University of the Witwatersrand

Faculty of Humanities

School of Literature, Language, and Media

Translation Studies Department

Expansion of South African Xitsonga terminology through
importing from agrarian pursuits of Xitsonga linguistic

communities in Mozambique and Zimbabwe

By
Godfrey Machisana Mabunda

Student Number: 2512962

Supervisor:
Dr. Alice Leal

A Research Report Submitted

to the Faculty of Humanities, University of the Witwatersrand

in Partial Fulfilment for the Award of the Master of Arts in Translation Studies

Johannesburg

2023

Abstract

This research report delves into the redundancy of the agrarian terminology in

South African Xitsonga. Agrarianism signifies farming and spirituality in a rural

setting. As the mainstay of Vatsonga culture, the agricultural lifestyle boasts a

host of terminology attached to it. There is an overt need for agrarian terminology

in the South African Xitsonga today to enhance its lexicon. This study posits that

the erosion of agrarian terminology in the South African Xitsonga can be linked

to the disruption of native farming by colonial powers and the far-reaching effects

that Christianity had on Vatsonga faith, which had exisited since antiquity. The

intellectualisation of Xitsonga also facilitated the eschewing and eventual loss of

the longstanding agricultural elements of the language. The Xitsonga linguistic

communities in Mozambique and Zimbabwe still use some of the agrarian

terminology that could serve to aid the expansion of South African Xitsonga.

Keywords

Xitsonga, Vatsonga, agrarian, agrarian terminology, linguistic communities,

speech communities, language, South African Xitsonga.

iii

Plagiarism Declaration

I Godfrey Machisana Mabunda (Student Number: 2512962) am a student

registered for Masters in Translation Studies in the year 2022. I hereby declare

the following:

§ I am aware that plagiarism (the use of someone’s work without their

permission and/or without acknowledging the original source) is wrong.

§ I confirm that the work submitted for assessment for the above course is

my own unaided work except I have explicity indicated otherwise.

§ I have also followed the required conventions in referencing the thoughts

and ideas of others.

§ I understand that the University of the Witwatersrand may take disciplinary

action against me if there is a belief that this is not my own unaided work

or that I have failed to acknowledge the source of ideas or words in my

writing.

Signature: Date: 1 June 2023

Acknowledgements

Lest I plunge into oblivion, it had never occurred to me among my dreams, nor

my career goals that language studies, let alone translation, would become one

of my fondest disciplines in the humanities. Thanks to an opportunity granted to

me by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ&CD) to

become a Court Interpreter, this has changed. I became a student not only of the

other languages I interpreted, but of my very own – Xitsonga. I had only

appreciated the role of language in getting things done. However, its balanced

and relevant role in science, health, justice, finance, social media and any other

future frontiers remains a Borgesian labyrinth that calls for linguistic magnifying

lenses.

The night-long telephone calls and Whatsapp texts that I exchanged with Dennis

Mhlanga, my colleague and friend in language, have been priceless on all fronts.

It would be a great folly if I did not mention the ever-helpful hands of Dr Bongeka

Selepe and Eugene Mathey whenever I called for assistance at the School of

Literature, Language and Media (SLLM) and the Wits Language School (WLS),

respectively. Natasha France has my deepest gratitude for meticulously

proofreading and editing this research report. Last but not least, my supervisor,

Dr. Alice Leal, who became the ethyl for the lenses that were becoming opaque

in the twists and turns of the linguistic labyrinth. I owe to her an eternal debt of

gratitude for the Transphil research and reading group that she brought as skaftin

(lunchbox) for us when she considered Africa. I became a direct beneficiary!

Rifumo na Mixo, ndlela hi yaleyi! (Rifumo and Mixo, this is the way!)

Table of Figures

FIGURE 1: MAP OF THE PROVINCE OF INHAMBANE (NYEMBANE), MOZAMBIQUE 12

FIGURE 2: COMMONLY AVOIDED AGRARIAN TERMS 21

Table of Contents

Abstract ii

Plagiarism Declaration iii

Acknowledgements iv

Table of Figures v

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1.1. Background of the study 1

1.1.1. The role of the translator 3

1.2. Problem statements 4

1.3. Aims of the study 5

1.4. Rationale of the study 5

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 7

2.1. Introduction 7

2.2. The nexus between a people and their language 7

2.3. History of Xitsonga speech communities in South Africa, Mozambique and

Zimbabwe 9

2.4. Xitsonga speech communities in South Africa, Mozambique and Zimbabwe 15

2.5. Probable causes for the dearth of Xitsonga agrarian terminology in South Africa 16

vii

2.6. They want to be like us! What can be done? 27

2.7. Mozambiquean Xitsonga (xiChangana) 32

2.8. The geography and terminology of a speech community 35

2.9. The profits of Xitsonga's transnational character 37

2.10. Xitsonga as a quotidian language of communication of Vatsonga in South Africa,

Mozambique and Zimbabwe 38

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 39

3.1. Data Collection 40

CHAPTER 4: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 41

4.1. Agrarian terminology as a key component of early language acquisition in Xitsonga

linguistic communities 41

4.2. Linguistic hospitality 42

CHAPTER 5: TEXT ANALYSIS 44

5.1. Xitsonga online newspapers and documents and the gratuitous use of loanwords and

transliteration 44

5.2. The ethnography of Xitsonga speech communities in Mozambique and Zimbabwe

5.3. The ubiquity of traditional and agrarian Xitsonga terminology in Mozambique and

Zimbabwe 62

5.4. Language and culture 80

viii

CHAPTER 6: ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS 81

CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION 82

Bibliography 84

Annexure 1: Xitsonga agrarian terminology 97

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of the study

In the same way that a builder needs stones and bricks to do their job, a translator

needs to be familiar with a wide range of terminologies and concepts to do their

job effectively. The builder, having gained an understanding of the construction

project at hand, collects his stone from the quarry and, depending on the

composition of the soil on the site, decides whether to use sand brick or clay brick

in the construction of the building. Similarly, once the translator becomes aware

of the skopos of the translation - the purpose it intendeds to fulfil in the target

culture they can select the strategies they will employ to achieve the desired

effect on the target text.

Where does the translator get the appropriate terminology and concepts to use

in a translation project? Although it is challenging to respond satisfactorily to this

question because each linguistic community has its own distinct culture and set

of norms, it is possible that the mutually intelligible Xitsonga spoken in

Mozambique and Zimbabwe could enhance and enrich the Xitsonga spoken in

South Africa because they are mutatis mutandis. Thus the building blocks of one

Xitsonga from across the border may aid in the renovations of [an]other.

Catford (1965) proposes that translation is the substitute of textual material in one

language of origin (the Source Language, henceforth SL), by equivalent textual

material in another language (the Target Language, henceforth TL). In addition,

Nida & Taber (1982) propose that translating entails reproducing the closest

natural equivalence of the SL in the TL. The message of the source text (ST) is

thus the translator’s paramount concern, lies first in context and then in design.

Both definitions demonstrate that translation is more than simply changing an

utterance from one language into another. During the process of translating,

some considerations include ensuring that the essence, ideas, or messages are

conveyed accurately, clearly, and in a natural way.

Many studies have shown that one of the challenges of translating into African

languages is finding suitable translation equivalents for English terms. Hadebe

(2006) contends that the politics of terminology, or the lack thereof, is used as an

excuse to keep indigenous languages outside the domain of contemporary

technology, relegating them to less formal roles in society. The culture of

adapting, adopting, and translating English words into a TL results in the

excessive borrowing of English terminology, even when not strictly necessary. H.

A. Junod (1927) foresaw the erosion of a rich Bantu language (Xitsonga) when

he said:

It is to be feared that books and book languages will destroy this most
interesting way of speaking, so much used by those Natives who are
truly Bantu, and the genius of the races will certainly suffer from this
loss.

As one of the progenitors of written Xitsonga, it is worth investigating whether

Junod's premonition has proven to be accurate.

This research report intends to demonstrate that Xitsonga linguistic communities

in Mozambique and Zimbabwe have rich agrarian terminology that could prove

valuable terminology for South African Xitsonga. The study follows Whorf (1956,

cited in Boroditsky et al., 2019) who, impressed by linguistic diversity, proposed

that linguistic categories and distinctions embody a way of looking at and

engaging with the world (other civilisations). Despite the difficulty of answering

the question of whether “language shapes thought”, several studies have

presented evidence favoring the affirmative (Boroditsky et al., 2019). Sapir (1912)

corroborates this assertion, stating that the setting in which a language is spoken

has a direct bearing on the vocabulary of a particular linguistic community.

The growth of a language’s terminology and the effective use of that vocabulary

are two of the most critical factors in that language’s success. According to Lyons

(1981), the primary mode of communication utilised by distinct human groups is

the use of languages. The Xitsonga language and its associated communities are

predominantly agrarian, much like most other African tribal languages. For the

context of this research, the term “agrarian” refers to a way of life characterised

by land cultivation. This way of life involves rearing animals and cultivating crops

in a rural setting while adhering to traditional customs, and often reflects a mode

of living that is not influenced by European cultures.

In contrast to the existing state of the Xitsonga language spoken in South Africa,

there is an expectation that the Xitsonga language would have an immense

lexicon of agrarian origin, following Lyons’s position. The utilisation of South

African Xitsonga agrarian terminology has significantly decreased in day-to-day

Xitsonga oral interactions, possibly leading to its eventual evaporation from

current literature.

1.1.1. The role of the translator

According to Martínez & Benítez (2009), translators must perform descriptive

terminological work to produce a text that is understandable for the target

audience because they play the role of language mediators in interlinguistic

communication.

Gambier & Gottlieb (2001) see a translator not only as a mediator of languages,

but of cultures too. In their view, a translator is a seasoned professional in the

field of intercultural communication who translates between two languages.

Translators act as cultural mediators, and the completed text is a semiotic cultural

product. Translators are familiar with mediation methods that would be most

successfully fitted to the sociocultural settings of both the SL and the TL. The

culture of each language used in a translation will have a role in determining how

the meanings are created and how they are interpreted. The translator bridges

the gap between the languages to arrive at a satisfactory product. This action is

accomplished by manipulating the implicit and explicit links between the

languages. Hermans (1996) emphasises that translators need to consider the

social norms and practices, national and/or corporate identities, and relationships

within the social and political structures of each culture, all of which have the

potential to impact a translation in some way or another. Thus the distinction

between the cultures associated with English and Xitsonga respectively cannot

be cast aside when studying their linguistic differences.

1.2. Problem statements

The following is a summary of the issues that prompted this line of research:

• Most specialised topic areas lack terminology when translated from

English to Xitsonga, which results in extensive transliteration, borrowing,

and adoption – even in situations where this is avoidable. However,

borrowing is sometimes unavoidable in interlingual translations because it

closes the linguistic gaps where a source language has an unknown

concept in the target language (that is, the target language does not have

a lexical equivalent).

• In his book Vutlhari bya Vatsonga (which translates to Wisdom of the

Vatsonga), Henri Philippe Junod describes Xitsonga as a language

“broken by the unfortunate incidents of history”. Xitsonga linguistic

communities were partitioned into four Southern African countries:

Zimbabwe, Mozambique, South Africa and Swaziland (Lee & Burheni,

2014), making the language nearly a minority language in all four nation

states which had different language policies.

• Xitsonga was divided between anglophone and lusophone imperial

regimes, which further contributed to linguistic and cultural disintegration.

The language lost touch with the vast fund of agrarian terminology that

could help fill the gaps in interlingual translations as well as in general use,

thus reducing the “necessity” for borrowing.

1.3. Aims of the study

This study intends to demonstrate that, despite the national boundaries where

the Xitsonga language is domiciled, it can still be considered to be a single

linguistic community that shares a massive corpus of agrarian1 terms that

respects neither fence nor national boundary. It also endeavours to expand

African Xitsonga terminology by importing from agrarian pursuits of the Xitsonga

linguistic communities still ubiquitous in Mozambique and Zimbabwe.

1.4. Rationale of the study

This research is about more than the issues of the orthography of the Xitsonga

language in South Africa, Mozambique and Zimbabwe. It is not an analysis of the

pros and cons of the Xitsonga language, nor whether missionaries and the first

crop of Xitsonga black scholars were heroes or monsters in their pioneering work

of language writing. It is not an assessment of the rights or wrongs of what the

Xitsonga language has become in all the countries where it is domiciled. It is not

a judgement of the justifications or condemnations of that process. It is also not

1 For the sake of this study, the term “agrarian” refers to the cultivation of land and all associated
activities taking place in a rural environment where it still follows its traditional cultural norms.

about its successes or failures. All these are essential and worthy issues for

discussion. However, the remit of this research is limited to the terminological

realities of the Xitsonga language and its implications for present and future South

African generations: what is the current state of this language, how did it become

so, and what does it mean for Xitsonga speakers and translators?

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Introduction

Against Benjamin’s utopia of a “pure language”, this research report “has nothing

to say but to show” how Xitsonga agrarian terminology and concepts have all but

vanished from regular day-to-day communication in South Africa and other

urbanised Xitsonga speech communities. As (innately) agrarian societies,

Xitsonga speech communities are expected to have a decent command of

agricultural concepts and terms, or to at least fully comprehend them. Sapir's

(1968) attestation posits that language is a guide to social reality and that human

beings are at the mercy of the language that has become the medium of

expression for their society. Against this backdrop, the Xitsonga speech

communities in South Africa have undergone a change that both challenges and

validates Sapir's conclusions. The fact that Xitsonga as a language does not

convey the agrarian nature of the Vatsonga culture is a point of contention. Still,

the fact that it reflects the new “social reality” – that of being situated in colonised

regions – is a point of affirmation. As Pennycook (2015) further ratifies that

language is indeed dynamic.

2.2. The nexus between a people and their language

According to Menkiti (1984), the African concept of man denies that humans may

be described by this or that physical or psychological attribute of the lone

individual. Instead, a person’s surroundings serve as a lens through which one

may view them. Against the French philosopher Rene Descartes’s “I think,

therefore I exist” (cogito, ergo sum), the Kenya-born philosopher Mbiti (1975)

writes, “I am because we are, and since we are, therefore I am”, summing up the

African perspective on the individual. Not only does an individual's biological set

allow for identification via a shared gene pool, but so does the language they

speak, which plays no small role in shaping their mental dispositions and attitudes

(Menkiti,1984).

It is thus observable from these African philosophical guiles that a person’s sense

of worth can never be outside the pillars of their societal framework. Language,

the primary tool of expression and communication, embodies the tenets those

societies chiefly value. For instance, repeatedly telling a child, “munhu i munhu

hi van'wana vanhu” (“a person is considered a person by how they relate with

other persons”) is a life-long assignment of civility and courtesy. The child’s way

of using language is likely to reflect a great deal of politeness stemming from this

philosophy.

Mbhanyele Jameson Maluleke (2017) upholds that “humans are social creatures

and historical actors who have an identity”. In this sense, identity symbolises a

people's particular qualities – including its singularity – which remain constant

and survives in their quotidian speech. On the other hand, Kembo-Sure & Webb

(2002) describe language as an identity marker in South Africa.

According to Mbiti's (1975) claims, African cultures place a high value on

language and believe that it governs and connects people who have lived lives

that span the past, present, and future, thus forming a commonwealth. Therefore,

this research seeks to explore the commonwealth fund of terminology of agrarian

descent in the Xitsonga speech communities in Zimbabwe and Mozambique to

enhance the South African Xitsonga terminology.

In General Manifestations of African Religiosity (2001), Mbiti raises the question

of what migrating people took with them as they moved from their places of origin

in eastern Africa at the dawn of evolution. This question suggests a connection

between a people's ancestry and an aspect of their lives that follows them

wherever they go – language.

In terms of numeracy and mathematics, H. A. Junod (1913) found that Vatsonga

people count on their hands beginning with the little finger of the left hand and

progressing to the opposite hand, beginning with the thumb. The number five is

represented by the left hand, with the thumb split from the other four fingers,

forming the Roman symbol of a V. Both hands represent the Roman numeral ten

joined together, fingers crossed, creating an X. Junod responded to this

observation by saying, “This shows that our numeration, of which we are justly

proud, probably began in the same way as it did amongst most of the Bantu!” If

European numeracy has connections to the Vatsonga (Bantu) of southern Africa,

what more can these tribes – speech communities – learn from each other having

one common fund of linguistic antiquity?

2.3. History of Xitsonga speech communities in South Africa,
Mozambique and Zimbabwe

Xitsonga is a Southern Bantu language in South Africa, Swaziland, Mozambique,

and Zimbabwe. The Vatsonga (Xitsonga-speaking people) is a multi-state African

ethnic group composed of many distinct clans. This spread has its roota in

colonial history, beginning with the European powers' establishment of African

nation states (Dyrness, 1990). The Vatsonga people now live in South Africa,

Mozambique, Zimbabwe, and Swaziland, although they lived in various countries

across the continent before the continent's partitioning. The geographic and

cultural homeland where Vatsonga resides is called Vutsonga. The native

language of the Vatsonga people, Xitsonga, is spoken in all four of these nations.

There are around 2 million native Xitsonga speakers in South Africa, or 4.4% of

the total population (Census, 2001). 60% of Xitsonga speakers are found in the

traditional Vutsonga of Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provinces – which previously

belonged to the Gazankulu Bantustan – while the remaining 25% call the

Gauteng metropolitan areas home (Van der Merwe & Van der Merwe, 2006). This

minor shift towards the south demonstrates how urban centres significantly

impact regional migration patterns.

According to records taken by Portuguese explorers, by the middle of the 17th

century, well established Vatsonga chiefdoms existed in the regions surrounding

Delagoa Bay in Mozambique. These chiefdoms extended southwards and inland

from the sea, encompassing a large portion of the surrounding landscape (Bill

1984). Bill & Masunga (1983) documented in Mbita Ya Vutivi that Xitsonga is one

of the languages that make up the Tsonga group of languages spoken in the

southeastern Bantu zone. This information was gathered as part of their

assignment to write the centenary bibliography of Xitsonga written literature.

Xitsonga differs from the Sotho group (Setswana, Sepedi, and Sesotho), the

Nguni group (IsiZulu, IsiXhosa, IsiNdebele, and IsiSwati), and Tshivenda in terms

of phonetics, lexicon, and syntactic constructions.

Mozambique, southeastern Zimbabwe, and the provinces of Limpopo,

Mpumalanga, Gauteng, North West, and northern KwaZulu Natal in South Africa

are all home to distinct Xitsonga varieties. What we have come to know as

Xitsonga is a collection of several dialects, including but not limited to the

following: Xihlengwe, Xinkuna, Xihlave, Xiluleke or Xin’wanati, Xibila, Xikomati,

Xichangana, Xidzonga, Xin’walungu, Xirhonga, Xicopi/Xilenge, Xitshwa,

Xindzawu, Xirhonga, Xihlanganu, Xigwamba, Gitonga, and Ximbayi.

Before South African Xitsonga standardisation, one would have considered these

dialects full-scale languages from which writing rules could be determined and

adopted. Txitxopi (Xichopi), Xirhonga, and Xichangana have different

orthographies (Bible Society of Mozambique 2007). Although Sitoe (2006, cited

in Madlome, 2020) shows that the umbrella language is Tsonga, whose primary

variant forms are Xirhonga, Xitshwa and Xichangana.

South African Xitsonga seems to have – wittingly or unwittingly – adopted the

motto suggested in 1776 by Pierre Eugene du Simitiere to the committee

responsible for developing the Great Seal of the United States of America, E

Pluribus Unum. Loosely, this means, “Out of many, we are one”. It united and

welded all (or most) of the Xitsonga dialects into what is now commonly referred

to as South African Xitsonga. Although H. A. Junod (1927) vehemently contended

that the Hlengwe were an influential group of Tsonga-Thonga dialects, he also

identified the Hlengwe as a distinct group with distinctive traits.

Bill (1983) reveals that language classifications by H. A. Junod (1927), Cole

(1959), and Guthrie (1962) all concur on the exclusion of Tonga (Gitonga) spoken

around Inhambane (Nyembane), Mozambique) from Xitsonga. Despite these

scholars having contributed immensely to the development of Xitsonga, they

have missed some crucial aspects related to Tonga’s exclusion from Xitsonga. It

fell in their blindspot that Gitonga is in fact the Xitsonga proto-language.

The reasons attributable to this folly could be as follows: Firstly, European

languages do not use prefixes when referring to languages and what they call

Tonga or Thonga in Nyembane, Mozambique, which is in fact Gitonga

(sometimes called Bitonga). Missionaries, H. A. Junod in particular, refer to

Gitonga (as shown in Figure 1 below) as Thonga. In the same way, Europeans

often call Xitsonga “Tsonga, IsiZulu, “Zulu”, and Setswana, “Tswana”. Secondly,

Junod was a Swiss missionary and the Swiss were most predominantly present

in the Northern Transvaal (now Limpopo and Mpumalanga provinces) and

southern Mozambique between the Limpopo and Nkomati rivers. The Methodists

were more dominant in the present-day Nyembane province in Mozambique,

extending westwards to southeastern Zimbabwe. Methodist missionaries in

Nyembane hardly made a reference about Thonga. Instead, they wrote and

published bibles and hymn books in Xitshwa (a Xihlengwe variant) for their

congregations in Nyembane, western Mozambique and southeastern Zimbabwe.

Figure 1: Map of the province of Inhambane (Nyembane), Mozambique

However, Junod argues that the Zulu or Nguni conquerors who enslaved most

Thonga tribes between 1815 and 1830 gave them the generic name of Thonga.

Junod said that the name Thonga comes from a Rhonga phrase that meant

“orient” (vuronga) and was famous in Lourenco Marques (Maputo) clans. For

example, in Rhonga, ku rhandza (to love) becomes thanda in Zulu, and nharhu

(three) becomes thathu in Zulu. Thonga may have been a Zulu moniker, almost

comparable to the word slave. The Thongas of southern Mozambique's northern

clans, particularly those of the Bileni and Djonga (Dzonga) groups, preferred

Tjongas (Tsonga) and Hlengwe. Tsonga, on the other hand, became more

popular than Thonga over time.

The Junodan “Tonga” could also be confused with the Tonga language of

Polynesian kingdoms of the South Pacific islands (although no such mistakes

have been recorded yet) and the Bantu Tonga of Southern Zambia and northern

Zimbabwe (Zambezi plateau). Thirdly, Gitonga of Nyembane is, according to oral

history, the proto-language of present-day Xitsonga and all its dialects. Gitonga

of Nyembane is the most ancient version of Xitsonga. For example, if Gitonga

were Latin, Xitsonga would be Spanish. Xichopi, Xindzawu, and Gitonga

speakers claim that when they hear Xitsonga speakers speak, it is akin to hearing

their children speak at the formative phases of their speech acquisition. Besides,

Xitsonga, Xindzawu, Xichopi have a vast inventory of shared terminology.

On the other hand, Henri Philippe Junod, son of Henri Alexandre Junod and a

Swiss Ramaine Mission missionary, wrote extensively about the Xitsonga in

South Africa and Mozambique. Like his father, he contended that the name given

to the Thonga (Tsonga) tribe was ancient and should be spelt VaThonga, which

was the orthography used by his father in his monography on the Thonga

(Tsonga) people.

One of H. P. Junod's distinguished inaccuracies about Vatsonga and Xitsonga as

a wider and transnational language is in the book Matimu ya Vatsonga (1977)

when he discusses the Vahlengwe people of the Ulundi River. He confused the

Ulundi (Mahlabathini) in the Zululand District municipality, KwaZulu Natal

province – the former Zulu kingdom's capital in South Africa – with the Runde

River (previously Lundi River) in southeastern Zimbabwe. The Methodist

missionaries would not have committed such a folly because one of their well

known mission schools is built on the banks of the Runde River, ironically named

after it – the Lundi mission. The Free Methodist Church's Lundi Mission was

founded in 1939 by Reverend Ralph and Ethel Jacobs, is located near Masvingo

(formerly Fort Victoria) in the Mwenezi (formerly Nuanetsi) district of southeastern

Zimbabwe.

Danielson (2015) presents a possible explanation for this error by revealing a

letter written by Reverend Tillman Houser in 1955 detailing some of his daily life

in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe). After spending two years at the Lundi Mission

learning the language and culture, Houser and his wife Gwen moved on to work

with the Hlengwe (Vatsonga of the Xihlengwe dialect) at the Dumisa Mission in

1951 under Chief Sengwe. In the letter, Houser wrote:

In South Africa missions have been prevalent since the 1800s. Our
particular area seemed to be overlooked because it is in the low veldt,
meaning generally unhealthful for human occupation, because of
malaria and other diseases. Also the usual heat ranges from 90° to
105° everyday for about seven to eight months a year. Then, too, it
gets very dry here, some years only 5 to 10 inches of rainfall.

Houser describes the likely cause of missionaries' neglect of the Vahlengwe

region in the lowveld of modern-day Zimbabwe and western Mozambique.

Houser's concerns could, among other factors, be responsible for the errors and

stark language barrier that are observable when investigating the Xitsonga

speech communities in Zimbabwe, Mozambique and South Africa

ethnographically.

On the other hand, H. P. Junod (1977) displays humility about his knowledge

when he says, “Vutsonga i byikulu, byi entile, byi anamile. A byi tiviwi hi

lavanyingi, a byi tiviwi hi munhu un'we”. Which means that Xitsonga is broad,

comprehensive, and deep; no individual can claim absolute knowledge of it all.

2.4. Xitsonga speech communities in South Africa, Mozambique
and Zimbabwe

Of course, human memory fades, becomes blurred, and then forgotten (Wa

Thiong'o, 1992), hence these events from the past must be recorded before the

significant loss of forgetfulness. Chauke (2009), citing Hammond-Tooke (1974)

in his book, The Bantu Speaking Peoples of Southern Africa, held that “about the

history of the Tsonga-Hlengwe little has been recorded and perhaps there has

been little to remember”. The reality is not that there was not much to recall, but

rather that very few people, if any, had attempted to write about the history of the

Vatsonga (also called Shangaan-Hlengwe) people who lived in Zimbabwe and

western Mozambique – let alone their terminologies.

As an established traditional agrarian economy, the Vahlengwe of Zimbabwe and

Mozambique possessed (and still do possess) exquisite terminology of agrarian

pedigree. An inventory of terminology in these Xitsonga speech communities

would still likely be understandable in South African Xitsonga, as these languages

function mutatis mutandis.

H. A. Junod acknowledged in his book, The Life of a South African Tribe (1927),

that Vatsonga possessed excellent minds and thought they were worthy of the

utmost respect. He discovered thousands of words that developed intuitively to

convey the impression generated on the brain by any experience, demonstrating

the language’s remarkable capacity for description. His emphasis reads:

The Bantu mind vibrates with an astonishing intensity at any shock
from outside, and it finds a way of expressing interest and color to
speech. Bantus are far superior to us in this respect, which is why few
Europeans can really learn and properly use these descriptive adverbs
(without mentioning those who look upon them with contempt). And this
is one of the signs that I am not ashamed of the literary sense of the
Bantu mind.

However, H. A. Junod was not cordial in his descriptions of the Bantu people he

met throughout his missionary travels. Despite Junod speaking in high regard

about Vatsonga's communication prowess, the rhetorical question about the

constitution of their self-reliance and pride needs to be clarified. The above

quotation captures a singular insight in which he had to be modest and

acknowledge that the Bantu’s (Vatsonga) mind was significantly more

linguistically sophisticated than that of Europeans. One notable feature about

Junod in The Life of a South African Tribe is his lack of diplomatic language to

lessen the severity of his critique of Vatsonga, whom he called Thongas. In one

instance, he stated the following about the Bantu (Vatsonga):

The “civilized” attain the height of bliss when they are able to procure
an irreproachable suit of clothes, and it is a sight to behold these young
men returning direct from Johannesburg, dressed in the latest style,
with a white starched shirt, a silk cummerbund, and trousers to match.
They think themselves handsome! We do not share their illusion! How
often have we longed to see them adopt some costume that would tone
their colour, their customs, their occupations, their climate! They want
to be like us! What can be done?

Although his purpose for being in Africa was to “civilise”, it is abundantly clear

that Junod had no respect for the people that he encountered in Africa – “civilised”

or not. However, he did appreciate the Vatsonga for their distinctive use of

language to describe various circumstances. It is thus compelling to investigate

the topic using such terms that enthralled Junod.

2.5. Probable causes for the dearth of Xitsonga agrarian
terminology in South Africa

Bill (1984) indicates that from 1830 onwards, the Xitsonga way of life changed

through the combined influences of Christianity, foreign western culture patterns,

and the townward drift of men and, later, women in search of work.

Wa Thiong'o (1992) reasoned that the belief was that English, together with

French and Portuguese, would serve as the language of literary and perhaps

even political mediation between Africans living in the same country and between

Africans living in different countries on other continents. In some instances, there

was a belief that European languages had the potential to unite African people

against the dividing effects of the variety of African languages spoken within

single African states. By the same token, Xitsonga speakers living with Swiss and

Methodist missionaries used the common lingua franca of their nation states –

English in South Africa and Zimbabwe, and Portuguese in Mozambique.

Bill (1984) credits the famous Swiss protestant pastor H. A. Junod as an early

proponent of Xitsonga oral studies. She claims that Xitsonga's oral history

research began with him since the Portuguese administration – which had been

present in the area of the eastern African coast (Mozambique) since the 16th

century – was preoccupied with other matters. Similar to Bill's claim, Brock-Utne

(2017) posits that European and American Christian missionaries were

responsible for the first codification and printing of most African languages used

today. Although missionary efforts were crucial in creating the framework for the

literary interpretation of African languages, their primary purpose was not to teach

the African people how to engage with their languages in written form.

Nonetheless, early Christian missionaries focused on learning African languages

to more effectively spread the gospel (Brock-Utne, 2017).

The quasi-promotion of Xitsonga (and other African languages) as mediums of

the evangeliscal project not only hampered its development, but also reduced the

use of concepts and terminologies deemed sinful by the missionary network,

which happened to be the social elite of the day. A colony's population was

forcibly turned away from its traditional belief systems and inculturated towards

the Christian faith, starting with chiefs and other community leaders.

Kgosi (Chief) Sechele of the Bakwena tribe in the present-day Botswana is a

unique case study of the severity of suppression of a lifestyle that was considered

pagan by David Livingstone to his converts. The Tswana tribes, like many other

African tribes, had rainmakers whose mission was to utilise magic to bring rain.

Livingstone, like other missionaries, fiercely opposed rainmaking on religious

grounds. Kgosi Sechele happened to be his tribe's rainmaker as well as its chief,

and Livingstone's stay coincided with one of the most destructive droughts ever

recorded. Therefore, Sechele's decision to quit rainmaking was unsurprisingly

unpopular among his people (Tomkins, 2013).

The other difficulty in Kgosi Sechele’s case was polygamy. He had five wives,

and Livingstone urged him to divorce the “superfluous” ones in order to become

a Christian. The nightmare was both personal and political, endangering the

tribe's own political system as well as its relationships with other tribes.

Sechele, however, divorced four of the women in 1848 and underwent his

baptism. The following year, Sechele got one of his ex-wives pregnant, and he

strayed. He repented and implored Livingstone: “Please do not give me up

because of this. I shall never give up, Jesus. You and I shall stand before him

together” (Tomkins, 2013).

The staggering arrogance of Livingstone to order and beseech a political principal

of a nation to which he was but a guest is shocking. A nation faced an extreme

famine, and although the remedial action lay with Kgosi Sechele to perform

rainmaking rituals, he chose to endure the drought that took the lives of livestock

and human beings because Livingstone was policing his activities. On the order

of the dissolution of his marriages to the four wives, it is possible that as a royal,

Sechele might have been married into neighbouring royal families. His

compliance with the missionaries’ standards might have caused an irreparable

dent in his reign within his own nation as well as that of his in-laws. If such

directives could apply to the Chief of a nation who may have been the equivalent

of a king, what could have been the weight of such an order to an ordinary man?

From this case study alone, it is clear that European influence was all but

inescapable in these colonial times. If even a king of a nation was susceptible to

the power of a coloniser – so much so that he abandoned his way of life, forsaking

the needs of his people – what chance did linguistic heritage stand at resisting

this force?

Chidester (1996) notes a widespread assumption among early missionaries,

explorers, and colonial administrators that indigenous people had no religion.

Such an assumption encompassed an effort to repress any outward

manifestations of spirituality or rituals that had nothing to do with the purview of

the Christian faith. In these circumstances, stigmatisation and profiling of those

who defied the clergy was an ostensible likelihood. One can imagine how the

persistent presence of missionaries among Vatsonga might have resulted in the

dearth of terminology and concepts related to African religion and other forbidden

agrarian pursuits.

Similar to Love's (1983) observation regarding the Maori language in New

Zealand, Xitsonga, as an indigenous language, has been subjected to forces that

have challenged its maintenance. Thus, despite recent efforts to make the

language official and promote linguistic diversity, terminology loss is almost

certain to occur. Multilingualism, diglossia, domain separation, and fusion are all

factors in the erasure of Xitsonga terminology.

Because of factors such as the number of people who speak each language, the

status of each language, and interactions between distinct cultures, there will

invariably be a shift in used terminology when two or more cultures come into

contact with one another.

Both Henri Alexandre Junod and his son, Henri Philippe Junod, undoubtedly

played a vital role in the intellectualisation of South African Xitsonga, from which

new generations of scholars drew inspiration. However, de Souza (2003) asserts

that to intellectualise language means to reduce it to writing, thus standardising

and disconnecting the language from the community's oral tradition. In the

Xitsonga linguistic communities in Zimbabwe and Mozambique, this process only

began in 2013 with the 2013 Zimbabwean constitution (Sithole, 2017) and in 2017

in Mozambique through the Food for Knowledge (FFK) project funded by US aid

and the local action group ADPP Mozambique (Fritzboger, 2018). Despite

Christian interference in these countries, Xitsonga still has a high command of

agrarian terminology, as shown in Annexure 1.

With Junod as a pioneer of written Xitsonga (Bill, 1996) and other black elite

scholars that later joined him up the ladder, a top-down linguistic posture of

Xitsonga development was created. However, this top-down linguistic posture

places the responsibility of language development in the hands of the elite, who

have largely lost touch with the masses whose everyday terminology is

incumbent. Further, the black elite with the fountain pen captains the language in

the direction that appeases the masters – European powers – and in a way that

ensures their proximity to these powers. Thus, loan words began to take

preference over what these black scholars considered too foreign for the masters,

therefore eroding and obscuring the rich terminology of the Xitsonga linguistic

communities.

It is also ineluctible that Junod, as an evangelical pioneer of written Xitsonga, may

have censored other terminology related to agrarian (traditional) religious beliefs

that he deemed pagan. This viewpoint is supported by Magorian (1964, cited in

Nkomazana & Setume, 2016), who asserts that the missionaries’ goal was for the

Africans to abandon their religions and cultures and adopt the western religion

and culture that they ported with the goal of furthering the colonial project. The

missionaries’ goal was to produce a new generation of Africans with the capacity

to abandon their previous way of life.

Missionaries from the London Missionary Society (LMS) imposed a similar

requirement on Africans, requiring them to entirely give up their agrarian

(traditional) cultures to become Christians. They viewed African religions as

demonic and worked ceaselessly to eliminate them. Moffat (1842, cited in

Nkomazana & Setume, 2016) held that the missionaries associated non-western

civilisations with degradation, barbarism, ignorance, and evil. As a result,

Christianity is at the centre of South African Xitsonga linguistic culture, leaving a

significant gap in the terminology that falls outside the bounds of Christian

interests.

For instance, during the ethnographic engagements of this research, it was

identified that a substantial proportion of adult Xitsonga-speaking men of

Christian background was reluctant to use the following terms:

Figure 2: Commonly avoided Agrarian terms

English
Avoided

Agrarian term
Preferred

term
Remarks

Church Ndhumbha Kereke

A hut in which rituals are performed.

Kereke is borrowed from Afrikaans

kerk.

Pray Gandzela Khongela Gandzela is associated with soliciting

the intervention of the

gods/ancestors.

Nun Nyankwave
Wansati wa

swikwembu.

An unmarried woman who is offered

to the gods/spirits as a token of

appeasement.

Eucharist Mphahlo Xikhongelo Ceremony to perform communion for

the gods/God.

Offering Magandzelo Munyikelo Giving unto the gods/God for

supplication.

Surrogate

mother

Mufukati Sarogeti Transliteration is preferred over the

original Xitsonga term.

Sperm

donor

Mumbewu Xipemudona Transliteration is preferred over the

original Xitsonga term.

Tombstone

unveiling

Sosonola Ku koka

nhlapfu

While ku koka nhlapfu also applies,

kusosonola is very common in the

Zimbabwean Xitsonga agrarian

communities.

Altar Gandzelo

Xiluvelo

Alitari Gandzelo seems to be avoided as it

is assumed to be directly linked to

practices relating to the spirits and

gods. Transliteration is preferred over

the original Xitsonga term.

Memorial Marilo Memoriyali A ceremony to remember the

deceased’s life and work, usually

after a year of burial. Transliteration is

preferred over the original Xitsonga

term.

Percussion Ncomani Xigubu Ncomani is used by people at

traditional ceremonies. The fact that

xigubu has phonetic features that

replicate percussive sounds may be

the reason that it is more common

than ncomani.

Coloured Mujiti Khaladi Mujiti is the offspring of a person of

Asiatic descent and a black African. It

owes its name to a reddish/brownish

garment used by the ancestral spirits

called njeti. Transliteration of the

colonial classification of this group is

preferred over the original Xitsonga

term.

Sister Tati Sesi Sesi is a borrowed term from English.

Butter Rimbyindla Botoro Botoro is borrowed from English.

Cotton clay

Alluvial soil

Tshovolo Xilogo Xilogo is a bastardisation of “slog”,

which means to work hard over a

period of time. How the verb “slog”

became a representative of a

Xitsonga noun “xilogo” is still a

wonder.

Yoghurt Hongwa Yogati Transliteration is preferred over the

original Xitsonga term.

Milk Ntswamba Meleke Transliteration is preferred over the

original Xitsonga term.”

Court Huvo Khoto Justice has always been a deep

seated fabric of Vatsonga before the

advent of the Roman-Dutch courts.

Offenses were dealt with at the

tribunals called huvo in Vatsonga

communities. However, a

transliterated word is used more

commonly used than the original

despite its rich history.

Cream Rivomba Khirimu Transliteration is preferred over the

original Xitsonga term.

System Endlelo Sisiteme Transliteration is preferred over the

original Xitsonga term.

Cheese Riveya Chizi Transliteration is preferred than the

real Xitsonga term.

Skills Vungayila Swikili Skills have been vast among

Vatsonga even before contact with

the Europeans. Swikili therefore does

not represent an ideal position of

Vatsonga having inveterate skills

which even the Europeans

themselves have substantiated.

Modern Ximanguvalawa Ximodeni Transliteration is preferred over the

original Xitsonga term. It would be

unjust to accept the implication that

modernity is a purely Western

concept.

New year Lembe ritshwa Novinjara A year is a median point of which

Vatsonga have a clear

understanding. The use of a

transliterated Afrikaans term nuwe

jaar appears inattentive to this fact.

Withdraw

(of money

from the

ATM)

Ku juluja (Verb)

from a noun

julu which

means “termite”

Ku humesa

mali/ku

withdirowa

Vatsonga eat termites of the drywood

variety (red or brown bodies). To

catch the termites from the anthill,

they would use a palm leaf or a string

from a tree to insert in the hole for a

while. After a short period, termites

would bite on the string/palm leaf.

Then termites would be pulled out of

the anthill into a container. The

process of pulling out the termites is

akin to a cash withdrawal from an

bank ATM.

Missionaries were the first to reduce African languages into written form when

they produced bilingual dictionaries that combined African languages with more

hegemonic European languages like English. These dictionaries supported early

missionaries' learning of African languages for evangelisation (Gouws, 2007;

Nkomo, 2018). According to Khumalo & Nkomo (2018), this tactic lies at the heart

of the issues in South African Xitsonga dictionaries. The specialised

terminological and conceptual data in Xitsonga are scarce in these volumes. This

is concerning because few Xitsonga dictionaries are available in monolingual

varieties in order to strengthen the standing of African Xitsonga in translation

studies and other linguistic pursuits.

The lack of use and availability of Xitsonga terminology related to agrarian origins

supports the centrifugal principle of Gile's gravitational model of linguistic

availability, which states that words (terminology) tend to drift outwards and away

from the centre of the system (working memory) if they are not stimulated (Gile,

2018). When particular terms are out of use in day-to-day communication and

written work, there is a chance that individuals will become less familiar with the

words and even lose the ability to recall them. This issue is intensified with each

generation that departs without those left behind having used the words that were

once part of everyday life.

Hall (2014) demonstrates that it is impossible to overstate the magnitude of the

change brought about by the South African parliament's passage of the Native

Land Act in 1913. The Act constituted the foundation for a dualistic agrarian

structure –land and livestock dispossession in the countryside and development

of commercial farming in designated farmlands. The Land Act left native

communities in the urbanisation of the population, without their means of

subsistence, and with a significant chunk of the wealth that was made possible

with mass evictions. These communities became storehouses for cheap

migratory labour for factories, farms, and mines with the advent of urban life (Hall,

2014).

It is plausible that the radical change in lifestyle brought on by urbanisation also

influenced a linguistic shift. Wa Thiong’o (1992) would call it “one memory burying

another”, because “we are the products of what we can remember”. In these new

settings – towns and cities – people wanted to fit in and thus became victims of

a “cultural bomb”:

The effect of a cultural bomb is to annihilate a people's belief in their
names, in their languages, in their environment, in their heritage of
struggle, in their unity, in their capacities and ultimately in themselves.
It makes them see their past as one wasteland of non-achievement
and it makes them want to distance themselves from that wasteland. It
makes them want to identify with that which is furthest removed from
themselves; for instance, with other peoples' languages rather than
their own. It makes them identify with that which is decadent and
reactionary, all those forces which would stop their own springs of life.

Despite their differences in ages, Wa Thiong’o and Junod made nearly identical

predictions, with Junod (1927) famously declaring:

How often have we longed to see them adopt some costume that would
tone their colour, their customs, their occupations, their climate! They
want to be like us! What can be done?

This quote would come back in many iterations. In 1964, Chinua Achebe, in a

speech entitled “The African Writer and the English Language”, said:

Is it right that a man should abandon his mother tongue for someone
else's? It looks like a dreadful betrayal and produces a guilty feeling.
But for me there is no other choice. I have been given the language
and I intend to use it.

Wa Thiong’o (ibid) argues that the paradox is that the possibility of using mother

tongues produces levity in phrases like “a dreadful betrayal” and “a guilty feeling”,

whereas the possibility of using foreign languages produces a categorical, joyous

embrace, which Achebe himself would describe ten years later, cited by Lynn

(2017) as the “fatalistic logic of the unassailable position of English in our

literature”.

2.6. They want to be like us! What can be done?

The text below is taken from the Republic of South Africa's Department of Basic

Education's 2021 Xitsonga Paper 2 National Senior Certificate Exams.

Source Text 1: South African Xitsonga

MA'AM JOYCE: Yimani ku ndzi byela swo tala mi ndzi dyondzisa hi swa

vuthicara leswi mi nga swi tiviki.

MZAMANI: Ku va thicara a swi vuli leswaku u fanele u nghena tindhawu

hinkwato. U hoxa na tintiho laha swi nga fanelangiki, hikuva u thicara? Wa

hloniphiwa no chaviwa hinkwako lomu u nghenaka kona?

MA'AM JOYCE: Se ndzi nghenisa tintiho eka vana loko ndzi ya vutisa hi ta

mapapila ya mina ya phenxeni? Piet i mabalani laha a tirhaka kona, wa swi tiva

swa tiphenxeni. Vukosi i thicara, wa swi tiva na yena. Kutani ho burisana na

Vukosi hi swa vuthicara, ku hava mhaka yo nghenisa tintiho.

MZAMANI: Kambe i swa yini leswo u tshika mitirho ya wena laha kaya? Loko

u nga yangi eka vana a wu nga ta hlaya mali ya siku na ku vona loko xitoko xi

ri kona laha spaza shop? A hi ku hoxa tintiho eka ntirho wa mina sweswo?

Xana eka mapapila wolawo a va ku hoxelangi cheke ya swin'wana swa

phenxeni?

MA'AM JOYCE: Sweswo i swa nkarhi wun'wana, ndzi ta mi byela nkarhi

wun'wana.

MZAMANI: A swi twali leswi u swi vulaka. Nkarhi wun'wana u hlamusela no

bula na mina hi ta muholo wa wena, kambe sweswi a swi twisiseki. Va na

erivaleni man! Ku vile na malinyana leyi va nga yi nghenisa eka mapapila

lamambirhi xana?

Target Text 1: English Translation

MAAM JOYCE: Stop telling me many things. You know nothing about teaching.

MZAMANI: Being a teacher does not mean having automatic access to every

place. You are poking your nose unnecessarily; is this because you are a

teacher? Are you respected and honored in all the places you get into?

MAAM JOYCE: Am I poking my nose in children if I enquire about my pension

papers? Piet is a clerk at his workplace, he has information about pension

issues. Vukosi is a teacher; she also knows. Thus, we are just discussing the

teaching career, there is nothing about poking my nose.

MZAMANI: But what good is all that if you're ignoring your housework?

Shouldn't you have counted the money and checked if there is enough stock in

the tuck shop if you hadn't visited the children? Isn't that interfering with my

work? Didn't they write you a cheque from the proceeds of your pension in

those documents?

MAAM JOYCE: That is for another time, I will update you some other time.

MZAMANI: That doesn't make any sense. You occasionally tell me about your

salary, but it's currently absurd. Just be honest! Is there any payments made

as a result of these two documents?

The following is a list of words from the above text that have been borrowed and

transliterated from English, Afrikaans, and IsiZulu:

Text 1’s transliterated words and their comparable Xitsonga terms

Borrowed/transliterated word Xitsonga comparable terms

1. Ma’am : Manana/Mhaki/Mhani

While “ma’am” is a short form of Madam in English, the polite form of address for

a woman in Xitsonga is Mnn, a shortened form of Manana. Although “ma’am” is

specially linked to teaching in the African language context, Manana is an ideal

term to use in this respect as it accords respect to women in general as well as

in formal settings.

2. Vuthicara : Vudyondzisi/Vugondzisi(Tshwa)/Vudzaberi

Vuthicara is a transliteration from the English noun “teacher” (tichara), which

means mudyondzisi in Xitsonga. While it has became common among Xitsonga

speakers in South Africa to use tichara in lieu of mudyondzisi, the latter is an ideal

term if transliteration is avoided.

3. Thicara (teacher) : Mudyondzisi/Mudzabi/Makombandlela

The transliterated version for a teacher is tichara, but the original Xitsonga term

is mudyondzisi.

4. Mapapila (paper) : Matsalwa

Mapapila is the plural form of papila, a transliteration of the Afrikaans term papier

which would be tsalwa in Xitsonga. In Afrikaans, the term could denote just a

piece of paper with no text written on it, while the Xitsonga version, papila, carries

a concomitant sense of something written on the paper. Therefore an ideal term

here would be tsalwa rather than papila, since tsalwa means “something written”,

usually on a paper. It is also worth mentioning that, although matsalwa has been

largely associated with scared scriptures, it would be correct in such a context.

5. Mabalani (clerk) : Matsalani

Mabalani is an IsiZulu term from ukubhala which means “to write” and ku tsala

which prompts an expectation of a matsalani (one who writes or performs clerical

tasks) in Xitsonga.

6. Phenxeni (pension) : Mudende

Phenxeni is a transliteration of “pension”, and Xitsonga would accept and

embrace mudende despite its association with many other types of grants, such

as child support and other welfare grants.

7. Tiphenxeni (pensions) : Midende

The plural form of the item above.

8. Xitoko (stock) : Nhundzu ya muxavisi

Xitoko is derived from the English term “stock”. Nhundzu ya muxavisi is an ideal

equivalent.

9. Mali (money) : Xuma

Mali is a common and conventional transliterated equivalent for money; however,

it is worth mentioning that the Xitsonga concept of money and value exchange is

xuma which could be also acceptable in this regard.

10. Malinyana (little money): Xumanyana

The dimunitive form of item (9) above.

11. Muholo (payment) : Hakelo

Muholo is an acceptable term for “payment”, however it has other synonymous

terms like hakelo, or ndziho.

12. Spaza shop : Ndzawu yo xavisela

Colloquial South African term for a small informal shop in a township, often run

from a private house

13. Cheke (cheque) : Ndziho/Hakelo

A clear transliteration from the English “cheque”, the Xitsonga terms ndziho or

hakelo could have been ideal in this case.

14. Man! : Kunene!

: Nandziwe/nandzuwe/nandiwe/nduwena

: Mundina/mundzina

Example:

Va na erivaleni kunene!

Va na erivaleni nandziwe!

Interestingly in the extract, the speaker (Mzamani) is male and is addressing a

female (Ma’am Joyce) as “man!” Kunene or nandziwe could have been better

than the English term “man!” – Kunene is an exclamation imploring for openness

while nandziwe or mundzina is the speaker calling their audience to attention in

engagement. On the other hand, the “man!” in the extract could be a misprint of

“mani” – an equivalent of the impolite “damn it”.

The above Xitsonga text, Source Text 1, comprises 223 words and its objective

is to assess the comprehension abilities of pupils who are Xitsonga first language

speakers at the highest level of high school national examinations. Of the 223

words, 26 are transliterated or borrowed from English, Afrikaans, and IsiZulu. This

is a whopping 11.66%. This number is too large for such a minor article in an

examination that seeks to stimulate (or is expected to induce) critical thinking in

the students’ native language. Besides, just like in economics, borrowing is never

a superfluous activity and should only be done when all the other avenues have

been exhausted. The use of transliteration and borrowing is unessential in this

text (Source Text 1).

2.7. Mozambiquean Xitsonga (xiChangana)

The article below is an extract from the Jehovah’s Witnesses website written in

Mozambiquean Xitsonga (xiChangana).

Source Text 2: Mozambiquean Xitsonga (xiChangana)

Mintlhanganu Ya Timboni Ya Yehovha

Tiva swilo swaswinyingi hi mintlhanganu ya hina. Kuma ndhawu leyi hi

tlhanganaka ka yona leyi nga kusuhi na wena.

Ku Yentxeka Yini Ka Mintlhanganu Ya Hina?

Hina Timboni ta Yehovha hi tlhangana kambirhi hi vhiki leswaku hi gandzela

Xikwembu. (Vaheberu 10:24, 25) Mani na mani lweyi a swi lavaka a nga

nghena ka mintlhanganu leyi. Ka yona hi kambisisa leswi Bibele li swi

djondzisaka ni leswi hi nga li tirhisaka xiswona ka wutomi la hina.

Ka mintlhanganu ya hina ku ni nkama lowu vayingiseli va hlamulaka. Hi

sungula mintlhanganu hi ku yimbelela se hi yentxa xikhongelo.

Ka mintlhanganu ya hina a ku ngheni Timboni ta Yehovha ntsena. Hirhamba

mani na mani. Ku nghena i mahala. A ku hlengisiwi mali.

Target Text 2: English translation

Jehovah’s Witnesses Meetings

Please get to know many things about our meetings. Look for a meeting place

that is closer to you.

What happens in our meetings?

The Jehovah’s Witnesses meet twice a week for prayers. (Hebrews 10:24,25)

Everyone is welcome in these meetings. We do some analysis about what the

Bible teaches as well as how we may apply it in our lives.

In these meetings, there is an opportunity whereby the audience is allowed to

air their views. We start the meetings by singing; after that, we pray.

Our meetings are not only exclusively for Jehovah’s Witnesses. We invite

everyone. Everyone is welcome. No payment for access.

This extract (Source Text 2) of 238 words from the Jehovah’s Witnessess website

in the Mozambiquean Xitsonga (xiChangana) presents at least seven words that

come with a number of synonyms of agrarian origin. The seven words bring with

them 29 diverse synonyms – almost a quarter of the total number of words from

the extract with no borrowed or transliterated term.

1. Mintlhanganu – “meetings”. Xitsonga synonyms are, but not limited to:

Mihlengeletano, hubyeni, maxuxweni, khorhweni

2. Swaswinyingi – “many things”. Xitsonga synonyms are, but not limited to:

Swo hlaya, swo tala, nyandza, matutu

3. Yentxeka – “what happens”. Xitsonga synonyms are, but not limited to:

Ku maheka, ku humelela, ku endleka, ku vangeka

4. Gandzela – “pray”. Xitsonga synonyms are, but not limited to:

Phahla, dzunisa, khongela, khongotela, xengetela

5. Kambisisa – “analyse”. Xitsonga synonyms are, but not limited to:

Xiyaxiya, xuxa, lavisisa, xopaxopa, endla hi vukheta

6. Djondzisaka – “teaches”. Xitsonga synonyms are, but not limited to:

Dyondzisaka, letelaka, dzabelaka, kombisaka

7. Nkama – “a chance” or “opportunity”. Xitsonga synonyms are, but not

limited to:

Nkarhi, xikhati, nguva

2.8. The geography and terminology of a speech community

According to Bonvillain (2019), linguists and anthropologists have focused

increasingly on how social power and control are mirrored in language, language

use, and language ideologies. Speech communities generate ideas about

language usage conveyed through communicative behaviour and how people

discourse about language and linguistic activities – whether they are small

linguistic groups, homogeneous villages, or vast, heterogeneous state societies.

“Ideologies of language are not about language alone”, writes Woodlard. “They

underpin not only linguistic form but also the notion of the person and the social

group, as well as fundamental social institutions like religious customs,

socialisation, gender relations, social livelihood, schooling, and law, through

linkages [to identity, aesthetics, and morality]” (Woolard, 2020). Bonvillain’s

perspective lends credence to the notion that speakers convey messages about

their identities, their understandings of the world, and their places within it through

the structure and use of the language they use.

According to Magga (2006), the physical environment (or the people’s primary

activities) in which a language is used impacts culture. The Saami civilisation has

a long and close link with the Arctic climate, and the Saami languages have a

vast vocabulary for reindeer, snow, and ice. Magga claims that there are at least

180 phrases related to snow and ice and a whooping 1000 words devoted to

describing reindeer in the language of the Saami people, who live in the

northernmost parts of Russia and Scandinavia. Thus, it is confirmed that Sowa’s

(1993) assertion that a concept depends on culture holds water.

Consistent with Magga's findings, Robson (2013) found that the Yupik people

(formerly referred to as “Eskimos”) of Alaska and throughout the Arctic, Canada,

and Greenland have more than 21 words to describe the varied conditions of ice.

Similarly, Prah (2017) reveals that the Masai people of Kenya and Tanzania have

a unique relationship with the grass and vegetation due to their pastoral and

nomadic lifestyle. As a direct consequence of this, they have the terminology of

more than 17 words to describe the various phases of grass that their animals

consume. It is interesting to find that the case of South African Xitsonga is

dissimilar with regard to agrarian terminology despite the fundamentally agrarian

background of the language.

According to linguists, the linguistic exuberance of the Saami, Yupik, and Masai

peoples is not surprising, because languages develop to accommodate the

concepts most essential to the lives of those who speak them. Prouhet et al.

(1905) would argue that the interest is in the competence that these words convey

rather than in the argument about how many terms there are.

Sapir (1968) corroborates that language is a guide to social reality and that

human beings are at the mercy of the language that, in the terms of Pop &

Muresan (2017), has become the medium of expression for their society. The

linguistic norms of the community substantially govern these assertions, and each

distinct structure represents a unique reality: “No two languages are ever

sufficiently similar to be viewed as embodying the same social reality”.

Aristotle said, “A man's virtues are formed in him by his doing the actions”.

According to one interpretation by author Will Durant, “We are what we repeatedly

do”. As a result, a people’s understandings of the world – and the languages with

which they communicate these understandings – is best interpreted through the

community in which they exist.

2.9. The profits of Xitsonga's transnational character

Xitsonga is a Southern Bantu language in South Africa, Swaziland, Mozambique,

and Zimbabwe (Lee & Burheni, 2014). The language’s transnational nature

opens up many opportunities for rich terminology throughout the southern African

Xitsonga linguistic communities. The Xitsonga speakers in these countries form

a speech community consisting of people who, albeit heterogeneous, are united

in numerous ways (Bonvillain, 2019). The term “speech community”, according

to Bloomfield (1933, cited in Bonvillain, 2019), refers to “a group of persons who

connect employing speech”. Bloomfield acknowledges that in addition to sharing

a common language, these individuals also share a common understanding of

what constitutes “proper” and “improper” linguistic usage in that language. Hymes

(1974, cited in Bonvillain, 2019) emphasises that norms concerning the uses of

language unite members of a speech community. The importation of agrarian

terminology from Mozambique and Zimbabwean Xitsonga linguistic communities

into South African Xitsonga is thus a realistic pursuit, given that the variations

between the different versions of Xitsonga are not insurmountable as they form

part of the same speech communities.

Thaman, Unesco Chair in Teacher Education and Culture at the University of the

South Pacific, said that the late king of Tonga (his country of origin) once referred

to education as a kato he loto kato (a basket within a basket). He interpreted this

terminology to imply that the knowledge, skills, and values that we learn as a

result of our various journeys – and which are stored, interpreted and shared

within a broader, all-embracing cultural context – are what define us, and the

means with which others define us, too (Thaman, 2010). This concept highlights

the significance of realising that cultural expressions, such as dances and rituals,

are rooted in a more comprehensive cultural setting. This “basket” contains how

various social groupings relate to the world other groups within it. The ability to

acknowledge the “basket” or cultural environment from which we came and the

willingness to accept the offerings of other “baskets” appear to be essential to

achieving educational goals. In a similar vein, for Xitsonga linguistic communities

to have an adequate understanding of other cultures, they need to have an

adequate understanding of their own culture so that they can construct

comparable terminology in their own context. Such an understanding of the

function of language – one of sharing and exchange within more similar societal

groupings – would bring about a reduction in the overuse of loanwords.

2.10. Xitsonga as a quotidian language of communication of
Vatsonga in South Africa, Mozambique and Zimbabwe

As stated above, Xitsonga is a collection of various dialects that sometimes

contest standard Xitsonga for autonomy. However, these dialects may be seen

as tributaries of concepts and terminology from the standardised Xitsonga.

Having various ways of naming an item or concept in different Xitsonga dialects

enriches the language. With the existence of all these dialects, Xitsonga should

be able to assign lexicon to numerous notions, providing the language with a high

semantic value. Higher semantic value would be of great service to the profession

of translation and the field of translation studies.

“The translator is a privileged writer who has the ability to rewrite masterpieces in

their language”, observed Spanish translator and author Javier Marias. It is hard

to believe that by “masterpieces” he could be referring to the excessive use of

loan words. A masterpiece is a work of exceptional artistry, skill, or quality – a

labour done with exceptional expertise. As much as borrowing and transliteration

are inevitable and often useful translation tools, the assignment of the word

“masterpiece” calls for more than borrowing and transliteration.

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In this study, ethnography is the primary research methodology. Terminological

data on the Xitsonga speech communities in Mozambique and Zimbabwe has

been gathered and analysed. In line with Agar's (1985) views, ethnography

involves “encountering alien realities and making sense of them”. This research

method aims to demonstrate how practices in one environment can be made

sense of when viewed from a different perspective. Cameron (1990), understands

ethnography as “learning from people”, while Leininger (1990) defines

ethnography as “the systematic process of observing, detailing, describing,

documenting, and evaluating the distinctive patterns of a culture (or subculture)

to comprehend the patterns of the individuals in their familiar environment”. The

researcher thus attempts to gain a deeper understanding linguistic features of

Xitsonga by way of observing and understanding the people who use the

language.

The researcher entered Xitsonga speech communities to observe and document

daily communications. The researcher investigated the farming, rites, and rituals

practised in Xitsonga communities and spoke with community members and

those regarded as cultural experts. These figures were crucial sources of

information. A combination of participant observation and clarity-seeking

questions to gather the data was employed. The researcher set aside their

preconceptions to understand the daily lives of these people. Concurrently, data

was gathered and analysed. The researcher sort answers to new queries that

emerged as terminological data emerged. The researcher adopted a

nonjudgmental stance by refraining from providing a personal evaluation of any

specific cultural practice to provide an environment where the participants freely

discussed their traditions and practices.

3.1. Data Collection

The data collection method for this study is the examination of focus groups to

explore the varied use of agrarian terminology amongst them. The research aims

required in-depth group work due to an interest in the social context of public

comprehension. Listening to exchanges amongst participants provided the

researcher time to acclimate to, for example, their preferred terms for discussing

sorghum and stopped him from prematurely shutting off the formation of meaning

in his search for an explanation.

In contrast to more traditional techniques of data collection, the fact that group

members act as each other's audience encourages a broader range of

communication among them. Work done in groups is extremely helpful in allowing

individuals to describe their understandings naturally, to avoid falling into the trap

of stereotypical representations of the dominant cultural conceptions. Since

knowledge and attitudes partially revolve around rational responses to

straightforward inquiries, it is essential to utilise various communication channels.

Standard modes of communication – such as tales, jokes, and casual word

association – may reveal much, if not more, about what individuals know. In this

way, focus groups cover areas that other approaches cannot reach, revealing

understandings that may have remained untapped in a more formal one-on-one

interview or questionnaire.

CHAPTER 4: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

4.1. Agrarian terminology as a key component of early language
acquisition in Xitsonga linguistic communities

The agrarian oral storytelling tradition is one of the pillars upon which Xitsonga

literature and communication was built. Vatsonga, like many African tribes, had

extraordinary storytelling giants in their communities. The distinctions of a great

storyteller lay in the use of words, images, and vocal inflections to achieve tonal

variety. In this way, the audience learned to appreciate words for their meaning

and nuance. As Wa Thiong’o (1992) rightly observed, at the height of oral

storytelling tradition, language was more than just a collection of words. It had an

evocative impact that extended beyond its immediate and lexical meaning. Word

games such as riddles, proverbs, syllable transpositions, and nonsensical but

musically arranged words reinforced the appreciation for the suggestive magical

power of language. Through images and symbols, language provided the

audience with a view of the world that had its own unique beauty.

Regrettably, urbanisation brought television to these communities, with viewing

material strictly governed by offensive Apartheid policies. Its seemingly endless

array of shows replaced the Vatsonga’s and other African tribes’ literary learning

rendezvous of storytelling, fine-tuning them to prefer Hollywood, Pinewood, and

other English language channels at the expense of their own languages.

Before the arrival of Europeans, Xitsonga speakers relied heavily on their shared

folklore, cattle husbandry, land tilling, and the various other operations involved

in food production as a mainstay for their shared terminology and conceptual

framework. Their first point of understanding the outside world – the other – was

via agrarian life. Thus, their understandings came from the routines that formed

their everyday agrarian existence.

4.2. Linguistic hospitality

Putting together a translation is akin to preparing a meal for a guest from abroad.

As much as one has dishes to offer, consideration of the guest is inevitable, as

Ricoeur (cited in Kearney, 2004) notes. Forfeiture of local cuisine in part or whole

is considered geniality. French fries, Mexican chilaquiles, Cantonese dim sum,

Nigerian jollof rice, Brazilian moqueca, South African boerewors, chakalaka, pap,

etc., are frequently noted as typical dishes in those nations. It is upon the courtesy

of the Brigade de Cuisine (the kitchen hierarchy) that one may offer a person a

dish that represents their home. Through the comprehension of intercultural

service, translators should also make the linguistic cuisine available to the target

audience.

The pleasure of dwelling in a language of an “other” balances receiving the

foreign word at home, “in one's own welcoming house”, as Ricoeur (ibid.) would

say. The concept of hospitality is linked to the concepts of beneficence, charity,

and courtesy. In meal preparation, the cook will serve wholesome food to the

guests based on their nationalities, just as the translator must use culture-specific

terminology for each target audience. There is a profound connection between

people and their food, just as a shatterproof association exists between people

and their culture and, therefore, their language.

In his essay, “The Task of the Translator”, Benjamin (2000) comprehensively

illustrates that since the translator’s work is not to please the reader, they must

serve as a bridge, conduit, and negotiator between the two languages (Benjamin,

2000). This duty expounds on the kinship of all languages in that they are related,

serve the same purpose, and describe the world in which they exist differently

from one another. According to Benjamin, if the agency of a translator in the

mediation between two languages is performed diligently, it raises the language

to a level of greater purity. This purity has nothing to do with the absence of

practical linguistic contamination but rather with the constitution of

comprehension, which according to Whorf (1956) does not represent the same

social reality.

Benjamin contends that language serves communicative ends and designates

the pure medium of man's “mental being”, because there is a difference in how

different aspects of the world are seen and described. Khatib (2016), in

accordance with Benjamin (1996), maintains that “all language communicates

itself”. As a result, language is not the carrier of meaning in an instrumental sense.

Instead, it is the “un-mediated” pure medium through which cognition can become

communicable (Khatib, 2016).

CHAPTER 5: TEXT ANALYSIS

5.1. Xitsonga online newspapers and documents and the
gratuitous use of loanwords and transliteration

Source Text 1: South African Xitsonga (from NSC June 2021 examination,
DBE)

Namadyambu o ya kamba2 Violet. U kume Violet a ambele tifasikoti3, a ri karhi a

dyondzisiwa ntirho4 wa le makhixini5. Tolly a fika a hlamala loko a kuma wonge a

ka ha ri yena Violet wakwe. A kuma se a languteka ku fana6 na vanhwana7 va

lomu madorobeni. Swi n'wi tsakisa8 a xeweta9 Violet hi ku ri: 'Vaxumi10 N'wa

2 Ku kamba – a concept that originated in agrarian Vatsonga communities of southern Africa meaning “to
check in after a while”. The term is usually used when going to see if a trap that has been set up to catch
birds has caught any. The term has come to refer to both paying a visit to someone who is ill or bedridden,
and simply making a courtesy call. Ku kamba has other synonyms like Ku hlomela which means to look
quickly and furtively at something.

3 Fasikoti – transliterated from an Afrikaans word, voorskoot (“waistcoat” in English). Although the
transliterated term is common in Xitsonga speech communities, there are Xitsonga terms that can replace
it, such as nkhancu, which means “coat”, related to Joseph's coat of many colors (Gen 37: 3). Khiva also fits
perfectly in place of fasikoti and is prevalent in Vatsonga culture.

4 Dyondzisiwa ntirho – Although the context is clear, ku dyondzisiwa is a school curriculum-oriented teaching,
whereas ku thwasisiwa is a work-oriented training.

5 Makhixini –a transliteration of the word switangeni, which means “in the kitchens”. The word for a kitchen
in Xitsonga is xitanga. When predominantly white families hired housemaids, the term makhixini gained
popularity. Makhixini has come to represent a domestic worker. The educated black elite can now also afford
the services of domestic housemaids (vamakhixi).

6 Fana –translates to “similarity” and has another synonym, ku yelana, with a semantic sense close to
“indistinguishable”.

7 Vanhwana –translates to “girls above childhood” and has synonyms such as tintombi and sometimes
tithokazi, which means “heifers”, lending credence to Xitsonga's predilection for agrarian settings.

8 Tsakisa – “to make happy”, with synonym ku nyawuleriwa.

9 Xeweta – “to greet”, with synonyms pfuxela, zumbisa, xumisa, vutisa ntsako, ambisa, among others.

10 Vaxumi – common greeting statement which means “those who are working”, or “workers”. As it is a
commonly accepted norm that a day is characterised by labour (usually in the field), vaxumi has turned

Makhanikhee!' Violet a hleka11 a ku 'Hi xuma yini12 hi nga ku dyondzeni ke?’13

Tolly a ku: Dyondzani14 swinene swi ta mi hakela ka rin'wana siku.' Tolly na yena

a vhela a sungula ku hlantswa mimovha15 ya ka Mininjere16 Makhahlela a ri

endlwini a ha dya mabulu na Valungu-kulobye. Loko va fambile a huma, a ku ka

Tolly: 'Nandziwe u teke17 mbhuri ya wansati, naswona wa ha rintsongo.18 Mesisi19

into a statement of salutation, hail, and obeisance in Vatsonga speech communities, mostly said in a high
pitched tone.

11 Hleka – “to laugh”, with synonyms from other speech communities such as ku n’wayitela, ku ba fenya,
among others.

12 Hi xuma yini? – “we are doing nothing of value”, a common greeting response that is a rhetorical question
that shows that people are hard at work but responding with humility as in, “We are not doing much, but we
are trying!” This is a typical response by Vatsonga men and women whose ordinary day is characterised by
observable work with remarkable milestones. On the other hand, it worth noting that money is called xuma,
with a more common transliterated version, mali. There appears to be an association between ku xuma of
working and xuma of money. For example, “Va xumile siku hinkwaro kutani va hakeriwa hi xuma xo
nyawula”, which means, “they were hard at labor the entire day and eventually got paid good money”.

13 Hi nga ku dyondzeni ke? – “Are we not still under training?” The speaker, despite being addressed alone,
uses the plural pronoun Hi, meaning “We”. This is another remarkable sense of community shown by
Vatsonga speech communities. This question implies, “I am learning because someone has dedicated
themselves to teaching me”. Possible responses to this question are: Hi nga ku deyeni! (“baby steps”), Goza
hi goza (“step by step”), Katsongo katsongo (“tiny steps”), or Swimatana (“little waters”), which figuratively
means small increments of progress.

14 Dyondzani –translates to “learn”, but here means “spread yourself wide and learn”. Other Xitsonga
speech communities would use hlakulani which means “weed out the (unwanted) grass”, “dig up”, or
“focus and learn”.

15 Mimovha – meaning “cars”, a transliterated term from “motor car”. Xitsonga has an equivalent term
xipandzamananga.

16 Mininjere – “leader”, a transliterated term for “manager”. Xitsonga has an equivalent terms like mulawuri,
mufambisi, or murhangeri

17 Teke – “married”, from a Xitsonga verb “teka” which means “to take”. Xitsonga has more synonyms for
marrying and marriage as a revered institution, such as ku lovola, ku vuta, ku hlomisa, ku tloma (Xihlengwe)
(the official procedural visit to the bride’s family by the suiter to request her hand in marriage), or ku tlhakisa
(which literally means “to abduct”, and although it is a prevalent way of marrying among Vahlengwe of
Mozambique and Zimbabwe, it is considered unprocedural).

18 Wa ha rintsongo – “she is still young”. Other Xitsonga speech communities would go on to use terms
like wa ha ri thokazi, meaning “she is still a heifer”.

19 Mesisi – “the boss's wife”, a transliteration of “Miss”. The woman being referred to does not need to be
married; all she needs to be is white, educated, and commanding of some authority (if she is not white)
over male subordinates or less educated black women.

wa mina wa n'wi tsakela. U ri hambi Violet a nga si tiva swa makhixi20 u na

mathatha,21 naswona a nga lolohi22. U tsavule kunene!23 Loko timhaka ta yindlu

to lulama ndzi ta mi xavela swo saseka'. Tolly u lo na heta ku hlantswa mimovha

ya Valungu, o hlamba.

Nhwanyana loyi a tirha va ka Makhahlela (Macgallon) o phama swakudya a yisela

Tolly na Violet le ndlwini ya vo vatirhi. Ko dyiwa ku xurhiwa. Tolly a lela24 Mininjere

na Mesisi25 le ndlwini. Ku te loko a ku wa famba, va ka Mininjere vo sivela26 Tolly

ku famba hi milenge va ku: 'I vusiku27, hi ta ya ku xixa kona Ghezini hi movha.'

[Xi huma eka: Xikotikoti wa Matshotsho, hi M. A. Mahuhushi]

20 Makhixi – kitchen affairs

21 Mathatha – to be a go getter.

22 A nga lolohi – “she is not indolent”, with other synonyms such as nghinghi which means “assiduous” or
“diligent.

23 U tsavule Kunene! – “What a pick!”. When eating with others, Ku tsavula is to select a piece of meat. The
eldest picks first and then the rest the order of their ages down to the youngest, according to Xitsonga
custom. The youngest are usually assigned the unfortunate situation of selecting either the smallest pieces
of meat or eating only soup. As a result, ku tsavula means “having the privilege of selecting first, you chose
the best” in this context. Other Xitsonga meanings associated with u tsavurile kunene include: U langile
khwatsi (“ perfect selection”), U hlawurile ndluwa u siya hove (“You selected the best among many”), U
khetile kahle (“You chose the best”), U na tihlo (“You have an eye for choosing”), A wu na nxanga (“You do
not have cataracts”).

24 Lela – to bid farewell, with synonym ku sarisa which means “goodbye”.

25 Mesisi – other than the meaning in footnote 18, the context in which the term has been used here simply
means “whites”.

26 Sivela – to urge or stop someone from doing something. Other Xitsonga synonymous terms are arisa and
tsimbisa.

27 I vusiku – “it’s dark”.

Target Text 1.1: Xitsonga from Mozambique and Zimbabwe

Namadyambu o ya hlomela Violet. U kume Violet a ambele nkhancu, a ri karhi a

thwasisiwa migingiriko ya le xitangeni. Tolly a fika a hlamala loko a kuma onge a

hi yena Violet wakwe. A kuma leswaku se wa yelana na tintombi ta lomu

madorobeni. Hi ku nyawuleriwa a pfuxela Violet a ku: ‘Vaxumi N’wa-

Makhanikhee!’ Violet a n’wayitela a ku ‘A hi va voni, hi nga ku deyeni!’ Tolly a

angula a ku: Hlakulani swi nyawula, mi ta tshovela mindzuku.’

Tolly na yena a vhela a sungula ku hlantswa swipandzamananga swa Mulawuri

wa feme. Makhahlela a a ha xuxa na Valungu-kulobye endlwini. Loko va sarisile

u lo humela handle a ku ka Tolly: Nandziwe, u tlome mbhuri naswona wa ha ri

thokazi. Nghamu ya mina wa n’wi tsakela. U ri hambileswi Violet a ha dyondzaka

swa makhixi, i nghinghi. U langhile khwatsi! Loko timhaka ta yindlu to famba

kahle, ndzi ta mi xavela swo saseka’. Loko a heta ku hlantswa

swipandzamananga swa Valungu, Tolly u ye ku hlambeni.

Ntombi leyi a yi tirhela va ka Makhahlela (Macgallon) u phamele Tolly na Violet

swakudya a va yisela endlwini ya vatirhi. Loko va hete ku dya Tolly a sarisa

Mlungu na Mesisi a ku wa tifambela. Ndyangu wa Makhahlela wu tsimbise Tolly

ku ngwingwa kutani a n’wi tshembisa ku n’wi heleketa hi xipandzamananga.

[Xi huma eka: Xikotikoti wa Matshotsho, hi M. A. Mahuhushi]

Target Text 1.2: English

In the evening, Tolly went to check up on Violet. He discovered she was stunning

in the waistcoat as she was under culinary training. Tolly was convinced that

Violet was just indistinguishable from the town girls. Excitedly, he greeted Violet

saying, “Greetings, dear Makhanikhe’s daughter – the worker!” Violet smiled and

answered, “Far from it – ain’t I just but a novice?” Tolly replied, “Work harder; the

future will hold hard workers in high regard.”

Tolly immediately started washing the manager’s cars. Macgallon was having

discussions with his peers in the house. After they had bid farewell, he came out

and beamed to Tolly, “My guy, you married a goddess, and she is still very young!

My wife dearly loves her. She said that though Violet is still an amateur in kitchen

affairs, she has proven to be assiduous. What an appropriate choice! If all goes

well about the house, I will buy you some exquisite furniture.” Upon finishing

washing the cars, Tolly went for a bath.

The Macgallons’ housemaid dished for Tolly and Violet in the servant’s cottage.

Tolly said his goodbyes to the boss and his wife when they finished eating. The

Macgallons stopped him from walking in the darkness and promised to drive him

there.

[Extracted from: Xikotikoti wa Matshotsho, by M. A. Mahuhushi]

Source Text 2: South African Xitsonga (from ‘Nthavela’, a Xitsonga
newspaper)

The footnotes of this text display other agrarian terms from the Xitsonga speech

communities in Mozambique and Zimbabwe.

Mirhi28 ya Xintu29

September 27, 2022 Dunisani Ntsanwisi

Hi Lulama Maluleke

Khale ka khaleni30 va kokwana wa hina a va horisa31 timbanga na ku tshungula

swivavi32 swihi kumbe swihi hi ku tirhisa swimilana swa nhova33 na ku endla swa

ku arhavela34 hi ku katsa swimilana na mati ya ku vila. Swirho swin’wana swa

swiharhi naswona a va swi tirhisa ku tshungula mavabyi yo karhi, ku dya

tinyunghu ta mihandzu yo karhi, na ku dya/cakunya timintsu ta swimilana, na ku

endla vukhongeri bya xintu ku nga ku phahla ku va va kota ku horisa mavabyi.

Kambe hi ku famba ka nkarhi na ku cinca ka minkarhi leyi, mirhi leyi yi tirhisiwaka

ku horisa vuvabyi, timbanga na swivavi eka masiku ya sweswi i mimirhi leyi yi

nga endliwa hi swa xilungu- hileswaku yi processed35. Vakokwana a va dya

28 Mirhi – “medicinal plants” – minsinya, minsinya, timitsu, mintsebyani, mirhi ya tin’anga naswin’wana

29 Xintu – “tradition” – xikhale, ntolovelo, ndhavuko, ntumbuluko

30 Khale ka khaleni – “in the olden days” – khale ka matiko, minkarhi leyi hundzeke, khale ka makongwa

31 Horisa – “cure” – tshungula, lapha, ongola

32 Swivavi – “ailments” – mavabyi, switlhavi

33 Swa nhova – “from the bush” – swa le mananga

34 Ku arhavela –“steaming”

35 Processed – kandziweke, chikitiweke, kuyiweke

swimilana swi ri tano kumbe va swi kandza kutani va swi dya, switirha. Nkarhi

wun’wana a va tirhisa mati ya swimilana swo karhi ku va va swi tola emirhini ku

horisa na ku sivela mavabyi lawa ya ha taka. Kun’wana a va teka mati ya

swimilana leswi va tota laha ku nga na mbanga kutani va hola, munyu na wona i

swin’wana swa minchumu leyi tirhisiwaka tani hi mirhi ya xintu. Kambe eka nkarhi

wa sweswi, mimirhi yi endliwile hi swimilana swa ku hambanahambana kambe hi

ku andza/ku kula ka thekinoloji36, va nghenisa swimilana leswi emichinini leyi
pfunaka ku antswisa matirhirhelo ya mirhi leyi. Nhlayo yi komba leswaku, i

vantima vatsongo lava va ha tirhisaka tindlela ta xintu loko swi ta eka timhaka ta

rihanyu. Vanhu vo tala va tirhisa tindlela ta ximanguva lawa ta mirhi ku kuma

mpfuneto eka swa rihanyu ra vona.

Ti 31 ta Mhawuri 2022 a ku ri siku leri ku tlangeriwaka ‘African Traditional

Medicine Day’37 hileswaku ku tlangeriwa siku ra mirhi ya xintu. Swimilana swa ku

fana na moringa, xikwavava, swirhi, nyunghu ya ovacado, jojoba, olives38, Aloe

vera39, basil, peppermint40, ginger41, Echinacea, makamba ma nsinya ya ku

hambana hambana i swilo leswi a swi tirhisiwa tani hi mirhi ya xintu. “Swimilana

swin’wana hi risema42 ra swona, wa swi kota ku va u horisa kumbe u ti twa u va

u hanya kahle emirhini.” Lama i marito ya kokwana Gigwana lava va nga hi

rungulela hi matirhiselo ya mirhi ya xintu. Kokwana Gigwana va kombisile

36 Thekinoloji – technology (transliterated) – matirhiselo ya ximanguvalawa

37 African Traditional Medicine Day – Siku ra Mintsebyana ya Xintu ya Afrika

38 Olives - mitlhwari

39 Aloe vera – mhangani, mhanga

40 Peppermint - musundzungwani

41 Ginger - mbvarhula

42 Risema – smell – nuhelo, ripunga

leswaku ku kandza makamba/matluka, na ku virisa tinyungu xikan’we na nyungu

ya ovacado, kumbe ku dya swimilana swi ri swoxe a ku ri ndlela ya ku ti pfuna hi

swa rihanyo khaleni ka masiku. Ku sindza rimintsu kutani u tola embangeni, a ku

ri ndlela ya ku hatlisa swinene ku va mbanga yi hola. Hi ku tsundzuka na ku

tlangela mirhi ya xintu swi fanerile leswaku hi tsundzuka maendlelo ya xintu ya

vutshunguri, hi tlhela hi seketela lava na le ka minkarhi ya sweswi va ha yisaka

mahlweni ni vutshunguri.

Source Text 3: Xitsonga from Mozambique and Zimbabwe

Misava ya hendlela43

Hi titiva hi ri vinyi va misava leyi hina. Tiko ra Zimu i ra vakokwani va vakokwani

va hina, a hi nga ri dzahangi44 ro mi lo hi khumulela45 mi hi hayekela mugiveni46

wa tlhava47, tshovolo48 na xitakataka49 ivi n’wina mi ya tshama nsekeni50! Laha

gangala51, xitichi52, maxalani53 na n’wahuva54 swi chelaka55 swi nga chengalangi.

43 Hendlela – to give away something you do not want anymore, usually clothes - ku hlakatela, ku humesa
nyiko, ku nyikela hi nchumu lowu u nga ha wu laviki

44 Dzahangi – from the verb dzaha meaning “to smoke”, dzahangi means “did not smoke” (the context in
which this word was used figuratively means “we did not get the information”. Vatsonga often update each
other on the latest information or village gossip over a cigarette or snuff)

45 Khumulela – an act of giving clothes to someone (though the subject here is land, the term khumulela has
been used metaphorically)

46 Mugiveni – a string used to hang blankets and clothes – ntambhu yo leha leyi ku hayekiwaka mpahla na
maxuka

47 Tlhava – sandy soil favourable to the growing of nuts

48 Tshovolo – alluvial soil – also referred to as xitakataka

49 Xitakataka – see previous

50 Nsekeni – granular sand – savasi

51 Gangala – drought resistant red sorghum, commonly used by Vatsonga farmers of the lowveld

52 Xitichi – sorghum variety

53 Maxalani – sorghum variety

54 N’wahuva – millet

55 Chelaka – from the verb ku chela meaning to pullulate and spread prolifically

Laha mativa na min’werheti56 swi halakaka ku kondza timbvumi57 ta nguva ya

xirhimo ti fafazela tiko na mintlangasi58 yi chela59, ku khuluka tiko hikwaro.

Makhutla60, mikwahle, swibodze naswona swi ku vuya!

Xana ma swi tiva hi ku hetiseka leswaku hi yi kumile njani misava leyi? A mi lo hi

hendlela nakambe a mi lo hi fuyisa61 misava leyi phela? Swona ya fuyiseka xana?

Ya hendleleka ke? A ko va tintswalo! Loko a swiritano, ti pyisiwa hayini

nyan’waka?

Tanani zumbyeni62 mi ta khondza xitava63 ndzi mi ambela hi ta tiko leri.

Khwenutanani hi rhumbu64 ndzi ta mi dlavela65 kwhatsi. Mi ta hi maxuxu66

56 Min’werheti – from the noun n’werheti, water-filled tree holes

57 Timbvumi – from the noun mbvumo, some rain-bearing clouds

58 Mintlangasi – from the noun tlangasi, “marshy” or “swampy”

59 Chela – to flow, also called ku khuluka

60 Makhutla – singular khutla, a large frog that appears in the rainy season, used as relish by Vatsonga

61 Fuyisa – to loan someone your livestock for a certain period of time with a payment of one animal per year
(a common practice among Vatsonga and other African tribes, a form of empowerment to a member of the
society who may have lost their livestock to theft or desease)

62 Zumbyeni – from the noun zumbo, a concealed resting place for female initiates during the day

63 Xitava – a way of sitting in which the legs are crossed, typically used by women, also called ku khondla
xitseve

64 Rhumbu – “intestines”, but in this context it means “kinsmen”, referring to people of the same clan

65 Dlavela – to tell and narrate stories

66 Maxuxu – a period of time in the evening after dusk when men meet and discuss serious societal or
family affairs

tinyeje67 na tingholota swi miyele minkhwela ya swona yo vitana timbvumi68 ta

mpfula. Hi ku ti tolovele ku hi vitanela mpfula, kutani yi vuya hi xivutani69 yi ku

haraa! Tanani hi khungil70 leto leva, tanani hi ta siyerisana mano. Hi ta mi fundza

hi njemani71 kasi na swin’wana swo lata nyoka72 mi ta swi kuma.

Rixaka ra hina ri fike tikweni leri khale ka khaleni ri ka ri huma evuxeni. Tanihi

rixaka ra vurimi na vuhloti, hi ti kumile hi ka hi aka etindzhawini ta misava yo nona

yo fana na tshovolo. Hi xitalo, hi kumeka emisaveni leyi kotaka ku hlayisa

tshongo73, yi tlhela yi kota ku seketela vutomi bya swimilani swa hina. Hambileswi

tiko leri ri toloveleke ku va na dyandza74, ha swi kota ku hanya ku suka eka nguva

yin’wana ku ya eka yin’wana handle ko sika. Hi vile na tindlela to

hambanahambana to hanya na maxelo ya vukarhi etikweni leri. Xo sungula,

timbewu leti nyenyelaka ku fana na xifake, xitichi na xichayeni tibyariwa

mimfuveni na le minkoveni hakanyingi laha ku milaka byanyi bya ritsewani75.

67 Tinyeje – an insect that produces a high-pitched shrieking sound, usually found in mopane trees
(colophospermum mopane)

68 Timbvumi – from the noun mbvumo, some rain-bearing clouds

69 Xivutani – the sound of wind brings about precipitation, mpfumawulo wa moya lowu susumetaka ku ta ka
mpfula

70 Khungile – from the verb ku khunga which means “to tie down”, usually a dog

71 Njemani – ilala wine, also called vucema

72 Lata nyoka – “to make the snake sleep”, a metaphor for eating (there is a belief that when someone is
hungry, the snake in the belly is hungry), sometimes ku miyeta nyoka, “to quieten the snake”

73 Tshongo – high soil moisture content that is favourable for germination, also ndzhongo.

74 Dyandza – a prolonged period of abnormally low rainful leading to a dry spell and water shortages resulting
food shortages and famine, also called ndlala, nsiko, or mumu

75 Ritsewani – a stubborn grass that shoots even after weeding, common in water-logged areas

Timbewu ta dzila76, ti gobiwa na le gangeni kumbe endzhawini ya maribye kambe

titshoveriwa swiritano. Gangala (mutod’o), phoho na n’wahuva i tin’wana ya

timbewu ta dzila.

Xa vumbhiri, vuswikoti byo xiyaxiya maxelo i byin’wana vutlhari lebyi endleke hi

hanya ku fika namutlha handle ko ya kangetela mphalalo wa mfumo na

Minhlangano yo ka yi nga ri ya Mfumo. Mimiti ya hina yina tingula77, madulu78,

switlati79 na marhala80. Etinguleni, hi hlayisa timanga, tindluvu na tinyawa,

emadulwini hi hlayisa gangala, xitichi, xichayeni, maxalani, kasi exitlatini hi

hlayisa xifake. Leswi hlayiseriwaka erhaleni i mahlanga ya xifake kumbe mavele

ku pfuna tihomu hi swakudya hi nguva ya Ximun’wana na Ximumu loko ka