Online Reporter
Kennedy Mandaza
LANGUAGE is more than just a tool for communication. It is a repository of a people’s history, a carrier of culture, identity, worldview and power. In many post-colonial nations, including Zimbabwe, language continues to reflect colonial hierarchies, with English often positioned as superior to indigenous tongues. This legacy is especially visible in educational institutions, public services and national discourse, where local languages are marginalised.
Any conversation about decolonisation in Zimbabwe often evokes images of political independence, land reform and economic autonomy. Yet one of the most powerful tools of colonisation — language — continues to shape minds and limit possibilities. It is time we take stock of the extent to which the failure to use indigenous languages for communication and instruction has perpetuated the colonial legacy.
Colonial rule did not only involve political domination but also cultural and linguistic erasure. In Rhodesia, as in other British colonies, the English language was enforced as the medium of education and governance. Indigenous languages such as Shona, Ndebele, Tonga, Kalanga, Venda and others were side-lined, treated as inferior or unsuited for “serious” use. This linguistic suppression was a form of mental colonisation, a way of making Africans see themselves through the eyes of their colonisers.
Decades after independence, English remains the primary language of instruction in schools, the main medium in Government, and the preferred language in official meetings, including rallies. Local languages are often confined to informal settings, despite being the first languages for the majority of Zimbabweans.
To truly decolonise the Zimbabwean mind, there must be an urgent and deliberate move towards embracing and institutionalising local languages, especially in education, public service and community engagement.
In Zimbabwe, the continued prioritisation of English over indigenous languages creates a hierarchy of intelligence and legitimacy. Fluency in English, and having an English accent is often equated with intelligence, competence and success, while local languages are relegated to domestic and informal spheres.
This linguistic divide reinforces colonial attitudes and undermines national cohesion.
One of the clearest areas where language has a direct impact is in education. Numerous studies globally have demonstrated that children learn better and faster when they are taught in their mother tongue. The use of the mother tongue in early childhood and primary education improves comprehension, cognitive development, retention, critical thinking and academic performance.
Conversely, when children are forced to learn in a foreign language, they struggle to grasp basic concepts, which negatively impacts their academic performance and long-term prospects. Sadly, because of the brainwashed mindset, Zimbabweans relegate their mother tongue to history in preference of English as soon as the child utters the first syllable.
Many rural and urban children enter school speaking only their mother tongue, yet from the first day, they are taught in English. This sudden linguistic transition hampers understanding, disrupts the learning process, lowers self-esteem, and contributes to high failure rates, as children are expected to grasp new and complex concepts in a language they are still acquiring.
Language also plays a critical role in how citizens interact with the state. When public institutions operate primarily in English, they exclude a significant portion of the population from fully understanding their rights, accessing services and participating in civic life.
Political leaders, community organisers, public figures, and development agencies often speak about empowering communities. But how can you empower people if you don’t speak their language? Public meetings, development forums, and local governance structures have a responsibility to use local languages in public discourse, to ensure meaningful participation.
A villager in Nembudziya attending a political gathering, a villager in Nyamahubogo visiting a health clinic, a farmer in Matetsi in Hwange engaging with agricultural extension officers, or a citizen needing legal advice should be able to receive information in a language they fully understand. Otherwise, communication breakdowns can lead to misdiagnosis, underutilisation of services and mistrust in public institutions. Conversely, using local languages foster inclusivity, build trust and empower citizens to engage meaningfully with their government.
At a gathering, which is predominantly of Ndebele speaking people, Ndebele should be the preferred language of communication, even when parts of the message is intended for those not in attendance. Doing so, not only ensures that messages reach a wider audience, but also validates the cultural identity of the people. It also fosters trust, clarity and cultural connection and affirms people’s dignity.
Public meetings conducted in English often alienate ordinary citizens and restrict participation to the educated elite. By using local languages, leaders can create spaces where all citizens feel heard and respected. Furthermore, local idioms, proverbs and storytelling — key components of indigenous communication — can be powerful tools for persuasion, education and mobilisation.
We must learn from Zimbabwe’s liberation struggle, in which local languages played a crucial role in spreading political messages and galvanising support. Pungwes, which focused on political education and conscientisation were all in local languages. Today, they can be just as powerful in nation-building, especially in fostering a shared identity and collective purpose.
In Zimbabwe, embracing indigenous languages in education, media, literature and public life would contribute to the preservation of oral traditions, proverbs, indigenous knowledge systems and communal values. It will also help combat the psychological effects of colonialism, where African languages are still viewed as “backward” or “primitive.”
Decolonising the mind through language should not just be a symbolic gesture. The decolonisation of the linguistic landscape of Zimbabwe requires more than rhetoric; it demands concrete policy action and sustained political will.
First, the education curriculum must be restructured to prioritise mother tongue instruction, especially in the early years. Second, government institutions must operationalise multilingualism by producing materials and offering services in all recognised languages. Third, national broadcasting and media must be required to include significant content in local languages.
Finally, there must be a national campaign to change attitudes towards indigenous languages. This includes elevating their status in society and promoting their use as symbols of pride and identity, not backwardness.
The decolonisation of Zimbabwe is incomplete without linguistic liberation. By embracing and institutionalising local languages, Zimbabwe can unlock the full intellectual, cultural and democratic potential of its people. Language is not merely a means of communication — it is a tool of empowerment, a vehicle of knowledge and a cornerstone of identity. To speak one’s language freely and to be educated, governed and heard in it, is not a privilege, but a right. The time has come for Zimbabwe to decolonise the mind by reclaiming the word.
