Zona Oeste

Santrock (2009:275) defines language as a form of spoken, written or signed communication, that is based on a system of symbols. All languages share certain common attributes but there

54

are some aspects of language that are unique. A person’s language and culture determines the way that person thinks (Nunan 2007:200). All cultures have their own ways of teaching, learning and education. It has now been realised that teaching needs should be sensitive to the cultural and environmental contexts in which they are done (Nunan, 2013:47).

Kirk et al, 2009:26) define culture as the customs, values, attitudes and language that families and friends pass on to their children. Prah (2007:83) gives a more concise definition of culture as everything that is the result of human creation which include all tangible materials and products of humanity and intangible creations like language, religion, customary usages and everyday practices. It is the sum-total of these time-tested habits, attitudes, tastes, manners, shared values, traditions, norms, customs, arts, history, institutions and beliefs of a group of people that define for them their general behaviour and way of life. Culture changes continuously. Some aspects are dropped, others are adapted or adopted and passed on to future generations.

Prah (2007:98) argues that if culture is the main factor that determines our attitudes, tastes and morals, then language is the key aspect of culture. He explains that it is in language that culture is passed on, explained and designed. Furthermore, he clarifies that language is also a record of culture. Therefore, when one learning a language, one is learning a culture (Bruce, Meggitt & Grenier, 2010:116). Therefore, it follows that when we introduce English as a LoLT in our primary schools, we are introducing a foreign culture into our system too soon before pupils have even fully acquired their own culture? Pupils’ mother tongue is part of the pupils’ culture. Cummins (2000:31) has often advocated for bilingual education and use of mother-tongue instruction.

Findings of studies conducted by Qorro (2010:75) have revealed that in Tanzania, even at secondary school level, learners using ESL still lack proficiency in that LoLT in class, yet the same learners were quite proficient in their local languages (Pitman, Majhanovich & Brock- Utne, 2010: 4). In support of that point, Brock-Utne adds: in reality most teachers use code- switching. If they speak in English only, it is like ‘teaching dead stones’, she quotes one of the teachers. University students too lack proficiency in English. An audit report from the Dar es Salaam University says that learners have challenges in using English as the LoLT (Pitman, Majhanovich & Brock-Utne, 2010:7).

We use our language to understanding our culture (Shizha 2007:7). Thondlana (1999:35) has similar views: “Language and culture are seen as being intimately related’’. Further, she goes on to say that language acquisition is a process of socialization and enculturalisation to the

55

extent that language is usually the principal way through which children learn to behave as members of the society in which they live and to adhere to its culture, mode of thought and action, beliefs and values. In short, language reflects culture.

Valentino (2010:67) advises teachers to refrain from demanding all learners to communicate in English only without taking into consideration their language limitations. She goes on to reveal that the majority of teachers and administrators do not have the prerequisite requirement necessary to deal with learners whose L2 is English. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that these teachers and administrators do not speak the different local languages of these learners and they are also ignorant of their cultures. Finally, she advises that it is important to bear in mind that learning a new language also means learning a new culture. She is affirming that culture and language cannot be separated.

The relationship between culture and language is also echoed by Jiang (2000:37) when she posits that language is a part of culture. Brown (1994:165) echoes the same sentiments: “a language is part of a culture and a culture is a part of a language; the two are intricately interwoven so that one cannot separate the two without losing the significance of either language or culture.”

This is indicating to us that our pupilsl use their vernacular in class to remember, to reason, to communicate with classmates and so on, but they must translate these thoughts to ESL first before communicating with the teacher (Siwela, 2013:51). In other words, the learners’ inner language is in their mother-tongue, but their expressive language is in ESL. Language and thought are so closely related that it is almost impossible to consider one without the other (Vygotsky, 1934/1986 cited in Honig, 2010:23).

Slavin (2012:80) points out that some culturally-based habits have important consequences for classroom teaching. Setati (2011:28) sees culture as a critical factor in determining how learners speak and interpret words. “Meanings of words are determined by their uses within a linguistic and cultural setting, and these settings differ from culture to culture. To fully function in a particular language, a person needs to understand the mechanics such as grammar and possess the knowledge to apply that language to different contexts, people, and uses”, Meyer (2002:120). This is supported by Valentino (2010:67) when she says that it is important to remember that learning a new language also means that one must learn a new culture. Are we therefore, not overburdening the primary pupils when we use ESL to teach them science? Setati (2011:19) maintains that the learning of science demands a learner to be proficient in the LoLT of that subject as well as in the language of science, which is, acquiring the special vocabulary

56 of science.

The above allusion helps to clarify why effective learning happens in an atmosphere that embraces the learners’ mother tongue since that revitalises various internal development processes that a child has acquired in his socio-cultural environment (Meyer, 2002:122). Zevernbergen (2001:204) echoes Meyer’s sentiments “Classroom interactions are imbued with cultural components that facilitate or inhibit access to the scientific content.” I support the above allusion. The LoLT should be the learners’ L1 and the examples given in lessons should be from their culture and experience. Learning would still be inhibited if the learners are not yet proficient in the LoLT being used during the lesson and the examples given to explain concepts are from a foreign culture. For instance examples of proteins would include traditional dishes learners know very well. Other examples might comprise the following: traditional medicines and herbs, flora and fauna from the learners’ environment, shelter and habitats, agricultural products and food preservation, reproduction and contraception, beliefs, norms and values. By promoting science teaching in mother tongues, we are helping to preserve our indigenous cultures. Implementing this is possible. The majority of Zimbabwean black pupils speak either Shona or Ndebele (Viriri, 2003:2), unlike the case of Nigeria with 450 mother tongues, 8 mother tongues in a single class (Okebukola 2013:5).