Ojibwe Dictionary Online Project

Sun Sep 16 18:33:57 UTC 2007

Hi Heather,

I think it is a common misconception that a written system can only represent one way of pronouncing words. One just has to look at an English dictionary to realize that it clearly doesn't have to be so. Also, there are writing systems, such as the one used by Chinese speakers, which do not even depend on pronunciation at all! 

No native speaker of a language learns that language through a dictionary. Dictionaries are only used to look up a word whose meaning is forgotten or occasionally, depending on what kind of dictionary it is, to find its pronunciation. Therefore, a standard orthography is not a threat to a dialect unless everyone in that dialect is planning on learning the language through books! And even then, once again as in English, all pronunciations of any particular dialect could be included under the head word in a dictionary. This would only serve to make the dictionary more complete and useful than having to fall back on using 4 or 5 dictionaries to compare dialects.

We have to ask ourselves, as Native peoples, whether we want our languages to remain local, and overpowered by the dominant language surrounding our communities are reservations, or do we want our languages to compete with the languages surrounding us. How, for example, is an orthography that is suited for use by only two or three communities going to amount to anything in the long run besides perhaps a few dictionaries and grammars? Why would a Michif or Anishinabe author publish a book that could only be read by a handful of people? There is no way to compete or ensure a strong future for our languages in a world that is based on information and literacy if we do not find some common ground about how to represent our languages in writing.

Kevin Brousseau

Heather Souter <hsouter at GMAIL.COM> wrote: Taanshi, Joseph,

Heather Souter nt-ishinikaashon. Aeñ Michif Camperville, Manitoba
uschi niya.  Michif n-piikishkwaan.

(Hello, Joseph.   My name is Heather.  I am a Michif (Métis) from
Camperville, Manitoba.  I speak Michif.)

I am also interested in the development of a writing system that can
be used by learner/users of all dialects of Michif.  (There are quite
a few!)  And, I have seen first hand how elders from differing Michif
speaking communities react to the idea of a standardized writing
system.  Often they seem to think that if a standardized system came
into being it would be based on ONE dialect of the language and it
might not be theirs!  And, if that happened they and their families
and communities would in the end be forced to start speaking
differently that they were taught by their parents, grandparents,
elders and other anscestors.  In light of this, my focus has been to
work to see the creation of an orthography/writing system that would
allow all dialects of our language to be written accurately.  And, as
far as an on-line dictionary is concerned, my goal is to see that all
alternative pronounciations and words used by different dialect
communities be properly noted and included.  This means thinking long
and hard about what categories need to be included  (and how many
alternatives should be reasonably anticipiated) and how the intial
data base needs to constructed.

In my work so far as a community linguist and as a gradute student
studying linguistics and language revitalization, the determining the
categories means requires the collaboration of at least one person
with extensive training in discriptive/field (or other appropriate
sub-fields of )linguistics (often this means a linguist who is likely
not Native) and speakers/learner from the community in question.  The
work on the database then needs to be a collaboration of the first
team and  a team with training computational linguistics AND
familarity with websites/ on-line systems needing an easy to use
user-interface.  The problem, of course, is often finding the funding
and developing good teams who trust and respect each other and are
committed to working and learning from each other over the long
term....

Good luck with your work!

Eekushi.
Heather

On 9/16/07, Joseph Lavalley  wrote:
>
> Dear K. Brousseau,
>
> It is both, Mishomis and Joseph, however for the purpose of English clarity
> please refer to me as Joseph, as I honour both names; the name my mother
> gave me which is Joseph and the name the people Anishnabek gave me which is
> Mishomis. Just because I am named Mishomis does not mean that I can not make
> errors in personal and professional judgement in matters that as important
> as creating an Ojibwe Online Dictionary. Wording can to different people
> mean different things; dependent upon life experience. Mine has been very
> undermined by people and I do try to take the time to understand where a
> person or group of people are coming from before I make a response to any
> letters or arguement proposed. I perhaps saw your statements as an anthema
> of continued doubt about the benefits of a dictionary. Due in part to the
> politicization of it. Mis-understanding can lead to more misunderstanding.
> For this I am sorry. Without your letter and subsequent letters of those
> that participated in this discussion about this project that I am currently
> working on, perhaps would not have had the opportunity to read other
> people's ideas and thoughts about this matter. For this I thank you as it
> gave me new perspective.
>
> The complete idea of the Ojibwe online dictionary, was to give a place for
> Ojibwe words to have a common home. From there the people with voice or
> sound snippets, new words and a place for people from different communities
> to place their words there with a reference to those particular communities.
> This is so that the people themselves would have a forum to speak their
> language on-line and allow share language resources, ei. local speakers in
> their communities and exchange with those from other communities. Both in
> Canada and United States and in at least one case that I know of in Mexico.
> With that the people themselves can decide what is right or wrong and can
> transform the website into something they can be proud of. It will be a
> place of educational renewal of language and a place where educators can
> extract educational materials for courses at the primary, secondary and
> post-secondary levels. Thus, a more complete way of utilizing the language
> to its fullest extent. From there perhaps it can be a model for other such
> online sites for other languages.
>
> Once again, I am only concerned with the Three Fires as far as language
> development goes for the Anishnabek, the rest can look at this work and see
> if it can fit their needs. If people wish to call themselves Anishnabek,
> then I suppose there are peripheral people of the language that I am not
> aware of and perhaps in the future look into it. As it is apart of what I am
> attempting to complete. They however do not have my priority at this time
> and being that I am only one person doing this project (meaning this
> project), I have to limit the scope to the three main bodies of the language
> which are the Ojibwe, the Pottatomi and the Ottawa. Once again, I am not
> attempting to standarize anything, I am attempting to unify. Unification
> meaning bring all the language to one place (internet) and allowing for the
> natural transmission of the language to happen. Eventually, they will all
> see a commonality in their languages and will make a suitable orthography
> that will serve their unique community needs and perhaps that will lead to
> dialogue in the political arena some day. If that happens then all the
> objectives of this online dictionary will be completed. Also, to give a
> place for the disemination of other dictionaries and orthographies for
> cross-comparision and examination for future generations. With that perhaps,
> the people will no longer be lost as to who they are. New culture will come
> forth. And that of the new millennium Anishnabe.
>
> When speaking of politics and language, when it comes to political
> boundaries, most people that I have heard from talk of 'standardization' and
> is incompatible with the local tribes of many nations that are attempting
> this. Naturally, being that the Algic language in itself being so very large
> and not to mention broad over a large body of land mass. This type of
> project is a many a lifetime project. I can only attempt to play my part by
> do this one thing. Once again, since I do not have the standing of a
> University nor have the extensive knowledge of linguists in the areas of
> Phonetics, Semantics, Snytax, Social-Linguistics and Anthro-Linguistics. I
> must endeavor to acquire these skills from a university. I am sure I could
> do it alone and leave this LISTSERV, however, too complete and have my work
> accepted by the Anishnabek communities that I am serving, I would require
> standing. Other then that I would be happy to have people who would rather
> help me. Provide me with resources and reference. Or point me to people that
> have specialized knowledge in the Algic languages that may help me further
> this project with meaningful data or datum. An in reciprocation, I could
> make this available to others for future reference, since we are all in this
> together, the building, re-discovering and learning about language, their
> people and perhaps environment. With people that don't know that they are
> Anishnabek, this is dedicated to them, in hope that one day, they and or
> their children will know who they are.
>
> Anyhow, if anyone wishes to help me in this and has material to share,
> please let me know, otherwise, I would like to withdrawal from further
> discourse on the merits of standardization of languages. Even if this may be
> important to some...with Respect for all.
>
> Joseph Brian Lavalley - Mishomis dezhnekaz, Nme dodem.
>
> Miigwetch
>
> PS. Kevin thanks for reminding me of my focus - JBL
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 09:49:29 -0400
>
> From: brousseau_kevin at YAHOO.CA
> Subject: Re: [ILAT] Ojibwe Dictionary Online Project
> To: ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
>
> Dear Mishomis - or is it Joseph?
>
> I don't see why you would have though that I would have taken that as an
> attack. I agreed with nearly everything you said.
>
> My point though, which might not have been that clear, was not to create
> some new Anishinabe standard and ignore all the dialects...I clearly said
> that the study of all dialects is very important. All I was pointing out was
> that a standard orthography would be extremely useful in for all Anishinabe
> people - and I also mentioned that it was political because it is up to
> Anishinabe people to take it upon themselves to do that. But in order to do
> that, you need to take into consideration all the ANISHINABE peoples, and
> that is a political task in the sense that many Anishinabe peoples see
> themselves as distinct peoples because of the politics of the day and the
> fact that they prefer using their English names (many do not even know that
> they are in fact Anishinabe because many do not speak they own language).
> This is why it is political and not in the sphere of linguistics. That is
> not to say that an Anishinabe linguist can get the ball rolling! It's just
> that it isnt a necessary step in order to do a linguistic study of the
> language. A standard orthography would only benefit the people themselves,
> in more ways than one. (imagine is Australians and Americans both wrote
> phonetically! They probably would argue that they speak different languages
> just by looking at each others writting systems!)
>
> Second, I never mentioned anything about unifying all Algic languages, in my
> opinion that would be impossible.
>
> Lastly, there are more peoples than what you call the 3 fires that consider
> themselves ANISHINABE...and use that name to identify themselves. And yes,
> they all speak dialects of the same language.
>
> Joseph Lavalley  wrote:
>  Dear K. Brousseau,
>
> It is not my contention to become political (that is a different arena then
> mine and for the people to figure) or to impose a system that is acceptable
> to all Anishnabek. It is my contention to however to create the forum and a
> base for that to occur naturally, based on as many Anishnabek nations as
> possible. The Anishnabek consists of the Three Fires Confederacy (Ojibwe,
> Pottawatomi and Ottawa). From that there is a existing political structure
> so there is no need for unification of those political bodies and continued
> division of extant individual communities (Sovereign Nations) therein.
>
> This project is about culture and understanding where one comes from. It is
> about keeping a language from not being spoken but to reach out the young
> that wish to retain their lanuguage, be it in the communities where they
> live, rural or urban, to have a sense of identity more then just, 'I am a
> First Nations person or I am Indian or I am Aboriginal. I am not concerned
> with the political boundaries of Canada or United States or their state
> boundaries or provincial ones. This is about being able to say a
> thanksgiving in ones' own language, to smoke a pipe (Powagon) and to do
> ceremonies. This is about being able to educate our children in their
> language and if they wish to learn English as a trading language similar to
> the Chinook language in BC. It is about being able to have self-esteem in
> ones' culture and community, instead of being isolated and forgotten. It is
> about a voice - called: Anishnawbemowin. With this project each community
> can list their individual dialects and inflexions which makes them unique
> and distinctive then the other communities. From there dialogue will ensue
> and from that the basis for a unified Anishnabek language - writting system.
> Created by the people, I am just getting it started. and it may take may
> years, decades or centuries, but as long as someone starts it, it will be
> fulfilled. It is for the people to decide, I am only a guide and think
> nothing more of it.
>
> As far as, using English lables for identification of nationality, that is
> for the people to decide, or the individual, eventually the words will be
> translated back into the symbology, gylphs, logos and so forth and our
> written language will unite us as one people with different dialects and
> different ideas, thus, culture will be renewed. Being a linguist with an
> Anishnabe background will help in many ways, one, I will be able to
> distinguish between two or more separate nations dialects and inflexions,
> secondly, by understanding where they are coming from in terms of the
> assimulation of our people, trust can be built and information transmitted
> to me for dissemination to the masses online. Thirdly, with all communities
> involved in this a sense of ownership of the language will bring forth new
> generations of natural aboriginal speakers and from there unity. Fourthly,
> by giving the people a road map to retain and enjoy their language, I am
> fulfilling my duties to the Anishnabek as Mishomis.
>
> Throughout this project I am sure that there will people that will oppose
> what I am doing or try to keep or discourage me from doing this project by
> whatever means at their disposal. I am not under the illusion that I can do
> this project alone completely. I here to inspire those that are serious and
> dedicated to completing this project so that Anishnabemowin will continue to
> be spoken forever and that it is not lost in translation in Indo-European
> thinking and philosophy. That we as a people can think very much for
> ourselves and that our culture (old and new) will live on forever. With that
> not end up as just footnotes in some PDF in the future.
>
> At this point, I am not interested in unifying all the Algic family
> languages. I am interested in specific ones and in the future it is for
> someone else to unify the others. Be it Cree, Micmac, Blackfoot, Dene etc.
> If this project unifies people then that is a positive thing and I for one
> encourage that. If this project gives well-springs a renewed sense of
> culture and social well-being; or a reawakening of old knowledge and lead to
> new knowledge not seen or spoken of in thousands of year, I am in. For those
> that wish not to discover themselves and understand their language, this
> project is not for you. You may not be interested in this and perhaps your
> energies should concentrate in other field where one can be useful. I am not
> doing this for self-congratulations or to blow my own horn, this will first
> and foremost, for the Anishnabek, their children (benogii) for all our
> relations (Past, Present and the ones that have yet to be). Other then that
> the world can go to hell in a handbasket if the politician do not like it.
> This is my position until forever comes up and bites my shiney metal hiney.
>
> Now without the tools available from Linguistics this project may as well
> not exist. To be able to understand the oral, audio and the written of
> people that took the time to write the grammarian, the othographies, the
> dictionaries, the symbols of the modern alphabet from the genus of the
> Phoenician alphabet, to do a comprehensive translation before all real oral
> speaker references, is the job of the people who own that language namely
> those of the Anishnabek. Of which, I am one, and have the honour, privilege
> and duty to do this project, based on heredity, spiritual right and my the
> validity of my name and family's place in Anishnabek culture and society.
> And as such I have a vested interest in seeing this project to its end. OR,
> my end whichever comes first.
>
> It is never too late to change, but only wrong not to begin.
>
> With compassion, love and understanding,
>
> Joseph Brian Lavally - Mishomis dezhnikaz - Nme dodem (Grandfather is my
> name - Sturgeon family, hereditary teachers)
>
> PS. This is not a remonstration of your opinion, but a response, don't feel
> that this is a personal attack upon you this just clarifies my position and
> commitment to this project and nothing more. - JBL
>
> ________________________________
> Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:02:55 -0400
> From: brousseau_kevin at YAHOO.CA
> Subject: Re: [ILAT] Ojibwe Dictionary Online Project
> To: ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
>
> One of the problems with a unified Anishnabe writting system is that the
> language crosses a few provincial boundaries and state boudaries.
> Researchers tend to focus on the language of one community or of a selected
> area...which is fine and important in itself but the the research is rarely
> done in the vision of a unified anishnabe language.
>
> Also, there isn t one anishnabe govt that represents all anishnabe people.
> The most important thing in my opinion is starting a discussion  between all
> anishnabe communities in order to agree on a writing system, which does not
> necessarily have to be based on the roman alphabet or syllabics (which of
> course everyone has an opinion about and might cause more divisions in the
> process).
>
> This idea of a unified writting system is outside of the concern of
> linguists in my opinion - it is a political issue. Anishnabe people
> themselves need to take the initiative to form a united front (at least in
> terms of language first). Identifying who is and speaks Anishnabe is the
> prerequisite to acually forming political ties in the future.
>
> A linguist would not insist, for example, that a group should call itself
> Anishnabe instead of their English labels (which of course are based on
> native words), such as Ojibwe, Chippewa, saultaux, Algonquin, Oji-Cree,
> etc... A unified writting system to a unified language - to a unified
> people.
>
> This is what should be done before a major project begins and people say it
> is too late to change things, but this is just my opinion.
>
>
>
>
>
> Joseph Lavalley  wrote:
>  Dear Mr. D. Osborn,
>
> Glad you have some contacts in regards to dictionary project. Perhaps a
> exchange of knowledge with them will provide me with a firmer ground to base
> this Ojbiwe Dictionary project on. So far it seems so. Look forward to
> speaking or having meaningful dialogue with someone who participated in it
> structure and creation.
>
> With great thanks, Chi-Miigwetch
>
> Joseph Brian Lavalley - Mishomis dezhenkaz, Nme dodem
>
> ________________________________
> Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 10:18:08 -0400
> From: dzo at BISHARAT.NET
> Subject: Re: [ILAT] Ojibwe Dictionary Online Project
> To: ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
>
>
>
> Dear Joseph,
>
> I can't speak to the issues of the Ojibwe language, but on the broader topic
> of online "living" dictionaries will mention - in case it is of interest to
> you and others on ILAT - that there is some interesting work ongoing and
> being discussed for several African languages.
>
> * The ""Kamusi" online living Swahili dictionary has been evolving for
> several years and, though currently at a moment of transition, is poised to
> continue its development.
> * Other dictionaries being developed by Kasahorow for Akan (Ghana) and Ewe
> (Ghana/Togo)
> * A larger project proposal is under discssion to facilitate among other
> things, pairing of various African languages
>
> Most of the languages concerned in the current efforts and discussions have
> millions of speakers and sometimes considerable, if difficult to access,
> published resources. So the context is somewhat different than what I
> understand one would be dealinng with for a Native American language like
> Ojibwe. Nevertheless, perhaps there could be some useful sharing of tools
> and experience.
>
> I'll cc Dr. Martin Benjamin (Kamusi) and Paa Kwesi Imbeah (kasahorow) for
> their info.
>
> All the best.
>
> Don Osborn
> Bisharat.net
> PanAfriL10n.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Indigenous Languages and Technology [mailto:ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]

=== message truncated ===

---------------------------------
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ilat/attachments/20070916/07cc0dfe/attachment.htm>