University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Linguistics ETDs Electronic Theses and Dissertations 12-1-2013 Language Ideologies and Orthographies: Developing a Writing System for Than Ówîngeh Evan Ashworth Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/ling_etds Part of the Linguistics Commons Recommended Citation Ashworth, Evan. "Language Ideologies and Orthographies: Developing a Writing System for Than Ówîngeh." (2013). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/ling_etds/2 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Electronic Theses and Dissertations at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Linguistics ETDs by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Evan Ashworth Candidate Linguistics Department This dissertation is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication: Approved by the Dissertation Committee: Melissa Axelrod, Chairperson Jule Gómez de Garcia Larry Gorbet David Margolin i LANGUAGE IDEOLOGIES AND ORTHOGRAPHIES: DEVELOPING A WRITING SYSTEM FOR THAN ÓWÎNGEH by EVAN ASHWORTH B.A., Linguistics, University of New Mexico, 2003 M.A., Linguistics, University of New Mexico, 2005 DISSERTATION Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Linguistics The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico December 2013 ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation represents the culmination of nearly a decade‘s work—in the classroom through graduate coursework and through fieldwork at Than Ówîngeh. Although I am the sole author of this work, its completion was only made possible with the help of a great many individuals, a few of whom I wish to recognize here. This dissertation is dedicated to Kó‘ôe Ogowée T‘ún, Kó‘ôe Póvi Kweeyó, Kó‘ôe Cha enu, Múusa Kwee, and Tséewee‘ay Kwee. They have taught me so much about the Than Ówîngeh Tewa language and culture. Although our affiliation began as a professional relationship based on linguistic consultation, it has since evolved into a personal relationship founded on friendship and trust. I thank them for sharing their time, their stories, their wisdom, and their delicious food. I have not met a more caring group of people who exemplify the spirit of community work. The sense of humor, patience, and tenacity they all display in fighting for the future of their language serves as an inspiration to all community members looking to revitalize their indigenous language. Many thanks goes to the members of my dissertation committee, Julé Gomez de Garcia, Larry Gorbet, and David Margolin. Their insights and feedback throughout the last few years have been inestimable and the patience they have demonstrated in responding to my seemingly endless stream of questions has been incredibly reassuring. In particular, I wish to thank Melissa Axelrod, the chair of my dissertation committee, who has served not only as a mentor within the Department of Linguistics at the University of New Mexico but outside of it as well. Through her guidance, I have become not only a better linguist but a better person. iii I wish to thank my fellow graduate student members of the Than Ówîngeh Language Program, Shelece Easterday, Iphigenia Kerfoot, Brittany Kubacki, and Andres Sabogal. Their support and companionship have been truly heartening. I wish to give special thanks to Logan Sutton, whose analyses of the linguistic structure of Tewa have been invaluable to the completion of this study. His discipline and leadership have served as an example for all of us in the program. Lastly, I wish to acknowledge Steven Menefee, or Nana Tay (‗Aspen Tree‘) as he was known among the Than Ówîngeh Language Program, who passed away in June of 2010 after a long battle with leukemia. Those who knew him best will remember his keen mind, his kind heart, his beaming smile, and his infectious laugh. Though he is gone, he will never be forgotten. Erin Debenport deserves many thanks as well. Over the last decade she has not only dedicated her time and energy to the Than Ówîngeh Languge Program, but her dissertation has served as a model for this study. I am indebted to Jim Wagner for his keen editorial eye; the speed and accuracy with which he performed his work was remarkable (and any errors in this work are, of course, my own). Jennifer Nader deserves thanks for her support and encouragement; over the last few years she has been a constant source of optimism and understanding. I wish to thank my colleagues at the Center for Academic Program Support at the University of New Mexico: Gary Allison, Jennifer Flores, Beth Kaimowitz, David Lucero, Matt Maez, Matt Makofske, Lauren Moore, Stephen Murillo, Beverly Shead, and Michelle Steiner. Daniel Sanford deserves special thanks for his guidance in helping me to navigate the waters of doctoral research and dissertation writing. iv I am grateful for the assistance I received from the Graduate Resource Center at the University of New Mexico. The guidance provided by Lawrence Roybal, Henry Gonzalez, Anne Burtnett, Talal Saint-Lot, and the entire staff of graduate consultants has been exemplary. I also must thank my fellow members of the dissertation writing group, Veronica Arias, Meg Edwards, Ben Yackley, as well as our group moderator, Santhosh Chandrashekhar. Their feedback and support throughout the writing process has been invaluable. Finally, I wish to thank my family and my friends. My mother, Sandy, patiently listened to my ideas and served as a sounding board, helping to transform my half-baked ideas into more developed ones. She was also one of my biggest motivators throughout the writing process. My father, Dan, deserves thanks for his encouragement and guidance. Although we don‘t get see each other as often as we‘d like, I treasure the time we spend together. I am also indebted to Lance Mason, Robin Graham, Trevor Scott, and Austin Draper, who have been a constant source of encouragement and our many stimulating conversations have enriched this study. If nothing else, they helped keep me sane throughout the writing process. Kú ‘daawó ‘h a. v LANGUAGE IDEOLOGIES AND ORTHOGRAPHIES: DEVELOPING A WRITING SYSTEM FOR THAN ÓWÎNGEH by EVAN ASHWORTH B.A., Linguistics, University of New Mexico, 2003 M.A., Linguistics, University of New Mexico, 2005 Ph.D. Linguistics, University of New Mexico, 2013 ABSTRACT The use of writing to represent the heritage language represents a contentious issue for many members of Puebloan societies in the American Southwest. Many community members resist the use of writing for this purpose on the grounds that it acts as a form of colonialism, while others accept the use of writing in the heritage language because it is seen as valorizing the heritage language itself. This study seeks to address three research questions: 1) What factors motivate either a resistance to or acceptance of the use of writing to represent a heritage language? 2) If the use of writing is accepted or even promoted, what factors motivate the decision to use one writing system (e.g., alphabet, syllabary) over another? and 3) What factors motivate the decision to employ certain sound-symbol correspondences within that system? Ultimately, the factors that motivate a general resistance to the use of writing will be shown to involve the view of writing as a centrifugal, or disunifying, force, whereas the factors that motivate a general acceptance of the use of writing will be shown to involve the view of writing as a centripetal, or unifying, force. Further, by using language ideologies (i.e., syncretism, variationism, utilitarianism) as a heuristic, the decisions made regarding the development vi of the Than Ówîngeh orthography will be shown to support the principles of learnability, transparency, and acceptability. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………. ix LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………………... x CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION………………………………………………... 1 1.1 Language Planning………………………………………………… 4 1.2 Overview of the Study…………………………………………….. 8 1.3 Structure of the Dissertation……………………………………….. 12 CHAPTER 2 – THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK………………………………... 17 2.1 ―Literacy‖ and ―Literacies‖………………………………………... 18 2.2 Functions of Writing ……………………………………………… 20 2.3 Semiotics ………………………………………………………….. 24 2.4 Language Ideologies ……………………………………………… 28 CHAPTER 3 –THAN ÓWÎNGEH AND THAN ÓWÎNGEH TEWA …………… 44 3.1 Than Ówîngeh …………………………………………………….. 45 3.2 Impact of Housing and Urban Development ……………………… 50 3.3 The Than Ówîngeh Tewa Language ……………………………… 52 CHAPTER 4 – THE THAN ÓWÎNGEH LANGUAGE PROGRAM …………… 69 4.1 Legislation of Native American languages ……………………….. 69 4.2 The Than Ówîngeh Language Program …………………………… 75 4.3 Components of the TOLP ………………………………………… 79 4.4 Development of a Than Ówîngeh Tewa Orthography ……………. 93 CHAPTER 5 – RESISTANCE TO AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE USE OF WRITING……………………………………………………….. 95 5.5 On resistance to the use of writing ………………………………... 95 5.6 On acceptance of the use of writing ………………………………. 109 CHAPTER 6 – SCRIPTS AND SOUND-SYMBOL CORRESPONDENCES………………………………………………….. 128 6.1 Kinds of Writing Systems ………………………………………… 128 6.2 Non-Alphabetic Scripts in the Americas …………………………. 134 6.3 The Alphabetic Writing System ………………………………….. 144 6.4 Sound-Symbol Correspondences in the Than Ówîngeh Tewa Orthography……………………………………………………….. 153 6.5 Syncretism, Variationism, and Utilitarianism in the Than Ówîngeh Tewa Orthography………………………………………. 158 CHAPTER 7 – LOOKING FORWARD: IT TAKES A CHILD TO