This paper discusses hybridity as a strategy of survival for those caught between the languages of their colonization and their indigenous languages and also illustrates how, through hybridization, postcolonial subjects use colonial languages without privileging colonial languages. Drawing on Bakhtinian notions of hybridization, this paper shows colonial and indigenous languages contesting each other's authority, challenging and unmasking the hegemony of English and to some extent Shona. Ndebele and Shona are indigenous languages spoken in Zimbabwe, Africa. However, this paper conceives the relationship of English and Ndebele as not always contestatory but as accomodating. Using Ogunyemi's (1996) notion of palaver, the paper extends our understanding of hybridity as marking both contestation and communion. Of particular significance is the way in which English is criticized even in the using of it in Amakhosi plays. This analysis of hybridity highlights the contradictoriness of colonized identity and establishes and confirms the idea of a hybridized postcolonial cultural and linguistic identity.

Postcolonial and globalization theory are both complex terms intertwined in an equally complicated relationship. Some theorists have been reluctant to establish a useful relationship between the two theories. In this paper, I will argue that postcolonial theory has a contribution to make to globalization and vice versa and that postcolonialism and globalization can indeed occupy the same discursive space. In conceptualizing the relationship, I present brief defi nitions of the concepts. I discuss defi nitions of these terms separately, not to emphasize diff erences but rather to highlight points of convergence. Postcolonial and global theories are not incompatible at all. Th eir histories are interconnected. To be useful, the relationship between postcolonial and globalization theory must be conceptualized within actual historical and political contexts and not disconnected from actual issues of power. Th is implies and emphasizes the imperative to understand the two concepts within a framework of political intervention.

Success in the fight against HIV/AIDS is related to the degree to which women are acknowledged as and indeed become active stakeholders in the negotiation process of sex relations. As part of that awareness, advertisement campaigns in Botswana attempt to make room for the participation of women in the fight against HIV/AIDS by including women's voices in the discourse around sex as significant actors in negotiation processes of sex and condoms. Using a critical approach, this paper deconstructs notions of equity and assumptions of empowerment in order to expose the limits of the discourse of inclusion of women in public. Advertisements campaigns that seek to empower women in Botswana, while a useful beginning, are examined for the ways they perpetuate cultural attitudes and stereotypes as well as maintain male hegemony. In addition, the paper suggests that the discourse of women's empowerment and inclusion in sexual negotiations cannot be isolated from the socio-cultural, economic and psychological contexts of women.

Recognizing students’ deliberate e!orts to minimize errors in their written texts is valuable in seeing them as responsible active agents in text creation. This paper reports on a brief survey of the attitudes towards self-editing of seventy university students using a questionnaire and class discussion. The context of the study is characterized by its emphasis on evaluating the finished written product. Findings show that students appreciate the role of self-editing in minimizing errors in their texts and that it helps in eventually producing well-written texts. Conceptualizing writing as discourse and therefore as social practice leads to an understanding of writers as socially-situated actors; repositions the student writer as an active agent in text creation; and is central to student-centred pedagogy. We recommend the recognition of self-editing as a vital element in the writing process and that additional error detection mechanisms namely peers, the lecturer, and the computer, increase student autonomy.

Abstract