| dc.description |
The study investigated challenges of the language used in campaigns against elephantiasis and elephantiasis of scrotum in Tanzania, using a case study of Kisarawe and Rufiji districts in the coast region. The researcher worked on three objectives which were; to examine whether the language used by campaigners against elephantiasis and elephantiasis of scrotum is understood by local coastal communities; to find out the stereotyping and stigmatizing language as used by local coastal communities against people with elephantiasis and elephantiasis of scrotum; as well as to evaluate the suitability of the language used during information dissemination against elephantiasis and elephantiasis of scrotum campaigns. CDA and Social Stigmatization theory guided the study through its different stages.
Interview, questionnaire and documentary review were the methods used for data collection. SPSS Programme Version 20 was used to analyse data collected through questionnaires whereas data from interviews were analysed by taking the essential concepts from the wide one in context so as to make data useful.
The study revealed that language used by campaigners against elephantiasis and elephantiasis of scrotum was Kiswahili. It is depicted that, the language used was understood by all local communities although not absolutely. This is due to the challenges imposed by the particular language such as the use of borrowed words, contradictions of information in the instructors' manual as well as combining use of Kiswahili and English during the training of campaigners. On the other hand, stereotyping and stigmatizing language was found to be used by local communities against people with elephantiasis and elephantiasis of scrotum. The main reasons for local communities‟ using such language were found to be peoples' poor perception of what causes the disease. In the leaflets/flyers, brochures, posters, roll-ups and instructors' manual read there were texts that showed the use of stereotyping and stigmatizing language, use of euphemisms, and improper use of sensational language. The use of these, made the language be regarded as inappropriate to campaign for people with elephantiasis and elephantiasis of scrotum. |
|