MIND YOU LANGUAGE: ‘Representing’ the estimates for her ministry, the honourable minister hinted that TZS 74.2/= ‘are’ for ‘normal’ use

APRIL is a month replete with public holidays. There is Karume Day on April 7 and Union Day on April 26. This year we also have Good Friday and Easter Monday on April 7 and 10 respectively.

The two public holidays of Idd el fitr will be around 21, 22, or 23 April depending on an authoritative confirmation of the sighting of the crescent moon. Under those circumstances, those who can, do plan for long weekend holidays or travel.

April 1 passed quietly, without a major action recorded as a result of the traditional lies expected on that day. But, I have in my hands the Custodian of that same day, on whose page 3, bottom left corner, is a short news item titled: “Parliamentary Committee advises government to increase the Trade Ministry’s Budget”.

Advertisement

The Minister of Investment, Industry and Trade presented the Ministry’s estimated Budget to this Committee. We are told something about this by the Custodian’s correspondent as follows:

“‘Representing’ the estimates, the Minister of Investment, Industry and ‘Business’, Dr Ashatu Kijaji asked for the allocation of a total of 117.8/= billion for the year 2023/24, of which 74.2/= billion ‘are’ for ‘normal’ use and 43.6/= billion for development”.

For a start, we note that for the writer, “Trade” and “Business” mean one and the same thing, which is not necessarily the case. More prominent, though, is the way the writer used the word “Representing”. True, the Honourable Minister represents some constituency, geographical or institutional, but what she did before the Committee was not “representing the estimates”, but “presenting the estimates”.

She requested for a lot of money, but that does not make “shillings” plural in this sense. Thus, the 74.2/= billion she asked for, “is for”, not, “are for”. Finally, in Budget lingo, they do not say “normal use”. They use the term “recurrent expenditure” (which, many times, includes Personal Emoluments – PE; and Other Charges – OC); and “development expenditure”.

So, the whole sentence could do with a re-write as follows:

“‘Presenting’ the estimates, the Minister of Investment, Industry and ‘Business’, Dr Ashatu Kijaji asked for the allocation of a total of 117.8/= billion for the year 2023/24, of which 74.2/= billion ‘is’ for ‘recurrent expenditure’, and 43.6/= billion is for development expenditure”.

On the same page, is a rather blurred, but colourful photograph of fire fighters in action. This time they seem to be well equipped. The caption tells us what was going on: “Fire and Rescue Force Officers extinguish ‘the’ blaze at ‘a house’ located ‘on’ ‘the’ building at the junction of India Street and Morogoro Road in Dar es Salaam yesterday. There were no ‘causalities’”.

Here, we find the use of the definite article “the”, when it should be the indefinite article “a”. This is because, up to now, we have not been told about the blaze or the storey building. So we cannot therefore, refer to them definitely. Besides, there is a difference between “causality” and “casualty”.

“Causality” means the relationship between cause and effect. It also means the principle that everything has a cause. On the other hand, “casualty” means a person killed or injured in a war or accident. The writer used the word “causalities”, instead of “casualties”. The mistake may be a result of these two words having near similar spelling.

Moreover, given the fact that the affected property was within another building, we are possibly talking about a flat or an apartment, instead of “a house”. The caption, therefore needs rewriting to reflect these observations:

“Fire and Rescue Force Officers extinguish ‘a’ blaze ‘in a flat’ located in ‘a’ building at the junction of India Street and Morogoro Road in Dar es Salaam yesterday. There were no ‘casualties’”.

We wish you all, a Happy Easter!

lusuggakironde@gmail.com