2018 Hodges Sapphire Thesis.Pdf (1.591Mb)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA GRADUATE COLLEGE COMMUNITY-BASED ARCHIVES, MUSEUMS AND LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION: A CASE STUDY FROM THE WICHITA AND AFFILIATED TRIBES IN ANADARKO, OKLAHOMA A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY In partial fulfillmEnt of thE rEquirEmEnts for thE DEgrEE of MASTER OF ARTS IN APPLIED LINGUISTIC ANTHROPOLOGY By SAPPHIRE HODGES Norman, Oklahoma 2018 COMMUNITY-BASED ARCHIVES, MUSEUMS AND LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION: A CASE STUDY FROM THE WICHITA AND AFFILIATED TRIBES IN ANADARKO, OKLAHOMA A THESIS APPROVED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY BY ____________________________________________ Dr. SEan O’NEill, Chair ____________________________________________ Dr. RacquEl SapiEn ____________________________________________ Dr. Marcia Haag ã Copyright by SAPPHIRE HODGES 2018 All Rights REsErvEd. This thEsis and thE efforts that wEnt into it arE and havE always bEEn dEdicatEd to ThE Wichita and AffiliatEd TribEs. And to all othErs who chErish thEir languagE and culturE, who fight to hold on to thEm, and pass thEm on. I am inspirEd by your dEEp commitmEnt to this work and your couragE in thE facE of its challEngEs. And to My Mom. Thanks for always bEing supportivE and proud no mattEr what I choosE to pursuE. TablE of ContEnts TablE of ContEnts................................................................................................. iv List of TablEs ....................................................................................................... vi Abstract .............................................................................................................. vii ChaptEr 1 .............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 ProblEms MinoritiEs FacE in Traditional MusEums and ArchivEs............. 4 1.3. Community InvolvEmEnt in MusEums, ArchivEs and LanguagE Revitalization .................................................................................................. 13 1.4 SEEking Solutions with Community-BasEd ArchivEs, MusEums and LanguagE REvitalization ................................................................................. 25 1.5 Conclusions ............................................................................................... 32 ChaptEr 2 ............................................................................................................ 33 2.1 Wichita REcEnt History ............................................................................. 33 2.2 ThE Wichita Today.................................................................................... 49 2.3 A Thumbnail SkEtch of thE Wichita LanguagE ......................................... 56 ChaptEr 3 ............................................................................................................ 65 3.1 REvitalizing LanguagEs Without SpEakErs ............................................... 65 3.2 LanguagE IdEologiEs ................................................................................. 74 3.3 SurvEy MEthodologiEs .............................................................................. 84 3.4 Participants In A Community ................................................................... 87 3.5 SurvEy Data ............................................................................................... 90 3.6 PotEntial LanguagE IdEologiEs in thE Wichita TribE ................................ 94 3.7 Wichita LanguagE and REligion ................................................................ 97 3.8 Motivations ............................................................................................. 100 3.9 ObstaclEs ................................................................................................. 103 3.10 Who Should BE InvolvEd In REvitalization? ......................................... 107 3.11 LanguagE REvitalization Programs and VoluntEEr Work .................... 110 3.12 ArchivE REsponsEs ............................................................................... 117 3.13 Individual Goals .................................................................................... 120 3.14 Summary............................................................................................... 126 ChaptEr 4 ...................................................................................................... 129 4.1 Introducing thE Wichita ArchivE ............................................................ 130 4.2 GuidE to Wichita DocumEntation and Archival ContEnts ...................... 134 iv 4.3 CrEating thE archivE ............................................................................... 141 4.4 ThE ArchivE Dictionary .......................................................................... 147 4.5 Comparing thE Wichita ArchivE and Traditional ArchivEs ................... 151 3.6 ThE Wichita ArchivE as a Community-BasEd InitiativE ......................... 154 3.7 ChallEngEs for thE Community-BasEd Archivist .................................... 159 3.8 Conclusions ............................................................................................. 164 ChaptEr 5 .......................................................................................................... 167 5. 1 Background on thE Wichita Tribal History CEntEr ............................... 167 5.2 ThE Wichita Tribal History CEntEr as a Community-BasEd MEmory Institution ..................................................................................................... 172 5.3 MusEums as a tool for languagE and culturE rEvitalization ................... 178 ChaptEr 6 .......................................................................................................... 180 RefErEnces ........................................................................................................ 187 AppEndix A ....................................................................................................... 195 AppEndix AB Glossary of TErms ...................................................................... 227 AppEndix B ....................................................................................................... 231 AppEndix C SurvEy Data ................................................................................... 233 v List of Tables FigurE 1 Nina Simon’s (2010) modEls of visitor participation in a musEum…17 FigurE 2 FigurE 2 Rood’s (1996) VErb ClassEs for Wichita………………………59-60 FigurE 3 Fishman’s vitality scalE from LEwis and Simon (2009)…………………..67 FigurE 4 ‘tachira.s’ brokEn down by morphEmEs from Rood, 1996, p. 597….148 FigurE 5 Wichita PhonEmEs……………………………………………………………………...197 FigurE 6 Wichita VowEls……………………………………………………………………..…...201 FigurE 7 PracticE Wichita sounds………………………………………………………202-203 FigurE 8 Rood’s 4 VErb ClassEs…………………………………………………………………205 FigurE 9 REviEw of Rood’s VErb CatEgoriEs with ExamplEs………………………...208 FigurE 10 Rood’s VErb CatEgoriEs with examplEs, and noun or pErson……….210 vi Abstract ThE last fluEnt spEakEr of thE Wichita languagE passEd away in 2016. According to many common languagE vitality scalEs in linguistics, thE Wichita languagE would bE considErEd extinct. HowEvEr, thE discoursE about this has bEEn changing in thE past dEcadE or two. LanguagEs likE Wampanoag and Myaamia havE bEEn rEvitalizEd evEn though thEy no longEr had living fluEnt spEakErs. It is evEn arguEd that thEsE languagEs wErE not rEally extinct bEcausE thErE was significant documEntation of thE languagEs and a community of pEoplE whosE ancEstors spokE it. ThE Wichita languagE is in a similar situation. It may not bE Extinct bEcausE thEy havE sEmi-spEakErs and documEntation in a nEw community archivE. ThEy also havE sEvEral positivE languagE idEologiEs that arE conducivE to rEvitalization. ThEsE wErE discovErEd whEn about 50 participants took survEys and thE rEsults are ExpoundEd on hErEaftEr. ThE Wichita havE alrEady crEatEd community-basEd cultural programs such as thEir archivE and a nEw musEum, which could also bE usEd as tools in languagE rEvitalization. With documEntation, productivE languagE idEologiEs, and community-basEd efforts, thE tribE may still bE ablE to rEvitalizE thEir languagE. vii ChaptEr 1 Community-BasEd LanguagE ArchivEs, MusEums and LanguagE Revitalization Introduction In rEcEnt yEars fiEld linguists havE bEcomE incrEasingly awarE of thE nEEd to changE thEir approach in fiEld work and involvE thE community morE in thEir work. ThEsE modEls of community-basEd rEsEarch in linguistics arE finding thEir way into mEmory institutions likE musEums and archivEs. This is an important movEmEnt in languagE rEvitalization, onE that many rEsEarchErs bEliEvE is both morE effEctivE and morE ethical. Community-basEd modEls can bE powErful tools for indigEnous communitiEs in indEpEndEntly devEloping and dirEcting thEir own rEvitalization efforts. My intErEst in community-basEd musEums and languagE archivEs is in thEir potEntial for positivE social changE, EmpowErmEnt for endangErEd languagE spEakErs and as a tool for rEvitalizing languagE and culturE. ThE following is a casE study of thE Wichita, a NativE AmErican tribE basEd in Oklahoma with a hEritagE languagE so EndangErEd that thErE arE no 1 longEr any fluEnt first languagE speakErs. Such languagEs arE gEnErally thought of as extinct. HowEvEr, that labEl may bE prEmaturE bEcausE thErE arE semi-spEakErs in thE community and thErE is somE documEntation in a nEw tribal archivE. I will arguE that morE community-basEd rEvitalization activities