LD&C Special Publication No. 15: Reflections on Language Documentation 20 Years After Himmelmann 1998

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/10125/61710

Browse

Now showing 1 - 20 of 35

SP15 Whole Volume
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01)
SP15 Cover
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01)
SP15 Front Matter
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01)
Introduction
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) McDonnell, Bradley; Holton, Gary; Berez-Kroeker, Andrea L.
This chapter introduces the volume, Reflections on Language Documentation 20 Years after Himmelmann 1998, providing a short justification for the volume, summarizing each of the four major parts of the volume, and identifying major themes that emerge in the 31 chapters. It concludes by noting some of the volume's limitations.
Reflections on the scope of language documentation
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Good, Jeff
Language documentation is understood as the creation, annotation, preservation, and dissemination of transparent records of a language. This leads to questions as to what precisely is meant by terms such as annotation, preservation, and dissemination, as well as what patterns of linguistic behavior fall within the scope of the term language. Current approaches to language documentation tend to focus on a relatively narrow understanding of a language as a lexicogrammatical code. While this dimension of a language may be the most salient one for linguists, languages are also embedded in larger social structures, and the interaction between these structures and the deployment of lexicogrammatical codes within a community is an important dimension of a language which also merits documentation. Work on language documentation highlights the significance of developing theoretical models that underpin the notion of language, and this can have an impact not only for the practices of documentary linguists but also for the larger field of linguistics. It further suggests that documentary linguistics should not merely be seen as a subfield that is oriented around the collection of data but as one that is in a position to make substantive contributions to linguistic theory.
Reflections on reproducible research
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Gawne, Lauren; Berez-Kroeker, Andrea L.
Reproducibility in language documentation and description means that the analysis given in descriptive publication is presented in a way that allows the reader to access the data on which the claims are based, to verify the analysis for themself. Linguists, including Himmelmann, have long pointed to the centrality of documentation data to linguistic description. Over the twenty years since Himmelmann’s 1998 paper we have seen a growth in digital archiving, and the rise of the Open Access movement. Although there is good infrastructure in place to make reproducible research possible, few descriptive publications clearly link to underlying data, and very little documentation data is publicly accessible. We discuss some of the institutional roadblocks to reproducibility, including a lack of support for the development of published primary data. We also look at what work on language documentation and description can learn from the recent replication crisis in psychology.
Meeting the transcription challenge
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Himmelmann, Nikolaus P.
The major challenge for language documentation in the next decade or two is what could be called the transcription challenge. This is a multilayered challenge that goes far beyond the practical challenge of speeding up the transcription process. Transcription, as practiced in language documentation, involves language making and changes the language ecology. Despite its centrality to language documentation, transcription remains critically undertheorized and understudied. Further progress in language documentation, and ultimately also its overall success, crucially depends on further investigating and understanding the transcription process, broadly conceived.
Why cultural meanings matter in endangered language research
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Dobrin, Lise; Sicoli, Mark
In this paper we illustrate why it is important for linguists engaged in endangered language documentation to develop an analytical understanding of the cultural meanings that language, language loss, and language documentation have for the communities they work with. Acknowledging the centrality of cultural meanings has implications for the kinds of questions linguists ask about the languages they are studying. For example: How is age interpreted? What reactions are provoked by accented speech or multilingualism? Is language shift experienced as a painful loss, or a source of newfound freedom, or both? It affects the standards we set for what counts as a satisfying explanation for language endangerment, with prediction necessarily limited in sociogeographic scope. It has implications for the research methods employed, calling for serious engagement with the particular histories and interpretive practices of local linguistic communities. Analyzing cultural meanings can help us see how language use and changes in language use are experienced and therefore acted on by people whose communicative behavior we are concerned with. It can help us interpret why language shift is taking place in a particular community, guide the practices of language documentation and preservation that linguists engage in with that community, and contribute to effective revitalization.
Reflections on (de)colonialism in language documentation
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Leonard, Wesley Y.
With origins in colonial logics and institutions, language documentation practices can reinforce colonial power hierarchies and norms in ways that work against the needs and values of Indigenous language communities. This paper highlights major patterns through which this occurs, along with their effects, and models how language documentation can be structured in ways that are more grounded in the experiences and perspectives of the communities that use it. I propose decolonial interventions that emerge from Indigenous research principles and perspectives, and illustrate how these practices can better support language community needs while also improving the scientific value of language documentation.
Reflections on public awareness
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Linn, Mary S.
In this reflection, I repeat Michael Krauss’s 1992 call for linguists of all kinds to be active in creating public awareness of language endangerment, and more importantly at this stage, in motivating global attitudinal changes in support of language diversity. I purposely do not distinguish between academic and non-academic, community and non-community linguists, requiring that we all participate in this call. I distinguish different target publics, namely the endangered or minoritized language community public and the majority language public in terms of message and response. I then briefly outline past and present efforts in varying media that are part of creating awareness and action on a global scale. I focus on integration of media and message, stressing that we must be able to provide a positive vision of a linguistically diverse world and a means for the general public, especially youth, to participate in its creation.
Interdisciplinary research in language documentation
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Penfield, Susan D.
This paper explores the parameters of interdisciplinary work in language documentation. Citing the strong call for the involvement of disciplines, other than linguistics, beginning with Himmelmann, to the present trajectories for language documentation research, the author claims that more attention is needed to the enactment of interdisciplinary work from project conception to the follow-through in terms of where to disseminate outcome.
Reflections on language community training
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Fitzgerald, Colleen M.
I reflect upon four decades of language community training, treating Watahomigie & Yamamoto (1992) and England (1992) as the starting point. Because the training activities these papers report began in the 1970s, there is a convincing and growing literature on training, including work published in the years since Himmelmann’s (1998) article. The upshot of my reflections is this central point: Language documentation is better when it occurs alongside an active training component. Underlying this point is an acknowledgement that linguists and communities are engaged in mutual training, and in fact, that a binary distinction between linguist and community member is a false dichotomy. The Chickasaw Model, a model that formalizes training, linguistic analysis, documentation, and revitalization as a feedback loop (cf. Fitzgerald & Hinson 2013; 2016), offers a way to capture a fully integrated approach to training. I conclude with nine significant contributions growing out of the training literature.
Reflections on funding to support documentary linguistics
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Holton, Gary; Seyfeddinipur, Mandana
Funding for documentary linguistics has changed dramatically over the past two decades, largely due to the emergence of dedicated funding regimes focused on endangered languages. These new regimes have helped to shape and reify the field of documentary linguistics by facilitating and enforcing best practices and integrating archiving into the documentation process. As a result both the pace and quality of documentation have improved dramatically. However, several challenges remain, and additional efforts are needed to ensure the sustainability of funding for language documentation efforts. In particular, more funding needs to be allocated toward training and capacity building in under-resourced regions.
Reflections on ethics: Re-humanizing linguistics, building relationships across difference
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Czaykowska-Higgins, Ewa
Himmelmann (1998) uses the word 'ethics' only once, but his arguments for proposing a field of documentary linguistics reflect assumptions about ethical stances that have been addressed in linguistics publications since 1998. This paper begins by outlining some of these ethical assumptions, and then focuses on considerations closely connected to what Dobrin & Berson (2011: 207) refer to as "re-humanizing linguistics'' and "building relationships across difference". The paper suggests that ethical language documentation work must be grounded in considerations of the human nature of research relationships, the histories of interactions between peoples which inform those research relationships, and varying conceptions of knowledge. Since language documentation work inevitably has social consequences for human beings, aligning language documentation practice with Indigenous research paradigms which emphasize relational accountability (Wilson 2008: 99), allows for a practice based on respect, reciprocity and responsibility and ultimately leads to good documentation.
Reflections on diversity linguistics: Language inventories and atlases
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Drude, Sebastian
This contribution gives a short overview of “language inventorying”: research aiming at creating comprehensive catalogues and atlases of all the languages in the world, which has seen a boost with the renewed interest in linguistic diversity triggered by the awareness of language endangerment in the 1990s. By focusing on the development of the ISO standard 639 and SIL’s Ethnologue, the main advances and issues in this area are discussed. The overview concludes by presenting the major alternative resources, in particular Glottolog.
Reflections on the diversity of participation in language documentation
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Arka, I Wayan
In this paper, I reflect on the diversity of participation in language documentation in the Indonesian context over the past two decades. I show that progress has been made in documentation research on the minority languages, with the concerted efforts of different stakeholders (community/non-community—among the latter, affiliations with universities, non-governmental organizations, the government, and other types of organizations of local speech communities). However, challenging issues remain in relation to the local communities' capacity, motivation, and leadership for helpful and long-term active participation in language documentation.
Reflections on software and technology for language documentation
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Arkhipov, Alexandre; Thieberger, Nick
Technological developments in the last decades enabled an unprecedented growth in volumes and quality of collected language data. Emerging challenges include ensuring the longevity of the records, making them accessible and reusable for fellow researchers as well as for the speech communities. These records are robust research data on which verifiable claims can be based and on which future research can be built, and are the basis for revitalization of cultural practices, including language and music performance. Recording, storage and analysis technologies become more lightweight and portable, allowing language speakers to actively participate in documentation activities. This also results in growing needs for training and support, and thus more interaction and collaboration between linguists, developers and speakers. Both cutting-edge speech technologies and crowdsourcing methods can be effectively used to overcome bottlenecks between different stages of analysis. While the endeavour to develop a single all-purpose integrated workbench for documentary linguists may not be achievable, investing in robust open interchange formats that can be accessed and enriched by independent pieces of software seems more promising for the near future.
Reflections on descriptive and documentary adequacy
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Riesberg, Sonja
One of Himmelmann's primary goals in his 1998 paper was to argue for a strict division of documentation and description. Language documentation has since successfully developed to become a discipline in its own right. Nevertheless, the question concerning the interrelation of description (and thus analysis) and documentation remains a matter of controversy. This paper reflects on descriptive and documentary adequacy, focusing on two major issues. First, it addresses the question of how much analysis should enter into an adequate documentation of a language and, second, it discusses the role of language documentation and primary data in the replicability of linguistic analyses.
Reflections on documentary corpora
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Rice, Sally
For decades, language documentation proponents have argued for the separability of LD as its own sub-discipline. Many corpus linguists have made this same claim; thus, corpus linguistics shares the ethos of data over theorizing, whereby primary data represent authentic, connected discourse that is natural (not elicited), broadly sampled (across speakers, generations, dialects), and balanced (reflecting different usage contexts and genres). Nevertheless, many misconceptions remain about what a language corpus is, how it is formatted, how big or balanced it needs to be, and most importantly, how it is queried. In this reflection, I dispel some of these misconceptions, while reassuring community members and field linguists alike that a corpus is an exceedingly powerful tool for guiding the expansion of the documentary record, keeping precious language data in circulation, and helping to produce the classic descriptive by-products of LD such as dictionaries, phrasebooks, and grammars. Above all, the less-familiar but more direct by-products of corpus interrogation, such as word lists, frequency counts, concordance lines, N-grams, collocations, distribution, and dispersion plots, are so immediately interpretable and useful by speakers, learners, and linguists, that LD should give corpus linguistic training the same attention as project planning, ethics, recording, transcription, annotation, metadata, and archiving.
Reflections on the role of language documentations in linguistic research
(University of Hawai'i Press, 2018-12-01) Schnell, Stefan
I reflect the role of language documentations in linguistic research beyond its most common linguistic use as a high-quality database for descriptive work. I show that the original Himmelmann-ian conception of documentations, as multi-varied and multi-purpose, and to some extent community-driven, enable a range of research outcomes that would not have been foreseeable within the traditional descriptive, typological and theoretical agendas. I argue that it is overall more fruitful for innovative linguistic research to invest into the processing of haphazard language documentation data rather than attempting to collect precisely the kind of data demanded by specific analytic goals.

Browse

Recent Submissions