What can you do when you have to stay at home?

Most people may not be used to having to stay at home. Due to a soccer (football) injury, I had to stay put for a long time, yet, I hardly ever got bored (lonely, at times, yes, but doing things makes one forget about that, be content with one’s own company, and get lots of new knowledge experiences along the way). As a silver lining of that—and since I’m missing out on some social activities now as well—I’m compiling a (non-exhaustive) ‘what to do?’ list, which may give you some idea(s) to make good use of the time spent at home, besides working for home if you can or have to. They’re structured in three main categories: enriching the mind, being creative, and exercising the body, and there’s an ‘other’ category at the end.

 

Enrich the mind

 

Leisure reading

If you haven’t signed up for the library, or aren’t allowed to go there anymore, here are a few sources that may distract you from the flood of COVID-19 news bites:

  • Old novels for free: The Gutenberg project, where people have scanned and typed up old books.
  • Newer novels for free: here’s an index of free books, or search for ‘public domain books’ in your favourite search engine.

 

Learning

  • A new language to read, speak, and write. Currently, the most popular site for that is probably Duolingo. If you’re short on a dictionary: Wordreference is good for, at least, Spanish, Italian, and English, Leo for German<->English, and isiZulu.net for isiZulu<->English, to name but a few.
  • A programming language. There are very many free lessons, textbooks, and video lectures for young and old. If you have never done this before, try Python.
  • Dance. See ‘exercises’ below.
  • Some academic topic. There are several websites with legally free textbooks, such as the Open Textbook Archive, and there is a drive toward open educational resources at several universities, including UCT’s OpenUCT (which also has our departmental course notes on computer ethics), and there are many MOOCs.
  • Science experiments at home. Yes, some of those can be done at home, and they’re fun to do. A few suggestions: here (for kids, with household stuff), and here, or here, among many sites.

 

Be creative

 

Writing

  • Keeping a diary may sound boring, but we live in interesting times. What you’re experiencing now may easily be blurred by whatever comes next. Write it down, so you can look back and reflect on the pandemic later.
  • Write stories (though maybe don’t go down the road of apocalypses). You think you’re not creative enough for that? Then try to re-tell GoT to someone who hasn’t seen the series, or write a modern-day version of, say, red riding hood or Romeo & Juliet.
  • Write about something else. For instance, writing this blog post took me as much time as I would otherwise have spent on two dance classes, this post took me three evenings + another 2-3 hours to write, and this series of posts eventually evolved into a textbook. Or you can add a few pages to Wikipedia.

 

Arts

These activities tend to call for lots of materials, but those shops are possibly closed already. The following list is an intersection of supermarket-materials and artsy creations.

  • Durable ‘bread’ figures with salt dough, for if you have no clay. Regular dough for bread perishes, but add lots of salt, and after baking it, it will remain good for years. The solid dough allows for many creations.
  • Food art with fruit and vegetables (and then eat it, of course); there are pictures for ideas, as well as YouTube videos.
  • Paper-folding and cutting to make decorations, like paper doll chains, origami, kirigami.
  • Painting with food paints or make your own paint. For instance, when cooking beetroot, the water turns very dark red-ish—don’t throw that away. iirc onion for yellow and spinach for green. This can be used for, among others, painting eggs and water-colour painting on paper. Or take a tea sieve and a toothbrush, cut out a desired figurine, dip the toothbrush in the colour-water and scrape it against the sieve to create small irregular drops and splashes.

  • Life-size toilet roll elephant figures… or even toilet roll art (optionally with paper) 😉
  • Knitting, sewing and all that. For instance, take some clothes that don’t fit anymore and rework it into something new (trousers into shorts, t-shirt as a top, insert colourful bands on the sides).
  • Colourful thread art, which requires only a hammer, nails, and >=1 colours of sewing threads.

 

Exercise that body

one of the many COVID-19 memes (source: passed by on FB)–Let’s try not to gain too much weight.

Barbie memes aside, it is very well possible to exercise at home, even if you have only about 1-2 square meters available. If you don’t: you get double the exercise by moving the furniture out of the way 🙂

  • Yoga and pilates. There are several websites with posters and sheets demonstrating moves.
  • Gym-free exercises, like running on the spot, making a ‘steps’ from two piles of books and a plank and doing those steps or take the kitchen mini-ladder or go up and down the stairs 20 times, push-ups, squats, crunches, etc. There are several websites with examples of such exercises. If you need weights but don’t have them: fill two 500ml bottles with water or sand. Even the NHS has a page for it, and there are many other sites with ideas.
  • Dance. True, for some dance styles, one needs a lot of space. Then again, think [back at/about] the clubs you frequent[ed]: they are crowded and there isn’t a lot of space, but you still manage(d) to dance and get tired. So, this is doable even with a small space available. For instance, the Kizomba World Project: while you’d be late for that now to submit a flashmob video, you still can practice it at home, using their instruction videos and dance together once all this is over. There are also websites with dance lessons (for-payment) and tons of free instruction videos on YouTube (e.g., for Salsa and Bachata—no partner? Search for ‘salsa shines’ or ‘bachata shines’ or footwork that can be done on your own, or try Bollywood or a belly dance workout [disclaimer: I did not watch these videos]).
  • Zumba in the living room?

 

Other

Ontologically an awful category, but well, they still are good for keeping you occupied:

 

If you have more low-cost ideas that require little resources: please put them in the comments section.

p.s.: I did a good number of the activities listed above, but not all—yet.

Version 1.5 of the textbook on ontology engineering is available now

“Extended and Improved!” could some advertisement say of the new v1.5 of “An introduction to ontology engineering” that I made available online today. It’s not that v1 was no good, but there were a few loose ends and I received funding from the digital open textbooks for development (DOT4D) project to turn the ‘mere pdf’ into a proper “textbook package” whilst meeting the DOT4D interests of, principally, student involvement, multilingualism, local relevance, and universal access. The remainder of this post briefly describes the changes to the pdf and the rest of it.

The main changes to the book itself

With respect to contents in the pdf itself, the main differences with version 1 are:

  • a new chapter on modularisation, which is based on a part of the PhD thesis of my former student and meanwhile Senior Researcher at the CSIR, Dr. Zubeida Khan (Dawood).
  • more content in Chapter 9 on natural language & ontologies.
  • A new OntoClean tutorial (as Appendix A of the book, introduced last year), co-authored with Zola Mahlaza, which is integrated with Protégé and the OWL reasoner, rather than only paper-based.
  • There are about 10% more exercises and sample answers.
  • A bunch of typos and grammatical infelicities have been corrected and some figures were updated just in case (as the copyright stuff of those were unclear).

Other tweaks have been made in other sections to reflect these changes, and some of the wording here and there was reformulated to try to avoid some unintended parsing of it.

The “package” beyond a ‘mere’ pdf file

Since most textbooks, in computer science at least, are not just hardcopy textbooks or pdf-file-only entities, the OE textbook is not just that either. While some material for the exercises in v1 were already available on the textbook website, this has been extended substantially over the past year. The main additions are:

There are further extras that are not easily included in a book, yet possibly useful to have access to, such as list of ontology verbalisers with references that Zola Mahlaza compiled and an errata page for v1.

Overall, I hope it will be of some (more) use than v1. If you have any questions or comments, please don’t hesitate to contact me. (Now with v1.5 there are fewer loose ends than with v1, yet there’s always more that can be done [in theory at least].)

p.s.: yes, there’s a new front cover, so as to make it easier to distinguish. It’s also a photo I took in South Africa, but this time standing on top of Table Mountain.

A controlled language for competency questions

The formulation of so-called competency questions (CQs) at the start of the development of an ontology or a similar artefact is a recurring exercise in various ontology development methodologies. For instance, “Which animals are the predators of impalas?” that an African Wildlife ontology should be able to answer and “What are the main parsers for compilers?” that a software ontology may be able to answer. Yet, going by the small number of publicly available CQs, it seems like that many developers skip that step in the process. And it turned out that for those who at least try, a considerable number of purported CQs, actually aren’t at all, are mis-formulated for even having a chance for it to work smoothly (for, say, automated formalisation), or are grammatically incorrect (a depressing 1/3 of the sentences in our test set, to be more precise). Also, there’s no software support in guiding a modeller to formulate CQs, nor to actually do something with it, such as converting it automatically into SPARQL; hence, it is disjointed from the actual artefact under development, which doesn’t help uptake.

In an attempt to narrow this gap, we have developed a controlled natural language (CNL) called CLaRO: a Competency question Language for specifying Requirements for an Ontology, model, or specification [1] for CQs for ‘TBoxes’ (type-level information and knowledge, not instances). Advantages of a CNL for CQs include that it should be easier—or at least less hard—to formalise a CQ into a query over the model and to formulate a CQ in the first place. CLaRO more specifically operates at the language layer, so it deals with noun and verb phrases, rather that the primitives of a representation language and the predetermined modeling style that comes with it. It is also the first one that has been evaluated on coverage, which turned out to be good and better than earlier works on templates for CQs. To add more to it, we also made a basic tool that offers assistive authoring to write CQs (screencast).

We got there by availing of a recently published dataset of 234 CQs that had been analysed linguistically into patterns. We analysed those patterns, and that outcome informed the design of CLaRO. Given the size, this first version pf CLaRO is template-based, with core CQs and several variants, totalling to 134 templates. CLaRO was evaluated with a random sample from the original 234 CQs, a newly created set of CQs scrambled together for related work, and half of the Pizza CQs, as well as evaluated against templates presented elsewhere [2,3]. The results are summarised in the paper and discussed in more detail in a related longer technical report [4]. Here’s the nice table with the aggregate data:

Aggregated results for coverage of the three test sets. The best values are highlighted in italics. (CLaRO results are for the complete set of 134 templates) (source: based on [1])

Given the encouraging results, we also created a proof of concept CQ authoring tool, which both can assist in the authoring of CQs and may contribute to get a better idea of requirements for such a tool. One can use autocomplete so that it proposes a template, and then fill in a selected template, or just ignore it and write a free-form CQ, hit enter, and save it to a text file; the file can also be opened and CQs deleted. Here are a few screenshots on selecting and adding a CQ in the tool:

We will be presenting CLaRO at the 13th International Conference on Metadata and Semantics Research (MTSR’19) in Rome at the end of October. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions, please don’t hesitate to contact us. The CNL specification in csv and XML formats, the evaluation data, and the tool with the source code are available from the CLaRO Github repo.

 

References:

[1] Keet, C.M., Mahlaza, Z., Antia, M.-J. CLaRO: a Controlled Language for Authoring Competency Questions. 13th Metadata and Semantics Research Conference (MTSR’19). 28-31 Oct 2019, Rome, Italy. Springer CCIS. (in print)

[2] Ren, Y., Parvizi, A., Mellish, C., Pan, J.Z., van Deemter, K., Stevens, R.: Towards competency question-driven ontology authoring. In: Extended Semantic Web Conference (ESWC’14). LNCS, Springer (2014)

[3] Bezerra, C., Freitas, F., Santana, F.: Evaluating ontologies with competency questions. In: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conferences on Web Intelligence (WI) and Intelligent Agent Technologies (IAT) – Volume 03. pp. 284-285. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2013)

[4] Keet, C.M., Mahlaza, Z., Antia, M.-J. CLaRO: A data-driven CNL for specifying competency questions. University of Cape Town. Technical Report. 17 July 2019. https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.07378

Tutorial: OntoClean in OWL and with an OWL reasoner

The novelty surrounding all things OntoClean described here, is that we made a tutorial out of a scientific paper and used an example that is different from the (in?)famous manual example to clean up a ‘dirty’ taxonomy.

I’m assuming you have at least heard of OntoClean, which is an ontology-inspired method to examine the taxonomy of an ontology, which may be useful especially when the classes (/universals/concepts/..) have no or only a few properties or attributes declared. Based on that ontological information provided by the modeller, it will highlight violations of ontological principles in the taxonomy so that the ontologist may fix it. Its most recent overview is described in Guarino & Welty’s book chapter [1] and there are handouts and slides that show some of the intermediate steps; a 1.5-page summary is included as section 5.2.2 in my textbook [2].

Besides that paper-based description [1], there have been two attempts to get the reasoning with the meta-properties going in a way that can exploit existing technologies, which are OntOWLClean [3] and OntOWL2Clean [4]. As the names suggest, those existing and widely-used mechanisms are OWL and the DL-based reasoners for OWL, and the latter uses OWL2-specific language features (such as role chains) whereas the former does not. As it happened, some of my former students of the OE course wanted to try the OntoOWLClean approach by Welty, and, as they were with three students in the mini-project team, they also had to make their own example taxonomy, and compare the two approaches. It is their—Todii Mashoko, Siseko Neti, and Banele Matsebula’s—report and materials we—Zola Mahlaza and I—have brushed up and rearranged into a tutorial on OntoClean with OWL and a DL reasoner with accompanying OWL files for the main stages in the process.

There are the two input ontologies in OWL (the domain ontology to clean and the ‘ontoclean ontology’ that codes the rules in the TBox), an ontology for the stage after punning the taxonomy into the ABox, and one after having assigned the meta-properties, so that students can check they did the steps correctly with respect to the tutorial example and instructions. The first screenshot below shows a section of the ontology after pushing the taxonomy into the ABox and having assigned the meta-properties. The second screenshot illustrates a state after having selected, started, and run the reasoner and clicked on “explain” to obtain some justifications why the ontology is inconsistent.

section of the punned ontology where meta-properties have been assigned to each new individual.

A selection of the inconsistencies (due to violating OntoClean rules) with their respective explanations

Those explanations, like shown in the second screenshot, indicate which OntoClean rule has been violated. Among others, there’s the OntoClean rule that (1) classes that are dependent may have as subclasses only those classes that are also dependent. The ontology, however, has: i) Father is dependent, ii) Male is non-dependent, and iii) Father has as subclass Male. This subsumption violates rule (1). Indeed, not all males are fathers, so it would be, at least, the other way around (fathers are males), but it also could be remodelled in the ontology such that father is a role that a male can play.

Let us look at the second generated explanation, which is about violating another OntoClean rule: (2) sortal classes have only as subclasses classes that are also sortals. Now, the ontology has: i) Ball is a sortal, ii) Sphere is a non-sortal, and iii) Ball has as subclass Sphere. This violates rule (2). So, the hierarchy has to be updated such that Sphere is not subsumed by Ball anymore. (e.g., Ball has as shape some Sphere, though note that not all balls are spherical [notably, rugby balls are not]). More explanations of the rule violations are described in the tutorial.

Seeing that there are several possible options to change the taxonomy, there is no solution ontology. We considered creating one, but there are at least two ‘levels’ that will influence what a solution may look like: one could be based on a (minimum or not) number of changes with respect to the assigned meta-properties and another on re-examining the assigned meta-properties (and then restructuring the hierarchy). In fact, and unlike the original OntoClean example, there is at least one case where there is a meta-property assignment that would generally be considered to be wrong, even though it does show the application of the OntoClean rule correctly. How best to assign a meta-property, i.e., which one it should be, is not always easy, and the student is also encouraged to consider that aspect of the method. Some guidance on how to best modify the taxonomy—like Father is-a Male vs. Father inheres-in some Male—may be found in other sections and chapters of the textbook, among other resources.

 

p.s.: this tutorial is the result of one of the activities to improve on the OE open textbook, which are funded by the DOT4D project, as was the tool to render the axioms in DL in Protégé. A few more things are in the pipeline (TBC).

 

References

[1] Guarino, N. and Welty, C. A. (2009). An overview of OntoClean. In Staab, S. and Studer, R., editors, Handbook on Ontologies, International Handbooks on Information Systems, pages 201-220. Springer.

[2] Keet, C. M. (2018). An introduction to ontology engineering. College Publications, vol 20. 344p.

[3] Welty, C. A. (2006). OntOWLClean: Cleaning OWL ontologies with OWL. In Bennett, B. and Fellbaum, C., editors, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS 2006), Baltimore, Maryland, USA, November 9-11, 2006, volume 150 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pages 347-359. IOS Press.

[4] Glimm, B., Rudolph, S., Volker, J. (2010). Integrated metamodeling and diagnosis in OWL 2. In Peter F. Patel-Schneider, Yue Pan, Pascal Hitzler, Peter Mika, Lei Zhang, Je_ Z. Pan, Ian Horrocks, and Birte Glimm, editors, Proceedings of the 9th International Semantic Web Conference, LNCS vol 6496, pages 257-272. Springer.

Language annotation on the Web with MoLA

The Web consists of very many resources in many languages and has information about even more. Sure, the majority of Internet users speak English, Chinese, or Spanish, but there are sites, pages, paragraphs, and documents in other languages and about lesser known ‘languoids’ (language, dialect, variant, etc.), ranging from, say, a poem about the poor man’s dinner written in an old Brabants dialect that used to be spoken in the south of the Netherlands to the effects of mobile phones on Zimbabwean (cf. South African) isiNdebele [1]. How should that be annotated? Here’s a complex use case of languoids for old French:

(source: [2])

The extant multilingual Semantic Web models, such as W3C’s ontolex-lemon community standard have outsourced that to a ‘the language tag comes from some place’, as they focus on the word-level and/or sentence-level for the multilingual (semantic) Web. There are indeed standardisations of language tags. Notably, there are the ISO 639 codes (parts 1, 2, 3 and 5) for some 8000 languages—but there are more languoids that are not covered by the ISO list, with an estimated 8-15K or so currently spoken languoids and 150K extinct. There are also Glottolog, Ethnologue, and MultiTree, which are more comprehensive in some respect, but they are limited and problematic in other cases. For instance, Glottolog—the best among them—still uses the broader/narrower than, has artificial names for grouping languoids, has inconsistencies in modelling decisions, and is still incomplete in coverage.

My co-authors—Frances Gillis-Webber, also at UCT, and Sabine Tittel, with the Heidelberg Academy of Sciences and Humanities—and I aim to change that so as to allow for more comprehensive and more inclusive language tags and annotations on the Semantic Web.

In order to be able to do so, we developed a Model for Language Annotation (MoLA) that caters for relatively comprehensive languoid annotations and how they are related, such as allowing recording which languoid evolved from or was influenced by which other languoid, when it was spoken and where, its preferred and alternate names, what sort of lect it is (e.g., dialect, pidgin), which dialect cluster or language family it is a member of, and backward compatibility with the ISO 639 codes.

The design approach was that of labour-intensive manual modelling, including competency questions, an extensive use case, and iterative development of the model at the conceptualisation stage using the Object-Role Modeling (ORM) language. This model was then formalised in OWL (well, most of it). It was tested on the competency questions, smaller use case scenarios, and validated with the large use case. A snippet for Spanish is as follows, as the one for Old French gets quite lengthy (some details).

It enhances Glottolog’s model on several key points, including proper relations between languoids cf BT/RT, a languoid can be associated with zero or more regions, and it allows for multiple names of a languoid both concurrently and over time.

This sounds like a smooth process, but there were a few modelling hurdles that had to be overcome. One of them is level of granularity of analysis of a languoid. For instance, one could argue both that isiXhosa is a language—it’s one of the 11 official languages of South Africa—but also that it is a dialect cluster (i.e., a collection), as there are multiple dialects of isiXhosa. This is a similar case for Old French that’s a language and member of the Romance family of languages, but also can be seen as a collection of dialects (e.g., Picard and Norman), and dialects, in turn, may have varieties (e.g., Artois and Santerre for Picard). On the bright side, this now can be represented and, because it is represented explicitly, it can be queried, such as “Which languoids are dialects of French that were spoken in the middle ages in France?” and “Which languoids are a member of Nguni?”. The knowledgebase still needs to be populated, though, so it won’t work yet with all languoids.

More details can be found in the paper that was recently published [2]. It will be presented in a few weeks at the 1st Iberoamerican Conference on Knowledge Graphs and Semantic Web (KGSWC’19), in Villa Clara, Cuba, alongside 13 other papers on ontologies. The first author, Frances, is soon travelling to the ISWS summer school, so I will present it at KGSWC’19.

 

References

[1] Nkomo, D., Khumalo, L. Embracing the mobile phone technology: its social and linguistic impact with special reference to Zimbabwean Ndebele. African Identities, 10(2): 143-153.

[2] Gillis-Webber, F., Tittel, S., Keet, C.M.. A Model for Language Annotations on the Web. 1st Iberoamerican conference on Knowledge Graphs and Semantic Web (KGSWC’19). Springer CCIS. 23-30 June 2019, Villa Clara, Cuba.

Ontology, part-whole relations, isiZulu and culture

The title is a mouthful, but it can go together. What’s interesting, is that the ‘common’ list of part-whole relations are not exactly like that in isiZulu and Zulu culture.

Part-whole relations have been proposed over the past 30 years, such as to relate a human heart to the human it is part of, that Gauteng is located in South Africa (geographically a part of), and the slice of the cake is a portion of the cake, and they seemed well-established by now. The figure below provides an informal view of it.

Informal taxonomy of common part-whole relations (source: [2])

My co-author, Langa Khumalo, and I already had an inkling this hierarchy probably would not work for isiZulu, based, first, on a linguistic analysis to generate natural language [1], and, second, the Shuter & Shooter English-isiZulu dictionary already lists 18 translations for just ‘part’ alone. Yet, if those ‘common’ part-whole relations are universal, the differences observed ought to be just an artefact of language, not ontological differences. To clear up the matter, we guided ourselves with the following questions:

  1. Which part-whole relations have been named in isiZulu, and to what extent are they not only lexically but also semantically distinct?
  2. Can all those part-whole relations be mapped with equivalence relations to the common part-whole relations?
  3. For those that cannot be mapped with equivalence relations: is the difference in meaning ontologically possibly interesting for ontology engineering?
  4. Is there something different as gleaned from isiZulu part-whole relations that is useful in improving the theoretical appreciation of part-whole relations?

To figure this out, we first took a bottom-up approach with evidence gathering, and then augmented it with further ontological analysis. Plodding though the isiZulu-English dictionaries got us 81 terms that had something to do with parts. 41 were discarded because they were not applicable upon closer inspection (e.g., referring to creating parts cf. relating parts, idioms). Further annotations and examples were added, which reduced it to 28 (+ 3 we had missed and were added). Of those 28, we selected 13 for ontological analysis and formalisation. That selection was based on importance (like ingxenye) and some of them that seemed a bit overly specific, like iqatha for portions of meat, and meat only. The hierarchy of the final selection is shown in the figure below, with an informal indication of what the relation relates.

Selected isiZulu terms with informal descriptions. (Source: [2])

They held up ontologically, i.e., some are the same as the ‘common’ ones, yet some others are really different, like the hlanganyela for a collective (cf. individual object) being part of (participating in) an event. Admitted, some of the domains/ranges aren’t very clearly delineated. For instance, isiqephu relates solid and ‘solid-like’ portions, as in, e.g., Zonke izicezu zesinkwa ziyisiqephu sesinkwa esisodwa ‘all slices of bread are a portion of some loaf of bread’. Where exactly that border of ‘solid-like’ is and when it really counts as a liquid (and thus isiqephu applies no more), is not yet clear—that’s a separate question orthogonal to the relation. Nonetheless, the investigation did clear up several things, especially the more precise umunxa that took me a while to unravel, which turned out to be a chain of parthood relations; e.g., the area where the fireplace is in the hut is a portion of the hut (sample use with the verbaliser: Onke amaziko angumunxa wexhiba). We didn’t touch upon really thorny issues that probably will deserve a paper of their own. For instance, the temporalised parthood isihlephu is used to relate a meaningful scattered part with identity to the whole it was part of, such as the broken-off ear of a cup that was part of the cup (but it cannot be used for the chip of the cup, as a chip isn’t identifiable in the same way as the ear is).

We did try to test the terms against the isiZulu National Corpus to see how the terms are used, but with the limited functionalities and tooling, not as much came out of it as we had hoped for. In any case, the detailed assessment of a section of the corpus did show the relevant uses were not contradicting the formalisation.

Further details can be found in our paper “On the ontology of part-whole relations in Zulu language and culture” that will be presented at the 10th International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems 2018 (FOIS’18) that will be held from 17 to 21 September in Cape Town, South Africa.

As far as I know, this is the first such investigation. Checking out other languages a bit (mainly Spanish and German), and some related works on Turkish and Chinese, it might be the case that also there the ‘common’ part-whole relations may not be exactly the same. We carried out whole process systematically, which is described as such in the paper, so that anyone who’d like to do something like this for another language region and culture, could follow the same procedure.

 

References

[1] Keet, C.M., Khumalo, L. On the verbalization patterns of part-whole relations in isiZulu. 9th International Natural Language Generation conference (INLG’16), September 5-8, 2016, Edinburgh, UK. ACL, 174-183.

[2] Keet, C.M., Khumalo, L. On the ontology of part-whole relations in Zulu language and culture. 10th International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems 2018 (FOIS’18). IOS Press. 17-21 September, 2018, Cape Town, South Africa. (in print)

Not sorry at all—Review of “Sorry, not Sorry” by Haji Dawjee

Some papers are in the review pipeline for longer than they ought to be and the travel-part of conference attendance is a good opportunity to read books. So, instead of writing more about research, here’s a blogpost with a book review instead, being Sorry, not sorry—Experiences of a brown woman in a white South Africa by South African journalist Haji Mohamed Dawjee. It’s one of those books I bought out of curiosity, as the main title intrigued me on two aspects. First, it contradicts—if you’re not sorry, then don’t apologise for not doing so. Second, the subtitle, as it can be useful to read what people who don’t get much media coverage have to say. It turned out to have been published only last month, so let me break with the usual pattern and write a review now rather than wait until the usual January installments

The book contains 20 essays of Dawjee’s experiences broadly and with many specific events, and reflections thereof, on growing up and working in South Africa. Depending on your background, you’ll find more or less recognisable points in it, or perhaps none at all and you’ll just eat the whole spiced dish served, but if you’re a woke South African white or think of yourself as a do-gooder white, you probably won’t like certain sections of it. As it is not my intention to write a very long review, I’ve picked a few essays to comment on, but there’s no clear single favourite among the essays. There are two essays that I think the book could have done without, but well, I suppose the author is asserting something with it that has something to do with the first essay and that I’m just missing the point. That first essay is entitled ‘We don’t really write what we like’ and relates back to Biko’s statement and essay collection I write what I like, not the Writing what we like essay collection of 2016. It describes the media landscape, the difficulties of people of colour to get published, and that their articles are always expected to have some relevance and insight—“having to be on the frontlines of critical thinking”—rather than some drivel that white guys can get away with, as “We too have nice experiences. We think about things and dream and have magic in us. We have fuzzy fables to share.”. Dawjee doesn’t consider such airy fairy stories by the white guys to be brave, but exhibiting opportunity an privilege, and she wants to have that opportunity and privilege, too. This book, however, is mainly of the not-drivel and making-a-point sort of writing rather than flowery language devoid of a message.

For instance, what it was like from the journalism side when Mandela died, and the magazine she was working for changing her story describing a successful black guy into one “more Tsotsi-like”, because “[t]he obvious reason for the editorial manipulation was that no-one wanted a story of a good black kid. Only white kids are intrinsically exceptional.” (discussed in the essay ‘The curious case of the old white architect’). Several essays describe unpleasant behind-the-scenes experiences in journalism, such as at YOU magazine, and provide a context to her article Maid in South Africa that had as blurb “White people can walk their dogs, but not their children”, which apparently had turned out to cause a shitstorm on social media. There was an opinion-piece response by one of Dawjee’s colleagues, “coming to my ‘rescue’” and who “needed to whitesplain my thoughts and sanitise them with her ‘wokeness’” (p190). It’s a prelude to finishing off with a high note (more about that further below), and illustrates one of the recurring topics—the major irritation with the do-gooders, woke whites, the ones who put themselves in the ‘good whites’ box and ‘liberal left’, but who nonetheless still contribute to systemic racism. This relates to Biko’s essay on the problems with white liberals and similar essays in his I write what I like, there described as category, and in Dawjee’s book illustrated with multiple examples.

 

In an essay quite different in style, ‘Why I’m down with Downtown Abbey’ (the TV series), Dawjee revels in the joys of seeing white servants doing the scurrying around, cooking, cleaning etc for the rich. On the one hand, knowing a little of South African society by now, understandable. On the other hand, it leaves me wondering just how much messed up the media is that people here still (this is not the first or second time I came across this topic) seem to think that up in Europe most or all families also have maids and gardeners. They don’t. As one Irish placard had put it, “clean up your own shite” is the standard, as is DIY gardening and cooking. Those chores, or joys, are done by the women, children, and men of the nuclear family, not hired helps.

Related to that latter point—who’s doing the chores—two essays have to do with feminism and Islam. The essay title ‘And how the women of Islam did slay’ speaks for itself. And, yes, as Dawjee says, it cannot be repeated often enough that there were strong, successful, and intelligent women at the bedrock of Islam and women actually do have rights (unlike under Christianity); in case you want some references on women’s rights under Islam, have a look at the essay I wrote a while a go about it. ‘My mother, the true radical’ touches upon notions of feminism and who gets to decide who is feminist when and in what way.

 

I do not quite agree with Dawjee’s conclusion drawn from her Tinder experiences in ‘Tinder is a pocket full of rejection, in two parts’. On p129 she writes “Tinder in South Africa is nothing but fertile ground for race-based rejection.”. If it were a straightforward case of just race-based swiping, then, statistically, I should have had lots of matches with SA white guys, as I surely look white with my pale skin, blue eyes, and dark blonde hair (that I ended up in the 0.6% ‘other’ box in the SA census in 2011 is a separate story). But, nada. In my 1.5 years of Tinder experiment in Cape Town, I never ever got a match with a white guy from SA either, but plenty of matches with blacks, broad and narrow. I still hypothesise that the lack of matches with the white guys is because I list my employer, which scares away men who do not like women who’ve enjoyed some higher education, as it has scared away countless men in several other countries as well. Having educated oneself out of the marriage market, it is also called. There’s a realistic chance that a majority of those South African whites that swiped left on Dawjee are racist, but, sadly, their distorted views on humanity include insecurities on more than one front, and I’m willing to bet that Dawjee having an honours degree under her belt will have contributed to it. That said, two anecdotes doesn’t make data, and an OKCupid-type of analysis like Rudder’s Dataclysm (review) but then of Tinder data would be interesting so as to get to the bottom of that.

 

The two, imho, skippable essays are “Joining a cult is a terrible idea” (duh) and “Depression: A journal”. I’m not into too personal revelations, and would have preferred a general analysis on how society deals, or not, with mental illness, or, if something more concrete, to relate it to, say, the Life Esidimeni case from whichever angle.

 

Meandering around through the various serious subtopics and digressions, as a whole, the essays combine into chronicling the road taken by Dawjee to decolonise her mind, culminating in a fine series of statements in the last part of the last essay. She is not sorry for refusing to be a doormat, saying so, and the consequences that that will have for those who perpetuate and benefit from systemic racism, and she now lives from a position of strength rather than struggling and doubting as a receiver of it.

 

Overall, it was an interesting book and worthwhile to have read. The writing style is very accessible, so one can read the whole book in a day or so. In case you are still unsure whether you want to read it or not: there are free book extracts of ‘We don’t really write what we like’, ‘Begging to be white?’, and ‘And how the women of Islam did slay’ and, at the time of writing this blog post, one written review on News24 and Eusebius McKaiser’s Radio 702 interview with Dawjee (both also positive about the book).