Ethical approval for collecting linguistic data

[Picus Ding]

Dear list members,

In recent years there has been increasing awareness
about the issue of research ethics involving human
subjects, which is good.  In the case of
anthropological linguistics, I take the view that
fieldwork consultants are more like co-workers rather
than 'subjects' for experiments in basic research
projects (which don't include perception or
psycholinguistic tests). Thus I wonder if they should
be regarded as human subjects, by default. The
proposed project I have in hand requires recording of
word lists and kinship terms, but no texts, of
minority languages spoken in China. The matter would
be very simple if I would forgo the recording part,
according to regulations for research ethics of the
university in Hong Kong.

I'd like to ask your opinion on the status of
fieldwork consultants who provide linguistic knowledge
of their native language, not personal data. Would you
consider them as human subjects? Could they be
classified as research assistants (if they're more
like co-workers)? Have you run into similar
situations/problems regarding approval of research
ethics in basic anthropological linguistic project?
I'd like to know what the current norm is in practice
in general. Please write to me directly or to the list
(which may like to see some discussion) to share your
thought.

Best regards,
Picus

_______________________________________
 »¶Ó­Ê¹Óó¬´óÈÝÁ¿ÑÅ»¢ÓÊÏä 
 http://cn.mail.yahoo.com