RHETORIC is the art of effective language use for purposes of persuasion, and it is an art form many gifted politicians use to convince not only their supporters, but others outside of their political ideological framework.

Mark Antony in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar is probably one of the best rhetorical speakers whose oratory before Caesar's burial is well known as he addressed mourners: "Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears; I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him . . ." But as he went on to speak, he did not only heap praises on Caesar, but also whipped up his listeners' emotions, resulting in an uprising.

If what MDC-T party spokesperson Nelson Chamisa said in an interview about sanctions on the pirate radio station Studio 7 of the Voice of America during the Unity holiday, was meant to be persuasive language, then there is something seriously wrong with the sanctions discourse. As Chamisa tried to defend the indefensible, he got caught up in the Shona jargon he used, exposing more than he could probably imagine. As he attempted to exonerate his party by putting the sanctions blame on Zanu-PF's feet, he was mired in the terms he used until it emerged that he was actually blaming the West for the imposition of sanctions, and doing so using the most uncomplimentary terms ever used by any senior MDC-T official to date. This writer wondered whether Chamisa was aware of the underlying meaning of what he was saying and the implications.

During the Shona news bulletin on Studio 7, Chamisa used four distinct terms to describe the illegal sanctions issue. These were "kutemera" (to make scars using a razor blade or a very sharp instrument); "nyora" (the mark[s] made after the scarring act); "chikwambo" (goblin) and "chitsvambe" (a children's game).

In summary, he said: "MDC haisi iyo yakatemera Zanu-PF nyora dzema 'sanctions'. Ngavaende kune vakavatemera . . ." (MDC is not responsible for the sanctions marks/scars that Zanu-PF has. Therefore, Zanu-PF should go back to the people who put those scars on them).

There are two key terms: "kutemera" and "nyora". The Shona dictionary, Duramazwi reChiShona edited by H. Chimhundu, defines "nyora" as: "kuchekwa kunoitwa munhu nereza kana chimwewo chinopinzawo chaizvo, kana munhu achiisa mushonga nepaganda" (The scarring done on a person's skin using a razor blade, or any sharp instrument to enable the one who is making the scars to apply medication on the skin.)

In normal cases, this is an act that is done among consensual parties. We also see many ethnic groups across the African continent practising this as part of their culture.

But, was this the case between Zanu-PF and the West? Did they co-author the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001, with the Bush administration? Did Zanu-PF ask for sanctions to be imposed on Zimbabwe?

The symbolic nature of these terms is that with the exception of the healing process, "nyora" are usually never viewed positively. There is a general belief that it is a ritual associated with witchcraft and other evil acts, especially when it is done without one's knowledge or consent.

There are three verb forms regarding this scarring procedure: "kutemera"; "kutemerwa" and "kutemwa nyora". "Kutemera" means that the act is performed on a willing and/or unwilling person by someone who has an upper hand over his/her victim.

The second one, "kutemerwa" means that the act has already been performed, for example, "akatemerwa nyora". It is quite common to hear people say, "So and so akatemerwa nyora dzouroyi." (So and so was initiated into witchcraft through the scars he or she got.)

The last one "kutemwa nyora" is the one usually used when the act is performed by a traditional healer before applying medicine on the mark.

It is also generally believed that the verb form "kutemera" (to scar/make a mark using a razor blade) is a ritual that involves evil covenants, mostly witchcraft. It is also a ritual that involves the drawing/spilling of blood, for you cannot make a scar without spilling blood, even if it is very little.

From a spiritual perspective be it in the Christian and/or traditional religion, the scarring covenant does not bode well for the victim, and it is also an agreement whose ties are very difficult to break, since the victim does not know the foundations on which the ritual was made.

This is why there is a general belief that once someone is initiated into witchcraft, it is difficult to exorcise the evil spirit, because of this covenant element. It is also believed that these covenants speak negatively in the victim's life. By using symbolic language from the dark world, what was Chamisa saying about sanctions vis-à-vis Zanu-PF and the Western nations that imposed those sanctions?

Is he now admitting the evil effects that accompanied these sanctions? Is he also accepting the power play in this act? For this writer does not think that anyone in Zanu-PF could have willingly offered themselves and the people of Zimbabwe as game.

The second symbol used by Chamisa was "chikwambo" (goblin) when he said in summary: "Zanu-PF vakazvitsvagira vega chikwambo chavaparadza. Ngavazive zvokuita kuti chikwambo ichocho chiende." (It was Zanu-PF that looked for the goblin that is now causing havoc among them. They must know what to do in order to rid them of that goblin.)

Duramazwi reChiShona defines "chikwambo" as magic purchased by a person seeking to enhance his wealth through bloodsucking means. In most cases, the goblins eventually turn against the owner, and wreak havoc in his/her life.

Media reports are replete with cases involving people obtaining goblins to enhance their wealth. Some of these cases have also been heard in our courts of law. Goblins have also become some of the most feared forms of magic used in witchcraft, where some people are believed to seek these bloodsucking objects to enrich themselves.

The irony, however, is that usually these goblins after "killing" their victims, are believed to turn against their owner, and kill him/her, if they run out of the blood they are said to feed on.

Chamisa's symbols sounded very strange to this writer. How could it be that he was describing MDC-T's financial power base using such unusual terms? We ask where Zanu-PF allegedly got this goblin from, and to suck whose blood? And who exactly represents the goblin that is sapping the strength out of Zanu-PF?

Truth is stranger than fiction. Thus we wonder why Chamisa chose to comment on the sanctions issue using such uncomplimentary terms.

Were these high-sounding figures of speech said in order for MDC supporters to believe that their party was clean inasfar as sanctions were concerned, and that it was Zanu-PF's problem, thus they had to go it alone if the sanctions had to be lifted? And was this said so that even right-thinking people could swallow this without so much of a question?

When someone finally opens up like this, we call it "kudura" in Shona, notwithstanding that they blame others while claiming innocence.

The third figure of speech used by Chamisa was "chitsvambe", which is defined as "mutambo wokuti kana vana voonekana, vanobata kana kudenha vamwe neruoko zvokuti vanenge vatsvarwa vakasadzorera vanoenda nechobodzwa" (A game played by children when they are parting from each other, and as they do so, one touches the other, and if the ones touched do not respond likewise, then they are indebted to those who touched first.)

Said Chamisa: "Ndivo (Zanu-PF) vakatanga chitsvambe." (It was Zanu-PF that started the game.)

This begs the question: If Zanu-PF indeed started this, according to the rules of the "chitsvambe" game, the other party still owes, and not the other way round.

That the land issue which brought about the evil sanctions can be described thus -- from the dark and mystical world to child's play, where only one side is always guilty -- is very unfortunate.

When these four terms are juxtaposed, is the MDC-T spokesperson saying that this summarises the land issue, just because the Zanu-PF Government dared to reclaim land? Did Chamisa use these terms with a sense of knowledge of the underlying meaning and implications? Language is a powerful communication tool, only if you can decode meaning. How would the MDC-T spokesperson have responded to this conversation witnessed two days after his interview, regarding the problems of change being faced by consumers and suppliers of goods and services, on a daily basis? Waving some dollar bills, a commuter bus conductor called out to the driver of another commuter bus: "Ndiri kutsvaga mhandara mubhawa!" (I am looking for a virgin girl in a pub.)

The driver responded: "Tough luck. Mhandara mubhawa haiwanikwe! Chenji, muZimbabwe mazino. Haiwanikwe" (It's not possible to find a virgin girl in a pub. Change is difficult to get in Zimbabwe).

It's quite evident that taken out of context, this conversation with its interplay with words, can mean something totally different from the simple issue of change required in any business transaction. The commuter transport system has fast tracked language use in Zimbabwe.

They coin new terms, and in other cases, they use everyday language to make their mundane work more exciting. The problem with change -- small denominations, especially coins -- has led them to create a new set of terms. You are either told: "Dollar for two, and if we can't find change 'tinokuchatisai'. (We will "marry" (combine) you off, and you look for change on your own.)

They are a peculiar lot, but so too is the game called politics. All that I did was to connect the prose and the passion, and in the process demonstrate that the social spectrum in which language operates is too wide and too deep, and cannot be confined to a user's intended meaning.