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

An education system based on hope is what South Africa needs – Dr Beryl Botman
2016-05-26

Description: Hope revised Tags: Hope revised

Dr Beryl Botman, a postdoctoral research
fellow at the IRSJ, with Dr Willy Nel research associate
at the IRSJ and lecturer at the UFS
Faculty of Education.

HOPE is tangible and concrete construct that should be rooted in the learning and training of teachers,” said Dr Beryl Botman, a postdoctoral research fellow at the Institute for Reconciliation and Social Justice (IRSJ).

She presented her research paper Educators, praxis, and hope: A philosophical analysis of post-apartheid teacher education policy, based on the theoretical ideologies of Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed. She explores ways in which oppression has been justified, and how it has been overcome through a mutual process between the oppressor and the oppressed, drawing on Paolo Freire’s theories and practices. The presentation was held at the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Faculty of Education, on the Bloemfontein campus on 13 May 2016.

From oppression to hope

Hope should be an educational construct for teacher education in South Africa. Dr Botman asserts that epistemology and ontology should be inseparable, as they are pivotal to an education system that is transformational.

The recent country-wide student protests and demonstrations are an indicant that education institutions need to seek understanding of mechanisms that fuel social conflict. Dr Botman claims that vast social inequalities make the process of democratisation difficult thus hindering transformation. She states that a critical consciousness is important for all South Africans, but more so for educators; it can be used as a tool to understanding the mechanisms of social conflict.

“Self-reflection and self-critique is vital for educators, we need to understand that we do not have all the answers because we ever-evolving beings, working on understanding ourselves and the people around us,” said Dr Botman.

The notion of hope
“I am a farmer. I have no hope for a future that is different from today. This quotation comes from Paulo Freire’s work," said Dr Botman. She said that the South African context and environment is similar. She said that people cannot live for today; one should live for tomorrow if hope is to manifest itself.

South African education environment needs to adopt a progressive consciousness that is future orientated, “You need to be hopeful, if you are radical. You need to be able to envision a new society and a new world,” said Dr Botman.

“You cannot only denounce the present, you need to also announce your hopes for a new society. South Africa needs education systems built on understanding. Although change is difficult, it is necessary for transformation,” Dr Botman added.

What makes hope educational?
“Hope is a vision for a tomorrow that is different, and vital for a transformative education system. To get out of a state of despair, people need to educate their hope. Lately, the issue of white privilege has been brought to the fore. You need to educate your hope, so that you understand the reality of others but, more importantly, of yourself,” said Dr Botman.

Dr Botma added that teacher education needs to adopt a Freirean pedagogy with a strong philosophy based on hope. The agency of teachers can either be hopeful or without hope. It is vital that education promotes hope.

“Teachers need to rely on their existential experience, the experiences of others, and the experiences of the children or students they teach. An understanding of all these experience reinforces the idea that people are life-long learners, always learning and adapting to society’s needs,” said Dr Botman.

Teachers as agents of hope

Dr Botman stated that current South African education policy is directed towards transformation but it does not stipulate means to achieve this objective. Further, she argues that educators need to put greater emphasis on self-knowledge, self-reflection, and self-education. Connecting with teachers, parents, students and the community engages with their self-knowledge and reflection.

Reorientation of teacher education
Dr Botman concluded by mentioning that rethinking ontological and epistemological aspects of education is important, and should be a pivotal point of teacher education. A renewed vision of hope-orientated philosophy and pedagogy needs to be adopted by the education institutions. A praxis, which is an informed action, when a balance between theory and practice is achieved. There is a need for an inclusive exploration of education philosophies and education systems not only European and Western but also African and Eastern as well.

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