The role of linguistics in promoting biocultural diversity for sustainable development:  A case of Chindali spoken in Ileje, Songwe Region, Tanzania

Imani Alinanuswe Mwang'eka

doi:10.51867/AQSSR.3.1.39

Authors

Imani Alinanuswe Mwang'eka Tanzania Institute of Accountancy, Tanzania Author https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9075-9706

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51867/AQSSR.3.1.39

Keywords:

Biocultural Diversity, Chindali, Linguistics, Sustainable Development, Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Abstract

This paper aimed to analyse the role of linguistics in promoting biocultural diversity for sustainable development by studying Chindali, an indigenous language as spoken in the Ileje District of the Songwe Region in the southern highlands of Tanzania. Using Chindali as an example of another indigenous language, the paper discusses the vital function of language in promoting bicultural diversity for meeting the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This study is based on Luisa Maffi's 1996 Biocultural Diversity Theory. This study employed a qualitative approach with a descriptive research design. Data were gathered through text collection. The population of this study consisted of Chindali native speakers found in Ileje District who are estimated to be 193,000 people. The population also included texts written in Chindali. To inform the study, 8 informants were sampled using purposive and snowball sampling techniques, which resulted in data saturation. The researchers also collected a book written in Chindali, which demonstrates biocultural diversity in different stories. Data were analysed descriptively through thematic analysis. The findings indicate that indigenous languages serve as a means of communication and, at the same time, act as a store of significant biocultural variation, including culture, ecology, and biodiversity. It demonstrates that indigenous languages play an important role in conserving and transferring biocultural information required for long-term development, influencing community behaviours in biodiversity, land use, and sustainability that adhere to the UN's 2030 Sustainable Development Goals 11, 12, and 15. The study adds to the scant literature on the role of linguistics in promoting biocultural diversity for sustainable development. The study suggests more research on Bantu orthography so that Bantu languages should be in written form.

References

Agbeleoba, S., Orebe, O., Adekunle-Ojo, G., & Owolabi, O. (2025). Ecolinguistic and critical discourse analysis of environmental narratives in sustainable development goal communications. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 13(5), 195-202. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20251305.12 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20251305.12

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Bridgewater, P., & Rotherham, I. D. (2019). A critical perspective on the concept of biocultural diversity and its emerging role in nature and heritage conservation. People and Nature, 1(3), 291-304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10040

https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10040

Buizer, I. M., Arts, B., & Westerink, J. (2016). Landscape governance as policy integration "from below": A case of displaced and contained political conflict in the Netherlands. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 34(3), 448-462. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263774X15614725 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0263774X15614725

Cocks, M. (2010). What is biocultural diversity? A theoretical review. In Biocultural diversity conservation (pp. 67-79). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5701-6_5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5701-6_5

Dastgoshadeh, A., & Jalilzadeh, K. (2011). Language loss, identity, and English as an international language. European Journal of Social Sciences, 21(4), 659-665.

Fill, A., & Mühlhäusler, P. (2006). The ecolinguistics reader: Language, ecology and environment. Continuum.

Fish, R. D., Austen, G. E., Bentley, J. W., Dallimer, M., Fisher, J. C., Irvine, K. N., & Davies, Z. G. (2024). Language matters for biodiversity. BioScience, 74(5), 333-339. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biae014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biae014

Gavin, M. C., McCarter, J., Mead, A., Berkes, F., Stepp, J. R., Peterson, D., & Tang, R. (2015). Defining biocultural approaches to conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 30(3), 140-145. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2014.12.005

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2014.12.005

Gorenflo, L. J., Romaine, S., Mittermeier, R. A., & Walker-Painemilla, K. (2012). Co-occurrence of linguistic and biological diversity in biodiversity hotspots and high biodiversity wilderness areas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(21), 8032-8037. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1117511109 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1117511109

Grenoble, L. A., & Whaley, L. J. (2006). Saving languages: An introduction to language revitalization. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615931

Gul, W., Elismarly, W. A. A., & Riaz, B. (2025). Eco-linguistics and sustainability: Language as a tool for environmental responsibility. ASSAJ, 4(1), 1776-1787. https://doi.org/10.55966/assaj.2025.4.1097 DOI: https://doi.org/10.55966/assaj.2025.4.1.097

Hanspach, J., Haider, L. J., Oteros-Rozas, E., Olafsson, A. S., & Fischer, J. (2020). Biocultural approaches to sustainability: A systematic review of the scientific literature. People and Nature, 2(3), 643-659. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10120

https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10120

Konga, J. (2019). Tunoshange utwajha twitu (1st ed.). SIL International.

LOT. (2009). Atlasi ya lugha za Tanzania: Mradi wa lugha za Tanzania. Chuo Kikuu cha Dar es Salaam.

Maffi, L. (1998). Nature and culture: The interdependence of biological and cultural diversity. UNESCO & Island Press.

Maffi, L. (2005). Linguistic, cultural, and biological diversity. Annual Review of Anthropology, 34, 599-617. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.081804.120437 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.081804.120437

Nayak, P. S., & Raval, R. J. (2024). Fostering global sustainability: The role of English language in development. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 30(1), 1782-1785. DOI: https://doi.org/10.53555/kuey.v30i1.6589

https://doi.org/10.53555/kuey.v30i1.6589

Ondondo, E. A. (2020). The role of indigenous languages in sustainable development in Kenya. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and Translation, 6(2), 42-46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijalt.20200602.11

https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijalt.20200602.11

Otamendi-Urroz, I., Quintas-Soriano, C., Hanspach, J., Requena-Mullor, J. M., Lagies, A. S., & Castro, A. J. (2025). Exploring biocultural diversity: A systematic analysis and refined classification to inform decisions on conservation and sustainability. Ambio, 54(10), 1581-1597. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-025-02168-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-025-02168-y

Pretty, J., Adams, B., Berkes, F., de Athayde, S. F., Dudley, N., Hunn, E., & Pilgrim, S. (2009). The intersections of biological diversity and cultural diversity: Towards integration. Conservation and Society, 7(2), 100-112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.58642

https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.58642

Sauro, J. (2015). Five types of qualitative research methods. Retrieved February 3, 2026, from http://www.measuringu.com/qual-methods

UNESCO. (2023). The role of linguistic diversity for sustainable development. http://www.unesco.org/en/articles

UNESCO. (2025). UNESCO and G20 promote linguistic diversity in the digital age. G20 Cultural Working Group.

United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda