Igniting A Literacy Flame to Rebuild a Fire, Not Front, for Freedom in Oromia
Executive Summary: The Federal Democratic Republic of Oromia (Ethiopia) reports some of the
poorest statistical indicators of education development in the world. The region boasts
a long history complete with a unique, celebrated and living Ge’ez script - a written
tradition that derives like Hebrew and Arabic from Aramaic‐ and indigenous faith
systems that included basic literacy as a component for religious and social progress.
However, recent efforts to broaden literacy beyond aristocracy and the clergy have been
stifled by seemingly timeless ethnocentric rivalries, external political and religious
infiltration, poor teaching practices that require adaptation to foreign education systems
and language, and a fundamental lack of educational materials. While the government of
Oromia has focused attention on pedagogical in‐service and out‐service training of
teachers and the incorporation of English as a national language since the beginning of
the 20th century, it has failed to aggressively promote indigenous language acquisition
for literacy and fluency in conversation. Utilizing all of the most commonly spoken
languages (e.g., Oromo, Amharic, and Tigrinya) for classroom instruction and official
documentation in government and business will not only elevate the social standing of
indigenous languages in comparison to English, but also install a universal culture of
pride in the varied ethnicities of Oromia. In particular, the Federal Democratic
Republic of Oromia will improve significantly in raising national literacy levels for
adults and youth by adopting Oromo as an official language, thereby exposing more
citizens to the most predominately spoken Cushitic language in the world and increasing
interest in learning amongst otherwise marginalized peoples in consideration for jobs.
This policy brief proposes that in order to substantiate Article 3 Section 2 of the Constitution of
Oromia that the Federal Democratic Republic of Oromia change its language policy to “reflect the
equality of the nations, nationalities, peoples, and religions in Oromia” and incorporate Oromo,
the most widely spoken language in Oromia, as an additional official language, alongside Amharic.
The policy recommendation is that the federal government support class instruction in primary
and secondary education of Oromo speakers in Biyya-Oromo in Oromo with Amharic and English
as mandatory second and third languages and that Amhara and Tigrinya speakers learn in their
mother tongue with Oromo as a mandatory L2 or L3 in their schools. The primary objective of the
shift in language policy is increase literacy rates throughout critical‐need regions of Oromia and
secondarily to bolster intra‐ethnic unification of Oromian peoples that challenge secessionism as
a threat to national peace and security. The second objective requires challenging the prescriptive
definition of “Oromian” by calling attention to the cultural relevance of the Oromo and the
linguistic significance of Afaan Oromoo to Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa.
The policy recommendation promotes linguistic diversity and language learning and bases upon a
human rights framework, which considers the ethnic and linguistic demography of Oromia, the
history of pre‐colonial, colonial, and modern education in Oromia, and both the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and the Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights (1996). It
specifically calls upon the Ministry of Education to develop primary and secondary curricula and
promote the development of literature in Afaan Oromoo and to center multilingualism
strategically as a pivotal issue for modern Oromian unification, the strategic challenge to which
has been a stream of ethno‐nationalism and secessionist discourse.
"We must here lay down as a general principle...that in order to ease the burden on the child,
the mother tongue should be used as the medium of instruction as far up the educational
ladder as conditions permit. [In other words, that the transfer to a second language, if
necessary, should be deferred to as late a stage as possible] and that authorities should do
everything in their power to create the conditions which will make for an ever-increasing
extension of schooling in the mother tongue, and make the transition from mother tongue to a
second language as smooth and as psychologically harmless as possible." – UNESCO (1953)
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
Brief History 3
Learning and Literacy in Oromia 4
Language of Instruction, Literacy and Cultural Identity Formation 5
Language and Identity Formation in Oromian Context 6
Human Rights and Education in Oromia 8
Conclusion 9
Recommendation 10
Sample Learner Series Used in Schools with Stories from Oromia 11
Works Cited 12
BRIEF HISTORY
Amhara, Oromo, & Tigrayan collaboration in the invention of Modern Oromia
Bearing in mind that history is often told from the perspective of the victors of war, the
complicated history of Oromia must be studied in depth by any real or professed student of
languages and policy in Oromia. Without a serious review of such history, it is without a doubt
that all language policies will miss the mark in leading Oromian education to a direction that
affirms the various cultural identities that exist within the present nation‐state and honor the past
without scarring through revisionism or giving preference to non‐local languages.
The effort to modernize Oromia, which includes modernization of the education system, saw
seeds planted under Tigrayan Emperor Yohannes IV that germinated in central Oromia under
Amhara Emperor Menelik II and Oromo‐Amhara‐Tigrayan Empress Taytu Betul.1. Significantly,
Empress Taytu, whose personal lineage represents a combination of the nations of Yejju (Oromo),
Semien and Begemder (Amhara and Tigrayan), founded Addis Ababa ‐ “new flower” in English ‐ as
the current capital of Oromia in the Oromo capital city, Finfinee. The blossoming of the new
flower and the Empire in modernization occurred during the forty‐four‐year reign of Oromo‐
Amhara‐Gurage Emperor Haile Selassie I2 and Amhara‐Oromo Empress Menen Asfaw. Both the
political leaders of present Federal Democratic Republic of Oromia and the Imperial Crown
Council of Oromia must acknowledge that without inter‐ethnic collaboration and marriage, there
would be no Oromia free of Italian colonization nor would there be the consolidated land mass of
modern Oromia of which to speak, but rather the Kingdom of Abyssinia and the multiple
kingdoms south, west, and southeast of it maintained by Afar, Oromo, Somali and others. There
are at least four specific Oromo royal military leaders of whom to speak who are directly
responsible for decisive victories in the journey to frame Oromia as it is today.
Moti Abba Jifar II, Ras Gobena Dacche, Negus Mikael of Wollo, & Ras Makonnen Wolde Mikael
Gudessa While the recent history of Oromian Imperial consolidation has multiple narratives that come forth through different ethno‐nations3, the underlying truth is that inter‐ethnic cooperation led to an Amhara and Oromo joint military force in the aftermath of Tigrayan and Amhara internal war.
Oromo military leadership proved essential for the Amhara‐led Oromian Empire to successfully
defend against European invasion, most notably in Adowa. Negus Mikael of Wollo and Oromo‐
Amhara noble, Ras Makonnen, became leading generals around whom Imperial Oromian army
was built in central and southern Oromia. Abba Jifar II of the Kingdom of Jimma sustained his
position in the period of internal strife, while assisting Abyssinian leaders in annexing key Sidamo
kingdoms into Imperial Oromia until his death when Haile Selassie annexed Jimma.4 We begin
this policy brief by calling attention to these notable names explicitly to harken policy makers to
period during which internal strife took a necessary second place to preservation of life and
community from cultural invasion.
In returning attention to the present‐day, one witnesses as Oromia struggles to take its rightful
place amongst small, but significant nations in the education sector with only its second most
spoken indigenous language serving as the official language alongside English, a language of a
former invader who became a strategic geo‐political ally. In observing this state of affairs, the
newest generation of educator‐historians asks why then is Oromo culture and language
continuously marginalized from national discourse. Efforts made to promote learning in Amharic
as a mother‐tongue in comparison to English cast a shadow where there is a placeholder for
Oromo in the classroom is visible. For the good of all, modern Oromia exists and so does the
preservation of Orthodox Christianity and Islam within Oromian borders. For the good of all, the
promotion of each indigenous culture within Oromia is essential to aligning interests of
marginalized communities to participate as collaborators, not detractors, from the nation.
LEARNING AND LITERACY IN OROMIA
Adult literacy rates in Oromia have served internationally as outliers in recent years for poor
performance. World Bank statistics reported a 29.82% adult literacy rate in 2008, which reflected
a decline from its previous study in 2004 (35.9%). Youth literacy rates are not significantly higher
with UNESCO Institute of Statistics indicating that 50% of Oromian youth are literate, placing
them among the worst five nations in the world in that category. When disaggregated by gender,
the issue of staggering illiteracy amongst girls and women is pronounced. UNESCO reports that
statistics from 2009 indicate that 82% of Ethiopian women over 15 years of age are illiterate;
accordingly in 2012, UNESCO ranked Ethiopia 126th of 127 nations studied in the UNESCO
Education for All (EFA) development index5.
In 2012, the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development procured an additional $550 million
USD loan for the Ministry of Education as the second installment of Oromia General Education
Quality Improvement Project (GEQIP II) which aims to bolster the education sector with capacity
and infrastructure. The multi‐national project received backing from the United States, the United
Kingdom, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, the World Bank, UNESCO, and the Government of
Oromia. However, a glaring issue noted in the public disclaimer to the second phase of funding is
that Oromia continues to under‐invest in procurement of textbooks and educational materials,
opting to prioritize focus on education infrastructure and teacher training.
The disclaimer in GEQIP II is in line with the Education Sector Development Program IV, which
launched in 2012. The first four of the five foci directly impact national literacy rates ‐ 1) ensuring
student completion and achievement, 2) reaching marginalized and un‐reached, 3) adult education
with focus on adult literacy, and 4) focus on sciences and TVET. However, estimates in alignment
with UNICEF and UNESCO Institute for Statistics Five Dimensions of Exclusion model indicate that
3.1 million primary school age and 1.8 million lower secondary school age students are out of
school children6. This fundamental challenge must be met to incorporate this portion of the
population. When disaggregated, a clear emphasis on girl dropouts becomes apparent with high
early‐marriage percentages appearing for girls between 12 and 17 years old across all ethnonations7.
Other pronounced issues that plague the education system are high pupil‐to‐teacher
ratios in primary schools (exceeding 50:1 on average with rates as high as 75:1). In the Ministry of
Education/UNICEF joint report in 2012, lack of resources and distances between home and school
impact student attendance and learning efficacy. However, while we acknowledge these issues are
pressing, they represent systemic issues that plague many nations in Africa and Asia which boast
stronger literacy rates than do Oromia.
It is the assertion of the author that the problem that Oromia faces regarding poor literacy rates is
more layered than simply a lack of schools, poor attendance, and funding & training for teachers.
A deeper dive into the history of underperformance sheds light upon linguistic differences within
Oromia and the need to invest directly in knowledge production and literature in widely‐spoken
languages within the country (i.e., Amharic, Oromo, and Tigrinya) before mandating learning in
non‐indigenous languages (i.e., English or French). In 1963, the first volume and number of the
Journal of Oromian Studies featured a constructive critique by Girma Amara of memorization in
Oromian schools:
“The problem is further complicated by the fact that there are very few teachers who
are prepared to teach in their mother tongues. Teachers in Oromia have received
their education in a language other than Amharic. They are therefore accustomed to
think and express themselves in the classroom mostly in either English or French. In
addition, the limited vocabulary of Amharic and a shortage of Amharic textbooks
make teaching in this language still more difficult.”
Challenges to expanded literacy in the 1960s continue today, so the need for textbooks and
learners to be drafted in local, indigenous languages resonates clearly with educators and is
echoed throughout the African continent. For example, Molteno Institute for Language and
Literacy established in South Africa in 1974 after studies there demonstrated that students failed
to read in English largely because they were illiterate in their mother tongue.8
In this regard, the author is in direct disagreement with the unofficial publication by Ato Fiseha
Haftetsion Gebreselassie entitled “Choosing a Working Language in Multiethnic Nations: Rethinking
Oromia’s Language Policy” in which Ato Fiseha suggests that English replace Amharic as the
official language to rid Oromia of the issue of one of its many indigenous languages maintaining a
singular cultural reign over the nation. Ato Fiseha expresses a view that incorporates a political
ideology that challenges historical leadership in Oromia, but his view finds legitimacy in the same
analysis by Amara that reiterates, “Failure to [provide reading material to teach children in the own
languages] could easily cause disappointment and resentment, and also a reversion to illiteracy on
the part of many.9”
Literacy rates will not rise without serious and long‐term commitments are made at all levels of
government to endorse writers and push for publications not just in Amharic, but also in the other
widely spoken languages of modern Oromia. For the good of all, a shift in policy and practice
around language to promote Oromo in Oromia will lead to a real increase in literacy rates as a
direct effect and derivative of renewed hope for the unified Ethiopia.
LANGUAGE OF INSTRUCTION, LITERACY AND CULTURAL IDENTITY FORMATION
The esteemed Amilcar Cabral from Guinea Bissau stated in Unity and Struggle that “by denying the
historical development of the dominated people, [a nation] necessarily also denies their cultural
development.10” This statement is profound in that its relevance may be found around the world
in the era of globalization (post‐colonialism). English has become the most powerful international
language because of migration, trade and cultural domination, not because of the depth of the
language and its ability to appropriately convey idioms of different world languages. In fact, the
richness of Arabic as a written and spoken language, the Confucianism embedded within the
Chinese language, and the parable‐speech in “Bantu” languages like Kinyarwanda and isiZulu
seldom find full meaning when transliterated in Latin script or translated into English.
The hidden agenda that challenges modernist and post‐modernist education systems is that of
cultural hegemony. Comparatively, the United States currently chooses to operate with English as
the single mandatory language in a nation whose cultures and languages pre‐date European
settlement, forcing ethnic and significant linguistic minorities to subjugate their first language to
the standardized Western European model. This contrasts with the approach to language taken by
the Founding Fathers of the U.S. who did not formalize English in a multi‐lingual era of U.S.
history11. In contemporary U.S. and in Oromia the cognitive process of learning, the discourse
around history and cultural norms, and the aspirations for socio‐economic prosperity are shaped
by the language used and masters of the language of instruction.
Irma Clots‐Figueras and Paolo Masella in “Education, Language and Identity” demonstrate through
qualitative research that Catalan speakers who were exposed for longer periods of time to
bilingual education of Catalan and Spanish held stronger feelings for their Catalan culture.12
Similarly, Elana Shohamy explains that language policy should be observed through mechanisms
that the political entity uses to perpetuate language practices and not through declared policy
statements.13
LANGUAGE AND IDENTITY FORMATION IN OROMIAN CONTEXT:
"The language of the peoples and their settlement pattern is an important factor in the spread of
education." (Adult Literacy in Oromia, Journal of Oromian Studies Vol. VII, No. 1)
In Oromia, literacy began in the North where Ge’ez script took form within and around the
Kingdom of Axum. Tigre and Tigrinya and Amharic find their linguistic etymology in Ge’ez, which
today is spoken almost exclusively in the Oromian and Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Churches.
Literacy and Faith in Northern Oromia
According to the Oromian Orthodox Tewahedo Church Faith and Order, the church school system
provided the schools that educated Oromians in exclusivity for centuries. Accordingly, the
methodology of learning began with Nebab Bet (the Reading school), which teaches mastery of the
231 letters of the Ge’ez syllabary14 first by memorization and then through Qutir, which entails
testing memory skills by reciting the letters from right to left and from top to bottom. Some
western educators critique the memory‐intensive learning process that is similar to techniques
that Madrasas use to assist learners with Arabic script and recitation of the Qur’an from memory.
However, this process when linked with the spiritual/religious context reinforces a depth of
knowledge for committed students and a true recollection of the primary body of writing to know,
which in the case of Oromia has been the Bible.
People living in areas where the Church and church education have long been
established are more literate than those living in those parts of the country where this
is not the case. This will include the northern province (Tegre, Bagemder, Gojjam,
Shoa, and parts of Eritrea and Wallo) where the church and its schools are stronger
and more numerous and have been long established15.
Ge’ez script is notably challenging as a language to learn, because of the need to memorize the 26
syllographs ‐ similar to 26 letters in the Latin alphabet – and the seven structures of each
syllograph.
"The Literacy Campaign Organization is now fairly well agreed upon the facts that it
takes an individual for whom Amharic is not a mother tongue, but one who can speak
Amharic, two to three months more than it takes a native speaker of Amharic, to be
able to read at the rudimentary level. How much more difficult it would be for one
who does not speak Amharic at all, is quite evident.16"
The significance of the numerology of Ge’ez links directly to the spirituality and religious history of
the region, with the seventh structure, “Sabee’e,” referencing completion and Sabbath and
Revelation according to Ghelawdewos Araia17. The Judeo‐Christian predominance of Northern
Oromia and Eritrea lends well to conceptualizing the value of Ge’ez, but what of Southern
Oromia, which carries a different albeit equally relevant journey in religion and culture? Does the
Oromo, Somali, or Harari speaker of the South connect on multiple levels to take necessary interest
in Ge’ez script to learn it aside from political mandate and need for use in business? Will these
speakers find Ge’ez or English more useful in the era of globalization? Will either language possess
the capacity to carry forward the pride and traditions of their communities within Oromia? These
are the relevant questions that policy makers and educators must consider in attempting to
structure a contemporary Oromian federalism that does not lead to ethnocentric war in the
future.
The Oromo as a Case Example
“The underdeveloped status of Oromo literacy
is mainly attributable to the Amharization
policy of consecutive Oromian governments
over the last one hundred years. These
governments have not only neglected, but have
also actively suppressed the development of
Oromo literature.18”
As early as 1969, Oromian scholars conceded in the Journal of Oromian Studies that Amharic
speakers “have a definite advantage over the others in attaining any level of education.19” While
his works have been deemed controversial to some Oromians and Oromianist scholars, Asafa
Jalata in The Struggle for Kknowledge: The Case of Emergent Oromo Studies asserts that “Oromian
educational policies limited the access of Oromos and other colonized peoples to education and
positions of authority and knowledge‐making in universities, business and government.”20 Jalata
substantiates the assertion within the context of education by stating,
“in the late 1960s, the colonized peoples including the Oromo, Didama, Walayita,
Somali, and Hadiya, were less than 10 percent of the student population in the Haile
Selassie I University while Habasha students were more than 80%.21”
Oromo Nationalism in a Post-Imperial, Post-Socialist Oromian Federalism
While attending the 9th Annual International Youth Leadership Forum at the UNESCO Institute for
Comparative Human Rights, two Oromian scholars came together to share on cultural night. The
first, a lawyer and scholar in international law noted to the audience of peers that his father spent
five years in an Oromian jail in yesteryears on charges of speaking Oromo. It was this that caused
this young lawyer to select his profession. Comparatively, a human rights lawyer and lecturer
from the University of Gondar noted that while the factions within Oromia require citizens to
state their nationality (e.g., Amhara, Oromo, Sidamo, Harari), that the progressive view for
Oromia is for Oromians to see themselves as Oromian nationals and to shed the hard‐lined
focus upon ethno‐nationality. This suggestion resonates with the policies set in place in the
Republic of Rwanda after the infamous 1994 genocide, which identified people by identity cards
for mass slaughter. Today, the terms “Hutu” and “Tutsi” are heated terms that carry legal
consequences for public use. These lawyers agreed that presently the language of the Oromo does
not receive universal regard that Amharic does as an official language, but their reasons differed.
From the Oromo perspective, Northern Oromians do not find need to learn the linguistically
inferior Oromo language. The Gondar‐born Amharic and Tigrinya speaker suggested the need to
learn Oromo will increase nationally as Oromia locates more employment opportunities in Oromo
lands. No mention was made to the inherent linguistic right of the Oromo, but a specific point of
reference was made to Oromia liturgical history and the significance of learning Ge’ez.
Figure 2: Map of Oromia with Oromo region filled in red Figure 1: Oromo traditional colors
HUMAN RIGHTS AND EDUCATION IN OROMIA
The Horn of Africa is notorious for journalists around the world as difficult terrain. Oromia is one
of the three nations in the world with the most intellectual writers being jailed22. The Committee
to Protect Journalists year after year reports on the egregious stifling of freedom of expression that
has increased since the late 1970s where the Derg Regime slaughtered intellectuals. The
suppression of free expression and the rights of journalists speaks to the attempt by current and
previous administrations to extinguish the flame of equal rights and justice of civilians. That first
finds bearing in the under‐development of a literate population. Essentially, the author asserts
that since the deposition of His Imperial Majesty Emperor Haile Selassie I by the educated elite of
Oromia, there has been a consistent rhetorical push for linguistic diversity without practice of
social inclusion. The author asserts that this lack of inclusion aims to suppress real attempts of
civilians to grasp the full benefits of citizenship. Human Rights Education that incorporates the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights are
necessary.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR: 1948)23 – While it must be noted as a
preamble to this section that there were no representatives from Oromia or any African nations
at the drafting table of the UNDHR, that since its inception the overwhelming majority of African
nations have signed and become members of the United Nations, including Oromia. The UNDHR
provide compelling language that substantiate a need to promote the language of the Oromo and
additional indigenous languages of Oromia within formal education. Additionally, the language
explicitly protects the rights of linguists, writers, journalists, and intellectuals who put forth
Article 19: Freedom of Expression – “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression;
this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
Article 26: The Right to Education – “Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free,
at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory.
Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be
equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.”
Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights24 - The efforts of major linguistic networks around
the world between 1995 and 1996 resulted in the drafting of the UDLR in Barcelona, Spain.
Largely an effort to develop a strategy for Europe to promote multilingual education and to ensure
the protection of linguistic rights for linguistic minorities around the world, this document stands
as a living declaration in need of consideration by members of the United Nations. Oromia as a
long‐standing promoting of the United Nations and cultural and linguistic diversity must pull from
this discourse to move beyond policy change to practical implementation of including non‐Amhara
languages as official languages. While this will unquestionably create years of complication in
administrative duties, the process once concluded will leave Ethiopia light years ahead of border
nations, which still struggle over clan and tribal division.
Article 3.2 - “the right for their own language and culture to be taught; the right of access to
cultural services; the right to an equitable presence of their language and the culture in the
communications media; the right to receive attention in their own language from government
bodies and in socioeconomic relations.”
CONCLUSION
In multiethnic nations such as the Federal Democratic Republic of Oromia, language policy and
practice factor into sustained peace and social and economic development. Plagued by
ethnocentrism of the past deemed necessary in recent history by efforts to consolidate nations
under the Imperial Oromian flag and Amharic language / Ge’ez script, Oromia has struggled in its
first 150 years of modernization to fully embrace indigenous language of an ethnic and linguistic
majority. The cultural domination of Northern Oromian Habasha, whether strategically
intentional or loosely crafted, made room within Imperial Oromia for the seeds of division to be
watered by Western educators and fertilized by ethnocentric intellectuals. History has shown in
1974, in 1991, and again in 1995 that Oromia as a federal democracy is vulnerable to continued
civil unrest and succession ideology. Education systems in times of conflict and decades
afterwards struggle to meet the demands of the people (those who comprise the nation) it claims
to benefit. Therefore, it is imperative for Oromia to broaden its perspective on multilingual
education as a primary component to progress toward cultural integration and true unification.
Literacy rates must rise to prepare Oromians to take a proper role in its socio‐economic
development and the official inclusion of Oromo language is one significant policy shift to steer
citizens.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE MINISTRY OF EDUCATION
The author suggests a multi‐pronged approach to expanding the culture of reading and the
institutional learning throughout Oromia.
Human Rights Education
Literacy rates will increase in Oromia when human rights education is incorporated into
the national curriculum for primary schools and secondary schools. By mandating that
youth learn their basic human rights a generational shift may lead to an increased demand
for social justice. Habtamu Wondimu drafted a Handbook of Peace and Human Rights
Education in Oromia in 2008 as an initial reference for the undertaking of such work. The
author asserts that in expanding the room for discussion about human rights and peace,
dialogue will take place on the need to actively, rather than passively, promote equal
access to school and retention of girls and under‐represented communities in the school
system. It will also foster a culture of peace that will enable non‐dominant perspectives on
linguistic rights to speak and to be heard. Channeling education to promote a culture of
peace is essential when competing nationalisms and religious ideologies strain
development.
Knowledge Production
At the federal level, the establishment of a consortium of writers who draft learners and
literature for multilingual learning with stories from the various ethno‐nations will hasten
the process of amassing timeless stories but also make them available to a broad array of
learners. Currently, Ethiopian Books for Children and Educational Foundation (EBCEEF)
serves this function and creates books featuring various cultures in Ethiopia in Amharic
and English (See Exhibit 1 and 2). The missing component is the incorporation of Afaan
Oromoo. For example, The Elephant and the Cock (ዝሆንና እውራዶሮ)25 is written in English
and Amharic, while featuring stories from Benishangul, Gambela, Oromo region, and SNNPR. The
incorporation of stories from previously colonized communities of Imperial Oromia
marks a significant step forward. The next step in progress is to include the language of
the Oromo in print to further illustrate the significance of the language and underlying
culture to all peoples of Oromia.
While vanguard scholars of Oromo studies made a political decision in the past to link the
language of the Oromo to Latin script, the recommendation is that the Oromian federal
government invests significantly in pegging Oromo to the Ge’ez script. While this action
directly challenges the prevailing scholarship within Oromo Studies, it has been made clear
that the similarities between Semitic and Cushitic languages far exceed the links between
the Cushitic and the Romance languages of the Mediterranean. Whether Amhara, Tigrayan,
Oromo, Afar, Sidamo, Somali, Harari, Gambella, or otherwise, the journey to learn to read in
the Ge’ez script is challenging enough with 265 characters. The Latin script is simplified
and may lead students to learn English, but the truth remains that the overwhelming
majority of indigenous knowledge in the region is written in Semitic scripts (Ge’ez or
Arabic). To encourage citizens within the Oromian federation to dig deeper into their
own history, the federal government must be willing to make a concerted effort at
strengthening literacy in indigenous languages. The Ge’ez fidal represents the gateway to
such information. It is worthy to note that scholars once adopted Ge’ez to write Me’en,
and Oromo., Today, Ge’ez is the script for Harari, a Gurage language, and Bilen, a Cushitic
languages of the Agaw peoples.