OJIBWE LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION, MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGY, AND FAMILY LANGUAGE LEARNING

Mary Hermes, University of Minnesota Kendall A. King, University of Minnesota Although Indigenous language loss and revitalization are not new topics of academic work nor new areas of community activism (e.g., King, 2001; Grenoble & Whaley, 2006), increased attention has been paid in recent years to the ways that new technology can support efforts to teach and renew endangered languages such as Ojibwe. However, much of the work with Indigenous languages and technology thus far has been aimed at adults rather than children or families (e.g., Coronel-Molina, 2005). Addressing this gap, the current project examined how urban Ojibwe participants utilized computer-based language learning technology with their families at home. Specifically, we investigated how a particular multimedia tool might jumpstart communication in the Ojibwe language at home. During the two-month study, families were regularly video-taped using the software and participated in weekly audio-video recorded interviews regarding their language use and learning. Presented here is a fine-grained, qualitative analysis of two families’ language and technology use. Findings suggest that technology-based language learning was incorporated into existing family dynamics and was helpful in providing a starting point for learning and language use within established extended networks.

[1]  Gary F. Simons,et al.  The world’s languages in crisis , 2013 .

[2]  Norbert Francis,et al.  Documentation and Language Learning: Separate Agendas or Complementary Tasks? , 2009 .

[3]  Mark Newbrook Endangered languages: current issues and future prospects , 1998 .

[4]  K. King,et al.  Family language policy and bilingual parenting , 2013, Language Teaching.

[5]  Joshua A. Fishman,et al.  Reversing Language Shift: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations of Assistance to Threatened Languages. Multilingual Matters Series: 76. , 1991 .

[6]  Marguerite MacKenzie,et al.  Applied Computer Technology in Cree and Naskapi Language Programs. , 2002 .

[7]  Kendall A. King,et al.  Language Revitalization Processes and Prospects: Quichua in the Ecuadorian Andes , 2001 .

[8]  Lenore A. Grenoble,et al.  Saving Languages: An Introduction to Language Revitalization , 2005 .

[9]  Katharine B. Nielson SELF-STUDY WITH LANGUAGE LEARNING SOFTWARE IN THE WORKPLACE: WHAT HAPPENS? , 2011 .

[10]  Tracey McHenry,et al.  Words as Big as the Screen: Native American Languages and the Internet. , 2002 .

[11]  Kendall A. King,et al.  Family Language Policy , 2008, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[12]  Kendall A. King,et al.  Language Revitalisation in the Andes: Can the Schools Reverse Language Shift? , 1996 .

[13]  Paul V. Kroskrity,et al.  On Using Multimedia in Language Renewal: Observations from Making the CD-ROM Taitaduhaan , 2001 .

[14]  N. Hornberger Indigenous literacies in the Americas , 1997 .

[15]  A. Rosenfeld,et al.  The Over-Scheduled Child: Avoiding the Hyper-Parenting Trap , 2001 .

[16]  Mary R Hermes,et al.  Designing Indigenous language revitalization , 2012 .

[17]  Joshua A. Fishman,et al.  Can Threatened Languages Be Saved? Reversing Language Shift, Revisited: A 21st Century Perspective. Multilingual Matters 116. , 2001 .

[18]  Margot Kinberg,et al.  Can schools save indigenous languages: policy and practice on four continents , 2010 .

[19]  Nancy H. Hornberger,et al.  Indigenous Literacies in the Americas: Language Planning from the Bottom up. Contributions to the Sociology of Language, 75. , 1997 .

[20]  Kendall A. King,et al.  Sustaining Linguistic Diversity: Endangered and Minority Languages and Language Varieties , 2008 .

[21]  Guadalupe Valdés Heritage Language Students: Profiles and Possibilities , 2014 .

[22]  P. Eisenlohr Language Revitalization and New TECHNOLOGIES: Cultures of Electronic Mediation and the Refiguring of Communities , 2004 .

[23]  Anna De Fina,et al.  Identity in Narrative: A study of immigrant discourse , 2003 .