The past few decades dating back to the era of Africa’s independence have experienced a heated debate about the continent’s future in the areas of economics, politics, arts, culture and languages.
Of great significance is the direction the continent is required to take in relation to language and its utility. Africa’s protagonists have argued vigorously the question of one overarching language for Africa.
But those who have been pushing the agenda seem to have given little attention to the complexity of languages as part of a culture for people groups irrespective of how small or big they might be.
As a result, Soyinka, for instance, seems to suggest the use of the Yoruba language, Ali Mazrui did advocate vehemently for Swahili as the language for Africa.
Interestingly, Mubanga Kashoki of Zambia points to Yoruba as a possibility for Africa.
Ngugi of Kenya goes so far as writing and translating some of his works in Gikuyu, his native language, perhaps with an inherent intent as others mentioned.
The question basically is this: would not this be an imposition of a language on a people or an ethnic group and be perceived as being an  equivalent to the western cultural imperialism we have so much trumpeted as an enigma to the survival of languages and culture of Africans?
Would not this lead to the disruption of other ethnic languages and culture as we have witnessed in African countries as a result of the use of English, French or Portuguese languages?
And would not this be a precursor to the disruption of the culture of a people, a kind of an imperial domination within the continent?
It is my considered view that a lot would be lost as our experience indicates right now: the flavour of languages, their aesthetics, idioms and riddles, proverbs and so on.
Let us take as an example Simon Mwansa Kapwepwe’s use of language in his epic book of poetry, ‘Africa We Can Forgive but We Cannot Forget’ or ‘Africa Kuti Twabelela Uluse Lelo Tekuti Tulabe.’ For starters, listen to the flare and elegance of the following:

Kuli ba kacele wesu
Bakalwila wa buntungwa bwesu
Ili buku lyenu
E bunga twakulakuba pa mputa shenu
Pakuti tumupakate bwino
Pantu mukaba umucele wa Zambia
Umuyayaya! Kabili tamwakafwe

(To our dearly beloved
The fighters for our freedom
This book is yours
It’s the mealie meal we shall
Be sprinkling on your graves
For a fitting veneration
Because you will be the salt
Of Zambia, forever!
And you will never die)

It is imperative to note that the mere translation of what should remain untranslated gives rise to a loss of beauty entrenched in a language.
First of all, the presence of the flare of a sound system is muffled by the use of another language whose idioms and expressions cannot adequately accommodate another’s.
Let us take as an illustration some words in the opening dedication of the book. Kapwepwe addresses the freedom fighters as ‘ba kacele’ (our dear beloved) and further distinguishes them by using a warm expression ‘umucele’ (salt).
I would like to impress upon the reader that the translation of the first expression is far from being an equivalent of the communicated sense in the original language.
In the process of the translation the flavor and flare is already lost and so is the end-rhyme of the Bemba words. We cannot also account for the end- rhymes in a translated work: words like ‘wesu’ (our), ‘bwesu’ (our); or as in lines one and two: ‘lyenu’ (yours) and ‘shenu’ (your).
Notice the significance of how the pronoun ‘our’ in English is used for two words in the Bemba pronouns as their equivalents more or less.
Also, in a general sense what is subdued in a translated text is the warmth, the affinity, the passionate appeal of the writer to the addressee; all of which a reader is expected to enjoy.
Let us further explore the language use in the book:

Ili buku aliba munani nga shibikilemo na mucele
Pantu ukubikamo umucele kulundulwila.
Nalemba nge ng’omba nabikamo no busesemo
Nabikamo na malango ukulingana nefyo
Ifikolwe fyalelanda imilandu pa kale

(If this book was relish I’d not add salt to it
For to do so would be to make it unassailable
I write like a court historian; I put in it prophesy
I put in it philosophy as our forefathers
Used to speak to discuss issues in olden days)

This text is part of a foreword in the book and Kapwepwe makes it clear on the outset that he would rely on the rich language of his forefathers as a thrust for his argument.
In a similar context it is difficult to translate local expressions or sayings as accurately as possible in another language.
In the second line, for example, the sense of ‘sweetness’ (or is it saltiness?) of the book is metaphorically compared to a known family commodity, relish in a local environment, an appreciation of which is hard to fathom with or no experience of it at all.
African or indeed Zambian women are experts in the use of salt to make the meal appetizing and a person outside this set-up might not appreciate the essence of what is implied here. However, what is critical is to infer what is meant by the non-use of salt on what, in fact, desperately requires salt.
It is a paradox, isn’t it? But what the writer is communicating is the elegance, the beauty; the flare of what the book contains. And we probably should insist that it is not only the book content but also the prominence of language usage.
The question would then promptly arise: how did the poet’s forefathers use his language? In order to appreciate this I would like to refer the reader to the last part of our discussion last week about which; in fact, one reader said they did not understand the meaning of the sayings.
It would be helpful to take a look at the expressions and make comments on each one of them:
Lunkuntwe shilupuma mpanga
Shimantanga we watangalila
Ubufumu na bulumbwe
In our previous discussion, I mentioned the fact that it would be difficult to translate sayings like these basically because of what we have already mentioned.
We can, however, make general statements as to what the inferences would be in a given context and this is what I ought to do now. In this case the person referred to possesses unpresented courage and bravery; he, metaphorically speaking owns the land and its possessions.
It is a person who is an accomplished warrior, uncompromising and absolutely pungent in character. Only the language speakers will appreciate the expression ‘Shimantanga we watangalila’ with its tones of straddling over something with an expression of ‘ubufumu na balumbwe’ implying possessing not only the inanimate things such as land but also chiefs and subjects. This is absolute chieftaincy.

Kanyelele mufukila kubili

This is an expression spoken of a person who is unstable. A person who is a lackey, who in a modern parlance we would call a sycophant or bootlicker.
The image this saying generates is of an insect paving its way in the soil and throwing soil both sides of its hole and, therefore, invokes a sense of instability.
Kwindi we ulya no kuputilisha
This is an interesting one similar to the previous and connotes a sense of sycophancy too. It is the image of a rat (kwindi) which is believed to bite its victim and soothe at the same time.

Cengabupele we wawalaile
Infumu umusengele wa cela

While we may have a possibility of a steel bed in our day, this was a far-fetched idea in the era the poet is referring to and so the person (Chengabupele) is said to have promised a chief a metallic or steel bed. In a sense, this refers to a person who is a liar to the core; an incorrigible liar.
Sondashi linso lya nkoko mushisha kalele
The person’s name is Sondashi from which the saying is derived. This is a thief who would not see anything and leave it. He/she is likely to take it, steal!

Chitapankwa uutapa ne shishili shakwe,
Kapopo mukali wa pwa bantu

The first (Chitapankwa) refers to a warrior, a conqueror, a looter. A person of this nature gets anything whether or not it belongs to them. This is similar to the saying above while the second (Kapopo) is about an unrepentant rustler who is ruthless and reckless.
Dear reader, the purpose of our discussion is to discourage any temptation whether internally led or externally inclined to suggest that we can adopt one particular language over many others without destroying a cultural heritage of a people.
Our languages should be cherished otherwise they face the danger of extinction as the present cultural imposition of western languages would seem to indicate in Africa.–ofpoetspoems@mail.com–