The sociolinguistic situation today

The common cultural background of the three countries makes the sociolinguistic situation rather similar. The major difference is the status of Kiswahili: in Tanzania, it is the true national language, since it is spoken nation-wide as a lingua franca, learnt in a relatively homogeneous form (sometimes called “Government Swahili”) in all primary schools and used in most national functions including education in most secondary schools; in Kenya it is just losing its associations with the coast or with lower social positions; in Uganda it is unfortunately still associated with the military and the “troubled” times in the 1970s and 1980s. This leaves more room for English and the other East African languages in Uganda and Kenya.

The official status of English in government, parliament or jurisdiction is not always easy to establish, as conflicting laws, regulations and proclamations since independence 40 years ago may contradict each other. Whereas it is clearly the language of nation-wide politics in Uganda, it is rarely used in those functions in Tanzania. Kenya occupies a middle position in this regard.

English is not really associated with white settlers any more. Although distinct accents can still be heard in this group, they range outside the general national norm. The multilingual educated African elite invests large sums of money in “good education”, which is usually based on “good English”. The Asians in East Africa are usually equally multilingual, speaking not only their native languages, mainly Gujarati or Panjabi, but also their own versions of Kiswahili and English.

Knowledge and actual use of English are based on very rough estimates, since no nation-wide census data are available and the last language survey was sponsored by the Ford Foundation more than 30 years ago. Thus to say, for instance, that English is “spoken” by 30% in Uganda, 20% in Kenya and only 5% in Tanzania may give an indication of the (historical) differences in education, urbanization, modernization or internationalization. However, this must be taken with great caution. Since English gives prestige, informants’ self-evaluations are unreliable, and nation-wide proficiency tests for national certificates of education often disappointing. The fact that even universities have started extensive course programmes in “Communication Skills” or even explicitly “Remedial English” reveals some of the problems at the highest level. The discussions can be followed even on the internet today in various contributions including numerous letters-to-the-editor to major national newspapers (e.g. “MUK enforces English for all” in The New Vision, Uganda’s leading daily 13/01/02). The key problem is that English is used as the language of instruction from upper primary school onward (in Uganda) and is thus the basis for all further education. The discussion is less about teaching English properly than teaching (other subjects) in English properly.

In all countries English is still (in Tanzania again?) a result and a symbol of good education and, directly or indirectly, a prerequisite for well-paid jobs with international links in trade and tourism. This is often reflected in popular debates on language attitudes in East Africa.