Language more important than land - academic (fwd link)

Thu Sep 13 06:23:43 UTC 2012

Thank you both...Chun (Jimmy) Huang, Bernadette Adley-SantaMaria for both
your reminders and cautions.  

The statement 'language is more important than land' makes sense and bears
application to a language which did not 'grow out of' and is not 'tied' into
any land. The assumptions of universality is innate to English since English
is an agglomeration of other languages and, in effect, has no 'home
lands(earth)' out of which it emerged. It is a portable language constructed
out of trade relations of other 'home lands' languages for the purpose of
'getting the best of the bargain'. I realize this brief post is a 'nutshell'
post with far more than I have included or touched on.

I do appreciate the myriad of information and ideas I receive from ILAT
postings though, often, it does not appear to be so in my responses.

P.S. I really like your signatures 'Siraya of Taiwan' and 'White Mountain
Apache' right on. The Great Grandmother of my two eldest Grandchildren was a
fullblood(whatever that means) Apache. So, they are Potowatomi, Ojibway,
Odawa, Apache, Spanish American...ok, ok...English too in one of the
closets...jeez I hate being honest...lol.

wahjeh
rolland nadjiwon
________________ 
Harper is a joke and 'pansy' to anyone and any country that will act as his
'sin eater'...

  _____  

From: Indigenous Languages and Technology [mailto:ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Huang,Chun
Sent: September-12-12 9:35 PM
To: ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [ILAT] Language more important than land - academic (fwd link)

Thank you, Bernadette Adley-SantaMaria

I recommend Hardman's article below where, through studying Jaqaru, she
explains how land is indeed, as you point out, intertwined with language
(both  being parts of the whole): if you lose one, you lose the other.
Hardman also demonstrates how English, especially the English cultural
thinking as manifested its three major linguistic postulates, can often do
damage to the indigenous/local. One of the English postulates Hardman
identifies is "ranking through comparative/absolute," which the original
article in question here exemplifies very well for us: "Language (is) more
important than land!" Really, what's the point of ranking the importance of
language against the importance of land anyway??? Many English users,
unfortunately, seem unable to escape such ranking mentality.

Hardman, M. J. (1994) "'And if we lose our names, then what about our
land?', or, what price development?" in L. H. Turner and H. M. Sterk (eds)
Differences that Make a Difference: Examining the Assumptions in Gender
Research (pp. 152-161). Westport & London: Bergin & Garvey.

Let me or Dr. Hardman know if you can't find a copy. I believe she wouldn't
mind sharing.

Chun (Jimmy) Huang

Siraya of Taiwan

Assistant Professor, University of Guam

On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:26:58 -0700, BSantaMaria wrote:

I strongly disagree with the last statement of paragraph:  "Language &
culture are intertwined & because of this it's impossible to see how land
can be seen as more important."  It is because of how intertwined everything
is in our Indigenous ideologies/philosophies including especially our lands,
natural resources, languages, cultures, social and economic issues, etc.,
etc., that is not understood by non-Natives or non-Indig. people that is an
issue in many aspects of language & culture revitalization efforts.  I
believe they do not "get it" because they do not speak an Indigenous
language that speaks intimately of our connections to our homelands within
our speech/terminology.  Speaking our languages fluently also
engages/intimately involves our lands and resources that come from it,
without these, our languages would be missing a vital link to our cultures,
some of us even believe that "our land is us" in our language, is our
mother.  Thinking of land as property with fiscal value is the antithesis of
some of our views on it and that usually comes from the western world
capitalist view.

These are also the reasons why I came to an MA thesis conclusion back in the
mid-1990's that language revitalization efforts involves "Wholistic Healing
for our Native People" to revive their languages and I meant in all areas of
Native life including returning to a belief in our cosmologies/spiritality
beliefs, traditional socio-economic patterns, etc.  It seems that recent
articles and books on these issues are arriving at similar conclusions.
These reasons are also why I saw the field of linguistics as lacking in
considering these aspects of Native people when studying our languages
focusing so narrowly on a certain aspect of them and mostly benefiting
themselves.

I'm also going to request info from those on this list that know of some
books and titles/articles that I can review pertaining to what I brought out
above.

Ahiye'e (Thank you,

Bernadette Adley-SantaMaria
White Mountain Apache

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Phillip E Cash Cash
<cashcash at email.arizona.edu> wrote:

Language more important than land - academic

Updated at 7:19 pm on 10 September 2012

Linguistics expert Ghil'ad Zuckermann says that the loss of language is more
damaging for indigenous peoples than the loss of their land.

Access full article below:
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korihi/115509/language-more-important-
than-land-academic

  _____  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2667 / Virus Database: 2579/5764 - Release Date: 09/12/12

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ilat/attachments/20120913/1cb581d0/attachment.htm>