[Lexicog] indigenous lexical relations

[Lou Hohulin]

"Wayne Leman" <wayne_leman at sil.org> wrote:
> Has anyone on this list worked on a dictionary project in which the
> indigenous speakers of the language themselves came up with the lexical
> relations, including any semantic categorization, that were displayed in the
> dictionary? I am particularly interested in instances of Indigenous
> Knowledge being reflected in the lexical relations and categorization,
> without influence from any other language or worldview outside that of the
> worldview of the indigenes. ("Indigenous Knowledge" is now a term which is
> used professionally and there are some interesting hits for it from Internet
> Web searches.)
>
I think that it is difficult to find languages and indigenous speakers who can process lexical relations and categorization without some training in thinking about their language in that way. Remember that most of us who know anything about lexical relations and categorization have been trained in school to think that way about our language. That is, we treat our language as an 'artefact'. And in training others to think about lexical relations and categorization, we are bound to influence the speakers to some extent.

I tried this in the Philippines with two different languages(Tuwali Ifugao, Keley-i Kallahan). Besides the problem of training people to think about semantic categorization in their language, I faced the problem that the speakers had learned, some more and some less, the lexical relations in and categorization of English in school and it was common for them to think in terms of a translation process.

I did learn some things by digging deeper, e.g. 'fruits' and 'vegetables' are categorized by whether or not they are eaten raw or cooked. Animals, birds, reptiles, insects are categorized on the basis of how they move -- four legs, two legs, many legs (some insects) fly, slither (snakes & worms), etc.; supernatural beings are largely categorized on the basis of where they live -- Skyworld, the Eastern World, the Western World, trees, streams, rocks, etc). Functionality vs. non-functionality is another criterial component for categorizing, e.g. palms (coconut, betelnut)are not classified as trees because they cannot be used for firewood though they are functionally useful in other ways. The technique that I used was largely 'analogy'. I also gained some knowledge of lexical relations and categorization by studying lexical cohesion in natural texts.

Dick Elkins(SIL)was fairly successful in training one of the speakers of Western Bukidnon Manobo, Philippines. He may not be on this discussion list so you may want to contact him to discuss this with him. I don't remember if he published a paper on this topic.

Lou Hohulin
SIL - Dallas and Philippines




Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/