N°019_Vol.1_02

Introduction This paper revisits the national language question in the new administrative configuration of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) so as to show how ethnicity remains a crucial factor in the national politics despite all the efforts made to combat separatism. The DRC has implemented administrative reforms increasing the number of provinces from eleven to twenty-five. This new map includes within itself some germs of conflicts: the borders of provinces do not always correspond to those of ethnic groups and languages. As a result, some national and vehicular languages are in competition in the new provinces for the status of the national language. Particularly, the division of the Kasai Oriental Province into three provinces contained some predictable conflicts of language loyalty. In fact, two of the new provinces, viz. Lomami and Sankuru, were created on the grounds of claims for self-determination and separatism from other ethnic groups. Presumably Ciluba, the national language of the area, would hardly be accepted as the national language therein. Such is the concern of this paper. As a background, this study was inspired by an incident which had a large coverage in the media in 2022.

In its efforts to boost literacy in native languages, the UNESCO had donated textbooks in the four national languages of the DRC to Congolese schools, viz. Ciluba, Kikongo, Kiswahili and Lingala. The Ministry of Education distributed them to the beneficiaries according to their respective national languages. However, it sent the Lingala version to Sankuru although this province used to be in the Ciluba speaking area in the past. Unexpectedly, Lambert Mende[1], a native elite of Sankuru, reacted publicly in the media against this literacy campaign. He decried cultural alienation of the Tetela children by their exposure to a foreign language. This donation was interpreted as an act of linguistic imperialism (Phillipson 1992, Tollefson 1991) impeding Tetela children to learn in their own native language. Admittedly, a simple educational decision had become a political issue with a large coverage in the media[2]^. Hence, this reflexion is based on the following research questions: Why did the Tetela elite reject Lingala as the national language to use in education in their province? How can language management work in education in the DRC in order to carter for people’s ethnolinguistic vitality?

As a hypothesis, Lambert Mende’s rejection of Lingala can be seen as a complex psychological response revealing frustration vis-à-vis the nation’s indifference to the promotion of native languages. This position is thus an assertion of Tetela identity and ethnolinguistic vitality justified by the following factors: Sankuru is the 10^th largest province (104 331 km²) out of 25; its language was already in competition for the status of a national language during the colonial period (Polomé 1968); its language is already in use as a “provincial language” in Kasai Oriental (Mulamba et Kambaja 2001); a proof that it can play the role that the Ministry of Education wants to allot to Lingala; its natives are participants in power sharing in the country with noticeable representation in the government, the army, the institutions and other spheres of power; its subjectively perceived vitality (Smith et al. 2017) expressed in the slogan “Ona Kema fumba”, that is, ‘a (Tetela) child is not a slave,’ is globally understood as an assertion of Tetela identity and power (political, spiritual, ancestral). It is widely popularized in the songs of the late Rumba star Papa Wemba, a native Tetela himself. Historically and politically, Sankuru is the homeland of the nation’s first Prime Minister, a pan-Africanist and international figure, Patrice Emery Lumumba.

All these factors should ensure the visibility and vitality of the Tetela language, at least in its native area. With regard to language management, it is hypothesized that a bilingual programme can ensure the visibility of native languages and help learners to begin their education in a language which is familiar to them. That would ensure cultural diversity and prevent glottophagia of minority languages by majority ones (Krauss 1992, Crystal 2000). Structurally, after some terminological and methodological considerations on the topic, turn by turn, this reflexion will cover language management (in the DRC), the history of the language question in the DRC, the analysis of language in education, discussion, and conclusion to wind up the paper.

• [1]Lambert Mende is a former Minister for Communication. He is well known for his opinions which are sometimes controversial. It cannot be ascertained whether this view is his own or that of his native Tetela community.
• [2]In response, Mr Atundu Liongo, a politician and a native elite of Lingala, defied this allegation. He recalled that Tetela children have always been in contact with Lingala, and that this language represented neither glottophagia nor linguistic imperialism in Sankuru. Obviously, the problem was elsewhere but not with the UNESCO literacy campaign.