traditions of assimilation...

[Mia Kalish]

Hi, Everyone, 

 

I just finished reading a strange combination of texts, one a book called
The Analogical Mind, and details on Emergent Grounded Theory, and some
political pieces on qualitative research. (I say this to give you an idea of
how to fix what I am about to say.) 

 

Anyway, we don’t really have “A Truth.”  “Truths” are from the old (an now
reasonably well-discredited) Positivist point of view that said that “Truth
was Out There and we just had to ‘discover’ it.”  We do have a kind of
truth, a relational, cultural kind of truth, that comes from thinking and
believing the same way about things. We could call these “positions” if we
had to call them something. But they are really the stories that create
cultural fabrics, the things we represent in our symbols, rituals, songs and
stories. I mention all these things because these are the ways we recall
them to mind, recall them to the collective mind and create ways for people
to participate in them. 

 

My friend Yolanda just defended her dissertation research. She wondered why
so many monolingual Spanish children of Mexican descent seemed to be ending
up – to their eventual detriment – in English immersion classes. She found
that it was the parents who were moving their children from bilingual to
English immersion, for two primary reasons: 

 

• Educacion is about deportment, not about disciplinary knowledge; and,

• Parents see English proficiency as a ticket to the big house, the good
job, and freedom from struggle. They do NOT understand  disciplinary
knowledge because they have no experience with it.  

 

Our next research is going to be together, and it is going to be about how
to create environments where parents can learn more both about what
Education is about here, and about the different disciplines. We have some
ideas, using technology (of course. . :-) )

 

 But an interesting thing happened in the defense, about the point she was
talking about new research. One of the committee members asked, Do you see
parents’ information as deficient? Yolanda said no, and then the committee
member said, But you are implying that it is deficient when you say you want
to change it. 

 

She was kind of stymied, because she wanted simultaneously to be able to say
that the parents were “okay” in that kind of 60’s-70s “I’m okay, You’re
okay” sense. On the other hand, she knew parents really needed new
information, new tools, and new discourses and conversations. 

 

Fortunately, the committee member saved her. He said, As minority faculty,
we do not have the luxury of not taking a stand. We have to be willing to
say that some things are just not right, and then we can work to improve
them. 

 

We are going to write a book about this, combining our dissertation
researches, and maybe some new work. We are also thinking about a second
book, which we were going to call “Whiteness” that would be based on
people’s impressions of language, education, and the hegemonies of language
and skin color. But based on what I read in this email, I’m thinking a
better title would be, “Whiteness”: Brown Courage to Change. 

 

What do you all think? 

 

Did I ever mention how much I love being on this list? You all just add so
much to what makes life rich!

 

My book chapter on visualization is turning out to be amazing! And it’s
almost done, so the little leaky comments that derive from the freedom of
Yolanda finally being done (I edited her dissertation, and coached her,
making sure she didn’t quite at all those hard places where because of her
parent’s critical illnesses made getting this done a near impossible feat.)
are sure to increase. Who knows, I might even write something of substance!

 

Thanks, Richard! You are terrific as always. 

 

Mia 

 

 

  _____  

From: Indigenous Languages and Technology [mailto:ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Richard Smith
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 9:42 AM
To: ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [ILAT] traditions of assimilation...

 

Hi David,

I think you raise an important topic towards revitalization.
Unfortunately people are easily made defensive about their own beliefs
This makes it difficult to discuss errors and offer possible solutions. 
I personally don't know one Native American who "hates" Christ.
But its the multitude forms of   _ianity we have had so much difficulty
with.

One I have found so damaging are forms of "Replacement Theology"
Which is basicly an attempt to reshape people by presenting
as "The Truth" a different foreign paradigm , from creation to afterlife.
We cannot automaticly doubt the sincerity of such proselytizers
because often they themselves are "the converted" and go to extraordinary
lengths and sacrifice to bring what they have been taught is "the gospel"

I confess i didn't read the entire book.But i glimpsed through an account of
early Christian missionaries first encountering Hawaiians and I learned
something. 
These European Christians had just sailed completely around S. America, were
suffering from scurvy, and food poisoning,and basicly were dying of
malnutrition.
When they finally encountered the people of the island joyfully welcoming
them from their dugouts and on the beaches,the missionaries burst into tears
from the deck of the ship. Why were they weeping?
Because the islanders were "naked" and unaware their "sinful" condition.

We may be tempted to snicker today, but this isn't the point at all.
I think we should recognize this as what happens when two 
extremely different paradigms collide.Problems happen when one group 
comes with a belief that it must completely CHANGE the other group.
New creation stories, new values, new parables, new ideologies. 
Islanders must now be taught about sheep,and of course ,camels,
or they will never understand the Good Shepherd or understand
how hard it is to put a camel through the Eye of the Needle.

When a societies paradigms expand, its simply healthy education. 
Language expands and new ideas are added to what already exists.
I don't know of any indigenous people wishing to return to a stone age.
But when paradigms replace other paradigms,as in culture and theologies
Language itself begins to change from the inside out.

just some thoughts to toss out there....
Richard Zane Smith




On 2/16/08 2:03 PM, "David Lewis" <David.Lewis at GRANDRONDE.ORG> wrote:

I for one appreciate more dialogue about how Christians and other sects have
contributed to the assimilation of Native peoples, which in turn has
contributed to the extinction or near-extinction of many native languages. I
too will use this in my classes.

David G. Lewis
Manager, Cultural Resources Department
Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde




-----Original Message-----
From: Indigenous Languages and Technology on behalf of Mark Sicoli
Sent: Sat 2/16/2008 12:49 PM
To: ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [ILAT] traditions of assimilation...

Thank you Phil, well said.  The nationalist myth is based on a pervasive
ideology where a single language is taken (or given) as the symbol of a
singular identity.  The one language=one nation association goes back to
nation-state building in Europe and the practices of linguistic
unifications, like in Spain, France, and Italy, and other such places
where vernacular languages were ideologically "erased" in the formation of
national unities.  These served as models for nation building in the
Americas and the ideology is real prominent in Mexico where I work, and
where language shifts from indigenous languages to Spanish are currently
occurring at unprecedented rates.  The same basic ideology is at work
equating one language with one individual, which serves to work against
bilingualism and bilingual education, thus facilitating language
abandonment rather than bilingual maintenance.  For these reasons I agree
that this is a worthwhile discussion for this list.

Mark


On Sat, February 16, 2008 9:02 pm, phil cash cash said:
> For the language advocates (LA) it might be worthwhile to point out these
> "assimilationist" agendas are all founded on a nationalist myth.  In
> today's
> contemporary context, this nationalist myth states that our societies are
> or
> can become linguistically, culturally homogenous.  When in reality, this
> may
> be impossible.Â
> And as Richard points out so well, the nationalist myth (in what ever
> manifestation it may take) supports other agendas as well.Â
> Phil
> UofA
>
>


--
Mark Sicoli Ph.D.
Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics
Postbus 310
6500 AH Nijmegen
The Netherlands



 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ilat/attachments/20080225/b26e82a8/attachment.htm>