"Access" itself is diverse: Typology & terminology

Two recent items - a tweet by the Office of the President of Niger touting greater internet access as a key to the digital development component its "Niger 2.0" program (below), and an announcement by IAB-South Africa (logo on right) of a campaign for free internet access in South Africa - raise anew questions about (1) what we mean by "access" in multilingual societies, especially in the service of development, and (2) how to clearly signify those meanings in ways that facilitate clear discussion, planning, and action.

Le développement du numérique, axe fort du programme Niger 2.0, passe par un plus grand accès à internet. La jeunesse Nigérienne, pilier de la Renaissance Culturelle, est au cœur de ce développement. #RenaissancedUneNation pic.twitter.com/pRMkdkdQYY

— Présidence du Niger (@PresidenceNiger) May 19, 2018

In African Languages in a Digital Age (ALDA) I discussed how "access" in information and communication technology (ICT) may refer to many things, but then adopted a binary distinction between on the one hand "physical access," basically the having a functioning digital device with power and connectivity, and on the other hand "soft access," being the software and applications. In a multilingual society, localization (L10n) is, or at least logically should be, a major concern of soft access.

Nearly a decade later, the tendency still seems to be to treat access as one thing, focused on the technical or physical aspects of access (devices, connectivity), and leaving out L10n and a deeper consideration of how people in multilingual societies access and might interact with the technology. In the wake of the 2015 "Connectivity Declaration" and Facebook's Internet.org initiative I discussed this problem at some length on this blog: "Access gap in the 'Connectivity Declaration'?"

What counts as "access"?

This gap in how we frame access is reflected in Wikipedia (English) articles relating in one way or another to access or to localization:

• Internet access (corresponds roughly with physical access; no mention of software outside of network context or of L10n) & the "right to internet access" (the discussion of which is framed in terms of physical access, and doesn't broach linguistic rights; and the latter article for its part doesn't mention access to the internet or ICTs in general)
• Computer accessibility & web accessibility ("accessibility" generally concerns people with disabilities)
• Language access, linguistic accessibility, & variants (a set of terms not covered in Wikipedia, which have to do with a range of situations including, but definitely not limited to ICT and the internet; this terminology "sub-space" does not seem clear or well-elaborated)
• Internationalization and localization & language localization (include processes leading to software and content in diverse languages, but does not mention access as a goal; in fact, the emphasis is more on reaching people with appropriate messages than it is in facilitating people's access and use of software and content)
• Digital divide (makes specific reference to access, and only marginal mention of languages, but language of software/content is not clearly evoked as a factor in enhancing access to help bridge the divide; no mention of L10n)
• ICT for development (ICT4D; references to access, with language mentioned as a consideration only in some ways that do not relate to access; a single mention of L10n)

It should be pointed out that these  Wikipedia articles do get editorial input from people who have some expertise in the topics covered, so while they may not be definitive, they offer a fair impression of thinking on these subjects.

The impression I get from reviewing these articles is that they show exactly the kind of gap between dominant use of "access" on the one hand, and the issues of access related to language on the other, that I had hoped to help bridge with ALDA and other writing.

The back story on "soft access"

When I first started looking at the dimensions of access to ICT in early 2000 - which was around the time of the Bamako 2000 "Internet: Bridges to Development" conference - I used the term "meaningful access" as distinguished from "physical access." This was intended in part to address the language dimension that was discussed at Bamako 2000 (its Plan of Action included "plurilingualism" among its 20 "essential activities"), but was largely overlooked in most of the early enthusiasm about how the internet was supposed to transform African development.

In later work on the PanAfrican Localisation project and the writing of ALDA, however, I instead used "soft access," a term borrowed from a TeleCommons Development Group report released in June 2000. I had a brief email correspondence with that NGO prior to the release of the report, but it is not clear whether or to what extent my input regarding types of access may have contributed to their thinking. In any event, their take on "soft access" (including as it did, attention to the issue of languages) seemed to capture the essence of what I was getting at. And their emphasis on software in defining soft access seemed productive in the context of localization I was dealing with in writing ALDA:

"software and applications which are designed to enable rural African users to utilize ICTs for their own needs and uses once the physical access has been established."

When it came time to translate ALDA into French, there was the question of how to translate "soft access." The resulting formulation - "accès logiciel" - is fine, but also shades the focus even more explicitly toward software and apps. (The translation adopted for "physical access" in Les langues africaines à l'ère du numérique is "accès matériel.")

Return to "meaningful access"? Or, "real access"?

In the years since, I have occasionally wondered if I should have stayed with "meaningful access," for a harder insistence on the linguistic and cultural dimension of access to technology. And more recently whether in fact that term and soft access might not better be thought of as two distinct but complementary access issues addressed by localization: content and interface.

Meaningful access, however, is a term that can be understood - and indeed is used - in ways that don't deal with language or even content. For example, meaningful access might simply refer to the quality of physical access (which would not be meaningful to have if, say, safety or noise were problems). One recent article on helping African women and girls to get online discusses "meaningful access to the internet" in broad terms that also encompass what I've been calling physical access (although it did not mention language):

"having a good, affordable connection and then being able to use it in a way that makes sense for you."

So, perhaps meaningful access might be a useful umbrella term, covering all aspects of "access" that might be left out if the sole focus is very narrowly on hardware and connections. But that doesn't get us too far in a context where language too easily is left on the margins of the discourse.

In this broader use, meaningful access reminds of the "real access" heading used in the early 2000s by Bridges.org (an early ICT4D NGO based in Cape Town, South Africa & Washington, DC, US; logo on left) in recognition that access "goes beyond just physical access and makes it possible for people to use technology effectively to improve their lives".

However, Bridges broke this broad category down into 12 "determining factors in whether or not people have Real Access to ICT" sketches out the environment in which organizations like IAB in South Africa or the government of Niger might try to increase "access" to the internet and ICTs more broadly (even if such organizations are not thinking about it that way). Language is explicitly mentioned only under #5 "relevant content," but a range of linguistic factors are relevant under several others (see my comments below on nos. 2, 4, 6, & 7; I've highlighted their & my uses of language or languages):

1. Physical access. Is technology available and physically accessible?
2. Appropriate technology. What is the appropriate technology according to local conditions, and how people need and want to put technology to use? [Comment: Software / apps localized in locally/regionally-important languages and, where needed, appropriate fonts & input systems can also be considered appropriate tech in this context.]
3. Affordability. Is technology access affordable for people to use? 
4. Capacity. Do people understand how to use technology and its potential uses? [Comment: User skills including knowledge of languages and basic literacy are relevant here.]
5. Relevant content. Is there locally relevant content, especially in terms of language? 
6. Integration. Does the technology further burden people's lives or does it integrate into daily routines? [Comment: Is tech less burdensome & more easily integrated to the extent it "speaks" the language(s) of daily use in the community?]
7. Socio-cultural factors. Are people limited in their use of technology based on gender, race, or other socio-cultural factors? [Comment: Linguistic factors, including lack of appropriate language of interface options would presumably fall under this item.]
8. Trust. Do people have confidence in and understand the implications of the technology they use, for instance in terms of privacy, security, or cybercrime? 
9. Legal and regulatory framework. How do laws and regulations affect technology use and what changes are needed to create an environment that fosters its use? 
10. Local economic environment. Is there a local economy that can and will sustain technology use?
11. Macro-economic environment. Is national economic policy conducive to widespread technology use, for example, in terms of transparency, deregulation, investment, and labour issues? 
12. Political will. Is there political will in government to do what is needed to enable the integration of technology throughout society? 

In fact, language and L10n in the access equation can also be affected by economic and policy considerations (nos. 10-12). Language is indeed a factor, and used of languages are conditioned by, almost anything that involves communication and knowledge. (This could lead into a discussion of "localization ecology," but I'll save that for another time.)

It is very useful when discussing access to technology (internet or ICTs in general) to spread out the subject, as it were, and to see how it might be disaggregated into specific concerns for specific attention, such as what Bridges did. I'm not currently aware of other similar efforts.

What about "linguistic access"? Or the "last inch"?

So why not just identify "linguistic access" as a key component in a broader "meaningful" or "real" access that goes beyond the usual focus on physical access? That thought occurred, but in the original dichotomy between physical and meaningful access, the latter was intended to go a bit beyond just language, much as L10n also is also concerned with more than just translation.

In a redo of Bridge's approach, one might call out linguistic access as a need addressed by localized software / apps and interface. And also localized content, perhaps still under "relevant content," meaning content created in, and/or translated into relevant languages.

A completely different way to refer to linguistic access is the "last inch" metaphor introduced by Dwayne Bailey and the African Network for Localisation (ANLoc; logo on right) a decade ago. The idea here is explicitly the language of software and interfaces (and content). However the term always seemed to be used only in the sense of "last inch limitations" and "last inch barriers," thus falling into the same trap of discussing lack of a common language first in negative terms that I've discussed elsewhere.* After all, the whole point of L10n is to bridge that "last inch" and thus facilitate linguistic access. Maybe "last-inch opportunities" or "bridging that last inch" to full access?

Wait - access for what?

Maybe part of the reason that the concepts and terms seem hard to settle on is that there is a deeper question that needs to be answered first: Access for what? Bridges discussed people using tech effectively "to improve their lives." One.org's "Internet for all" site, home of the Connectivity Declaration), says "Internet Access is Essential for achieving humanity's potential." These are broad well-intentioned goals - everything will be better with access to ICTs, or more specifically the internet. But what exactly is the vision of what people will do with access that will yield such vaguely wonderful outcomes?

Most examples of use of the internet on site Internet for All (which by the way makes no mention of L10n for access or of languages at all outside of a few translated versions of the Connectivity Declaration) relate to consumption of information and e-commerce. No problem as far as those go - they are important. But is access for all really about increasing markets?

In other words, in what vision of access to technology would linguistic diversity not be important? Is it one where people participating in a market for info and goods are really only those speaking a small range of dominant or "elite" languages? Is our current discussion of "access to the internet" really prioritizing certain uses and certain linguistic and cultural priorities?

I pose such questions as a proponent of greater access to ICTs (powered in part by better provisions for use in more languages). One of the dimensions I see as fundamental is the creation of content which while globally accessible, might be local or regional in relevance. Such non-mainstream perspectives may be as important for global learning as they would be for cultural/linguistic survival and development.

Even if the terminology about types of access might be hard to pin down, and even contested, it is essential to begin with acknowledgement that "access" to the internet and ICTs in general is not one thing and needs to be considered from several angles including languages, whether in Niger, in South Africa, or anywhere else.

---

* For example the discussions at the end of "Breaking the 'dialect barrier'" or on my other blog, "Reimagining 'language barrier'."

UNESCO literacy prizes for Mozambique & Madagascar

On Wednesday 22 July, UNESCO announced the recipients of the 2015 prizes for literacy efforts. Organizations in five countries (of which two in Africa - Madagascar and Mozambique) each received one of two categories of prizes:

• The UNESCO King Sejong Literacy Prize (2 annually)
• Associação Progresso, Mozambique
• National Institute of Education
  National Institute of Education, Sri Lanka
• The UNESCO Confucius Prize for Literacy (3 annually)
• La Plateforme des associations chargées de l’ASAMA et du post-ASAMA, Madagascar
• La Escuela Juan Luis Vives de Valparaíso, Chile
• Svatobor, Slovakia

King Sejong Literacy Prize

Of the two prizes, the King Sejong prize, named after the Korean monarch who designed Hangul (the Korean script), "gives special consideration to the promotion of mother-tongue languages in developing countries."

The Associação Progresso was described in the UNESCO release as "a Mozambican nongovernmental organization recognized for its effective ‘Literacy in Local Languages, Springboard for Gender Equality’ programme in Mozambican languages. It has achieved good results by building on international standards and research, training facilitators and involving the community in designing, monitoring and improving delivery."

Some background on Associação Progresso is available in a 2009 report mentioning its activities:*

“This case involves a partnership between Associação Progresso in Mozambique, and CODE, a Canadian organisation specialised in the promotion of quality primary education. Progresso and CODE have been working to increase the quality of education in the two Northern provinces of Mozambique for over 15 years. The activities in their joint programme, 'Promotion of a Literate Environment in Mozambique,' include the provision of reading and learning materials in Portuguese and local languages, skills development for primary teachers and adult literacy teachers, and training of education officers in specialised functions such as education planning, in-service training, and the monitoring of teaching and learning.

“Progresso and CODE work in close cooperation with the Mozambican Ministry of Education and Culture at the national and provincial levels. Their experience and innovative practices have influenced government policy, notably through the inclusion of a bilingual curriculum in the Government of Mozambique’s Education Sector Strategic Plan. ...”

It is unfortunate that such descriptions do not name the languages involved. If the activities are still concentrated in the north of the country, the languages might include for example: Makhuwa; Lomwe; Yao; and Nyanja.

Confucius Prize for Literacy 

The other prize, named after the ancient Chinese philosopher Confucius, recognizes "the activities of outstanding individuals, governments or governmental agencies and NGOs whose work in literacy serves rural adults and out-of-school youth, particularly women and girls." Often these also involve first languages.

According to the UNESCO release, La Plateforme des associations chargées de l’ASAMA et du post-ASAMA (Platform of Associations in Charge of ASAMA** and Post-ASAMA) is "an NGO in Madagascar that developed a comprehensive approach to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by establishing partnerships between the national authorities and 66 other NGOs. The programme provides a range of literacy courses for illiterates who account for 40% of the population, technical and vocational training at all levels and supports graduates in their efforts to find employment or start their own business."

It is not specified which language or languages are used, and I haven't found further information on that question elsewhere, but it may include literacy in Malagasy.

Past African winners of UNESCO literacy prizes

In past years, other African organizations have also received UNESCO literacy prizes. A list of African awardees over the previous seven years is presented below, with brief information on languages, where available.

Year	King Sejong Literacy Prize	Confucius Prize for Literacy
2014	L’Association pour la promotion de l’éducation non formelle du Burkina Faso (BF-APENF), Burkina Faso. - "activities in five local languages"	L’Association algérienne d’alphabétisation « IQRAA » (which means "read" in Arabic), Algeria. Bridges to the Future initiative of Molteno Institute for Language and Literacy, South Africa & International Literacy Institute, USA. - "reaches primary school children and illiterate adults through a specially designed multilingual computer program that tries to bring a more cohesive learning experience to the learner."
2013	La Fédération des associations de promotion des langues du Guéra, Chad.  - literacy in maternal languages of Guéra region	Savoir pour mieux vivre (SAPOMIVIE), Ivory Coast. - literacy in maternal languages and a publication "translated into 23 languages including Senufo and Bambara. Maninka, Attié, Abidji, Kulango or Dan syllabaries are used." (Gban is also mentioned)  Directorate of Adult Education of the Ministry of Education, Namibia.  - "basic literacy course consists of a 3-year training, averaging some 240 hours per annum. The first two years combine basic mother tongue functional literacy, offered in eleven local languages and life skills. English is introduced during the third part of the training."
2012	National Adult Literacy Programme, Pentecostal Church, Rwanda. - (no specific mention of languages) (Honorable mention) Programme d’alphabétisation fonctionnelle à l’intention des femmes et des filles à travers des groupes de femmes et la formation tout au long de la vie of the Direction de l’alphabétisation et de l’éducation des adultes, Niger. - "covers not only reading, writing and counting in the mother tongues but also life skills and practical and productive activities" (Honorable mention) Programme d’alphabétisation et de post-alphabétisation : autonomisation et intégration socio-économique des femmes marocaines of the Direction de l’élimination de l’analphabétisme, Morocco.  - (no specific mention of languages)	(no African recipients this year)
2011	Service national d’alphabétisation, Burundi. - "The government-funded courses take place in more than 900 centres across the country and are delivered in the national language, Kirundi."	Collectif ALPHA UJUVI, D.R. Congo. - "... Peace Hut scheme ... runs alongside literacy classes for adults and young people in both Swahili and French."
2010	General Directorate of Adult Training, Cape Verde. - "Portuguese language lessons draw on real life in Cape Verde and are held in the national language, Crioulo, in all of the 17 education and adult education centres scattered throughout the archipelago."	Females for Families program of the Governrate of Ismailia, Egypt. - (no specific mention of languages) (Honorable mention) Women Land Rights Project, Coalition of Women Farmers, Malawi. -  (no specific mention of languages)
2009	Tin Tua, Burkina Faso. - "curriculum in five local languages covering basic literacy and numeracy skills along with practical knowledge about health, hygiene, human rights, gender and farming."	(no African recipients this year)
2008	Reflect and HIV/AIDS program of People's Action Forum, Zambia. - "The Jury admired the association’s use of local languages in teaching the rural women in their literacy programmes to be autonomous, following the motto: 'rather than wait for government to decide, people should be involved in the decision-making process.'"	Adult and Non-Formal Education Association (ANFEAE), Ethiopia. Operation Upgrade, South Africa. [information on the above two awardees from Wikipedia]

________
* Réal Lavergne and Jacqueline Wood, "Civil Society and Aid Effectiveness: Exploration of Experience and Good Practice. A Reference Document" (2nd ed.), Prepared for the Advisory Group on Civil Society and Aid Effectiveness, August 31, 2009.
** ASAMA stands for Asa sekoly avotra ho an'ny Malagasy in Malagasy and Action Scolaire d'Appoint pour les Malagasy Adolescent in French.

Ethnologue: "National" and "Principal" languages in Africa

Since raising the issue of Ethnologue's use of the term national language last December, that resource has undergone some revisions. Among the changes is replacing the problematic heading of "National Languages" (problematic because it is used in various distinct ways) with "Principal Languages" on the "Country" tab of the country information pages.

This is a positive step as far as it goes (I'll come back to that below), but the new heading raises new issues. I believe these are important to review since Ethnologue is a major reference on the world's languages, and as such its presentation of data will influence how people (especially those from outside the region concerned) understand or misunderstand linguistic situations, with the potential to influence approaches taken to extension, public education, training, etc. for emergencies like the ebola outbreak in West Africa.

What counts as a "Principal language"?

A  reader looking up information on the languages of Niger would first come to the "Country" tab of the Niger page (a screenshot is pictured). On it, they would see under "Principal Languages," one language, French. A logical assumption the reader might make is that this language is unambiguously the "most important, consequential, or influential" (per Merriam-Webster.com's definition) in the country. But what of Hausa, spoken by perhaps half the population as a first language, which Ethnologue itself notes is also "the main trade language of Niger"? Or Zarma, spoken by 18-25% of the population,^* which although concentrated in the west of the country, represents a number greater than the number of French speakers (5-15% of the population)? The Peace Corps program in Niger for many years (before its closure) prioritized Hausa and Zarma language training for rural development volunteers since French, however important on the governmental level, was not as useful where they worked.

So where to draw the line in what is considered "principal" is a new problem. It turns out, however, that Ethnologue has a narrower definition of "Principal Languages":

"Languages that have been identified as having a function at the nation-wide level are listed here. This includes all the languages that function at the national level as a working language or a language of identity or both, whether this is by statute or is the de facto situation. For a fuller discussion, see Official recognition."

But even stated this way, couldn't Hausa, as the main trade language and one of Niger's statutory "national languages," still be considered a "principal language" in its own right? Also, from personal observation, Hausa as well as Zarma have been used de facto in local government work (as spoke languages), even though everyone knows French is the de jure language of governance. So there are several criteria on which one might add Hausa and perhaps Zarma as "Principal Languages."

 

In this regard, the treatment of  Senegal (another example used in the previous posting) seems even more problematic. Here too, only French is listed in the category "Principal Languages," although Wolof is the most widely spoken language in the country, as well as being statutorily a national language. 

Similarly, in Mali, Bambara is most widely spoken, and by a number of people larger than those speaking French. It is also statutorily a national language.But only the official language French is listed among "Principal Languages."

Part of the reason for citing these examples is that by a common understanding of this new category "principal language," and arguably by a broader reading of Ethnologue's definition of the term, major languages other than the official one in some countries would seem to qualify. Certainly what one counts as "principal language" in many multilingual countries may depend on the criteria used, and a that in turn would depend on the intended application.

Levels of official recognition

One criterion in Ethnologue's treatment of "Principal Languages" in these countries is evidently the kind of official recognition involved. So in the case of South Africa, which has eleven official languages, all eleven are listed as "Principal Languages." Same for Chad's two designated official languages - French and Arabic.

However, for the Republic of the Congo, three languages are listed as "Principal Languages": French, which is official; and Kituba and Lingala, which are statutorily national and vehicular languages (which seems similar to Hausa in Niger, Wolof in Senegal, and Bambara in Mali).

What of countries where no language is designated in the constitution or legislation as official? (This is the case for quite a number of countries, including the US.) For Kenya and Tanzania, which each have English and Swahili as de facto official languages, both are "Principal Languages" for each.

On the other hand, the page for Sierra Leone lists only English (de facto official) under "Principal Languages" even though Krio is used more widely (by at least 90% of the population). Though not formalized, Krio in practical terms could be regarded as a "principal language" of the country, since it is so widely used and arguably serves in part as a language of identity (another criterion in Ethnologue's definition). English, on the other hand, is reportedly understood well by only 13% of Sierra Leonean women - how principal is it from their perspective?

How useful are Ebola messages in English when only 13% of women in Sierra Leone understand English? @TranslatorsWB
— Lori Thicke (@lorithicke) October 13, 2014

An exhaustive review is beyond the purpose of this posting, but from the various examples, it seems that a narrow application of Ethnologue's definition for "Principal languages" on that important first page of country language information gives an incomplete picture of the linguistic reality in a number of African countries.

Suggestions regarding "Principal Languages"

Changing the heading "National Languages" to "Principal Languages" on the "Country" tab of Ethnologue's country information pages was a positive step for presenting first-glance information on the linguistic situations of multilingual African countries. A next step would be to review the criteria for giving languages that categorization. It might be useful to think of this as a way to give the readers a quick sense of the linguistic reality, which in multilingual states may be complicated, involving more than one language playing important roles in different ways.

Part of the problem is using a commonly understood term like "principal" in a very limited way, requiring the reader to find the specific definition and adjust their understanding accordingly. I suspect that many readers will, like I did when first looking at the page, assume the common definition of "principal."

Maybe a key would be to make the definition of "principal language" less dependent on the EGIDS framework. That would lead to another problem, mentioned above in the case of Hausa and Zarma in Niger - where to draw the line in a more flexible application of the term. One way to address this would be short annotation highlighting the criteria used. For example (not advocating this but giving as example), one could list for Niger: French (official); Hausa (main trade language). Or for Senegal: French (official); Wolof (most widely spoken). Sierra Leone: English (official); Krio (most widely spoken; identity). And so on.

"National language," cont'd

When one gets past the "Country" tab of the country information pages to the "Languages" and "Status" tabs, Ethnologue still uses "national language" in the way it previously did. This is again a question of nomenclature, important I would argue in the case of African countries that use the term in different ways (see the previous posting on this topic for a more complete discussion). Ethnologue has evidently reduced its use of the term "official language," so maybe "national language" could also be replaced by a term not already used in divergent senses or (like "principal language") carrying a generic meaning beyond that intended.

Concluding note

As in my previous posts about Ethnologue's content, I would like to stress that the purpose here is to offer constructive criticism and contribute to improving this important resource.

---

* There do not appear to be any published percentage estimates of speakers of Zarma (including closely related and mutually intelligible varieties of Songhai) in Niger. When I worked there in 2000-04, the common understanding was that 25% of the country's population spoke it (as a first language). Ethnologue's 2006 estimate of 2.35 million speakers would be about 18% of the 2006 total estimated population of 13.248 million.

Fula and the letter H

The origin and uses of the letter "h" in various European languages was the subject of a 2008 essay by Coby Lubliner, professor emeritus of Engineering Science at the University of California at Berkeley. In "The Story of H," as he titled it, Prof. Lubliner admits it may not be the "whole story, but some interesting parts of it."

Here then is a quick complement to that essay, focusing on three hopefully interesting roles of the letter "h" in the historically more recent Latin-based orthography(ies) of the Fula language (Fulfulde, Pulaar, and Pular), and in foreign nomenclature for the Fula people and their language:

1. The role of the letter in the language: First of all, in Fula, as in many languages, "h" represents a "voiceless glottal fricative." When in initial position in nouns and verbs, however, it typically alternates with "k," for the "voiceless velar plosive" sound, between singular and plural forms. (The system of consonant alternance or mutation of which this is a part is quite regular across the varieties of Fula spoken mainly in the West African Sahel, with the exception that in Pular - spoken in parts of Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, and Sierra-Leone - verbs do not feature the alternation.) 
2. Orthography of Pular in Guinea, pre-1985: The old Latin-based orthography for languages of Guinea was established after the country's independence in order to facilitate production of materials in its various languages with existing typewriters. This orthography included various digraphs for: (1) sounds not present or carrying a meaningful difference in European languages, for which other conventions were being developed in neighboring countries; and (2) three common sounds which in written French (the language of education and government since the colonial period) represented by its own digraphs or trigraphs. In the case of Pular, the combinations, including four using "h," and equivalents in current Fula orthographies are: bh = ɓ ; dh = ɗ ; dy = j ; nh = ŋ ; ny = ñ or ɲ ; ty = c ; yh = ƴ. These conventions - particularly the ones with "h" - can sometimes be observed in use in written Pular today, even though this orthography ceased being in official use since the mid-1980s.
3. "Random H": I've used this expression (not to be confused with the "random.h" utility) to describe the here-again gone-again use of "h" in English and French terms for the people and their language. 
• The English "Fula" sometimes appears as "Fulah," especially in older literature. However the spelling with the "h" is used in language coding (see here and here) and hence in localization (note its use last week by The Economist in reference to computer terminology in Fula). However, one has yet to observe the random H applied to the alternative term for Fula in English, "Fulani."
• The French "Peul" sometimes appears with an "h" before or after the terminal "l": "Peuhl" or "Peulh." I haven't been able to discern any particular pattern in use of these spellings other than that either use of the random H seems to be less common now. 

Addendum (8 Oct. 2014)

Since posting this, I've remembered another unusual instance of the "h" in Fula:

4. "Himɓe" for "yimɓe":  In most varieties of Fula, the word for "people" (as in persons) is pronounced "yimɓe." However, in Western Niger and apparently into Burkina Faso it is pronounced, and written, as "himɓe." The word yimɓe is techically the plural of "gimɗo," a term that I've never heard used, but which shows another of the consonant mutations discussed above - this one between "y" and "g." However it is usually the word "neɗɗo" that is used to refer to the singular, "person." Neɗɗo is actually derived from the root for being raised, educated. This sets up an atypical pair of singular/plural in common usage (and in materials for learners): neɗɗo / yimɓe. I first encountered the variant himɓe when working on a Fulfulde lexicon, and then later when in Niger. Without having researched the matter, I'm wondering if the "y" to "h" shift in local pronunciation was in effect permitted by the decoupling of the plural form from the rarely used singular form, gimɗo.

Ethnologue and "national languages" in Africa

In this post I'll discuss the second of two aspects of Ethnologue's presentation that seem to me to detract from its overall quality. The previous one was on cross-border languages being titled simply as "a language of" a single country. This one deals with how the new, 17th edition of Ethnologue* uses the term "national language" in presenting summary information about countries.

The Country information/summary pages in the current version of Ethnologue appear as the first tab in a set of pages for each country. These Country information pages feature a table that in the third row indicates "National languages." This replaces "National or official language(s)" in the 16th edition** (there is also a significant redesign of the presentation). This seeming simplification actually is problematic in the case of many African countries which use the term national language in a way different than that in the current Ethnologue. .

For example, if one goes to Ethnologue's current page on Niger, one sees a single language - French - listed as the national language (compare the page in the previous edition) - the same as for France. However in Niger and by Nigeriens, French is not called the national language, but rather the official language. "National language" (langue nationale in French) is a legal and widely understood category for the endogenous languages, that is separate and distinguished from "official language." Same with perhaps 20 other countries in Africa. The choice of terms by these countries was (is) deliberate and meaningful, but was it taken into account when revising Ethnologue's use of terms?

Although one appreciates the challenges of finding terms that work in a reference that seeks to cover all languages and all countries, this particular choice of term on a summary page does not seem at all fortuitous from the point of view of information on Africa.

Official, national, and local languages: An example

When I was on the Peace Corps staff in Niger in the early 2000s, a somewhat similar question arose. The then new regional training officer for West Africa - an American - referred to the consideration of language training approaches in terms of a choice of emphasis on "national language or local languages." However, "national language" in most of the countries we were talking about actually means what in Peace Corps is often referred to as "local language." The real distinction for our use, I suggested, was actually between "official language" and "local languages" (although those terms also have some shortcomings).

The issue was communication, not just semantics or formality of usage. If we started using the term "national language" in a way different from our host country colleagues and counterparts, it could create unnecessary confusion (aside from appearing to ignore what is effectively a common regional usage). And by the same token, since many American staff would tend to hear "national language" as "nationwide" language, it would not make sense to oblige everyone to conform to host countries' use of the term. Better simply to avoid the term "national language" in our planning in favor of alternatives that were known and clear to all.

The choice in this case was fairly straightforward, but it may be worth keeping in mind when considering the more complicated set of terminology choices facing Ethnologue.

"National language" in Ethnologue

Ethnologue defines its current use of the term "national languages" on the country information pages in this way:

"Languages which have been categorized as national languages at EGIDS [Expanded Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale] level 1 are listed here. This includes all the languages that are actually used for education, work, mass media, and government at the nationwide level, regardless of how they are classified in legislation."

Ethnologue's use of the term national languages on the initial country information page therefore comes out of a broader system for classifying languages and helping to understand their status and condition. This is important work and the schema they have developed is of great value. The issue here however is terminology.

In that system, references to "official language" have effectively been eliminated. Editor Paul Lewis, in discussing the terminology changes in his Ethnoblog posting, "Functions of Languages in Countries" (31 October 2013), gave the example of the Turkish language, which is listed as a "statutory national language," even though in the Turkish constitution reference cited (article 3) it is actually called the official language.

However this schema also relies on various modifications of "national language" (and terms relating to nation and nationality):

• Under EGIDS, "national" (meaning effectively "nationwide" but overlapping a lot with common and language policy use of "official language")
• Under "Official recognition categories and definitions," which is how Ethnologue now deals with official status, several descriptors:
• Statutory national language
• Statutory national working language
• Statutory language of national identity
• De facto national language
• De facto national working language
• De facto language of national identity
• Language of recognized nationality

As it stands, it does not seem that Ethnologue has a way of describing the language situation in many African countries that does not collide with established local and indeed regional usage. The official language is called "national" and the national languages seem to fall mainly under the somewhat sterile rubric "recognized."

Nation, national, nationality ...

A lot revolves around the meanings assigned to and understood by the term "nation" and its derivatives. These can on the one hand refer to a country or nation-state (nationwide, or in/by all of the country), which is how Ethnologue appears to use them. On the other hand, they may also have more visceral and identity-related meanings, which is how I understand the main African use of the term. Ethnologue's categories relating to languages of national idendity are also along the latter lines.

Part of  the problem is that Ethnologue uses "national" across this range of meanings, even if primarily in the "nationwide" sense. And in the case of many countries of Africa it has in effect switched the potentially more identity-related term "national" with the more formal term "official" for some languages, and the more formal term "recognized" for "national" in the case of other languages.

To a certain extent, one can in academic and reference publications use a term in a particular way by defining it clearly, as Ethnologue attempts with the above. However, when one's chosen usage is at variance with an existing legal and common use of the term, and the term itself has many applications and colors of meaning, it is often worth looking for alternatives.

Distinct meanings of "national  language"

The term "national language" actually turns out to have more than just the two uses discussed above (per "nationwide" and legal status as "national language"). Conrad Brann, who has taught and researched on language policy and multilingual societies for decades in Nigeria, suggests that in Africa there are actually "four quite distinctive meanings" of the term*** (which I've numbered for ease of reference):

1. "Territorial language" (chthonolect or chtonolect) of a particular people
2. "Regional language" (choralect)
3. "Language-in-common or community language" (demolect) used throughout a country
4. "Central language" (politolect) used by government and perhaps having a symbolic value.

The African usage that I highlight above is probably mainly under #1, but depending on the country, nos. 2 (DRC, Ethiopia) and/or 3 (see below). In a few African countries it corresponds with #4 and with Ethnologue's usage (Lesotho, Burundi).

Ethnologue's definition of "national language" seems to overlap #4 and in some cases #3 in Brann's typology. However, in some countries more than others, the official languages Ethologue lists as national languages may be less "languages-in-common" (#3) than some languages that those countries call national: The case of Wolof in Senegal, used widely as a first or second language, comes to mind.

Looked at from this perspective, "national language" seems to be a conglomerate of concepts, which requires clarification as to intent based on the context and intent. As such, it seems ill-suited for using in a quick reference page of any sort. Add to that the fact that many African countries use the term in a particular way, it would seem less than fortuitous for Ethnologue to choose it to use as a simple category for all countries.

Another look at Ethnologue's Country information pages

Another problem with Ethnologue's current approach to listing "National languages" is that for countries like Niger or Senegal, the top of the language summary gives the impression that French is the only language of importance. On the Senegal page, Wolof, for instance, does not appear anywhere. Nor do any of the other main languages of the country. On the other hand, there is a list of "immigrant languages" by name. As such the country information page - the first place a user would come in this reference to find information on languages in a country - seems very selective in the information it highlights.

A related question: Paul Lewis's Ethnoblog posting referred to above refers to continued use of the category "National or Official Languages" on the Country information tab, under which one would find all languages that they "have identified as national languages, or national working languages, or national languages of identity whether statutory or de facto." Is it possible that the issues discussed in my posting here may have arisen from a recent change within Ethnologue 17th edition's presentation of information on the Country information pages?

Alternatives

For a reference like Ethnologue that aims to cover all countries and all languages, a term that means different things to different people by itself would seem to make it a problematic choice for an information heading. One simple way to resolve this would be to return to the use of the former rubric - "National or Official Languages"- or something similarly broad, which allows naming of principal languages on the Country information pages.

Considering the issues I've raised with "national language" as well as the range of uses of the term highlighted by Prof. Brann and indeed by Ethnologue's own schema, it may also be worth considering whether and how to avoid using "national language" altogether in the schema and the titling, just as Ethnologue now omits "official language."

---

* Lewis, M. Paul, Gary F. Simons, and Charles D. Fennig (eds.). 2013. Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 17th ed. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Online version: http://www.ethnologue.com
** Lewis, M. Paul (ed.), 2009. Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 16th ed. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Online version: http://www.ethnologue.com/16
*** Brann, C.M.B. 1994. "The National Language Question: Concepts and Terminology." Logos [University of Namibia, Windhoek] Vol 14: 125–134.

Ethnologue and the cross-border languages of Africa

Two content features seem to me to detract from the overall quality of Ethnologue - which is the indispensable reference on all the world's languages. One is that pages on cross-border languages - a prominent sociolinguistic feature in Africa - are titled as the language of only one of the countries where they are spoken. The other is that in the current online version, the country pages list "national language," which is a problematic heading, given diverse use of the term, notably in a number of African countries. In this post I will deal with the first of these two items.

A continent traversed by cross-border languages

Due to the way borders in Africa were drawn, a great many of its ethno-linguistic groups are split among two or more of the modern African countries. The languages spoken by such groups can today be called "cross-border languages," and in fact this is the term used by the African Academy of Languages for some of the work it is doing, notably the Vehicular Cross-Border Language Commissions.

Languages that are spoken in more than one country - whether as a first language, which is often the case, or as a vehicular language, which is also frequent - have been a concern of language planning in Africa since independence. The various conferences on African languages that I have cited in some previous posts reflect this concern. Cross border languages were also highlighted by former Malian president Alpha Oumar Konaré, who compared them to "sutures" uniting African countries.*

"A language of" one country, more than one country, or a region?

When one looks up one of these cross-border languages in Ethnologue, however, they are as a rule listed as "a language of" a single country. It bears noting that when borders divide a language community, that community is rarely split in equal parts, so it appears that Ethnologue usually assigns the language to the country where there are more speakers. Other countries, regardless of significance in the language usage, are placed under "Also Spoken In:..."

So, for instance Hausa, the first language of 18.5 million Nigerians (according to Ethnologue, based on a 1991 SIL estimate), but also of about half the much smaller population of Niger, and used across large parts of West Africa (as a lingua franca), is titled simply "... a language of Nigeria." Is Hausa any less a language of Niger, given that the historic home of most Hausas (sometimes called Hausaland) extends well into the latter country? Better "A language of Nigeria and Niger"? Or given the number of other countries where it is "also spoken," maybe Hausa is really "A language of West Africa"?

Another example is the Ewe language, spoken by a population split between southeastern Ghana and southern Togo, which is listed as "... a language of Ghana." Similar to the case with Hausa in Nigeria and Niger, Ewe is spoken by more people in Ghana, but by a larger percentage of the population in Togo. So why not "A language of Ghana and Togo"? The reverse is noted in the case of Southern Sotho, which has more speakers in South Africa, but a higher percentage of population speaking it in Lesotho (it has legal status in both countries) - and is listed as "A language of Lesotho."

Examples abound, among which the major regional language of Swahili is listed as a language of Tanzania (see also discussion of macrolanguages, below).

Ultimately it seems (1) misleading to title pages on cross-border languages as languages of one particular country, and (2) inconsistent the way it is done. Going back to Ethnologue's "Plan of the Site" page, one finds mention of counting "each language only once as belonging to its country of origin" - but what if the area of origin of a language (to the extent one can determine that with any precision) is divided by borders?

Would it not be possible to develop a simple set of criteria by which cross-border languages were given titles  based on the extent (countries) of their major use?

Cross-border macrolanguages

The category of macrolanguage - defined as "multiple, closely related individual languages that are deemed in some usage contexts to be a single language" - takes this issue up another level. Although defined on linguistic criteria, macrolanguages in Africa are even more likely to cross borders, often many borders. There are 14 African macrolanguages by my count, with many of those being cross-border and some really looking like regional languages. Yet all of those are listed as being of one country or another:

• Arabic, "A macrolanguage of Saudi Arabia" (spoken in many countries, including at least 9 in Northern Africa)
• Dinka, "A macrolanguage of South Sudan" (spoken mainly in South Sudan)
• Fulah, "A macrolanguage of Senegal" (spoken in well over a dozen countries, mainly in West Africa)
• Gbaya, "A macrolanguage of Central African Republic" (spoken in CAR and Cameroon)
• Grebo, "A macrolanguage of Liberia" (spoken in Liberia and Ivory Coast)
• Kalenjin, "A macrolanguage of Kenya" (spoken mainly in Kenya, and also in Uganda and Tanzania)
• Kanuri, "A macrolanguage of Nigeria" (spoken in 5 countries of West and Central Africa)
• Kongo, "A macrolanguage of Democratic Republic of Congo" (spoken in DRC, Angola, and Congo)
• Kpelle, "A macrolanguage of Liberia" (spoken in Liberia and Guinea)
• Malagasy, "A macrolanguage of Madagascar" (spoken mainly in Madagascar)
• Mandingo, "A macrolanguage of Guinea" (spoken in 7 countries of West Africa)
• Oromo, "A macrolanguage of Ethiopia" (spoken in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Somalia)
• Swahili, "A macrolanguage of Tanzania" (spoken in at least 9 countries mainly in East Africa, among which some governments have accorded it legal status)
• (Akan is described as "A language of Ghana" in Ethnologue, and is also a macrolanguage in ISO 639-3. Either way it is considered to include Fanti and Twi, and is spoken mainly in Ghana.)

Here again, would it not be possible to adjust certain titles to more accurately convey the range of use? For instance, Fulah as "A macrolanguage of West Africa" and Swahili as "A macrolanguage of East Africa." The macrolanguage items may be easier to modify on a case-by-case basis, as there are fewer of them than languages, and their respective circumstances are somewhat unique. The language entries on the other hand might, as suggested above, need a set of criteria to avoid case by case discussion.

Final thoughts

These observations and suggestions are made in the spirit of helping improve the Ethnologue resource, with a mind particularly to what kind of information that people new to the study of languages of Africa would take away from their initial encounter with it. Cross-border languages exist in all world regions, of course, but perhaps in none more than Africa, where borders were never intended to respect the integrity of ethno-linguistic groups. This category of languages seems to me to merit attention and appropriate revision in how it is presentated.

---

* "Les langues nationales transfrontalières doivent être non pas des points limitrophes, des points de démarcation, mais des points de suture entre nos pays."

Niger's coup: Do two wrongs make a right?

Although this blog has a title related to Niger, it is not concerned primarily with that country, nor is the area of politics and governance its focus (except when policies relating to localization, language, or education may be concerned).

Nevertheless, the diverse reactions to the recent coup in Niger raised in my mind the same question as that of the IRIN News article linked in the title. The African Union and ECOWAS have been consistent in condemning the measures taken last year by President Mamadou Tandja to modify the constitution to prolong his rule. Yet they have also condemned the coup on principle - they could hardly do otherwise. The evident expressions of support for the coup in Niamey therefore exposes an odd juxtaposition.

There are two other perspectives: One that the coup was not a surprise, and the other that Pres. Tandja seemed to have sacrificed his potential longer-term stature as an elder statesman in his country and the region in the quest for a longer period in power - and now he has apparently lost that too.

Beyond whatever lessons one might draw, or what one may think about the coup, the main issues now are how the new junta will handle the transition back to democracy and rule of law, and how ECOWAS, the African Union, and other international partners can support and facilitate that transition.

Remembering Rita Herkel

I have just arrived in Dakar, Senegal after the long trip west and then south from China. Before the work here begins in earnest, I wanted to first take a moment to remember someone who died suddenly and unexpectedly last week. (This is something I wrote earlier in the trip but was unable to post before now).

In a time when so many innocents are dying - victims of disaster (and sometimes inadequate help) such as in northern Niger and New Orleans, victims of a freak accident such as the Shiite pilgrims in Baghdad recently, victims of genocidal actions and policies, people blown up by others, other people caught in the crossfire of wars and conflicts, and so on, it may seem inappropriate to dwell on the passing of one person somewhere else. But every life is precious and this is one that I had the chance to cross paths with for a brief period.

Last week, on 27 August, one of the people who had served as a volunteer in the group I was responsible for in Niger, Jenny Paulk, forwarded a really nice letter by another former Niger volunteer who was in Malawi helping to build schools - Rita Herkel. Rita had written it on 24 August to some friends, telling with enthusiasm how the work with the communities was going and expressing her feeling of being so lucky at that time.

Four days later (31 Aug.) another e-mail from another former volunteer, Barney Smith, (it's considerate of them to keep me on some mailing lists) said that the Peace Corps office in Niger had decided to name the resource center at the office in her honor since she had died in a bush taxi accident a few days earlier.

There is so much that could be said, and others closer to her or more eloquent might say it much better, but once past the shock, I couldn't help but think that if she had to go so soon, this was the way to do it. She was doing something that made her feel lucky and indeed was helping others. She went out on top, as the expression goes, something we might all hope for when our time inevitably comes.

I knew Rita only as her Associate Peace Corps Director (APCD) - every volunteer is in effect assigned to a sector headed by an APCD - for the two plus years (2001-03) she served in the village of Holla Bella in the Balleyara district northeast of Niamey. I've always had a lot of respect for all volunteers, but as in any walk of life, some seem to shine especially. Rita as I knew her from being her APCD was one of them. In her work, in her integration in the local community (she had a very high level in Zarma language), and her relations with other volunteers she was exemplary. It was fitting that she be remembered back in Niamey

I did not know that after her planned travel following her close of service in Niger she went on to work in Malawi. But it didn't surprise me. As a volunteer and in other development work she took the risks that we all do - local modes of transportation are sometimes quite unsafe whether because of mechanical issues, road conditions, the fault of drivers, or some combination. I don't know what it was the last day Rita took a bush taxi some short time after writing such a bright letter about her work, but she was among 6 people who died in that accident that day. Such accidents happen frequently without world notice, and at a rate certainly much higher than what we know in the West.

There are so many senseless deaths, and with each we all lose something precious, intangible, and from that point on, forever unknown. Separation and distance from the ones we knew are never easy, but the sense of a lost future is hardest of all to take.

This, then, is to remember Rita, her work, dedication, and spirit, and by her the many others who have left us too early. May their souls progress serenely and their memory inspire rather than sadden.

Perspectives sur la situation au Niger

Voici un mot d'un ami et ancien collegue qui est basé à Maradi:

En réalité, la crise alimentaire est localisée dans quelques zones pastorales et agropastorales du Nord Maradi, Tillabéry, Zinder et de quelques département de la région de Tahoua. Elle a surtout été causée par la rareté des dernières pluies de l'année passée et, par des dégâts importants des criquets sur la culture et le pâturage, entraînant ainsi la hausse des prix des céréales et les crises chroniques de malnutrition des enfants. Dans ces zones de taux élevé de sous-alimentation, évidement le niveau de mortalité infantile est très élevé. Voilà en un mot la situation. Mais elle n'est pas générale dans tout le pays. Ce sont les médias qui font d'une situation localisée, en situation nationale.

The New York Times has an article that, without clarifying this aspect, does attempt to look at different dimensions of the crisis, including chronic risk of famine, Niger's Anguish Is Reflected in Its Dying Children.

Among other things, the topic of poor agricultural technniques / tools / use of inputs was mentioned. This is true, but the solutions tried before haven't had much impact. One of the main avenues to improving agriculture is not more research or money, as important as these are, but more education of farmers. In fact there are a lot of issues intertwined in perpetuating rural poverty, and in the Sahel where rain is uncertain, turning that into annual risk of food shortfall or worse. But if there is to be a hope for any fundamental and long-term changes, it will require a concerted effort for education. And that should necessarily be done to the maximum extent possible in the farmers' first languages - which does not mean to exclude French or English, but if you are going to talk with farmers about farming etc., and expect them to discuss among themselves, best to use their languages from the start.

In the case of Niger, the language issue is one that is actually in its favor. Hausa, spoken by about half the population (not to mention millions south of the border in Nigeria), is a major language with a literary tradition. It would be easy to discuss all aspects of agriculture (and related aspects of rural economy) on any level of complexity in this tongue. Zarma, spoken by a quarter of the population and closely related to Sonrai spoken in eastern Mali, cannot lack adequate vocabulary either. Similarly, Fulfulde and Tamajak in Niger are dialects of major regional languages spoken by pastoralists, who have been surviving in this environment for ages. Why not put some resources into working in these languages for education and rural renaissance?

"Can't win for losing..."

The crisis in Niger is suddenly all over the press. An interesting analysis of how this situation was allowed to get so bad is in today's New York Times: A New Face of Hunger, Without the Old Excuses. "For decades famine was seen largely as a consequence of bad political leadership. ... Far from ignoring or playing down its troubles, Niger's government, in cooperation with international aid agencies, sounded the alarm back in November. It provided subsidized grain and other aid from its own stocks, and has apparently made every effort to avert disaster. The world simply failed to respond, leaving the government unable to mount a sufficient aid campaign." In effect, Niger's government did what it should have with its limited means but still the country is facing a serious problem.

Meanwhile, south of the border, BBC reports that Birds devastate crops in Nigeria. "Farmers in northern Nigeria beat drums to stop a plague of hungry quela quela birds eating their crops. ..." Different situation and context but a similar story - the farmers work hard and then what? Stay tuned.

At some later point I'd like to explore how ICT, localized in African languages, might be an "appropriate technology" for agricultural development in these areas.

Famine in Niger

I've written previously that although this blog bears the name of Niger's capital, where I lived nearly 4 years, this blog is not primarily about the country but about larger issues of localization around the continent. However since the blog does bear the name of Niamey, and there is no more important matter on earth than life, I want to mention the drastic circumstances that have befallen large parts of Niger (esp. the agro-pastoral zones towards the north). Would that mention here could save a life or make a positive difference somehow in the world response to the unfolding tragedy.

Niger is already practically the poorest place on earth even in a good year. As I used to explain to new Peace Corps volunteers when I was an Associate Director there, life for rural Nigeriens is like a stacked gamble: when it rains enough you survive to try again next year; when it doesn't rain, maybe you die. This grim assessment, something that I gained a little familiarity with when in neighboring Mali in 1984 (year of a huge drought regionwide), has been borne out this year with a vengeance. But this time it's not just an issue of rain but one of locusts - something that is favored by a lot of rain in preceding years.

In 2000, when I first arrived in Niger, the country was facing a shortfall in grain. Or actually, the previous year's crop was not going to stretch through the "hungry season" which is the period beginning more or less about the time you plant the new year's crops but the granaries from last year are running low. Obviously the less full the granaries are then the bigger problem you face the next. That is in effect what is happening now. What is a bit confusing hearing about this longdistance is how the state of affairs now couldn't have been better anticipated considering the les than full granaries last year. Indeed there was some early warning back in November, but apparently not all those on the ground agreed on how bad it would be (perhaps because it was mostly in areas away from the capital and administrative centers?).

Back in 2000, the problem was relatively mild, but saying "relative" is easy when you can retreat to a place with food and have money to buy it. That year I gained a renewed appreciation for Sahelians and their resilience, and also for the PCVs who were practically the only foreigners on the front lines as it were, trying to make sure that the villages they lived in were not forgotten when the lists of needs were compiled, seeking ways to generate project monies to assist in matters that get neglected when food is the bottom line, and more.

During the time I was in Niger, each year there was a kind of watch of the weather and then an assessment of the situation in various parts of the country where rainfall was marginal. When I left the country in 2004 I told some new volunteers, as I had earlier incoming groups, that there was a chance that they'd see a major drought or famine during their two years there. Would that I had been wrong.

Though the focus of this blog - to the extent I can add to it and have time to do so - will remain ICT in African languages, I will add any further information I receive from people on the ground in Niger. One letter by the Peace Corps Director in Niger, Jim Bullington, can be read on the Friends of Niger site, which also has links to other articles on the situation in Niger.

Student demonstrations this morning in Niamey. Happens just often enough that one loses track of exactly what the issue is - generally something with the bourses, that is the student living stipends, but sometimes politics.

On the national scene the local elections have been postponed from March to June. Not sure if there is a connection. (The curious can check out some of the links at J. Mayer's page - click on the link to that in the left column under "Niger" - for sources of news.)

I wrote an e-mail with a quick take on my interests (a networking/jobhunting thing important even as the clock ticks down...) which I'll revise part of a bit for this venue:

In effect I have one foot in language & multilingual ICT and the other in agriculture, environment and rural development. What links the two are

• a conviction about the nature and importance of agriculture in human society (goes beyond the obvious; the relentless focus on production is leading to some very questionable results), and an interest in enhancing opportunities for smallholder farming families in poorer countries


• an approach to land & resource management that emphasizes "putting the mind on the land" beginning with local knowledge (not stopping there, of course) and using various low & high tech tools of spatial imaging


• a view of "development" that goes back to its core meaning of "unfolding, revealing potentialities" (if you start from there rather than the usual usages of the term, you get a much broader set of goals)


• seeing education or "learning" as the dynamic thread linking these interests (with a Freirian accent - though this is pretty mainstream now)


• understanding of the importance of one's first language in learning, "owning," and generating knowledge (but for various reasons most of education & development approaches in Africa minimize this)


• the strong impression from experience that multilingual societies function differently from monolingual ones in ways that people used to monolingual living (or even alternating from one to another more or less monolingual setting using different languages) don't easily appreciate


• recognition of the importance of language skills in life success and social skills, and that current education systems and economic factors are producing in Africa many people with what one might call "impaired bilingualism" (no schooling in the first language(s) and more or less limited acquisition of the language of instruction - the worst of both worlds when in fact the best of both is possible)

The latter is an interesting line of reasoning I have only recently begun to really think about - the suggestion being that inadequate skills in self-expression lead to social and psychological problems esp. in men (?), and that lack of words, of language skills, effectively equals inadequacy. A quote I ran across by Australian author John Marsden a couple of months ago got me thinking along these lines: "Language impoverishment can lead to frustration, impotence and/or rage."

Is lack of language education, within the broadly recognized "lack of education" (which tends to get reduced to the also important but different domain of vocational education - as if young people don't need to think as long as they learn to do), an underappreciated factor in problems in disadvantaged communities? And lack of good bilingual language education a factor in polyglot societies? A lot of the youth caught up in the violent armed groups in Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Côte d'Ivoire, for instance, are probably really fluent in no language - whether there is any link or not I think is is a valid question to look at. Obviously all the violence plays out in a context of social, political and economic issues - but how it is playing out may have something to do with a rootless/hopeless generation that speaks neither maternal language nor external language well. George Packer's descriptions of the youth in CI are worth rereading in this context.