This research is premised on Armstrong's (1990:7) argument that „every interpretive approach reveals something only by disguising something else, which a competing method with a different assumption might disclose.‟ This statement indicates that preference or marginalisation of some literary theories impedes progress in African-language literary criticism because different literary theories tend to focus on one or a few selected aspects of a work art. This flows from the assumption that no literary theory can unearth all aspects and meanings of a literary text. This research comes against rigidity, conservatism and narrow-mindedness of those literary critics and scholars who refuse to open up and embrace literary theories which they are opposed to. The research is an attempt to demonstrate the benefit of flexibility and ability to accommodate even those opposing literary views that can make positive contribution in the field of African-language literary criticism. The research further calls for pragmatism, tolerance and co-existence of opposing literary views for the benefit of progress in the field of African-language literary criticism. This research is an acknowledgement of the fact that no literary theory is infallible because all literary theories have their own strong and weak points. In this research, a survey of literary approaches commonly applied in African-language criticism is conducted. This is followed by an analysis of a Tshivenḓa novel (i.e. A si ene) from different literary angles to prove that every literary theory can help to unmask a particular meaning of a literary text which no any other literary theory can do. For example, the intrinsic literary approaches will, most certainly, unlock the meaning of a literary text differently from the way the extrinsic literary theories do because diverse literary approaches focus on different aspects or elements of a work of art. This research is an endorsement of the argument that through multiple-reading of a literary text, readers‟ understanding of the same literary text is broadened and deepened. / African Languages / D. Litt. et Phil (African Languages)

This research is premised on Armstrong's (1990:7) argument that „every interpretive approach reveals something only by disguising something else, which a competing method with a different assumption might disclose.‟ This statement indicates that preference or marginalisation of some literary theories impedes progress in African-language literary criticism because different literary theories tend to focus on one or a few selected aspects of a work art. This flows from the assumption that no literary theory can unearth all aspects and meanings of a literary text. This research comes against rigidity, conservatism and narrow-mindedness of those literary critics and scholars who refuse to open up and embrace literary theories which they are opposed to. The research is an attempt to demonstrate the benefit of flexibility and ability to accommodate even those opposing literary views that can make positive contribution in the field of African-language literary criticism. The research further calls for pragmatism, tolerance and co-existence of opposing literary views for the benefit of progress in the field of African-language literary criticism. This research is an acknowledgement of the fact that no literary theory is infallible because all literary theories have their own strong and weak points. In this research, a survey of literary approaches commonly applied in African-language criticism is conducted. This is followed by an analysis of a Tshivenḓa novel (i.e. A si ene) from different literary angles to prove that every literary theory can help to unmask a particular meaning of a literary text which no any other literary theory can do. For example, the intrinsic literary approaches will, most certainly, unlock the meaning of a literary text differently from the way the extrinsic literary theories do because diverse literary approaches focus on different aspects or elements of a work of art. This research is an endorsement of the argument that through multiple-reading of a literary text, readers‟ understanding of the same literary text is broadened and deepened. / African Languages / D. Litt. et Phil (African Languages)