A World of Variety: A Devil's Bargain

Posted Tue, January 26, 2010 - 9:22 PM
language, religion

I'm starting to get back into my language series, doing some more (time-consuming) online research to find traces of linguistic diversity. And I feel the need to vent for a minute.

One of the most helpful resources has been the Ethnologue. It's perhaps the most complete assessment of the world-language situation available anywhere. Another useful resource has been Global Recordings. But if you take even a minimal amount of time on either site, you'll find some disturbing similarities.

In exchange for depth in information, well, let's just anticipate the theme and call it a devil's bargain.

The Ethnologue is a long-running project started by SIL International - originally called the Summer Linguistics Institute.

For which they should be commended. Nevertheless, it smacks of "all your primitive lifestyles and quaint customs are valuable, but we know better. We know how things really are." And if you're really interested in languages only, why make an issue of the fact you're "faith-based"? Perhaps it's a defensive statement.

How about this mission statement instead, which took less than two minutes to write? Anyone?

Global Recordings is more direct:

Because as we all know... it's just a story, take it or leave it, and how could there be any more harm in telling it (usually to the "unenlightened") than the stories of the Trojan War, Hansel and Gretel, or George Washington and the cherry tree?

Am I the only person in the world who finds it ironic that the very organizations that are apparently most interested in using a language, and thus indirectly helping my efforts, are motivated by a force that has historically supported the destruction of its speakers' cultural identities?

Why are native language communities, run by native speakers, for native speakers, not much more visible, much more active on the web? Granted, saving a dying language is hard - the most important focus is "on the ground": recruiting native speakers at a young age, as well as imparting to them the stories, the myths, the legends, an understanding and a sense of responsibility about being a member of a threatened culture. Although that's the first priority, why do they allow organizations that are ultimately, if not explicitly, destructive of their unique identities to speak for their language, dictate the terms of discussion, and in my particular case, dominate Google search results?

That said, there are some sites like native-languages.org and firstvoices.com that offer a lot of useful links and information. Nevertheless, many sites you'll find on the web tend to suffer from an apparent lack of ownership. Many seem more like a simple collection of links than a resource managed by people who care about both their language and culture, and about presenting it in an engaging way. Some languages, Hawai‘ian for example, have enough exposure for a thriving language community and good online presence. But many don't.

Why can't I do a Google search and find links to "learn-dakota.net", "yakutscentral.com", "bantuheritage.com", "aztecdescendants.org", or, "walbiri.org.au"?

Ultimately, it's with mixed feelings that I view much of the material that's out there now. It's better than nothing, yet I have to recognize that there's often a taint. I would much prefer to link to the "Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Language Preservation Site", should such a thing ever become reality.