30.1441, Saving Endangered Languages with Prescriptivism
The LINGUIST List
linguist at listserv.linguistlist.org
Mon Apr 1 16:23:50 UTC 2019
LINGUIST List: Vol-30-1441. Mon Apr 01 2019. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.
Subject: 30.1441, Saving Endangered Languages with Prescriptivism
Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Student Moderator: Jeremy Coburn
Managing Editor: Becca Morris
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Everett Green, Sarah Robinson, Peace Han, Nils Hjortnaes, Yiwen Zhang, Julian Dietrich
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
Editor for this issue: Sarah Robinson <srobinson at linguistlist.org>
================================================================
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2019 12:23:30
From: LINGUIST List [linguist at linguistlist.org]
Subject: Saving Endangered Languages with Prescriptivism
Saving Endangered Languages with Prescriptivism
Re-Printed from the Speculative Grammarian
by: Neil de Veratte
Director of Fieldwork Studies
Winter Academy of Language
All over the world, languages are being lost at an alarming rate. Field
linguists do their best to preserve these languages, but find their speaker
communities apathetic. “Why should I learn Wotʃa-Korlitt?” they ask, “It’s
Spanish I need to get a job.” We need to look at successful languages, whose
speakers are engaged with their language, to see what endangered languages can
learn from them. When we do, we inevitably find that the most successful
languages are those which possess a tradition of prescriptivist grammar.
English has an army of armchair pedants who tell us all to never split an
infinitive, that the passive should be avoided, and that prepositions must not
be used to end a sentence with. French has the Academie Française to pronounce
arbitrary bans on loanwords, and Spanish the Real Academia Española, which
aims to ensure everybody talks like Cervantes. The Chinese are taught from an
early age to regard all Sinitic languages as dialects of Mandarin.
All these languages were originally documented by their own speakers, who made
up arbitrary rules to show off their own cleverness. The results are
invigorating. Such rules are endlessly debated, denounced, defended and
defied, and as a result, the speakers care about their language.
Contrast the situation with endangered languages. These are documented by
outsiders, schooled in the descriptivist method, and content to simply record
what they find. Their work may result in a Bible translation, but that is as
close to arbitrary commandments as they’re likely to get.
A new approach is necessary. Fieldworkers should no longer passively describe
a language. They must set out to create new rules for the language, so as to
stimulate the debate that keeps a language alive. As such rules must be
internally unmotivated, the researcher needs to think carefully about where to
obtain them. A good strategy is to copy rules from a language that the speaker
community considers prestigious, as English pedants do with Latin. In South
America, Spanish or Portuguese would be the first choice, although it may be
wise to base rules on the European form of the language rather than the local
one. This approach has two advantages—those who accept the new rule will see
it as conferring the prestige of the dominant language on their own, whereas
those who reject it will see the dominant language as tainted by association
with the hated rule.
Other researchers may prefer to manufacture rules based on theoretical
considerations. This raises the question of which framework to use for the
purpose. On one level, it makes little difference, as they will all be equally
incomprehensible to the speaker community, but I would recommend Metasyntactic
Heuristics, (for further discussion of these topics, please see these
discussions: http://specgram.com/CLXVI.2/05.mcmosky.frameworks.html ;
http://specgram.com/CLXVIII.2/04.berish.heuristics.html ) since it is now
understood only by two aging academics in remote English universities, and
they haven’t spoken to each other for 25 years.
Our fieldworkers are now reporting back from the first trials of this method.
We are still analysing their findings, but one has reported spectacular
results from convincing an Amazonian tribe that they are not allowed to
discuss abstract concepts.
----
This article was originally printed in SpecGram Vol. CLXXII, No. 4
Thanks for reading this special LINGUIST List announcement of this important
April 1st news article re-printed with permission from the Speculative
Grammarian. Check out SpecGram at http://specgram.com/
In seriousness, the LINGUIST List devotes countless hours to helping out the
global linguistics community by managing thousands of announcements for
journals, tables of contents, new book publications, reviews, jobs,
internships, calls for papers, and conferences. We are managed by a small
group of graduate students who work hard to provide these services. We rely on
your donations to keep ourselves afloat! At this time we are at only 17% of
our goal. If you use the LINGUIST List's numerous services, please consider
donating here https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*************************** LINGUIST List Support ***************************
The 2019 Fund Drive is under way! Please visit https://funddrive.linguistlist.org
to find out how to donate and check how your university, country or discipline
ranks in the fund drive challenges. Or go directly to the donation site:
https://iufoundation.fundly.com/the-linguist-list-2019
Let's make this a short fund drive!
Please feel free to share the link to our campaign:
https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-30-1441
----------------------------------------------------------
More information about the LINGUIST
mailing list