Die stand van Afrikaans in ons regswese in historiese perspektief en ’n vooruitskouing
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
8 May 2025 marks the centenary of the recognition of Afrikaans as an official language. Notwithstanding all the celebrations commemorating this event, the present position of Afrikaans can be regarded as precarious. This tendency is incidental to the political development of our subcontinent and the historical handicap experienced by the majority of the population in South Africa before 1994. In this historical review an account is provided of the legal language in sway during subsequent periods since the establishment of the first European settlement at the Cape of Good Hope in 1652, up to the present. This survey first touches upon the position regarding the official language and, more specifically, the judicial means of communication in each era, and then covers the status of Afrikaans as a language of tuition. Regarding the first theme, the following periods are subjected to scrutiny: (i) the mainly Dutch East India era: 1652-1806; (ii) the position in the Cape since 1806 and Natal since 1843; (iii) the position in the Boer republics; (iv) the period after the Second Anglo-Boer War: 1902-1910; and (v) the period after Unification: 1910 to the present. Thereafter the emergence of Afrikaans as a language of tuition is evaluated. In the second part of the article dealing with the continued viability of Afrikaans as an official language and language of record, as well as a medium of tuition, the main reasons for the decline of Afrikaans are addressed and evaluated. The establishment of 11 official languages in our constitution and the decree in terms of which Mogoeng CJ declared English as the only official language of record in 2017 are identified as the main reasons for the decline of Afrikaans as a means of communication in legal practice. The abolition of Afrikaans as language of tuition at all previously Afrikaans tertiary institutions – with concomitant effects such as the reluctance of publishers to continue producing Afrikaans textbooks and academics’ preference for publishing in English in order to gain a good rating from the National Research Foundation (NRF) – is identified as a crucial debilitating factor for Afrikaans as a medium of tuition. It is suggested that Afrikaans may still survive as a medium of communication in the legal sphere if the method of the Canadian supreme court of writing judgments in two columns (English and French) is followed. This method has recently found favour in judgments of our supreme court of appeal (English and Xhosa) and constitutional court (English and Afrikaans). This strategy is particularly commendable, because it represents a “practical and positive” measure as determined by section 6(2) of the constitution, which recognises the historically diminished use and status of our indigenous languages and mandates the state to take practical and positive measures to elevate their status and advance their use. Although the future of Afrikaans is ultimately dependent on the loyalty of its speakers towards the language in which they were brought up, its continued existence is bolstered by the fact that there are still numerous Afrikaans legal firms conducting their day-to-day business in Afrikaans, while the possibility of financial inputs by Afrikaans capital may present additional support for enhancing the relevance of Afrikaans as a language of record.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».