Phraseology and Culture in English

Fixed expressions as manifestations of cultural conceptualizations
403
In as much as the Igbo nation is trying to unite with itself and with its 
South-South brothers because the Igbo people know that they cannot do 
without neighbouring brothers, non-Igbo brothers and non-brothers believe 
they cannot do without us. There must be a kind of marriage or rethinking 
between these two brothers. (WCL, from Nigeria) 
As part of this model, on the vertical axis, 
LEADERS
are conceptualized as
FATHERS
. Here is an example from Zambian English, which refers to the 
traditional village setting: 
It was a [...] song which talked about headman Mbakalungu’s renowned 
generosity and his unwavering concern for the welfare of the people in his 
village [...] They tunefully sang [...] and likened him to a father and protec-
tor. (Luangala 1991: 16) 
In modern African national politics, the recourse to the kinship model
is a crucial aspect, too, as has been prominently shown by Schatzberg 
(1986, 2001). In particular, it is well known that African leaders are per-
ceived and readily present themselves as 
FATHERS OF THE NATION
, as an 
extension of the above traditional 
LEADERS ARE FATHERS
conceptualiza-
tion:
The head of state is like a father, his children are crying for food, he cannot 
feed them grenades. (A Cameroonian protestor, on BBC 1992) 
Such evocations of the kinship model are pervasive and systematic through-
out sub-Saharan Africa. They are frequently used as an effective means of 
legitimating some leader’s political power; in addition to or in the absence 
of other possible sources of justification (e.g. regular elections). The status 
related to the 
FATHER
-role allows for a largely unchallenged exercise of 
power. Two particular aspects of the 
FATHER 
concept, and the kinship model 
as a whole, are crucial here: the spiritual dimension and the notion of nur-
ture and care. Both these aspects shall be briefly outlined. 
Within this model, the father is given the right to freely draw on the
resources of each individual and of the community as a whole. In ex-
change, however, he is expected to nurture and protect. Basically, it is a 
reciprocal eating and feeding pattern (cf. Bayart’s 1993 notion “politics of 
the belly”). In terms of the cultural model, 
LEADERSHIP IS EATING AND 
FEEDING
, mixed in with the metaphor 
RESOURCES ARE FOOD 
(see be- 
low). Specifically, it is feeding one’s kin, i.e., one’s community or con-
stituency. For some manifestations of this concept, note the following ex-
amples: 

---

404
Hans-Georg Wolf and Frank Polzenhagen
Promise to deliver the “national cake” to your constituents. […] Come the 
day of election, the one who gave more “tea” […] emerges the winner. 
(Shikwati 2000, from Kenya) 
Because Taylor was able to distribute some rice and souvenirs […] the Li-
berian people quickly forgot seven years of hell and decided to stick with 
him […] The ordinary voters became contented with whoever gave them 
some rice to eat or some little ‘cold water,’ meaning financial offer in the 
form of a tip or a bribe. (Williams 2002: 33) 
The thriving system of patronage and clientelism, which is pervasive (not 
only but especially) in sub-Saharan Africa may be regarded as the imme-
diate manifestation of the eating-and-feeding pattern observed above. It 
rests on the availability and distribution of resources along vertical struc-
tures:
Hence, the notion that politicians, bureaucrats or military chiefs should be 
servants of the state simply does not make sense. Their political obligations 
are, first and foremost, to their kith and kin, their clients, their communities, 
their regions or even to their religion. All such patrons seek ideally to con-
stitute themselves as ‘Big Men’, controlling as many networks as they can. 
But to succeed as a ‘Big Man’ demands resources; and the more extensive 
the network, the greater the need for the means of distribution. The legiti-
macy of the African political elites, such as it is, derives from their ability to 
nourish the clientele on which their power rests. (Chabal and Daloz 1999: 
15)
So far, we have sketched the prevalent nexus between the kinship model 
and political leadership, with a focus on the nurture aspect. In the follow-
ing, we will outline its spiritual implications and its link to the realm of the 
supernatural. We may recall that the kinship model was described above as 
a lateral or horizontal network of relations. And its vertical dimension was 
described, so far, in terms of patron-client relations. Yet this is not its only 
range of vertical extension. In sociological terms, a hierarchy exists with 
elders and other persons of respect and authority occupying the highest 
level in the visible world, but the hierarchy does not end here. Since the 
boundaries to the world beyond are permeable, the hierarchy and line of 
command extends to the world of the ancestors and ultimately to God or the 
gods (cf. Musopole 1994: 77). Three conceptualizations are important here: 
ANCESTORS ARE SPIRITS
, as in 
May our ancestors devour him, may he be punished by the spirits. (Saho 
1994: 21, from Gambia) 

---