Buffet, Gates, & the future of linguistic diversity

[Mia Kalish]

I am going to hazard a guess that projects will do better if they provide a
Technology Improvement hook. After all, people like to work on the things
that interest them most, and Gates == Microsoft == Technology. 

 

The other thing that causes problems with projects is the vast difference in
Time to Complete. Technology likes to move very fast. People don't always.
Technology likes to try lots of different options, see how things look lots
of different ways. Do things nobody has done before. People don't always. I
know a lot of the people I have worked with will argue for hours, sometimes
days and weeks, over the 1 right way to say something. Things would move
faster and accomplish more if ALL the ways were included. 

 

This One-Way-Only is not limited to Indigenous groups: When I was a
consultant, lots of people in commerce, banking, the stock market,
engineering, and construction thought their view was the Only View. It was
only when they found themselves left out of the loop that they began to open
their eyes and see that there were lots of perspectives and that all were
valid, operational, and necessary to keep the overall system working well.
You don't see these fine and often sophisticated details until you have to
Reproduce a System Exactly in Software. Designers become hard-bitten because
if it doesn't work, the fact that John, or Sam or someone told you how it
works doesn't place the responsibility for fixing what doesn't work on John,
or Sam or someone. YOU, the designer, who Believed rather than verifying,
are still responsible. And guess what: You don't get to go home until it IS
fixed. So you learn. You learn to develop a sense of balance, of smooth
functioning, and you watch how data and information moves so everyone has
what they need to do what they need to do. And then, joy of joy, you get to
get on that plane and fly home. Dog, Significant Other, bed, porch, kitchen.
. . . Home. Is there any other place like it? 

 

Mia 

 

  _____  

From: Indigenous Languages and Technology [mailto:ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Susan Penfield
Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 11:40 AM
To: ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [ILAT] Buffet, Gates, & the future of linguistic diversity

 

All,
I can certainly confirm what Phil adds here -- and I have shared these ideas
with my contact at the Gates Foundation. Like many private foundations, the
Gates Foundation supports projects with a particular focus in a rotating
fashion. Their interest in Native American concerns has been limited to
tribal libraries In our case, we were able to cover training in
language-learning technology by orchestrating an affiliation with a tribal
library. However, they have not yet been interested in broadly supporting
language revitalization nor any language-related projects that are not
focused on tribal libraries. 

Best,
Susan

On 7/1/06, phil cash cash <cashcash at email.arizona.edu> wrote:

Yes, I agree Don.  The Gates Foundation has had technology outreach
programs targeting native communities, however, it seems these programs
were short lived and did not continue for one reason or another.

I do believe however that, at least from the perspective of Gates-funded 
projects carried out here in the SW several years back, that language
was and is a compelling component for any community development
project.  Tribes certainly made this an important issue.

Based on my own experience on working on a Gates-funded project, I can 
say that these projects were extremely valuable and rewarding.  I
surely hope to see the continuance of community-oriented technology
development in the future coming from the Gates Foundation!

Phil Cash Cash (cayuse/nez perce) 
UofA, ILAT list mg


Quoting d_z_o <dzo at BISHARAT.NET>:

> With the news of Warren Buffet's donation of most of an estimated $44
> billion to the Gates Foundation (GF), and remembering that the GF has 
> funded some programs for endangered languages, one wonders whether any
> of this new mass of capital can be directed for use for language
> revitalization and linguistic diversity.  Is not just a question of 
> whether some more money can be allocated for specific projects, but
> rather whether resources can be found to develop and implement
> long-term programs for the development of minority languages.  There 
> are a number of important but relatively small programs to assist in
> documentation of endangered languages, and there are sometimes
> programs in individual countries to promote teaching of and
> development of literature in certain languages, but there does not 
> seem to be any overarching strategy involving a range of actors (or
> "stakeholders") involved in or concerned with language preservation
> and development.
>
> At this time, when we read so often about about the current and 
> expected rates of language extinction, when many countries and
> communities lack the resources to plan and manage for their own
> linguistic diversity, when many children especially of minority groups 
> do not have access to formal education of any sort let alone in their
> maternal language, and when older people in minority language
> communities pass away taking with them knowledge that cannot be
> replaced (the proverbial "when an elder dies, a library burns"), while
> at the same time we have the resources, both monetary and
> technological, to record, manipulate, produce, and instruct in any 
> language, there is an urgent need to develop bold, coherent and long
> term strategies.
>
> Basically we seem to be faced with a window of opportunity of limited
> duration, and an imperative to act promptly. The GF even with this 
> added capital, is not the only organization that can assist in this
> area, so it shouldn't be singled out.  There are other organizations
> that can and should contribute as well - philanthropic, national, 
> intergovernmental, etc.  However, given the amount of resources now at
> the GF's disposal, and its implied link via its founder to information
> technology (which has a great potential to help work language 
> development and revitalization), it certainly is a logical starting
> place. And since this story is big in the news at this moment, maybe
> it deserves some focused discussion in order to produce a strong 
> policy proposal?
>
> Don Osborn




-- 
Susan D. Penfield, Ph.D.


Department of English(Primary)           
American Indian Language Devel.Institute 
Department of Linguistics 
Second Language Acquistion &Teaching
     Ph.D. Program
Dept. of Language,Reading and Culture
The Southwest Center (Research)
      
Phone for messages: (520) 621-1836 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ilat/attachments/20060701/a233b1ae/attachment.htm>