Vol. 13 (2019), pp. 446–513 http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/ldc http://hdl.handle.net/10125/24871 Revised Version Received: 22 May 2019 Global Survey of Revitalization Efforts: A mixed methods approach to understanding language revitalization practices Gabriela Pérez Báez University of Oregon & Smithsonian Institution Rachel Vogel Cornell University Uia Patolo Auckland University of Technology The world’s linguistic diversity, estimated at over 7,000 languages, is declining rapidly. As awareness about this has increased, so have responses from a number of stakeholders. In this study we present the results of the Global Survey of Re- vitalization Efforts carried out by a mixed methods approach and comparative analysis of revitalization efforts worldwide. The Survey included 30 questions, was administered online in 7 languages, and documented 245 revitalization ef- forts yielding some 40,000 bits of data. In this study, we report on frequency counts and show, among other findings, that revitalization efforts are heavily fo- cused on language teaching, perhaps over intergenerational transmission of a lan- guage, and rely heavily on community involvement although do not only involve language community members exclusively. The data also show that support for language revitalization in the way of funding, as well as endorsement, is critical to revitalization efforts. This study also makes evident the social, cultural, polit- ical, and geographic gaps in what we know about revitalization worldwide. We hope that this study will strengthen broad interest and commitment to studying, understanding, and supporting language revitalization as an integral aspect of the history of human language in the 21st century. 1. Introduction1 The world’s linguistic diversity is estimated to encompass over 7,000 languages (Hammarström et al. 2018; Simons & Fennig 2018). This diversity, as has 1This research has been made possible primarily through funding from the Recovering Voices initiative of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History. This study greatly benefited from the support of the Auckland University of Technology and the intellectual stimulus and research assistance from mem- bers of the Linguistics Department at the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa: Andrea Berez, Lyle Campbell, William O’Grady, and Ken Rehg, and their students and alumni: Carolina Aragon, Raina Heaton, Bradley Rentz, and Kaori Ueki. The interest of national and international interns at the undergraduate and grad- uate level was critical for the research. Thus, we thank Carlos Cisneros, Sarah Johnson, Kate Murray, Jessica Nesbitt, Chris Pérez, Skyler Rachlin, and David Silverman. We appreciate the time that colleagues took to review drafts of this paper. Above all, we are grateful to the respondents of the surveys for taking the time to share their experiences with us. Licensed under Creative Commons E-ISSN 1934-5275 Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Global Survey of Revitalization Efforts: A mixed methods approach to understanding language … 447 been reported for decades, is declining rapidly. Early calculations estimated that as many as 90% of the world’s languages could go dormant by the end of the 21st cen- tury (Hale et al. 1992). More recently, Simons & Lewis (2013) calculated that from a sample of 7,480 languages, the process of intergenerational transmission has been interrupted in 1,480 (20%) of them, and 2,384 (32%) languages are in some stage of shift. The Catalog of Endangered Languages (ELCat; 2018) lists 3,150 languages at some level of vulnerability, amounting to 46% of the 6,879 languages (Campbell & Rehg 2018). To give but a couple of precise examples of the extent to which linguistic diversity has been reduced, of the more than 300 languages documented to have been in use at the time of European contact in what are now the United States and Canada, over half no longer have native users (Campbell & Rehg 2018). Of some 700 lan- guages currently still in use in Latin America, most are in some degree of vulnerability (Pérez Báez et al. 2016). In Africa, home to about a third of the world’s languages, more than one quarter of the languages are endangered (see Belew & Simpson 2018 for details about language endangerment in all other regions of the world). Critically, 24% of the world’s linguistic diversity has been lost in the last 60 years alone (Barlow & Campbell in press, as cited in Campbell & Rehg 2018). The estimates and figures might vary from one study to another and debate has arisen based on the fact that languages have changed and gone out of use throughout history. However, there is general agreement on the realization that the rate at which languages are going out of use is unprecedented in recorded history. As awareness about the issue of language endangerment has increased, so have responses from a number of stakeholders and supporting parties. Independently of the debates about whether it is valid, reasonable, or recommended to intervene and attempt to change the course of the ongoing decline in linguistic diversity (see, for instance, the oft-cited Ladefoged 1992 and ensuing responses), the fact of the mat- ter is that there are numerous ongoing efforts to maintain languages in use. These range from documentation of extant languages; efforts to preserve, disseminate, and analyze historical documentation of languages without first-language speakers; devel- opment of methods in language teaching; approaches to open or re-open domains of use for endangered languages; raising awareness about the importance of sustaining linguistic diversity; and establishing policies at the local, national, and international levels intended to support it. The goal of the present study is to gain greater knowl- edge of the extent of these efforts and as many of their particularities as possible, and to do so in a systematic, comparative manner that might pave the way for future growth and improvement in our understanding of language revitalization. The academic literature reporting on language revitalization efforts is now co- pious and dates back several decades. In order to contribute to this literature, we present here the results of what we believe to be the first study to survey, at a global scale and in a mixed methods and comparative format, efforts to revitalize languages: the Global Survey of Language Revitalization Efforts (henceforth the Survey). This study follows a pilot project in which the Survey methods were tested, with prelim- inary results reported in Pérez Báez et al. (2018). Through the Survey we obtained data on 245 efforts to revitalize languages, providing some 40,000 bits of data on lan- Language Documentation & Conservation Vol. 13, 2019 Global Survey of Revitalization Efforts: A mixed methods approach to understanding language … 448 guage revitalization practices around the world. In this paper we present frequency counts from most sections of the Survey followed by a discussion of the contribution of such data to what is currently known about language revitalization. This study provides data to back some assumptions about language revitalization. This study also presents new findings, some which are surprising. For instance, efforts that began after the year 2000 make over 50% of the sample, prompting the question as to what factors might be motivating an increase in engagement in revitalization. This study provides evidence that while languages in the more advanced stages of lan- guage shift make up a large percentage of the cases surveyed, the data do not support the assumption that engagement in revitalization might be dependent on the realiza- tion that a language is in an advanced stage of shift – cases of maintenance of extant vitality are well represented in the survey. The Survey reveals a strong focus on lan- guage teaching over language socialization and intergenerational transmission of the language amongst its respondents. Nevertheless, practitioners engage in a diversity of activities which require collaborations which are not limited to the language commu- nity: Over half of the efforts documented involve collaborations between individuals from within the language community as well as individuals external to it. The Sur- vey shows unequivocally that support for revitalization, both in the way of funding and in the way of moral, social, political, and institutional support, constitutes the greatest asset to the efforts as well as their greatest need. This study is the result of an interdisciplinary collaboration directed by the lead author and made possible by the Recovering Voices initiative of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History. The impetus for this study came from numer- ous discussions with colleagues in the Linguistics Department at the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa about the need to develop methods of comparative analysis in or- der to better understand how revitalization is being practiced around the world and how best to contribute towards revitalization depending on one’s own set of skills and the particular circumstances of any given effort. The research began painstak- ingly with an extensive literature review carried out primarily by co-author Vogel (see Pérez Báez et al. 2018 for details). A pilot survey ensued, followed by analysis of its results and improvements leading to the implementation of the full Survey. Data processing was carried out by co-author Patolo, sociologist with the International Center for Language Revitalization whose participation in the research was made possible by the Auckland University of Technology. §2 explains the rationale for a comparative mixed-methods study of this kind based on the review carried out of the literature on language endangerment and revi- talization. In doing so, it builds upon Pérez Báez et al. (2018). In §3, we describe the methods used during the research, both in terms of the design, pilot, and full-scale implementation of the survey, and in terms of the processing and analysis of the data. Results of the Survey are presented in §4 mostly in the form of frequency counts.