Language Documentation among the Unangan (Aleut) Anna Berge Alaska Native Language Center University of Alaska Fairbanks

Context The Unangan (Aleut) territory: – The Aleutian Chain As a result of the Russian colonial period (18 th -19 th centuries) – The Commander Islands (off coast of Kamchatka) – The Pribilof Islands (off coast of Alaska) Population: – Between 16 and 20,000 before the arrival of the Russians – Evidence of population crash before arrival of Russians, and of post-contact crash as well – About 3,000 by the end of the 18 th – Stable at about 3,000 today

Alaska

The High Cliffs, St. George (Pribilofs)

The Village of St. Paul (Pribilofs)

Historical Background (Pre)-history: – Archaeological evidence for a very long and stable residence on the islands – Linguistic evidence of genetic relationship with Eskimo languages – Evidence from various sources for complex relationship with Eskimo, neighboring Pacific Northwest Coast cultures, and other (mystery) groups – Society was stratified, maritime, and engaged in war History: – Under Russian control (1750s-1869): changes in political structure, social structure, economy, and religion; some language contact effects Strong identification with Russian Orthodox Church; literacy (1820s-présent) – Under American control (1869-now) – Forced relocation during WWII; lasting effects on social, political, and economic structures, education, and language use

Some Aspects of Unangax ̂ Culture All photos downloaded from web

Unangam Tunuu (Aleut) Only member of the Aleut branch of the Eskimo-Aleut language family Dialects – Originally a chain of dialects, including those spoken in the far West (e.g. Attu), on the Rat Islands, on Atka, and in the East – Today: Most speakers are on Atka, the Pribilof Islands, and in Anchorage Attuan is effectively obsolete Eastern, Medniy and Bering (Commander Islands) are almost obsolete Severely endangered today – Fewer than 100 speakers, at all levels of fluency – Older speakers: (Atka = youngest speakers are in their 50’s in Atka; in their 70’s and older elsewhere)

State of Language Documentation What has been done: Traditional and religious texts, excellent grammar and dictionary, many original sound recordings, some language learning materials, some web-based materials – What needs to be done: More of everything…go for breadth as well as depth – conversation, explanations, figurative language use, gender-based language studies, synchronic language change, etc.

State of Language Documentation Access: – Raw data and descriptive materials (published and unpublished) housed in Alaska Native Language Archive and elsewhere – Materials are being digitized and made available via web ( Accessibility: – Most are inaccessible to community members without extensive training » Published materials are often for academic audience, and school materials are often not useful » Raw data is difficult to interpret

Issues in doing Language Documentation Mismatch between what community wants and what linguist can offer Community: – Language revitalization; language learning materials; language speakers; community-driven research Linguists: – Documentation; description; linguistic expertise and consulting; training in language work (e.g. D&D, transcription and translation, recording, preservation…); access to products of linguistic research

Issues continued: Community Politics and Sensitivities Generational differences – Elders: may be lonely, have different interests, needs, working dynamics, expectations, and levels of fluency – Middle: point of contact for linguists; protective of elders, activists, afraid of language loss, insecure – Young: struggle with identify, conflicting pressures of tradition/modernism, unclear buy-in to value of language and language work There is often a mismatch between the generations in terms of expectations of linguist’s role and relationship with community

Issues continued: Community Politics and Sensitivities Perceptions of Outsiders – Long-term effects of previous relationship(s) with outsiders – Long-term effects of previous research(ers) (e.g. publishing unvetted results, taking without giving) – Changing views of relationships and responsibilities between community members and representatives of various types of organizations/institutions (e.g. products, disclosure/IRB, control) – Changing needs of communities and researchers (e.g. revitalization vs. documentation, what constitutes documentation)

Issues continued: Community Politics and Sensitivities Interfamily/Intertribal politics—tensions because of – who controls choice of standard/correct language form – who has acknowledged linguistic authority (among speakers) – who controls access to language (to speakers, to funds, to materials, to events) – who works/is allowed to work with linguists, revitalization programs, etc. – who is committed and who isn’t (results of surveys) – pressures to perform/to be perfect/to maintain tradition

Issues contined: Community Politics and Sensitivities Language Sensitivities – importance of regional/village/family language variety – sensitivity to language change, fear of language shift, importance of tradition – role of language, and purpose of language work – changing expectations of methods of fieldwork, products of fieldwork, discourse between community and fieldworkers and greater scientific community in general

Issues continued: Effects of Linguistic Work Long-term effects of Linguistic Work – Effects on community: choice of language variety, tolerance for language change, perception of role of language in community – Effects on individuals: what does training in documentation provide individual? How does community respond to trained individual? – Effects for future documentation work: image of fieldworker, level and type of contribution

Current Partnership Model Documentation is a partnership between: – Communities – commitment, access to speakers, understanding, responsibility – Linguists – adequate documentation, accessibility to materials, training, responsiveness to community needs, participation – Pedagogues – teacher training, second language acquisition training, materials development, integration into curriculum – Archivists/Librarians – preservation and access – Large organizations/institutions – Funding agencies

Where does the individual fit in? ?

It is still the case that most fieldwork is done by individuals – You are just going to be held accountable to more groups Ethical approaches to fieldwork in the Aleutians as an individual – Be honest: find a way to do what you like, not what someone else imposes on you – Be creative: find a way to do what you like that also satisfies someone else’s needs – Be flexible: find different ways to do what you like – Be open: discuss issues; explain work; give results back to community; communicate, negotiate – Don’t isolate yourself

Qaĝaalakux ̂ (Pribilofs)