A blatant disregard of Section 6 (1) of the Constitution of South Africa by higher education institutions and language authorities: An onomastic discrepancy

Abstract

The primary focus of this article is the onomastic discrepancies that are considered a blatant disregard of Section 6 (1) of the Constitution of South Africa (Act No. 108 of 1996). The article employs a qualitative research approach where text analysis is used, focusing on constitutional documentation, legislative frameworks on language-related matters and higher education policy documentations, as well as language policy documentation from the selected 10 South African universities that offered Sepedi as a first language or conversational module. It is found that there is a constitutional disregard by competent organisations such as universities, financial institutions, Google and language authorities (such as Pan South African Language Board, Sesotho sa Leboa National Language Body and Sesotho sa Leboa National Lexicography Unit), since most of the policies are inconsistent with Section 6 (1) of the South African Constitution, 1996. In summary, the article records that the policies supersede the Constitution, since the language name ‘Northern Sotho/Sesotho sa Leboa’ is the most used name to refer to the official standard language rather than its counterpart, Sepedi.

Lexical similarities between Khelobedu dialect and Tshivenḓa and Sepedi languages

“…As authors, we are fully aware that 'Sepedi' replaced 'Northern Sotho/Sesotho sa Leboa' as the official name for the language according to the Section 6(1) of the Constitution of South Africa, Act No. 108 of 1996 (Rakgogo & Van Huyssteen 2018, 2019Rakgogo & Zungu 2021, 2022a, 2022b.…”