Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site ubvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!timeinc!phri!pesnta!amd!amdcad!cae780!ubvax!tonyw From: tonyw@ubvax.UUCP (Tony Wuersch) Newsgroups: net.social,net.politics,net.religion Subject: Re: American Blacks & Swahili Message-ID: <231@ubvax.UUCP> Date: Mon, 24-Jun-85 22:28:07 EDT Article-I.D.: ubvax.231 Posted: Mon Jun 24 22:28:07 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 1-Jul-85 06:05:47 EDT References: <1867@ut-ngp.UTEXAS> Distribution: net Organization: Ungermann-Bass, Inc., Santa Clara, CA Lines: 29 Xref: watmath net.social:759 net.politics:9661 net.religion:7193 In article <1867@ut-ngp.UTEXAS>, sunil@ut-ngp.UTEXAS (Sunil Trivedi) writes: > > While almost all of the slaves who were brought to the > 'New World' came from West Africa, why is Swahili given > such a high stature by Blacks in the U.S. when Swahili > is from East Africa? Most of the internationalist (n > 1) generation Africans I know don't distinguish between East or West Africa in their sense of African heritage. That is, they are African more than they are East or West African. Why Swahili? I'm not sure, but perhaps because at the time of rising identification with Africa, Swahili was being pushed as a continental black African language, a tongue for commerce, diplomacy and culture between black African nations. There would be more point in picking a language to be close to modern African political developments than to choose an arbitrary tribal language out of historical nostalgia. Of course, most of these choices were made before the rise of Nigeria to its current prestige and economic power. As to "white" influence on this decision, my impression from the history books I've read is that African nationalist movements in the US have always been led and supported by Blacks alone. Tony Wuersch {amd,amdcad}!cae780!ubvax!tonyw