Current Trends in Language Documentationand

the Hans Rausing Endangered Languages Project

Lenore A. GrenobleDartmouth College

Lenore A. GrenobleLinguistics & Cognitive Science, Dartmouth College

&

Peter K. AustinELAP, Department of Linguistics SOAS

Outline

What is language documentation?Why has documentation emerged now?The Hans Rausing Endangered Languages

ProjectCurrent 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 folklorepoetics - metrical and music aspect of oral literatureanthropology - cultural aspects, kinship, interaction styles,

ritualoral history, andeducation - 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 technologyincreased focus on data new attention to linguistic diversityarchiving concernsother 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 Diversityrenewed focus on cross-linguistic

typologyincreasing 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 designEstablishment of field site, including

negotiation of permissionsFunding applicationData collection and processingCreation of outputsEvaluation 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 SprachenE-MELD project of LinguistListDELAMAN archives networkHans 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 (£50,000-100,000)

Major Documentation Project: 6 months-2 years, large projects (£40,000-130,000)

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 supportCommunity involvement, community-driven

agendasArchiving

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 descriptionwhere are the boundaries?

the responsibility of the linguist

in training community members?in developing materials for community use?

The end