Omayityo nomunyolelo gwokatungithi ‘Bantu’ mOshiwambo

2024-06-21T11:53:17+02:00

Abstract

This paper examines the meanings of the morpheme ‘Bantu’ and the reasons why authors write it differently in the Oshiwambo language. The paper further analyses the morphological and phonological changes that occur during borrowing the morpheme ‘Bantu’, investigates noun classes in which it is found, as well as its orthography in the Oshiwambo language. The study adopts the Natural Generative Phonology (NGP) theory, as proposed by Hooper (1976), along with Word Formation theory and the Use Theory of Meaning (UTM), as its theoretical framework. This study adopted a qualitative approach, and data were collected through documented texts, text analysis, daily texts and utterances. After the analysis and interpretation of data, it has become evident that the morpheme ‘Bantu’ is a polysemic word in the Oshiwambo language. Data reveals that the author’s level of education, knowledge of other languages, geographical location, meaning and the noun class in which the author allocates the morpheme ‘Bantu’ are the reasons authors write it differently in Oshiwambo. The finding reveals that the morpheme ‘Bantu’ undergoes various morphological and phonological changes such as prefixation, nasalisation, free variation and modern trend to be integrated into the Oshiwambo speech system. Furthermore, it has been found that the orthography of the morpheme ‘Bantu’ in the Oshiwambo language is: Mbantu, Mbanhu, Banhu, Bantu, Aambantu, Ovambanhu, Aambanhu/Aabanhu, Aabantu, or Ovabantu, and Oshimbantu, Oshimbanhu, Otshimbanhu, Otshibanhu, or Oshibantu. These words are in Oshiwambo noun class 1.a., 2 and 7 respectively (cf. Oshiwambo 18 noun classes). Teachers, lecturers, learners, students, authors, journalists, and lexicographers could utilise knowledge acquired through this study.

Engongo

Ombapila ndjika oya lalakanene okwiilonga omayityo gokatungithi ‘Bantu’ nokukonakona omatompelo kutya omolwashike aanyoli haye ka nyola sha yooloka mElaka lyOshiwambo. Ombapila oya sinasina wo omalunduluko gopamofolohi nopafonolohi ngoka ga holoka mokuhehela okatungithi ‘Bantu’ mElaka lyOshiwambo, oya konakona wo oongundutyadhina dhOshiwambo moka taka adhika nomunyolelo gwako gwomondjila mElaka mOshiwambo. Oshinyolwakonakono oshi iwega kOmadhiladhiloyukitho gOpafonolohi yElaka ngoka ga andjaganekwa nokuyambulwa po kuHooper (1976), Omadhiladhiloyukitho gEndulukopo lyIitya nosho wo Omadhiladhiloyukitho gEyityo lyOshitya mokundjandjukununa uuyelele. Oshinyolwa shika osha longitha omukalo gwomadhiladhilo gomuule nuuyelele owa gongelwa okupitila mokulesha iinyolwa ya nyanyangidhwa, okusinasina iinyolwa, omishangwa dhakehe esiku nosho wo omatumbulo ga popiwa. Konima yokusinasina nokundjandjukununa uuyelele wa gongelwa, osha kolekwa kutya okatungithi ‘Bantu’ oshipolisemitya mOshiwambo.Uuyelele otawu ulike kutya okatunguthi ‘Bantu’ ohaka pangwa sha yooloka pamofolohi nopafonolohi ngaashi momukalo: gwokunkotseka ko oshitetekeli, gwokukwamayupaleka, gwokupingenapo okanyolo/uunyolo nokanyolo/nuunyolo uukwawo nogwopashinanena okutambiwa ko momutumbulilo gwOshiwambo. Kakele kaashono, okwa monika wo kutya omunyolelo gwokatungithi ‘Bantu’ mOshiwambo ogwo: Mbantu, Mbanhu, Banhu, Bantu, Aambantu, Ovambanhu, Aambanhu, Aabanhu, Aabantu, nenge Ovabantu, nosho wo Oshimbantu, Oshimbanhu, Otshimbanhu, Otshibanhu, nenge Oshibantu. Iitya mbyoka otayi adhika mongundutyadhina 1.a., 2, nosho wo 7 yOshiwambo (cf. [mekwatathano] noongundutyadhina 18 dhOshiwambo). Aalongisikola, aalongiputudhilolongo, aanasikola, aalongwaputudhilolongo, aanyoli, aatolinkundana naanyolimambwiitya otaya vulu okulongitha uunongo wa gongelwa okupitila moshinyolwakonakono shika. Hugunina, oshinyolwasinasino shika otashi thaneke kutya oompata dha li pokati komulongi gwOshindonga nomulongi gwoshilongwa shOmayilongo gOnkalathano osho dha yi pehulilo.

Expounding the Nama - Herero genocide of 1904-1908: A cognitive metaphor approach

2024-08-31T18:05:18+02:00

This study examined four Namibian Nama-Herero literary texts about the genocide in Namibia through the application of the cognitive stylistics theory as a framework for analysis. These are, namely, Lauri Kubuitsile’s The Scattering (2016), Jaspar D. Utley’s Lie of the Land (2017), Rukee Tjingaete’s The Weeping Graves of our Ancestors (2017) and Zirk van den Berg’s Parts Unknown (2018). The four novels were chosen because they present the Nama-Herero genocide, which took place from 1904-1908, where over 65,000 Ovaherero and 10,000 Nama people died in what is known as the first genocide of the twentieth century. The study promotes new discourses on cognitive stylistics studies of Namibian literary works. The study is significant to researchers and readers as it is a useful reference tool for students, politicians and researchers conducting studies in the field of cognitive stylistics. Cognitive linguistics argues that a particular situation in a literary text can be interpreted in different ways. Observations from nuanced readings of the texts indicated that themes in the selected texts largely centre on the natives’ experiences of the genocide during this period of colonial occupation and encounter. This was achieved through the examination of literary creativity through the use of cognitive metaphor, genocidal trauma, and mental and physical oppression. It was concluded that reading, analysing and schematising genocidal fictional works can reflect a negative past for current world citizens to understand and adopt ways that can be used to prevent genocide.

JULACE: Journal of the University of Namibia Language Centre

Omayityo nomunyolelo gwokatungithi ‘Bantu’ mOshiwambo

Expounding the Nama - Herero genocide of 1904-1908: A cognitive metaphor approach