Lang backgrounds of LEP students in 2000-2001

[Tony Johnson]

Another note in this regard.  I know at least five speakers of Kiksht
(Upper Chinookan) at Warm Springs and Yakama.  I also know at least two
individuals who are working very hard with their elder family members to
become good second language learners.

Tony A. Johnson
Shawash-ili7i

>>> Ros' Haruo <lilandbr at HOTMAIL.COM> 03/03/2004 6:01:14 PM >>>
Jeffrey, you wrote (or quoted, I can't quite tell) "Note one student's
"language background" got listed as "Upper Chinookan"--which could be
an
accurate report of heritage, but linguistically would be a 150-year
stretch."

Upper Chinookan is probably not dead, much less 150 years gone. The
1990 US
Census showed 69 speakers of Wasco-Wishram, including 7 monolinguals,
according to the Ethnologue:

http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=WAC

lilEnd


        ROS' Haruo / 2355 Eastlake Ave E / Seattle WA 98102 / Usono
    lilandbr at scn.org / lilandbr at hotmail.com / tel 206-324-3176
              ROS' Haruo = Leland Bryant ROSS





>From: Jeffrey Kopp <jeffreykopp at ATT.NET>
>Reply-To: Jeffrey Kopp <jeffreykopp at ATT.NET>
>To: CHINOOK at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
>Subject: Re: Lang backgrounds of LEP students in 2000-2001
>Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:50:27 -0800
>
>At 12:47 PM 3/1/2004, Jim Holton wrote:
>>Given the source and the disclaimer at the bottom, I am wondering if
the
>>13 students didn't come from bi-lingual programs at Grand Ronde in
>>2000-2001.  They might be lumping bi-lingual programs in with LEP
programs
>>for their estimate.
>
>Yes, that was my guess, too. It next occurred to me that not long
before
>the program began, there were still great-grandparents who had spoken
>fluent Jargon, and I don't doubt they shared it lovingly with kids
who
>remain in school today. In either case (pre-program or after launch),
it's
>likely some of today's children were introduced to the Jargon as early
as
>English.
>
>Mr. Roy also mentions the LEP categorical criteria included the
"influence"
>(the criteria unfortunately employed the potentially pejorative term
>"impact") of previous generations' languages upon Native Americans,
though
>I believe any such effect on today's Native children's
English-learning
>capability would be socio-economic in origin rather than linguistic.
(The
>goals of the LNCB Act might not even require distinguishing this
point.)
>
>The source report appears a bit apologetic about its own sketchiness;
the
>criteria were in the process of revision at the time, so they some
had
>trouble getting fitting data out of the states:
>
>"Meaningful interpretation of the available data is challenging for
several
>reasons." Survey of the States' Limited English Proficient Students &
>Available Educational Programs and Services, p. 9.
><http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/states/reports/seareports/0001/sea0001.pdf>
or
>(HTML):
><http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:LQcFWWU4nvYJ:www.ncela.gwu.edu/states/reports/seareports/0001/sea0001.pdf>
>
>This quirk may have been encouraged by one of the data-gathering
>instruments, OMB No. 1885-0543. See page 4 (at 35 of the above .pdf):
>
>>A2. Languages Spoken by Grade Level
>>List ALL the non-English languages spoken by LEP students and the
number
>>of LEP students at each grade level who speak each of those
languages.
>
>This brought to mind the scenario of "Okay, kids.... Hey! Quiet down
back
>there! ....what other languages do you speak?" (I thought Emmett
might
>enjoy that.) It's an educational funding and planning report (and
they
>apparently did the best they could), not an anthropological or
linguistic
>study. Note one student's "language background" got listed as "Upper
>Chinookan"--which could be an accurate report of heritage, but
>linguistically would be a 150-year stretch. Of course, any kind of
survey
>stat below a couple points may offer interesting ideas for further
>research, but can't be relied upon by itself.
>
>I kidded Dave privately about "trolling [his] own list" (not wishing
to
>launch any pointless hoo-ha's--at least until today's email came in,
which
>offered me the higher ground of rebutting them). But at least it got
us a
>couple new posts, plus word from one specialist we hadn't heard from
before
>(and welcome!)
>
>J.

_________________________________________________________________
Learn how to help protect your privacy and prevent fraud online at
Tech
Hacks & Scams. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/techsafety.armx