OBSERVARE

Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº.1, TD4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026

LANGUAGE POLICY MANAGEMENT FOR MULTILINGUALISM IN PORTUGUESE-

SPEAKING AFRICAN COUNTRIES: DISCUSSIONS FROM ANGOLA AND

MOZAMBIQUE

JEFFERSON EVARISTO

jeffersonpn@yahoo.com.br

Professor of Portuguese at the State University of Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), where he teaches on

the postgraduate programmes PPGLILP and PPLIN/FFP. He is currently undertaking postdoctoral

research in Linguistic Studies and has previously completed postdoctoral research in Linguistics

and Portuguese Language. He holds a PhD in Portuguese Language from UERJ, as well as a PhD

and an MA in Neo-Latin Studies (Italian Language) from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro

(UFRJ). A recipient of the Young Scientist of Our State fellowship awarded by FAPERJ and the

Procientista scholarship granted by UERJ, he is an elected member of the Brazilian Academy of

Philology, where he occupies Chair 18. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7561-5400

ALEXANDRE ANTÓNIO TIMBANE

Alexandre.timbane@unilab.edu.br

Linguist whose academic career spans Brazil and Mozambique. He holds postdoctoral

qualifications in Philology and Portuguese Language from the University of São Paulo (USP), in

Letters from the Federal University of Sergipe (UFS), and in Forensic Linguistics from the Federal

University of Santa Catarina (UFSC). He also completed both a postdoctoral degree and a

doctorate in Linguistics and Portuguese Language at São Paulo State University (UNESP). He

holds an MA in Linguistics from Eduardo Mondlane University, Mozambique, and a Licentiate and

Bachelor’s degree in French Language Teaching from the Pedagogical University of Mozambique.

He serves as a faculty member at the University for International Integration of the Afro-Brazilian

Lusophony (UNILAB) and the Graduate Programme in Linguistic Studies at the State University of

Feira de Santana (Brazil). http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2061-9391

DANIEL PERES SASSUCO

dperesasuku@gmail.com

Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Humanities at Agostinho Neto University (Angola). He holds

a PhD in General Linguistics from Atlantic International University (USA) and a PhD in Language,

Culture and Society from Zambeze University, Mozambique. He earned a Master’s degree in

Multilingual Information and Communication Processing from the Autonomous University of

Barcelona, Spain, and a Licentiate and Bachelor’s degree in Applied Pedagogy, specialising in

French and African Linguistics, from the Higher Pedagogical Institute of Lubumbashi in the

Democratic Republic of the Congo. His teaching and research interests encompass linguistics,

multilingualism, language policy, and intercultural communication. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-

0965-0483

Abstract

Language policy management is a significant challenge in the African Portuguese-speaking

Countries (APSC). It stems from the idea that poorly constructed language policies threaten

the existence of languages, reducing their preservation, and can contribute to their

obliteration. In this sense, Angola and Mozambique share a common historical and linguistic

past: the existence of Bantu and Khoisan African languages and their coexistence with

Portuguese, a language inherited from Portugal and also the only language established for

administrative services, which puts multilingualism in check. Our research aims to analyse

the sociolinguistic situation of Angola and Mozambique, describing the established policies and

the challenges that can contribute to the revitalization of endangered languages. This is

bibliographic research (also supported by interviews) that seeks to understand how language

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

policies can be established that effectively contribute to the safeguarding, revitalization, and

preservation of Bantu and Khoisan African languages in both contexts. In conclusion, our

discussion points to the need to rethink the place of African native languages in the APSC

countries and to debate the need to implement multilingual education, as well as the creation

of grammars for the African varieties of Portuguese.

Keywords

Language Policies; Multilingualism; African Languages; Angola; Mozambique.

Resumo

A gestão de políticas linguísticas constitui-se como um desafio significativo nos Países

Africanos de Língua Oficial Portuguesa (PALOP). Parte-se da ideia de que políticas linguísticas

mal construídas ameaçam a existência das línguas, reduzem sua preservação e podem

contribuir para sua obliteração. Nesse sentido, Angola e Moçambique compartilham um

passado histórico e linguístico comum: a existência das línguas africanas bantu e khoisan e a

convivência com o português, língua herdada de Portugal e, também, a única língua instituída

para os serviços administrativos, o que coloca o multilinguismo em xeque. Nossa pesquisa

visa analisar a situação sociolinguística de Angola e de Moçambique, descrevendo as políticas

estabelecidas e os desafios que podem contribuir para a revitalização das línguas em perigo.

Trata-se de uma pesquisa bibliográfica (com suporte, também, em entrevistas) que busca

entender como se pode estabelecer políticas linguísticas que efetivamente contribuam para a

salvaguarda, a revitalização e a preservação das línguas africanas bantu e khoisan nos dois

contextos. Ao final, nossa discussão aponta para a necessidade de se repensar o lugar das

línguas originárias africanas nos PALOP e de debater a necessidade de implementar uma

educação multilíngue, assim como a criação de gramáticas para as variedades africanas do

português.

Palavras-chave

Políticas Linguísticas; Multilinguismo; Línguas africanas; Angola; Moçambique.

How to cite this article

Evaristo, Jefferson, Timbane, Alexandre António & Sassuco, Daniel Peres (2026). Language Policy

Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African Countries: Discussions from

Angola and Mozambique. Janus.net, e-journal of international relations. Thematic Dossier –

Geopolitics of Anxiety: Ideology, Identity, and (Un)Bordering in Contemporary Europe and Asia,

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD4, October 2026, pp. 43-63. DOI https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.DT0726.2

Article submitted on 12 July 2026 and accepted on 14 August 2026.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

LANGUAGE POLICY MANAGEMENT FOR MULTILINGUALISM IN

PORTUGUESE-SPEAKING AFRICAN COUNTRIES: DISCUSSIONS

FROM ANGOLA AND MOZAMBIQUE

JEFFERSON EVARISTO

ALEXANDRE ANTÓNIO TIMBANE

DANIEL PERES SASSUCO

Introduction

Angola is a country located in Africa, more specifically in the Southern African region,

occupying an area of 1,246,700 km². According to the final results of the Census (INEA,

2024)

, the population is 36,604,681. With an area of [insert area here] 4.837 km, its

land borders are located in the north of the province of Cabinda with Congo Brazzaville,

to the north and to the east with the Democratic Republic of Congo (formerly Zaire), to

the East with Zambia, and to the South with Namibia. In accordance with Law No. 14/24

of September 5th

, the new Political-Administrative Division of the country was approved

, establishing 21 (twenty-one) Provinces, 326 (three hundred twenty-six) Municipalities,

and 378 (three hundred seventy-eight) Communes. On the ground, Angola is to the

South of the Francophone countries of the centre and to the North of the Anglophone

countries, being the only Lusophone country in this region.

Mozambique, located on the southeastern coast of Africa, is a country composed of eleven

provinces, with an estimated population of over 26 million, according to the General

Declaration of Interest - The author declares that there are no known financial, professional, or personal

conflicts of interest that could have appeared to influence this research. The author has no competing interests

to declare.

Acknowledgment - The author acknowledges the use of Microsoft Copilot in assisting with the improvement

of English grammar, the formatting of references, and the standardization of citations in this work. All

intellectual content, arguments, analysis, interpretations, and conclusions remain the sole responsibility of

the author.

Retrieved from https://www.ine.gov.ao/publicacoes/detalhes/NDc0MTE%3D

Retrieved from https://mpla.ao/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Lei14.24de5deSetembro.pdf

Retrieved from Diário da República [Official Gazette] of November 28, 2024, Iª Série, nº 229/12938. Also,

in Law nº 14/24, of September 5, of the Political-Administrative Division, which revokes Law nº 18/16, of

October 17, Law of the Political-Administrative Division, and all legislation that contradicts the provisions of

this Law.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

Population and Housing Census conducted in 2017. The Mozambican people are

characterized by their wide geographical, cultural, and linguistic diversities. With a vast

territory and a multi-ethnic population, it borders Tanzania to the North, Malawi and

Zambia to the northwest, Zimbabwe to the West, Eswatini and South Africa to the

southwest, and is bathed by the Indian Ocean to the East. The arrival of the Portuguese

language through the colonization process brought profound changes to the lives of

Angolans and Mozambicans, especially from the prohibition of the use of local languages.

Thus, the consolidation of Portuguese as an official and taught language intensified its

spread, especially throughout the 20th century, producing profound linguistic and social

inequalities: both countries came to have Portuguese as an official language because

they were overseas provinces of Portugal. During the colonial period, local languages

were prohibited, and the colonial system contributed to their silence, an erasure aimed

at potentiating Portuguese dominance and materializing its linguistic superiority. In the

colonial context, Portuguese was a superior language that should be compulsorily learned

and known by the citizens of the colonies.

Angola and Mozambique fought for and won their freedoms, proclaiming their

independences in 1975. However, with power in their hands, they adopted attitudes

similar to those of colonial language policies: both imitated the Portuguese government

and made Portuguese the official language, to the detriment of the local languages

spoken at the time by the majority of the population. The independence fighters failed to

see that this strategy was an authentic erasure of the local languages that constituted

the languages of the cultural identities and traditions of their respective peoples. The

idea of forming the post-colonial "new man," therefore, failed, because the "new man"

was supposed to abandon his traditions, cultures, languages, and religion, behaving in

practice as a "non-African," a replica of a "Portuguese."

In this sense, the linguistic issue has been neglected in the African Portuguese-speaking

Countries (APSC

), especially in Angola and Mozambique, and politicians rarely discuss

the subject publicly. The universities have conducted studies and researches presenting

these linguistic challenges, but the topic of languages is treated as a secondary and

complementary element. For example, fifty years after independence, the sign languages

have not been included in education and public institutions, multilingual/bilingual

education is not promoted, and the protection and revitalization of local languages of

African origin is not encouraged. The local radio stations are exceptions, providing parts

of their broadcasts in local languages.

On the other hand, incentives for literary production in local languages are non-existent,

public television channels ignore the presence of deaf people in both countries, and local

languages are only used during election campaigns. All these concerns are considered of

little interest, which explains the absence of language policies promoting locally spoken

languages.

It is important to say that we do not support the idea of prohibiting the use of Portuguese

in the APSC because this language allows communication between ethnic groups within

The original: PALOP – Paises Africanos de Língua Oficial Portuguesa

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

the country and with the outside world; however, learning a language for national and

international communication does not mean abandoning local mother tongues. We,

therefore, advocate for equal opportunities and respect among speakers of these

languages.

This study aims to analyse how language policy management can influence the dimension

of multilingualism in the APSC. We start from the idea that the similarity of political

decisions has largely hindered the expansion of Angolan and Mozambican languages.

Specifically, we seek to (i) explain the current linguistic situation in Angola and

Mozambique; (ii) criticize established language policies, drawing attention to a future in

which local languages may disappear; and (iii) explore possible paths towards a more

inclusive language policy and planning that does not exclude other languages which are

spoken in these territories, understanding that linguistic hierarchies are ideological and

colonizing, and above all, constructs of cultural domination should be critically examined.

Thus, through bibliographic and documentary research (also supported by interviews),

we were able to understand the sociolinguistic reality, language management, and

language policy decisions in this context.

This research is divided as follows: the first section discusses (de)coloniality, seeking to

understand how linguistic ideology was implemented in the two countries. The next one,

we discuss language policies, language planning, and their impacts. In sections 3 and 4,

we analyse the sociolinguistic realities of Angola and Mozambique from the (de)coloniality

paradigm. Finally, in the fifth section, we compare the two realities in order to present

some concluding remarks.

Coloniality and decoloniality

The African case is perhaps the most evident example for a discussion of coloniality and

decoloniality. Understanding its existence and implications, first, recognizing that the

Portuguese overseas colonization that began in the fifteenth century went beyond the

physical occupation of territories, constituting a broad project of domination, control, and

the political, economic, cultural, and epistemological reorganization of the affected

regions; it was also a form of linguistic domination.

Although the etymological origin of the term refers to the Latin verb colo , originally

associated with the occupation and cultivation of land, authors such as Bosi (1992)

demonstrated that the colonial process also implied the imposition of values, languages,

forms of knowledge, and models of social organization that disrupted the cultures of the

subjugated peoples. Colonization, in this sense, produced lasting effects that did not end

with the political independence

of the former colonies (Nascimento and Bittencourt,

“On November 11, 1975, a date agreed upon between Portugal and the Angolan liberation movements,

Angola’s independence was declared” (Pinheiro, 2007, p. 83).

“The Mozambique Liberation Front (FRELIMO) was responsible for leading the movement that culminated in

the independence of Mozambique in 1975” (Rêgo, 2024, p. 22)

All quotations in our text were freely translated by the authors.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

2016), remaining present in power relations, institutions, and the production of

knowledge.

It is precisely this permanence that underlies the concept of coloniality, developed

primarily through the work of Aníbal Quijano and further developed by authors such as

Mignolo (2003). From this perspective, modernity cannot be understood separately from

the European colonial expansion that began in the sixteenth century. Contrary to

traditional interpretations, which locate its origin in the Enlightenment or the Industrial

Revolution, decolonial studies argue that the conquest of Africa and America, together

with the consolidation of the colonial system constitutes the initial landmark of modernity.

European centrality brought about a fundamental rupture in those colonized countries,

relegating the experiences of their peoples to the status of peripheral or inferior

knowledge, originating from societies equally inferior to the colonizer.

Many of today's geopolitical boundaries were imposed through the process of

colonization. It was the Europeans, for example, who demarcated African territories and

separated families, ethnic groups, and languages. We need only remember that no

African was present at the Berlin Conference (1884/1885), the event that defined the

current partition of Africa. In the context of the APSC, this reflection takes on particular

relevance. Angola, Mozambique, Cabo Verde, Guinea-Bissau, and São Tomé and Príncipe,

for example, experienced long processes of Portuguese colonization that left deep marks

on their political, cultural, and linguistic structures. The fact that Portuguese played an

important role in the construction of nation-states and in communication between

different linguistic groups results from colonial policies that sought to marginalize African

languages and associate the colonizer's language with social prestige, access to

education, and the exercise of power.

From this perspective, decoloniality does not propose rejecting the Portuguese language

or denying the shared history between these countries. Its objective is to problematize

the hierarchies inherited from colonialism and to recognize the legitimacy of the multiple

forms of cultural, linguistic, and intellectual production existing in these territories – and,

as a consequence of this position, to act for their promotion, safeguarding, and

protection, understanding these actions as fundamental issues of language policies and

multilingualism. By shifting the centre of knowledge production to the historical and social

experiences of the Global South, decolonial thought contributes to valuing local

knowledge, strengthening national identities, and broadening the understanding of

Portuguese-speaking African societies beyond the categories traditionally constructed by

the Eurocentric gaze. It is, therefore, a movement that seeks to make visible historically

silenced epistemologies, reaffirming the cultural and linguistic diversity that characterizes

the APSC and questioning the mechanisms by which coloniality continues to produce

asymmetries even after the end of formal colonial domination. Thus, the decoloniality

movement can be summarized by the following assumptions: Decolonial studies share a

systematic set of theoretical statements that revisit the question of power in modernity.

These conceptual procedures are:

1. The location of the origins of modernity in the conquest of America and

the control of the Atlantic by Europe, between the late 15th and early 16th

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

centuries, and not in the Enlightenment or the Industrial Revolution, as is

commonly accepted;

2. Special emphasis is placed on the structuring of power through colonialism

and the constitutive dynamics of the modern/capitalist world-system and its

specific forms of accumulation and exploitation on a global scale;

3. Understanding modernity as a planetary phenomenon constituted by

asymmetrical power relations, and not as a symmetrical phenomenon

produced in Europe and subsequently extended to the rest of the world;

4. The asymmetry of power relations between Europe and its "others"

represents a constitutive dimension of modernity and, therefore, necessarily

implies the subordination of the practices and subjectivities of the dominated

peoples;

5. The subjugation of the majority of the world's population is established

through two structural axes based on the control of labour and the control of

intersubjectivity;

6. The designation of Eurocentrism/Westernism as the specific form of

knowledge and subjectivity production in modernity (Quintero, Figueira and

Elizalde, 2019, p. 5)

Originating in the Global South, the notion of decoloniality finds its first contributions

from subaltern studies, pioneered in India by the research of Ranajit Guha and strongly

influenced by Gramscian Marxism, constituted an important contribution to the critique

of Eurocentrism and the general dynamics of colonialism during the 1980s (Quintero,

Figueira and Elizalde, 2019, p. 4).

If “the second half of the 20th century was marked by a series of conflicts and events

that highlighted the rupture between the colonizer and the colonized, now independent”

(Rêgo, 2024, p. 21), this occurred, to a large extent, coinciding with the growing

discussion about decoloniality. We have seen, with Pinheiro (2007), Rêgo (2024) and

Nascimento and Bittencourt (2016), that this process, which took place in Angola and

Mozambique in 1975, culminated in the liberation of these countries, then Portuguese

colonies, and led to their autonomy from the former colonizing country.

This autonomy, however, could not be verified in all areas. In our analysis, this is

particularly evident in the linguistic domain and directly impacts language policy issues,

especially in relation to the expected Lusophony that would unite PSC or, on a more

localized level, the articulation of different African countries as a cohesive group based

on the APSC. The following section addresses these issues.

Language policies, language planning and their impacts

The discussion about language policies – or, more broadly, “policy” and “policies,” even

if not necessarily “linguistic” ones – historically dates back to the Greek world, with

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

Aristotle systematizing the first structured argument in this regard (although Socrates

and Plato had already begun developing ideas in this direction). In Evaristo (2021a;

2021b), one can find an extensive discussion about the diverse interpretations of the

concept of politics, ranging from the Greek world, Aristotle, Augustine of Hippo,

Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Marx, and contemporary authors, especially based

on dictionaries. This long journey shows how the idea of politics is multifaceted and how

different authors have appropriated it in very varied, sometimes conflicting or mutually

exclusive ways. Following the discussion and bringing the idea of "politics" closer to the

linguistic field, we arrive at the new concept of "language policies." Its first appearance

as an autonomous idea conventionally dates back to the discussions initiated by Ferguson

in 1959 (Calvet, 2007), when he systematized problematizations about the relationship

between languages and societies and outlined the first aspects of the organization and

management of these languages. Naturally, it is possible to find many other episodes in

human history where one could say there was some discussion about what we understand

today as language policy, such as the Socratic and Platonic discussions of the Greek

world, the defence of the Latin language as a unifying factor of the Roman Empire, the

perception of a socio dialectal variation in the 14th to 17th centuries, or even the first

steps of Philology and the historical-comparative method, to cite a few occurrences.

However, although they existed, these situations showed the seeds of a discussion that

only centuries later would acquire a name and transform into an autonomous concept.

Here, it is also possible to consider that, in a certain way, the emergence of the concept

of language policy could only have occurred from the point of the very foundation of

Linguistics as a science, which took place at the beginning of the 20th century.

From Ferguson's initial proposal in the late 1950s, even if not in immediate and direct

connection, discussions arose regarding the position of European languages in the world,

a situation in which the Portuguese language fits. This fact shows, once again, how the

status of these languages remains almost perpetually high and prestigious, reinforcing

their interpretation from the notion of coloniality. In Calvet (2007), for example, there is

a detailed exposition of the notions of Francophonie and Anglophonie, indicating their

historical development. The fact of thinking about a "Francophonie" and an "Anglophonie"

- and, in our case, a "Lusophony" - is an unequivocal demonstration of how these

languages expanded through processes of colonization and how they occupy places of

symbolic power as a result of these events.

In this movement, we arrive at the idea of Lusophony, a theoretical construct that has

been widely discussed, fundamentally because of its implications for language policies.

On the one hand, we have authors such as Brito (2013), Bastos (2012), and Martins

(2014), who associate – not without critical connotation – Lusophony with the linguistic

and cultural rapprochement between Portuguese-speaking countries, identifying positive

points and geopolitical advances in its adoption; on the other hand, we have authors

such as Bagno (2017) and Faraco (2016), who will show the theoretical inconsistencies

of this construct and argue that it is yet another colonial stage of Portugal, which would

recolonize its former dominations from a new form of control and exercise of power.

Finally, authors such as Rizzo (2019) critically discuss the implications of different ways

of understanding Lusophony and how it oscillates between the imaginary of a natural

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

association among countries, as if they were all perfectly equal not only linguistically but

also politically and socioculturally; a union of forces shaped by international geopolitics;

and an epistemology of neo-colonization that should be resisted. However, regardless of

how we understand Lusophony, the fact remains that it presents itself as an unavoidable

form of categorization for its member countries. Thus, Lusophony is a construct that

directly impacts the context of the APSC countries, the situation of Angola and

Mozambique. As a political and administrative construct, the idea of APSC emerged

around the 1970s, coinciding with several of the independence movements of these

countries. Chabal et al (2002) show, for example, a fundamental problem in constructing

the idea of a "Lusophone Africa." For the authors, thinking of African countries as a single

linguistic unit is a reductionist view of reality, since, after their independence processes,

the post-colonial trajectory of each country was such that it would be impossible to

consider these countries as part of any unified bloc. Thus, starting from an

epistemological discomfort with the idea of "Lusophone Africa," the work served to show

how adopting the notion of APSC could be more realistic given the context of these

countries: a non-homogeneous and natural union of nations on the African continent, but

rather an agglomeration of countries that shared the common characteristic of

maintaining Portuguese as an official and prestigious language due to their historical

colonization.

The APSC, then, will be a key conceptual element in our analysis, since they will

represent, at the same time: (i) the language policies of these countries, which adopted

a certain bureaucratic monolingualism based on the Portuguese language; (ii) the

territoriality of these countries, belonging to the African continent; and (iii) the

inseparable link between language policies and coloniality. In Evaristo (2020; 2022) we

can see a discussion that extends to dictionaries and shows that, in practice, little

attention is paid to the concept. The management of language policies, therefore,

constitutes a significant challenge in the APSC from the colonial period to the present

(Timbane, 2022). In our proposal, as mentioned, we start from the idea that poorly

constructed language policies threaten the existence of languages, reduce the

preservation of these languages, and can contribute to their obliteration, as we will see

in the analyses of the Angolan and Mozambican contexts. In this sense, the two countries

share a common historical and linguistic past which, in effect, is also that of all the almost

60 African nations: “observing the 54 Constitutions [of the African nations,] it is observed

that there was the inclusion of at least one European language for official status”

(Timbane and Tamba, 2020, p. 99). Furthermore,

What is observed in the constitutions seems to be a combination of factors

across countries. This is because the place of African languages is secondary

or tertiary. Colonization was so intense that Africans were unable to

appreciate the value of their native languages (Timbane and Tamba, 2020,

p. 99).

In this way, the existence of African Bantu and Khoisan languages, for example, is erased

or diminished. This gesture amounts to a new form of linguistic colonialism - or, echoing

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

Phillipson’s (1992) discussion, linguistic imperialism. Although Phillipson’s analysis

focuses on English, his observations apply by analogy to the Portuguese language in

Africa - a context also deeply marked by imperialism and colonialism. As the author

demonstrates, the sociopolitical dimensions—note: not merely “linguistic,” but broadly

“sociopolitical”—of these countries deemed subaltern are rarely considered based on their

own premises; instead, they are viewed (almost) exclusively from external perspectives

that disregard their actual needs.

In the preface to the Atlas of the World's Languages in Danger, Bokova (2010, p. 7)

states: “Over recent decades, as information technologies have brought more of the

world’s knowledge to more of the world’s people at unprecedented speed, humanity’s

linguistic diversity has been shrinking.” This statement by the UNESCO Director aligns

with our discussion and illustrates that, in the African context, the risk of such

disappearance is real - specifically regarding local mother tongues, as highlighted by

Firmino (2014). Thus, even though these local languages coexist with Portuguese - a

language inherited from Portugal and the only one established for administrative services

- this fact calls multilingualism into question (Timbane and Penha, 2022). As we indicated

earlier, our research aims to analyse the sociolinguistic situation of Angola and

Mozambique, describing the established policies and the challenges that can contribute

to the revitalization of endangered languages, a situation in which they are minority or

marginalized (Lagares, 2011). In the following section, we will address the situation of

Angola in relation to its language policies.

The sociolinguistic reality of Angola: issues of language policy.

Angola achieved its independence on November 11, 1975, and adopted Portuguese as

its official language. In sociolinguistic terms, Angola is a multi-ethnic, multicultural, and

multilingual country. Its original population is comprised of two origins: Bantu and non-

Bantu.

The Bantu includes the Ovimbundu, Ambundu, Tvucokwe, Bakongo,

Ovakwanyama, Vangangela, Ovahelelo, Ovanyaneka, Vambunda, Valuvale, Andembo,

and Vasongo; the non-Bantu include the Khoisan

. People present in the provinces of

Cunene, Kwando Kubango, Huíla and Namibe (Kondja, 2023, p. 32), and by the Indo-

European community represented by Portuguese descendants. Bantu languages cover

the entire national territory and are divided into three linguistic zones (Guthrie, 1948),

as described in Maho (2009, pp. 63-86):

(i) Zone H, with the Kikongo (H16) and Kimbundu (H21) languages;

(ii) Zone K with languages Cokwe (K11), Lwimbi (K12a), Ngangela (K12b), Luchazi

(K13), Lwena or Luvale (K14), Mbunda (K15), Nyengo (K16), Mbwela (K17),

Nkangala (K17), Lunda Ndembo (K22); and

(iii) Zone R with the languages Umbundu (R11), Oshikwanyama (R21), Olunyaneka

(R13), Olukumbi (R14), central Herero (R31a).

Khoisan has two lexemes: khoi-, which designates people, the indigenous herders and farmers, and -San,

which means hunters, gatherers.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

Considering the sociolinguistic overview above, the INEA (2024) classifies the most

spoken languages and those included in social communication in this order: Portuguese

71.15%, followed by Umbundu (22.96%), Kikongo (8.24%), Kimbundu (7.82%), Cokwe

(6.54%), and other several languages distributed among the remaining percentages.

Therefore, three groups of languages define the country’s sociolinguistic landscape,

namely: Portuguese, Bantu languages, and Khoisan languages. In any case, “the official

language of the Republic of Angola is Portuguese” (CRA, 2010, p. 9), and the other

languages are considered Angolan national languages (Oliveira, 2018).

This kind of consecration of the Portuguese language dates back to 1975, with National

Independence, when it was reinforced by the Basic Law of the Education and Teaching

System

, which defined Portuguese as the language of schooling and communication.

This fact ruled out both the possibility of education geared towards

multilingualism/bilingualism and any possibility of adopting educational policies in this

sense. Thus, the definition of Portuguese as the sole official language in Angola was

accompanied by the adoption of prejudiced ideologies, cultural negligence, and

devaluation and social injustice that implied seeing the world somewhat distant from the

pluridiscursive, multilingual, and diverse reality of Angolan identity; consequently, the

Portuguese language acted strongly as an element of silencing, isolation, and hierarchies

(Oliveira, 2018).

The Constitution of the Republic of Angola (CRA, 2010) does not clearly define its role

regarding the Bantu languages of Angola: even with its five revisions between 1975 and

2010, none of these occasions saw any increase in the number of languages recognized.

The document only mentions Angola's multilingual status by stating that "the State

values and promotes the study, teaching and use of the other languages of Angola, as

well as the main languages of international communication" (CRA, 2010, p. 9 [emphasis

added]). Even so, in the only article that provides legal provisions on language, the

document cites "the other languages of Angola," without specifying which languages

these are. Ultimately, this could include both Bantu languages and non-Bantu languages,

or foreign languages from other nations. In short, there is no clear provision regarding

local/national languages.

In Article 21 CRA, when listing some of the “fundamental tasks of the Angolan State”

(CRA, 2010, p. 10 [emphasis added]), it only speaks, in a generic way, of “protecting,

valuing and dignifying Angolan languages of African origin, as cultural heritage, and

promoting their development as languages of national identity and communication”.

Bernardo (2026), an Angolan linguist, regarding language policies in this context, states:

I understand language policies in three very fundamental dimensions: those

related to decisions, actions, and laws themselves. These elements are

adopted by a given government to manage, promote, or restrict the use of

certain languages by a specific group.

Retrieved from

https://sys.portais.gov.ao/uploads/13lei_32_20_de_12_de_agosto_lei_de_bases_de_educacao_e_ensino_alt

eracao_a_lei_17_137004928963237a670211f_16_compressed_28b9365abc.pdf

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

Let us examine the Angolan context from the perspective of the CRA and the statement

on language policies made by Bernardo (2026), and the result can only be one, as

anticipated by the author himself:

Now, anyone who intends to act in the area of language policy must first

decolonize their mind. This is a very fundamental element because the

exercise of decolonizing the mind is an element that makes people remove

the blindfold from their eyes and begin to see elements that, until very

recently, were seen as fundamental to the language policy we have today in

Angola. I am referring here to the language policies currently upheld by

Angola, which focus on the Portuguese language and marginalize national

languages.

It is noteworthy that the Angolan Constitution does not concretely define the function of

national languages, which contributes to their marginalization and secondary position in

the Angolan sociolinguistic landscape. Further evidence of this can be seen in the constant

confusion of nomenclatures, since the concept of "national languages" does not appear

in the CRA: the document speaks, as we have seen, of "Angolan languages of African

origin" or "languages of Angola," which shows a real lack of attention and consistency in

language policy. When listing national symbols in Article 18 (CRA, 2010, p. 9), the

national flag, the national insignia, and the national anthem are listed; nothing is said

about the Portuguese language or the other languages mentioned.

In linguistic terms, therefore, the only point that is clearly defined is the fact that

Portuguese is the official language of the Republic of Angola; for all other languages, the

State recognizes and promotes their study and protects them as cultural heritage and

identity of the indigenous peoples of Angola. Nothing more. Thus, “the official

monolingual model marginalizes national languages, exacerbating social exclusion and

school dropout in rural areas” (Bernardo, 2026).

In our view, colonial ideology was so strong that it obscured the relevance of

local languages. We repeat: multilingualism had never been seen as a

problem before colonization. The linguistic policy of Africans failed by denying

the potential of their languages (Timbane and Tamba, 2020, p. 99).

Thus, colonialism on the African continent is still a reality, at least linguistically, even

though political-territorial and economic domination has ceased. In this context, thinking

about language policies and the planning of different languages in society involves

understanding that one of them will have official status, social prestige, and public and

everyday acceptance; all the others will have to coexist with the central language, adapt

to its restrictions, and seek, in their own way, to remain alive. Even so, it would be

possible to ask ourselves if, from the point of view of language policies and decoloniality,

there is any possible progress for the Angolan scenario. The answer given by Bernardo

(2026) is direct:

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

Unfortunately, no. I say no because, until very recently, there was a proposed

law for national languages that included some elements which, in turn, raised

several questions, among them the conception of the status that should be

attributed to national languages, because thinking about attributing a status

to national languages in the Angolan context presupposes looking at the

Constitution of the Republic of Angola. That's how I understand it. If we only

look at the status of national languages, without considering the Constitution

of the Republic of Angola, which has an article that defines Portuguese as the

only official language, we will hardly give due space to national languages,

which are very marginalized and segregated.

Angola, then, is an example of a country where language policies have failed to promote

the safeguarding of the country's linguistic heritage, value its linguistic diversity, or even

respect the existence of these other languages. In the next section, we will examine the

Mozambican context and then we will compare the two scenarios.

The sociolinguistic reality of Mozambique: issues of language policy

The official status of the Portuguese language in Mozambique dates back to the country's

independence, when FRELIMO adopted it as the movement's official language:

It was the language of the movement—the one that could unite everyone.

The name itself says it all: it was a “front,” a union of all people, provided

they held an anti-colonial stance. FRELIMO brought together diverse

tendencies; we chose a common catalyst, and the Portuguese language

served that purpose. However, this often confuses people: it does not mean

that everyone spoke Portuguese (Firmino, 2014).

Unlike what happens in Angola, in Mozambique, only Bantu languages exist. These

languages are classified as such due to their common characteristics. Mozambique

encompasses 4 zones, namely Zone G (G40-Swahili), Zone P (P20-Yao, P30-Makhuwa),

Zone N (N30-Cewa-Nyanja, N40-Nsenga-Sena) and Zone S (S10-Shona, S50-Tswa-

Ronga, S60-Kopi), according to Guthrie's classification, updated by Maho (2009).

Mozambique possesses a linguistic diversity characterized by the coexistence of Bantu

languages and Portuguese, the official language, according to the CRM, the Constitution

of the Republic of Mozambique (2004), in its Article 10. In addition to Portuguese,

approximately 20 Mozambican Bantu languages are spoken in Mozambique, of which 17

already have standardized the orthography, according to Ngunga and Faquir (2011):

Kimwani, Shimakonde, Ciyaawo, Emakhuwa, Echuwabu, Cinyanja, Cinyungwe, Cisena,

Cibalke, Cimanyika, Cindau, Ciwute, Gitonga, Citshwa, Cicopi, Xichangana, and Xirhonga.

There are also languages of Asian immigrants (Hindi, Gujarati, Urdu, and Konkani,

according to Maciel [2018]). There are Bantu languages from neighboring countries,

spoken in the border regions: cimanyika, cishona, isiswati, isizulu, kunda, nsenga, tonga,

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

nindi, mwera, kokola, chewa, kunda, tawara. There are also languages classified as

foreign, international and used in trade relations (English, French, Mandarin) and

languages of religion (Arabic, isizulu, Swahili), in addition to Mozambican Sign Language

(LMS).

This linguistic mosaic does not pose a problem for the lives of Mozambicans, as each

language has its own domain of use. Firmino (2014), a renowned Mozambican linguist,

when asked in an interview which language he learned first, explains:

It is very difficult for some Mozambicans to say what their first language is,

because we are exposed to so many. The one spoken at home – which was

likely the first I heard, though I cannot be certain – is a Bantu language,

Gitonga, one of the many in the country. My parents live in a region where

another Bantu language is also spoken; so, when I was with my friends, I

had to speak a different language. And throughout my life, I went on to learn

others.

The same author (Firmino, 2014) goes on to say that "Mozambique is multilingual; people

speak various languages. There are various pockets of languages, and even when we say

'multilingual', we are simplifying". Multilingualism is a normal phenomenon in each

member of the communities, based on the idea that each language carries cultural traits

of its speakers. We understand that if Bantu languages spoken in Mozambican territory

were official, they would have greater vitality and would not experience a decrease in the

number of their speakers, as the Table 1 illustrates:

Table 1. Census results for speakers of Portuguese and Bantu languages (as mother tongues)

Languages

1980

1997

2007

2017

Bantu (L1)

98.8%

93%

85.2%

79.2%

Portuguese (L1)

1.2%

6.5%

10.7%

16.5%

Source: Data from INEM (1980, 1997, 2007, 2017)

As shown in Table 1, the number of native Portuguese speakers has been increasing,

while the number of Bantu languages spoken as native languages has been decreasing.

From 1980 to 2017, there was a reduction in the number of native Bantu language

speakers, a fact that is dangerous in a context where Portuguese is valued at the expense

of African languages.

The data presented warn of the possibility of language extinction in the coming decades.

A language dies when the last speaker passes away, and with them disappears a way of

looking at and organizing the world specific to the community that speaks it. With the

language dead, the knowledge and wisdom accumulated by that community throughout

its history also disappear (Crystal, 2005). The extinction of a language is an

incomparable, irreparable, and inestimable loss for human diversity. What we are

analysing in this table is a gradual, slow and collective process of the disappearance of

speakers of Bantu languages as mother tongues. Languages expand rapidly through

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

acquisition processes, not learning, because acquisition involves more everyday uses that

represent the culture and life of the speech community.

We are not aware of the death of a language in the context of Mozambique, but rather

of the death of varieties. There are varieties that are no longer spoken or heard. This is

already a reality that warns that, soon, the death of these languages may be observed if

the established language policies are not adjusted to the real context. For example,

Xirhonga is a Bantu language (S54) with 4 variants, according to Bachetti (2006): (i)

Xilwandle or Xikalanga, spoken in the Manhiça district; (ii) Xinondrwana, spoken in

Marracuene, Maputo, Matola and Boane; (iii) Xizingili or Xiputru, spoken from kaTembe

to Ponta do Ouro; and (iv) Xihlanganu, spoken in Moamba, the capital and part of the

Namaacha district. The districts of Manhiça, Marracuene, Boane, Namaacha, Moamba

and kaTembe are no longer inhabited by speakers of these varieties: they have become

urbanized districts inhabited by people from various parts of the country, which weakens

the maintenance of the Xirhonga variant.

Mozambique is not a monolingual country, and the co-officialization of local languages

(of Bantu origin) would be fundamental not only for their revitalization but also for their

expansion to new generations. The situation presented shows that new generations are

not learning Bantu languages. These generations do not learn them because the

dominant and official language has greater power compared to the local languages, which

causes parents to lose interest in their acquisition. Politicians rarely debate language

policy and seldom read studies and research on the subject. Languages disappear in a

short period of time, and the factors leading to their disappearance are not exclusively

linguistic, but markedly political and of colonial origin, as the scenario allows us to affirm.

To grant official status to a language is to give it power; it is to confer legitimacy and,

above all, to give it an opportunity to be taught in schools, to be used without prejudice

and without fear. We understand that "from the State's perspective, it is important to

find the common factor, especially to awaken in people the awareness that they belong

to the same State" as argued by Firmino (2014); however, we also understand that this

common factor cannot be used to reject other linguistic forms. We believe that there are

no languages superior to others, just as there are no weak, poor, or inferior languages

(Soares, 2015). Timbane and Berlinck (2012) show that, at times, the linguistic prejudice

of teachers is passed on to students, with many still repressing any kind of manifestation

of linguistic variety, punishing errors, crossing out locally used words, deducting points

on tests, and promoting the failure of students. This has undermined the self-esteem and

self-confidence of students, who feel that they will never be able to perfectly master their

languages, especially grammatically.

Language policy and planning, therefore, interfere with and influence the valuation or

devaluation of languages. Even so, Bantu languages resist the expansion of Portuguese,

as the three most spoken mother tongues continue to be Emakhuwa (26.3%),

Xichangana (11.4%), and Cisena (7.8%) – even though, according to CRM (2004),

Portuguese is the only official language among other national and international languages

spoken in the territory. "Even now, in Mozambique, many people don't speak Portuguese"

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

(Firmino, 2014). This data is corroborated, for example, by the INE (2017, p. 25), which

shows that:

In urban areas, the mother tongue with the highest percentage is Portuguese

(39.2%) and is spoken most frequently at home (42.8%). Only 5.2% of the

population residing in rural areas has Portuguese as their mother tongue

(Table 8.1). The data show that, overall, almost half (47.4%) of the

population aged 5 and over can speak Portuguese, with urban areas standing

out (78.1%) compared to rural areas (31.7%).

In rural areas, there are more women (52.1%) than men (47.9%). The women, in the

vast majority of cases, who teach their children their first language. If these women have

a Bantu language as their mother tongue, there is a greater likelihood of having more

speakers of Bantu languages over the next few decades, since Portuguese is learned as

a second language in school there. When they return home from school, students

continue speaking Bantu languages, which are the languages of the community's cultures

and traditions. This interaction between the few Portuguese speakers and the majority

of Bantu language speakers contributes to the stabilization of the local variety of

Portuguese, which linguists refer to as the “nativization” of Portuguese (Silva and Mevis,

2024).

Illiteracy is one of the major problems in Mozambican society, especially in rural areas.

Schools need to move out of the city and into rural areas. More attention needs to be

given to the rural population, where illiteracy rates are higher. Data from the INE (2017)

shows a significant reduction in illiteracy rates, but efforts must be redoubled to truly

reach rural populations. Mozambique has been independent for half a century, but

progress in the linguistic and educational sectors is slow and contradicts the promises of

the independence movement. Education should be a priority because no country in the

world has developed without investing in the education of its people, and in the post-

colonial context of the APSC, the scenario could not be different.

Angola and Mozambique: Sociolinguistic realities in comparison.

By way of comparison, Angola and Mozambique share some aspects that we would like

to highlight: in the sociocultural and political-administrative domain, they are former

Portuguese colonies, inherited Portuguese as their official language, and achieved

independence in 1975. They suffered linguistic reprisals, forcing indigenous people, who

had no right to education, to speak Portuguese (Mingas, 2000; Ngunga, 2010; Severo et

al., 2014). They looked down on Bantu languages and those who spoke these,

culminating in punishments for their use – which led, to a large extent, to the progressive

and massive abandonment of Bantu languages.

In the realm of language policies, these countries, in the post-independence context,

intended to restore the freedom, autonomy, and circulation of national languages to their

peoples, so that they would feel valued and effectively integrated into the country

(Sassuco 2016). Over the years, however, the situation took a new turn, since the

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

adoption of Portuguese as the sole official language not only created discontent but

definitively established a hegemonic linguistic colonization. The sequence was even

worse: until today, there are no clear language policies to guide the use and management

of linguistic and cultural diversity in these countries, maintaining only the common fact

of the official language as established by their constitutions.

This reality further delays the desire and hope of seeing Bantu and Khoisan languages as

languages of administration and schooling, although there are now greater efforts to

value multilingualism and cultural plurality in these countries. The “linguistic situation of

Angola, like that of most African countries, characterized by heterogeneity where most

languages are of Bantu origin and have a more or less limited and defined territorial

location,” writes Miguel (2014, p. 13), which leads us to consider that in these two

countries, policies of linguistic oppression, exaggerated monolingualism, linguistic

coloniality, linguistic exclusion, injustice, and linguistic prejudice prevail as a result of the

hegemony of Portuguese. This scenario can lead, as we have seen, to the genocide of

Bantu and Khoisan languages in these spaces.

Mozambique and Angola share a common historical past, that is indisputable. First,

because both nations are made up of peoples of Bantu origin whose cultures and

traditional practices are similar; second, because in both nations Bantu languages are

spoken as the languages of the majority of the population. The term "Bantu" was coined

by Guthrie to designate a set of African languages that have a common vocabulary; that

have a set of invariable roots from which most words are formed by agglutination of

affixes; third, because Angola and Mozambique were colonies of Portugal and their

territories were demarcated by the Europeans at the Berlin Conference, with Portuguese

being the only official language among dozens of local languages; fourth, because both

achieved independence in 1975, after years of armed struggle against Portuguese

colonialism; fifth, because in both nations the formation of

Portuguese-based "creoles"

did not occur, a situation of linguistic contact that happened in Guinea-Bissau, Cabo

Verde, and São Tomé and Príncipe.

The reasons for the non-existence of creoles in Mozambique and Angola were diverse:

(i) African (mother tongue) languages were used in everyday life in all contexts, beyond

the specific situations of communication with the Portuguese; (ii) there were many

bilingual intermediaries, such as missionaries and merchants; (iii) the territorial

extension of these countries is vast, given the small number of their speakers

(Portuguese) compared to the number of speakers of Bantu languages; (iv) the stability

and isolation of rural groups and the low mobility strengthened these languages among

autochthonous populations (Timbane, 2017); (v) both are potentially rich countries with

varied natural resources, but with very poor populations and low life expectancy.

Above all, and ultimately, both countries have in common the fact that their language

policies and sociolinguistic realities do not work to promote, safeguard, or protect their

linguistic heritage. This, in fact, lies the main colonial problem that independence failed

to resolve.

The term, as described by several authors, is questionable and problematic (Bagno, 2017).

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

Conclusion

As we have seen, the constitutions of neither Angola nor Mozambique make any reference

to Bantu or Khoisan languages that would define, protect, or promote them within their

respective countries. This omission reflects a problematic approach to language policy

that contributes to social injustice and reinforces the hegemony of Portuguese at the

expense of indigenous languages. In doing so, it perpetuates colonial dynamics and

hierarchies that have persisted beyond the independence processes of the African

Portuguese-Speaking Countries (APSC). However, these actions provoke enormous

dissatisfaction because they are seen as linguistic and cultural genocide that promotes

the erasure of these languages and their cultures for future generations. This represents

a genuine lack of linguistic planning and encourages a linguistic and sociocultural

devaluation of the legitimate peoples of this immense multilingual and multicultural

territory. Ultimately, the management of linguistic policies in the two countries, we

analysed, does not promote multilingualism or concern itself with the preservation of

local languages.

Angola and Mozambique share very similar sociolinguistic realities, including challenges

in teaching the Portuguese language and managing other languages, which are

frequently and imminently at risk of extinction. At the same time, Angolan Sign Language

(LGA) and Mozambican Sign Language (LMS) still lack accommodation and support from

their respective states, which also means that established language policies are not

inclusive. Angolan and Mozambican varieties of Portuguese are present in the daily lives

of teachers and students, and their existence cannot be ignored; however, teachers need

to engage in debates on the subject, especially given that these varieties do not coincide

with the variety of Portuguese spoken in Portugal. Bringing discussions about linguistic

variation into the classroom is a necessary, positive, and, in this context, courageous

attitude, since presenting students with the different varieties and forms of language use

is an important step in combating linguistic prejudice.

A language policy management approach for multilingualism is one that values local

languages and offers equal opportunities for development, a principle also defended in

other official international documents, such as the Universal Declaration of Linguistic

Rights (1996), which states that all linguistic communities have the right to self-organize,

ensure their survival, and have their languages represented in socio-political and

administrative functions, while also maintaining the right to officialize them, create

mechanisms for standardization and normalization, without having to submit to external

influences. This guarantees – or should guarantee – a more efficient language policy

management, as it would make it possible to preserve and promote the teaching and

preservation of local languages in the PALOP countries.

No foreigner will value local languages on behalf of Angolans or Mozambicans, meaning

that, this language policy action must come from Africans themselves. Joseph Ki-Zerbo,

historian and philosopher, in his work "When Africa Will Come," argues that Africa cannot

achieve "endogenous development" without the use of local languages, because they are

the means of understanding its world, making it necessary to "return to literacy and

schooling in African mother tongues" (Ki-Zerbo, 2006, p. 17). Both Angola and

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

Mozambique have constitutional indications that the State should be concerned with

national languages, even if this is superficial and vague in these documents. This makes

it clear that the legislator's discourse does not align with decisions on language policies.

The promotion of Angolan and Mozambican languages remains a wish, the teaching of

these languages is still in the realm of imagination, and their use continues to be

undervalued. In this sense, the languages of the Khoisan group are the ones that suffer

the most prejudice and social exclusion, due to the isolation of their peoples.

The effective management of multilingualism in Angola and Mozambique depends on the

recognition by state institutions of the sociocultural, historical, and communicative roles

played by indigenous languages. Such recognition must be accompanied by measures

aimed at their preservation, protection, and promotion through comprehensive linguistic,

educational, and public policies. Official recognition of these languages would represent

a significant step toward their revitalization and the mitigation of ongoing language shift

and speaker decline. Moreover, sustained state support for literary, cultural, and artistic

production in indigenous languages is essential for safeguarding linguistic diversity and

sustaining multilingualism within these societies. By contrast, the continued

marginalization of local languages is likely to accelerate processes of language attrition,

contributing to linguistic homogenization and potentially culminating in language

extinction, or linguicide, in the coming decades.

References

Bachetti, C. (2006). Gramática da língua Ronga. Paulinas Editorial. Maputo.

Bagno, M. de A. (2017). Dicionário crítico de sociolinguística.

Bastos, N. B. (2012). Língua portuguesa: Aspectos linguísticos, culturais e identitários.

EDUC

Bernardo, Ezequiel. (16 de junho de 2026). Se a gente aqui disser que não existe um

português de Angola, a gente está doente e é preconceituoso. Recurso. Retrieved from

https://recurso.info/se-a-gente-aqui-disser-que-nao-existe-um-portugues-de-angola-a-

gente-esta-doente-e-e-preconceituoso/

Brito, R. H. P. (2013). Sobre lusofonia. Verbum, 4, 6–19

Bokova, I. (2010). Preface. In C. Moseley (Ed.), Atlas of the world's languages in danger

(3rd ed., pp. 6–7). UNESCO Publishing. https://lenguasdearagon.org/wp-

content/uploads/2022/02/Atlas-of-the-World-Languages.pdf

Bosi, A. (1992). Dialética da colonização. Companhia das Letras.

Calvet, L.-J. (2007). As políticas linguísticas. Parábola Editorial; IPOL.

Chabal, P., Birmingham, D., Forrest, J., Newitt, M., Seibert, G., & Andrade, E. S. (2002).

A history of postcolonial Lusophone Africa. Indiana University Press

Cristine, G. Severo; Bento, Sitoe e José, D. Pedro (2015). Estão as línguas nacionais em

perigo? 1ª ed. Escolar Editora. Cadernos de Ciências Sociais, ISBN9789725924563.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

Crystal, D. (2005). A evolução da linguagem. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar Ed., 2005.

Cunha, A. G. da. (2010). Dicionário etimológico da língua portuguesa. Lexikon.

Evaristo, J. (2021a). O conceito de política no período antigo e medieval: Maquiavel e

Aristóteles como bases epistemológicas da política contemporânea. Medievalis, 7, 1–9.

Evaristo, J. (2021b). Do bem comum da Pólis em direção à Cidade de Deus: O conceito

de política em Agostinho de Hipona em comparação com Aristóteles. Medievalis, 7, 1-9.

Faraco, C. A. (2016). História sociopolítica da língua portuguesa. São Paulo: Parábola

Editorial

Firmino, G. (2025). A situação do português no contexto multilíngue de Moçambique.

Comunicação apresentada no Colóquio sobre diálogos Culturais em contexto Post-

Colonial, Universidade de Genébra, Suíça (UC), aos 10-11 de Dezembro 2015.

Firmino, Gregório. (24 de janeiro de 2014). Os limites da Lusofonia, segundo o linguista

Gregório Firmino, de Moçambique. Recurso. Retrieved from

https://ventosdalusofonia.wordpress.com/2014/02/02/os-limites-da-lusofonia-

segundo-o-linguista-gregorio-firmino-de-mocambique/

Guthrie, M. (1948). The classification of Bantu languages. London: Oxford University

Press.

Instituto Nacional de Estatística de Angola (2014, 2016, 2024). Resultados definitivos:

Recenseamento Geral da População e Habitação 2011. Luanda: INE.

Instituto Nacional de Estatística de Moçambique. (2017, 2007, 1997, 1980).

Recenseamento Geral da População e Habitação. Maputo: INE.

Ki-Zerbo, J. (2006). Para quando África? Entrevista com René Holenatein. Trad. Carlos

Aboim de Brito. Rio de Janeiro: Pallas.

Lagares, X. C. (2011). Minorias linguísticas, políticas normativas e mercados. In X. C.

Lagares & M. Bagno (Orgs.), Políticas da norma e conflitos linguísticos. Parábola.

Maho, J. F. (2009). The Online Version of the New Update Guthrie List, a Referential

Classification of the Bantu Languages, NUGL Online.

Martins, M. de L. (2014). Língua portuguesa, globalização e lusofonia. In N. B. Bastos

(Ed.), Língua portuguesa e lusofonia. EDUC.

Mignolo, W. (2003). Histórias locais / projetos globais. UFMG.

Miguel, Maria Helena (2014). Dinâmica da pronominalização no português de Luanda.

Luanda: Mayamba Editora.

Mingas, Amélia (2000). Interferência do Kimbundu no português falado em Luanda.

Luanda: Chá de Caxinde.

Moçambique (2004). Constituição da República de Moçambique. Maputo: Assembleia da

República.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 17 Nº. 1, TD 4

Thematic Dossier – From Colonial Rule to Nationhood:

Amílcar Cabral and the Birth of Lusophone Africa

October 2026, pp. 43-63

Language Policy Management for Multilingualism in Portuguese-Speaking African

Countries: Discussions from Angola and Mozambique

Jefferson Evaristo, Alexandre António Timbane, Daniel Peres Sassuco

Nascimento, A., & Bittencourt, M. (2016). Quatro décadas de independência: da cartilha

ideológica às contingências políticas e sociais nos PALOP. Estudos Ibero-Americanos,

42(3), 797–814. https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-864X.2016.3.25663

Ngunga, A. (2015). Introdução à linguistica bantu. Maputo: Imprensa Universitária.

Ngunga, Armindo (2010). A problemática de interferências das línguas moçambicanas na

língua portuguesa. 1 ed.

Oliveira, Heloisa (2018). Tramontim de. Língua Portuguesa em Angola: silenciamentos,

isolamentos e hierarquias. Revista da ABRALIN, [S. l.], v. 17, n. 2.

Pinheiro, L. (2007). "Ao vencedor, as batatas": o reconhecimento da independência de

Angola. Revista Estudos Históricos, 1(39), 83-120.

Quintero, P., et al. (2019). Uma breve história dos estudos decoloniais. MASP.

Rêgo, A. S. (2024). O Processo de Independência dos PALOP: Uma Análise da

Independência de Moçambique e sua Trajetória. Revista CEDEPEM, 4(3).

Rizzo, M. F. (2019). Discusiones actuales en torno a la lusofonía: Panorama de los

estudios sobre política internacional del portugués. Trabalhos em Linguística Aplicada,

58(1), 287–312.

Sassuco, Daniel Peres (2016). Pistas essenciais para um Português de Angola. In kadila.

Culturas e ambientes. Diálogos Brasil-Angola, Blücher. Pp. 199-218,

Timbane, A. A. (2012). Os estrangeirismos e os empréstimos no português falado em

Moçambique. Cadernos de Estudos Linguísticos, Campinas, SP, v. 54, n. 2, p. 289–306,

2011.

Timbane, A. A. (2022). Políticas linguísticas de internacionalização do português nos

Países Africanos de Língua Oficial Portuguesa: Caminhos e desafios do português

africano. Revista de Estudos de Português Língua Internacional, 2(2), 187–205.

Timbane, A. A., & Tamba, P. (2020). A política linguística na África e situação das línguas

autóctones na educação: Uma análise crítica das Constituições. Revista Digital de

Políticas Linguísticas, 12, 85–105.

Timbane, A. A.; Berlinck, R. de A. (2022). A norma-padrão europeia e a mudança

linguística na escola moçambicana. Revista Gragoatá: Revista dos Programas de Pós-

Graduação do Instituto de Letras. Niterói, n.32, p.207-226.

Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights. (1996). Universal Declaration of Linguistic

Rights [Declaração Universal dos Direitos Linguísticos]. World Conference on Linguistic

Rights.