ENDANGERED POETICS:! Assessing Ethnolinguistic Vitality in the Francophone Pacific Ena Manuireva (AUT) & Alexander Mawyer (UHM)! ICLDC 2015! SNAPSHOTS • • • • • • Status of FP languages Assessing Vitality Language culture nexus Mangarevan poetics Assessing through poetics New conservation strategies LANGUAGE AND VITALITY " " It is quite an illusion to imagine that one adjusts to reality essentially without the use of language and that language is merely an incidental means of solving specific problems of communication or reflection. Edward Sapir What are the challenges of documentation and conservation of your poetics when time chews a hole through your talk? EASTERN ! PACIFIC ! OCEAN! Mangareva! New Zealand! Rapa Nui! Marequesas! Hawai‘i! Tahiti! Tuamotu! Austral! Cook Islands! FRENCH POLYNESIA’S “DIALECT ENSEMBLES” Charpentier and Francoise (2015)! GAMBIER ARCHIPELAGO Rikitea in the great bay Agakono ! ASSESSING VITALITY Problems of commensuration?! GRIDS OF LANGUAGE VITALITY Stage 8! Stage 7! Stage 6! Stage 5! Stage 4! Stage 3! Stage 2! Stage 1! Most vestigial Xish users are socially isolated and need to be reassembled and taught to demographically un-concentrated adults! Most Xish users are a socially integrated and ethnographically active population but are beyond child-bearing age! Informal intergenerational oralcy transmission and demographically concentration and institutional reinforcement attainment! Xish literacy at home, school and community! Xish in lower education that meets the requirements of compulsory education laws! Use of Xish in the lower work sphere (outside Xish community) involving interaction between Xmen and Ymen! Xish only in both lower governmental services and mass media! Some use of Xish in higher level educational, occupational and media efforts (but without the safety provided by political independence)! Joshua Fishman’s GIDS (1991)! Degree of endangerment! Intergenerational Language Transmission! Safe! Language is spoken by all generations; intergenerational transmission is uninterrupted ! Vulnerable! Most children speak the language, but it may be restricted to certain domains (e.g., home)! Definitely endangered! Children no longer learn the language as mother tongue in the home! Severely endangered! Language is spoken by grandparents and older generations; while the parent generation may understand it, they do not speak it to children or among themselves! Critically endangered! The youngest speakers are grandparents and older, and they speak the language partially and infrequently! Extinct! There are no speakers left ! UNESCO’s Framework (2003)! GRIDS OF LANGUAGE VITALITY Level! 0! Label! International! 1! National! 2! Provincial! 3! Wider Communication! 4! Educational! 5! Developing! 6a! Vigorous! 6b! Threatened! 7! Shifting! 8a! Moribund! 8b! Nearly Extinct! 9! Dormant! 10! Extinct! Description! The language is widely used between nations in trade, knowledge exchange, and international policy.! The language is used in education, work, mass media, and government at the national level.! The language is used in education, work, mass media, and government within major administrative subdivisions of a nation.! The language is used in work and mass media without official status to transcend language differences across a region.! The language is in vigorous use, with standardization and literature being sustained through a widespread system of institutionally supported education.! The language is in vigorous use, with literature in a standardized form being used by some though this is not yet widespread or sustainable.! The language is used for face-to-face communication by all generations and the situation is sustainable.! The language is used for face-to-face communication within all generations, but it is losing users.! The child-bearing generation can use the language among themselves, but it is not being transmitted to children.! The only remaining active users of the language are members of the grandparent generation and older.! The only remaining users of the language are members of the grandparent generation or older who have little opportunity to use the language.! The language serves as a reminder of heritage identity for an ethnic community, but no one has more than symbolic proficiency.! The language is no longer used and no one retains a sense of ethnic identity associated with the language.! EGIDS (Lewis & Simons, 2010)! SPEAKING MANGAREVAN? " " " " " " Laval (1834): Flexible, extensive, ingenious, rich, scientific.! Buck (1934): Westernized, eroded, high comparative value, cognate.! Stillman (1985): Preserved, high contrastive value to regional centers.! Mawyer (2002): Intense intergenerational difference, severe loss of compentence across all cohorts with distinct patterns.! Census (2011): 600 speakers, essentially not assessed.! Manuireva (2014): Critically at risk, new strategies required, previous strategies energizing but of limited uptake.! LANGUAGE AND CULTURE NEXUS: IMPLICATIONS FOR DOCUMENTATION AND CONSERVATION " " " " " " " " " " Cosmological tropes Placenames, toponyms Cultural performances Situated practices Registers LEK, TEK Calendars Number systems Orientation, wayfinding Poetics ETHNOMETAPRAGMATICS OF EVERYDAY TALK Locally active language ideologies (observed by Mawyer 2002-2009)! • Takao ‘ou ! ! ! !(New-speak, hybridized, code-flowing)! • Takao teito ! ! ! !(Old-speak, increasingly archaic or obs.)! • Tumu takao! ! ! !(Speech “rooted” in perceived Mg.-ness)! • TAKAO TUPUNA! ! !(Heightened speech forms of the ancestors" ! ! ! ! ! !ie. “poetically enhanced speech”)! ! Silverstein, M. (2004) “Cultural” Concepts and the Language-Culture Nexus. Current Anthropology 45(5):621-652.! Makihara, Miki (2005) Rapa Nui Ways of Speaking Spanish: Language Shift and Socialization on Easter Island. ! !Language in Society 34(5):727-762.! Makihara, Miki (2004). Linguistic syncretism and language ideologies: Transforming sociolinguistic hierarchy on ! !Rapa Nui (Easter Island). American Anthropologist 106:529-40. (2005). Being Rapa Nui, speaking ! !Spanish: Children's voices on Easter Island. Anthropological Theory 5(2): 117-34. ! TAKAO TUPUNA ATONGA KAPA PEI 'AKATARI PEI 'AKAMAGAREVA KEKO 'AKAUTATAPAPAKU 'AKAREIMARU TAU TAGI TAGITAGI KEROKERO 'UGA POROTU 'AKA'EREGA IVI 'AKAPAPA ROGOROGO History (so-called “traditional history”) Laments, poems of heightened affect Chant A kind of pei A style of chanting/speaking (obs.) Lullabies; lauditory chant for the nobility Funeral chants Chant for the dead on the 1st night, with pei Lament in honor of the dead, exposes grief Lament, especially funeral dirge Sexualized chant/dance form Hymn form with strong beats (obs.) Embelished speech Lauditory Genealogical recitation Foundational recitation Rogorogo recitation ASSESSING THROUGH POETICS? • Competence reading takao tupuna! • Competence performing takao tupuna! • Evidence of community stance and lg. ideologies regarding poetics.! • Emergence of new korero and takao tupuna forms! ! Bauman, Richard and Charles L. Briggs (1990) "Poetics and Performance as Critical Perspectives on Language and ! Social Life." Annual Review of Anthropology. 19:59-88.! Silverstein, M. (1985) “On the pragmatic ‘poetry’ of prose: Parallelism, repetition, and cohesive structure in the time course of dyadic conversation,” in Meaning, form, and use in context: Linguistic applications (GURT 1984).! Silverstein, M. (1998) “The improvisational performance of culture in realtime discursive practice,” in Creativity in ! performance. ! ! ACCESSING THE POETIC CODE? " " " " " Literary analysis demands precise information about the cultural and social context of the speeches that only custodians of traditional knowledge can provide. (Guindo, 2010)! Orbell‘s thesis on Māori love poetry shows how a meticulous knowledge of past semantic systems and literary conventions can be put to work in serious efforts at understanding tribal thought. (Salmond, 1983)! Poetry had something to do with a special way of arranging words which were full of meaning. (Mead, 1969)! Trying to understand sung poetry so often seems a sciamachy, if you are not a member of the culture. (Crowe, 1987)! “Long sobs of autumn violins wound my heart with a monotonous languor”. (Verlaine, 1866)! WHAT HAPPENS WHEN ONE CANNOT CRACK THE CODE?! LOSS IN TRANSLATION Te Rangi Hiroa (1934)" (informant Karara)! Amy Stillman (1987)! (informant Piripo)! My love, my love, I lowered you down, I lowered you down! Our dear daughter the Princess-who-plaited-precious things! Who died in the open sea.! ! I lowered you to that coral, ! The place of the Gods! So they can hear you my love.! Language & Culture Nexus! Syntax! Semantics! Documentation! Conservation! Design! ! ! ! ! Implementation! Where is the threshold of attention for documentation and conservation of poetics and other features at the language-culture nexus across the kinship of disciplines?! Conservation strategies & radical hope? • • • • • Cablitz, G., and F. Chong. 2009a. The Documentation of Endangered Linguistic, Lexical and Cultural Knowledge of the Marquesan and Tuamotuan Languages of French Polynesia. 11ème Inter-congrès des Sciences du Pacifique Joint aux 2nd Assises de la recherche française dans le Pacifique, 2-6 mars, TAHITI, Polynésie Française.! Cablitz, G., and F. Chong. 2009b. Empowerment and Capacity Building in Endangered Speech Communities : an Example from French Polynesia. 11ème Intercongrès des Sciences du Pacifique Joint aux 2nd Assises de la recherche française dans le Pacifique, 2-6 mars, TAHITI, Polynésie Française.! Cablitz, G., J. Ringersma, and M. Kemps-Snijders, M., 2007. Visualizing endangered indigenous languages of French Polynesia with LEXUS. In Proc. of the 11th Int’l Conf. on Information Visualization. IEEE Computer Society.! Tetahiatupa, E. (2004). Les langues polynésiennes: obstacles et atouts, Journal de la Société des Oceanistes. 119, 139-153. ! Tetahiatupa, E. (2007). Expérimentation pour le renforcement de l'Enseignement des langues polynésiennes à l’école primaire de la Polynésie Française. Ministry of Education in charge of Higher Education and Research. ! Working References:! ! • Buck, P. (Hiroa, Te Rangi), (1938). Ethnology of Mangareva. Honolulu, HI: Bernice P. Bishop Museum! • Cablitz, G., and F. Chong. 2009a. The Documentation of Endangered Linguistic, Lexical and Cultural Knowledge of the Marquesan and Tuamotuan Languages of French Polynesia. 11ème Inter-congrès des Sciences du Pacifique Joint aux 2nd Assises de la recherche française dans le Pacifique, 2-6 mars, TAHITI, Polynésie Française.! • Cablitz, G., and F. Chong. 2009b. Empowerment and Capacity Building in Endangered Speech Communities : an Example from French Polynesia. 11ème Intercongrès des Sciences du Pacifique Joint aux 2nd Assises de la recherche française dans le Pacifique, 2-6 mars, TAHITI, Polynésie Française.! • Cablitz, G., J. Ringersma, and M. Kemps-Snijders, M., 2007. Visualizing endangered indigenous languages of French Polynesia with LEXUS. In Proc. of the 11th Int’l Conf. on Information Visualization. IEEE Computer Society. ! • Crowe, P. (1987). Review Problems and Solutions: Occasional essays in Musicology presented to Alice. M. Moyle. Journal of the Polynesian Society 96 (1), 125-130.! • Dwyer, Arienne M. 2011. Tools and techniques for endangered-language assessment and revitalization. In Vitality and Viability of Minority Languages. October 23-24, 2009. New York: Trace Foundation Lecture Series Proceedings. Preprint. Online: http://www.trace.org/events/events_lecture_proceedings.html.! • Fishman, J.A. (1991). Reversing Language Shift: theoretical and empirical foundations of assistance to threatened languages. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.! • EGIDShttp://www.ethnologue.com/about/language-status! • Gippert, J., N.P. Himmelmann, and U. Mosel (eds.), 2006. Essentials of language documentation. Mouton de Gruyter. Berlin.! • Guindo, J. A. (2010) « Étude d’un genre cérémoniel de la tradition orale ajië, le vivaa (Nouvelle-Calédonie) », Le Journal de la Société des Océanistes [En ligne], 125 | Année 2007-2, mis en ligne le 01 décembre 2010, consulté le 19 octobre 2012. URL : http://jso.revues.org/1032! • Laval, H. (1968). Mémoires pour servir à l’histoire de Mangareva ère chrétienne 1834-1871. Publications de la Société des Océanistes, No 15, Musée de l’Homme. Paris, France: Edités par C.W. Newbury & P. O’Reilly.! • Lewis, M.P. and G. Simons. 2010. Assessing Endangerment: Expanding Fishman’s GIDS. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique/Romanian Review of Linguistics, v. 2.! • Mead, S. M. (1969). Imagery, symbolism and social values in Maori chants, Journal of the Polynesian Society, 78 (3), 378-404.! • Salmond, A.(1983) The study of traditional Maori society: the state of the art. Journal of the Polynesian Society, 92 (1), 309-332.! • Stillman, A. K. (1987). Report on survey of Music in Mangareva, French Polynesia! • Tetahiatupa, E. (2004). Les langues polynésiennes: obstacles et atouts, Journal de la Société des Oceanistes. 119, 139-153. Retrieved November 6, 2014 from http://jso.revues.org/128 ! • Tetahiatupa, E. (2007). Expérimentation pour le renforcement de l'Enseignement des langues polynésiennes à l’école primaire de la Polynésie Française. Ministry of Education in charge of Higher Education and Research. Retrieved from http://montraykreyol.org/sites/default/files/tahiti.pdf ! • UNESCO (2003): Language Vitality and Endangerment UNESCO Ad Hoc Expert Group on Endangered Languages Document adopted by the International Expert Meeting on UNESCO Programme Safeguarding of Endangered Languages. Retrieved from ! http://www.unesco.org/culture/languagesatlas/index.php?hl=en&page=atlasmap! • Zinn, C., G. Cablitz, J. Ringersma, M. Kemps-Snijders and P. Wittenburg. 2008. Constructing Knowledge Spaces from Linguistic Resources. Paper presented at CIL 18, Workshop 12 on Linguistic Studies of Ontology: From Lexical Semantics to Formal Ontologies and Back, July 21-26, 2008, Seoul, Republic of Korea.! !