1 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO The Declining Use of the Mixtec Language: The Persistence of Memory, Discrimination, and Social Hierarchies of Power A Thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements of the Master of Arts in Latin American Studies by Elizabeth Perry Committee in charge: Professor Robert R. Alvarez, Chair Professor Nancy G. Postero Professor Wayne A. Cornelius 2009 2 Copyright Elizabeth Perry, 2009 All rights reserved. 3 The thesis of Elizabeth Perry is approved and is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Chair University of California, San Diego 2009 iii 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page ………………………………………………………… iii Table of Contents………………………………………………...……. iv List of Maps, Figures and Images ….…………………………………. v Preface .…………………………………………………..……………. vi Acknowledgements........…………………………………………….… x Abstract of Thesis…………..………….…………………………….... xiii Chapter 1: Language Discrimination, Social Hierarchies of Power, and the Declining Use of the Mixtec Language…………………….… 1 Chapter 2: Conceptualizing Social Memory and Symbolic Violence .. 23 Chapter 3: Mixtec Social Memory of Language Discrimination……... 48 Chapter 4: Mixtec Language Use and Symbolic Violence in the Context of Neoliberal Multiculturalism ……………………...... 82 Chapter 5: Mixtec Language Use and Social Hierarchies of Power: Meanings and Future Directions …………………………………….. 107 Appendix …………………………………..……………………….… 119 Works Referenced ……………………………………………………. 120 iv 5 LIST OF MAPS, FIGURES, AND IMAGES MAP 1.1: Oaxaca, Mexico and the Oaxaca’s seven socio-cultural regions … 5 MAP 1.2: San Miguel Tlacotepec and Ixpantepec Nieves ………………….. 7 MAP 1.3: Primary Tlacotepense and Ixpantepense Migrant Destinations in the United States…………………………………… 12 FIGURE 3.1: Percentage of Tlacotepenses Who Speak Some Mixtec, by Age…………………………………………… 57 FIGURE 4.1: Evolution of Poverty Rates in Mexico, 1992-2002 …………... 95 IMAGE 3.1: Bridge in San Miguel Tlacotepec……………………………… 62 v 6 PREFACE As a participant in the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies’ Mexican Migration Field Research Program (MMFRP) during the 2007-2008 academic year, I conducted qualitative and quantitative research in San Miguel Tlacotepec, Oaxaca and in San Diego County, California as part of a bi-national collaborative research team. My focus within this larger project was to investigate the relationship between ethnicity, civic participation, and migration. Drawing on the team’s collective survey data and in-depth interviews, I co-authored a chapter for a publication titled “Migration from the Mexican Mixteca: A Transnational Community in Oaxaca and California” (Cornelius et al., 2009). This research experience and preliminary work informed the development and foundation for this independent research. From late July through August 2008, I conducted five weeks of field research in Oaxaca, Mexico. I selected two neighboring towns in the Mixteca Baja Region, San Miguel Tlacotepec and Ixpantepec Nieves, located ten kilometers apart, in which to conduct interviews and engage in participant observation. I selected these towns because of their similar socio-demographic profiles,1 my own prior fieldwork and that of other scholars, and the towns’ notably different levels of indigenous language use. I hoped their similar profiles yet disparate rates of indigenous language use would facilitate comparative analysis and illuminate the factors of influence in the declining use of the Mixtec language. Interviews were semi-structured and guiding questions were designed to facilitate personal narratives regarding memories, experiences, and observations of the use and devaluation of the Mixtec language in various sites, including the local community, 1 See Chapter 1 for overview of research sites. vi 7 surrounding urban areas, and migrant destinations. Furthermore, interviews were also geared toward addressing the knowledge and perceptions about current grassroots, state, national, and binational efforts to restore indigenous language use in Mixtec communities in Oaxaca and in Mixtec migrant communities. While many respondents lacked familiarity with the agendas and programs established by these various programs, their perspectives on the prospect of such projects was nonetheless insightful. Formal interviews were conducted with both female and males over the age of eighteen. However, my research focus required that interviews be conducted with respondents whose memories and life experiences address the transition from indigenismo (1920-1980) to neoliberal multiculturalism (1980-present) and thus, the average age of an in- depth interviewee was 62 (see Appendix 1). All interviews were conducted in Spanish and were therefore limited to bilingual speakers (Mixtec/Spanish or Spanish/English) and monolingual speakers of Spanish, with the exception of one interview conducted partially in Mixteco with the assistance of a non-professional translator. Interviewees were identified through snowball sampling, originating with contacts established during previous research. In addition to formal and informal interviews, I engaged in participant observation during various community activities, such as religious ceremonies and cultural events. For example, I attended the Patron Saint celebration in Ixpantepec Nieves on August 5th, 2008 and family- sponsored events, such as a wedding, in San Miguel Tlacotepec. Upon my return to the United States in September of 2008, I conducted informal interviews with Mixtec migrants currently residing in California. In addition, I drew on in-depth interviews conducted during the MMFRP field study of 2008 with Tlacotepenses residing in the United States to analyze migrant perspectives on and efforts vii 8 to preserve the use of the Mixtec language. Thousands of Mixtec migrants have created thriving “satellite,” or “daughter communities,” in areas such as northern San Diego County, which has been a major site of Mixtec activism and bi-national organization (Velasco Ortiz, 2003; Stephen, 2007; Cornelius et. al (eds.), 2009). The interests of many Mixtec activists and organizations include replicating, cultivating, and revitalizing cultural and linguistic practices on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border. In addition, in the fall of 2008 I began Mixtec language instruction at San Diego State University and volunteered at the Bayside Community Center in Linda Vista, San Diego, which hosts a Mixtec cultural exchange program. While I did not conduct formal interviews during these activities, they have nonetheless been instructive and have connected me to a greater range of experiences and perspectives on the use of the Mixtec language and language revitalization efforts among Mixtec migrants. I also attended cultural events in San Diego County, such as Tlacotepec’s annual Patron Saint festival on September 29th, which brought me closer to the experiences of Mixtec migrants residing in the United States. The role of the Mexican state was documented primarily through analysis of state policies and programs. A colleague from Oaxaca City, Lic. Julio Ricardo Méndez García, who assisted me during the first week of field research, attended a gathering of the Special Commission for the Reform of the State of Oaxaca regarding the “Legislation Proposal to Create an Indigenous Languages Institute in the State of Oaxaca,” held in Oaxaca City on August 8th, 2008. Documents he collected and research on the federal and state position on indigenous language use, as represented in their policies and programmatic agendas, have informed my analysis on the state’s multicultural stance on viii 9 the inclusion of and rights granted to indigenous peoples within a neoliberal multicultural framework. Oaxacan newspaper coverage also provided insights into projected and current engagements of the state in various matters relating to Oaxaca’s indigenous peoples. In conducting this research, I took heed of the suggestions and examples set by various progressive and influential scholars, such as my committee members, Robert Alvarez, Nancy Postero, and Wayne Cornelius, as well as Nicolas de Genova and Charles Hale, who make considerable effort to acknowledge their own positions and biases as researchers and who have meticulously tried to avoid many of the extractive and abusive ethnographic practices. Research regarding memory of discrimination required me to ask interviewees about sensitive experiences and emotionally charged topics such as race and ethnicity. I attempted to approach these topics with tremendous care and appreciate the time, energy, and personal contribution made by each participant. Though almost all interview respondents expressed consent for their proper names to be used within this written report, I have changed the names of participants in accordance with the policies of the University of California, San Diego’s Human Research Protections Program. ix 10 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research could not have been completed with out the support and participation of numerous people, who I thank wholeheartedly for their assistance, time, and contributions. To begin, I am grateful for the opportunity to conduct this study, which was made possible by the Center for Iberian and Latin American Studies, the Latino Studies Research Initiative, and the Center