Post-contact Aboriginal languages in the Northern Territory

Author(s):  
Peter Mühlhäusler
1979 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 33-44
Author(s):  
M. Christie

In the 1973 parliamentary session, the Australian Federal Government introduced acampaign to have Aboriginal children living in distinctive Aboriginal communities given their primary education in Aboriginal languages…and to supplement education for Aboriginal children with the teaching of traditional Aboriginal arts, crafts and skills mostly by Aboriginals themselves.Following that announcement, a committee was formed to investigate the possibilities of bilingual education and to direct the setting up of some initial programs. Five schools originally changed to a bilingual education program, and the number has grown to almost twenty. The original schools have now been in operation for five years, and there is a call for their evaluation. The government has expended large sums of money on the development of the programs, but there is still discussion concerning their possible future. Some of the key issues concerning bilingual education in the Northern Territory have not been resolved, and much of the development of programs was taken over by people of initiative in individual schools. This may or may not have been a good thing, but for the purposes of evaluation, we are presented with a very complex and freely structured situation. A just and constructive evaluation of all that has happened thus far will be difficult but invaluable for the government, the administrators, and the teachers.


1994 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 22-26

In January/February 1973 at the request of the Minister for Education, the Hon. Kim E. Beazley, an Advisory Group was set up to make recommendations for the implementation and development of a program involving teaching in Aboriginal languages and the incorporation in the school curriculum of further elements of traditional Aboriginal arts, crafts and skills. The members of the group were:Dr. Betty H. Watts, Reader in Education, University of Queensland, Mr. W.J. McGrath, Inspector of Schools, Aboriginal Education Branch, and Mr. J.L. Tandy, Department of Education, Canberra.It is believed that many teachers will be interested in the thinking behind the bilingual education program and the manner of its recommended implementation.The extracts which follow set out the rationale and the recommended progress through the educational program. The recommended roles of both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal staff members will be outlined in the next issue.


1990 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Harris

I think those of us who are interested in what is written in Aboriginal languages need to be much more open than we have been in the past to shifts of emphasis in the development of written Aboriginal literatures. Looking at the way the Northern Territory bilingual program developed is one way in to thinking about this issue.


1994 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary-Anne Gale

Since leaving ‘the bush’ I have been continually surprised at the ignorance that still exists about Aboriginal people and their languages. When people chat to me, and it is revealed that I used to work in Aboriginal schools in the Northern Territory, they say things like “Do you speak Aboriginal then?… Maybe you could make a sign for us saying ‘Welcome to our Kindergarten’ in Aboriginal?” I then have to explain that there are many, many different Aboriginal languages, not just one, and to say or write such things in any one of these languages requires a lot more than a mere literal translation. When I began doing research on the topic of writing in Aboriginal languages. I was again surprised at the sorts of comments people made to me. Comments like “How can you do research on writing in Aboriginal languages; I thought the Aborigines didn't even have an alphabet!”


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-135
Author(s):  
Maïa Ponsonnet

Abstract This article analyzes some of the lexical semantic features of Barunga Kriol, an Australian creole language (Northern Territory, Australia), in comparison with Dalabon, one of the Australian Aboriginal languages replaced by Barunga Kriol. Focusing on the semantic domain of emotions, this study offers insights into how creole languages select and organize semantic meanings, and to what extent this results in lexical loss or retention. I spell out the exact nature of the lexical resemblances between the two languages, and highlight major differences as well. The conclusions of the study are two-fold. Firstly, I show that the Barunga Kriol emotion lexicon shares a great many properties with the Dalabon emotion lexicon. As a result, speakers in Barunga Kriol and Dalabon respectively are often able to package meaning in very similar ways: the two languages offer comparable means of describing events in the world. From that point of view, language shift can be considered to have a lesser impact. Secondly, I show that the lexical resemblances between Barunga Kriol and Dalabon are not limited to simple cases where the lexemes in each language share the same forms and/or meanings. Instead, lexical resemblances relate to a number of other properties in semantics and combinatorics, and I devise a preliminary typology of these lexical resemblances. Beyond the comparison between Barunga Kriol and Dalabon, this typology may tentatively serve as a grid to evaluate lexical resemblances between languages more generally.


1973 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-51

In January/February 1973 at the request of the Minister for Education, the Hon. Kim E. Beazley, an Advisory Group was set up to make recommendations for the implementation and development of a program involving teaching in Aboriginal languages and the incorporation in the school curriculum of further elements of traditional Aboriginal arts, crafts and skills. The members of the group were:Dr. Betty H. Watts, Reader in Education, University of Queensland, Mr. W.J. McGrath, Inspector of Schools, Aboriginal Education Branch, and Mr. J.L. Tandy, Department of Education, Canberra.It is believed that many teachers will be interested in the thinking behind the bilingual education program and the manner of its recommended implementation.The extracts which follow set out the rationale and the recommended progress through the educational program. The recommended roles of both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal staff members will be outlined in the next issue.


1994 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 33-42
Author(s):  
Mary-Anne Gale

Since leaving ‘the bush’ I have been continually surprised at the ignorance that still exists about Aboriginal people and their languages. When people chat to me, and it is revealed that I used to work in Aboriginal schools in the Northern Territory, they say things like “Do you speak Aboriginal then?… Maybe you could make a sign for us saying ‘Welcome to our Kindergarten’ in Aboriginal?” I then have to explain that there are many, many different Aboriginal languages, not just one, and to say or write such things in any one of these languages requires a lot more than a mere literal translation. When I began doing research on the topic of writing in Aboriginal languages. I was again surprised at the sorts of comments people made to me. Comments like “How can you do research on writing in Aboriginal languages: I thought the Aborigines didn't even have an alphabet!”


1990 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 48-63
Author(s):  
Graham R. McKay

Aboriginal languages are still widely used in most parts of the Northern Territory, particularly in isolated communities. These languages and their associated patterns of communication and socio-cultural systems are very different from those of the mainstream Australian society. The contact between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal groups is characterized by extensive communication failure and by differences in status. Language related problems of intercultural contact exist within the formal education system and in general communication situations, giving rise to a variety of needs for education and training for both non-Aboriginal and Aboriginal groups.


1990 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 1-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harold Koch

This paper discusses aspects of the intercultural communication processes involved in the quasi-legal presentation of claims to traditional land by Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory before the Aboriginal Land Commissioner. The findings are documented by means of selected extracts from the transcripts of proceedings. Although the proceedings took place predominantly in English, there was some use of interpreters, liberal use of words from Aboriginal languages, and even considerable usage of nonverbal gestures. Most of the Aboriginal witnesses spoke some form of non-standard English influenced by Kriol and traditional Australian languages. The most salient features of their non-standard English are described here. Aboriginal witnesses accommodated their language toward Standard English. Some of their non-standard utterances were clarified by others for the record. The court also accommodated somewhat to Aboriginal styles and forms of speech. Nevertheless there were numerous instances of communication failure, which had various specific causes but were not aided by the culturally alien general legal procedure of question-and-answer elicitation of information.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document