Revitalisation of languages in danger of extinction

Talofa lava.

For this week’s column I want to introduce some of the ideas of Joshua Fishman, Fishman’s interest has been in the revitalisation of languages in danger of extinction, of which I am sad to say there are many.

Early this week Maui Solomon from Ngai Tahu commented on the success of their programme in returning the Maori language to the South Island. We should remember that up until recently there were purported to be only 2 native speakers of Ngai Tahu Maori left alive and they were very old. Maui however predicted that in two generations there would once again be children in Ngai Tahu who were first language speakers of Maori.

How is this being achieved? Fishman has had considerable input into their programme with the result of priority being given to the language in the home. Fishman asserts that if the language is not transmitted intergenerationally, within the home and the community, it is forever at risk. In our context, we have parents who have elected to educate their children in schools in order for those children to gain fluency in Maori, Samoan or French. In many cases the school has become the only mechanism by which the language is being resuscitated. However if these children do not grow up to be parents speaking the language to their children, but send them to school to learn it, we will have only put off the evil moment for another generation.

While one might argue that French is not an at-risk language, within our families living in NZ it is quite likely that a French family in two generations time may be French only in name and not be speakers of the language. This has certainly been the pattern for most other immigrant groups in NZ. For Samoan a similar risk exists, and for Maori the possible disappearance of the language is a constant risk.

Our family’s language is part of our heritage and helps us define who we are and where we stand in the world. It is a treasure to be passed on by us all and not left for a school system. It is essential that we encourage our children to speak their Heritage language to our grandchildren from birth.

Ia manuia lou aso,

Challenges in teaching children a second language

Hi everybody,

This week I want to take a short exploration of the nature of language in order to give some more insight into the challenging task our children undertake in learning a second language. We often think of oral language and written language as different beasts but it is more helpful to see them as part of a continuum.

Scenario 1:

Two people are sitting at a table at home, on the table is a set of keys.

“ Hey, chuck us those please.” Says Fred, pointing to the keys.

“ What these?” says his friend Mac, holding them up.

“ Cheers!”

This interaction depended for its meaning entirely on both parties being there together in sight of each other, body language is a key element. Notice that a lot of the language is ungrammatical and colloquial, eg. chuck, us and cheers.

Scenario 2:

Mac is near the table and the Fred is trying to get into the garage outside.

“Hey chuck us the keys off the table please.”

“Hang on I’ll get them.”

“Cheers!”

Now they must be more specific about needing the keys because they can’t assume that the

other person would know what “those” are.

Scenario 3:

Mac is still at home, Fred has gone to work.

“ Hi! Did I leave my keys on the table?”

“ Hang on I’ll go and look.”

“ Cheers!”

The information is even more specific and more grammatical.

Scenario 4:

One person is at work and calling Mac’s flatmate Joe.

“Hi Joe! Can you have a look and see if I left my keys on the table in the corner of the dining room please?”

Notice that now the speaker needs to understand that Joe doesn’t know which of the many

tables in the house are being referred to because Joe wasn’t there at the time, but Fred assumes that Joe will recognise the keys. More detail and more grammatical.

Scenario 5:

No one is home when the call is made and the answer phone comes on.

“ Hi! This is Fred here. I think I left my keys on the table in the corner of the dining room, they are on a red key ring with a Honda tag. Can you call me back on 0123 4567 please?”

Now there is lots of detail so that whoever gets the message knows who is calling, where the keys

might be and what makes them different from the other keys in the house.

Scenario 6:

Fred who left his keys behind is explaining to his son what happened to his keys.

“ Look son, I left my keys on the table at a Mac’s house and they had all gone out when I phoned. I think I left them on the table in the corner of the dining room. Could you go round after school and see if they are there? They are the ones on the red key ring with the Honda tag.”

Because the son is completely unfamiliar with the whole situation Fred has to give a large

amount of detail, but select only that which is relevant to the job of getting the keys back. This has a lot of the characteristics of written language because when we write we need to make the same sort of decisions about what the audience needs to know when they are distant in time and place from the event we are writing about. Because the purpose of the language is harder to fulfill in these conditions we need to be more grammatical, and provide more detail relevant to the situation.

Being able to use one’s second language successfully and appropriately across this range of

situations requires a high degree of sophistication and control of language. Food for thought isn’t it?

Cheers, Chris