OUTLINE

language influences perception - MUST DO otherwise they wouldn't have brought laws in against it how narrative therapy deconstructs - double storied conversations - whaqt do we have to know about a language before we can translate it

A man was travelling through a land he had not visited before. He picked up a rock and he asked a man who lived on the land about the rock. He took the rock home and without holding the rock up to any other light or looking at it through any other window, he made a story about the rock. He took the rock further away and put it on display in it’s own little museum case. And future knowledge finders, who had never known about where the rock was found, interpreted the life of the rock only by what they were directed to see in the museum case. With their new knowledge, the Finders went and visited the new land but they didn’t ask the man who lived there about the rock, instead they told him about the rock

• Item A
• Item B

introduction - the telling part one - normal as a concept - how narrative therapy offers a different view o double storied conversations o absent but implicit - my use of narrative in journey of learning language - personal journey of learning language o australia’s early political relationship  exemption choice  language illegal o my language journey to the phd question  formal • limited perspective given from the people who answered the language questions • languages were collected because they thought we would die out • and you and us and them leant on that knowledge to live in the world. Institutional knowledge making, and how this holds fixed certain stories of self, but also of peoples. has the impact of clouding future studies and ??? of future knowledge holders.  informal • data pigeon hold on collection, power at play that articulates a different world than actually was - how language works o language influences perception  must do otherwise they wouldn’t have brought in a law against it o not the phonology or grammar, it’s the narrative - language influences perception o what needs to be known before we can translate a language - texts o 1838 Major Thomas Mitchell o 1873 Harriet Barlow o 1905 K Langloh Parker o discrepancies Influences of Interpretation Many believe that language is fixed and to a point it is, like verbs or commas or when to use ‘Maam’. Accepted rules exist, some if only for moments in time. But the ways in which we interpret those moments and the impact that interpretation has on how we understand our world, is far less rigid. There are many influences and choices vying for our attention while we are constructing our perception of language, even if we are following all the ‘rules’. This essay shares my experience of some of those influences while deciphering English recordings of Yuwaalaraay history and the strategies that I learnt could help. I descend from the Yuwaalaraay people, and like many Australian language groups who are engaging and extending their language, learning opportunities exist at various academic and community levels. I am currently in the Certificate III at Dubbo TAFE and to extend my connection to my Ancestors experience, I also seek out historically written resources. I find that language is like a time machine (Tan, 2018), enabling an insight into a familial world that I could never grieve firsthand. In 2018, I was reading The Euahlayi Tribe (Langloh Parker, 1905). Like many books of the day, it couldn’t be confirmed if the Author understood the Yuwaalaraay context in which they were recording so sometimes it seemed that certain interpretations were being privileged over others. This is not the same concession as say that given in Australian Aboriginal Language teaching where lessons are built around the historical needs of Ancestors. For example, there is no Yuwaalaraay word for Kangaroo, but there are words for Grey Kangaroo, Red Kangaroo etc., differences that would have affected how a hunting party prepares for a kill and affects how I understand my Ancestors use of the language. At the time, my reading practices were coming into line with Indigenous research methods, that is to understand people within their own social context, and then the global and local influences inside of that (Chilisa, 2012). I felt that Langloh had it turned around and was making choices about what she saw, ultimately losing or deferring certain aspects of the story along the way. I was also exposed to Hartley & Benington’s (2000) model of co-research where there is a tri-relationship in collecting information. To apply the model to Langloh’s book had Langloh as the contributor of the ‘outsider view’, the Yuwaalaraay interviewed contributing the ‘insider knowledge’ and I, as the reader with a century more experience, the co-researcher alongside Langloh and the Yuwaalaraay. The model further unpacked Langloh’s interpretation and highlighted how dominant plots were being maintained. Shortly after, I put the book away not only because of my time poor University study but also because I felt I had gained as much as I could, interpreting as the co-researcher. A few months ago though, levelling up in my Yuwaalaraay study exposed me to the tool of Linguistics, and Langloh once again sits on my desk. Combining Linguistics with my knowledge of Yuwaalaraay, has brought to me, a knowledge of the substance of language. For instance, I had not considered that Langloh may have recognised words, but may not have understood what was important in the sentence as the Syntax in Yuwaalaraay is reversed to that of English. To say, “I will eat meat” is “Dhinggaa ngaya dhal-li” which directly translates as “Meat I will eat”. It is the meat that is of importance, not the eating. Semantics may also have played a part because of its culturally dependant nature (National Center for Homeless Education, 2004). Mawu-gi, for example, is a verb that means to scratch or to dig, in Yuwaalaraay it’s the same action. Langloh’s interpretation may only have been based on the first use of the word that she heard. Other possible Linguistics differences include dialects and phonetics. Yuwaalaraay people are from the Gamilaraay nation which also encompasses the Yuwaalayaay and Gamilaraay. Guduu is the Yuwaalaraay word for fish, e.g. “guduu galgaa” means “many fish”. Guya is the equivalent in Gamilaraay, same syntax, different use of the mouth and throat. Sounds also affected questions. For instance, there is no Yuwaalaraay question word such as ‘Who’ but to ask “Who is that woman?”, I would say “Yinarr” while increasing my voice and motioning my face and my mouth towards the person. My journey with Langloh has been like the peeling of an onion. What I thought was the only layer had Langloh as a secondary source of information. My Narrative Practice gave some voice to the primary source but couldn’t get me passed story interpretation. Linguisitics handed me the peeler and shown me the core of language, the possibilties of understanding that existed before the words were even shared. I am very excited.

- what did Normal want? - what stories did Normal want upheld? What ideas and beliefs were of more benefit to the colonisation of Australia? - If the question is why are new understandings possible, then I think this might imply a range of possible directions... one of which might involving deconstructing the truth claims of existing texts or historical and anthropological knowledge claims, and showing their limits and blindspots. I think this would be a question that is hard to pursue on its own, but could be addressed secondarily after asking what or how - CURRENT: what alternate understandings are possible FROM HISTORICAL ANTHROPOLOGICAL TEXTS written by non-indigenous researchers ON THE EUHALARI PEOPLE when reviewed by Yuwaalaraay descendants USING THE BARRIYAY FRAMEWORK WHAT IF THAT FIRST PART WAS: **how** are alternate understandings possible OR **why** are alternate understandings possible To ask what alternate understandings are possible seems to make the new story the focus of what is important. So there was one misguided/racist story and now there is a different, potentially more correct or generous story. However, shifting to how seems to move the focus from the content of the story as being the only concern, and towards considering the processes by which story and knowledge of Euhalari people can be revised, reclaimed and remade. These are processes that you are initiating exploring and detailing in your thesis.

The knowledges that I have stem from a family of scottish immigrants wanting a new life and tarnished as trash and an Aboriginal family wanting an old life and tarnished as trash.

I am a descendent of the Yuwaalaraay and Muruwuri peoples who come from the land of what is now known as NSW and QLD border, and the Scots whose land is currently claimed by British Ownership. I was born in Brisbane in QLD 10 years before Aboriginal people were recognised as citizens. I spent the first 34 years of my life in a suburb called Wynnum. My great grandmother Ada Hooper was born on Tinnenburra Station to Lizzie and Samuel Hooper, and she had my grandfather Colin in Cunnamulla. It is from them that the most reliable knowledge comes about our connections to Yuwaalaraay and Muruwari. My father and I survived the generation of exemption.

There are changemakers and there are gatekeepers and Aboriginality needs both. I have a set of skills born from biology, experience and history that points me in the Gatekeeper direction

in my career, I work with clients, to breakdown historical truths that were imposed by others. Others such as parents, teachers, government, religion etc who had the power of definition in a particular circumstance. i find that when people seek healing, they come clutching a story that they and others may only have considered from a select viewpoint. i combine these skills with my cultural and life experiences to expand those viewpoints.

I was born in Brisbane, Queensland 10 years before the official stolen generation policies stopped and 6 months after Aboriginal people were recognised as citizens. I spent the first 34 years of my life in a suburb called Wynnum. My mother was born in Bellshill in Scotland and my father is Aboriginal and Irish. My great grandmother Ada Hooper was born on Tinnenburra Station to Lizzie and Samuel Hooper, and she had my grandfather Colin in Cunnamulla. It is from this web of people that the most reliable knowledge comes about our connections to Yuwaalaraay and Muruwari. Language was not freely shared in my childhood as my Ancestors were forced to give it up as part of the cost of exemption certificates. I started to learn Yuwaalaraay language from early historical books like The Euahlayi Tribe by K. Langloh Parker and sound recordings by Janet Mathews but without daily practice or access to other speaker, I was just parroting. During Covid, Dubbo tafe began online classes run by elders Aunty Beth and Uncle John. These learning yarns gave me a new understanding of the purpose and reason [words Uncle John would never let us forget] of language and each word within it. It is from this web of people that I realised I had been learning how to say Yuwaalaraay, but not how to tell it.

After the courses finished, i started two facebook groups, dhubaanmala to keep in touch with other speakers, and tinnenburra-baa to increase Hooper / Johnston connection across the borders. I am not yet fluent and may never be but I practice everyday. Even with the limited knowledge I have so far of Yuwaalaraay, it is enough to highlight the differences that I now see between what was collected from our Ancestors and what they were reported as saying.

I am not referring to sterotyped opinion like that of Mitchell (1852) in the excerpt above, ignorant sentiments that fed a nation's view. My focus is on Authors who were collecting information, language etc directly from our people but rather than check purpose and reason, they started to create "facts' from their own assumptions. F or instance, Barlow in the passage below, where our Ancestors appear to not have the capacity to count rather than the truth of having no need for high numbers. It is almost like the Collecters moulded our words into a colonised view.

Nowadays, research methods and ways of recording history are much more inclusive with cultural knowledge holders having more control in clarification and publication. For language research, it means our culture and purpose are recognised as part of the words, and the words are recognised as part of the culture and purpose. Much of this came about because of the courage of past Indigenous researchers who not only acknowledged the absence of our voice but created new methods to ensure it would be heard. . While that change is itself a cause for celebration, for me it is important that it is not left at that as all unclarified historical research impacts future studies as it constricts the view of the past. Our new knowledge holders, our emerging elders, who now have wider access to the world and less access to community and elder confirmation will find these Ancestoral voices when looking up historical records but they will hear them within the limitations of how they were first collected.

So in my Masters year, I focused on ideas on how to deconstruct historical knowledge from a few different vantage points. Armed with my new found ideas and many language misinterpretations, I approached Charles Darwin University and told them that many words and pronounciations and nuances do not align with the knowledges handed down in community and that I was worried that what we are now nurturing is a colonial interpretation of what our Ancestors shared. They said, hey why don't you research it!