A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
Mata, Leah
Goucher College
Advisors
Michael Shepard, Ph.D.
Sue Eleuterio, M.A.
Nakia Zavalla, Chumash Language Credential Teacher
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
Abstract
A project to create and develop culturally appropriate frameworks that will continually
support the revitalization and preservation of indigenous languages that are endangered or have
no living speakers. This project takes a decolonized approach in assisting communities to
develop their own tribal protocols that work within their cultural context. The project
methodology and its findings are applicable for Native American communities developing
archival and cultural heritage management systems.
Keywords: Chumash, Language Archives, Language Revitalization, California Indian
Languages, Community Engagement, Issues of Authority.
2
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
3
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
The project was developed to meet the needs of the yak tityu tityu (YTT) Northern
Chumash communities’ language revitalizations goals. Members of YTT have expressed
frustration that after having access to legacy documentation of their language for the past 10
years, they have not created speakers, curriculum or an archival system that will organize
material and give greater language documentation access to tribal members. The tribal language
committee wants a system that allows them to house all of the tribes’ scattered linguistic
documentation into a central tool that the tribal community can easily utilize. Access controls
based on cultural protocols will allow the tribal language committee to create curriculum, a
dictionary and share cultural knowledge in a culturally appropriate manner. The project provides
the tribe with an implementation plan and framework to set up a culturally appropriate working
archival database, which will include and follow cultural tribal protocols. In this paper, I describe
how traditional protocols make it possible to address issues of authority and head off any
potential conflicts among the tribal community as the archival system is developed. This project
helps facilitate development and application of these protocols with the tribe and language
community. These protocols define a range of access levels for digital language/ heritage objects
and collections, and make it possible to share based on what the tribe decides what is sharable
and what is not.
Introduction
This is a reflective paper applying the theory of Cultural Sustainability to a community
based language revitalization project, through the lens of a decolonized application to language
archival systems (Hufford 1994). Often tribal communities lack effective control of their
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
4
intellectual property and find that archival management systems do not meet their cultural and
educational needs. This is particularly true for digital environments such as archives, which are
developed primarily for academic institutions. My capstone project centers on community
engagement. I conducted focus group about exerting tribal sovereignty around intellectual
property rights; especially in regards to language revitalization and its relationship to an archival
system. The project aims to address the barriers that often create division in language
revitalization projects; with particular focus on tribal communities with few or no native
speakers left. I will illustrate the process and methods used to create what I call a decolonized
approach to language revitalization and digital archival management.
Methodology
The most effective method applied in the project was taking an indigenous perspective
and placing value on indigenous knowledge systems. There is a need for community-based
participatory research in indigenous communities, and using a participatory approach through a
community engagement project is in line with indigenous methodologies (Bryson and Carroll
2007). Additionally when working in indigenous communities, as Kovach points out in her text,
Indigenous Methodologies, there often exists a hierarchy of knowledge systems between
academia and indigenous knowledge systems (Kovach 2010). Ultimately, we need to re-frame
those systems for our communities, in a way that makes them equal and places value on existing
indigenous knowledge systems. I support Kovach’s statement that the theoretical positioning
pits one against the other, with the western academia in a position of privilege and power, and
traditional knowledge of lesser value. To eliminate this hierarchal approach in my research, I
incorporated the idea of equal-ness in my research, between myself and my research partners. In
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
5
that I am the facilitator, but they are the ones with the knowledge and we are partners in
resolving issues that affect our communities. To help ensure this equal exchange, my project
operates under the following beliefs:
•
That all ideas are equal
•
I alone do not take full credit, that I give credit to the community
•
I provide the research information and results to the community
•
I focus on the need for change not just the perceived deficits of the community
•
I follow tribal protocols or “ethics”.
In addition to the focus group meetings, my methodology work for this project consists of
building upon my prior years of work, which includes years of what I call “pre work”, which
consists of loose and informal discussions with the language community. This has been
accomplished with substantial casual conversations, and putting the idea out into the community
and positioning myself as someone who is exploring the idea of an archive system for the tribe. I
believe it was my pre work dedication in the community that positioned me as someone who is
spear-heading this idea and looking for collaborative input, thus allowing the tribal community to
trust my leadership in in this project.
The community engagement method applied in this project, is centered on letting the
community make decisions for themselves. First and foremost, before I started the project I
asked the tribal community for “permission”. Even as an “insider” traditional protocol dictates
that I do not have the authority to make decisions about my tribes’ language revitalization, based
solely on my own authority. Traditionally my community believes that language ownership
belongs to the community, and therefore any language decision must include the community in
which it belongs to.
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
6
After the tribal council voted to approve my project, I asked them “who” and “how” from
the community has the authority to make decisions, as well as to clarify the protocol for this
project. The tribal council determined that they would create a “Language Committee” and that
the newly formed language committee would be trusted and authorized to make language
decisions. The tribal council selected committee members based on tribal membership, interest,
and prior work in our language revitalization, as well as identifying skill sets among the tribal
members that would enhance the project. The project outcomes were derived from the language
committee focus group meetings, where participants were guided through the process. Meetings
were held at various locations, and were based on which location was most convenient for the
language committee. Data collection and information gathered during the focus group sessions
were pictures of the notes from a white board (a method the language committee felt was best for
them in terms of easy record keeping and strong visuals). Information gathered at these meeting
was used to create the strategic plan, and measure the overall success of the project.
Literature Review
Margret Kovach: Indigenous Methodologies
The academic research for my capstone was largely influenced by Kovach’s work which I relied
on for my methodologies application. Her work is so validating, to see her talk about oral
history which is so often dismissed in the academic world she goes on to say “I struggled with
the appropriateness of bringing an oral –based knowledge system into an academic world that
has only recently been open to it” (Kovach 2009:4). I know for myself that interviewing (getting
that oral knowledge) in my community is the key to doing good qualitative research. Yet at the
same time is can be intimidating because so much of what we have is taken out of context,
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
7
appropriated, or violated. I think of myself as a “translator” between the two worlds, and my
work has to be as ethical as possible to build that trust. For example, my current work gives me
validity in the community, and I am known for following traditional protocols. I also have to be
careful when using examples of other tribe’s experiences because I don’t want to seem like I am
gossiping about another tribe’s business. I think that inserting my voice is an important part of
my style, as it helps to position myself as an insider. If my goal is sustaining California Indian
cultures, I can only be successful if I am ethical, transparent, and passionate about the work.
Kovach’s point “that cultural longevity depends on the ability to sustain cultural
knowledge” (12) resonated with me because it applies to my passion for language preservation/
revitalization and traditional arts. For traditional arts, preserving, protecting and advocating for
traditional knowledge systems helps provide us with the materials need to create our baskets,
regalia etc. For language, I see using her work as helping our emerging language program
decolonize its efforts by giving tribal communities the tools to empower themselves to take over
their language programs, rather than letting only the linguist make decisions about their language
community. Too often, in tribal communities we devalue our own knowledge systems because
of what the academic world tells about our communities. Like Kovach points out in chapter 4,
there is almost this hierarchy of knowledge systems, and we need to reframe that for our
communities, in a way that makes them equal. I also incorporate the idea of equal-ness in my
research, in that I am a facilitator, but my communities are the ones with the knowledge and we
are partners in resolving issues that affect our communities.
Additional readings extraordinarily influential to this project are the works of Walter
Echo-Hawk (2010, 2013) in terms of cultural property rights and tribal sovereignty; which are
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
8
guiding principles when looking at ownership of language and cultural materials. Work by Brian
Haley and Larry Wilcoxon (1997, 2005) played a significant role in terms of acknowledging the
negative impacts of ethnogenesis on the Chumash communities. There were several less-useful
sources but still important as far as validating information I know to be true as a member of the
Northern Chumash Tribe in regards to the history of our territory and language, such as Milliken
and Johnson (2005) and Golla (2011).
I cannot express enough the magnitude by which Dr. Kathryn Klar’s work has influenced
not only this project, but the Northern Chumash community. Her work (Klar 1991) includes,
"Precious Beyond the Power of Money to Buy": John P. Harrington's Fieldwork with Rosario
Cooper, as well as her dissertation and lexicon from the J.P. Harrington materials. Her work will
become an integral part of this language archival project.
Ken Hale and Leanne Hinton’s influential publication (Hale and Hinton 2001) has been
useful in terms of general language revitalization, particularly in regards to California Indian
communities with no living speakers. Their work provides tools and techniques used in this
project to facilitate a dialog within the language community about the issues of language loss and
revitalization.
I found Jane Hill’s work (Hill 2002) validating when talking about the negative impacts
of extractive research. Throughout the project issues of authority were a concern not only by
outsiders doing extractive research, but by the issues of authority within our own communities.
Additionally, her work highlights the impact that historical trauma plays within our community’s
ability to follow traditional protocol, that may be been broken down by the impacts of
colonization. I found research related to issues of authority in language documentation and
revitalization limited, and have considered conducting further research in this area.
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
9
Tribal History of Language Loss and Revitalization and Frustrations
In the Northern Chumash language we call we called ourselves “the people,” Yak tityu
tityu and pointed to the Pacific Ocean as our first home. The belief is that the Chumash were give
the name Chumash because in the Island Chumash dialect the people were identified by other
native groups, as the “shell money bead makers” or “shell people”, which referred to the
manufacturing of shell bead money on the islands. Prior to European contact and the Spanish
Mission system, Chumash bands lived along the coast of California (Milliken and Johnson
2005).
At one time, our territory encompassed 7,000 square miles that spanned from the beaches
of Malibu to Paso Robles, and inland to the western edge of the San Joaquin Valley. Today
linguists have identified eight Chumash language groups within the Chumash traditional
homeland area (Golla 2011).
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
10
Figure 1 Chumash territory, linguistic boundaries and Spanish mission locations (Haley and
Wilcoxon 1997:76).
For this project I focus on the Northern Chumash tribal linguistic territory identified in
the map (see Figure 1) as Obispeno (after the San Luis Obispo Mission), which stretches from
Morro Bay California and down the coast to approximately Santa Maria. Currently the tribe has
approximately 350 enrolled tribal members, with more than half its member residing outside the
homeland area due to lack of affordable housing, gentrification, and earlier Indian policies that
removed many members from their traditional homeland. Having a logistically dispersed
language community is not an uncommon occurrence in California, equally impacting both
federally recognized tribes, state recognized tribe and those “terminated” Rancheria tribal
communities.
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
11
Tribal Historical Background of Language Loss
Researchers believe that in the year 2001, as the second millennium came to a close, at
least 6,912 distinct human languages were spoken worldwide (Harrison 2007). However many
linguists are predicting that by 2101, only about half of these languages will still be spoken
(Krauss 1992). North American Native languages are particularly in danger of extinction, with
over 80% of these languages are no longer being taught to children (Bokamba 2008). The
reasons for language endangerment and loss are complex and this project is not an attempt to
detail those accounts, but rather to focus on the background of language loss in regards to the
Northern Chumash.
This history of language loss for the Chumash is similar to many California indigenous
communities who have felt the negative impacts of colonization. We know at present many
languages in the world that have fallen silent, meaning there are no fluent speakers left in the
language community (Hale and Hinton 2001), unfortunately all the Chumash languages fall in
this category. I think is important for people to understand the diversity of California Indians and
the complexities that such diversity brings. There is not one “Chumash” language, in
Chumashian languages there are eight different languages and within each of those languages
there are different dialects. The Chumash languages are considered by linguists to be a
classificatory isolate, and are considered a language group all of their own (Golla 2011).
Obispeño, or Northern Chumash, is a single language spoken by the village communities around
Mission San Luis Obispo (Golla 2011). The Northern Chumash were impacted early in the
California Mission period, and thus began the phase of language loss for the Northern Chumash
people. From the point of European contact, the gradual loss of the Northern Chumash language
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
12
continued and then ceased to be spoken with any fluency in 1917 when the last fluent speaker for
the Northern Chumash, Rosario Cooper language changed worlds.
Rosario Cooper was known as the last fluent Northern Chumash speaker, and worked
with linguist J.P. Harrington during the years 1912-17, where they spent a total of approximately
six to seven weeks doing intensive fieldwork. Her work with J.P. Harrington is said to be the
largest known documentation of the Northern Chumash language. This documentation is curated
by the Smithsonian and includes wax cylinder recordings of songs sung by Rosario Cooper
(Golla 2011). These legacy recordings in textual and audio formats have been the primary source
for the Northern Chumash language revitalization. However, until recently these archival
language resources were only accessible though academic institutions with limited access for
tribal members; making further research and verification difficult.
Current History of Language Revitalization
Language revitalization in the Northern Chumash community started about 12 years ago
with a few tribal members attending a language revitalization conference on the campus of U.C
Berkeley, in which participants were given access to legacy language documentation, and
provided a linguist. For the Northern Chumash language, the bulk of archived material includes
the work of J.P. Harrington and Rosario Cooper, with less extensive work from Alfred Kroeber,
Clinton Hart Merriam, and Henry Wetherbee Henshaw. Tribal participants of the conference had
access to these archives the first time, and many members spent hours in the microfilm room
reading through the documentation. The linguist assigned to the Northern Chumash during the
conference was Kathryn Klar, whose doctoral work on the Northern Chumash has made her an
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
13
expert in the language. Participants worked with Dr. Klar to gain further understanding and
knowledge of the Northern Chumash language.
After the week-long conference ended, tribal members who wished to continue in the
language revitalization process, realized they had very limited access to the archived language
documentation materials. Limited in that barriers such as, location of the campus, time off work
for research, long term access to Berkeley’s archives for non-students, as well as how to access
and navigate archives were among the many obstacles. In fact the only ongoing access to any
language materials was the work of Dr. Klar, who had graciously made copies of her work for
tribal members to take home. Dr. Klar’s work includes a lexicon and some grammatical analysis,
but she advised tribal members to access the full legacy collection for continued research on the
language, in areas such a prefix/suffix and other linguistic functions of the language.
Over the past 12 years, the language community has worked on language revitalization
despite limited access to archives, lack of funding, and other issues. In particular, lack of an
effective language archive system aligned with tribal values has been a challenge. Their
approach has largely been community based work, with different tribal families participating as
they are able. Additionally, the language community encourages and supports tribal member’s
participation in language revitalization conferences and programs. Recently the tribe’s language
committee started offering a monthly language classes with the help of a volunteer linguist. This
is a very basic level course and lessons are developed by the language committee using the work
of Rosario Copper, J. P. Harrington, and Dr. Klar. This is where the basis for this project
emerged, through the language community’s on going struggles to have a language archive
system that meets the design and cultural needs of the community.
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
14
Identifying the Issues in the Language Community
The focus group meetings with the tribal language committee were conducted to help
identify the issues that create barriers when trying to create speakers while using an archival
system. During the focus groups meetings the language committee discovered that there are
multiple issues. However in order to move the project into more manageable objectives, I
suggested that we prioritize and address the most pressing concerns for the strategic plan. The
issues the language committee felt most pressing was: issues of authority, lack of a culturally
appropriate archival management system, and lack of an organized and tribally sanctioned
orthography.
Issues of Authority in Language Revitalization
I draw reflectively from my own personal experiences thru my language revitalization
work in California and academic theoretical background. I understand how issues of authority
can have devastating results, especially in language revitalization projects (Hill 2002). In fact,
research in this subject area could be a thesis all in its own. However for this project, the intent
is to head off any issues, rather than take a deep look in to the issue of authority. I believe that
for any revitalization project, we must acknowledge there is an issue authority. I believed we
should begin to have a dialog about issues of authority, and how they play a role in
disempowering language revitalization projects. In my language revitalization work with
California Indian communities, I notice reoccurring themes in language projects that have
resulted in derailment of the projects. I am outlining some of these themes in hopes of further
research into issues of authority around language revitalization projects. I would also point out
that (based on my own observations) not all issues of authority in indigenous communities come
from outside privilege or experts, but they can also come from the imbalances in our
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
15
communities as a result of colonization; issues such as historical trauma, a breakdown in
traditional protocol, and views on language ownership (Willow 2010; Gray, Coates, Yellow Bird
and Hetherington 2013; Guerrettaz 2015). When thinking about the capstone project my greatest
concern was not about the ability of my community to execute the project, but rather how to
avoid issues authority. I can’t emphasize enough the importance of applying indigenous
methodologies to the project and following traditional protocols as the project moved forward,
and we moved in the group facilitation process. Outside experts need to allow the communities
make their own decision about leadership, including who is authorized to act on behalf of the
tribe. Tribal communities should have the right to decide what is sharable and what is not, and
outside institutions should not make decisions or speak for tribal communities (Hill 2002;
Guerrettaz 2015).
Additionally, many tribes need to deal with “inside” or internal issues of authority, in
terms of who is authorized to revitalize language? How do we deal with historical trauma, which
has played a role in the breakdown of our traditional protocols and has created an internal
imbalance due to the effects of colonization? From the beginning of this project, these are the
very questions I asked myself and my community, because often in our communities we all
define cultural revitalization differently (Willow 2010). I wanted to make sure that this project
reflected a collective view point and that the tribe had a role in authorizing the project, including
appointing leadership to collectively make decisions, which is one of the tribes traditional values
and protocols (Willow 2010; Gray, Coates, Yellow Bird and Hetherington 2013).
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
16
No Archives to House Language Documentation Materials
Over the past few years many of the tribes’ members who worked on early language
revitalization efforts have expressed frustration over the lack of a centralized and tribally
controlled language archive. Furthermore, locating language resources such as legacy recordings
and/or written interviews is a challenge, especially those archive institutions with limited access.
Ability to conduct further research on the language and/or to verify a quick question is limited by
lack of an archive system. This is particularly true for language communities where there are
no/or only a handful of speakers left. Because often these types of legacy recordings and field
notes of fluent speakers are all the community has to rely on; making these recordings and
documents a tremendous, (and in many cases the only) resources available for language
revitalization and/or protection. The language committee felt that by having accessible archives,
it would foster and enhance efforts for further research and verification of current language
understanding. During the focus groups I asked the language community to define what “useful”
and “ideal” archival system would look like. The groups identified the following ideals for a
language archive system:

Easy to use, with capacity for tribal administration

An operating system that won’t be discontinued or obsolete in a few years, so that
the tribe has continued access

Allows for restricted access based on traditional protocols

Could be used for curriculum development

Allow audio and video clips

Mobile access.
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
17
The ideal qualities of an archive identified by the groups will be the indicators they will
use to measure and evaluate different content management systems. This will allow the language
committee to make a decision on the program application they will use to develop their archives.
Part of my work for this project was to research different applications and present them to the
group. The language committees authorized me to do the research, and trusted in my ability to
thoroughly and accurately present the best options to them.
No Organized Orthography Developed by the Community
Historically the Northern Chumash language was an oral language, and before European
contact it was unwritten. Since that time, no standardized written orthography has been identified.
However, in order to create language learning tools, curriculum, and a written orthography for
such applications as texting, the language committee felt a sanctioned orthography would be a
necessity step for language revitalization. During the group facilitation, one of the language
community’s most pressing issues identified was the lack of a tribally sanctioned orthography.
While members of the tribe are working on language revitalization, many tribal members are
using different orthographies and the method of “coining” new words is inconsistent. A lack of
orthography was an issue, as members started to communicate or create lesson plans for
language class. While the language community was letting the orthography develop organically,
a decision was made to choose a standard orthography so that the language community could
move forward on written communication (texting), curriculum development and archival data
entry. This language sustainability strategy includes the design, development, expansion or
enhancement of an alphabet / writing system that will be sanctioned and used by the tribal
community. The language community was adamant that they did not want a linguist to make this
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
18
decision for them, but rather they wanted to have an active voice in developing their orthography
and let the language community make the decisions they felt best address their needs.
The tribe is well aware that the orthography development can be a long-term process, as
orthographies are revised, or whole new ones created, and as language communities learn more
about their languages, orthography may need to be revisited. The tribe will use practical
considerations, such as the ease with which orthography can be typed, and other key concerns
when looking to adopt a writing system. The language committee will consider how new
technology is rapidly being developed and make sure there is some flexibility around the
orthography to allow for changes that might be need to keep up with new ways of
communicating, for example texting and what symbols are available within that key board
application. The language committee also expressed a concern for elders and older adult learners,
who have spent years learning the language and had become comfortable with the orthography
J.P. Harrington created when documenting the Northern Chumash Language. J.P Harrington
created symbols not seen in the standard International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) or in the North
American Phonetic Alphabet (NAPA). He created unique symbols such as the raise Y a sound
that is distinctively a Northern Chumash sound. Since the bulk of the Northern Chumash
language was documented by J.P. Harrington, when a lexicon was created, the J.P. Harrington
symbols were utilized, Current language learners are largely using Harrington’s system. For now
the language community has made a decision to keep Harington’s system. For the coining for
new words, the language community made the decision will go through a system of standardized
options.
1. Looking to Central Chumash Lexicon (Samala) to see if the word exists and then
translating into the Northern Chumash lexicon.
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
19
2. If no word exists in Central Chumash (Samala) then the tribe will look at other
Central Coast Chumash language, and if the word exists the word will be translated
into the Northern Chumash lexicon.
3. If there is no word found in the Chumash languages the language community will
create new words, using the existing Northern Chumash lexicon.
Other orthography decisions such as grammar will continue to develop organically as the
language community grows in its research and understanding of the language. The language
community felt this decision would give them greater flexibility as the work towards creating a
written language.
Another standard the language committee identified as important was the translation of
words and their meanings. The language committee decided to have all words entered in to the
archival data base, to be entered in their literal translation. The language committee felt by using
literal translations first, the world view of the tribe would be visible. For example our word for
“North Star” translated directly is “the one that is with you at all times” and given the tribes
relationship with the North Star, the direct translation makes sense to the tribe. The language
committee was adamant that as they moved the tribe’s language from an oral language into a
written format, it was imperative to retain as much of the tribe’s world view. They felt by
keeping the translation in their literal meanings would foster world view with new language
learners, as well as play a role in developing conversational use of language.
Identifying and Implementing Solutions: A Strategic Plan for the Language Community
During the group meetings, the community identified solutions and laid out a strategic
plan to address the identified issues (see Figure 2). The strategic plan is an important piece of the
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
20
project and serves as a guide to the ongoing revitalization efforts. Additionally the plan will
mobilize the community to take action, and assist in the development of culturally appropriate
archival management system.
Tribally Sanctioned Orthography
Given that the language committee has decided on an orthography, the committee will
present its recommendations to the tribal council and propose that the tribe moves to adopt the
orthography through tribal legislation. The language community believes that with a tribally
sanctioned orthography, the tribal government will assist in cultivating language skills needed to
meet tribal priorities and support the language revitalizations efforts. This action item is part of
the strategic plan as laid out in Figure 2.
Software Archival Decision
During the course of this project, part of my research was to identify cultural archival
management systems, to which I would provide my research and recommendations to the
language committee. The committee would then make a decision on which system they feel
would best meet the needs of the tribe. The decision making process is what I define as
community engagement, where members of the tribal council directed a committee to oversee a
program and/or project. In this project the tribe’s language committee was the citizen make up,
which includes the members of tribal council and tribal members at large. The projects’
approached works for well for the Northern Chumash community, because the process is similar
to the traditional decision making process the tribe still retains. This approach creates a better
and deeper understanding of the problems, issues, opportunities and options for action (Bryson
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
21
and Carroll 2007). It allows for transparency, a coalition of tribal support, and gives the tribe a
voice in its own decision making processes. Decisions were made based on how well a
management system would meet the needs of the Northern Chumash. The committee also
considered the overall cultural needs of the system, including system growth, cost, and technical
ease. Based on the research of digital archival management systems the language committee
believes that the Mukurtu system will best meet the needs and goals of the tribe. Mukurtu is a
digital heritage management system which works within the framework of an indigenous world
view. The Mukurtu platform allows for communities to become stewardship of their digital
cultural heritage materials, http://mukurtu.org/
Defining Communities Protocols
To describe community protocols related to language documentation access, I facilitated
additional group meetings. Members were asked to attach traditional protocols as well as more
contemporary protocols to sample archival language documentation resources. For example, a
traditional protocol set in place might be a scared site location and place names, the committee
may decide to give the “place name” access to a larger community, but place traditional
restrictions on what those locations mean in terms of how the site was used. A more
contemporary use of protocol may occur when archiving current language documentation
materials, where the tribe might only want access to these materials given to enrolled tribal
members. At this stage of the project members were asked to define what is “sharable” and what
is not “sharable” and to whom is it sharable too, basing their decisions on tribal cultural
knowledge of protocols. In the first example for this exercise we used a song by Rosario Cooper,
from the J.P. Harrington wax cylinders. This song is identified as a women’s song, sung and
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
22
danced by women only (as stated by Rosario). Members of language community (for this
particular song) made the decision to have access only to women. Then the members were asked
to decide, to what community group(s) of women this song will be available to? Given the
issues of cultural appropriation and ethnogenesis, the members wanted to exercise their cultural
property rights and provided access only to women who are enrolled tribal members.
Ethnogenesis is a process of “self-identification” with largely unproven supposition, an issue that
has particularly affected Chumash communities (Haley and Wilcoxon 2005). Ethnogenesis and
cultural appropriation have had a negative effect on the Northern Chumash tribe, and therefore
having restricted access protocols in place helps protect the tribe from further damages of
ethnogenesis. The process to identify protocols and restricted access decisions are made by the
language committee and the committee will follow the process as language and cultural heritage
content are entered in to the archives.
Aside from cultural protocols the language committee will make data entry standards or
protocols for entry of the lexicon and grammar rules. These standards will be developed in
partnership with a linguist. These standards will include original source, original orthography,
new orthography, literal translation, and closest English equivalent.
Project Funding
The language committee is well aware that funding for some of their action items will be
necessary and my recommendation is for the tribe to seek funding to carry on some of the action
items and goals. Funding for data storage and an archival project manager will be essential for
moving the project forward. The project manager should be responsible for data entry
management, content management, overall project goals as identified, and working with the
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
23
language committee to define cultural protocols and identify communities. Staffing should also
include data entry staff, a linguist, and possibly a technical support person. The language
committee will ask the tribe to seek funding for the archival project. Once the archival project is
in progress I recommend the language committee look into using the archival system as a tool in
the development of on-line learning classroom materials. However, ultimately it will be the tribal
community’s decision, if and how they would like to expand on the archival project.
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
Project Strategic Plan
Goal #1 Language Committee Makes a Selection on Archival Management Programs
Objectives
Tasks/
Timeline
Lead Role
Resources
Tribe will decide on
Activities
June 2016
Leah will set
Needed
operating system for
Tribe will
up meeting
On line
archival project
meet and
with different
meeting
review
AMS (Archival
access and
different
Management
computers,
archival
System)
internet.
management
systems
Goal #2 Language Committee Draft an Official Proclamation for the Tribal Council to Vote on
Orthography as Official Tribal
Objectives
Tasks/
Timeline
Lead Role
Resources
To have a Tribally
Activities
July 2016
Needed
sanctioned orthography
Draft a formal
Language
Computer
Proclamation
Committee
for Tribal
Chairs
Council
Goal #3 Find Funding for Project
Objectives
Tasks/
To find and secure funding
Activities
for project
Language
Committee
ask Tribal
nonprofit to
find funding
for project
Goal # 4 Staffing Project
Objectives
To meeting staffing needs
of Project
Tasks/
Identify
Staffing
needs for
project, and
hire staff
Figure 2 Project strategic plan.
Timeline
July 2016 on
going
Lead Role
Tribal non
profit
Timeline
Lead Role
Depending on
Language
funding or
committee
volunteers
and tribal non
profit
Resources
Needed
Grant Writer
Resources
Needed
Funding
24
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
25
Conclusion
In summary I believe this project has the potential to make an impact on other tribal
communities dealing with language revitalization and documentation. This topic is particularly
applicable for those communities who struggle with the discourse between academic archives
that are designed for and by intuitions and that do not meet the cultural, educational, and social
needs of tribal communities. Reflecting back on the project, I credit much of the project’s
success to the support of the Northern Chumash tribal council and the Northern Chumash
language committee who see the value of such projects and the impacts they can make on
language revitalization efforts.
Other effective tools I attribute to the success of the project is the language committee’s
willingness to have an open dialog about historical trauma and how that can play into our issues
of authority, a discussion in my opinion not addressed nearly enough in California Indian
communities. Additional strategies that added value to the project were the community
engagement strategy which focused on the tribal community’s assets instead of highlighting
defects. My hope is that this project will not only meet the goals and objectives of the Northern
Chumash language community, but that other communities can learn through the Northern
Chumash experiences, and can build capacity for other communities struggling with the same
issues around archival management systems and digital heritage collection protocols.
To conclude, in our work to sustain cultures we must apply appropriate methodologies
and place equal value between traditional knowledge systems and academic theory. We need to
develop frameworks that work to collectively to produce a cross cultural exchange, where
capacity building is a result for both knowledge systems. We must remember that cultural
revitalization is rooted in the community. Following the protocols for that community and
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
26
understanding that each community has the right to make decisions for themselves, will result in
collaborative projects that help sustain the cultures we wish to protect.
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
27
References
Bokamba, Eyamba (2008). Vigouroux, C. B., & Mufwene, S. S. (Eds.). (2008). Globalization
and Language Vitality: Perspectives from Africa. London, GB: Continuum. Retrieved from
http://www.ebrary.com
Bryson, J.M. & Carroll, A.R. (2007). Public participation fieldbook. St. Paul, MN: University of
Minnesota.
Echo-Hawk, W. R. (2010). In the Courts of the Conqueror: The 10 Worst Indian Law Cases Ever
Decided. Golden, Colo.: Fulcrum Pub. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10400455
Echo-Hawk, Walter R. (2013). In the Light of Justice: The Rise of Human Rights in Native
America & the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: Fulcrum Publishing.
Golla, V. (2011). California Indian Languages. Berkeley, US: University of California Press.
Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com
Gray, M., Coates, J., Yellow Bird, M., & Hetherington, T. (2013). Decolonizing social work
(Contemporary social work studies; Contemporary social work studies). Burlington: Ashgate
Pub. Company. http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=1182736
Guerrettaz, A. M. (2015). Ownership of Language in Yucatec Maya Revitalization Pedagogy.
Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 46(2), 167-185.
Haley, B. D., & Wilcoxon, L. R. (1997). Anthropology and the Making of Chumash Tradition
with CA comment. Current Anthropology, 38(5), 761 .
Haley, B., & Wilcoxon, L. (2005). How Spaniards Became Chumash and Other Tales of
Ethnogenesis. American Anthropologist, 107(3), 432-445. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.goucher.idm.oclc.org/stable/3567028
Hale, K. L., & Hinton, L. (2001). The Green Book of Language Revitalization in Practice. San
Diego: Brill.
Harrison, K. D. (2007). Oxford Studies in Sociolinguistics: When Languages Die: The
Extinction of the World's Languages and the Erosion of Human Knowledge. Cary, GB: Oxford
University Press, USA. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com
Hill, J. H. (2002). "Expert Rhetorics" in Advocacy for Endangered Languages: Who Is Listening,
and What Do They Hear? Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 12(2), 119-133.
A DECOLONIZED APPROACH TO ARCHIVAL MANAGEMENT FOR LANGUAGE
Hufford, M., & American Folklife Center. (1994). Conserving Culture: A new discourse on
heritage. Urbana: Publ. for the American Folklife Center at the Library of Congress by the
University of Illinois Press.
Klar, K. A. (1991). "Precious Beyond the Power of Money to Buy": John P. Harrington's
Fieldwork with Rosario Cooper. Anthropological Linguistics, 33(4), 379-391
Kovach, M. (2009). Indigenous Methodologies: Characteristics, Conversations and Contexts.
Toronto: University of Toronto Press, Scholarly Publishing Division.
Krauss, M. (1992). The world's languages in crisis. Language, 68(1), 4-10.
doi:10.1353/lan.1992.0075
Milliken, R., Johnson, J. R. (2005). An Ethnogeography of Salinan and Northern Chumash
Communities--1769 to 1810. Davis, CA: Far Western Anthropological Research Group.
Willow, A. J. (2010). Cultivating Common Ground: Cultural Revitalization in Anishinaabe and
Anthropological Discourse. American Indian Quarterly, 34(1), 33-60.
28