AAAL 2025: Invited Colloquium
Convened by Adrienne Tsikewa and Barbra Meek
First Americans/Nations and Applied Linguistics: Building better partnerships through relational accountability
Conveners:
Adrienne Tsikewa, Zuni Pueblo; University of California, Santa Barbara
Barbra Meek, Comanche Nation; University of Michigan
Colloquium Abstract
There have been recent efforts to be more inclusive of historically underrepresented community members and minorities in the language sciences (Charity Hudley et al. 2020). Of particular interest to this session are efforts to broaden participation of and partnerships with Indigenous peoples of the Americas not only in language sciences, but also by informing organizational changes, whether by increasing our attendance at conferences such as the annual AAAL conference or through a deeper, more intentional engagement with the research and scholarship that Indigenous academics and community members produce. Relationality is a core Indigenous value such that an Indigenous approach to relational accountability (Wilson 2008, Kovach 2010, Leonard 2023, Chew et al. 2021) entails recognizing and honoring relationships to land, community, and intergenerational knowledge, among other areas. It also argues for greater recognition of Indigenous contributions to and impact on the language sciences, along with guidance for transforming how language researchers do science.
An early step towards building out relational accountability within a sister organization, Linguistic Society of America (LSA), was the creation of Natives4Linguistics (N4L), a project to imagine linguistics from Native American and other Indigenous ways of knowing, and in ways that are fully accountable to Native communities. The eponymous LSA special interest group, Natives4Linguistics (N4L), has been pivotal in this effort in order to create true and authentic Indigenous inclusion (Leonard 2018). While N4L has attempted to increase participation of Indigenous peoples at the Annual Meeting, many of these scholars still feel it is not a place for them. A focus of this proposed session is to explore the participation, or lack thereof, of First American/Nations linguists at conferences, in research and scholarship, citational practices,
funding awards, and so forth. This is especially important during this time of the United Nations International Decade of Indigenous Languages which places a central focus on Indigenous languages and their users and calls for the meaningful participation of Indigenous peoples (IDIL Global Action Plan; Grounds 2019).
This symposium builds on previous research done by non-Indigenous peoples on First Americans/Nations and Indigenous linguists/language scholars and shifts the conversation to emic perspectives from Indigenous linguists. Non-Indigenous linguist Gerdts (2017) reported on observations that several Indigenous language scholars had on their linguistics journeys. A major observation Gerdts had is that the linguistic field is transitioning to be more welcoming to these scholars. Though the field now has perspectives on race and colonization in linguistics and ethical considerations for working with Indigenous peoples (Davis 2023, Leonard 2020, Tsikewa 2021, Gaby and Woods 2020, Shulist and Rice 2019; see also Riley, Perley and Garcia-Sanchez 2024), linguistics (and academia in general) lacks varied perspectives that First Americans/Nations/Indigenous linguists and language scholars have regarding their experiences in academic contexts (e.g. graduate programs, academic conferences) to affirm this observation. This session will highlight the lived experiences of First Americans/Nations linguists and language scholars as they expand on the notion of relational accountability as a framework for applied linguists to responsibly support Indigenous communities and their language efforts (see for example McKenzie 2022; Dupris 2020). These perspectives will provide insight on Indigenizing linguistics that are crucial to inclusion of First Americans/Nations/Indigenous linguists/language scholars at/with the AAAL and the field of Linguistics for the foreseeable future.
Relational agency and linguistic responsibility
Adrienne Tsikewa, Zuni Pueblo; University of California, Santa Barbara
As Indigenous scholar Tynan (2021) explains, relationality involves both agency and responsibility, especially to kin. In the context of language revitalization and reclamation, Chickasaw scholar Chew (2015) proposes the concept of “linguistic responsibility,” that she links closely to kin and recognizes it as a recurring theme in stories of individuals and families striving to prioritize their ancestral languages in their daily lives. Linguistic responsibility entails ensuring that our Native and Indigenous languages are revitalized, reclaimed, and regenerated with the goal that future generations will be able to learn them, speak them, and have knowledge of the cultural views expressed through them. This is accomplished through relational agency, or the assertion of the linguistic responsibility that First Americans/Nations and Indigenous peoples have regarding our ancestral languages.
In this talk, I engage the concept of relational agency to discuss the question of who is linguistically responsible for ensuring the survival of Shiwi’ma, or the Zuni language, by sharing the perspectives of select Zuni tribal members. These perspectives emphasize the significance of language ecologies (Haugen 2001) which is essential for language policy and planning. They also highlight the importance of amplifying and centering Native American and Indigenous voices and perspectives concerning the health and future of their languages, which in turn supports relational accountability through the creation of “a more inclusive space for Indigenous linguists, thus broadening participation and further increasing educational outcomes for Indigenous people and advancing the language sciences” (Fitzgerald 2017:e292).
Mskwaankwad Rice, Anishinaabe, Wasauksing First Nation; University of Minnesota Institute of Linguistics
The vast majority of Indigenous linguists choose to study Linguistics for its utility in furthering Indigenous language reclamation efforts. The discipline, however, has a troubled history and maintains an inequitable relationship with Indigenous peoples, and this is a strong deterrent for Indigenous students that requires extra work to navigate. Further, the frameworks of Linguistics and academia generally do not inherently support the goals of Indigenous students, nor do they align with Indigenous cultural values. This is an additional challenge for those seeking to work for their peoples in languages in a way that is compatible with their personal and communities’ values and goals. In this talk I will relate my own experiences in navigating the deterrents inherent in Linguistics and the supports that have helped me through. I will also discuss how my past and current linguistic research is learner- and community-centered; an approach that is not typical of Linguistics or academia.
Cherry Meyer, University of Michigan
In the pursuit of academia, Native scholars may face a multitude of added obstacles stemming from settler colonialism and the resultant exclusion of Natives from institutions of higher education. Despite this exclusion, certain fields of study established regular contact with Native communities, most often for the extraction or supposed “salvage” of intellectual and material resources. Linguistics, being one of these fields, has a history of poor relations with Native peoples, leading to the development of opposing priorities on numerous points of intersection including research focus and outcomes, issues of access and trust, authenticity, and financial security. Following Chew et al. (2021; see also McCarty et al., 2018), a group of interdisciplinary Indigenous scholars engaged in indigenous language work, I use the metaphor of a spider web to explore some of these intersections, their ability to compound and potential to create obstacles for Native scholars seeking to do community focused language work. I draw on my own journey through academia, as a member of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, and a linguist learning how to do language work in a good way. In my current position as assistant professor at the University of Michigan, I have been part of a newly formed collaborative of scholars focused on supporting and promoting the presence of the Ojibwe language at the university and beyond. I share insights from this collaboration, drawing special attention to the challenges and benefits of doing this fundamentally interdisciplinary work in a university setting.
Tribalizing Linguistic Inquiry
Joe Dupris, Brown University
In this presentation I outline methodological considerations for tribalizing linguistic inquiry that acknowledge the history of Linguistics, incorporate lessons from state-based, civil rights-oriented approaches to research, and integrate Constitution-based and inherent rights-oriented research. Specifically, I consider Community-Based Research, Indigenous
Research Methodologies, Tribally-Based Community Research, and Tribally Driven
Participatory Research in context of UNESCO’s International Decade of Indigenous Languages 2022-2032, the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and the United States’ 10-year National Plan on Native Language Revitalization.
The common principles threading each approach center on reciprocity and redistribution as means to assert rights to self-determination in tribal and colonial frameworks. These principles are present in the work of tribal, Indigenous, and accomplice language workers who are helping to change Linguistics from a scientific discipline complicit with, if not embracive of, the construction of the United States as a white European Nation to a science that sustains the political integrity of tribal peoples from time immemorial to time infinite.
Recognizing Chickasaw scholar Amanda Cobb’s argument that sovereignty is an active process of work on our journey toward self-determination that is at once our destination and our stories of the journey, I share this presentation from my lived experiences as a Klamath Tribes citizen of Modoc, Klamath, Big Pine Paiute, and Mnicoujou Lakota (Cheyenne River Sioux) descent engaged in the inter-sovereign relations of my own nation, my nation with other tribes, and (colonial) states.
Associated plenary: Wesley Y. Leonard