SV: Sign language 'fieldwork'

[Sonja Erlenkamp]

Interesting question!

I have always assumed that many of us do this kind of fieldwork.

I have been "raised" in an academic environement with typologists where the professor and others were working on spoken languages in polynesia and austronesia, so fieldwork was a given (and they always gave med willingly the latest stories from their ecperience ;-) and thus doing fieldwork always has been a natural way to collect data for me.

And as far as I can, many of my colleagues in Norway also do fieldwork in their research.



All the best



Sonja

________________________________

Fra: linguists interested in signed languages [SLLING-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU] på vegne av Adam Schembri [A.Schembri at LATROBE.EDU.AU]
Sendt: 2. februar 2012 06:03
To: SLLING-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU
Emne: Sign language 'fieldwork'

Hello SLLING-L and SLLS list members,

Recently, a language documentation colleague asked me why there were so few sign language researchers conducting 'fieldwork'. She was reasonably well-informed about the field, and could name a few sign language linguists who were collecting data from micro-community/ 'village' sign language communities (e.g., in Bali), or from macro-community sign language communities in developing countries (e.g., Uganda), and identified them as doing sign language 'fieldwork'.

I could see her point, but I thought this was an interesting perspective, because (without wanting to diminish the challenges of those who work on sign languages in places like Bali and Uganda), I have always considered myself an 'urban fieldworker' working on the sign language varieties cities in Australia and the UK. I read the definition below, and I feel that the Auslan and BSL corpus projects I have worked on do (more or less) fit the bill:

Bowern (2008:7) “…what is ‘fieldwork’? My definition is rather broad. It involves the collection of accurate data in an ethical manner. It involves producing a result which both the community and the linguist approve of. That is, the ‘community’ (the people who are affected by your being there collecting data) should know why you’re there, what you’re doing, and they should be comfortable with the methodology and the outcome. You should also be satisfied with the arrangements. The third component involves the linguist interacting with a community of speakers at some level. That is, fieldwork involves doing research in a place where the language is spoken, not finding a speaker at your university and eliciting data from them".

What do others think? Are many more of us 'fieldworkers' in Bowern's sense than our colleagues realise?

Cheers,
Adam


--
Assoc. Prof. Adam Schembri, PhD
Director | National Institute for Deaf Studies and Sign Language
La Trobe University | Melbourne (Bundoora) | Victoria |  3086 |  Australia
Tel: +61 3 9479 2887 | Fax: +61 3 9479 3074 |http://www.adamschembri.net/webpage/Welcome.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/slling-l/attachments/20120202/2b7f6896/attachment.htm>