Abstract
As a result of the bilingual nature of African nations due to the historical accident of colonialism, the problem of which language (ie. Indigenous or colonial language) to adopt for literary expression, has lingered on. This has precipitated the use of various devices by African writers to contextualize aspects of indigenous meaning in the L2 text. Against this background, the present study examines lexico-semantic aspects of transliteration in Gabriel Okara’s The Voice (1964), using the parameters of Robert Lado’s contrastive analysis. The study explores the various sociolinguistic constraints which determine appropriate lexical choices in the text. The main aim is to enhance understanding and appreciation of the language of Okara’s The Voice in particular and African literature in general. The study also highlights the importance of lexis and meaning, as distinctive levels of language, to the construction of any literary discourse. Keywords: Nativization, African literature, lexico-semantic, transliteration,Gabriel Okara,The Voice Introduction Every Literary text is constructed with language. Therefore, it is imperative to determine how a particular writer has utilized the potentials of language to negotiate meaning(s) for his text This thesis is anchored on the premise that, as Brumfit and Carter (1986) put it, we need to show “how what is said is said and how meanings are made” within the psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic ambience of the text. As a bilingual and bicultural text, the structure of language use in Okara’s The Voice “calls attention to itself” (Murakarovsky, 1964:58), in the sense that the author manipulates and adapts the rhythm, register, syntax and semantics of the English Language to the linguistic and cultural nuances of his native ijaw Language. Specifically, the peculiarity of Okara’s linguistic style in the text under study is a product of, or direct response to, the lingering problem of language in African literature. This problem borders on whether or not the colonial linguistic media (i.e. Portuguese, English, French etc), would be able to adequately and authentically express the socio-cultural and linguistic realities of the African continent. Scott (1990) refers to it as: ….the long-standing debate among critics of African literature over the relation between African authors and the colonial linguistic legacy. This debate which has dominated Africa literature in the past fifty years (Osundare, 2004), stems from the recognition among African scholars/writers of the centrality of language to literature, and the close connection between political independence and cultural emancipation. As literary works are cultural artifacts, the basic thinking is that, the use of colonial languages in African literature is a willing perpetuation of imperialism. Significantly, there has been a sustained polarity of opinion about the appropriate attitude the African writer should adopt to this phenomenon. These range from the fervidly nationalist to the stridently compromising. Osundare (2004) identifies three “attitudes” viz: (i) accomodationist, (ii) gradualist, and (iii) radicalist. According to this scholar, the first group (i.e. accommodationist), which has as its chief promoter, Leopold Sedar Senghor of Senegal, favours an outright use of imperialist languages; while the “gradualists” are “the dwellers of the middle of the road”, prominent among whom is Ali Mazrui who advocates a de-Anglicization and re-Africanization of the English language, to authentically convey Africa’s literary sensibilities. The third group, on the other hand, is the “radicalist” composed of writers who call for an immediate adoption of indigenous African languages as the media of literary expression. Obi Wali and Ngugi Wa Thiongo are proponents and exponents of this attitude. Instructively, majority of African writers belong to the “gradualist” group identified above (i.e. indigenizing the colonial language).
The Special Issue on Social Science Research © Centre for Promoting Ideas, USA www.ijhssnet.com
203
Gabriel Okara, Chinua Achebe, Amos Tutuola, Elechi Amadi, J.P. Clark-Bekederemo, Kofi Awoonor, etc. all fall into this category. In the main, this linguistic constraint would have informed the device of “transliteration” adopted in Okara’s The Voice. On his part, Ushie (2001), summarizes some of the major positions canvassed by scholars on the problem of language in African literature as follows:
a) Those who, following Obi Wali, have continued to advocate the use of African indigenous languages, e.g. Ngugi Wa Thiongo and Immeh Ikiddeh.
b) Those who have followed the sophisticated formal English expression e.g. Okigbo, Soyinka, Dennis Brutus, J.P. Clark-Bekederemo, e.t.c.
c) Those who, following Janheiz Jahn, have suggested that European languages, for instance, English, be used in such a way that languages bear the African cultural experience while remaining intelligible internationally. Chinua Achebe‟s novels, especially Things Fall Apart and Arrow of God, and the poetry of Okot P „Bitek and Kofi Awoonor illustrate this category.
d) Those who advocate transliteration as a way of keeping intact African cultural heritage while using foreign words, e.g. Gabriel Okara, AS illustrated in his novel, The Voice
e) Those who may be described as following a plural code e.g. Ken Saro Wiwa (whose literary oeuvre is a pot-pourri of linguistic codes with which he has experimented in his work. His novel, Sozaboy, for instance, comes in Nigerian pidgin English; his poetry collection Songs in a Time of war, is in both Nigerian “Standard” English and in Nigerian pidgin English; while several of his biographical works are in sophisticated Nigerian English, just as his posthumously published novel.
Generally, it is germane to note that African scholars who advocate the use of indigenous languages are goaded on by nationalist sentiments, while their counterparts who favour colonial languages place a high premium on the global intelligibility and outreach of a work of art. Bilingualism and African Literature We have established Gabriel Okara’s text as a bilingual text. It is, therefore, pertinent to shed some light on the term “bilingualism”, in relation to African literature. Bloomfield (1933) defines the term as “the native-like control of two languages”. Lambert (1977) sees it as “the existence of two languages in the repertoire of an individual or a speech community”. The significant thread that runs through both definitions is that the term reflects a situation where two languages are used side by side, whether by an individual or a given society. Bilingualism is a product of language contact. Appel and Muystan (1987:1) confirm inter alia: “Language contact inevitably leads to bilingualism.” The inference of this is that, at least, two different languages with distinctive features (i.e. lexical, semantic, phonological and syntactic) must come into contact for bilingualism to occur or manifest. Akindele and Adegbite (1992) identify factors such as colonialism, commerce, conquest, annexation and war, etc, as having the potentials to precipitate such language contacts. The bilingual situation in Africa is traceable to the historical accident of colonialism, which was a by-product of the Berlin conference of 1885, where African nations were balkanized among imperial powers (i.e. Britain, France, Portugal), for administrative purposes. The corollary is that African countries are either Anglophone or Francophone, etc. in addition to the sundry local languages spoken by the compatriots. As literature is an expressive art, the consequent complex linguistic situation is reflected in the literature of these African countries, as explored above. Alo (1998) has outlined some devices used by African writers to reflect local or indigenous nuances in their styles viz:
i. Coinages, borrowing, etc.
ii. The use of native similes and metaphors
iii. The transfer of rhetorical devices from native languages
iv. The translation of native proverbs, idioms, etc.
v. The use of culturally dependent speech styles
vi. The use of syntactic devices and deviation
vii. Code-switching and code-mixing
viii. Transliteration
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Vol. 1 No. 13 [Special Issue – September 2011]
204
It is important to note that, the foregoing devices are adopted, in varying degrees, by different writers to reflect aspects of indigenous meaning. This gives a distinctive African cultural identity to the texts. Literature Review/Theoretical Foundation According to McAthur (1992), contrastive linguistics is a branch of applied linguistics that “describes similarities and differences between two (or more) languages at such levels as phonology, lexis, grammar and semantics”. This concept is relevant to the present study because it enables us to compare and contrast the two languages in question i.e. Ijaw and English. Based on behaviourist and structuralist theories of the 1950’s, Lado’s (1957) contrastive analysis, which we adopted for the analysis, operates on two broad principles. The first is that both languages are described separately. Secondly, only patterns form the basis for comparison and not whole languages, for, as Olabode (2001) observed: … each language is a complex of a large number of patterns at different levels and at different degrees of delicacy. Therefore, there can be no single general statement accounting for all of these patterns. In his introduction to Okara‟s text, Ravenscroft (1969) remarks that, the text had a mixed reception and that some African reviewers found its unconventional use of the English language uncomfortable. The scholar adds that reviewers abroad were also partly nonplussed by the language and curious about its strange symbolism. This situation could have engendered the initial cold feet developed by critics, and the awful misunderstanding of the linguistic and cultural value and significance of The Voice in African literature (Iyasere, 1982). However, Duruoha (1992) observes that, “a growing volume of critique on this novel is emerging”. Previous linguistic works on the text include: shiarella‟s (1970) “Gabriel Okara‟s The Voice: A Study in the Poetic Novel”, Burness‟ (1972)” The Voice: Stylistic Innovation and the Rhythm of African Life”, Okiwelu‟s (1987) “ Gabriel Okara: The Voice and Transliteration”, Scott‟s (1990) “Gabriel Okara‟s The Voice: The Non-Ijo Reader and the Pragmatics of Translingualism”, and Duruoha‟s (1992) “ Form as Metaphor in Gabriel Okara‟s The Voice”. The Significant point is that none of these works focuses mainly on how lexis and meaning have been organized to help the author achieve the target of transliteration in the text, using the tools of contrastive analysis. Transliteration and Translation Alo (1998) defined “transliteration” as the “process whereby the units of one language, e.g. words, structures, are replaced by those in another language e.g. from a Nigerian language into English …” Hornby (2000) says it is “to write words or letters using letters of a different alphabet or language”. These definitions imply that the term involves the replacement of each source language word or other units with the units of the target language. Thus, words or structures in the Ijaw language could be converted to the English Language, as is the case in Okara’s The Voice. Translation is a related concept. It refers to the neutral term used for all tasks where the meaning of expressions in one language is turned into the meaning of another language, whether the medium is spoken or written (Catford, 1965), without recourse to the structures or rules of the source language. In ranking translation, Catford identified three levels of the term: