The effects of diglosssia on the teaching and learning of English as a second language
A case of Gweru rural schools
Keywords:
Diglossia, bilingualism, second language acquisition, cultural capitalAbstract
Bilingualism is the case in the Zimbabwean socio-linguistic context, the population uses two languages, English as the high variety (H) and the community’s native language as the low variety (L). Such a situation is referred to by sociolinguists as diglossia, a term coined by the German linguist Karl Krumbacher as early as 1902. The school instructional language in Zimbabwe, the state's official language, is English. English significantly differs from vernacular languages and is rarely used in rural communities’ daily interactions. This poses challenges in teaching and learning English as a second language, particularly in rural schools, due to the diglossic relationship between English and the local languages. Both the teacher and the learner are usually not native speakers of the English language and this has proved to be a challenge in teaching and learning the second language. Findings obtained through observations, questionnaires, and interviews reveal that teachers need to understand the pedagogical, sociolinguistic, psycholinguistic, and cognitive consequences of diglossia, to teach the language effectively. Most learners have a negative attitude towards the language and are not intrinsically motivated to learn it. Learners also lack cultural capital to support them from the early stages of learning the foreign language as their communities also have a negative attitude towards English due to its origins in the country. The study advocates for the constant upgrading of the local languages especially in line with the fast advancement in technology, so that they can be used equitably with the English language as most learners would rather use their mother tongue in all subject areas. The assessment systems should consider the variability of cultural realities as learners in rural areas have incomparable developmental milestones with those in cities and, hence cannot be evaluated using the same instrument.
Key terms: Bilingualism, diglossia, second language acquisition, cultural capital.
References
Alessandroni, N. and Ferreira, J. M (2024). Materiality and cognitive development: Contemporary debates and empirical studies in early childhood. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 29(2), 79-83 doi:10.5964/ejop.14433.
Al-Sharoni, J. (2007). Dialogue language between vernaculars and the classical in authoring movements and criticism in our modern literature. Cairo: Dar Al-Fekkr Al Arabi.
Arnold, C., Bartietti, K., Gowani, S., & Merali, R. (2006). Is everybody ready? Readiness, transition, and continuity: Reflections for moving forward background paper for EFA Global Monitoring Report 2007.
Ball, J. (2014). Children learn better in their mother tongue. GPE Transforming Education. Retrieved from https://globalpartnership.org
Benson, C. (2002). Real and potential benefits of bilingual programmes in developing countries. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 5(6), 303–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050208667761.
Benson, C., & Kosonen, K. (Eds.). (2013). Language issues in comparative education: Inclusive teaching and learning in non-dominant languages and cultures. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Bernstein, B. (1981). Codes, modalities, and the process of cultural reproduction: A model. Language in Society, 10(3), 327–363.
Bhebe, C. (2022). Language interference involving isiNdebele and Kalanga in a selected secondary school in Bulilima district in Matabeleland South province in Zimbabwe(Unpublished PhD Thesis) University of Venda, Thokoyandou.
Chapanga, E., & Makomani, R. (2006). Teaching Shona in English/Shona: Ideological challenges and implications. UZeScholar, UZ Library Institutional Repository.
Chitiga, M. (2021).Code-switching as a pedagogical tool in bilingual classrooms. Insights from a secondary STEM classroom in Zimbabwe. 1st Edition. Routledge: New York.
Chivhanga, E. (2008). The diglossic relationship between Shona and English languages in Zimbabwean secondary schools. (Unpublished Master’s thesis). University of South Africa.16
Chivhanga, S. (2013). The diglossic relationship between Shona and English languages in the teaching and learning situations in Zimbabwe secondary schools. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 12(5), 43–50. https://doi. org/10.9790/0837-1254350.
Ferguson, C. A. (1959). Diglossia. Word, 15, 325–340.
Ferguson, C. A. (1963). Problems of teaching languages with diglossia. In E. Woodworth & R. DiPietro (Eds.), Report of the Thirteenth Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies (pp. 165–177). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Fishman, D. B. (1966). Need and expectancy as determinants of affiliate behavior in small groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(2), 155–164.
Gee, J. P., Allen, A. R., & Clinton, K. (2001). Language, class, and identity: Teenagers fashioning themselves through language. Linguistics and Education, 12, 175–194.
Hashen, R. (2022). Diglossia and Arabic literacy: From research to practice. British Journal of Education, 10(11), 1–13.
Hudson, A. (2002). Outline of a theory of diglossia. International Journal of Sociology of Language, 157(1), 48.
https://doi.org/10.1515/IJS.2002.031.
Hurwitz, D., & Kambel, E. R. (2020). Redressing language-based exclusion and punishment in education and The Language Friendly School Initiative. Global Campus Human Rights Journal, 4, 5–24.
Ibrahim, Al H. (2012). The impact of diglossia in teaching and learning Arabic. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3307838.
Kloss, H. (1966). Types of multilingual communities: A discussion of ten variables. Sociological Inquiry, 36(2), 135–145.
Lantolf, J. P. (2007). Conceptual knowledge and instructed second language learning: A sociocultural perspective. In S. Fotos & H. Nasaji (Eds.), Form-focused instruction and teacher education (pp. 35–54). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lubiner, S. (2004). Help for struggling upper-grade elementary readers. The Reading Teacher, 57(5), 430–438.17
Maamouri, M. (1998). Language education and human development: Arabic diglossia and its impacts on the quality of education in the Arabic region. International Literacy Institute.
McLeod, S. A. (2024). Lev Vygotsky’s cognitive development. Simply Psychology. Retrieved from https://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html.
Mpofu, P. and Salawu, A. (2018). Culture of sensationalism and indigenous language press in Zimbabwe: Implications on language development. African identities. 16(2).1-16 DOI:10.1080/14725843.2018.1473147.
Myhill, D. (2009). From talking to writing: Linguistic development in writing. British Journal of Educational Psychology Monograph Series, 11, 1–17.
Nath, B. K. (2010). Major language theories influencing learning of mathematics. Theories of Language in Learning Mathematics.
Paolucci, C. (2021). Cognitive semiotics, radical activism, pragmatics and material engagement. In Cogninive semiotics: Integrating signs, minds, meaning and cognition pp.1-25 Springer.
Pascoe, M. (2022). Diglossia and children’s literacy in South Africa. In SaieghHaddad, E. Handbook of literacy in diglossia and in dialectal contexts. DOI: 101007/978-3-030-80072-7.
Ratner, C. (2002). Cultural Psychology: Theory and method. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Sarahi, L. (2016). A moving target: Literacy development in situations of diglossia and bilingualism. Arab Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–18.
Stubbs, M. (1980). Language and literacy: The sociolinguistics of reading and writing. London: Routledge.
Taringa, B. and Manyike, T. V. (2024) Decolonising pedagogies: Unpacking postcolonial language policies in higher education. Forum for linguistic Studies. 6(5), 1017-1031https//doi.org10.30564/fls.v6i5.6710.
UNESCO. (1953). The use of the vernacular languages in education. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2008). Mother tongue matters: Local language as a key to effective learning.Paris: UNESCO.
