Fennougristiikan historiaa Virittäjän valossa

Artikkeli tarkastelee yhtäältä 125 vuotta täyttävän aikakauslehti Virittäjän historiaa fennougristiikan valossa, toisaalta fennougristiikan historiaa Virittäjän valossa. Päähuomio on erityisesti suomen etäsukukielten tutkimuksessa. Virittäjässäkin fennougristiikkaa ovat tyypillisimmin edustaneet konkreettiset pyrkimykset suomen ja sen sukukielten menneisyyden valaisemiseksi: keskiössä ovat olleet toisiinsa kietoutuneet etymologia ja äännehistoria sekä niiden kehyksiksi hahmotellut kantakielet eri vaiheineen ja kontaktikielineen. Tämän fennougristiikan kovan ytimen lisäksi Virittäjässä ovat kuitenkin aina olleet näkyvissä myös tieteenalan suuremmat kehykset: yhtäältä pohdinnat siitä, miksi ja miten tällaista tutkimusta harjoitetaan, toisaalta halu kertoa fennougristisen tutkimuksen tuloksista myös suurelle yleisölle. Erityisesti Suomi ja täällä etenkin Virittäjä ovat ympäristöjä, joissa suomalais-ugrilaisten kielten tutkijat ovat kerta toisensa jälkeen eksplisiittisesti pohtineet olemassaolonsa tarkoitusta. Vaikka ala mielletään usein kielihistorian tutkimukseksi, fennougristit ovat aina harjoittaneet myös synkronista kielentutkimusta; myös suomen sukukielten uhan­alaisuuteen ja vähemmistökielten puhujien oikeuksiin on kiinnitetty huomiota jo 1800-luvulta lähtien. Artikkeli keskittyy lähinnä Virittäjän ensimmäiselle vuosisadalle, mutta 2020-luvulle tultaessa fennougristiikka ja sen ilmenemismuodot Virittäjässä ovat muuttuneet lehden yleisilmeeseen verrattuna suhteellisen vähän. On the history of Uralic linguistics in Virittäjä The article provides an account of Virittäjä, the major journal of Finnish linguistics established in 1897, and its relation to the study of Uralic languages during the first 125 years of the journal’s history. At its most typical, the study of Uralic languages has been a branch of historical-comparative linguistics aiming to pursue the distant past of Finnish and other Uralic languages: etymology, historical phonology, questions of proto-languages and their chronology and geography as well as language contacts. Beyond this hard core of Uralic linguistics, Virittäjä has continuously provided a forum for discussing the larger frameworks of the discipline: questions of why and how Uralic linguistics is conducted in the first place. Virittäjä has also provided a forum for Uralicists to communicate the results of their research to scholars of Finnish and the wider general public. Moreover, Finland in general and Virittäjä in particular have traditionally been places where Uralicists have pondered and discussed the purpose of their own existence. In addition to historical linguistics, Uralicists have also engaged in synchronic linguistics, and from as early as the 19th century they have also paid attention to language endangerment and the linguistic rights of minorities. This article focuses mainly on the first century of Virittäjä’s history, though by the 2020s Uralistics and the manifestations of the discipline in the pages of Virittäjä have remained largely unchanged.

A Program for the Preservation and Revitalization of the Languages of Russia

This article presents the Program for the Preservation and Revitalization of the Languages of Russia proposed by the Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences (the Program). The Program is based on knowledge accumulated in linguistics in domains such as linguistic diversity, language endangerment, and language preservation methods. According to a recent assessment, there are 150 to 160 languages of Russia. This number of languages, even though quite high, is manageable for a national language preservation Program. Languages are rapidly becoming extinct worldwide, and Russia is no exception to this trend. The following terms are used to categorize languages according to risk of extinction: safe languages, endangered languages, severely endangered languages, and nearly extinct languages. There are several important humanitarian and scientific reasons for engaging in language preservation. The central idea of the Program is to boost intergenerational language transmission wherever feasible. Various approaches to different language situations are envisaged, including enlightenment campaigns, language nests, and language documentation. Three necessary conditions for language revitalization include engaging local activists, administrative and financial support, and the scientific validity of the methodology. The Programs 12-year roadmap is split into three stages. There are a number of favorable factors making the Program feasible, as well as a number of potential obstacles. We have a historic opportunity to preserve languages spoken in Russia, and this is an opportunity that must be used.

WHERE SHOULD WE LEARN OUR NATIVE LANGUAGE? FOUR CASES OF INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES IN LATIN AMERICA

Хотя усвоение языка в раннем детстве в семье является важнейшим условием сохранения языка, многие автохтонные языки мира сегодня уже перестали передаваться внутри семьи. Многие родители считают, что их этнический язык для детей бесполезен, и предпочитают воспитывать детей на официальном языке страны. В статье я сравню ситуации четырех автохтонных языков Латинской Америки, с которыми я работаю: юго-восточный хуастекский (майя, Мексика), цоциль де Сан Исидро де ля Либертад (майя, Мексика), виличе/цесунгун (мапудунган, Чили) и михе (михе-зокеанский, Мексика). Эти миноритарные языки находятся в разных регионах и в разных социальных контекстах. В некоторых сообществах естественная передача языка от родителей детям уже давно прервана, а в других, напротив, внутрисемейная передача языка поддерживается. Из этих четырех языков под серьезной угрозой исчезновения находятся, прежде всего, виличе/цесунгун (мапудунган, Чили) и юго-восточный хуастекский (майя, Мексика), поскольку родители перестали передавать эти языки новым поколениям, лишая таким образом собственных детей их языкового наследства. Первым языком детей в этих двух сообществах является испанский. С другой стороны, ситуация с цоцилем де Сан Исидро де ля Либертад (майя, Мексика) и михе (михе-зокеанский, Мексика) гораздо лучше, так как подавляющее большинство детей в этих сообществах говорят на своем этническом языке и усваивают испанский только в начальной школе. Можно добавить, что в Сан Исидро де ля Либертад, как и в некоторых удаленных деревнях михе, в начальной школе преподавание ведется на их этническом языке. This research was presented at the colloquium “The fate of linguistic heritage: transmitted to the younger generations or lost?” held at the RAS Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences in May 2021. My presentation was a short overview of the language acquisition patterns within four indigenous communities in Latin America, speakers of the following indigenous languages: South Eastern Huastec (Mayan, Mexico), Tsotsil of San Isidro de la Libertad (Mayan, Mexico), Huilliche/Tsesungun (Mapudungan, Chile) and Mixe (Mixe-Zoquean, Mexico). I carried out extensive fieldwork and research with these communities (more details can be found in Kondic 2021, Kondic 2021 (forthcoming), Kondic 2015b, Kondic 2014a, Kondic 2014b, Kondic 2011b, Kondic 2010). At the moment my research concentrates on the sociolinguistic situation with the language Mixe (Mixe-Zoquean, Mexico), namely, on their language attitudes. During each of these four projects I produced learning materials to facilitate language teaching and revitalization (Kondic 2009b, Kodic 2016, Kondic 2015a, Kondic 2013b, Kondic 2015c, Kondic 2018b). The materials I produced and left in the communities are now being used for language teaching and maintenance. In this article I am going to present my insight into the patterns of native language learning within the above four communities. Many of Mexican indigenous languages are at present in decline and falling into disuse. Language endangerment often causes interruption in the process of language transmission, and it will be interesting to see what the situation is like within these different languages of Latin America that I had an opportunity to work with.

Globalization as a Factor for Language Endangerment: Nigerian Indigenous Languages in Focus

Globalization can be viewed from economic, cultural and socio-political perspectives including information and communication technology (ICT). In view of this, it is seen as the increasing empowerment of western cultural values including language, philosophy and world view. In many African countries Nigeria inclusive, English language which is the language of colonization is gradually becoming a global language due to its influence and subsequent adoption as the official language by many African nations which are largely multi-cultural and multilingual under the British colony. This trend has not only relegated the status of Nigerian Indigenous languages to the background but has also threatened their existence in Nigeria which accommodates over 500 native languages. If this trend is left unchecked, the ill-wind of globalization will gradually sweep the native languages including the so-called major ones (Hausa, Igbo and Yoruba) out of existence particularly in Nigeria. This paper discusses globalization as one of the major factors for language endangerment with respect to Nigeria as a nation, with a view to proffering possible solutions capable of sustaining and empowering the nation’s socio-cultural and economic stability.

Cultural Dominance and Language Endangerment: The case of Efut in Cross River State, Nigeria

The Efut culture, and by extension language, seems to have been mortally threatened after their speakers’ migration to Nigeria from Cameroun in the 16th Century. The linguistic situation resulting in language shift was especially exacerbated in the last seven decades, largely due to the dominant cultural influence of Efik, Ibibio and English. The most ostensive vestige of the language manifests in the Ekpe ‘Leopard’ secret society songs, rituals and proverbs (performed by, and intelligible mostly to octogenarians). The Efut language sociolinguistic status is between post moribund and dead stage(s). This paper attempts, therefore, to x-ray ways to revitalize and revive it. Two such revival strategies are the use of digital communication technology and Efut in Nollywood movies. Data for this work came mainly from songs, proverbs, interviews, wordlist and available historical literature. The prognosis for reviving Efut appears realistically poor, at present. However, with appropriate input and pragmatic will from all stakeholders, it would be hasty, uncharitable, to consign the language to irreversible extinction. This optimism is sustainable only if language engineers, policymakers and the Efut nation do not continue to sit on the fence.

Language Endangerment and the Need for Technology for Language Empowerment: Case Study of the Brahui language in Balochistan

Diaspora and indigenous speech communities are under the threat of extinction in Balochistan. Local inhabitants with a lower economic and commercial value symbolize cultural and ethnic genocide in western Pakistan. In my study, I investigate the scope of technology for the documentation and maintenance of the Brahui language in the province of Balochistan. Also, I discuss how language policy and the digital divide are creating unfamiliar pedagogical, socio-cultural and linguistic practices, along with putting minority speech communities in danger of losing their identity and bringing about linguistic extinction. Drawing on the work of critical theorists, perceptions of indigenous Brahui community are recorded to understand the influence of digital technology for language survival. The study identifies that digital divide and flawed educational policies in Balochistan are potent instruments of Brahui endangerment. I call for inclusive and unbiased language policies and uniform access to technology for linguistic empowerment of the Brahui speech community in Balochistan.