Environmental Change and Sustainability of Indigenous Languages in Northern Alaska (original) (raw)
Relatively few people under the age of 60 are fluent speakers of the various Indigenous languages of Alaska. Concurrently, climate change is severely impacting Alaska and its residents, where environments are changing far more rapidly than the majority of the planet. These factors complicate the land-language nexus and may have implications for the sustainability of Indigenous languages in Alaska and other parts of the Arctic. In this collaborative, community-centered project, we spoke with Iñupiaq and Yupik language speakers to learn how rapid environmental change affects heritage language discourse practices and how generational gaps in levels of heritage language fluency affect safety and efficacy of customary and traditional land use activities. The results show how local community choices and attitudes are reflecting and constructing dynamic ecologies of language, culture, and environment. Iñupiaq and Yupik languages provide important forms of socio-cultural resilience because they embed the past, yet are inherently dynamic. Community-driven social practices that promote increased local heritage language use can lead to new, creative language domains, new expressions of Indigenous culture, and new Indigenous stances toward a changing environment. RÉSUMÉ. Relativement peu de personnes de moins de 60 ans parlent les diverses langues autochtones de l'Alaska couramment. En même temps, le changement climatique a de fortes incidences sur l'Alaska et ses habitants, où l'environnement change beaucoup plus vite que dans la majorité de la planète. Ces facteurs compliquent le lien entre la terre et la langue, sans compter qu'ils peuvent avoir des répercussions sur la durabilité des langues autochtones en Alaska et dans d'autres régions de l'Arctique. Dans le cadre de ce projet collaboratif axé sur la communauté, nous nous sommes entretenus avec des locuteurs parlant les langues des Iñupiaq et des Yupik afin d'apprendre comment les changements environnementaux rapides influencent les pratiques linguistiques patrimoniales et comment les écarts générationnels en ce qui a trait aux degrés de facilité verbale des langues du patrimoine influent sur la sécurité et l'efficacité des activités habituelles et traditionnelles liées à l'utilisation de la terre. Les résultats de l'étude illustrent comment les choix et les attitudes des gens de la région sont le reflet d'écologies dynamiques en matière de langue, de culture et d'environnement, et comment ils parviennent à former ces écologies. Les langues des Iñupiaq et des Yupik fournissent d'importantes formes de résilience socioculturelle parce qu'elles incorporent le passé tout en étant intrinsèquement dynamiques. Les pratiques sociales communautaires favorisant une utilisation accrue des langues du patrimoine local peuvent finir par engendrer de nouveaux domaines linguistiques créatifs, de nouvelles expressions de la culture autochtone et de nouvelles positions autochtones à l'égard de l'environnement changeant.
Related papers
Language Variation in the Integration of Ecology of Indigenous Peoples with their Environment
The 1st International Conference on Science, Health, Economics, Education and Technology , 2019
Human ecology always involves the relationship between humans as a community and its environment. Humans grow and develop in an environment with continuous interaction between the two. However, this interaction can be built with two sides, namely going hand in hand in integration or even conflicting. It is the man who is in control to determine which side will be displayed. Among these integrations can be built through the language system. In linguistics, there is a sub-field of sociolinguistics which studies the use of language in society. This research will examine language variations in the ecology of indigenous peoples and their environment. There are two variations of language that become aspects of research, namely proverbial language and legal language. Respondents in this study were students of the General Competency Education Program, Bogor Agricultural Institute (PPKU IPB) with predetermined criteria. The research method was conducted by giving a questionnaire accompanied by an open interview of PPKU IPB students as a representation of indigenous peoples. In-depth interviews were conducted to examine the language element as a means of control for indigenous peoples. Interview data were analyzed using human ecology and sociolinguistics approaches. The results of the study can show the choice of proverbial or legal language variations that are dominant in the ecological integration of indigenous peoples with their environment.
Anthropologica, 2017
In order to answer the critical question of “how (and whether) communities can sustain continued use of their languages in the future,” this article addresses the subject of linguistic “sustainability” by comparing linguistic situations in two geographically and politically divided Yupik communities with dissimilar degrees of language maintenance: the predominantly Russian-speaking village of Novoe Chaplino in the Russian Far East and the still bilingual (English-Yupik) village of Gambell on St. Lawrence Island in the United States. Addressing the question of sustainability from “within” – that is, looking at what “sustainability” looks like and how it works on the ground – the article discusses the place of language ideologies in this process, advocating for a move away from purists' conceptualisation of language to more experimental practices and “bilingual games.”
2009
In this comparative case study, language shift and language maintenance are examined among Shoshoni speakers of the Shoshone-Bannock tribes in south eastern Idaho, and North Sámi speakers of Norway. In examining language shift, the following research questions are addressed: what are the mechanisms of language shift according to the members of these speech communities? What are the commonalities of language ideologies and language barriers promoting language shift? To approach the research questions, a theoretical framework is applied where significant concepts of language shift and maintenance are examined: (1) Fishman’s Reversing Language Shift, (2) macro mechanisms such as globalization, Americanization, Norwegianization and economic mobility, (3) micro mechanisms that include concepts such as diglossia and social capital, (4) language ideologies, and lastly (5) language policy and planning theory. A research design using a comparative approach in the form of a multiple-case stud...
Dynamics of Indigenous Language in Environmental Communication
Lagos Papers in English Studies, 2007
The seriousness of environmental issue has been brought to the fore, not only because of its significance to human sustainability but also due to its degeneration to communal conflicts, as well as emergence of miscreants and hoodlums who find expression of their destructive tendencies in environmental problems. This paper calls for a reappraisal of method of communicating environmental messages in particular reference to the language of communication. It begins with identification of environmental problems, the goal that environmental communication is meant to achieve and the inappropriateness of the English language packaged messages to achieving the goals. It stresses the significance of indigenous language use in communicating environmental massages and rounds off with examples of indigenous language communication.
The proposition 'When a language dies, a culture dies' gives a reason for preserving endangered languages, but raises valid questions in light of recent work on multilingual communities and on the conservatism of some aspects of language use in situations of language shift. It is claimed that these objections are met if the proposition is revised to say that interrupted transmission of an integrated lexical and grammatical heritage spells the direct end of some cultural traditions, and the unraveling, restructuring, and reevaluation of others. In support of this, it is argued that in situations of language shift, ancestral and replacing languages are not equivalent vehicles for cultural maintenance or expression. An extended empirical case is made on the basis of Central Alaskan Yupik Eskimo demonstrative use.
Landscape in Language, ed. by D.M. Mark, A.G. Turk, N. Burenhult and D. Stea, 225-37, 2011
This paper further explores the non-universality of landscape terms by focusing on one particular landscape, the Yukon Intermontane Plateau of western Alaska. This region serves as the boundary between two great language families of North America, Athabaskan and Eskimo, and thus offers a unique laboratory in which to examine the extent to which cultural factors in two genetically unrelated languages influence the categorization of a single, fixed landscape. Drawing on published lexical sources, unpublished place name documentation, and firsthand interviews with Native speakers, the results presented here demonstrate that, while Athabaskan and Eskimo speakers may occupy the same landscape, their respective languages conceptualize that landscape in different ways.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.