Language is the pivot around which all human activities revolve. Many scholars (Adedimeji, Fasold, Hudson) have presented various functions performed by language, all pointing to the fact that the human society would be inconceivable without language.
It is the instrument by which culture is expressed and transmitted; and culture in turn shapes the character of an individual. Whatever is to be said or communicated has to fit the situation or context in which it is uttered.
We choose our language according to the situation or context, which sometimes is created by the language itself. That is to say that the way we use language creates certain scenarios or environments that are different from others. Therefore, the use of language in conflict situations is different from ordinary day-to-day conversations and in some instances, the kind of language used brings about situations of conflict.
Communication is successful only if the message is received in the same way as originally intended by the speaker. Language performs both positive and negative functions in society. It is a double-edged sword which can be an instrument of fostering peace and harmony as well as a source of conflict or a catalyst for escalating one that has
80
started (Abdulhahman, Jowitt). This dual attribute is just a reflection of the nature of man to do both good and evil.
A conflict erupts as a result of differences in opinions, cultural practices or interests. It is part of human nature and cannot be avoided, rather it should be managed.
Conflict should not be viewed as entirely negative since when managed well, it is an instrument for growth and development (Abdulmalik, Best, Falet, Francis,Ovie- D‟Leon,Salihu,Weber). Language has the potential of bringing about conflict, or of resolving it. It is central to all issues relating to conflict and its resolution. Words can be harmful, and their meanings or interpretations vary with time and space, and with persons and situations. The wrong use of words can even provoke physical responses, and further worsen bad relationships (Adedimeji, Akin,Iwara). Misinterpretation also leads to the escalation of conflict.
To avert trouble, the parties involved in a conflict should employ respectful communication. When opinions are respected and treated objectively, the problem is easily resolved. People should think and weigh their words before speaking. In this way, they should employ the art of listening which will enable them to understand each other‟s problems more critically, since it is not just hearing the words but taking into consideration what is said (Akin, Iwara, Kellet).
In conflict situations, hatred, hostility, abuse and other confrontational approaches are often expressed by the tone used, rather than by the words themselves.
Differences in the understanding of conflicts are portrayed by the language people use to interact with each other, and so clear and straight-forward communication is essential in getting to the root of a conflict and resolving it. Bad language can only increase a conflict. In all conflicts, communicating is always the best thing to do. Choice of words matters a lot in all human conversation. In the same way, the type of language used during conflicts can either calm frayed nerves or propel the parties to higher levels of the conflict. Language use in this regard is not only from the parties involved but also from third-party individuals or organizations. The mass media, for example have been found
81
responsible for the escalation of the crises that engulfed Jos and its environs in the last decade. This is blamed on their choice of words and the tone in presenting the conflict which were largely inflammatory and provocative (Saidu, Salihu).
From all the literature reviewed so far, the role of language in society has been emphasized. Language use has been found to be determined by the context in which it is used. Particular to this work is the fact that language in conflict situations generally is different from ordinary day-to-day conversations. While language use is general determined by context and situation, the context or situation can actually be created by language itself. Furthermore, some researchers have examined the type of language used by the mass media in their reportage of the Jos crises in the last decade. In addition, instances of crises around Nigeria have also been analyzed with focus on language use in the social media.
However, none of the works, to the knowledge of the researcher, has recorded and analysed the verbal exchanges (directly or indirectly) between the parties involved in the Jos crises. The works that focus on the Jos crises particularly only investigated the language used by third parties, particularly the mass media, in most cases specifically the print media. In addition, attention was only paid to the incidents beginning from 2001.
This research has gone further to analyse the linguistic situation of Jos and environs during the crises that have erupted. It has collected and analyzed samples of the verbal exchanges between the feuding parties. The research further involved interviews with key figures of the affected communities to ascertain the role of language considering the way it was used during the crises. The scope has also been extended to cover the period from 1994 to 2010, as well as covering the entire surrounding of the Jos-Bukuru axis.
Generally linguistic choices and preferences of citizens of the area of study have also been captured.
82
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN
This study is an examination of the patterns of language use and communication in conflict situations, focusing on Jos and environs. This covers the entire city of Jos, Bukuru and surrounding areas. One part of the data was obtained from reports of Commissions of Inquiry, conference reports, newspaper reports and interviews. The other part was obtained from the questionnaire and personal observation. Data was randomly collected from across the study area. Copies of the questionnaire were given out to members of communities in different locations within the study area. As a cosmopolitan city, respondents are representative of almost all ethnic nationalities in the country and even from outside the country.