Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
13 May 2025 | Story Dr Francois Smith | Photo Supplied
Francois Smith
Dr Francois Smith, Head of Department: Afrikaans and Dutch; German and French, University of the Free State.

Opinion article by Dr Francois Smith, Head of Department: Afrikaans and Dutch; German and French, University of the Free State 




On 8 May 1925, the writer CJ Langenhoven introduced a bill in the parliament of the then Union of South Africa that led to Afrikaans being recognised as one of the country’s official languages, alongside English. It is this historic moment that marks the centenary being celebrated today. However, the language itself predates its official status by centuries. The roots of Afrikaans can be traced back to the 1500s, during the first interactions between European sailors and the indigenous Khoi-Khoi people. What makes the origin of Afrikaans particularly significant is that it developed on African soil, shaped by the contact and exchange between European colonists, enslaved people brought from Africa and Asia, and the local Khoi population. Afrikaans is, therefore, a uniquely South African creation – a rich tapestry of diverse influences. It is this diversity, this cultural and linguistic fusion, that is truly worth celebrating.

It is evident that Afrikaans did not begin as a fully developed written language. Some of the earliest recorded instances of written Afrikaans date back to the 1830s, when Muslim imams used Arabic script to communicate with their pupils in Afrikaans in religious schools. A more formal effort to establish Afrikaans as a written language emerged in 1875 with the founding of the Genootskap van Regte Afrikaners (Society for Real Afrikaners), which played a pivotal role in standardising and promoting written Afrikaans.

 

The Dutch language

During the Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902), the two Boer republics – the Zuid-Afrikaansche Republiek and the Orange Free State – were defeated by the British Empire. In the aftermath of this conflict, efforts were made to unite the two British colonies, the Cape Colony and Natal, with the former Boer republics into a single political entity. This led to the National Convention, where representatives negotiated the constitution for what would become the Union of South Africa. Given the dominant position of Britain, the prevailing influence of English-speaking authorities in the Cape and Natal, and the Anglophile stance of many British leaders, it would have been reasonable to expect the new Union to adopt English as its sole official language. However, due to the tireless advocacy of figures such as former President MT Steyn and General JBM Hertzog, the resulting South Africa Act of 1909 – passed by the British Parliament – stipulated that ‘the Dutch language’ would share official status with English in the Union. This was a significant victory for the preservation of Dutch (and later, Afrikaans) in the political and administrative life of the country.

The ‘Dutch’ used in South Africa at the time, particularly among ordinary people, was far from uniform and bore little resemblance to the Standard Dutch of the Netherlands. Very few South Africans were proficient in writing formal Dutch. Meanwhile, Afrikaans had only just begun the process of standardisation in the years following the formation of the Union. In many cases – especially in written contexts – the language appeared as a hybrid of spoken Afrikaans and formal Dutch, or what was loosely referred to as ‘Hollands’. Recognising this linguistic shift, figures such as CJ Langenhoven began advocating for Afrikaans to be recognised as a full-fledged language, particularly as a standardised orthography began to take shape. Langenhoven and his contemporaries likely understood that the continued use of Standard Dutch in South Africa was untenable. Thanks to their dedication, a joint session of the Volksraad and the Senate was held on 8 May 1925, during which Act No. 8 of 1925 was passed. This legislation clarified that the term ‘Hollands’, as used in South African legal and governmental contexts, also encompassed Afrikaans – marking a pivotal moment in the formal recognition of the language.

A necessary consequence of the 1925 legislation was that Afrikaans, now recognised as an official language, had to rapidly develop in areas such as orthography, terminology, and grammatical consistency. Subsequent constitutions – specifically those of 1961 and 1983 – further entrenched the status of Afrikaans by extending the use of both official languages to the provincial level. Because Afrikaans was now required to operate on equal footing with a global language such as English across all spheres of government, the development of a standardised variety became essential. This standard form enabled the state not only to fulfil its constitutional obligations but also to communicate effectively with a significant portion of the population.

 

Most South Africans not first-language English speakers

Today, South Africa officially recognises twelve languages, following the recent addition of South African Sign Language. While earlier constitutions explicitly outlined the functions and domains of the official languages, the 1996 Constitution is notably more open-ended. It mandates that the state must take "practical and effective measures" to elevate the status and promote the use of all official languages, and that they must be treated equitably and enjoy equal status. However, these provisions are vague and lack clear implementation guidelines or enforceable obligations. Unlike earlier frameworks that prescribed specific uses and provided mechanisms for accountability, the current constitutional language leaves much to interpretation. As a result, and in the absence of meaningful incentives or enforcement, English has become the de facto sole language of government, undermining the ideal of multilingualism and linguistic fairness envisioned in the Constitution.

The reality that most South Africans are not first-language English speakers means that a significant portion of the population has limited access to essential information, which in turn restricts their ability to fully participate in the country’s economic, educational, and social opportunities. This linguistic barrier perpetuates inequality and undermines the goals of inclusive development. One of the pressing challenges facing the current government is, therefore, strikingly similar to that which confronted the Union government a century ago with respect to Afrikaans: the need to actively develop all of South Africa’s official languages. Only through dedicated investment in their growth and functional application can these languages truly operate as instruments of democracy, equality, and social justice.

The development of human potential and the advancement of science and technology are among the foremost priorities of the current South African government. However, these goals are unattainable without language – spoken or written – as the foundation for communication. More specifically, the absence of well-developed scientific languages renders scientific and technical communication ineffective. This reality places increasing demands on South Africa’s official languages, requiring the creation and maintenance of robust, multilingual terminology across a wide range of disciplines. Ensuring that all languages are equipped to handle specialised knowledge is essential for equitable access to education, innovation, and national development.

Due to the dominance of English, South Africa’s other official languages face significant challenges in developing technical vocabulary and keeping pace with the demands of a rapidly evolving modern world. One notable achievement in Afrikaans is the Woordeboek van die Afrikaanse Taal (WAT), a comprehensive dictionary project that began in 1926 and, despite minimal state support, continues to progress toward its final volume, expected in 2028. This kind of initiative should serve as a model for all of South Africa’s official languages. Scientific and technological knowledge must be made accessible in every language, ensuring they are equipped to function effectively across all levels of society. When a language loses functional domains, its practical value diminishes, its cultural sphere contracts, and its speakers are more likely to shift towards a language perceived as more useful.

News Archive

UFS committed to transformation
2005-02-23

UFS committed to transformation

The management of the University of the Free State (UFS) takes note that plans are being made to stage a student protest at the UFS main campus on Monday 28 February 2005 .

This is in line with a concerted national campaign to highlight the issue of transformation at higher education institutions.

At this stage the UFS management has not received any application from student formations to stage such a protest at the main campus in Bloemfontein .

The UFS upholds the right of all staff and students to hold legal, non-violent protests and in this spirit encourages the student formations to apply for permission to hold their protest. However, the UFS management has been - and always will be willing to discuss the important issue of transformation of the UFS with staff unions and student formations.

Again the UFS management appeals to student formations to make use of this open door policy and not to adopt a confrontational position. In fact the management and the Senate of the UFS have come out in support of a new phase of transformation at the UFS.

In his speech at the official opening of the UFS earlier this month (on 4 February 2005 ), the Rector and Vice-Chancellor, Prof Frederick Fourie, announced that a comprehensive transformation plan for would be drafted for the UFS.

This Transformation Plan would address issues such as:

  • a new institutional culture for the UFS
  • the need for representivity in the staffing of the UFS
  • ensuring relevance of curricula for the South African and African context
  • enhancing excellence in the overall academic life of the UFS
  • ensuring greater interaction among black and white students and staff
  • addressing outstanding issues in the incorporation of the Qwaqwa and Vista campuses, among others

Concerning some of the issues that are being put forward to motivate for a protest march, the UFS would like to highlight the following facts:

  1. The situation at the Qwaqwa campus
  • It is not true that the UFS has decided to close down the Qwaqwa campus. This is a complete falsehood. The campus was incorporated into the UFS in January 2003 and since then every effort is being made to ensure the viability of the Qwaqwa campus.
  • In fact the UFS has just upgraded residences at the Qwaqwa campus – to the tune of R6,8-million.
  • In addition, another R1,4-million has been set aside for the upgrading of other facilities on the Qwaqwa campus.
  • More staff has been appointed and the library is acquiring more books etc.
  • The management of the UFS wants to assure staff at the Qwaqwa campus once again that there has been no decision to close the campus.
  • We realise that the incorporation of the campus into the UFS has given rise to certain fears and concerns, but these are being addressed, including the question of reporting lines of staff and the further delegation of powers to the head of the Qwaqwa campus, Prof Peter Mbati.
  1. The situation at the Vista campus
  • A number of processes are currently under way to address outstanding issues following the formal incorporation of the Vista campus into the UFS in January 2004.
  • This includes the integration of former Vista staff into the UFS as well as the alignment of the conditions of service of the former Vista staff with the UFS conditions of service.
  • Indeed, over the last few weeks, a climate of trust has been developing and a number of meetings have taken place in contrast to the situation that obtained at the end of 2004.
  • Just last week, the Rector reassured the Vista Task Team representing the former Vista staff that these staff members are indeed part of the UFS staff complement.
  • When the Vista campus was incorporated into the UFS, it was agreed that no new first years would be registered there, so as to avoid duplication with the main campus which is only a few kilometers away.
  • Instead, those students who were registered as Vista students at the time of incorporation (January 2004) would be allowed to complete their studies.
  • In terms of this agreement another process of consultation with key stakeholders on and off campus would be initiated to determine how the physical facilities of Vista could be used to contribute to educational and skills provision in the region and the province.
  • This process is still in its early stages and no final decision has been made regarding the long term strategic reconfiguration of the Vista campus.
  • In any case, as stated by the Rector, former Vista staff do not have to fear about their work security as this is not dependent on the future use of Vista campus – the two issues are not related.
  1. Financial aid for students at the Qwaqwa campus
  • Concerning financial aid to students at Qwaqwa, the UFS has to date (that is up to 22 February 2005 ) made available R25 000 each to 705 students.
  • That amounts to R17,6 million.
  1. Financial aid for students at the Vista campus
  • Concerning financial aid to students at Vista , the UFS has to date (that is up to 22 February 2005 ) made available R14 500 each to 104 students.
  • That amounts to R1,5 million.
  1. Registration
  • The registration processes at both these campuses are not yet completed. So final figures are not yet available.
  • What we can say so far, is that 1339 students have registered at the Qwaqwa campus and that more are expected to register. At Vista , 545 students have registered so far, and more are expected to do so.
  • In an effort to assist students during the registration process, management has put in place a structure which is called the Monitoring Committee.
  • This Monitoring Committee provides counseling on courses of study but also sorts out problems relating to academic fees, etc.
  • This is how the UFS management in a concrete way gives expression to its commitment to broadening access for academically deserving students.
  1. Alleged racism
  • There have recently been unsubstantiated allegations of racism leveled at the UFS.
  • We would like to state unequivocally, that the UFS does not and will not tolerate racism in any way.
  • There are policies and procedures in place to deal with such allegations and those who feel aggrieved should bring this to the attention of the Director of Diversity, Mr Billyboy Ramahlele.
  • The UFS also has sensitisation programmes for staff and students to assist in bringing about a truly non-racial, non-sexist, inclusive, multicultural and multilingual campus.

.

  1. Conclusion
  • The UFS management remains committed to the further transformation of the institution so that it can play its role in supporting the goal of a non-racial, democratic South Africa united in its diversity.
  • We are committed to the successful incorporation of the Vista and Qwaqwa campuses and to the speedy resolution of all outstanding issues facing staff and students on these campuses.
  • We appeal once again to staff and students on these campuses, who are indeed members of the broader UFS community, to play a constructive role in the debate about the strategic direction of the UFS and all its campuses.

 

Issued by: Mr Anton Fisher

Director: Strategic Communication

Cell: 072-207-8334

Tel: 051-401-2749

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept