By Eben van Tonder, 3 Dec 2025

Introduction

I am studying German. My vocabulary studies brought me face-to-face with two words that surprised me. “Taschenrechner” in German and “sakrekenaar” in Afrikaans. Both translate in English as a calculator. The same semantic logic is used in German and Afrikaans. Literally, a calculator for the pocket. Then “Staubsauger” in German and “stofsuier” in Afrikaans—a device that sucks dust, a vacuum cleaner.

These are not casual coincidences. Both languages arrived independently at parallel compounds following almost identical structural logic. Seeing this forced me to realise that something more deliberate was at work in the development of Afrikaans and German than I had assumed. The process of looking over one’s shoulder to the parent language must have continued long after the spoken forms diverged, because the pocket calculator and the vacuum cleaner emerged long after the languages separated. This made me wonder about the relationship between Dutch and German, as Afrikaans contains many words with clear German roots that entered through Dutch.

I had naively expected that the origin of new words in Afrikaans was a bottom-up event. The ordinary speaker coins a term, newspapers repeat it, and it becomes standard. In reality, I found the opposite. The development of Afrikaans was heavily top-down, organised, institutional, ideological and at times, political. This made me wonder about the development of Dutch from German. The relationship between education, nation-building, and vocabulary expansion was not unique to South Africa. It was also present in the Netherlands and in German-speaking territories. In each case, language had to keep up with independence.

In South Africa, the great question was direct: just not an English borrowed word, especially because of the Anglo-Boer War and our history against the British. In the Netherlands, the relationship with German was more subtle. Neither hostile nor submissive but marked by admiration, competition, resistance and cultural self-respect.

This article explains the process. It shows why new technical words in Afrikaans are not accidents and why Dutch itself earlier followed a similar gravitational pull toward German. The mechanisms were different, but the logic was similar. Language was inseparably linked to schooling, universities, technical education and administration. It had to serve industry and to serve the state. A language without new words cannot run a railway or teach chemistry at university level. It does not matter whether it is Pretoria or Leiden. Society demands vocabulary. When a new invention arrives, words must follow. They do not emerge in a linguistic vacuum. They emerge from institutions, from habits of word formation and from deep, older grammatical instincts inherited from earlier Germanic languages.

This is the story.

Afrikaans did not develop its technical vocabulary by accident

When Afrikaans became an official language in 1925, replacing Dutch in government and public life in South Africa, a vast technical problem presented itself. Afrikaans had the grammar and the everyday vocabulary of a living spoken tongue, but it did not yet have the terminology of science, engineering, transport, law and administration. The nineteenth century had never required Afrikaans to explain chemistry to university students or to issue technical railway manuals. Dutch had served as the written medium. Once Afrikaans took over, the entire lexical landscape had to be rebuilt.

This was not done informally. It was driven by organised bodies. The Suid-Afrikaanse Akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns, founded in 1909, acted as an early guardian of language, literature and terminology. After 1925, the need became acute. During the 1930s, committees inside government departments produced Afrikaans equivalents for specialised fields. The South African Railways created a terminology committee in 1932 to standardise technical words for locomotives, signalling, inspection, boiler codes and maintenance. Word lists were compiled and submitted to the Academy for approval. They were then printed, distributed, and formally adopted.

New words, therefore, did not spread because a journalist liked them. They spread because schools, state departments and technical training programmes adopted official lists. The Afrikaans railways, the post office service, the engineering departments and the education system acted as engines of word creation, translation and enforcement. The Afrikaans Language and Culture Association and the Federation of Afrikaans Cultural Societies organised additional terminology work. By the 1940s, military vocabulary, agricultural vocabulary and industrial vocabulary all existed in structured lists. Teachers were expected to use them. Students learned them. Universities taught with them. Language and education were therefore linked in a very concrete way. Vocabulary was power. Vocabulary was sovereignty. Afrikaans could not be a language of instruction if it lacked the words that instruction required. Where would the people who took it upon themselves to “invent new words” and technical terminology look for “inspiration”? The easy answer is Dutch, but then, definitely also German.

The Afrikaans Lexicon: A Response to History

The structural choices made during the formalisation of Afrikaans were a direct response to political and historical trauma. Following the Anglo-Boer War, English was perceived as the language of the conqueror, creating a powerful impetus among scholars and language architects to protect Afrikaans from English linguistic domination.

This avoidance mechanism did not lead to linguistic isolation. Instead, it led to the robust development of a Germanic compounding instinct, a structural pattern inherited via Cape Dutch from Proto-Germanic. This instinct operates under a simple, potent rule: the fusing logic. It allows a speaker to build complex words from transparent roots, effectively using a linguistic “Lego set.” For instance, the Afrikaans word for calculator, ‘rekenaar’, is an instantly understandable compound of ‘reken’ (to calculate) and the agent suffix.

While Dutch provided the primary framework and the majority of the vocabulary, the language committees, comprised of experts familiar with German academic prestige, also looked independently to German scientific and technical sources.

This is crucial because it confirms that scholars were not just relying on Dutch tradition, but were actively seeking high-status, non-English templates for creating a modern vocabulary. They recognised that German’s compounding system offered a powerful model for systematic terminology. This is evident in numerous coinages where Afrikaans mirrored German structures to create precise, native terminology, often bypassing contemporary Dutch preferences for Latinate or English loanwords.

Here are further examples of this direct structural modelling:

Afrikaans Word	Meaning (UK English)	German Source/Model	Literal Translation
‘Vlugskrif’	Pamphlet/Flyer	‘Flugschrift’	Flight-writing
‘Swaartekrag’	Gravity	‘Schwerkraft’	Heavy-power
‘Windtonnel’	Wind tunnel	‘Windkanal’	Wind-channel
‘Aardgas’	Natural gas	‘Erdgas’	Earth-gas
‘Molmassa’	Molar mass (Chemistry)	‘Molmasse’	Mole-mass
‘Suurstof’	Oxygen	‘Sauerstoff’	Sour-stuff (Acid-stuff)
‘Chemikus’	Chemist	‘Chemiker’	Chemic-er
‘Wiskunde’	Mathematics	Modelled on ‘Wissenschaft’	Certain-knowledge
‘Verplasing’	Displacement (Engine capacity)	‘Verdrängung’	Pressing-away
‘Aanleg’	Talent/Aptitude	‘Anlage’	Laying-on (or inherent ability)
‘Wrywing’	Friction	‘Reibung’	Rubbing
‘Rekenkunde’	Arithmetic	‘Rechenkunst’	Reckoning-art

This parallel consultation affirmed that the compounding method was both modern and structurally sound, allowing Afrikaans to rapidly create a sophisticated, home-grown technical vocabulary while maintaining its unique Germanic identity.

The transparent logic of the fusing instinct

This preference for compounding relies on a specific grammatical mechanism often called the fusing instinct. It acts like a linguistic set of Lego bricks. In English, a speaker must often memorise a new term as a standalone abstract label. In Germanic languages, the speaker constructs the word from visible parts. This makes the vocabulary transparent. You do not need to learn a new arbitrary sound for a vacuum cleaner if you already know the words for dust and sucking.

The rule is simple yet potent. The speaker takes a base word, which acts as the functional core, and attaches a descriptor to the front of it. The resulting weld creates a single solid lexical unit. This is why German and Afrikaans feel so engineered. They are not collections of random labels. They are systems of assembly. The speaker feels a satisfying click when “hand” and “doek” combine to form “handdoek” (towel). The meaning is literally a cloth for the hand. This transparency means that complex technical terms are often instantly intelligible to a layperson. A “waterstofbom” is clearly a bomb made of hydrogen stuff. The internal logic is exposed rather than hidden behind Latin or Greek roots.

A shared architectural blueprint

The surprise of seeing “Taschenrechner” in German and “sakrekenaar” in Afrikaans is not that they look similar. The interesting thing is that the engineering blueprint is identical. Both languages form nouns by pairing a context word on the left with a functional core on the right. The left element provides the setting or the purpose, while the right element names the essence of the object.

Consider the humble pocket calculator. In German, the word is “Taschenrechner”, which literally translates as “pocket reckoner”. In Afrikaans, the word is “sakrekenaar”, which also literally translates as “pocket reckoner”. The same applies to the vacuum cleaner. In German, it is a “Staubsauger” or “dust sucker”. In Afrikaans, it is a “stofsuier” or “dust sucker”.

These are not random coincidences or simple copy jobs. They are the result of deep compounding rules that predate the modern versions of these languages. This architectural pattern existed in Old High German and in early Dutch. Afrikaans inherited its version from seventeenth-century Cape Dutch. When new inventions like calculators and engines arrived, the speakers did not need to invent a new grammar. They instinctively applied the ancient blueprint to the modern machine.

Structural basis for compounding in Afrikaans, Dutch and German

All three are West Germanic languages. Their grammar allows lexical elements to be welded together into a single unit without inserting prepositions or separate function words. The compound is treated as one word with one stress pattern and one grammatical slot in the sentence. This comes from Proto-Germanic, where nominal modifiers often stood directly in front of the noun.

• Example:
  • Afrikaans: lugdruk
  • Dutch: luchtdruk
  • German: Luftdruck

In English, the same meaning requires a two-word phrase (air pressure). In these languages, it becomes one lexical item formed by fusing two roots.

Head-final compounds

The general rule in all three is that the last element is the head. It determines gender, grammatical category and core meaning. All previous parts restrict or specify it.

• German Example:
  • “Donaudampfschifffahrtsgesellschaftskapitän”
  • The head = Kapitän (Captain). Everything before it describes the type of captain. The word is long, but the logic is linear: qualifiers accumulate to the left.
• Afrikaans Example:
  • “rekenaarprogramskakelaar”
  • The head = skakelaar (switch). It is a switch, and the earlier morphemes explain its context.
• Dutch Example:
  • “toetsenbordverlichting”
  • The head = verlichting (light). Light of a keyboard.

The system allows theoretically unlimited extension because each new element modifies the head without altering the underlying grammar.

Internal binding elements

German often inserts linking consonants between parts. These are not random. They are historical remnants of declension or genitive endings.

• Common binders: -s, -n, -es, -er
• German Examples:
  • Arbeitsmarkt. Binder -s
  • Hochzeitskleid. Binder -s
  • Kinderngarten. Binder -n
  • Bilderrahmen. Binder -er
• Dutch also sometimes shows linking elements, especially s and en.
  • zonsondergang
  • arbeidscontract
  • paardenstal
• Afrikaans has fewer binders because it eliminated most case endings early, but they appear where inherited.
  • arbeidsreg
  • vroueraad
  • leerdersboek

These binders make very long compounds easier to pronounce and preserve morphological clarity.

Stress and pronunciation

Compounds in these languages have primary stress on the first element. This tells the hearer it is one word, not an adjective plus noun phrase.

• German: ‘Wasserfall, not Wasser ‘fall
• Dutch: ‘stoeptegels, not stoep ‘tegel
• Afrikaans: ‘handdruk, not hand ‘druk

The stress pattern signals that the listener should interpret the construction as a single semantic unit.

No internal inflexion

The internal parts of a compound are normally not inflected. The head may decline, not the modifiers.

• German:
  • der Wasserfall
  • die Wasserfälle. (The plural mark attaches to the head.)
• Afrikaans:
  • boordevol appels
  • appelboorde. (The plural attaches only at the end.)
• Dutch:
  • boekenkast
  • boekenkasten. (The head takes the plural.)

This keeps compounds morphologically stable and predictable.

Contrast with English structure

English tends to form nominal compounds as two independent words or with hyphens. The language relies heavily on word order and prepositions.

• supply chain management
• decision making process
• credit card terminal

These are phrases, not single lexical units. The grammar resists welding the parts together. When English does form a single compound, it often becomes opaque or idiosyncratic.

• “Butterfly” does not mean “butter fly”.

Understanding the meaning must be learned case by case. Afrikaans, Dutch and German compounds are typically transparent: the parts still carry meaning inside the whole.

Why German can be extremely long

German retains the old rule that any noun, even a phrase-level idea, can serve as a modifier if placed before the head. There is no grammatical ceiling on how many elements can stack. Legal, medical and engineering terminology take advantage of this.

The Power of German Compounding

These two official German names demonstrate the “fusing logic” we discussed. Instead of using prepositional phrases or acronyms, German grammar allows roots to be welded together into a single, technically precise lexical unit.

1. ‘Bundesausbildungsförderungsgesetz’

This word refers to the federal law providing financial aid for student training and education. It is one of the most famous examples of German bureaucratic compounding.

Component (German Root)	Afrikaans Meaning	English Meaning	Notes
Bund	Bond / Federasie	Federation / Federal	Refers to the Federal Republic of Germany.
Ausbildung	Opleiding	Training / Education	The noun for vocational or academic training.
Förderung	Bevordering / Ondersteuning	Promotion / Aid / Support	The act of providing support or subsidy.
Gesetz	Wet	Law / Statute	The legal instrument governing the aid.

Full Meaning:

• English: The Federal Training Assistance Act (or Federal Education Support Law).
• Afrikaans: Die Federale Opleidingsondersteuningswet (The Federal Training Support Law).

The Afrikaans translation ‘Die Federale Opleidingsondersteuningswet’ breaks into two words where German uses one because Afrikaans compounds are typically limited to two or occasionally three roots, while German allows for almost limitless compounding. Furthermore, many long German compounds use ‘s’ or ‘en’ as linking morphemes which are not consistently used in Afrikaans, structurally forcing the split.

This limitation, which restricts compounding to generally two or three roots, is primarily a legacy of Afrikaans’s development as a simplified, contact language. Early Cape Dutch, the predecessor to Afrikaans, experienced rapid grammatical and morphological simplification due to intense multilingual contact in the 17th and 18th centuries. This process naturally shed complex Germanic features, including the ability to concatenate words infinitely with linking morphemes. The language thus stabilised with a preference for analytical structures (like phrases) over the heavy synthetic morphology (long compounds) of German. When language committees formalised Afrikaans in the 20th century, they consciously adopted the powerful Germanic compounding method (the logic of ‘Vlugskrif’), but they prudently avoided the German orthographic extreme (the length of ‘Bundesausbildungsförderungsgesetz’), thereby maintaining clarity and accessibility for its broad, rapidly standardising user base.

2. ‘Verkehrsinfrastrukturfinanzierungsgesellschaft’

This word is the official name for a specific type of corporation established to finance transportation infrastructure projects. It is a highly complex administrative term.

Component (German Root)	Afrikaans Meaning	English Meaning	Notes
Verkehr	Verkeer	Traffic / Transport	Refers to the movement of vehicles and goods.
Infrastruktur	Infrastruktuur	Infrastructure	A direct loanword, but treated as a root for compounding.
Finanzierung	Finansiering	Financing / Funding	The process of providing money.
Gesellschaft	Genootskap / Maatskappy	Company / Corporation / Society	The legal entity established to carry out the financing.

Full Meaning:

• English: The Traffic Infrastructure Financing Corporation (or Transport Infrastructure Funding Company).
• Afrikaans: Die Verkeersinfrastruktuurfinansieringsmaatskappy.

These examples vividly show how the Germanic compounding method creates words that are long, but whose meaning is immediately clear to the educated speaker, as the entire concept is systematically built from recognizable, functional roots.

---

Summary of rules

• The compound is one word with head at the end.
• Modifiers accumulate to the left, each narrowing meaning.
• Linking elements s, n, er, es may appear between parts.
• Primary stress lies on the first element.
• Only the head takes inflection.
• Transparency is expected: the internal parts keep their meaning.
• There is no fixed limit on length if rule 1 to 6 remain satisfied.

These structural features make productive compounding natural in Afrikaans, Dutch and German, while English tends to block it by keeping expressions at phrase level rather than lexical level.

The departmental machine behind Afrikaans terminology

In South Africa, state institutions became deliberate engines of vocabulary creation.

The Railways were the first great laboratory. The South African Railways and Harbours administration had to operate locomotives, brake systems, signalling networks, depots, workshops and ticketing systems. Imported manuals arrived in English, because British engineering dominated the industry. The railways refused to remain dependent on English terminology. Technicians and clerks submitted Afrikaans equivalents to language committees. These were not symbolic gestures. They were printed in circulars, used in procurement documents and included in regulations.

The railway vocabulary travelled along the network itself. It appeared on timetables, platform signs, safety notices, maintenance forms and training materials. Afrikaans was forced into industrial life. It became the language of pneumatic brakes, couplings, gradients, axle loads and freight manifests. The railways demonstrated that Afrikaans could operate in a modern technical system, not only in domestic speech.

In South Africa, one important aspect of the development of new words was that several government departments acted as vocabulary engines. It was true in the railways, but also in other departments. They did this consciously. Their goal was explicit: Afrikaans must function as a full administrative language. It must not collapse into English. New inventions, new technologies and new bureaucratic procedures demanded new words, and those words had to be Afrikaans.

The Post Office played a central role. Postal administration in the twentieth century involved telegraphy, telephony, switching, wireless signalling and internal reporting systems. English words dominated these fields internationally. Terms for relay boards, battery banks, trunk lines, automatic sorting and subscriber billing arrived in South Africa through English manuals. The Post Office refused to simply adopt the English words. Staff submitted Afrikaans alternatives to the Suid Afrikaanse Akademie. Committees reviewed the proposals and standardised them. The resulting terms were printed in official instructional booklets and circulated to every post office technician and clerk in the country. This is why Afrikaans vocabulary for communications is surprisingly uniform. It was not the product of folklore. It was the outcome of bureaucratic discipline.

Public Works followed the same logic. When construction regulations and engineering standards expanded in the 1930s and 1940s, English terminology arrived first because it came with imported tools and imported contracts. The department produced Afrikaans term banks for cement grades, bridge components, earthworks profiles and surveying. These terms were not suggestions. They were directives. Textbooks used them. Tender documents used them. Municipal engineers used them. The academy stamped them. The bureaucracy enforced them. Afrikaans therefore became a high precision language for infrastructure because engineers in Pretoria and Bloemfontein demanded it.

Agriculture formed another engine. Livestock management, disease reporting, soil science, fertilisation and crop rotation required specialised vocabulary. Agricultural colleges and departmental circulars pushed Afrikaans terminology into the rural heart of the country. Farmers used it in official correspondence, veterinary inspectors used it in reports, cooperatives used it in bylaws and packaging. Many terms that appear to be folk Afrikaans are in fact officially sanctioned standards drafted by agronomic committees.

Mining and energy developed their own lexicon. Twentieth century South Africa was a mining civilisation. Shafts, haulage cages, explosives, ventilation, rock mechanics, blast patterns and occupational safety all needed Afrikaans names. The vocabulary was developed through departmental memoranda and training manuals. The same mechanism repeated itself. Engineers wrote the words. Departments formalised them. The Academy approved them. Schools taught them to fitters and mine captains. English was avoided wherever a cognate could be built from Germanic roots.

The railways shaped the result more than any other institution. It was the one system that physically connected the country. It moved language along the track beds from port to hinterland. A term created in a Pretoria drafting office did not remain an academic coinage. It reached the Cape via circular, the Karoo via depots, the Transvaal via locomotives and workshops. Track gangs, telegraph operators, fitters and station masters all used the same vocabulary. Uniformity emerged because usage was mandatory. The railway was not simply a mode of transport. It was a distribution network for terminology.

The effect of this process cannot be overstated. It created a network of institutional funnels that moved words from technical specialists into the bloodstream of the language. Newspapers did not lead. They followed. Ordinary speakers did not invent. They absorbed. Afrikaans expanded its lexicon because state organs made it impossible not to. As a result, Afrikaans could run post offices, railways, power stations, mines, hospitals and law courts without reverting to English.

The top-down moment in Afrikaans

After 1925, there were three channels for new words in Afrikaans:

1. The press and ordinary usage
2. Education
3. Terminology institutions

The press stabilised new words. It did not invent them in isolation. School systems taught them. Terminology committees and academic circles validated them. Afrikaans was not a village dialect expanding on its own. It was a national language project. This explains why terms like sakrekenaar and stofsuier appear organised and consistent. They did not arise randomly across separate communities. They passed through commissions, translations, manuals, and teaching materials.

When new technology arrived, committees asked how to express it in Afrikaans. They looked at existing equivalents in Dutch. They sometimes examined German. They preferred cognates. They avoided English calques where possible. If the Dutch had already coined a meaningful compound, Afrikaans adapted it. If the Dutch did not yet have a stable form, Afrikaans wordsmiths used the productive roots they possessed.

Dutch before Afrikaans and its own journey from German

If Dutch shaped Afrikaans, one must ask what shaped Dutch. The answer lies in German. From the late eighteenth into the nineteenth century, German was the dominant language of science, medicine, theology, philology and technical education in Central Europe. Dutch scholars trained in Göttingen, Heidelberg, Leipzig and Berlin. They read German textbooks, used German laboratory manuals and corresponded with German academics. Vocabulary travelled with these materials. It entered Dutch in two forms.

The first form was direct loanwords that kept their German shape, such as sowieso and überhaupt. These entered because their pragmatic nuance did not exist in Dutch at the time.

The second form was far more influential: semantic calques (literal translations) of German compounds. Dutch tijdschrift, literally time writing, mirrors German Zeitschrift. Dutch waterstof and zuurstof copy German Wasserstoff and Sauerstoff as transparent compounds based on native Germanic roots. Instead of using Latin or French terminology such as hydrogen or oxygen, Dutch followed the German model. It did so because German science possessed prestige and precision.

This influence was not random. It came from connected academic networks. Dutch professors, engineers and medical men read German periodicals because those periodicals carried the frontier knowledge of the age. The vocabulary of modernity did not reach Dutch through Paris or London first. It came through Leipzig, Munich and Berlin. When Dutch linguistic societies later reacted in the early twentieth century, groups such as Onze Taal attempted to defend Dutch against Germanisms and promote native formations. They slowed further imports but did not erase what had already taken root. The earlier Germanic compounds became part of mainstream Dutch.

The deeper relationship between German and Dutch

Dutch did not simply “come from German” in the way a dialect becomes a new language in one moment. Both Dutch and German descend from West Germanic. Old Dutch and Old High German were parallel developments, not parent and child.

However, the political and academic dominance of the German lands in the nineteenth century created a vertical relationship in practice. German universities trained Dutch scholars. German scientific and technical industries were more advanced. German philosophical schools set intellectual agendas. As a result, Dutch adopted scientific and technical terminology from German not because it was linguistically subordinate, but because Germany controlled the highest-value knowledge.

German prestige and the idea of purity

Prestige often becomes confused with purity. In parts of South Africa, especially among some conservative communities, Dutch was seen as “cleaner” than Afrikaans well into the twentieth century. Schooling in Dutch was preferred because Afrikaans was associated with the street, with soldiers, with rural speech, or with lower-status registers. That view persisted into the 1990s in isolated farming districts, long after Afrikaans had become the dominant written language. The motivation was rarely linguistic science. It was cultural hierarchy. Dutch carried the aura of the Netherlands as a “civilised” European source, while Afrikaans was seen as something local, mixed, practical and unsophisticated. The irony is that Dutch itself had borrowed heavily from German precisely because German supplied the technical vocabulary that Dutch lacked.

Was there a similar attitude in Germany? The situation was different. Germany did not look to a linguistic “parent.” It saw itself as the intellectual centre. German linguistic purism in the nineteenth century targeted French and Latin influences in law, administration and science, not Dutch. Movements such as the Allgemeiner Deutscher Sprachverein attempted to replace Romance loans with Germanic compounds. They did so from a position of confidence, not insecurity. German was the export language of chemistry, physics, engineering and philosophy. It was not borrowing upward. It was being borrowed from.

The Afrikaans parallel

The Dutch case clarifies the Afrikaans case. Afrikaans did to Dutch and German what Dutch had earlier done to German. When faced with the need to name new technologies, bureaucratic procedures and modern concepts, Afrikaans reached into the Germanic toolkit. Sometimes it borrowed directly from Dutch technical terms. Where gaps remained, committees drew on German models. Many Afrikaans compounds do not sound “learned” because they use roots already familiar to speakers. They map new concepts onto existing mental categories. This is exactly what Dutch scientists did when they adopted Wasserstoff into waterstof.

Afrikaans was not expanding for aesthetic reasons. It was expanding because modern South Africa needed a language capable of running railways, post offices, power stations, courts and universities. In the same way that Dutch looked to German because German institutions led science and technology, Afrikaans looked to Dutch and occasionally German because those languages already possessed the sophisticated registers that Afrikaans lacked. The pattern was pragmatic and institutional, not sentimental.

More German Afrikaans parallels beyond tools

Here are additional German Afrikaans parallels that reflect either direct borrowing or mediated calquing through Dutch. Dates reflect approximate period of stabilised use in Afrikaans.

German Word	Afrikaans Word	Context and Source Notes
Knödel	‘knoedel’	Culinary and Central European immigrant circles (early 20th century). Austrian and German boarding houses preserved the form without English pressure.
Keller	‘kelder’	Continuous usage from Cape period wine estates. Functionally linked to underground wine storage rather than the English domestic cellar. Reinforced by agricultural manuals.
Kabel	‘kabel’	Engineering and maritime terminology (late 19th/early 20th century). Already common in Dutch and transferred into Afrikaans without English mediation. Used in harbours and telegraph infrastructure.
Fenster	‘venster’	Core architectural noun documented in 17th-century Cape Dutch legal records. A pure Germanic inheritance, not an English window loan.
Mantel	‘mantel’	Clothing, clerical vestments, and military uniform terminology. Stabilised in school textbooks and uniform descriptions, retaining ceremonial and formal associations.
Gesang	‘gesang’	Hymnological vocabulary in Protestant education and liturgy. Embedded in pre-Boer War church communities and Bible translation committees, becoming standard in synod documents.
Messer	‘mes’	Butchery and domestic knife vocabulary. Stable since 17th-century Cape Dutch inventories. English ‘knife’ never penetrated beyond specialised branding.
Leder	‘leer’	Generic for tanned hide and manufactured leather. Tanning and saddlery industries maintained the Germanic form. Dominant in agricultural, equestrian, and shoe-making vocabulary.
Hafen	‘hawe’	Port and harbour infrastructure. Retained in VOC maritime records, later administration, and coastal trade.
Futter	‘voer’	Animal feed in farming systems. Appears in early farm ledgers and veterinary bulletins. English ‘feed’ never replaced the Germanic concept in pastoral economics.
Tisch	‘tafel’	Domestic furnishing, documented in early colonial inventories. English ‘table’ existed but did not displace the Germanic root. Used in legal auctions and estate valuations.
Gürtel	‘gordel’	Clothing and military leather craft. Adopted through saddlery, wagon transport, and uniform descriptions. Still active in everyday speech and technical harnessing.
Pfeife	‘pyp’	Smoking pipes and plumbing conduits. Transferred through Dutch and Low German sailors. Maintained in household vocabulary and engineering diagrams.
Topf	‘pot’	Domestic cookware. Directly continuous across 17th-century Cape Dutch. Retained in farm kitchens and church feast records.
Kamm	‘kam’	Personal grooming and animal care. Inherited through domestic Germanic vocabulary. English ‘comb’ never displaced the native form.
Schneider	‘Snijder’ / later ‘kleermaker’	Guild terminology for tailors. Appeared in Cape muster rolls as surnames, marking the Germanic origin before the shift to the compound ‘kleermaker’.
Schuster	‘skoenmaker’	Shoemaking craft transferred directly from German guilds and Cape German communities. Still active in business signage into the 20th century.
Zange	‘tang’	Metalworking tools and farm repair vocabulary. Common in wagon maintenance, farriery, and smithing. English ‘pliers’ entered much later and remained secondary.
Schere	‘skêr’	Cutting tools for cloth and livestock. Retained in domestic use and butchery. English ‘scissors’ remains marginal in Afrikaans registers.
Vieh	‘vee’	General livestock category. Carried through agrarian Dutch-Germanic usage. Central to taxation, land tenure, and church tithe records.
Henne	‘hen’	Poultry breeding and laying vocabulary. Stable since early Cape farm ledgers. English ‘chicken’ is a species name, not a breeding term.
Stall	‘stal’	Animal housing. Recorded in estate inventories and VOC farm reports. English ‘stable’ only appears in high prestige texts much later.
Heu	‘hooi’	Hay for wintering livestock. Inherited through Germanic agriculture. Appears in shipping records for cavalry and wagon teams.
Weide	‘wei’	Pasture grazing. Used in Cape grazing rights, church land grants, and commonage law. English ‘pasture’ did not dominate rural speech.
Wurst	‘wors’	Sausage technology across German guild traditions. Immigrants and meat traders stabilised ‘wors’ in Cape Dutch before industrialisation. English ‘sausage’ is commercial, ‘wors’ is the native term.
Braten	‘braad’ / ‘gebraad’	Roasting whole muscle joints. Cape feast traditions and Sunday cooking retained the Germanic culinary frame. English ‘roast’ never replaced the verb–noun pair.
Fleisch	‘vleis’	General term for meat. Germanic inheritance through Dutch into Afrikaans. English ‘meat’ remains an import, not a root.
Speck	‘spek’	Fatty pork cuts and bacon styles. Used in Cape German households, frontier garrisons, and wagoneer supplies. English ‘bacon’ is a commercial name, ‘spek’ is the primal family.
Leber	‘lewer’	Organ meat and veterinary anatomy. Stable across textbooks and kitchen vocabulary. English ‘liver’ exists only in loan contexts.
Schacht	‘skag’	Vertical mine shaft. German engineers on the Witwatersrand stabilised usage. Appears in mining permits and survey maps.
Bohrer	‘boor’	Drilling tools. Early gold fields technical schools standardised the term. English ‘drill’ entered much later in catalogue language.
Motor	‘motor’	Engine technology from early automotive adoption. Prestige borrowing from German industrial literature. Not from English ‘engine’ which remains technical.
Maschine	‘masjien’	Mechanised apparatus. Entered agricultural colleges and workshop manuals. English ‘machine’ was secondary to German vocabulary networks.
Werkstatt	‘werkswinkel’	Technical workshop. Common in railway depots and state factories. English ‘workshop’ did not replace the trained form.
Benzin	‘bensien’	Petroleum product. Imported through automotive manuals and supplier catalogues. English ‘petrol’ was a later colonial overlay.
Garnison	‘garnisoen’	Permanent troop location. Documented in VOC forts and Boer republic garrisons. English ‘garrison’ never displaced it in Afrikaans military culture.
Marsch	‘mars’	Tactical movement and ceremonial marching. Used in commando rosters and school drills. English ‘march’ was introduced much later.
Wache	‘wag’	Guard or sentry post. Embedded in commando and frontier policing registers. English ‘guard’ never replaced the native term.
Befehl	‘bevel’	Command or order. Recorded in Boer War dispatches and commando statutes. English ‘order’ in Afrikaans is commercial, not military.
Truppe	‘troepe’	Organised military body. Used in General De la Rey and Smuts era documentation. English ‘troops’ appears only in translated histories.
Pfarrer	‘predikant’	Clergy role. Cape Reformed and Lutheran communities standardised ‘predikant’. English ‘pastor’ arrived via American evangelical missions much later.
Kanzel	‘kansel’	Pulpit architecture. Stone and woodwork manuals in churches preserved the term. English ‘pulpit’ is not native in Afrikaans liturgy.
Vortrag	‘voordrag’	Public recitation. School competitions and literary societies stabilised the form. English ‘public speaking’ never erased it.
Schrift	‘skrif’	Text or scripture. Afrikaans Bible translation and catechism used the Germanic core. English ‘scripture’ remains an external reference.

How Dutch grew from the Germanic continuum and why its name points to “Deutsch”

Dutch developed inside the West Germanic dialect belt shared with German rather than “after” German. The earliest ancestors of Dutch are the Old Low Franconian varieties spoken in the Rhine and Meuse region. In the early medieval period these communities were not separated by a political frontier or a clear linguistic boundary. They spoke related dialects that graded into one another.

The decisive difference came from phonology. The High German consonant shift, which turned $p$ into $pf$ and $k$ into $ch$, advanced across central and southern Germany but did not reach the Low Franconian area. Words such as maken stayed maken rather than machen, and water stayed water rather than Wasser. This preserved the lowland sound system that later stabilised as Dutch.

The name reflects this older unity. The English word Dutch descends from Deutsch, which meant “of the people” or “vernacular.” English medieval sources used forms like Duutsc or Duyche to refer to Continental Germanic speakers in general, including the populations of the Low Countries as well as speakers in the German principalities. Only in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, during the Dutch Revolt, the formation of the Dutch Republic and the Reformation divide, did English usage tighten. The Protestant Netherlands emerged as a separate political and cultural entity, and English narrowed Dutch to refer specifically to the inhabitants of that new state. At the same moment, Dutch itself standardised through state printing, church translation and administrative usage, moving away from a regional cluster into a national written language. The distinction between Dutch and German then became visible not because the dialects had suddenly diverged, but because the political world had.

The Dutch Attitude toward German Vocabulary before and after the First World War

Before the First World War, Dutch linguistic culture was remarkably open to German influence because the two languages were not experienced as fundamentally separate civilisations. Dutch belonged to the same West Germanic family, shared a similar compounding logic, and, more importantly, participated in the German intellectual orbit. As we stated, German was the language of research and advanced technical writing. When German scholars coined new terms, Dutch academics adopted them almost without hesitation. This was not seen as “borrowing from a foreign language” in the modern nationalist sense. It was the uptake of vocabulary from the leading scientific culture of Europe.

German Root (German)	Dutch Intermediary (Dutch)	Afrikaans Result (Afrikaans)	Domain
Taschenrechner	‘zakrekenaar’	‘sakrekenaar’	General
Staubsauger	‘stofzuiger’	‘stofsuier’	General
Geisteswissenschaften	‘geesteswetenschappen’	‘geesteswetenskappe’	Academia
Naturwissenschaften	‘natuurwetenschappen’	‘natuurwetenskappe’	Academia
Erkenntnis	‘kennisleer’	‘kennisleer’	Philosophy
Anschauung	‘aanschouwing’	‘aanskouing’	Philosophy
Darstellung	‘voorstelling’	‘voorstelling’	Academia
Bestandteil	‘bestanddeel’	‘bestanddeel’	Science/Tech
Nebenwirkung	‘bijwerking’ (or ‘neveneffect’)	‘newe-effek’	Medicine
Lehrbuch	‘leerboek’	‘leerboek’	Education
Grundsatz	‘grondbeginsel’	‘grondbeginsel’	Law/Philosophy
Eigentum	‘eigendom’	‘eiendom’	Law/Commerce
Versuch	‘proef’	‘proef’	Science
Untersuchung	‘onderzoek’	‘ondersoek’	Academia
Leitfaden	‘handleiding’	‘handleiding’	Practice/Manual
Generalstab	‘generale staf’	‘generale staf’	Military
Feldwebel	‘veldwebel’	‘veldwebel’	Military
Ausrüstung	‘uitrusting’	‘toerusting’	Military/Logistics
Wehrpflicht	‘dienstplicht’	‘diensplig’	Law/Military
Werkstoff	‘werkstof’ / ‘materiaal’	‘werksstof’ / ‘materiaal’	Engineering
Betriebsordnung	‘bedrijfsregels’	‘bedryfsreëls’	Industry
Normung	‘normalisering’	‘normalisering’	Engineering
Pflegeplan	‘onderhoudsplan’	‘onderhoudsplan’	Industry/Tech
Lagerbestand	‘voorraad’	‘voorraad’	Commerce
Kundendienst	‘klantendienst’	‘kliëntediens’	Commerce
Fleischqualität	‘vleeskwaliteit’	‘vleiskwaliteit’	Butchery/Science
Kühlkette	‘koelketen’	‘koelketting’	Industry
Schnittführung	‘snijrichting’	‘snyrigting’	Butchery
Ausbeute	‘opbrengst’ / ‘uitbeening’	‘uitbeute’ / ‘uitbeenskoste’	Butchery/Accounting
Ertrag	‘opbrengst’	‘opbrengs’	Agriculture
Zucht	‘teelt’	‘teling’	Agriculture
Mischkultur	‘mengcultuur’	‘mengkultuur’	Agriculture
Viehbestand	‘veestapel’	‘veestapel’	Agriculture
Genossenschaft	‘coöperatie’	‘koöperasie’	Commerce
Vorderviertel	‘voorste kwartier’	‘voorste kwartier’	Butchery
Hinterviertel	‘achterste kwartier’	‘agterste kwartier’	Butchery
Keule	‘bout’	‘boud’	Butchery
Rücken	‘rug’ / ‘lende’	‘rug’ / ‘lende’	Butchery
Hochrippe	‘hoge rib’	‘hoë rib’	Butchery
Filet	‘filet’	‘filet’	Butchery
Schulter	‘schouder’ / ‘blad’	‘skouer’ / ‘blad’	Butchery
Brust	‘borststuk’	‘borsstuk’	Butchery
Nacken	‘nek’	‘nek’	Butchery
Bauch / Wamme	‘buikstuk’	‘buikstuk’	Butchery
Schinken	‘ham’	‘ham’	Butchery

The role of education and independence

Language becomes official only when it can teach mathematics, law, rail engineering, and medicine. Afrikaans faced this reality. The development of vocabulary was inseparable from the development of Afrikaans education. School inspectors and university councils demanded standardised terms. Teachers required them. Textbook writers relied on terminology committees. The administrative state pressed for uniform terms in public service. Afrikaans, therefore, became a technical language by political necessity.

The Netherlands experienced the same in earlier centuries. Dutch had to compete with Latin and French in scholarship. It drew on German to strengthen itself. Academic nations do this repeatedly. Hebrew in Israel. Turkish under Atatürk. Bahasa Indonesia after independence. The pattern is clear. A language asserts itself by lexical expansion. It does so by mining its own roots or by borrowing from sister languages when its own stock is insufficient.

Afrikaans as a managed language

Afrikaans is not the product of chaos. It is the product of stewardship. The Genootskap van Regte Afrikaners laid an early foundation. The Suid-Afrikaanse Akademie later guided vocabulary. Its commissions reviewed word lists from technical departments and published authoritative orthography. The Woordeboek van die Afrikaanse Taal began in 1926 to document vocabulary. It was prescriptive in places and descriptive in others. Where Anglicisms seemed to dominate, it resisted them. Where cognates were available, it favoured them. This is why compounds echo Dutch and German logic. The compounding itself is ancient. The committees merely channelled it.

Why this matters

When I looked at Taschenrechner and sakrekenaar and saw that they are almost identical in logic, I realised I was not observing coincidence. I was observing history. When I saw Staubsauger and stofsuier I saw inheritance. I saw nineteenth-century German science shaping Dutch. I saw Dutch shaping Afrikaans. I saw committees, schools, manuals, tests, and textbooks. I saw the intellectual machinery that turns a dialect into a language of universities.

Language is not created by whim. It is created by civilization.

Conclusion

The development of Afrikaans vocabulary was not random. It was guided. It was strategic. It was institutional and it was political. It was also cultural and academic. The same is true of Dutch in the nineteenth century when it looked to German. The same is true of German earlier when it created its scientific compounds. The continuity lies in grammar. The compounding logic is not invented each time. It is inherited. Speakers use it because it makes the world legible.

Afrikaans did not borrow blindly. It defended itself against English for historical reasons and drew on the Germanic tradition for structural reasons. Dutch did not borrow blindly. It drew on German when German scholarship led the world. This pattern repeats wherever languages seek independence. The engine is not ideology alone. It is the necessity of education.

When one studies German and confronts Taschenrechner and Staubsauger and then turns to Afrikaans and finds sakrekenaar and stofsuier it becomes impossible to maintain the belief that such similarity is accidental. One sees the arc of history and the institutions that carried it forward. One sees that Afrikaans did not stumble into modernity. It engineered itself for it.

References

Woordeboek van die Afrikaanse Taal 1951–. Stellenbosch Bureau of the WAT (Cambridge University Press & Assessment)

Alberts M 2001 Lexicography and Terminography: A South African perspective. Lexikos 11 1–12 (lexikos.journals.ac.za)

Alberts M 2022 The South African National Lexicography Units: A retrospective overview. Lexikos 32 1–28 (journals.co.za)

Alexander N 2002 Linguistic rights, language planning and democracy in post apartheid South Africa. In R Mesthrie ed Language in South Africa. Cambridge Cambridge University Press 170–188 (Cambridge University Press & Assessment)

Ammon U 1995 Die deutsche Sprache in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz. Berlin de Gruyter (PagePlace)

Ammon U ed 2001 The Dominance of English as a Language of Science. Effects on Other Languages and Language Communities. Berlin Mouton de Gruyter (ResearchGate)

Booij G 2012 The Grammar of Words. An Introduction to Linguistic Morphology. 3rd ed. Oxford Oxford University Press (Google Books)

Booij G 2012 The Morphology of Dutch. Oxford Oxford University Press (Oxford University Press)

Carstens W A M 2016 Norme vir Afrikaans. 5de uitg. Pretoria Van Schaik (Old Colony Library Network)

Carstens W A M and Raidt E H 2017–2018 Die storie van Afrikaans. 2 dele. Pretoria Protea Boekhuis (Van Schaik Publishers)

Deumert A 2004 Language Standardization and Language Change. The Dynamics of Cape Dutch. Amsterdam John Benjamins (Google Books)

Donaldson B C 1993 A Grammar of Afrikaans. Berlin Mouton de Gruyter

Haugen E 1966 Language Conflict and Language Planning. The Case of Modern Norwegian. Cambridge MA Harvard University Press (Google Books)

McLelland N 2009 Linguistic purism, prescriptivism and nationalism in German speaking Europe. In N Langer and W V Davies eds Linguistic Purism in the Germanic Languages. Berlin de Gruyter 233–260 (Cambridge University Press & Assessment)

Oostendorp M van 2019 Dutch linguistics and the general audience: The case of Onze Taal. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics 8 2 181–196 (jbe-platform.com)

Plag I 2003 Word Formation in English. Cambridge Cambridge University Press (Google Books)

Ponelis F A 1993 The Development of Afrikaans. Pretoria J L van Schaik (SciELO)

Roberge P T 1994 The formation of Afrikaans. SPIL Plus 23 Stellenbosch University of Stellenbosch (SciSpace)

Roberge P T 2002 Afrikaans: Considering origins. In R Mesthrie ed Language in South Africa. Cambridge Cambridge University Press 79–103 (Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics)

Schutte G J 2011 Stamverwantschap onder druk: Over Nederland en de Afrikaners. Amsterdam Bert Bakker (openjournals.ugent.be)

Smakman D 2006 Standard Dutch in the Netherlands: A sociolinguistic study of perceptions of standardness. PhD thesis Leiden University (Radboud Repository)

Van der Horst J and Van der Horst K 1999 Geschiedenis van het Nederlands in de twintigste eeuw. Den Haag Sdu Uitgevers (Onze Taal)

Van der Sijs N 2004 Taal als mensenwerk. Het ontstaan van het ABN. Den Haag Sdu Uitgevers (DBNL)

Van der Sijs N 2005 De geschiedenis van het Nederlands in een notendop. Amsterdam Bert Bakker (Google Books)

Van der Sijs N 2019 15 eeuwen Nederlandse taal. Gorredijk Bornmeer (bookmatch.nl)

Van Rensburg C 2012 So kry ons Afrikaans. Pretoria Protea Boekhuis (LitNet)

Van Rensburg C 2018 Finding Afrikaans. Stellenbosch SUN Press (LitNet)

Van Wyk E B 1989 Taal- en termebeleid in Suid Afrika. In H C Hauptfleisch et al eds Afrikaans en Taalpolitiek. Pretoria HAUM 45–63 (Cambridge University Press & Assessment)

Willems R 2013 Dutch. Biography of a Language. Oxford Oxford University Press