Current Trends in Language Documentation and the Hans Rausing Endangered Languages Project Lenore A. Grenoble Dartmouth College Lenore A. Grenoble Linguistics & Cognitive Science, Dartmouth College & Peter K. Austin ELAP, Department of Linguistics SOAS

Outline  What is language documentation?  Why has documentation emerged now?  The Hans Rausing Endangered Languages Project  Current and future concerns

What is language documentation?  “a comprehensive record of the linguistic practices characteristic of a given speech community” (Himmelman 1998:166)

Documentation versus Description  Description: aims at a record of the language {including abstract elements, rules, etc.}  Documentation: aims at records of the linguistic practices and traditions of a speech community

Documentation versus Description  language documentation: systematic recording, transcription, translation and analysis of the broadest possible variety of spoken (and written) language samples collected within their appropriate social and cultural context  language description: grammar, dictionary, text collection, typically written for linguists

Documentation versus Description  documentation is discourse-centered primary goal => direct representation of naturally occurring discourse  description and analysis are contingent by- products

The documentation record  the core of a documentation is a corpus of audio and/or video materials with time-aligned transcription, multi-tier annotation, translation into a language of wider communication, and relevant metadata on context and use of the materials  the corpus will ideally be large, cover a diverse range of genres and contexts, be expandable, opportunistic, portable, transparent, ethical and preservable  as a result documentation is increasingly done by teams rather than ‘lone wolf linguists’  grammatical analysis and description are tertiary-level activities contingent on and emergent from the documentation corpus

Uses of documentation  documentation of a language can provide an empirical basis for:  linguistic research - phonology, grammar, discourse, sociolinguistics, typology, historical reconstruction  folklore - oral literature and folklore  poetics - metrical and music aspect of oral literature  anthropology - cultural aspects, kinship, interaction styles, ritual  oral history, and  education - applications in teaching  language revitalization

Users of documentation  collection, analysis and presentation of data  should be useful not only for linguistics but also for research into the socio-cultural life of the community  should be analyzed and processed so it can be understood by researchers of other disciplines and does not require any prior knowledge of the language in question  should be usable by members of the speaker community  should respect intellectual property rights, moral rights, individual and cultural sensitivities about access and use

Why now?  advances in technology  increased focus on data  new attention to linguistic diversity  archiving concerns  other stakeholders

Why now?  Technology: developments in ICT for linguistic data recording, digital capture and manipulation, representation and maintenance

Why now?  Data: increased focus on data and replicability of descriptive analyses, e.g. grammars with linked corpus

Why now?  Linguistic Diversity  renewed focus on cross-linguistic typology  increasing concern for endangerment of languages and language practices  Concerns for archiving and data preservation

Why now?  Stakeholders: growing awareness that linguistics has crucial stakeholders well beyond the academic community; in endangered language communities themselves, and beyond

Stages in documentation project  Project conceptualization and design  Establishment of field site, including negotiation of permissions  Funding application  Data collection and processing  Creation of outputs  Evaluation and reporting

Stages in documentation data process  Recording (media, text, metadata)  Capture (moving to digital domain)  Analysis (transcription, translation, annotation, notation of metadata)  Archiving (creating archival objects, assigning access and usage rights)  Mobilization (publication, distribution)

Skills for language documentation  Project conception and design - familiarity with documentation theory, data structuring, socio-cultural issues  Grant application writing  Data recording - ICT skills, fieldmethods skills  Annotation - transcription, linguistic analysis (phonology, morphology, syntax), use of tools (Transcriber, Shoebox/Toolbox, ELAN, IMDI)  Archiving - data representation, XML, relational databases

Responses:  Endangered Language Fund (US)  Foundation for Endangered Languages (UK)  DEL: Documenting Endangered Languages (NSF/NEH/Smithsonian)  DoBeS: Dokumentation Bedrohter Sprachen  E-MELD project of LinguistList  DELAMAN archives network  Hans Rausing Endangered Languages Project

Hans Rausing Endangered Languages Project  The Documentation Programme (ELDP) provides research grants  The Academic Programme (ELAP) runs postgraduate programs in Field Linguistics & Language Documentation and Description  The Archive Programme (ELAR) archives & disseminates language documentation

HRELP  Hans Rausing Endangered Languages Project (HRELP) funded by Lisbet Rausing Charitable Fund, based at SOAS, University of London, distributes £1million per year in 5 types of grants  50 teams of researchers around the world documenting languages and cultures  Digital archive at SOAS  Academic program for training MA, PhD, post-doctoral researchers  Publishing books, newsletter, CD-ROMs, website

HRELP projects

Types of grants  Individual Postdoctoral Fellowship  Major Documentation Project  Individual Graduate Studentship  Pilot Project Grant  Field Trip Grant

Types of grants  Individual Postdoctoral Fellowship: 2 years, fieldwork, salary (£50, ,000)  Major Documentation Project: 6 months-2 years, large projects (£40, ,000)  Individual Graduate Studentship: up to 2 years, fieldwork, stipend (£15,000)  Pilot Project Grant: pilot projects (£6000)  Field Trip Grant: for fieldwork, 6-12 months (£10,000)

The Model  Team approach (versus the “lone wolf” linguist)  Tech support  Community involvement, community-driven agendas  Archiving

Practical issues  How does one formulate a team?  (Potential) conflicts: community-driven documentation versus linguist-driven documentation  Intellectual property rights, archiving and access

Theoretical issues  documentation = a “comprehensive record” of a language (Himmelman)  what is “comprehensive”?  how much is enough?  what is “quality” documentation  “best practices” versus “pretty good practices”  documentation versus description  where are the boundaries?

the responsibility of the linguist  in training community members?  in developing materials for community use?

The end