Dynamics of Botho/Ubuntu in Basotho Folklore: The Relevance of Basotho Folktales in the 21st Century Exemplified by “Leobu”
Keywords:folklore , Basotho folktales, botho/ubuntu, human nature, dynamics
This study is triggered by the one description given to botho/ubuntu nowadays. The term botho/ubuntu is often described as a special kind of African humanism, based specifically on one Basotho proverb, Motho ke motho ka batho, which means “a person is a person through other people.” It is associated with positive attributes among African people such as kindness, sincerity and humanness. This article argues that botho/ubuntu can also be described as a multifaceted aspect of human nature that should not be interpreted narrowly or as one-sided, in terms of conformity to goodness and kindness to be accepted or fit within society, because human nature—botho/ubuntu—is not always harmony-seeking. It is human nature for people to be kind and loving as much as it is human nature for people to be jealous, selfish, rebellious, or to lie. Basotho folktales such as “Leobu” have always depicted within the Basotho various characteristics in human beings to make listeners or society aware of different personalities in life, because human nature is a dynamic phenomenon. The study employed a contextual approach to analyse and interpret the Basotho folktale “Leobu” in relation to events and human activities as well as connections with the self, the environment and with other people. A contextual approach will help readers become aware that Basotho folktales are still relevant as a tool for scrutinising people’s actions and to encourage people to interrogate every piece of information they receive, for they may not know the real intentions of those delivering such information.
Collins Student’s Dictionary: Survival Guide. 2005. “Retribution.” New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers.
Collinson, D., and J. Hearn. 1994. “Naming Men as Men: Implications for Work, Organization and Management.” Gender, Work and Organization 1 (1): 2–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.1994.tb00002.x
Furniss, G., and L. Gunner, eds. 1995. Introduction to Power Marginality and Oral Literature, 1–20. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511521164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511521164.003
Guma, S. M. 1977. The Form, Content and Techniques of Traditional Literature in Southern Sotho. Pretoria: J.L. Van Schaik.
Hornby, A. S. 2000. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Hornby, A. S. 2015. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. International Student’s Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jacottet, E. 1991. Ditshomo tsa Basotho. Lesotho: Morija Book Depot.
House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee. 2019. Disinformation and “Fake News”: Final Report; Eight Report of Session 2017–19. Accessed August 20, 2022. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmcumeds/1791/1791.pdf.
Kabaji, E. S. 2005. “The Construction of Gender through the Narrative Process of the African Folktales: A Case Study of the Maragoli.” PhD diss., University of South Africa. http://hdl.handle.net/10500/1798.
Kaschula, R. H., ed. 1993. Introduction to Foundations in South African Oral Literature, edited by R. H. Kaschula, vii–xiii. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.
Leedy, P. D., and J. E. Ormrod. 2005. Practical Research: Planning and Design. 8th ed. New York, NY: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Mboti, N. 2015. “May the Real Ubuntu Please Stand Up?” In “Ubuntu for Journalism Theory and Practice,” edited by C. G. Christians, special issue, Journal of Media Ethics 30 (2): 125–47. http://doi.org/10.1080/23736992.2015.1020380. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23736992.2015.1020380
Mensele, M. S. 2012. “A Study of Rituals Performed at Two Sacred Sites in the Eastern Free State.” MA diss., University of the Free State. http://hdl.handle.net/11660/2153.
Moleleki, M. M. 1993. Makokonana a Neanotaba le Dingolwa tsa Sesotho. Randburg: Vivilia Publishers and Booksellers.
Nakin, R. M. 2017. “Deconstructionist Analysis of the Basotho Folktale Ngwana ya Kgwedi Sefubeng.” South African Journal of Folklore Studies 27 (1): 30–41. https://doi.org/10.25159/1016-8427/2503. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25159/1016-8427/2503
Neuman, W. L. 2000. Social Research Methods: Qualitative Approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Nthako, M. S. 2012. “The Structural Analysis and Interpretation of Sesotho Folktale: Mokoko le Phakwe.” MA diss., University of the Free State. http://hdl.handle.net/11660/11873.
Phillip, A. 1998. African Myths and Legends. London: Belita Press.
Phindane, P. 2019. “An Analysis of the Sesotho Folktale Kgubetswana le Talane using the Binary Opposition Approach.” South African Journal of Folklore Studies 29 (2): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.25159/1016-8427/5094. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25159/1016-8427/5094
Rosenberg, D. 1997. Folklore, Myths and Legends: A World Perspective. Lincolnwood, IL: NTC Publishing Group.
Sekhukhune, P. D.1988. “Discourse Analysis and Speech Varieties in Northern Sotho: A Sociolinguistic Study.” MA diss., University of the North. http://hdl.handle.net/10386/2127.
Viriri, A. 2011. “Performance in Folklore and the Reclamation of Indigenous Knowledge Systems through Oral Traditions.” Southern African Journal for Folklore Studies 25 (1): 51–62.
Wu, Q., B. Xie, C.-P. Chou, P. H. Palmer, P. E. Gallaher, and C. A. Johnson. 2010. “Understanding the Effects of Social Capital on the Depression of Urban Chinese Adolescents: An Integrative Framework.” American Journal of Community Psychology 45 (1–2): 1–16. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-009-9284-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-009-9284-2
Yang, H. C. 2018. “A Discussion on the Harmonious Relationship of Human, Nature and Society.” Advances in Applied Sociology 8: 613–19. https://doi.org/10.4236/aasoci.2018.88036. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/aasoci.2018.88036
How to Cite
Copyright will be vested in Unisa Press. However, as long as you do not use the article in ways which would directly conflict with the publisher's business interests, you retain the right to use your own article (provided you acknowledge the published version of the article) as follows:
- to make further copies of all or part of the published article for your use in classroom teaching;
- to make copies of the final accepted version of the article for internal distribution within your institution, or to place it on your own or your institution's website or repository, or on a site that does not charge for access to the article, but you must arrange not to make the final accepted version of the article available to the public until 18 months after the date of acceptance;
- to reuse all or part of this material in a compilation of your own works or in a textbook of which you are the author, or as the basis for a conference presentation.