Egara Kabaji Dictionary – to lazy with and stagnate Lulogooli

 

A Facebook screenshot of Kabaji's dictionary self promotion.

I sadly go through the newly printed ‘English-Maragoli’ Dictionary by Egara Kabaji. Printed because a publication would aim higher. What he did a PDF or a blog post would best serve for it isn’t much. But old schools think Publishing so as to mark territory or make sales. 

It is year 2024 and Prof. Egara Kabaji’s print is less helpful compared to Luragoli-English Dictionary, 1940, Kaimosi Press. The definitions the missionaries put to Logooli words were well meditated, picked carefully and helped in publishing the first Luhya Bible 1951 [In Lulogooli].

He titles it English-Maragoli Dictionary. Which language is “Maragoli” a word? Why does the word miss in the dictionary? Many Valogooli have refused to be termed “Maragoli”, a colonial creation whose derivation still confuses. A deserving title would be “English-Lulogooli” Dictionary for language or “English-Valogooli” for thesaurus, encyclopedia etc. 

Below the title is “selling” words, “Kitabu Chivaara Amang’ana ga L’logooli”. So it is language in there. With this sentence the famed Professor is either a victim of native advocacy to language or unaware of underlying structure of Lulogooli. 

Word “Chivaara” is structured thus: “chi.vaar.a”. This morphological approach follows order: Noun class (chi) + Verb (vaar) + Noun ending (a). It is known that dialectual issues are the cause for /chi/ sound where /Ki/ should be. Professor finds it hard to write “Ki-” as he has in other words and falls for “surface” other than “underlying”. 

This inconsistency has him use “Ke-, Ki-, Chi-, Chu-, Chu-” for same noun class. At a time when we need to teach Lulogooli by first ironing out such varying situations, a work as Kabaji’s needed to be introduced by an orthographical text. Without which it is a doing for hideous aims as seen in tenders for curriculum development.

Other words in the dictionary that Egara has fallen for sound /chi/ are: ‘obstacle – ichigaraa’, ‘measurement – ikibimu cha kindu’, month; September – chuvwi’ and more. The words are ‘grammatically’ written as “ikiigalila, kia, kiuvwi’ respectively. 

Root “vaal.a” means “be unreliable” yet that is not what Egara is saying. He intends, by writing “chivaara” to mean “that explains”. The verb here is “ivaal.a” for explain, expound, elaborate. He misses the “i” which needs a careful writer, not imprisoned in native’s language rush. To reduce the mistakes, perhaps “chiivaara [kiivaala]” with double “ii” would score him. 

Use of letter ‘r’ and not traditional ‘l’ adds to the derailing speed. It is clear that Valogooli do not have a trill sound as “r” requires for articulation. This allophone phenomenon has that it happens between points of “l” and “r” at the palate. 'L' is one of the special letters of Lulogooli. 

First acquaintance to Kiswahili and English has made new generational Valogooli to write “r”. Perhaps that is the generation that Prof. wants to attract to language. Yet it would be best to teach them the place of letter ‘l’ in writing and place of sound ‘r’ in Lulogooli. But the whole book, all words, he has written letter ‘r’ – but we learn that to be progressive is to build on existing knowledge areas.

And if Prof should be given the benefit of doubt that he seeks to put language simple, evolving and plain as daily interacted with, why again failing to understand that tone is important in writing? “Cashier” he defines, “umundu urinda izisendi” yet we read, /umuundu uliindaa iziseendi/. We have root words which differentiate one from another by simply the vowel sound. This is not visible in the dictionary.

The few names he credits to have helped him over the years did not research on vocabulary well. Where there is a Lulogoolinized word, better it takes the second definition, without missing a known indigenous word. Is ‘manure’ ‘embolea?’, is ‘globe’ ‘igulobu’? and more. A giraffe is “inyoloodi” in Lulogooli, a name that means ‘tall and stretching’. But the dictionary defines a giraffe as; ‘itwiga/umunyama gwi rigoti ritambi’ – does this definition understand that nouns of Lulogooli are derived?

There is more to the above, which only can be visible at least if the said is studied by the author and assistants. A publication may be in need for improvements, but a print work, as visible in the spacy 238 quickly filled pages, would need an overhaul. It is not what is currently needed to contribute to Lulogooli appreciation, standardization and teaching.