Language Documentation among the Unangan (Aleut)

Anna BergeAlaska Native Language CenterUniversity of Alaska Fairbanks

amberge@alaska.edu

Context

• The Unangan (Aleut) territory:– The Aleutian ChainAs a result of the Russian colonial period (18th-19th centuries) – The Commander Islands (off coast of Kamchatka)– The Pribilof Islands (off coast of Alaska)

• Population: – Between 16 and 20,000 before the arrival of the Russians– Evidence of population crash before arrival of Russians, and of post-

contact crash as well– About 3,000 by the end of the 18th

– Stable at about 3,000 today

Alaska

The High Cliffs, St. George (Pribilofs)

The Village of St. Paul (Pribilofs)

Historical Background• (Pre)-history:

– Archaeological evidence for a very long and stable residence on the islands – Linguistic evidence of genetic relationship with Eskimo languages– Evidence from various sources for complex relationship with Eskimo, neighboring Pacific Northwest Coast cultures, and other (mystery) groups– Society was stratified, maritime, and engaged in war

• History:– Under Russian control (1750s-1869): changes in political structure, social structure,

economy, and religion; some language contact effects• Strong identification with Russian Orthodox Church; literacy (1820s-présent)

– Under American control (1869-now)– Forced relocation during WWII; lasting effects on social, political, and economic structures,

education, and language use

Some Aspects of Unangax̂ Culture

All photos downloaded from web

Unangam Tunuu (Aleut)• Only member of the Aleut branch of the Eskimo-Aleut language

family• Dialects

– Originally a chain of dialects, including those spoken in the far West (e.g. Attu), on the Rat Islands, on Atka, and in the East

– Today:• Most speakers are on Atka, the Pribilof Islands, and in Anchorage• Attuan is effectively obsolete• Eastern, Medniy and Bering (Commander Islands) are almost obsolete

• Severely endangered today– Fewer than 100 speakers, at all levels of fluency– Older speakers: (Atka = youngest speakers are in their 50’s in Atka; in

their 70’s and older elsewhere)

State of Language Documentation

• What has been done:• Traditional and religious texts, excellent grammar and

dictionary, many original sound recordings, some language learning materials, some web-based materials

– What needs to be done:• More of everything…go for breadth as well as depth

– conversation, explanations, figurative language use, gender-based language studies, synchronic language change, etc.

State of Language Documentation• Access:

– Raw data and descriptive materials (published and unpublished) housed in Alaska Native Language Archive and elsewhere

– Materials are being digitized and made available via web (http://www.uaf.edu/anla/collections/aleut/)

• Accessibility:– Most are inaccessible to community members without extensive

training» Published materials are often for academic audience, and school

materials are often not useful» Raw data is difficult to interpret

Issues in doing Language Documentation

• Mismatch between what community wants and what linguist can offer

• Community:– Language revitalization; language learning materials;

language speakers; community-driven research• Linguists:– Documentation; description; linguistic expertise and

consulting; training in language work (e.g. D&D, transcription and translation, recording, preservation…); access to products of linguistic research

Issues continued: Community Politics and Sensitivities

• Generational differences– Elders: may be lonely, have different interests, needs,

working dynamics, expectations, and levels of fluency– Middle: point of contact for linguists; protective of elders,

activists, afraid of language loss, insecure– Young: struggle with identify, conflicting pressures of

tradition/modernism, unclear buy-in to value of language and language work

• There is often a mismatch between the generations in terms of expectations of linguist’s role and relationship with community

Issues continued: Community Politics and Sensitivities

• Perceptions of Outsiders– Long-term effects of previous relationship(s) with outsiders– Long-term effects of previous research(ers) (e.g. publishing

unvetted results, taking without giving)– Changing views of relationships and responsibilities

between community members and representatives of various types of organizations/institutions (e.g. products, disclosure/IRB, control)

– Changing needs of communities and researchers (e.g. revitalization vs. documentation, what constitutes documentation)

Issues continued: Community Politics and Sensitivities

• Interfamily/Intertribal politics—tensions because of– who controls choice of standard/correct language form– who has acknowledged linguistic authority (among

speakers)– who controls access to language (to speakers, to funds,

to materials, to events)– who works/is allowed to work with linguists,

revitalization programs, etc.– who is committed and who isn’t (results of surveys)– pressures to perform/to be perfect/to maintain tradition

Issues contined: Community Politics and Sensitivities

• Language Sensitivities– importance of regional/village/family language

variety– sensitivity to language change, fear of language shift,

importance of tradition– role of language, and purpose of language work– changing expectations of methods of fieldwork,

products of fieldwork, discourse between community and fieldworkers and greater scientific community in general

Issues continued: Effects of Linguistic Work

• Long-term effects of Linguistic Work– Effects on community: choice of language variety,

tolerance for language change, perception of role of language in community

– Effects on individuals: what does training in documentation provide individual? How does community respond to trained individual?

– Effects for future documentation work: image of fieldworker, level and type of contribution

Current Partnership Model

• Documentation is a partnership between:– Communities – commitment, access to speakers,

understanding, responsibility– Linguists – adequate documentation, accessibility to

materials, training, responsiveness to community needs, participation

– Pedagogues – teacher training, second language acquisition training, materials development, integration into curriculum

– Archivists/Librarians – preservation and access– Large organizations/institutions– Funding agencies

Where does the individual fit in?

?

Where does the individual fit in?• It is still the case that most fieldwork is done by individuals

– You are just going to be held accountable to more groups• Ethical approaches to fieldwork in the Aleutians as an

individual– Be honest: find a way to do what you like, not what someone else

imposes on you– Be creative: find a way to do what you like that also satisfies

someone else’s needs– Be flexible: find different ways to do what you like– Be open: discuss issues; explain work; give results back to

community; communicate, negotiate– Don’t isolate yourself

Qaĝaalakux̂ (Pribilofs)