This paper briefly examines possible alternatives to linguistic documentation in helping to maintain and enrich endangered languages and their respective cultures. It is based in large part on a cooperative project between the Kosrae State Department of Education and Shonan Institute of Technology in Fujisawa, Japan, which aims to help reverse language shift on the island of Kosrae in the Federated States of Micronesia.
Kosrae is a small island in Micronesia with a population of just under 9,000 and an additional 2,500 living off-island – mainly as migrant workers in Guam, Hawaii and the US mainland, or in the US military at bases around the world including war zones.
The people of Kosrae have their own language and culture which they wish to maintain and build upon. However, the education system is based on US benchmark standards, imposed in large measure by the US under the Compact of Free Association. These standards, intentionally or otherwise, serve to devalue traditional ways of knowing, cultural values and belief systems. They also result in highly assimilative educational practices that favor English as the language of advancement and exacerbate language shift. In 2001, for example, the FSM National Language conference warned that “a realignment of values to combat forces such as individualism, pragmatism and materialism is needed to address language shift.” (p. 20).
In order to help reverse this shift, the Kosrae DOE and Shonan Institute of Technology embarked on a community-based project in 2001 to produce first language literacy materials. One of the initial problems encountered was how to train members of the community to develop curricula (e.g., dictionaries, oral histories, etc.) which could be used in the schools. There was a strong bias within DOE for training to be based on descriptive linguistics (i.e., linguistic documentation), where priority would be given to quantified teaching/testing of the standardized spelling system. Some members of DOE, however, felt that overdue emphasis on standardized spelling would detract from other more important issues of cultural maintenance and enrichment, and that more could be gained by training in ethnography and critical pedagogy whereby students, teachers and members of the community at large could share in developing a deeper understanding and appreciation for their language and culture.
During this process of discussion and critical enquiry, other problems with traditional linguistic documentation became evident. These included the dichotomizing of researchers into “outside experts” and “native informants,” where funding and decisions regarding research methodologies and outcomes are ultimately in the hands of outsiders. One result of this, in the case of Micronesia at least, has been the slowing down of the application phase of research for curriculum development and other purposes which would directly benefit the local populations. It has also resulted in loss of community control and involvement in the process of language maintenance. Some felt that this loss of community control further exacerbated language shift.
|
