Paper short abstract:

The paper proposes a critical review of current South African studies in (socio-)linguistics under the lens of the 'urban bias'. Problematizing the rural/urban dichotomy, it asks whether this research retains a geopolitical distortion in reflecting the South African linguistic landscape.

Paper long abstract:

The problem of the urban bias remains a debated topic in South Africa in many spheres of society. Due to the logic of apartheid, 'rural' came to mean 'black'; or in post-apartheid-speak 'disadvantaged'. Up to today, the effects of long-term structural and systematic disadvantaging are quite tangible in the country. Though in parts also applicable to urban settings, poverty, insufficient infrastructure, and lack of access are largely foremost still a problem of the rural − and mostly black − population.

These structural imbalances are purported through a number of social fields including the academia. Often studies are conducted where access and conveniences are close and risks impeding the successful completion of research projects are low. While the tendency to consider feasibility in research is not per se questionable, the sum of research projects and results as a body might carry forward a distorted reflection of a field such as the sociolinguistic landscape of South Africa.

The paper proposes a critical review of current South African studies in (socio-)linguistics under the lens of the 'urban bias'. While problematizing the applicability of the rural/urban dichotomy for the South African set up, the paper asks whether research on South African languages and its use does retain and represent a geopolitical distortion and thus neglects a relevant part of language representation vital to the study of the heterogeneous (socio-)linguistic landscape in South Africa.