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

Artikel in Die Burger: Steeds is daar die kans vir heling deur Dr Franklin Sonn
2008-04-07

Steeds is daar die kans vir heling

Dr Franklin Sonn - Kanselier van die Universiteit van die Vrystaat en ’n oud-ambassadeur.


TOE gene-navorsers uiteindelik die menslike genoom georden het, is bevind dat menslike wesens inderdaad slegs in minder as 2 % onderling verskil en andersins ooreenstem.

Dít is die goeie nuus.

In die loop van die mens se ontwikkelingsgang en in die proses van ons sosiale organisering is godsdiens-, taal- en kultuurpatrone ontwikkel wat gelei het tot territorium-afbakening en volksvorming waaruit ’n hele geskiedenis van haat, nyd en bloedvergieting ontstaan het het wat ondanks die hoë peil van die beskawing wat die postmoderne mens bereik het, steeds voortwoed.

Dít is die slegte nuus.

Gebeure op die kampus van die Universiteit van die Vrystaat (UV) het ons op onnoemlik tragiese wyse herinner aan ons menslike mislukking dat ons – ondanks die oorheersende ooreenkomste tussen ons – ons liewer op grond van die bykans een persent onderlinge verskil vergrype pleeg wat selfs by diere ondenkbaar is. Dat dit boonop op die kampus van ’n universiteit gebeur, is des te ontstellender.

Dit strek ons universiteit egter tot eer dat die verwagte strafstappe onmiddellik gedoen is en dat geen poging aangewend is om selfverskonend verduidelikings te gee of die kombers oor die kop te trek nie.

IN ’n breër konteks wys prof. Hermann Giliomee tereg daarop dat die tydskrif The Economist ’n opname van Markinor gepubliseer het wat aantoon dat meerderhede in al die gemeenskappe te kenne gee dat rasseverhoudings sedert die koms van die demokrasie verbeter het.

Die afleiding daarvan is dat Suid-Afrika in al sy dimensies op die regte pad is en dat ons in die hoop op ’n beter toekoms vir ons almal voortleef. Die nasionale projek om godsdiens, taal en verskille te eerbiedig maar terselfdertyd ’n heterogene tapisserie van eenheid as nasie te bou is die meeste van ons se erns. Ondanks die terugslag is die universiteit verbind tot hierdie toekomsvisie van transformasie wat herhaaldelik leidinggewend deur die rektor, prof. Frederick Fourie, sowel as sy voorganger, prof. Stef Coetzee, uitgespel is.

Vir die UV gaan dit daarom om die pad van insluiting en eenheid diepgaande te bestuur sodat wit en swart die universiteit as tuiste vir almal sien en ervaar en om die idee van verdringing van een groep deur die ander te vermy of selfs te voorkom dat die toestand geskep word dat een groep in die proses op die vlug slaan. Ons is verbind tot die skepping van ’n nierassige universiteit en nie die toestand dat wittes buite woon en swartes binne of andersom nie.


Ons koester die begrip van medemenslikheid en agting vir ons almal se gelyke menswaardigheid op grond van ons oorheersende menslike ooreenkomste en gedeelde waardes. Ons staan rassisme teen, of dit nou van wit of van swart kom. Ons wil nie aan die eenkant versoening predik maar in waansinnige onderlinge verdeeldheid en agterdog voortleef nie. Almal moet die wonder beleef van die moontlikheid dat ons een kan wees.

Ons waardeer dit opreg dat daar van die kant van ons minister Naledi Pandor paslike veroordeling van die rassevoorval uitgespreek is, maar dat sy onmiddellik die fokus geplaas het op die geleenthede wat die geval vir al ons kampusse maar ook vir ons land bied.

Eweneens ervaar ons die reaksie van die rektore van nasionale universiteite as aandoenlik positief waar die vanselfsprekende veroordeling gepaardgegaan het met die oorheersende geneigdheid om as leiers van meer rassige kampusse intellektuele leiding te probeer gee in die bepaling van waar ons land staan in die hantering van rassisme, ons erfsonde.

Ons is maar alte bewus daarvan dat ons ongelukkige geskiedenis van kolonialisme en apartheid nog vars in die geheue is. In ons euforie oor die koms van die demokrasie, wat gegrond is op ons grondwetlike verklaring van ons eenheid, was ons nietemin miskien naïef om te dink dat ons in werklikheid nou een is. Dit was bloot die aanhef. Jody Kollapen van die Suid-Afrikaanse Menseregtekommissie het iets beet wanneer hy aanvoer dat ons wel versoening omhels het, maar naïef gedink het dat solank ons die konsep op ons lippe neem, dit alles sal regmaak. Ons stem saam dat daar inderdaad steeds baie werk te doen is.

Ons wil te maklik die omvang van die taak om ’n nierassige nasie te bou geringskat. Ons misken heel dikwels die inherente gebrek aan kapasiteit by mense om op hul Godgegewe ooreenkomste te fokus. Dit lyk asof mense veel meer geneig is om verskille, gewaand of eg, te beklemtoon. Dit is ’n deel van ons menslikheid. Daar is ’n ontstentenis van leiding van byvoorbeeld ons kerk. Die kerk verkondig met heilige preweling ons eenheid in Christus, maar verdedig onmiddellik daarna dawerend verdeeldheid in die kerk. Ons pas regstelling in die werkplek toe sonder om werklik aandag te gee aan en bronne beskikbaar te stel vir die hantering van geregverdigde swart woede en sonder om begryplike aanmatiging en meerderwaardigheid te versoen met ewe begryplike wit verydeling en vervreemding.

Ons ag diversiteit as ’n gegewe sonder om genoegsame werk daarvan te maak om die rykheid van ons heterogeniteit in te bou in die nierassige eenheidstaat wat ons voorsien. Ons begaan ook die fout om die erfsonde van rassisme as net ’n Suid-Afrikaanse fenomeen te eien en is geskok as ons opmerk hoe diep die kloof tussen groepe in Amerika steeds lê.

SENATOR BARACK OBAMA se toespraak in Philadelphia spreek tot die hart van die kwessie oor hoe moeilik dit is om medemenslik te wees en hoe ons sukkel om ons in ander skoene te plaas en so eenheid te bou.

Ons vergeet so maklik dat ons versugting na vrede nêrens sal kom as ons nie die aandrang verstaan dat niemand gevra word om af te skuif nie, maar dat mense bloot gevra word om op te skuif sodat almal sitplek kan kry sodat ons sodoende mekaar se menswaardigheid kan voel en verstaan. Ons almal het gelyke aanspraak op Suid-Afrikanerskap. Niemand het die reg om meerderwaardig te voel nie. Ons mag ook nie ruimte skenk aan die geboorte of oplewing van ’n nuwe veronderstelling dat gemeensaamheid gebou kan word deur rassevernedering aan die een kant en rassevergelding aan die ander kant nie. Ons in Suid-Afrika het ’n hoë prys betaal vir die beoefening asook die verdraagsaamheid. Ons moet enige vorm van rassehegemonie teenstaan.

Hoe erg die provokasie ook al by swart mense kan wees wanneer ons rassevergelding soek, ons mag dit nooit weer verdra nie. Aan die ander kant is dit ewe gevaarlik dat ons nasionale geesdrif vir vergifnis en versoening deur wit mense geag word as ’n geleentheid om terug te val in gemaksones van meerderwaardigheid en toe-eiening Ons is dit aan ons toekoms verskuldig om hierdie tendense onmiddellik raak te sien en te besweer. Dit verg dapper leierskap. Ons universiteit het rede om trots te wees op ons prestasies om groter oopheid en toeganklikheid te skep. Die afgelope 5 jaar het ons 61 studente uit lande soos die Soedan, Ethiopië, Kameroen, Botswana en Lesotho gedoktoreer. Boonop het 6 studente uit lande soos Korea en Indië by ons doktorsgrade verwerf en 11 uit lande soos Amerika en Duitsland. Dit is ons trots.

Ons aan die UV is dit aan ons land maar ook aan onsself verskuldig om nederig te bly en, waar nodig, ons hand diep in eie boesem te steek, maar terselfdertyd te beklemtoon dat ons nie gedefinieer wil word deur insidentele vergrype van ’n klein groep misleide studente nie – hoe erg hul optrede ook al is. Ons reken daarmee af, maar ons wil graag onsself erken as deelgenote aan die erfenis van die nasionale sonde van rassisme, maar ’n universiteit wat transformasie aktief nastreef. Ons is trots op ons oopheid en wat daaruit voortspruit. Op die oomblik is ons onsosiale tradisie van herkoms Afrikaans en Sotho en is ons daarop ingestel om, waar doenlik en waar dit vereis word, Engels as internasionale taal in te bou in ons pogings om mekaar te vind eerder om ons trotse kultuur tradisies te vergeet.

DIE raad, die senaat, die rektor, die personeel van die universiteit wil saam met studente en werkers opnuut geleenthede soek om in gesprek met mekaar te bly. Ons wil saam opgewonde bly oor die moontlikheid van heling, groei en transformasie wat die onlangse insident vir ons geskep het.

Artikel in Die Burger, Saterdag 22 Maart 2008

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