning and is therefore largely based on an analysis of applicable post-1994 language legislation for the four official-language domains, namely legislative, judicial, administrative and educational. The analysis was conducted using a typology of languages with official status (statutory, symbolic, operational), on the one hand, and language treatment principles, on the other, namely functionality (efficiency) versus equity (inclusivity). The results of the study reveal that although there are specific legislative arrangements for each language domain, they show similar tendencies with regard to language policy approaches and language arrangements. Overall, decision makers strive for efficiency, which they assume can be achieved by using English as the working language, whether overtly in the legislative and judicial domains, or covertly in the educational and administrative domains. However, the pursuit of inclusivity does inform some decisions. For instance, section 6(3)(a) of the Constitution, 1996, requires the national government and each provincial government to use at least two official languages. In practice, English is always used in legislation, along with another official language chosen on a rotational basis (which necessarily limits the use of individual HMIOLs). In parliamentary debates, members may use the official language of their choice; this applies in principle to oral court proceedings as well. In the education domain, all official languages may be taken as subjects, either as Home Language or as additional languages (except SASL, in the latter case), subject to certain conditions. Government language policies formulated in terms of the minimum requirement of the Use of Official Languages Act, 2012, of "at least three" languages generally include as many official languages as possible. One of the surprising findings of the study is that the pre-1994 official arrangement of using both English and Afrikaans as co-official languages is still, to some extent, maintained in the administrative domain, but no longer in the legislative and judicial domains. Somewhat disturbingly, little evidence was found of the state fulfilling its constitutional obligation to elevate the status and advance the use of the HMIOLs through language legislation. One of the core findings of the study is that the tension between the two language policy principles (functionality and equity) has resulted in post-1994 language legislation creating in ejfect a new language hierarchy contrary to the principles of the Constitution, a hierarchy in which English (and sometimes even Afrikaans) function as official working language, while the other languages remain largely symbolic official languages. An implication of this is that all official languages other than English are further marginalised or re-marginalised (the nine Sintu languages) or newly marginalised (Afrikaans), a trend that does not bode well for a 12th official language. The only concrete evidence of the advancement of the HMIOLs was found in the education domain. However, the downside of this is that, to date, very little has been done countrywide to advance these languages as languages of teaching and learning in order to counter the dominance of English. The fact that English has become the institutionalised medium of instruction in higher education effectively torpedoes the worthy efforts in the Eastern Cape Province to counter this trend. The study nevertheless found that, compared to the pre-1994 period, the HMIOLs do in the end benefit somewhat from the new language dispensation in that they have in principle been institutionalised as legislative languages (albeit on a rotational basis), that they are by law now included as at least one of the three minimum languages required in the administrative domain and that they are (both first and second) additional languages in education. In the final instance, they also have gained status as symbolic official languages and are regularly used in this capacity. The downside is that this practice could be pointing to diversity tokenism in action. In contrast, the status of SASL has been increased significantly through language legislation. It was officialised in 1996 in the education domain and, in the same year, included in PanSALB's constitutional language mandate. In 1997, it was introduced as a language subject and, in 2002, in the Languages Learning Area of the school curriculum. In 2012, it was elevated as a language of choice when dealing with government and introduced as a Home Language option in the school curriculum in 2014. In 2020, SASL was included as one of the indigenous languages targeted for language development in higher education. The downside is that, as an official language, SASL has now become one of the HMIOLs, one of the 11 "other official languages" (other than English, that is) and, consequently, one of the re-marginalised official languages. In conclusion, the study makes some recommendations concerning post-2023 language planning for the official languages. The most important one is that language campaigners should capitalise on the principle of sanctioned discrimination against non-selected official languages established in Lourens v Speaker of the National Assembly. Even though it is applied in case law to rationalise the use of English as operating official language, its wider application should be explored. The HMIOLs, SASL and Afrikaans can benefit from such endeavours. Language campaigners should nevertheless accept both the de iure and de facto status of English as preferred official language and focus their efforts on domains in which definite gains could be made by applying the principle of sanctioned discrimination. This recommendation is especially valid for Afrikaans, a language that celebrates 100 years as an official language in 2025.

Keywords : language legislation; language planning; language official status; language policy approaches; official language domains; language promotion; language marginalisation; historically marginalised indigenous languages; South African Sign Language; Afrikaans.

        · abstract in Afrikaans     · text in Afrikaans     · Afrikaans ( pdf )