In January 2002, the government of Zimbabwe officially declared six official minority languages, namely, Kalanga, Nambya, Shangani, Sotho, Tonga and Venda as languages of instruction and subjects in primary schools in the areas where they are spoken as mother tongues. The government had planned for these languages to be introduced to a grade per year until they could be taught at grade 7 level by 2005 (Secretaryâs Circular Number 1 of 2002). Three of these languages (Venda, Tonga and Kalanga) under the auspices of the Venda, Tonga and Kalanga Association (VETOKA) were pioneers in advocating and lobbying for the introduction of marginalised local languages in education in the early 1980s. However, Kalanga and Venda have remained behind, despite having been the pioneers of this initiative. Long after 2005, only Tonga emerged as the first language to be examined in grade 7 in 2011. In current studies in language planning, policy and management, there have been strong suggestions that bottom-up approaches may be more successful than top-down approaches. Bottom-up approaches are said to be the most promising in terms of community commitment and sustainability (Alexander, 1992; Baldauf, 1994; 2005; 2008; Kaplan and Baldauf, 1997; Webb, 2002; 2009; 2010; Mwaniki, 2004; 2010b; Benson, 2005; Trudell, 2006; Lewis and Trudell, 2008; Liddicoat and Baldauf, 2008; Baldauf, Li & Zhao, 2008; Hatoss, 2008). The delay in the implementation of the 2002 policy development and success story of Tonga raises the questions: âWhy this delay? Why was Tonga first?â This study therefore examines the possible causes for the delay in the implementation of the 2002 policy development and the conditions and factors that led to the success story of Tonga. It is expected that an understanding of these causes could help explain the delay in the implementation of the other three languages and similar initiatives elsewhere. It is also hoped that this study will enhance our understanding of the dynamics of bottom-up approaches to language planning. In evaluating and examining the implementation of the 2002 policy development and conditions and factors that led to the success story of Tonga, I adopted the Language Management Approach (LMA) proposed by Mwaniki (2004). The LMA is used alongside Kaplan & Baldaufâs (1997; 2003) seven areas of policy development for language-in-education policy implementation; the ethnolinguistic vitality model advanced by Giles, Bourhis & Taylor (1977) as well as Webbâs (2010) factors and conditions that determine the success and failure of bottom-up and top-down policies. These three frameworks interrelate and overlap with one another, and also with some of the language management variables, methodologies and strategies. It emerged that the delay in the implementation of the 2002 policy development was due to the failure to secure and deploy the language management variables, methodologies and strategies at an optimal level. The failure to timeously develop the seven areas of policy development for language-in-education policy implementation also accounts for the delay. On the one hand, the Tonga group owes its success to the deployment of some of the language management variables, methodologies and strategies and the development of some of the seven areas of policy development for language-in-education policy implementation. The ethnolinguistic vitality of the three language groups in question and the conditions and factors that determine the success or failure of bottom-up and top-down policies also contributed to the delay in the implementation of the 2002 policy development. The success story of Tonga is as a result of the Tonga groupâs ethnolinguistic vitality and some of the conditions and factors that determine the success and failure of bottom-up and top-down policies.

The Constitutional Assembly accepted a new democratic constitution for the Republic of South Africa on 8 May 1996. The Constitution makes provision for a fair amount of clauses regarding language issues. Among other it makes provision for eleven official languages that reflect the multicultural nature of our society. The National Government presents their position on language in education in the 1996 South African Bill of Rights. It seems clear that the Department of Education emphasises the development of multilingualism within the framework of additive bilingual education. Schools are strongly recommended to offer at least two languages of instruction as from Grade 1, one of which should be the home language of the learner. Aside from these positive goals, the opposite seems to happen in practice. Even more complaints arise, especially from the ranks of minority languages (Afrikaans and African languages) that their languages are marginalised as languages of instruction. A positive development is that more voices are heard in support of language teaching, especially in communities that have traditionally been seen as being in favour of English teaching. This re-evaluation of the role of mother tongue teaching could be contributed to certain language activist initiatives since 1994. This study investigates the role of language activism in the movement back to mother tongue education in South Africa after the establishment of a democratic language dispensation in the country. The perception is investigated that communities are apathetic towards language rights issues in education brought about by political and other pressure groups that want to retain the status quo regarding the promotion of English as medium of instruction at the expense of minority languages. This is done by determining: (a) how widespread the phenomenon of language activism in South Africa occurs, (b) the forms (if any) of language activism among the different language communities, (c) whether there is indeed a re-evaluation of mother tongue teaching and (d) what role (if any) language activism plays in the restoration of mother tongue education. Chapter 2 provides an outline of the theoretical background of the study. It provides an overview of the literature on language activism as phenomenon (and its role within the field of language planning) and how it manifests in mother tongue struggles around the world, especially with regard to education. Various definitions of language planning as an inclusive process, and not only as a top-down action, are investigated. The role that communities play in influencing language policy is investigated on the basis of various definitions in the literature regarding language rights activism. Employing the tools of language activism, as developed by Martel and later Lubbe and Du Plessis are investigated. At the end of the chapter the conclusion is reached that interaction between governments and community organisations plays a vital role in preserving and developing the cultural and linguistic heritage of any community. Chapter 3 provides an overview of the qualitative research design and methodology used in the study. For the purposes of this study a literature, documents and empirical study was done which involved analysing the press clippings. This provides an outline of the methods followed to obtain information from the literature (both nationally and internationally), relevant documents and media records selected for the purpose of the study. It also outlines the strategies followed in order to ensure the validity and reliability. The study is done on the basis of the typology of the instruments of language activism introduced by Martel (1999) and further developed by Lubbe et al. (2004) and Du Plessis (2006). The typology distinguishes between the main instruments of language activism used by language activists and presents an appreciation of which tools would be more successful. The analysis was done on the basis of the definitions of language activism and the social movement theory as discussed in Chapter 2. Chapter 4 provides an historical background to language planning and language policy development in South Africa. The chapter highlights the main moments within the political context of language policy development. An attempt is made to present the role of language activism in South Africa by studying the relevant literature. Studies on language activism and mother tongue education as well as official documents on language in education are used. The period 1652 (the beginning of the Colonial period) until 1994 (the democratisation period) is covered. In Chapter 5 the findings regarding the media analysis for the period 1994 to 2005 are discussed. This is followed by a critical analysis and interpretation of the findings in order to determine the role language activism played in the re-evaluation of mother tongue education in South Africa. The conclusion is reached that language activism did take place within the South African community. Also that the two main traditions of language activism still figure, but there are signs from both sides of the spectrum that there is a willingness to cooperate inclusively to a greater democratic education system. In the last chapter a summary is presented of the findings in the various chapters. A synthesis of the findings is presented with regard to the problem statements outlined in Chapter 3. Conclusions are made based on the findings and recommendations are then made regarding further investigations into problem areas and possible solutions.