A critical discourse analysis of TikTok on parliamentary processes: Unpacking language ideologies in South Africa
There is no doubt that South African parliamentarians have embodied English, even though 12 languages are spoken in South Africa and are constitutionally protected. This insidious embodiment of English speaks to language ideologies that set it above other African languages, and it is important to highlight this on the African continent, where languages of colonisers remain more dominant. The article sets out to analyse language ideologies as reflected in TikTok discourses responding to South African parliamentary processes, particularly following a few notable incidents that occurred in Parliament in July 2024. Furthermore, the dominance of English in public discourse is examined as realised and reflected on social media platforms such as TikTok. We argue that, based on parliamentary discourses in South Africa, the TikTok comments analysed show a complex interplay of language ideologies that reflect broader societal debates about language, power and identity. We conclude that there is still a need to highlight the importance of recognising and valuing linguistic diversity as a key component of social justice and access. Contribution: The article extends language ideology scholarship into the South African digital context, using TikTok discourse to show how ordinary citizens interpret and contest the dominance of English within a formal political institution such as Parliament. In doing so, it demonstrates the value of social media as an underused site for tracking public sentiment on multilingual policy tensions that often remain hidden in official parliamentary discourse.
Authors
- Kudzayi Savious Tarisayi (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0086-2420)
- Simthembile Xeketwana (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0876-6847)
Institutions
- Stellenbosch University (ZA)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Inkanyiso
- Published
- 2026-11-02
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.4102/ink.v18i1.416
- Primary Topic
- Multilingual Education and Policy
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00