Re: Saving endangered langs (was Re: Extrapolating languages)

Dirk Elzinga wrote:

> Hey.
>
> Being a professional linguist engaged in language preservation (I am
> currently working with the Chemehuevis and several Shoshoni communities
> on language preservation and documentation), I probably ought to
> respond to this.
>
> I think that the *sole* determining factor concerning language
> preservation efforts should be the wishes of the community. As Padraic
> says, some people really don't care if a language survives or not. What
> surprises many is that these indifferent souls may also *be* speakers
> of the language.

I disagree.  We should not insist that they speak and use their own
language in preference, but we should at least record a grammar and
dictionary of the language, so that future genarations, if they wish,
may come back to it(providing people are willing to talk to you about it.).

> One of the communities I work with held a referendum several years ago
> about implmenting a bilingual education program. There was serious
> debate about whether the second language (i.e. not English) should be
> the heritage language or Spanish. Sound incredible? Not really,
> considering the economic realities the community faces. What good will
> it do school kids to be able to talk to a handful of their elders (who
> are fluent in English as well) in their heritage language when they are
> being elbowed out of jobs because they don't have a working knowledge
> of Spanish?
>
> It may be a mistake for such a community to abandon their heritage
> language, but it is their mistake to make. I think it's misguided for
> linguists and anthropologists to insist that linguistic/cultural
> preservation is inherently good and should be pursued regardless;
> indigenous communities are made up of intelligent and capable people
> who should be allowed to make these kinds of decisions for themselves
> [1].
> Of course, this is not to say that linguists and anthropologists should
> not offer their help to communities or give it freely when it is asked;
> but we need to respect their wishes when they say, "No, thank you.
> We're not interested." It's a hard thing to watch a language die, but
> it's the right thing to do if that is the wish of the people who speak
> it.

Yes, but we should at least point out the virtues of  attempting to
preserve their language.  And, of course, a community generally has
divergent views.  There will be some that wish to preserve their
language, and some that do not.   Again, though, the language should be
documented, providing people are willing to talk to you.

> Dirk
>
> [1] For the same reason, I feel that any religion should be allowed to
> proselyte freely, provided that they do not use manipulative or
> coercive techniques; people are smart enough to make these kinds of
> decisions for themselves, and they don't need help or advice from any
> political authority in matters of conscience or faith.
>
> --
> Dirk Elzinga
> Dirk_Elzinga@byu.edu
>
> If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so
> simple we couldn't.
> - Lyall Watson
>
>

Replies