[RNLD] Request for methodology assessment; Anthropology, narrative, headhunting

[Oliver Claycamp]

Hello,


I was recommended by Penelope Schmidt of the RNLD organization to post my request for an assessment of a research methodology to this mailing list.


I am a new anthropologist who recently finished an MA by research at the University of Malaysia Sarawak. My research focused on the Iban people of Sarawak, Borneo.


In my fieldwork I developed a methodological instrument which I believe could have a positive attribution to the field of language documentation. My methodology is called a 'Scripted Equivocation.' Briefly the process works that the anthropologist develop a narrative specifically targeted towards a group of people. In my case it was a group of traditional Iban. After the narrative is written the anthropologist arrives in the field and delivers the narrative through a translator to several different audiences of natives. The process is simply to record the words spoken by the anthropologist and the words spoken by the translator, transcribe, translate, and compare the original against the translator's version along with the audience commentary.


The point of the exercise is that the translator will, during their presentation, alter the text to better match the cultural expectations of the audience. In my work this happened many hundreds of times. The translator even changed the ending of the narrative entirely without telling me what he was doing.


The continuation of the method is to utilize the recapitulated script as a basis for a community film making experience. Give the people the tools, resources, and script which they already approved of, and then make the kind of movie which they agree to. The last step is to show the film to other members of the larger community and gather even more feedback.


As a cultural research tool there is naturally much to commend this method, and I've received feedback from other cultural scholars to that effect. Yet, there is also the possibility of using this method as a language documentation and language revitalization tool. If you choose to peruse my thesis you will see in the appendixes a large amount of Iban language text, nearly 100 pages. I obtained this material after only 9 hours of work in the village. Basically, I spend a weekend at the village and managed to obtain a sizeable amount of material.


The reason why it might make a good language documentation tool is because it is quite easy. Once the original narrative is created then getting into the field (assuming a translator can be found) is relatively easy. Most groups will be flattered that so much work was done on their behalf. While the initial request is unusual (i.e. requesting permission to tell a story) it is not too far out of the range of the normality, especially to native groups.


After gaining permission to tell the story the process becomes quite straightforward. My work uncovered a great amount of fairly terms and linguistic features which would have been otherwise challenging to obtain. I was also able to do this without speaking any of the language. The people, for the most part, were interested in the process. It was an unusual and memorable social event.


The results of the process is a narrative which is accessible to both the anthropologist and the audience. As opposed to simply recording a traditional narrative which quite often will contain elements which are obscure and idiosyncratic to that community, the Scripted Equivocation begins with a baseline and is then transformed by members of that community into something new. This baseline and subsequent transformation could ideally allow for a wider audience to find interest in the story and then, ideally, develop an appreciation or interest in the language.


A further attribute involves revitalization. If the community goes through the entire community film making process then the anthropologist would receive a video record of the language in action, as well as other incidental material brought up through the act of making the film.


While this process will never be as directly applicable to the field of linguistics as a dictionary it does offer other features, ease of procurement, community involvement, possibility of large audience awareness on both sides, etc, which I think could make it a useful tool overall. It can also be done by a nonspecialist for the benefit of specialists. Once the narrative is written then any storyteller can obtain the data which could then be assessed by a professional.


A possible limitation is that the process does require a translator. In certain cases this might not be possible. Having to work through a translator also brings along certain other features. If the translator is a man of status, as it was in my case, then the material produced might reflect the language normally used by that kind of person. Yet, given the ease of the process, it might be possible to do the process again with, say, a woman in the community and get even more results, etc.


I am attaching a copy of my thesis to see if anyone on this list might be willing to make an assessment. Please note that the native language components are in the appendixes. The story is a headhunting horror story. It gets a bit intense a moments.


I would appreciate any feedback that anyone on this list might be willing to offer.


Thank you very much,


Oliver Claycamp

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/resource-network-linguistic-diversity/attachments/20180615/a014bd14/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Conjunctive Staging.EXAMINER 3-1 1.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 972075 bytes
Desc: Conjunctive Staging.EXAMINER 3-1 1.docx
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/resource-network-linguistic-diversity/attachments/20180615/a014bd14/attachment.docx>