On recognizing persistence in the Indigenous language ideologies of multilingualism in two Native American Communities

Abstract

Based on original and long-term research in two ideologically divergent Native American linguistic communities, I want to demonstrate the surprising persistence of Indigenous language ideologies associated with multilingualism and how differences in these ideologies have manifested in divergent patterns of language shift and, more recently, in the nature and scope of language revitalization efforts. The Village of Tewa (NE Arizona) still partially retains a multilingual adaptation in all generations except the youth and young adults (Kroskrity, 1993, 2014). The Western Mono (Central California) of such towns as North Fork and Auberry were traditionally multilingual with neighboring languages of the Yokuts and Southern Sierra Miwok groups (Kroskrity 2009). Though both groups were historically multilingual, the practice of multilingualism was differentially influenced by distinctive language ideologies such as those regarding purism/syncretism and the expressive/utilitarian functions of language. I will demonstrate that divergent indigenous ideological complexes associated with multilingualism have shaped distinctive patterns of language shiftda process significantly more totalizing among the Western Mono. In addition to language shift, these indigenous ideological complexes also appear to significantly influence such language revitalization practices as the private curation vs. publication of language renewal materials (Debenport, 2015). I facilitate this contrast and highlight patterns of persistence by developing the notion of language ideological assemblage.

Learning language regimes: Children's representations of minority language education

“…For example, regimes influenced by monolingual ideology can be found across social scales, from nation‐state assimilation policies to ethnic preservation movements (Cameron, ). Complex and sometimes contradictory arrays of ideologies are present in minoritized language communities (Messing, ), termed “language ideological assemblages” by Kroskrity ().…”

One Village, Two Sign Languages: Qualia, Intergenerational Relationships and the Language Ideological Assemblage in Adamorobe, Ghana

“…“Discourse about language frequently coincides with discourse about other practices,” remarked Meek (, 29) in her account of language shift in a Northern Athapascan community in Canada. To frame this entanglement of language‐related and other discourses in a holistic way, I am inspired by Hill’s () and Kroskrity’s () approaches to language ideologies and generations. In her seminal account on language ideology and discourses about respect in Mexico, Hill () shows how language ideology is central to nostalgic discourses about youth having more respect in the past.…”

“…Similarly, Kroskrity () explores how language ideologies are embedded in a larger aggregation of ideologies, focusing on the Western Mono in New Mexico, a community practicing extensive borrowing from other languages (syncretism), and the village of Tewa, a community valuing multilingualism yet resisting language mixing and borrowing into their language (purism). Kroskrity shows how different language ideologies connected to multilingualism are associated with divergent patterns of language shift in these communities.…”

“…Deaf perspectives on AdaSL are embedded in a “language ideological assemblage” (Kroskrity ), i.e., clusters of language ideologies and other ideologies that impact on language use, including but not limited to qualic evaluations of lived/sensuous experiences. Based on fieldwork stints in Adamorobe spread over a period of 10 years, I analyze how language ideologies are connected to discourses on formal education, future prospects, adulthood, respect and reciprocity, linguistic repertoires and language practices of youths and elders; all in the context of shifts in intergenerational relationships.…”

“…Research in linguistic anthropology, sociolinguistics and applied linguistics that looks at linguistic differences across generations typically focuses on language shift, intergenerational language transmission, language endangerment and language revitalisation (Henne‐Ochoa and Bauman ; Kroskrity ; Lee ; Meek ; Suslak ; Wyman ). In the context of Adamorobe, the continued existence of AdaSL is uncertain because the population of primary users (i.e., deaf people) is aging: deaf people are no longer born in Adamorobe on such a frequent basis.…”