African Language As An Adequate Depiction Of An Adequate African Reality
Chapter One.
EVOLVING ON ACCEPTABLE YORUBA LANGUAGE
Preface
This chapter will examine Godwin Azenabor’s view that the particular language used to report African philosophical disposition is insignificant as long as the disposition reported is respectable. The chapter argues that what’s important is the fact that one must be communicating with the followership to be address. The recrimination to this is that Yoruba language like every other African language including the ideas and belief of the people is thrown into deportation and a whole lot of effects about the generality of reality in Yoruba language will be lost
In the current chapter an attempt will be made to foster Makinde’s view that African languages are underdeveloped was also examined. It was noted that the underdevelopment that African languages were indicted of, is only applicable when one compare them with other languages but since every culture is dynamic, similar energy will be taken into the culture’s language.
The current chapter will examined Makinde’s view that African languages are underdeveloped. With respects to Yoruba language, the chapter will argue thatinter-cultural influences can help to develop Yoruba language better through the assimilation of introductory generalities.
Language, Culture and Reality
As mortal beings, the function that language plays in our lives can not be overlooked. It’s a necessary condition for mortal actuality since humans are all members of a culture and because this so, one of the factors of a culture is the language in which its members communicate their ideas. Besides being a means of communicating our ideas, language is also a means of study. The study that it seeks to communicate is of course told by the artistic environment into which its thinkers belong. Each and everyone have a differing frame of study, before indeed taking artistic factors into consideration at all. It’s this kind of logic that underlies the benefactions of the Milesians who were of the same society and still supposed different effects in their attempt at arresting nature. It’s the same logic that lies behind the studies of British Researchers, Locke, Berkeley and Hume as well.
therefore, it’s established that our language is a necessary condition for philosophical study. It becomes insolvable to suppose, believe, or to act or indeed to be conscious without a language. Hegel wrote in his prolusion to his wisdom of Logic “ It’s in mortal language that the forms of study are manifested and laid down in the case ”( i). For Micheal Dummett,
Language is the expression of what the speakers want to express, that is, their studies and gests . It’s commonplace to hold that language is a medium of communication and also a vehicle of study( ii)
Since our world includes our study as well as our reality, whatever allowed we may have, it’ll be insolvable to capture generalities that are alien to formerly culture with the language. This is because indeed trying to suppose about alien ideas to one’s culture requires the operation of one’s language as a base of conceptualization. Indeed Noam Chomsky mentioned that the “ possession of mortal language is associated with a specific type of internal association ”( iii) so that whatever internal association allows one to suppose beyond the confines of his/ her culture, is only in connection to our language. important like in the complex ideas of John Locke which explain language as the combination of several simple ideas in the mind of the perceiver.
One beliefs and intentions can not really be articulated, not indeed in geste , unless they’re expressed through language and same goes for cognitive countries as well. That language enables us to communicate our ideas to others doesn’t indicate that this process of communication is one of simplicity. An existent may convey different modes of study in different ways. At one point of time, the grown-up may use language to assert, at other times to state objective data or convey information, for case, “ the rainfall is changing for worse ”, “ bodies fall to the ground ”.
The relationship between language and culture is a complex one due largely in part to the great difficulty in understanding people’s cognitive processes when they communicate. Language doesn’t live piecemeal from culture, from the socially inherited assemblage of practices and beliefs that determines the texture of our lives.( iv) The fact that one uses their language to capture our reality in different ways enables it to affect our communication. Since language is tied to cognitive capability, and it’s in an attempt to communicate ideas which themselves are internal events that one employ language. It’s thus natural that differences as well as difference should crop out of our attempts to capture our reality. On another ground, it’s true that reality is private to individualities and is just “ out there ” for us to seize, but the language with which one attempt to seize this reality is of a private character and if it’s the only means through which one could adequately capture Yoruba reality, also there are bound to be differences, since language being private can be employed as pertaining to the mind- frame of each stoner. More or less utmost people agree that language is, in some way, a system of symbols related to realities in the world( as they’re represented mentally) and to the connections between them.( v)
Language, Allowed and Reality The Yoruba Thought System
Having asserted that our language is indeed a reflection of our world, there’s an attempt to examine the connection participated from the perspective of the Yoruba language speakers.
There has been a debate about the nature of African languages and whether they represent a sufficient means of landing African reality. While some hold that language may be important in this relationship, one will be reluctantly reminded of the fact that the reality that one seeks to capture is one that’s objective in nature, and because it’s objective it’s universal. As similar, whatever language one employ isn’t the point, but the fact that it attains universal adequacy as well as understanding. Some hold that African languages aren’t a sufficient means of landing African realities, and because they’re not, there’s a need to develop a universal African lingua franca through which the communication of ideas that brims in an average African may be given a international connotation and understanding.
utmost if not all indigenous African languages have been indicted of being underdeveloped, and because they are, they’re unfit to adequately contribute to several fields it’s felt they can contribute in. The fact that they’re underdeveloped therefore has made it similar that generalities in these languages can hardly be successfully restated into those of a different culture, or to be suitable to accommodate foreign generalities that naturally members of the culture can relate with and ought to be suitable to be assimilated in the culture. The incapability to successfully prompt restatement has rendered it insolvable to be suitable to view these societies as being as advanced as they really are. incapability of restatement for utmost people implies some inadequacy of whatever language can not be restated.
The problem with this position still is that during attempts at restatement, Yoruba culture strictly want to hold onto the identity and whatever conception that one wants to restate is coming from the original possessors of the conception. Forgetting that the reason why similar conception if alien to the resident African language is due to its not being a part of the African culture, showing the incapability of the language to capture it. naturally, if a conception exists in in a culture, and is original to similar culture, also it’s natural for the verbal mechanisms of that culture to be suitable to capture it. But if the conception is alien to some culture, also for as long as we’re tryinginter-cultural and sointer-linguistic restatement, also one must to some extent be ready to let go of the rigid identity with which it was brought into the indigenous African culture in order that it may be captured by the language. It should be noted that the purpose of this reduction in strict identity isn’t to alter the identity of the conception, but to be suitable to accommodate in some other language which will formerly have it represented in a way that differs from how it’s firstly honored.
thus, that a conception lacks acceptable restatement isn’t as a result of the inadequacy of the secondary language, but because of the incapability of the speakers to take note of the below mentioned point. Anyhow of this, it has been noticed that some languages warrant some introductory syntactical capacities that’s allowed ought to be primary to any language. For illustration, the Yoruba language represents a womanish as oun in speech, so that when we want to for case citation that “ she ate it ” we say oun lo ję. When still the pronoun is in its manly form, when we want to say “ he ate it ”, the Yoruba language doesn’t fete any difference between any of this senses of operation. So that it’s also appertained to as oun lo ję. It’s due to cases of exemplifications similar as these and some others that similar language is deprived any verbal credentials good of a standard language. It may also be concluded on this ground that as important as similar language is used adequately by its speakers to represent their reality within their culture without difficulties or misgivings, it can not serve adequately outside of this culture. It simply won’t meet the norms set by other “ standard ” languages with which it might come in contact with.
For Makinde, he had claimed that individuals are an effect of whatever culture into which they belong, and because they are then it seems natural for these to be reflected in their perception of reality. Including how they perceive other people’s cultures as well. But there is an inability of African languages to be able to capture adequately concepts that themselves employ as typified by the pronoun case cited above, and those that are brought into the culture as a result of cultural influence like mathematics. This inability has impaired majorly the ability of Yoruba philosophers for one to be able to pass across what qualifies as African philosophy in their own languages.
It is this inability of language that renders it inferior in contrast to some “superior” language. One should however note that the case is that of an attempt to juxtapose two different languages, and as far as our claim of language as an adequate tool to depict reality goes, two different tools of depiction. For people to even consider an attempt at comparison, it is for no other reason than due to the fact that a difference is discerned, if one now seeks for similarity even amidst this difference between languages, it contradicts the initial position. For it has been established that language is a mental systematization of thoughts, it is unlike the reality Yoruba language purport to report, subjective and because it is subjective it cannot adhere to the objective reality of some other culture for which it was not initially suited to cater for. It might not be the best course of action to attempt to use the standard of some other language considered “superior” or more advanced to juxtapose some other “inferior” language and hence claim that it is on the grounds of its inferiority inadequate and lacking.
It is a sociological fact to say that the best way to understand a people’s culture, way of life and thoughts is through their language and if language is anything to go by, then in contrast to English and French languages, the Yoruba language suffers a shortcoming. It is easier to do philosophy for example in English language because in contrast to Yoruba language, it enjoys universal acceptation and a wide range of understanding. For the reason initially cited of the latter’s being underdeveloped and so inadequate but one should note that for as long as one is a member of the Yoruba speaking community of Western Nigeria and because of the several ethnocentric comments made about such language, had to adopt a secondary language in order to make a philosophical contribution. Language is understood to be very flexible, and because it is, it is very easy for a foreign speaker to adopt a language and employ it as much as the native speakers do. But for as long as this is held to be a valid comment, it means that my original language plays a role in the successful adoption of the secondary language of communication. It assists in understanding some concepts one would otherwise not understand, and these concepts might not even exist in the Yoruba language but it only means that one know what it means for the concept not to exist, and so one is able to easily adjust to having it exist and be able to relate with it. In the Yoruba language, they use the term meta to represent the figure “3”, when one comes into contact with the branch of philosophy called “metaphysics” however, it is immediately seen that they do not belong to the same contexts of usage. And our grasp of what 3 means in Yoruba helps us establish a difference between it and the “meta” in “metaphysics”.
For philosophy to be done in an African language, it requires that there be an attempt to establish a continental language that will be widely acceptable and shall be the means of the communication of our ideas. Western languages have succeeded in doing this as we can see there is wide usage of English and French for instance. This is due to the fact that there was cultural as well as linguistic assimilation, so if any African language is to be recognized as universal, there must be assimilation between the several cultures concerned.
1.3 The Inadequacy of African Languages to Depict an African Reality
The charge of underdevelopment stands against the possibility of assimilation. If Yoruba language are said to be underdeveloped, how could they then be intelligible enough to enable an effective assimilation? The possibility of a successful assimilation in the case of the Western languages is only made necessary due to some functions of linguistic accommodation as well as intelligibility discerned. So if African languages are deprived of this intelligibility, then how is the assimilation to be effected? We might as well be giving a person food to eat while taking away his appetite.
The worldview as well as culture of a people determines their language.[vi] The implication of this is that, if there is going to be some sort of misgiving on the part of the culture, it will reflect in the language but the objective and subjective nature of both culture and language should be taken into adequate consideration as well. For culture, it is not the characteristic of it that one tends to compare it to some other culture. Culture is of a dynamic nature, and because it is, to compare one culture with some other one is to commit an unfair mistake. On the part of language however, when a deficiency is supposedly recognized within a language, it is not in consideration of the speaker’s independence of other cultures and languages. It is through Africans’ attempt to compare more than one language that we tend to recognize supposed inability and inadequacies. The attempt to carry this inability to the cultural landscape however is a surprise. It has been asserted that these two influence each other, but one should not make the mistake of carrying an inability of language into culture.
Due to the connection, the learning of the language of a people brings one closer to their culture, and because it does, one is well on the way to the adoption of other people’s culture. This is the fact that underlies modern philosophical landscapes. Granted that the inadequacy ascribed to African languages is an unfair one, it might seem rather justified to use the medium of comparison with some other language which supposedly reaches the extent that African languages do not to compare and so conclude. This renders the inter-cultural comparison justified in a way, so that the adoption of the English language by an African gives him an edge over even the speakers of the language. But this does not shadow the inadequacy that is characterized in one’s own language.
One of the problems for the defense that Yoruba language isn’t acceptable to depict reality is in relation to the counting system. Yoruba counting system is complicated and obscure. Counting system is easy in English language compare to Yoruba language which their counting system is delicate to represent in figures. The more the number increases the more it gets complicated. For case to counting system of “ 1000 ” is egberun while “ 2000 ” is egbewa. The question is how will they regard for millions without complications?
There are certain conception that are nebulous which which make it delicate for the idea in Yoruba language as compare to other idea in other culture. For case the conception of verity and probity. verity is Otito which applies to proposition and it’s an epistemological conception. probity is olooto which applies to person character and is of moral conception but in Yoruba verity and probity will be represented as Otito which is why it’s delicate to dissect Yoruba conception of verity and probity.
These are some of the setbacks why Yoruba language isn’t sophisticated enough to depict their reality. But also it could be argued that the fact that these differences couldn’t be clarify in Yoruba language doesn’t mean that Yoruba language doesn’t fete the epistemological and moral conception of verity and probity. It’s fete through the way they talk and this affirm the differences. For cases what he said is true could simply interpret to mean otito ni nkan to so different form he she is a veracious person olooto eniyan ni yearning( this is simply about character). Yoruba language has a way of feting generalities although doesn’t make unequivocal of it.
One should still note that the fact that the Yoruba people have a language that isn’t acceptable enough to capture their reality doesn’t mean that they don’t have some other means through which this reality could be captured.
Anyhow of the ironical nature of development in a culture and latterly in language is only base on the fact that one has to come in contact with some other culture which in effect influences one and the advancements in similar told culture, will be according to the experience gathered from other societies. therefore, while it may be true that African traditional language is an shy tool for philosophical intellection and analysis in light of Western language and culture, an attempt to develop the language takes us back to the foreign influence. Hence, it can not be denied that artistic assimilation is an acceptable suggestion to the development of any culture and language; it still shouldn’t be only one culture but between two societies regarded as both inferior.
The Possibility of the Development of an African Language to Capture the African Reality The Yoruba Language
The recognition of the incapability of a Yoruba language to depict its artistic reality will suggest that a result must be effected. To consider the Yoruba language for case, having been charged with the underdevelopment characterized like other African languages, it’s material to attempt to rise to the problem by assessing the language and proffering a result that will be applicable to the reality concerned.
It has been established that there’s an unbreakable connection between culture, reality and language, to be suitable to develop the Yoruba language for case will indicate that, one looks to the development of the culture and hence the perception and definition of reality. The charge of underdevelopment still shouldn’t be forgotten and if the language is underdeveloped, also it must be some consequence of the culture. Reality is an objective fact as opposed to the private nature of language. Culture can not be regarded as being underdeveloped; this is because it’s meant to be an indicator according to which a specific people live. The charge of underdevelopment only comes by, in the event of a comparison of a culture with some otherone.However, it’ll be an attempt to compare two definition of reality, which isn’t a rational approach, If this is done. No definition of reality can be contained under some other because the element of each system differs, and because it does, what would obtains within similar systems will also differ.
still, a tool to the effect of the description of similar reality, one can transfer the point that it’ll amount to a comparison of two realities on the analogous ground as that of culture, If language is a element. It isn’t a coherent assertion to claim that a language isn’t suitable to adequately capture some other reality from which it wasn’t abstracted. This will be asking of it much further than it can go to proffer, further than it was cooked for. If languages are a part of culture also they were abstracted from similar societies and on the grounds that they’re shy only records an attempt to compare them with some other culture which doesn’t conform to the reality from which it was originally uprooted.
To develop the Yoruba language thus will mean that one develop the realities of the Yoruba people. It’ll mean that Yoruba culture will be put alongside some other culture used as a applicable mark and attempts will be made to meet the criterion of similar culture but one should note that culture firstly is dynamic, the energy is a function of the individualities who are the thinkers within similar culture, and this energy contributed could only crop because of the external artistic influence to which they’ve come through. To consider the word used to relate to an onion for case, alubosa is a term firstly belonging to the Hausa language. Onions are imported from the Northern part of Nigeria and because they are, they aren’t a function of an indigenous Yoruba reality. This explicates the point that when there’s a need for expansion, the languages seek to borrow the identity of the conception involved and accommodate it within its own confines.
The same thing applies to “ blessing ” called alubarika which was firstly imported from the Arabic language in which it was called Al- barka. While the language might not be developed enough to propagate a study or gospel, it’ll essay to rise to the occasion whenever need arises in order to accommodate the idea presented. Whether it now enjoys universal adequacy is another question. One doesn’t anticipate generalities alien to Yoruba culture and reality to suddenly spring up and have verbal identity in the frame. They’re generalities belonging to some other culture and will be accommodated as much as Yoruba verbal inflexibility reaches. That the Yoruba language is still flexible enough to accommodate the generalities that it can which are firstly foreign to it, is in itself a mark of an advanced and evolving language. Theinter-cultural influences pave a way for languages which are espoused. For case as it’s argued before on that the counting system of the Yorubas devoid them to adequately depict reality but also a lot of languages are espoused from Arabic indeed fine computations doesn’t make use English numbering system but rather different conception have been espoused from Latin words to English language thus on this base the abstract assimilation isn’t new, it has been espoused but also more generalities can be assimilated. In doing this better will enhance Yoruba language.
Summary
The current chapter examined the part and connection between language, reality and culture. It also examined the inadequacy of African languages as been egregious, and because it is, it’s an acceptable suggestion thatinter-cultural influence will enable the development of indigenous African languages which will be carried into their perception of their world as well. This chapter eventually suggested that, Yoruba language still, as long as it’s suitable to accommodate generalities firstly foreign to it, is a advanced language and is able of representing or depicting reality in the way in which Yoruba people perceive it.
Leave a Comment