Ethical approval for collecting linguistic data

[Ronald Kephart]

On 10/18/08 10:44 PM, "Picus Ding" <picus_ding at YAHOO.COM.HK> wrote:

> 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 am a member of our IRB here. I can say that we would probably give you an
"exempt" status, even with the recording, because there is no reasonable
expectation that consultants will be harmed as a result of your research.

As you know, the IRB process was built on the model of protecting people
from harmful medical/biological experimentation. There appears to be a
movement toward realization that these concerns are not reasonable for some
kinds of research, and "oral history" is an area that has been leading the
way in this. Most if not nearly all of what we as linguists do is more like
oral history than it is like biomedical research, and the people we work
with are more like collaboraters or consultants than "subjects." This does
not mean that you can just go off and do stuff without going thru the IRB
process, though.

When I went to Carriacou, Grenada, a couple years ago to record elderly
people speaking the local French Creole, which is endangered, I was not
required to obtain written consent- just oral.  I will say, though, that I
did a lot of my data collection with paper and pencil. It was just easier to
hang out with folks and write down anything new they happened to think of
while we passed the time. And, I know the language well enough that this was
feasible.

Ron

-- 
Ronald Kephart
Associate Professor of Anthropology
University of North Florida
http://www.unf.edu/~rkephart