"In", "for", or "with"? (was Re: [ILAT] LSA 2006)

[Susan Penfield]

Scott
Couldn't agree more -- so maybe 'with' and 'for' blend here. All I was
trying to suggest is the clear 'paradigm shift' (to use current rhetoric)
that has occurred for linguists working in the context of communities. Since
being in the field (now easily over 30 eyars) , the position of 'linguist'
has changed -- for the better, I think, in that most of us are very
concerned with how we can advocate and support the communities we work with
(or for) -- I have, on occasion, actually been employed by the tribes so
working 'for' them is accurate in my case. But the projects I now design,
while I'm now based in academia, are always, to the best of my ability,
conceived as fully collaborative..i.e., working with the community on every
level possible.

We may both be splitting hairs, but we are not wasting words. Linguists
need to think carefully through their relationship and responsibility to the
community...Most know that of course, but it certainly hasn't always been
the case. It is rarely clearly articulated what working 'with' communities
means nor is it often addressed as to just how these collaborations are
actually implemented.
Best,
Susan



On 1/11/06, Scott DeLancey <delancey at uoregon.edu> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Susan Penfield wrote:
>
> > Jeff's session) is supportive of the community's efforts. This requires
> a
> > second set of 'Best Practices' -- still being defined -- for working
> with
> > communties (actually, I think we should think in terms of working FOR
> > communities --a step beyond working 'IN' or even 'WITH' ) ...
>
> I may be splitting hairs here, but then, that's what I do for a living ...
>
> A lot of folks in linguistics now put these in the other order--once upon
> a time we worked *in* the communities, then we learned we had to think
> about working *for* the community, now we work *with* them.
>
> To me the difference is:  if you are working *for* the community, that
> sounds like you design and carry out the project, and the community
> benefits.  Sounds cool, but it can't work that way--no revitalization
> program can get anywhere unless the community is involved all the way
> along, not just in goal-setting but in implementation too--if you're
> not working *with* the community then the community isn't going to end
> up getting much out of your work.
>
> Scott DeLancey
> Department of Linguistics
> 1290 University of Oregon
> Eugene, OR 97403-1290, USA
>
> delancey at darkwing.uoregon.edu
> http://www.uoregon.edu/~delancey/prohp.html
>



--
Susan D. Penfield, Ph.D.

Department of English
Affiliate faculty: Department of Linguistics
and the Second Language Acquisition and Teaching Program
American Indian Language Development Institute
Phone for messages: (520) 621-1836
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ilat/attachments/20060111/39ee50d2/attachment.htm>