how we might do this
my gut tells me that theres not a lot of joy happening hereI used language to name it to remind me of the multiple authorities necessary to understand a story, in that no one view can give a full picture and each view informs the complete picture. When revisiting history, my goal is not to rewrite it or inflate it or cut parts out i don’t like, I am exposinge all the reasons why it became that way because when we know how something was put together, we can then pull it apart
what records will be used
there are a few options being considered, we’re down to these four as together they span two centuries, have all been under the research microscope by non Yuwaalaraay person at some stage and have all had some inclusion in present language materials. Note that we don’t review the entire books, just parts of them
what is the question
Are alternative understandings possible .. when Euhalari* descendants .. deconstruct historical text .. written about their ancestors by non-indigenous researchers .. using the Barriyay framework
having conversations with people as to why they don’t want to participate and it seems that it is more of a “whats the point” and the comments i’m getting is that this is coming from how I have posed my question, not all of it, really just the start ARE ALTERNATIVE UNDERSTANDINGS POSSIBLE.
they are possible, we know that they are there, amongst our language communities we’ve recognised that for decades, so what’s the point of spending time, having it recorded in a colonised way .. that is how some people are seeing the phd
when i have asked what is worth the work, even though I feel that putting it like that has me highlighting a measure to my participants answers, i.e. having it in a phd is important, the answers are:
- how we passed the language down and kept the meaning
- bringing attention to our knowing, to how it has been here since before colonisation, during coloiniation and now as we come back round to ustilising our kinowing to continue language development
how did we learn that, how did they learn that
i think we already know that alternative understandings are possible, i think the barriyay framework brings more about the ways of knowing to the surface rather than specific differences in words and interpretations.
so i’m looking at the change of one line, so instead of ARE ALTERNATIVE UNDERSTANDINGS POSSIBLE, it becomes WHAT WAYS OF KNOWING ARE BROUGHT TO THE SURFACE
if that change of one line happens, the methodoloogy expands with the barriyay questions in reference to how someone knows that there are differences
for example, Aunty Beth knowing that there are many words for kangaroo even though as a woman, she has never hunted and never been exposed to the language of hunting,
AS IT WAS KNOWN
AS IT TOLD
AS IT IS KNOWN
AS IT IS TOLD
possibilities
- rather than a particular text being reviewed by a group of people, it is specific instances of known mistakes, like the kangaroo, that are utilised
Are alternative understandings possible ..
we are looking for the voices of Ancestors that were not heard or ignored when Euhalari descendants deconstruct historical texts
what ways of knowing are brought to the surface
when Euhalari* descendants..
Yuwaalaraay [no matter how you spell it) will be doing the work written about their ancestors by non-indigenous researchers
deconstruct historical text ..
we are going to step into the role of researcher using what we know to be the systems and practices of what is knowledge and the forms of authority that go with that
written about their ancestors by non-indigenous researchers ..
the specific texts are those where a non Indigenous person collected language directly from a Yuwaalaraay Ancestor, or through a Yuwaalaraay translator, and probably something from the late 1800s and the mid to late 1900
using the Barriyay framework
barriyay will guide us in where to look rather than in how to look, i.e. AS IT WAS KNOWN, AS IT TOLD, AS IT IS KNOWN, AS IT IS TOLD
Are alternative understandings possible .. when Euhalari* descendants .. deconstruct historical text .. written about their ancestors by non-indigenous researchers .. using the Barriyay framework
| QUESTION | AS IT WAS KNOWN | AS IT WAS TOLD | AS IT IS KNOWN | AS IT IS TOLD |
| are alternative understandings possible | ||||
| when Euhalari descendants | ||||
| deconstruct historical texts | ||||
| written about their ancestors by non-indigenous researchers | how did thee linguists engaging with the communities with whom they’re working – were activities driven by linguists’ interests or community interests – was there enough community consultation and community-led decision making | |||
| using the barriyay framework |