6.2 Kaaps
PS
6.2 Kaaps
by Peter Snyders © 8.9.2020 with support from Unison Music and Literature
In this writing on Kaaps, we will look at the ê (alt + 136). The diacritical sign is [ε]
(alt + 238). It is written as e in Kora by Menán du Plessis. A diacritical sign is a sign of a distinctive phoneme of a language.
This diacritical sign [ε] will obviously not work for a written language, so whenever you see e in Kora it means [ε], i.e. ê. These linguistic signs can be very useful. When we consult a dictionary, the commendable ones will use these signs to indicate how the word is conventionally (generally) pronounced. The study of any foreign language’s unfamiliar sounds or pronunciation (typical of Dutch) can be recorded and remembered by writing the difficult pronunciations in their diacritical [ ] form. Some linguists use / / in place of the square brackets.
We think that the time is right to prove why it is so difficult (probably impossible) to just abandon the rules and sounds of one’s own language just to be civilised in trying one’s best to accommodate the other person’s language. With our demonstration of (Djan and Djorro) we saw how difficult it is in the first place for two people with completely different languages to communicate. It makes the inconvenience for the indigenous person even more unfavourable.
Jan points at himself and says “Jan”. Jan is a concrete thing, a human being that Jorro’s senses can see. His sense of understanding tells him that Jan is the name or label for this fair-skinned man in front of him. Taking this Perception and applying it to himself, he identifies his own name.
Please allow us to add that the scene that we created with Jan and Djorro did not happen this way. Coree, the Khoikhoi, was kidnapped by the English and taken to London, where he remained for six months. After he was brought back, he ensured that the English ships were provided with livestock. When he refused to barter with the Dutch, they murdered him.
The English then took Autshumao or Autshumao with them on their ship to Bantam. On the ship he learned to communicate in English with the other seamen. We will come across him (called Harry or Herrie by the Dutch) after Jan van Riebeeck came here on 6th April 1652. Autshumao entered the Dutch ship soon after the Dutch had anchored in the Table Bay. He could speak some English, so the Dutch could partially understand him.
We are creating a more common way for Europeans meeting the indigenous peoples for the first time. This is a more universal way of sketching the way a pidgin language has its foundation. The Djan and Djorro scenario are typical of how the language began.
Returning to our original train of thought, this is where the second of the six means of obtaining knowledge comes in. It is called Inference. It means taking one proof and establishing another, second proof, from it. Those of you who have done mathematics in high school would be familiar with this systematic way mathematics goes about forever staying with the facts.
Remember, just as the child’s mind is completely blank at birth regarding any language, so, too, is the mind of Djorro with regard to the Dutch language. So, we have again used inference, which is closely associated with our first pramana (tools for obtaining true knowledge), perception. Similarly, the child, when it wants to know the name of something, let us say a table or a chair, points to it. The mother or family member then gives the name. The child now associates the sensory object (sight) with the sensory sound. This is learning by perception. Science calls it observation.
For a child to remember something, the mother – and the child – will repeat the new word on a regular basis. The words ma, pa, dada, usually get heavy service. As psychology has proved, rote learning (mechanical, unthinking means of learning) assists the remembrance of the nouns (material objects). Nothing abstract is suitable at this stage or in the pidgin phase of language creation. It is the same with the new language, pidgin, that is germinating.
Knowing words (the lexicon) of a language without knowing how to use them, i.e. the rules, is quite useless. The child needs to know the rules without even knowing about rules and language. Even before the rules, the child from birth persistently hears the sounds of the mother tongue, and because of this continuous exposure to the sounds of the mother tongue, they are ingrained in the brain of the child.
Again, Cognitive Science has proved this. Scientists non-invasively put earphones and electrodes into the child’s cap. While the child was playing, they suddenly played a sound (phoneme) of the mother tongue. The child’s mind lights up on the computer screen, showing that it recognised the sound.
When an English-environment child was signalled an uncommon Chinese phoneme, there was a very tiny reaction in the brain, and it obviously rejected the temporary and unsaved file. When the situation was reversed, and a Chinese child was studied using an English foreign sound, the same but opposite happened.
This proves that language sounds – and rules – are internalised, and the more you use or encounter them, the stronger they attach to the brain and memory.
3.10.2026