Language Policy

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 277–297 | Cite as

Writing Khoisan: harmonized orthographies for development of under-researched and marginalized languages: the case of Cua, Kua, and Tsua dialect continuum of Botswana

  • Andy Chebanne
Original Paper


Khoisan languages are spoken by various culturally diverse communities of Southern Africa. These languages also present an important linguistic diversity. Some of Khoisan languages communities are generally under-researched, marginalized and experiencing sustained sociolinguistic forces that threaten them. For those that have been documented, researchers have come up with IPA writing systems that some users, especially missionaries and literacy materials developers, have deemed impractical. These writing conventions challenges have become challenges in Khoisan orthography development. For less documented languages this situation of illiteracy in their languages compounds the problem as speakers have no resources to develop and promote their languages. The question of harmonization is raised in this paper to create a common base for the development of orthography for less documented endangered languages that are in dialect continuum such as the Cua, Kua and the Cua. The paper will argue for these dialectal continuum harmonized orthography development as a resources that will benefit these endangered languages and facilitate their integration in educational and language use policies. Harmonization with Nguni and Yeyi languages will not be envisaged as they are not Khoisan, and may not provide typical phonetic inventories found in Khoisan. Also the extensive contrast in the sound system within Khoisan will not be tackled, but the general principles of community-based writing efforts. The point made is that the promotion and preservation Khoisan languages effectively happen when they feature in education and are written and passed from one generation to the other.


Khoisan (Khoe and San) languages Orthography Dialect continuum Language policy Marginalized languages Endangered languages 


  1. Bala, G. G. (1998). Hadza stories and songs. Coloured edition. Edited by Bonny Sands and Will Grundy. Translated by Bonny Sands. Friends of the Hadzabe. Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  2. Barnard, A. (1988). Cultural identity, ethnicity and marginalisation among the Bushmen of Southern Africa. In R. Vossen (Ed.), New perspectives on the study of Khoisan. Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung (7). Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.Google Scholar
  3. Batibo, H. M. (1998). The fate of the Khoisan languages of Botswana. In M. Brenzinger (Ed.), The endangered languages in Africa (pp. 243–252). Rüdiger Köppe: Cologne.Google Scholar
  4. Biesele, M. (1998). Creativity and conservation: Ju|’hoan language education projects. In A. Bank, H. Heese, & C. Loff (Ed.), The proceedings of the Khoisan identities and cultural heritage conference, held at the South African Museum, Cape Town, 12–16 July 1997. Cape Town: Institute for Historical Research, University of Western Cape.Google Scholar
  5. Biesele, M. (Ed.). (2009). Ju|’hoan Folktales: Transcriptions and English translations: A literacy primer by and for youth and adults of the Ju|’hoan community. Victoria, BC: Trafford Publishing, First Voices Programme. ISBN: 978-1-4269-9809-6.Google Scholar
  6. Bolaane, M., & Saugestad, S. (2011). The University of Botswana and the University of Tromsø Collaborative Program: Its relevance to minority education and San youth capacity-building. Diaspora, Indigenous and Minority Education, 5(2), 119–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cameron, B. A. (2002). Language maintenance and literacy: Examples from Khoekhoegowab and Oludhimba. In K. Legère, S. Fitchat, & F. D. Akindele (Eds.), Talking freedom: Language and democratisation in the SADC region (pp. 225–242). Windhoek: Gamsberg Macmillan.Google Scholar
  8. Chebanne, A. (2010). The Khoisan in Botswana—Can multicultural discourses redeem them? Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 5(2), 11–29. African Realities of Language and Communication in Multicultural Settings, guest-edited by K.K. PrahGoogle Scholar
  9. Chebanne, A, H. Chimhundu, W. M., et al. (2006). A unified standard orthography for shona language varieties (Botswana, Mozambique and Zimbabwe). CASAS Monograph No.37. Cape Town, South Africa: CASAS.Google Scholar
  10. Chebanne, A., & Mathangwane, J. (2009). The divisive heritage: The case of missionary orthography development of African languages of Botswana. In K. K. Prah (Ed.), The role of missionaries in the development of African languages (pp. 91–122, Chapter 3). CASAS Book Series, No. 66.Google Scholar
  11. Chebanne, A., Namseb, L., Haacke, W., Davids, L., Kure, B. K., Araes, A., et al. (2008). The standard unified orthography for Khoe and San languages of Southern Africa. CASAS Monograph Series No. 232. Cape Town: CASAS.Google Scholar
  12. Chimhundu, H. (1997). Language standardization without policies in Africa. In U. Royneland (Ed.), Language contact and conflict. Ivhar Aasen Institute: Volda.Google Scholar
  13. Chimhundu, H. (2005). The unification of the Shona dialects by Clement Doke. ALLEX Project: University of Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe.Google Scholar
  14. Collins, C., & Namaseb, L. (2011). A grammatical sketch of N|uuki with stories. (Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung/Research in Khoisan Studies, 25). Köln: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
  15. Crawhall, N. T. (Ed.). (1992). Democratically speaking: International perspectives on language planning. National Language Project: Salt River.Google Scholar
  16. Dickens, P. (1994). English-Ju/hoan - Ju/hoan-English dictionary. (Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung, 8) Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
  17. Dickens, P. (2005). A concise grammar of Ju|’hoan, with a Ju|’hoan-English glossary and a subject index. (Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung,) Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
  18. Dornan, S. S. (1917). The Tati Bushmen (Masarwas) and their language. Journal of Royal Anthropology Institute (47).Google Scholar
  19. Ferguson, C. A. (1962). The language factor in national development. In F. Rice (Ed.), Study of the role of second languages in Asia. Centre for Applied Linguistics: Africa and Latin America, Washington.Google Scholar
  20. Fishman, J. (1974). Language modernization and planning in comparison to some types of national modernization and planning. Language in Society, 2(1).Google Scholar
  21. Güldemann, T., & Vossen, R. (2000). Khoisan. In Heine, Bernd & Derek Nurse (Eds.), 99–122.Google Scholar
  22. Haacke, W. H. G. (1998). A Khoekhoe dictionary in the making: Some lexicographic considerations. In M. Schladt (Ed.), Language, identity and conceptualization among the Khoisan (Research in Khoisan Studies, 15, pp. 35–64). Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
  23. Haacke, W. H. G. (1999). The tonology of Khoekhoe (Nama/Damara), In R. Voßen (Ed.), Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung No. 16, Ph.D thesis (p. 245). Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
  24. Haacke, W. H. G., & Eiseb, E. (2002). A Khoekhoegowab dictionary with an English–Khoekhoego-wab Index (p. 754). Windhoek: Gamsberg-Macmillian.Google Scholar
  25. Heine, B., & König, K. (2008). The !Xun language: A dialect grammar of Northern Khoisan. Köppe: Quellem zur Khoisan. Cologne.Google Scholar
  26. Hunziker, D. (2008). Sandawe alphabet poster. Dodoma: SIL.Google Scholar
  27. Janson, T. (2000). The history of minority-language speakers in Botswana. In H. Batibo & B. Smieja (Eds.), Botswana: The future of the minority languages. Germany: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  28. Kamwendo, G., Jankie, D., & Chebanne, A. (Eds.). (2009). Multilingualism in education and communities in Southern Africa. Botswana: UB-Tromso Collaborative Programme for San Research and Capacity Building. Gaborone.Google Scholar
  29. Kilian-Hatz, C. (2003). Khwe dictionary. With a supplement on Khwe Place Names of West Caprivi by Matthias Brenzinger. Namibian African Studies 7. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
  30. Köhler, O. (1971). Die Khoe-sprachigen Buschmaenner der Kalahari. Forschugen zur allgemeinen und regionalen Geschichte (Festschrift Kurt Kayser). Wiesbaden: F. Steiner.Google Scholar
  31. Köhler. O. (1981). Les Langues Khoisan. In, Les Langues dans le monde ancien et moderne. In J. Perrot (Ed.), Les Langues de l’Afrique Subsaharienne. S. 455–615. France: Editions du CNRS.Google Scholar
  32. Lüpke, F. (2004). Language planning in West Africa-who writes the script? Language Documentation and Description, 2, 90–107.Google Scholar
  33. Lüpke, F. (2009). CUP handbook on endangered languages Orthography development. ELAP workshop on training and capacity building for endangered language communities in February 2004, on endangered languages and literacy in December 2005, and of the ESF exploratory workshop on contact between Mande and Atlantic languages in September 2008, all held at SOAS, London.Google Scholar
  34. Miller, A. L., Brugman, J., Sands, B., Namaseb, L., Exter, M., & Collins, C. (2007). The sounds of N|uu: Place and airstream contrasts. (ed. Hye-Sook Lee & Pittayawat Pittayaporn. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications). Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory, 16, 101–160.Google Scholar
  35. Miller, A., Brugman, J., Sands, B., Namaseb, L., Exter, M., & Collins, C. (2009). Differences in airstream and posterior place of articulation among N|uu clicks. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 39(2), 129–161. Note: sound files at:
  36. Mühlhausler, P. (1990). ‘Reducing’ Pacific languages to writing. In J. Joseph & T. Talbot (Eds.), Ideologies of language (pp. 189–205). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Nakagawa, H. (2006). Aspect of Phonetic and phonological structure of the |Gui language. Unpublished PhD thesis. Johannesburg: University of Witwatersrand.Google Scholar
  38. Namaseb, L., Haacke, W., Davids, L., Kure, B. K., Araes, A., Ortman, D., et al. (2008). The standard unified orthography for Khoe and San Languages of Southern Africa. CASAS Monograph Series No. 232. Cape Town: CASAS.Google Scholar
  39. Pamo, B. (2011). San language development for education in South Africa: The South African San Institute and the San language committees. Diaspora, Indigenous and Minority Education, 5(2), 112–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Prah, K. K. (Ed.). (2000). Between distinction and extinction: The harmonisation and standardisation of African Languages. Centre for the Advanced Studies of African Society (CASAS) Series No: Cape Town. 1.Google Scholar
  41. Smieja, B. (1996). Language attitudes and language use in three African countries: Preliminary LICCA tests: Proceedings and results (p. 278). Duisburg: LAUD (Linguistic Agency of the University of Duisburg), Series B, No.Google Scholar
  42. Traill, A. (1985). Phonetic and Phonological Studies in !Xoo Bushman. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.Google Scholar
  43. Traill, A. (1986). Do the Khoi have a place in the San? New data on Khoisan linguistic relationship. Sprache und Geschite im Afrika (7).Google Scholar
  44. Visser, H. (1998). Language and cultural empowerment of the Khoesan people: The Naro experience. Lecture delivered at the University of Botswana.Google Scholar
  45. Visser, H. (2001). Naro Dictionary: Naro-English, English-naro. D’Kar: Naro Language Projects.Google Scholar
  46. Vossen, R. (1998). Historical classification of Khoe (central Khoisan) languages of Southern Africa. African Studies, 57(1), 93–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Webb, V. N. (Ed.). (1995). Language in South Africa: An input into language planning for post-apartheid South Africa. The LiCCA (SA) Report. University of Pretoria, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  48. Working Group in Indigenous Minorities in Southern Africa (WIMSA). (2001). The Penduka declaration on the standardization of Ju and Khoe languages. Windhoek.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.GaboroneBotswana

Personalised recommendations