L2 MOTIVATION IN LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION PRACTICE by ALLISON TAYLOR-ADAMS A DISSERTATION Presented to the Department of Linguistics and the Division of Graduate Studies of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September 2022 DISSERTATION APPROVAL PAGE Student: Allison Taylor-Adams Title: L2 Motivation in Language Revitalization Practice This dissertation has been accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Doctor of Philosophy degree in the Linguistics Department by: Spike Gildea Co-chairperson Gabriela Peréz Báez Co-chairperson Julie Sykes Core Member Jenefer Husman Institutional Representative and Krista Chronister Vice Provost for Graduate Studies Original approval signatures are on file with the University of Oregon Division of Graduate Studies. Degree awarded September, 2022 ii © 2022 Allison Taylor-Adams This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. iii DISSERTATION ABSTRACT Allison Taylor-Adams Doctor of Philosophy Department of Linguistics September 2022 Title: L2 Motivation in Language Revitalization Practice This dissertation investigates the initial and ongoing motivations of language revitalization practitioners. This study extends our understandings of language revitalization from the programmatic and sociological levels to the level of the individual practitioner. It also extends theory in L2 motivation into a largely unstudied language learning context. I primarily engage with the L2 Motivational Self System (Dörnyei, 2005) and Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) to frame the findings, as well as drawing on Ushioda’s (2009) ‘person-in- context relational view’ of L2 motivation. The findings in this study arise from rigorous, inductive qualitative analysis of individual practitioner voices and experiences. I propose a model for conducting applied research that centers principles of respect, relationality, and reciprocity with language communities and community members. Built on this model, and with careful attention to interview and transcription methods, this study includes data from interviews with 28 revitalization practitioners as well as qualitative data from the Global Survey of Language Revitalization Effort (Peréz Báez et al., 2019). Key themes in the findings from these sources include: Goals, that is, practitioners’ diverse goals and trajectories towards those goals; Relationships, meaning the role of relations and relationship-building in sustaining motivation and effort; and Time, including how motivation and effort vary across periods of time, as well as how practitioners iv describe being motivated by perspectives on the past, experiences in the present, and visions of the future. From these findings I propose practical suggestions for practitioners looking for strategies to sustain motivation, and theoretical implications for our understanding of L2 motivation in general. Language revitalization is not an easy task; it requires significant effort on the part of many individuals, most of whom recognize they will not get to see the results of their work in their lifetimes. Individuals who learn these languages as second languages face enormous odds with enormous determination. My hope is that this dissertation might, in some small way, help those individuals stay motivated in their journeys, and might contribute in some small way to a future where all people have the chance to speak their languages. v CURRICULUM VITAE NAME OF AUTHOR: Allison Kathleen Taylor-Adams GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS ATTENDED: University of Oregon, Eugene University of Massachusetts-Boston University of Oklahoma DEGREES AWARDED: Doctor of Philosophy, Linguistics, 2022, University of Oregon M.A., Applied Linguistics, 2013, University of Massachusetts-Boston B.A., International & Area Studies, 2006, University of Oklahoma B.A., Religious Studies, 2006, University of Oklahoma AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST: Language Revitalization Applied Linguistics Second Language Learning Second Language Teaching PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: Graduate Employee, Department of Linguistics, 2018-2019; 2020-2022 University of Oregon Graduate Employee, College of Arts and Sciences, 2019-2020 University of Oregon Graduate Teaching Fellow, American English Institute 2017-2018 University of Oregon Graduate Administrative Fellow, Northwest Indian Language Institute, 2015-2017 University of Oregon NEH Summer Institute Administrator, Religion Department, 2015 The George Washington University Executive Aide, Religion Department, 2007-2015 The George Washington University vi PUBLICATIONS: Taylor-Adams, A. & Lhawa, Y. (2020). A sketch grammar of Siyuewu Khroskyabs. Himalayan Linguistics, 19 (2). http://dx.doi.org/10.5070/H919246822 Taylor-Adams, A. (2019). Recording to revitalize: Language teachers and documentation design. Language Documentation and Conservation, 13, 426-445. Taylor-Adams, A. (2016). Learning to fly: Vocabulary acquisition and extensive reading in an intermediate Classical Greek classroom. Classical World, 109 (4), 525-542. vii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Write in recollection and amazement for yourself – Jack Kerouac, from “Belief & Technique for Modern Prose” This dissertation is more than a product of research or a piece of scholarly writing. It is also the documentation of a period of my life, and a testament to how richly, abundantly blessed I am in my relationships. On every page, I see the imprint of someone I love, someone who has spoken to me, someone who has cared for me. In these acknowledgements I get to put into writing the names of some of those people, and I write this section in recollection and whole- hearted amazement. First of all, I would like to thank the many revitalization practitioners who have been my teachers and friends over these many years. That includes all the practitioners who had conversations with me during the interview part of this research; thank you for your time, your insights, your trust and your care. Thank you also to Joana Jansen, Robert Elliott, Judith Fernandes, Janne Underriner, Regan Anderson, Jerome Viles, and Carson Viles. Special thanks to Jaeci Hall and Zalmai Zahir. Shu’ ‘aa-shii-la Jaeci, hišəbəʔ Ɂəswəli. I would also like to acknowledge in writing how lucky I feel to have been part of the Linguistics Department at the University of Oregon, and how grateful I am to the community I have found there. Thank you to my friends Charlie Farrington, Misaki Kato, Marie-Caroline Pons, Shahar Shirtz, Amos Teo, Zachary Jaggers, Don Daniels and Kelsey Daniels. Special thank you to Matt Stave, for holding me in the light when I needed it; and to Kaylynn Gunter, the most beloved of officemates, the most steadfast of friends, the most treasured of grad school comrades. I quite literally could not have done this without you. I also would like to thank my generous teachers Scott Delancey, Doris Payne, and Eric viii Pederson. I also wish to record here my gratitude and indebtedness to Zoltán Dörnyei, whom I unfortunately never had the chance to meet. His passing, shortly before the completion of this dissertation, leaves me feeling bereft of a scholarly conversation I was so looking forward to, and clearly leaves a large hole in the field of L2 motivation. Though he did not know me, I want to use this space to acknowledge that he was a generous teacher to me as well. I also gratefully acknowledge my committee members. Thank you to Jenefer Husman, for pushing me to think theoretically about my topic and for welcoming me into the community of your Education Studies class. Thank you to Julie Sykes for stimulating discussions about the nature of language learning and for guidance in approaching qualitative research. Thank you to my dissertation co-chair, Gabriela Peréz Báez; Gabriela, I am profoundly lucky that you arrived during my time in this degree, as you joining this department made so many things possible, not just for me but for the whole department and university. Thank you for your wisdom and your insights. I look forward to many more years of learning from and working with you. And to Spike Gildea I say: thank you for your unwavering faith, thank you for sharing in both the trials and triumphs of this long and sometimes unexpected journey, thank you for pushing me to be a better writer and scholar and thank you for never letting me forget to be a human with a heart at the same time. I would also like to thank the Taylor family: my mother, Carolyn, my father, Robert, and my brother and oldest friend, Adam. Thank you also to Brittany and to Elijah, Tommy, and little Katie for bringing so much additional joy to the Taylors. I love you all. To my extended family, Anne, Jan, and Susanne, I write in recollection and amazement that we have been together in friendship and love for all these many years and all the many chapters in our lives. It will take me a long time to write enough about how grateful I am to you; ix this is just the first piece of that. I love you. To my godson Moses, I am inspired by your curiosity, your perceptiveness, and your fearlessness. Thank you for being exactly who you are. Finally, I want to thank Aaron. You have taken care of me in a thousand ways, big and small, during this long long labor. I know I would not have managed to stay fed, housed, sane, and writing all at the same time if it weren’t for you. But even more than that, I get to talk to you every day. And that is my favorite part of every day. I love you very, very much. x TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Language revitalization ............................................................................................. 2 1.2.1 Language shift and language loss ...................................................................... 2 1.2.2 Terminology ..................................................................................................... 5 1.2.3 Research and practice in language revitalization ............................................... 8 1.2.4 Individuals in language revitalization .............................................................. 11 1.3 Motivation ............................................................................................................... 13 1.3.1 Motivation theory – Key concepts from Self-Determination Theory ............... 14 1.3.2 L2 Motivation theory – integrative vs instrumental orientations ...................... 16 1.3.3 L2 Motivation theory – The L2 Motivational Self-System .............................. 18 1.3.4 The role of context in L2 Motivation research ................................................. 20 1.3.5 The Rooted L2 Self ......................................................................................... 22 1.4 L2 Motivation in language revitalization contexts – literature review ....................... 24 1.4.1 Spain and neofalantes ..................................................................................... 24 1.4.2 Celtic languages .............................................................................................. 29 1.4.3 Māori .............................................................................................................. 33 1.4.4 Other cases ..................................................................................................... 36 1.4.5 The gap ........................................................................................................... 39 1.5 An overview of the chapters in this dissertation ....................................................... 41 II. METHODS .................................................................................................................... 43 xi 2.1 Introduction and framing ......................................................................................... 43 2.2 The Global Survey of Language Revitalization Efforts – Survey data and analysis .. 46 2.2.1 Introduction to Survey .................................................................................... 46 2.2.1.1 Survey questions to be investigated ........................................................ 47 2.2.1.2 Descriptive information about the survey responses ............................... 48 2.2.2 Methodology for survey analysis .................................................................... 52 2.2.2.1 Gap in the literature ................................................................................ 52 2.2.2.2 Grounded Theory/Constant Comparative method ................................... 53 2.2.3 Procedures of analysis..................................................................................... 55 2.2.3.1 Input procedures ..................................................................................... 55 2.2.3.2 Initial coding .......................................................................................... 59 2.2.3.3 Analytic decisions about the text ............................................................ 61 2.2.3.3.1 Example categories from Language Ideologies .............................. 61 2.2.3.3.2 Examples from Focus on Language Domain .................................. 62 2.2.3.3.3 Examples of ‘speaking’ versus ‘speakers’ ...................................... 63 2.2.3.4 Inter-rater checks.................................................................................... 64 2.2.3.5 Refinement of categories ........................................................................ 65 2.2.3.6 Summary of workflow and survey data presentation ............................... 67 2.3 Interviews with revitalization practitioners – Interview methods and analysis .......... 68 2.3.1 Introduction to the case sites and participant recruitment................................. 69 2.3.1.1 Multilingual Institute (MLI) ................................................................... 69 2.3.1.2 Northwest Indian Language Institute (NILI) ........................................... 71 2.3.1.3 Kodrah Kristang ..................................................................................... 72 xii 2.3.1.4 Summary ................................................................................................ 74 2.3.2 Pre-interview preparation ................................................................................ 75 2.3.2.1 Informed Consent ................................................................................... 75 2.3.2.2 Interview guide ...................................................................................... 76 2.3.3 The interview via Zoom .................................................................................. 76 2.3.3.1 Descriptive details of the interviews ....................................................... 76 2.3.3.2 Video of the interviews .......................................................................... 77 2.3.3.3 Theorizing the interview......................................................................... 78 2.3.4 Transcription .................................................................................................. 80 2.3.4.1 Theorizing the transcript......................................................................... 80 2.3.4.2 Analytical choices made by Zoom transcriber ........................................ 81 2.3.4.2.1 Messy ............................................................................................ 82 2.3.4.2.2 Lossy ............................................................................................. 85 2.3.4.3 Transcription workflow .......................................................................... 88 2.3.5 Post-transcription procedure ........................................................................... 91 2.3.6 Sharing of research product............................................................................. 92 2.3.7 Follow-up interviews ...................................................................................... 93 2.3.8 Analytic methods ............................................................................................ 94 2.4 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 96 III. GOALS ......................................................................................................................... 97 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 97 3.2 Community effort goals versus individual goals ...................................................... 99 3.2.1 Survey data – Focus on Language Products as a Goal ................................... 100 xiii 3.2.2 Interview data – Tools as a support and Creating Tools as a step towards goals ............................................................................................................. 103 3.3 Linguistic Goals .................................................................................................... 106 3.3.1 Language skills ............................................................................................. 107 3.3.1.1 Interviews ............................................................................................ 107 3.3.1.1.1 Reclaim pieces of language ......................................................... 107 3.3.1.1.2 Communicative abilities .............................................................. 108 3.3.1.1.3 Being a speaker ........................................................................... 110 3.3.1.2 Survey .................................................................................................. 112 3.3.2 Number of users/creating new users .............................................................. 116 3.3.2.1 Survey .................................................................................................. 116 3.3.2.2 Interviews ............................................................................................ 119 3.3.3 Language domains ........................................................................................ 120 3.3.3.1 Interviews ............................................................................................ 121 3.3.3.1.1 Widespread in the community ..................................................... 121 3.3.3.1.2 Increasing domains of use ............................................................ 122 3.3.3.1.3 Increasing language in professional life ....................................... 126 3.3.3.1.4 Language maintenance ................................................................ 128 3.3.3.2 Survey .................................................................................................. 130 3.3.3.2.1 Language maintenance ................................................................ 130 3.3.3.2.2 Focus on language domains ......................................................... 131 3.3.4 Language practice ......................................................................................... 134 3.3.4.1 Making language a habit ...................................................................... 134 xiv 3.3.4.2 Storytelling .......................................................................................... 136 3.3.4.3 Multilingualism .................................................................................... 138 3.4 Beyond language – Extra-linguistic goals .............................................................. 141 3.4.1 Cultural preservation and revival .................................................................. 141 3.4.2 Public outreach and program growth ............................................................. 144 3.4.2.1 Accessibility of material ....................................................................... 144 3.4.2.2 Capacity building ................................................................................. 146 3.4.2.3 Public attitudes ..................................................................................... 149 3.4.2.4 Recognizing diversity ........................................................................... 153 3.4.3 Personal growth ............................................................................................ 155 3.4.3.1 Gaining perspective  Language = Thought ........................................ 155 3.4.3.2 Strong sense of self .............................................................................. 159 3.4.3.3 Well-being ........................................................................................... 162 3.5 Discussion of goals typical from the literature ....................................................... 166 3.5.1 Instrumentality .............................................................................................. 166 3.5.2 Fluency ......................................................................................................... 172 3.5.2.1 Fluency as L1-like language ability ...................................................... 173 3.5.2.2 Fluency as relative ability ..................................................................... 174 3.5.2.3 Fluency as domain-specific ability ....................................................... 175 3.5.2.4 Summary .............................................................................................. 176 3.6 Progress towards goals .......................................................................................... 180 3.6.1 Survey responses – Measuring progress ........................................................ 180 3.6.2 Interviews – Recognizing progress ................................................................ 182 xv 3.6.3 Interviews – Non-linear progress .................................................................. 185 3.6.4 Interviews – Any amount of progress is progress .......................................... 186 3.7 Goal achievement and motivation .......................................................................... 188 IV. RELATIONSHIPS ...................................................................................................... 191 4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 191 4.1.1 SLA Theory – Room for Relationships ......................................................... 191 4.1.2 Relationships in L2 Motivation Research ...................................................... 192 4.1.3 Relationships and Relationality in Language Revitalization .......................... 196 4.1.4 Overview of chapter on Relationships ........................................................... 198 4.2 Varieties of relationships ....................................................................................... 198 4.2.1 Interpersonal connections in the survey ......................................................... 198 4.2.1.1 Family .................................................................................................. 199 4.2.1.2 Focus on Elders, Ancestors .................................................................. 200 4.2.1.3 Focus on Youth, Children ..................................................................... 201 4.2.1.4 Generations .......................................................................................... 203 4.2.1.5 Key individuals .................................................................................... 204 4.2.1.6 Outside connections ............................................................................. 206 4.2.1.7 Comparison .......................................................................................... 207 4.2.2 Relationship types in interviews .................................................................... 208 4.3 Relational motivations ........................................................................................... 211 4.3.1 Expressions of support .................................................................................. 212 4.3.1.1 Praise ................................................................................................... 212 4.3.1.2 Encouragement .................................................................................... 213 xvi 4.3.1.3 Making others proud ............................................................................ 219 4.3.2 Reciprocating and responsibility ................................................................... 221 4.3.2.1 Personal responsibility ......................................................................... 221 4.3.2.2 Setting an example ............................................................................... 227 4.3.2.3 Motivating others ................................................................................. 231 4.3.3 Sharing and socializing ................................................................................. 235 4.3.3.1 Social capital (aka “cool factor”) .......................................................... 235 4.3.3.2 Shared code .......................................................................................... 238 4.3.3.3 Sharing something meaningful ............................................................. 240 4.3.3.4 Interaction ............................................................................................ 243 4.4 Challenges associated with lack of relationship or difficult relationships ............... 247 4.4.1 Navigating relationships as a language revitalization practitioner .................. 247 4.4.2 Lack of relationship ...................................................................................... 251 4.4.3 Barriers caused by important relationships .................................................... 259 4.5 Strengthening relationships .................................................................................... 261 4.5.1 Collaboration ................................................................................................ 262 4.5.2 Networks of support...................................................................................... 264 4.5.3 Connecting to other practitioners .................................................................. 266 4.5.4 Connecting to roots ....................................................................................... 269 4.5.5 Recognizing relationships ............................................................................. 273 4.6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 276 V. TIME ........................................................................................................................... 277 5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 277 xvii 5.2 Motivational Dimensions ....................................................................................... 277 5.2.1 Initiation ....................................................................................................... 279 5.2.2 Persistence .................................................................................................... 284 5.2.3 Effort ............................................................................................................ 287 5.3 Temporal dimensions ............................................................................................ 295 5.3.1 Past – contextual background and narrative memory ..................................... 297 5.3.1.1 Learning language and learning community history .............................. 299 5.3.1.2 Memories of a painful past ................................................................... 304 5.3.1.3 Perspectives on the past as L2 motivation ............................................. 306 5.3.1.3.1 Healing and resistance ................................................................. 306 5.3.1.3.2 Past is a model for the future ....................................................... 310 5.3.1.3.3 Comparing the past to the present ................................................ 312 5.3.2 Present experiences ....................................................................................... 313 5.3.2.1 Pandemic – opportunities and barriers .................................................. 314 5.3.2.2 Pandemic – range of emotions .............................................................. 321 5.3.2.3 Pandemic – effects on perspectives....................................................... 324 5.3.3 Future ........................................................................................................... 327 5.3.3.1 Intermediate and distant futures ............................................................ 330 5.3.3.2 The role of the self in future visions ..................................................... 336 5.3.3.3 The lifespan and beyond ....................................................................... 342 VI. CODA: (AUTO)ETHNOGRAPHY OF RESEARCHING LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION ......................................................................................................... 345 6.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 345 xviii 6.2 Goals ..................................................................................................................... 346 6.3 Relationships ......................................................................................................... 353 6.4 Time ...................................................................................................................... 365 VII. MOTIVATION LANGUAGE GROWTH: SUGGESTIONS FOR REVITALIZATION PRACTITIONERS............................................................................................................ 372 7.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 372 7.2 Methods that motivate ........................................................................................... 373 7.2.1 Puyallup Method for Expanding Language Use ............................................ 373 7.2.2 Kodrah Kristang approach ............................................................................ 377 7.2.3 Master-Apprentice approach/mentor relationships ........................................ 379 7.3 Ten suggestions for revitalization practitioners ...................................................... 381 7.3.1 Suggestion 1: Find Ways to Use the Language .............................................. 382 7.3.2 Suggestion 2: Make It Personal ..................................................................... 383 7.3.3 Suggestion 3: Don’t Be Afraid to Make Mistakes ......................................... 385 7.3.4 Suggestion 4: Recognize That There Are Ebbs and Flows ............................. 387 7.3.5 Suggestion 5: Celebrate Incremental Progress ............................................... 389 7.3.6 Suggestion 6: Develop an Assessment that Fits Your Situation ..................... 389 7.3.7 Suggestion 7: Try not to Put Too Much Pressure on Yourself ....................... 391 7.3.8 Suggestion 8: Be Aspirational ....................................................................... 392 7.3.9 Suggestion 9: Find a Community of Practice ................................................. 394 7.3.10 Suggestion 10: Share Your Knowledge ....................................................... 395 VIII. RESEARCH IMPLICATIONS, FUTURE DIRECTIONS, & CONCLUSION ......... 397 8.1 Theoretical implications – L2 Motivation .............................................................. 397 xix 8.1.1 L2 Motivation is about more than learning an L2 .......................................... 397 8.1.2 The L2 Self is shaped through relationships .................................................. 398 8.1.3 Motivation to learn an L2 is complex and dynamic ....................................... 399 8.2 Future research directions ...................................................................................... 400 8.2.1 A major research gap – motivation to learn sign languages ........................... 400 8.2.2 Motivation across time .................................................................................. 401 8.2.3 Motivation and learning across the lifespan ................................................... 402 8.2.4 The learning context – social, physical, and ecological.................................. 404 8.2.5 The learning context – characterizing relationships and community .............. 406 8.3 Methodological implications.................................................................................. 407 8.4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 408 APPENDIX A. Table of inter-rater test results .................................................................. 410 APPENDIX B. Sample interview recruitment text............................................................. 412 APPENDIX C. Informed Consent document for interviews ............................................... 413 APPENDIX D. Interview guide text sent to first round interview participants ................... 418 APPENDIX E. An example follow-up interview guide ..................................................... 419 REFERENCES CITED ..................................................................................................... 420 xx LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Question items from Global Survey analyzed in this study ................................ 48 2. Number of survey responses by region in this dataset. ....................................... 49 3. Number of survey responses by language situation in this dataset ...................... 50 4. Survey question items used as Descriptor Fields in Dedoose ............................. 57 5. Survey analysis workflow.................................................................................. 67 6. Excerpt from auto-generated transcript with segments ....................................... 86 7. Excerpt from transcript with segments, manually corrected ............................... 87 8. Transcription of Zoom_16 excerpt, as produced by automatic transcriber .......... 89 9. Transcription of Zoom_16 excerpt, edited manually .......................................... 90 10. Transcription of Zoom_16 excerpt as sent to interviewee .................................. 91 11. Bar chart, language products by language category ............................................ 102 12. Linguistic skills in Survey responses by language category ............................... 114 13. Questions 2 and 3 from Global Survey of Language Revitalization Efforts ........ 117 14. Distribution of Focus on Domains across language vitality categories ............... 133 15. Language vs Cultural Maintenance codes by language category ........................ 143 16. Mentions of 'fluency' by language category ....................................................... 178 17. Interpersonal Connections sub-codes by language situation ............................... 207 18. Schematization of three motivational dimensions in temporal space .................. 278 19. Questions about intermediate and distant futures for interview participants ....... 331 xxi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Correlations between geographic region and vitality status categories ............... 51 2. Answer counts for survey questions in this study ............................................... 59 3. Examples from Language Ideologies categories ................................................ 62 4. Examples from Language Domain categories .................................................... 63 5. Examples of ‘speaking’ vs. ‘speakers’ coding .................................................... 64 6. Summary of initial interview recruitment, Summer 2020 ................................... 74 7. Language names mistranscribed by Zoom ......................................................... 82 8. Linguistic terms mistranscribed by Zoom .......................................................... 83 9. Segment counts in transcript files before and after editing ................................. 87 10. Survey responses focused on Language Products ............................................... 101 11. Categories of Linguistic Goals in Survey Responses .......................................... 113 12. Surveys by speaker number compared with language situation .......................... 118 13. Survey responses mentioning Language Domains ............................................. 132 14. Survey responses mentioning ‘fluency’ ............................................................. 178 15. Distribution of Ratings from survey question of how well goals are being met .. 181 16. Interpersonal Connections in the Global Survey ................................................ 199 xxii CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction This dissertation investigates the initial and ongoing motivations of individual practitioners of language revitalization. This topic extends our understandings of language revitalization from the programmatic and sociological levels to the level of the individual practitioner. This topic also extends theory in L2 motivation into a largely unstudied language learning context. The findings in this study arise from rigorous, inductive qualitative analysis of individual practitioner voices and experiences. In this first chapter, I introduce the different topics that this dissertation engages with and extends. Section 1.2 gives an overview of language revitalization (LR), including LR as a particular L2 learning context as well as a summary of literature in the field so far. I end this section by arguing in favor of considering individual practitioners within this highly relational and community-driven enterprise. Section 1.3 turns to the topic of L2 motivation, a rich area of research within second language acquisition that has generated theoretical insights and practical implications but has, as yet, not taken into account learners of revitalizing languages. Section 1.4 then discusses in some detail studies that illustrate what we do know about L2 motivation in language revitalization, as limited and as poorly understood as it is. Having laid this groundwork, in section 1.5 I then summarize my approach to L2 motivation in language revitalization contexts and preview the chapters that make up the body of this dissertation. 1.2 Language revitalization I use the term ‘language revitalization’ to refer to activities aimed at maintaining or increasing the use of a language in the context of language shift, which encompasses a range of different activities in a variety of contexts (see more detailed discussion in 1.2.2). This echoes 1 Hinton et al’s (2018) broad definition of language revitalization as “giving new life and vigor to a language that has been decreasing in use (or has ceased to be used altogether)” (p. xxi), and King’s (2001) specification that revitalization "encompasses efforts which might target the language structure, the uses of the language, as well as the users of the language.” (p. 23). In this section, I begin by describing the phenomenon of language shift as both an outcome of historical forces and the background for present-day revitalization efforts (section 1.2.1). I then explain some key terms in language shift and revitalization (section 1.2.2), before giving an overview of what is known about language revitalization as a widespread, global phenomenon (section 1.2.3). I end with a discussion of the role of the individual in LR practice, and propose to investigate motivation as an important component of individual experience in these contexts (section 1.2.4). 1.2.1 Language shift and language loss Anyone who sets out to write about language revitalization is faced with a rhetorical dilemma – whether, and how much, to discuss the issue of language endangerment and loss. Language revitalization, by definition, is an effort to reverse language loss; language endangerment is itself a topic that has received several book-length treatments. As such, it is hard to know what the appropriate scope is for discussing this complicated phenomenon in a project that focuses on revitalization. This rhetorical decision is not trivial. Linguists have used phrases such as “the world’s languages in crisis” (Krauss, 1992) in both scholarly and public-facing writing; after all, if one feels this truly is a crisis, and a crisis that needs to be urgently addressed, one needs a way to convey that urgency and alarm. But Hill (2002) cautions that “linguists and anthropologists may unwittingly undermine their own vigorous advocacy of endangered languages by a failure to 2 think carefully about the multiple audiences who may hear and read advocacy rhetoric” (p. 119), which includes the practice of enumerating the figures for languages under threat as a way of emphasizing the urgency of the crisis (p. 127). Furthermore, referring to languages as ‘moribund’ or ‘extinct’ (another common advocacy rhetorical strategy) may become “self-fulfilling prophecies which serve to hasten the decline of those languages” (King, 2001, p. 188; see section 1.2.2 for discussion of terms like ‘extinct’). Finally, many of the circumstances surrounding community language loss are the source of deep psychic wounds and intergenerational trauma for individuals in these communities. Discussion of these issues demands care and respect, especially from writers outside these communities who do not share these experiences and histories. Given these caveats, the practice of language revitalization is inextricable from the context of language endangerment. Language revitalization is a response to something; it is a reaction, a resistance, a reclaiming. Language revitalization entails deliberate, effortful practices to halt and reverse community language loss. As such, it is imperative to recognize that language endangerment is catastrophic and widespread. The immediate cause of this endangerment of language is lack of intergenerational transmission; the youngest generations in a language community are no longer learning their language as part of their upbringing. But this immediate “cause” is itself the outcome of a long process of language shift. While all languages change over time, most of the thousands of languages undergoing shift on this scale are threatened not by this gradual change but rather by forces set in motion by users of dominant languages. By not noting the reality of language endangerment and its root causes, we risk enacting what Davis (2017) refers to as ‘erasure of colonial agency’, a discursive strategy which “minimizes the historical and ongoing causes of language endangerment and 3 dormancy, sometimes to the extent of misattributing agency for such realities onto Indigenous communities themselves” (p. 37). Hinton (2003) puts it plainly, “[t]he processes of empire, industrialization, and globalization have made casualties out of indigenous languages and cultures.” (p. 44). In the US, policies aimed at breaking apart Indigenous communities included sending children away to residential boarding schools which “deployed systematic militarized and identity-alteration methodologies to attempt to assimilate American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian children” (Newland, 2022, p. 7). Such policies deliberately disrupted the chain of intergenerational culture and language transmission. These overt historical policies are extended by contemporary ideologies that continue to emphasize assimilation and monolingualism. In other cases, the causes of language shift are more subtle, and range from unequal distribution of economic opportunities in the globalized world to even more subtle issues of language attitudes and ‘prestige’ (Crystal, 2000). But these attitudes are no less agentive; as Crystal notes, “people have to get their negative attitudes from somewhere. One isn’t born with feelings of shame and a lack of self-confidence about one’s language” (p. 84). Every language community has its own particular history and its own experience of language loss; every language community has its own unique position in larger contemporary society, and its own response to the reality of language endangerment. In this dissertation, I focus on this response, recognizing that revitalization takes place against a background of disenfranchisement and injustice, but choosing to highlight what Davis (2017) describes as “the incredible extent of Indigenous language and cultural maintenance against all odds as a decolonial act of breath-taking resistance, resilience, and survivance” (p. 54). In the next section I clarify some key terms in language revitalization, before giving a cursory overview of the rich research and practitioner literature on revitalization to date. 4 1.2.2 Terminology One of the key terms that is often used in rhetoric around language endangerment loss is the term extinct or extinction. This term is used in the literature to describe a language that no longer has any living users; for example, the Glottolog, an online encyclopedia and directory which bills itself as the “comprehensive reference information for the world’s languages, especially the lesser known languages” (Hammarström et al., 2022) still classifies languages in advanced stages of shift as “extinct1” or “nearly extinct2”. However, in recent years many language communities that have no living language users are nonetheless reclaiming their languages from documentary records. Well-known examples of this include the Wampanoag language, which had not been spoken for 150 years before it was brought back to community use through written documents produced in the 17th century (baird, 2016). Examples like this challenge the notion of the ‘extinction’ of the Wampanoag language; extinction implies an absolute endpoint, a finality from which there is no recovery. For this reason, Leonard (2008) proposes the term sleeping languages to refer to “those that are not currently known but that are documented, claimed as part of one’s heritage, and thus may be used again” (p. 23). This definition arises out of his own experience with working on his heritage language, Miami, which has been brought back to community use after decades with no living speakers (see also Baldwin, 2013). Another key term for framing these situations is to refer to a period of language dormancy; that is, a period where there is no contemporary language use, though there is the possibility of its use in the future (note that the term ‘dormancy’ does not entail the same finality 1 This is the status listed for Lushootseed, Nuu-wee-ya’, Nanticoke, and mitsqanaqan (Ventureño Chumash); learner-speakers (Hall, 2021) of these languages are interviewed in this dissertation. 2 This is the status listed for Xaad Kil (Haida) and Nez Perce, also represented in the interviews. 5 as ‘extinction.’) I use the term sleeping languages and dormancy to refer to these situations, rather than words like ‘death’ and ‘extinction.’ The main term I use in this dissertation is language revitalization, which I use as an umbrella term to cover activities that are variously referred to in the literature as language revitalization, language revival, language reclamation, language awakening, and language maintenance. These terms are sometimes used to distinguish between efforts that support languages in different stages of language shift. In particular, some terms are used specifically for instances where the language is dormant. These efforts are referred to in the literature as language revival (e.g. Dorian, 1994), language reclamation (e.g. Hall, 2021), or language awakening (e.g. Leonard, 2008). These terms are not contradictory, but emphasize different aspects of the endeavor; for example, language reclamation is a term that emphasizes the decolonizing work of reclaiming what was taken from the community (Leonard, 2017), while language awakening draws special attention to the fact that the language was previously sleeping, which entails special social and practical considerations. Another term, language maintenance, can refer to languages on the less dire side of the language vitality scale; they are efforts to support languages that still have some users, but for which the community recognizes the threat of language shift and responds by maintaining existing language use. This might apply, for example, to efforts to support vital languages that are nonetheless minoritized in the face of a dominant language (e.g. Afrikaans in English- dominant South Africa, Dyers, 2008). This term also is often applied to the maintenance of heritage languages in diaspora communities, where the language itself might be vital in the original homeland but is being lost in the heritage community in favor of the dominant language in that location (e.g., communities of German-speaking immigrants in the United States and their 6 descendants, Bousquette and Putnam, 2020). In this dissertation, practitioners from a wide range of language situations are represented, from sleeping languages being reawakened to maintenance efforts for languages that are still being transmitted intergenerationally (though this transmission is under threat.) Following Peréz Báez et al. (2018), I use the term language revitalization as a cover term to refer to all of these efforts aimed at maintaining or increasing the use of a language in the context of language shift. One final key terminological clarification to be made is the term Indigenous; or, more properly, the overlap between language revitalization and Indigenous languages. It is undeniably true that, as Indigenous peoples around the world have been disproportionally impacted by the disruption and brutality of the colonial enterprise, and as colonialism is a major source of language loss, Indigenous languages are threatened and destroyed. Additionally, much of the literature on language revitalization comes from cases of Indigenous languages of the Americas and Australia (see discussion section 1.2.3), and as such, issues of Indigenous identities and cultures are richly represented in the global language revitalization literature; Hall for example characterizes her personal language revitalization journey as a journey of reclaiming and affirming Indigeneity (Hall, 2021), and McIvor’s (2020) position paper in a major journal of applied linguistics refers specifically to Indigenous Language Revitalization, or ILR. But other language communities who may not identify as Indigenous are also working to maintain and restore their heritage languages (Mufwene, 2017). For example, many European language communities prefer the term “autochthonous” rather than Indigenous (Linn, 2021) when emphasizing their longstanding connection to a particular territory. Furthermore, many languages being reclaimed around the world are minoritized though not necessarily native or indigenous to a territory. This is true of immigrant heritage language maintenance, as well as efforts to 7 revitalize languages like Kristang, which is a creole arising from the colonial history of Singapore (see discussion in Methods 2.3.1.3)3. In this dissertation, I examine language revitalization on a broader scope than Indigenous language revitalization specifically. Where Indigeneity is referenced by practitioners as part of their heritage, this will be made explicit, but it is not necessarily a relevant concept for all practitioners. By making this clarification, I by no means intend to downplay the centrality of Indigenous identities, Indigenous communities, and Indigenous epistemologies to language revitalization. Rather I simply note that the global phenomenon of language revitalization, as I have defined it here, is broad and diverse, and this diversity is seen in the range of different histories, cultures, identities, and values of the many communities who are undertaking these efforts. 1.2.3 Research and practice in language revitalization – literature overview Examples of language revitalization are attested for much of modern history, including early efforts to maintain Cornish starting in the early 1900s and Hebrew in the late 1800s. These early cases, while important, were few in number. But in more recent decades, the number of communities undertaking language revitalization efforts has grown exponentially. In their report on findings from the Global Survey of Language Revitalization Efforts (collected in 2017), Peréz Báez et al (2019) report that of 137 respondents who provided a year of inception for their community’s effort, almost two-thirds (65%) began in the year 2000 or later. 3 That is to say, in some sense Kristang is an indigenous (small i) language of Singapore, rather than a language brought in by immigrants from outside communities, and Kristang learners describe this close connection between this creole and Singapore itself. At the same time, one heritage Kristang speaker described Malay as the “indigenous” language of Singapore, as it was the language spoken prior to European colonization. Therefore the issue of indigeneity/native-ness is a complex topic for users of this language, as it is no doubt for others around the world. 8 In that same time period, the literature about language revitalization has grown and diversified. Peréz Báez et al (2019) identify three chronological/regional “segments” in the literature, starting with model cases of Hebrew, Cornish, West Frisian and Breton in the 19th and early 20th centuries; growing into case studies on the languages of the US and Canada, the Pacific, and Europe, including special attention to efforts to revitalize Māori and Hawaiian in the second half of the 20th century; and continuing into the present day with more geographically diverse case studies covering efforts beyond those already well-represented in the literature. Despite this recent expansion, they note that cases from the Americas, Europe, and Australia and New Zealand remain disproportionately represented, while information on efforts from other regions is limited and much needed. In addition to this regional distribution of case studies, Hinton (2003) also identifies four “functional categories” of literature on language revitalization at the time: 1. Theoretical and empirical works about language revitalization 2. Applied works on language revitalization in practice; how-to manuals, books and articles on best practices. 3. Pedagogical and reference publications for use in language revitalization (such as grammars, dictionaries, other pedagogical materials) 4. Legal documents – written “speech acts” that create possibilities or impediments for language revitalization. (excerpted from p. 48) This framework remains useful for discussing the topics that are covered in the literature. In particular, literature in ‘applied works’ and ‘pedagogical’ categories are well-attested especially starting in the second half of the 20th century (Pérez Báez 2019). Some of the practical strategies and pedagogical approaches that are represented in the literature include: 9 • School-based language programs – there is ample literature discussing the teaching of the language as an L2 in a traditional language classroom, including language immersion in the school setting. • Language nesting in the Māori/Hawaiian model – this is a specific kind of immersion programming in which a community childcare program immerses or ‘nests’ very young children (i.e. usually pre-school age) in constant language exposure.4 • Master-Apprentice language learning (Hinton et al., 2002); in this method, an L2 learner is paired with an L1 user in a one-on-one relationship. This intensive one-on-one apprenticeship more closely mimics the context of natural language transmission, and has been adopted in many communities where classroom-based language learning is logistically difficult or impossible. • Archives-based language revitalization (Baldwin et al., 2018; Thieberger, 1995; Hall, 2021); this topic deals with approaches that gather language data from archives and methodological approaches to Indigenous language philology, and applies in particular to dormant languages that are being reawakened based on prior documentation There is also a considerable body of literature about different tools that can aid in revitalization activities, such as talking dictionaries or other computer assisted learning aids. Finally, in the field of language documentation and description, there is a growing body of literature focusing on designing documentary corpora to be more useful for language revitalization practice (Jansen & Beavert, 2010; Nathan & Fang, 2013; Taylor-Adams, 2019). As evidenced by this brief overview, language revitalization practice includes L2 learning and teaching, but this learning and teaching is not confined to the classroom; and learning and teaching is supplemented by 4 See section 7.2.1 for the different way that Zalmai Zahir uses the term ‘language nest’. 10 many other kinds of activities that support individual and community language use (Hall, 2021; Zahir, 2018). In summing up our current understandings of language revitalization, Peréz Báez et al. (2018) write, “[w]e know that revitalization is extremely demanding, requiring extraordinary commitment and dedication, often over a lifetime. The learning curve is steep, and practitioners are often overwhelmed. It would therefore be of tremendous value if future practitioners could have access to information about how certain variables might correlate with outcomes” (p. 472). This is the rationale for their Global Survey of Language Revitalization Efforts, aimed at gathering a broad set of comparative data that includes such variables and possible outcomes. Specifically, the Survey collected information about community efforts; as with much of the literature reviewed in this section, the focus is on community-level and programmatic variables and outcomes. In this dissertation, I turn attention to the individual level; in the next section, I explain the rationale for this shift in focus. 1.2.4 Individuals in language revitalization Given the nature of the enterprise, it is clear that revitalizing a language is an endeavor deeply rooted in community. Indeed, the majority of the literature on language revitalization looks at the sociological (community) or programmatic (program design or language policy) levels. But language revitalization also takes place at the individual (psychological) level. As McIvor (2020) argues: “just as with SLA itself, the necessary approach to ILR is simultaneously individualistic and collective in nature. Each learning journey begins with one person, who must be personally motivated and interested and have the necessary access to high-quality learning opportunities, based on proven practices, underpinned by what is known about additional language learning. Equally, there must be an understanding of the barriers and collective contextual factors at play and necessary supports in place to manage them.” (p. 87) 11 Practitioner literature especially underscores the importance of the individual in LR practice. For example, Atkins (2012) describes a ‘Self-Apprentice Program’ aimed at facilitating independent learning of a sleeping language, drawing on her own experience of learning the Wiyot language, which has no L1 speakers and is being reawakened based on archival documentation. Atkins notes that there are currently no comprehensive sources in the language teaching literature that focus on ‘self-instruction,’ that is, “the unique situation of a learner- teacher who must be the driving force behind the planning, development, and application of an indigenous language learning program” (p. 25). Many language efforts in fact depend on individual learner-teachers who spearhead revitalization activities not just for their own learning, but also to increase language use in the community. This leads Bommelyn (2011) to focus on the notion of learner autonomy in the Dee-ni’ community; as he argues, “there is a scarcity of available speakers and language learning materials, such that learners will have to be in control of their own language learning if they are going to be speakers of Dee-ni'.” (p. 12). That is, focusing on individual differences in language revitalization practice does not entail “individualism” in opposition to collectivism or communalism. Rather, it is important to acknowledge the key role that individuals play in their communities and networks of relationship, and by acknowledging this, seek to better understand the individual practitioner as a way of better supporting the individual and the community. One of the key ‘individual difference variables’ from the field of Second Language Acquisition is Motivation (Ushioda, 2020). The need to sustain motivation in the face of the challenges of language awakening and revitalization is explicit in Atkins’ (2012) and Bommelyn’s (2011) work, and motivation was the specific research question of another 12 practitioner (Viles, 2013). Viles outlines both practical and theoretical reasons to study motivation in these contexts: "Given the importance of motivation to learning and the purpose of this thesis to aid others attempting to revitalize Native languages, we can gain a better understanding of what motivations may be useful and effective and what problems may await speakers within their motivations. We can use motivation as a lens for understanding larger issues within language revitalization, such as the existence of worldviews within endangered languages, the role of the family in learning, and the importance of community support in deterring or enabling successful language revitalization efforts." (p. 28) That is, because individuals are so key to community revitalization efforts, and because motivation is so difficult to sustain in challenging circumstances, understanding motivation in these contexts can help us better support practitioners. At the same time, understanding motivation helps us better understand the nature of language revitalization itself, as both an individual and a relational enterprise. In the next section, I discuss the topic of learning motivation as it is represented in the literature on second-language acquisition. 1.3 Motivation This section is an introduction to the topic of motivation as it pertains to learning. In this dissertation, I primarily engage with two theories to frame the findings: the L2 Motivational Self-System (Dörnyei, 2005) and Self-Determination Theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985). Section 1.3.1 introduces key concepts from SDT as a domain-general motivation theory, primarily drawing from the literature in educational psychology. The remaining sections deal with L2- specific theories of motivation. Section 1.3.2 describes an early influential model, which introduced the concepts of integrativeness versus instrumental orientations into the vocabulary of second language acquisition researchers. Section 1.3.3 then discusses the current prevailing model, that of the L2MSS. Section 1.3.4 examines the role of context in theories of L2 13 motivation, drawing particularly on Ushioda’s ‘person-in-context relational view’ of L2 motivation (2009). Section 1.3.5 describes a construct that has been proposed to account for the unique context of heritage language learning. 1.3.1 Motivation theory – Key concepts from Self-Determination Theory An individual’s motivation can be characterized as one of two key types: intrinsic motivation, wherein the individual engages in a task out of curiosity, interest, enjoyment; and extrinsic motivation, wherein the individual engages in a task to earn a reward or avoid externally imposed punishment (Ortega, 2009). Tasks which are engaged in out of intrinsic motivation are associated with feelings of competence and autonomy, and are also associated with greater effort and better performance. In a learning context, teachers who wish to help their students improve their efforts and learning outcomes may wonder how to increase students’ intrinsic motivation. However, by definition, no one can make anyone else be intrinsically motivated; any motivation affected by any outside source is definitionally extrinsic. This does not mean that learners’ motivations cannot be effectively leveraged. Increasing learner autonomy allows learners to engage in a task purely out of intrinsic motivation. But individuals do engage effectively with tasks even when they are not intrinsically motivated by them. To this point, it is useful to break down types of extrinsic motivations, as suggested by Deci & Ryan’s (1985) typology from Self-Determination Theory. This framework breaks down external motivations into different types with respect to the personal values of the individual learner: • External regulation – doing a task in order to receive a reward or to avoid punishment. This is the most external (and most instrumentalized) type of extrinsic motivation. Learners who engage in learning tasks only to ensure a good grade in a class are externally regulated. 14 • Introjected regulation – doing a task out of a sense of guilt or obligation. This is less instrumentalized than external regulation, but is still markedly extrinsic, as it has to do with the opinions and expectations of others (as opposed to the self). • Identified regulation – doing a task because it will help the individual achieve their goals. This is more closely associated with internal values; while the learner does not necessarily take pure pleasure or interest in the task as such (which would be intrinsic motivation), the learner does have goals which are personally meaningful and sees the usefulness of the task for achieving those goals. • Integrated regulation – doing a task because it matches one’s sense of self. That is, learners who see themselves as being someone who studies hard will have integrated regulation to put effort into a learning task. These four types of extrinsic motivation can be thought of as a scale from most externally (external regulation) to most internally regulated (integrated regulation). The two most externalized regulations, external and introjected, can be considered maladaptive in this system as they are controlled rather than autonomous or self-determined (Noels et al., 2019); this means that in the absence of external controls, the learner would be unlikely to engage in the activity. Furthermore, while introjected regulation has sometimes been shown to correlate with expended effort (Ryan & Connell, 1989), it is also associated with maladaptive feelings of guilt, anxiety, shame (McLachlan et al., 2009), and poorer ability to cope with failure (Ryan & Connell, 1989). On the other hand, identified and integrated regulation are correlated with more motivated behaviors and better learning outcomes (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Pedagogical interventions can have a profound effect on the type of regulation experienced by the learner; for example, a teacher can design tasks that are clearly useful for learners’ goals and focus their 15 energies on helping learners see this usefulness rather than emphasizing purely external rewards for completion. This moves the learners’ motivations away from external regulation and towards the more internally-driven identified regulation. In the field of second-language learning, Self-Determination Theory has been used by Noels and colleagues as a framework for understanding L2 motivation specifically (Noels, 2009; Noels et al., 2019). Noels has conducted cross-contextual L2 learner research to identify variation in regulation types among, for example, learners of ESL compared with learners of other modern languages and learners of heritage languages (Noels, 2009). Aside from this work, the most prominent models of L2 motivation theory have arisen from within the discipline of SLA itself, and we now turn to a discussion of L2 motivation theory more specifically. 1.3.2 L2 Motivation theory – integrative vs instrumental orientations In the field of SLA, there are specific models that are proposed to account for the learning of an L2. One of the earliest and most influential models of motivation specific to L2 learning is Gardner’s Socio-educational Model (Gardner, 2001; Gardner & Lambert, 1959). Within this model, Gardner introduced the concept of integrativeness, which is formulated as “a genuine interest in learning the second language in order to come closer to the other language community […] this implies an openness to, and respect for, other cultural groups and ways of life” (Gardner, 2001, p. 5). Individuals who exhibit integrativeness are motivated to learn an L2 as a means of integrating into the target culture which uses this language. This is contrasted with instrumental orientations, that is, pragmatic or utilitarian reasons for learning the L2, such as for career advancement and other kinds of economic gain. It is hypothesized that integrativeness leads to more motivated behavior, and that therefore a learner’s orientation, either integrative or instrumental, determines individual differences in L2 outcomes. Research in L2 motivation has 16 been and continues to be heavily influenced by Gardner’s model; one meta-analysis conducted 20 years ago included 75 different studies that used Gardner’s model and testing instruments to investigate motivation of over 10,000 total individual learners (Masgoret & Gardner, 2003), and this work continues to be influential. Despite this influence, there are some strong critiques to this model. One critique of this work comes from Ushioda (2020), who notes that Gardner is explicitly not interested in pedagogical applications for his research, but is solely focused on validating and refining his theory through rigorous testing and replication with no intention of providing teachers or learners insights that might help in their language learning (p. 19). This is a prime example of the challenge Ushioda raises about the field in general, posing the question “Whose motivations are we really interested in – the motivations and priorities of the people we are researching, or our own motivations and priorities as researchers?” (p. 3). This question is the foundation of Ushioda’s ‘ethical framework’ for all L2 motivation research, and in the case of revitalizing languages, this ethical question is even more pertinent. Also with respect to language revitalization, the definition of integrativeness as “learning the second language in order to come closer to the other language community […] openness to, and respect for, other cultural groups and ways of life” (Gardner, 2001, p. 5, emphasis mine) is questionable. For individuals learning the language of their own language communities, it does not make sense to refer to the other language community or the other culture. While heritage language learning is no doubt more closely tied to the integrative orientation than the instrumental, this binary opposition, along with the poor fit of the notion of ‘integrativeness’, means Gardner’s model needs to be significantly modified to account for LR contexts.5 5 This poor fit notwithstanding, these constructs are so pervasive in SLA that many of the studies discussed in section 1.4 invoke these terms as part of their explanatory framework. 17 Other questions have been raised about the utility of the notion of ‘integrativeness’. For example, Dörnyei (2009) points out that “it has been without any doubt the most researched and most talked about notion in L2 motivation studies and yet it has no obvious equivalent in any other theories in mainstream motivational and educational psychology” (p. 23). He also argues that the construct does not make sense beyond the context from which the model originates. Gardner’s research has been primarily conducted in bilingual parts of Canada, and concerns Anglophone learners of French (and Francophone learners of English). In these settings, the learner is an outsider to the target culture but has significant and regular contact with speakers of the target language, meaning they have ample opportunity to integrate in some meaningful way. Beginning in the 1990s, Dörnyei and colleagues began to question whether integrativeness in that setting is useful for describing L2 motivations in foreign language classrooms, where learners have little if any direct contact with the target culture. In particular, Dörnyei drew attention to the rising numbers of L2 learners of English, where English is not associated with any one particular ‘target culture’ but is instead an international language (Dörnyei et al., 2006). Because of these major theoretical shortcomings, in the early 2000’s Dörnyei found himself “ready to move beyond integrativeness” (2009, p. 25), and began to develop an alternative model which has become similarly widely used in the field. 1.3.3 L2 Motivation Theory – The L2 Motivational Self-System In a 2005 publication, Dörnyei proposed a model called the L2 Motivational Self-System (L2MSS), a theoretical model which he has continued to elaborate (Dörnyei, 2005, 2009, 2015). This model draws on theory from domain-general motivation theory (as opposed to Gardner’s L2 specific model). In particular, Dörnyei draws on Higgins’ Self-Discrepancy Theory (1987) as well as Markus and Nurius’s (1986) of ‘possible selves.’ Self-Discrepancy Theory posits that 18 human behavior is motivated by comparing one’s imagined future self with one’s present self, noticing key differences, and then acting to decrease the mismatch (or discrepancy) between the present self and the desired future. Specifically articulated for L2 learning, the L2MSS contains three levels: • Ideal L2 Self – this is a desirable future self; as Dörnyei describes, “if the person we would like to become speaks an L2, the ‘ideal L2 self’ is a powerful motivator to learn the L2 because of the desire to reduce the discrepancy between our actual and ideal selves.” (2009, p. 29). • Ought-to L2 Self – this is an imposed future self, and is partially parallel to Higgins’ (1987) ‘feared self.’ As Dörnyei puts it, the ought-to L2 Self “concerns the attributes that one believes one ought to possess to meet expectations and to avoid possible negative outcomes” (p. 29, emph original). • The L2 Learning Experience – this component “concerns situated, ‘executive’ motives related to the immediate learning environment and experience (e.g. the impact of the teacher, the curriculum, the peer group, the experience of success).” (p. 29) In this model, the Ideal L2 Self is posited to have a stronger and more positive motivational impact than the Ought-to L2 Self, for the same reason that more internalized forms of regulation are posited to be more motivational in SDT (see discussion section 1.3.1); that is, the Ideal L2 Self is more strongly associated with internalized and valued visions of the self. Research in this framework consistently does find statistically significant correlations between the Ideal L2 Self and motivated behaviors (e.g. effort expended learning the language; for a review see Al-Hoorie, 2018). Meanwhile, the effects of the Ought-to L2 Self have been less well understood, and the 19 L2 Learning Experience has been by far the least examined of the three constructs (Mendoza and Phung, 2019). It is important to note that the Ought-to L2 Self has been equated both definitionally (McEown et al., 2014) as well as empirically (Nishida, 2013; Teimouri, 2017; Takahashi ) with the SDT categories of introjected regulation. This tendency to equate a sense of obligation to others, as an aspect of the Ought-to L2 Self, with maladaptive introjected regulation (see 1.3.1) poses a critical problem when considering individuals working to revitalize and maintain their heritage languages, as is discussed throughout this dissertation (see also discussion of the Rooted L2 Self, section 1.3.5). Boo et al (2015) report that the L2MSS framework is the most commonly used framework for studying language learner motivation (though see also discussion of Noels’ work in SDT, section 1.3.1). But research in this system is overwhelmingly based on L2 learners of English, a problem that Dörnyei himself acknowledges. In a special issue of the Modern Language Journal, Dörnyei and colleagues call for more research attention on learners of languages other than English. They note, among other things, that the over-representation of L2 English learners may inadvertently promote an “individualistic” and “community-independent” idea of the Ideal L2 Self (Dörnyei & Al-Hoorie, 2017, p. 459) while also misrepresenting the nature of the Ought-to L2 self in other kinds of communities. This latter point has also been raised by Chen et al. (2005) in their findings that language learners outside of Western cultures may be more positively motivated by family obligations and sense of responsibility than is currently reflected in L2MSS research. 1.3.4 The role of context in L2 Motivation research Given that the L2 Learning Experience is the least examined of the three components of the L2MSS (Mendoza and Phung, 2019), and also given that this component “is conceptualized 20 at a different level from the two self-guides” (Dörnyei, 2009, p. 29), the role of learner-external factors has been largely undertheorized in mainstream L2 motivation theory. Ushioda (2009) charged that L2 motivation literature sets up a dualism between an individual and their contexts, which is approached as “something pre-existing, an independent background variable, outside the individual” (p. 218). She argues instead for a focus on a “person-in-context relational view of language motivation,” by which she means “a view of motivation as emergent from relations between real persons, with particular social identities, and the unfolding cultural context of activity” (p. 215). Recently, the field of SLA has shifted somewhat to address issues of complexity and dynamism in language learning (Larsen-Freeman, 2008). This includes an edited volume meant to address the “dynamic turn” by applying Complex Dynamic Systems Theory (CDST) to the L2MSS (Dörnyei et al., 2015b). In that volume, Ushioda (2015) discusses the “mutually constitutive and co-adaptive” relationship between the learner and the context (p 48); that is, rather than a unidirectional effect of context on learner, the learner both shapes and is shaped by their context. She suggests that the notion of an ecosystem is “perhaps the most useful metaphor for describing this symbiotic and co-adaptive relationship between learner and context, and the organic interconnectedness of social, psychological and environmental processes” (p. 48). Other researchers who underscore the importance of considering context include Mercer (2016), who argues that “[f]rom a complexity perspective, context is not perceived as an external, objective, independent variable affecting the self, but rather is seen as an integral part of our self system” (p. 12). Mercer also emphasizes that “context cannot just be conceived of in spatial or social terms, but it inherently involves a temporal dimension too” (p. 14). Like Ushioda, Mercer uses the metaphor of an ecosystem, saying “ecological systems draw attention to the fact that we are 21 situated within multiple layers of interconnected contexts as well as our own personal history, all of which are continually undergoing change across time at different paces” (p. 14). 1.3.5 The Rooted L2 Self As noted above, a special issue of the Modern Language Journal collected studies based on research with learners of languages other than English. Of particular relevance to the field of language revitalization and heritage language learning, MacIntyre, Baker, and Sparling (2017) report findings with heritage learners of (Scottish) Gaelic in Cape Breton Island, a small territory situated in the Canadian province of Nova Scotia. They note that the Gaelic language has been an important part of the identity of immigrants and their descendants on Cape Breton Island for the past two centuries (in fact in the 19th century, it was the third most spoken language in Canada after English and French). But in recent years, use of the language has been rapidly declining. At the same time, interest in Gaelic traditional music and dance has experienced a resurgence, and the learners in this study are all active members of a Gaelic music group. Thus the study represents “a highly contextualized combination of psychological and ethnomusicological perspectives on language learning motivation for a language with relatively few speakers” (p. 501). A key phrase in this quote is “highly contextualized’, and MacIntyre et al. refer to Ushioda’s (2009) ‘person-in-context relational view’ of motivation as being particularly relevant for this research. In particular, they note that “[f]or Gaelic learners in Cape Breton, macro-level processes (such as trends in minority/majority language use) affect the individual just as individuals affect the linguistic context” (MacIntyre et al. 2017, p. 502). Because motivation in heritage language learning contexts are overall so understudied (Comanaru & Noels, 2009), “there have been no concepts proposed to describe processes unique to heritage language learning motivation” (MacIntyre et al., 2017, p. 503). As such, in their 22 study, the researchers propose to modify the L2MSS with a construct specifically appropriate for this kind of language learning context. Using unstructured interviewing and a lexically-driven approach to thematic content analysis, MacIntyre et al. derive the construct of the Rooted L2 Self as “a heritage-oriented concept defined by strong feelings of connection to speakers of the language, which can be tied to specific individuals (such as one's grandmother) but more generally a defined community” (p. 512). The Rooted L2 Self, they argue, “incorporates a form of L2 experiences from the L2 self system (Dörnyei, 2005), but goes well beyond the immediate context and the learner's personal experience to include historical knowledge, connection to one's ancestors, identity, attachment, demographic trends, hopes for the future of the language and its meaning to future speakers, among other interrelated ideas.” (p. 512) The Rooted L2 Self amends the L2MSS in two key ways. First, it incorporates perspectives on the past, in contrast to the purely future-oriented framing of the Ideal and L2 Self concepts in the L2MSS (MacIntyre at al., 2017, p. 509). This focus on the past is not mutually exclusive with a forward-looking future vision; rather, MacIntyre et al. note that “our respondents generated a clear sense of rootedness-in-community for their ideal selves, integrating the future with the past." (p. 513) Secondly, the Rooted L2 Self problematizes the concept of the Ought-to L2 Self as being distinct from the Ideal L2 Self, as well as the hypothesis that the Ought-to Self is disadvantageous for motivation. That is, “there is a sense that the ought-to self does not necessarily reflect unwanted obligation to learn the language of an outside group, but rather a welcome (albeit challenging) obligation to continue the Gaelic traditions into which they were born” (p. 513). The Rooted L2 Self is the most clearly relevant construct for the study of motivation in language revitalization contexts, arising as it does out of a context of language shift and heritage 23 language maintenance. In this dissertation, the Rooted L2 Self resonates with the perspectives of language revitalization practitioners in many contexts. But though this is the most widely cited example, MacIntyre et al.’s (2017) study with Gaelic learners in Cape Breton is not the only one to examine motivations of learners in LR contexts. The following section provides an overview of some pertinent studies specific to language revitalization. 1.4 L2 motivation in language revitalization contexts – literature review Though there is not yet a huge body of literature on L2 motivation in language revitalization contexts, a handful of case studies from around the world shed light on unique aspects of motivation to learn minoritized languages. None of these studies are found in mainstream journals of second language acquisition or applied linguistics; neither are they found in journals of language documentation and description. The following set of studies were found by searching a comprehensive bibliographic database (Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts) using two combinations of search terms: “language revitalization” + “motivation”; or “language maintenance” + “motivation”. References here come from features, articles, or reports in scholarly journals written in English. This literature review is by no means exhaustive, but it does shed light on a body of literature as yet unrepresented in the field. These studies engage with mainstream L2 motivation literature in unique ways, and highlight key concepts useful for LR contexts and important disconnects between LR and better studied contexts. 1.4.1 Spain and neofalantes One set of related studies comes from the context of the minority languages of Spain. In this multilingual nation, several regional languages have become the focus of language maintenance and revitalization. Though each regional context has its own social and historical characteristics, one commonality is the importance of neofalantes (or ‘new speakers’, O’Rourke 24 and Ramallo, 2015) in maintenance efforts. As Lasagabaster (2017) notes, “it is mainly this group who account for the dramatic rise in the number of minority language speakers in the last three decades in Spain. New speakers have thus become an indispensable part of reversing language shift, which is why special heed has been paid to their language attitudes and language learning motivation” (p. 585). Characterizing Catalonia as “the region in Spain where revitalisation policies were more decisive and successful” (p. 168), Pujolar and Puigdevall (2015) describe how Spanish speakers become “functionally bilingual” in Catalan. Using quantitative data from a large-scale language use survey as well as qualitative data from 24 interviews and 15 focus groups, they evoke the word mudes to denote “specific biographical junctures” in these individuals’ lives, explaining that the word is “a Catalan term referring to (often reversible) variations in social performance, such as dressing-up for an event or change appearance generally” (p. 168). They note that individuals experience several different mudes throughout their lives, meaning there are many different trigger points with respect to language use, language choice, and language identity. They argue that their research “demonstrates the need to be aware of the ways in which people develop their linguistic repertoire not only across different social spaces, as has been the traditional focus of sociolinguistics, but also throughout their lifetime” (p. 185). More directly relevant for the research topic at hand, Pujolar and Puigdevall (2015) note that the notion of linguistic muda emphasizes the ways that language choices are “life investments”, that is, “they constitute performative acts of social consequence with enduring implications that unfold over (life) time” (p. 169); as such, they argue that even in cases where Catalan was pursued for instrumental means, “an exclusively ‘instrumental’ investment into speaking Catalan appears as 25 a theoretical oxymoron only possible for those who believe languages to be neutral cognitive resources. This is not how Catalans, or any other group, live languages” (p. 186). O’Rourke and Ramallo (2015) also report on research with Spanish-dominant neofalantes, in this case in the context of Galician language movements. Using focus group data, they investigate these neofalantes as examples of an ‘active minority’, which they define as individuals or groups who through their behaviour attempt to influence both the attitudes and practices of the majority and in doing so, bring about social change” (p. 151). They argue that for active minorities, “motivations for change” are what prompts specific kinds of practice – in this case, ‘motivation for change’ prompts Galician language practice. They also note that these new speakers “showed a strong sense of responsibility in securing the future survival of the language, as well as a clear commitment to what they see as a situation of social and political injustice” (p. 164). DePalma (2015) reports on a study of 18 students enrolled in an intensive university- based summer Galician language program. She analyzed student agency and motivation in this context, noting that “[d]ue to language revitalization movements, certain professional, academic, and social environments can afford certain advantages, but they are not strong and universal enough to provide a sufficient immersion experience without some degree of personal initiative” (p. 438). The ‘personal initiative’ that she particularly observed with these learners was that highly motivated individuals actively sought out opportunities for “contexts of micro- immersion” (p. 440). That is, though Galician is not spoken widely enough in the community to be considered an ‘immersion’ experience like other study abroad contexts, some learners purposefully sought contexts where Galician language use was more reliable; for example, one learner traveled outside of the main town to shop at markets, “since local farmers living outside 26 the city are more likely to speak Galician than urban residents” (p. 438). One learner even used the context of the interview itself as an opportunity for ‘micro-immersion’, electing to conduct the interview exclusively in Galician. In addition to illustrating what highly motivated behaviors look like in this context, these examples highlight the dynamic nature of the context itself, and the individual’s agentive role in co-constructing this context. (p. 440). The importance of ‘new speakers’ in minority language maintenance in Spain is also highlighted in Lasagabaster’s (2017) comparative review of research literature from across Spanish contexts. Lasagabaster reviews the language attitudes and language practices of new speakers of Basque, Catalan, and Galician, and also considers the effects of immigration and the status of Spanish (as the dominant language) and English (as a growing target language for L2 learners across the country). Against the robustly multilingual backdrop of minority-language areas of Spain, Lasagabaster introduces the notion of a “cosmopolitan ideal self” as correlated with high motivation, arguing that “[i]n societies where multilingualism is highly valued, strengthening students' multilingual ideal self is of the utmost importance. The combination of students' cosmopolitan view of themselves (Newman et al., 2008) and their multilingual ideal self will bring not only individual but also social benefits” (Lasagabaster 2017, p. 590). This Cosmopolitan Ideal Self is an intriguing counter-point to the Rooted L2 Self (see section 1.3.5), and highlights the fact that different motivational constructs are more salient for particular learning contexts. I note for example quite a lot of the ‘new speakers’ in the preceding studies are immigrants learning the minority language of their new home, meaning learning these minority languages is not always as strongly connected to a sense of heritage (though, as Pujolar and Puigdevall point out, this enterprise always involves a sense of identity.) 27 The notion of ‘new speakers’ is taken up also in de Meulder’s (2019) study of sign languages and the role of ‘new signers’. Like in the case of spoken minoritized Spanish languages, new signers of European sign languages are an increasingly large proportion of total signers; in some countries, hearing new signers outnumber traditional signers by 10 to 1 (p. 2). Access to sign language is unevenly distributed in these contexts; de Meulder notes while parents of hearing children are encouraged to adopt “baby sign” for its demonstrable benefits on infant cognition, parents of deaf children who have received cochlear implants (in northern Europe, this is an estimated 80% of deaf children) are actively discouraged from using sign with their infants (p. 2). This leads to a situation where, she argues, “by talking about the ‘endangerment’ of sign languages it is first of all their use by deaf people, in ‘deaf spaces,’ that is endangered […] their use by hearing people in non-deaf spaces is not endangered, but even promoted” (p. 8). Based on interviews with 15 deaf and hearing signers in Belgium and extensive participant observation (the researcher is herself a deaf new signer), de Meulder (2019) demonstrates that motivations to learn sign language vary depending on the individual’s relationship to the deaf community. For example, while hearing new signers who are not related to a deaf person may have more instrumental motivations (e.g. getting course credit), hearing new signers who are related to a deaf person are motivated by the desire to communicate with their family member. These different motivational orientations, de Meulder argues, has direct relevance for language revitalisation policies and frameworks. Current efforts to encourage the growth of sign language use through instrumental motivations aimed at hearing learners (e.g. through the promotion of ‘baby sign’) excludes deaf new signers as well as hearing new signers who are more motivated by relational connections and sense of self. (p. 16). In summary, she argues that “a better understanding of the profiles, language practices and motivations of each of 28 these groups will be instrumental for developing evidence-based sign language policies for the future” (p. 16). Thus there is a clear implication for policy in understanding the varying motivations of learners. 1.4.2 Celtic languages Several case studies also come from efforts to maintain and revive Celtic languages. This includes Harasta (2017), which reports on semi-structured interviews with 64 Cornish (Kernewek) second-language users over the course of five years of ethnographic fieldwork in Cornwall. Specifically for this article, the author investigates the language learning motivations of these L2 users as a way “to examine the concept of perceived uselessness” with respect to minoritized languages. Harasta (2017) argues that these learners do indeed articulate the practical usefulness of Cornish, “not as an end to itself, but as a tool for broader cultural change” (p. 250). That is, the Cornish language is not exclusively a symbolic marker of heritage, but is a tool for “a sociocultural transformation directed towards three objects: the self, the Cornish ethnic community and the geopolitical unit of Cornwall.” (p. 250). In particular, this transformation concerns turning away from English dominance and towards Cornish autonomy, both at the macro-level (Cornish society at large) and at the individual level; one learner explained that by studying Kernewek, “she could decolonize her mind of its Englishness.” (p. 253). This shift from Englishness to Cornishness “was the most common motivation amongst interviewees” (p. 256), a fact that Harasta argues underscores the utility of this ‘useless’ language outside of the narrow scope of purely economic utility. This calls into question the notion of instrumentality in these contexts. Baker et al. (2011) conducted research on the motivations of adult L2 learners of Welsh, with the specific aim of investigating the effectiveness of pedagogical practice and language 29 planning policies. They report on findings from a large-scale questionnaire that was distributed to all official adult Welsh language classes in Wales and returned 1061 responses. The questionnaire was designed “with an underlying conceptual framework partly based on Gardner's (1985) research on instrumental and integrative motives for language learning.” (p. 50) The results found that adults were particularly motivated to learn Welsh when they anticipated using the language in the home with children and other family members; in particular, they found that 60% of respondents indicated that helping their children on Welsh language homework and speaking with their children in Welsh were major motivations for language learning. In this result they find support for current Welsh language learning policy, which emphasizes the importance of adult L2 learners in creating a context for intergenerational transmission (p. 50). Because these findings were analyzed in an instrumental vs integrative framework, the authors situate such familial motivations within the ‘integrative’ side of the dichotomy. They note however economic stability and employment opportunities are also ultimately important goals that parents have for their children, arguing that “there is a danger in separating integrative and instrumental motivations” for this reason. That is, “[w]hile identity, community engagement, social networking, culture and leisure are all important, […] for parents to transmit a minority language to their children, utilitarian reasons as well as integrative reasons may be an important part of the rationale” (p. 58). Beyond this integrative-instrumental framework, there is evidence in this study of other important components of L2 motivation, including the impact of (lack of) self-confidence in language learning persistence. Petit (2016) reports on a study of learner motivation with university students and members of a Gaelic language society in Dublin, Ireland. This study follows a more conventional quantitative motivation research design, utilizing a standard questionnaire instrument (modified 30 slightly for the Irish language context following a focus group pilot). The questionnaire collected 45 responses, and these were supplemented by qualitative analysis of three follow-up interviews. This study engages more with the L2MSS model rather than the instrumental vs integrative framework. Analysis of the questionnaire results indicate that external motivation factors (including parents and teachers as well as the Ought-to L2 Self) were not as strongly correlated with “motivational intensity” as “intrinsic factors” such as the Ideal Irish Self and the Ideal Irish Community. I note here that ‘motivational intensity’ was not defined in this study, and the questionnaire instrument itself was not published with the study, so it is not clear what this criterion measure means6; I also note that a motivational construct such as Ideal (Irish) Self and Ideal Community is not ‘intrinsic’ in the strict definition given above, but is more in line with the Identified Regulation of Deci and Ryan’s (1985) four-way typology of extrinsic motivational factors (see section 1.3.1). One of the most interesting findings from the three interviews in Petit’s (2016) study is that it was peer relationships, rather than family relationships, which seemed to be most impactful on these young adults’ lives; Petit notes that although all three interviewees “were raised in families which were very enthusiastic about the language”, it was the Irish summer colleges they went to as teenagers that “made a big difference” (p. 53). Petit characterizes these summer experiences as linguistic mudes (Pujolar and Puigdevall, 2015; discussed above), turning points in their language identity and practice; the learners in these cases reported that “[s]ince then, even though they do not take Irish class, they use Irish nearly daily with their friends.” (p. 54). These relationships that transcend the formal language classroom were formative for these young learners. 6 I also note that the term “successful”, as in the title of the paper (“Successful Learners of Irish as an L2”), was never defined with respect to this learner population. 31 Wright and McGrory (2005) report on research in adult Irish L2 motivation from a specific historical lens. They note that one of the most comprehensive and well-cited studies of L2 Irish (Ó hAdhmaill, 1985) was conducted during a particularly violent and tumultuous moment in the sociopolitical upheavals known as the Troubles. The Ó hAdhmaill study found that issues of identity and politics, including alliance with the Sinn Fein Republican Movement, were by far the most prominent factors in adult interest in learning Irish; Wright and McGrory (2005) note that these studies must be understood in their historical context, wherein for example 10 Irish political prisoners had recently died in a hunger strike at Long Kesh prison (p. 196). Given this, one of the research questions for their study was “to seek to uncover whether, two decades and an IRA ceasefire after Ó hAdhmaill’s (1985) study, the same issues of identity and the political situation remain as prime motivating factors for learning Irish” (Wright and McGrory 2005, p. 198). In results from a largely quantitative questionnaire designed specifically for this study, Wright and McGrory found that of their 104 respondents, learners did in fact seem to be departing from the strongly political motivations for learning Irish than were seen in previous studies. In fact, they found that a large percentage of learners were motivated at least partially by intrinsic interest in the language, with 58% reporting to be motivated by ‘fun’ and nearly two- thirds motivated by aesthetic interest in ‘the sound of the language’ (p. 203).7 Even so, the most significant finding that they highlight is “the overwhelming interest in culture as a decisive motivating factor in respondents' choice to learn Irish” (p. 203). That is, though the emphasis on affiliation with particular political groups was no longer a major factor at this juncture in Irish 7 Though one could argued to what extent aesthetic judgements about a language can ever be “pure”, rather than bound up inextricably with ideologies about the worth and value of the language and attitudes about its user population. 32 history, the majority of learners in Wright and McGrory’s study continued to report that a sense of Irish identity and an interest in Irish culture were the key reasons they had begun language class (p. 204). This suggests that some aspects of L2 motivation in heritage language contexts may be relatively constant, while others are subject to fluctuations in the macrosocial and political contexts in which learning is taking place. 1.4.3 Māori A few studies with learners of Māori also investigate issues of L2 motivation. Chrisp (2005) reports on a qualitative study comprised of small focus groups in four Māori language learning communities. Chrisp raises the issue of motivation with respect to these speakers by arguing that “[l]anguage knowledge by itself does not automatically lead to language use […] people must want or need to speak a language before they choose to do so.” (p. 158) He also argues that bilingual speakers of any languages continually and regularly make choices about which language to use in which context, such that language choice (conscious or unconscious) is one of the salient realities of bilingualism. He further points out that contextual factors at the macrolevel (i.e. wider social context) can hinder or encourage an individual’s choice to use the target language. That is, though large-scale contextual elements undoubtedly affect language use, in this study he focuses on “language choice at the microlevel” – the level of individuals and their families (p. 156). At this more microlevel, Chrisp (2005) found that personal relationships had a significant effect on the choice to use Māori language. This might have discouraging effects; for example, some participants reported that they would be unlikely to use Māori in the presence of people that they knew did not speak Māori (p. 168). On the other hand, most of the statements about positive choice referenced family and children, including the belief “that Māori language 33 strengthened the self-identity and self-esteem of their children because they ‘know who they are and where they are from’” (p. 172). The powerful nature of these familial connections were often implicated with what Chrisp calls “trigger events”, which are turning points in one’s lifetime. Among Chrisp’s focus groups, “[s]ome participants spoke of the birth of their children as the critical trigger event, whereas others discussed funerals and being faced with the key role of Māori in ceremonial rituals.” (p. 173) These ‘trigger events’ echo Pujolar and Puigdevall’s (2015) notion of a linguistic muda (see discussion above). In addition to this finding about ‘trigger events’, one key takeaway from this article is his argument in favor of focusing more on individual-level motivations and practices in language revitalization. Chrisp’s work draws primarily on the sociolinguistic literature, in which economic advancement and social prestige are considered primary motivational factors, possibly supplemented by the factors of cultural identity and gratification (factors that originate with Fishman, 1991 in fact). Among Māori focus group participants, Chrisp found that motivation was articulated almost exclusively in terms of cultural identity and familial connections – factors that would be missed if these learners were only considered within a macrocontextual lens. Te Huia (2015) and (2017) also reports on qualitative research with Māori learners. Through thematic content analysis of semi-structured interviews with 19 learners of different proficiency levels, Te Huia first examines themes in goals and motivations (2015) and then focuses specifically on the role of identity in Māori heritage language learner motivations (2017). Like Chrisp (2005), Te Huia argues that the motivations of these learners need to be addressed at a more micro-level rather than the macro-level that is addressed in current national and tribal language policy and sociolinguistic theory; the author notes for example that in the interview findings, “the desire to satisfy their immediate identity needs and the shared goals of their 34 language-learner community were more urgent (or pertinent) than the larger goal of language revitalisation” (Te Huia, 2015, p. 628) That is, while the general goal of language revitalization does have some motivational impact, it is close interpersonal relationships which are more directly impactful. Following from this, Te Huia suggests that the intrinsic vs extrinsic dichotomies articulated by Gardner (2007) are not the best fit with the Māori situation, and instead posits a “relational framework” for heritage language learning motivation which includes “identity and the sense of belonging that learners experience as a result of being engaged with learning” (Te Huia, 2017, p. 300). These relational motivations include cultural and ceremonial roles which require language skills, as well as “an immense sense of obligation toward maintaining the language for future generations” (2015, p. 627). Te Huia points out that Māori heritage L2 learners differ from learners of globally dominant languages in that they feel personally obligated to maintain the language for future generations, and argues that “[t]he fact that Māori learners are aware of the possibility of language death is unavoidably linked to their motivation to initiate language learning behaviour and to improve their language abilities even if they are already proficient.” (2015, p. 627) The impact of this sense of obligation is also mediated by relationships. Te Huia (2017) finds that this sense of responsibility and expectation can be demotivating to learners who do not have the linguistic skills or support to feel confident in their abilities to meet those expectations, leading lower proficiency level learners “feeling badly about themselves” (p. 307). But for learners who do have both linguistic skills and “relational support”, these expectations are in fact motivational (p. 309). This is the main theoretical implication of this study – that relationships 35 are central both to the aims of language revitalization and also to the necessary motivational supports to achieve those aims. 1.4.4 Other cases A handful of other cases also refer to L2 motivation, but are of somewhat limited utility for understanding this topic for various reasons. One of these is Torres-Guzman et al (2011), which investigates adults who have immigrated to the Spanish Basque Country and their motivations to have their children learn the Basque language; that is, this study does not focus on individuals’ motivations to engage in a language learning task themselves, but rather with parental attitudes and motivations that affect the language socialization of children in these L2 contexts. Using both discourse analysis and content analysis of interviews with 26 parents of children between the ages of 6 and 8 years old, the authors suggest that these parents have primarily instrumental motivations; that is, “most parents want their children to learn Euskara so that they can have a better opportunity to be educated, to work, and to live, if they chose, in the area” (p. 60). The authors in fact set up a strong instrumental/integrative dichotomy in their study, arguing that it is primarily the instrumental orientation that characterizes parents’ positions with respect to their children’s language practice. In contrast, several parents noted that the children themselves “embraced the language as part of their identity” after an initial period of adjustment to the new living situation (p. 61). However, given the design of the interviews in this study, individual motivation to learn language can only be inferred indirectly; in the parents’ case, indirectly through their attitudes towards their children’s language use (they did not discuss their own language learning or motivations to engage in language learning), and in the children’s case, indirectly through the impressionistic reporting of the parents and the researchers. 36 Focusing on the revitalization of Southern Sami, an indigenous language of Norway, Lyngsnes (2013) also investigates school-based language maintenance programming, but includes the voices of students themselves in investigating learning motivation in these contexts. Based on semi-structured interviews with 29 individuals during fieldwork conducted at four different Sami schools, the author argues that “children, young people and parents in our study showed great enthusiasm and motivation for learning and revitalising Southern Sami” (p. 236). Though the nature and quality of this motivation is not explicitly articulated in this study, evidence for this ‘great enthusiasm and motivation’ is given in examples such as two students who stayed late into the evenings on Friday after school in order to receive additional Sami language instruction. The author discusses the realities of time and resource barriers in the teaching of Sami, noting that "all the teachers are highly committed and work hard to revitalise Southern Sami language, culture and identity. Some of them are however beginning to feel a little worn out” (p. 235). This hints at the impacts of demotivating factors in these difficult language learning contexts, and the need to find ways to stay motivated over the long term. The author also hints at the importance of identity and cultural pride found in the interviews, noting, “[t]he Southern Sami identity seems to be important for the young people and this is underlined in statements such as: ‘Many people think it's cool to be a Sami’, and ‘I'm actually quite proud of being a Sami’” (p. 235). Outside of Europe, Abd-el-Jawad (2006) examined the attitudes and practices of speakers of Circassian in Jordan. The Circassians are an ethnic minority group originally from the Caucasus who have been displaced repeatedly over the past two centuries and are now settled in several former Ottoman territories, including Turkey, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, and Jordan. In this study, Abd-el-Jawad administered a 15-item questionnaire to 250 members of the Circassian 37 community in Jordan; one item on this questionnaire was specifically targeted at motivation (“Why do you use Circassian?”) This questionnaire was followed up by interviews with 10 community members (5 older than 60, five in their 20s) and language use surveys distributed to 50 families to collect data on language use in the home. Common responses about the reasons for maintaining Circassian language echo those seen in other language maintenance contexts; for example, “if everyone does not speak it, it will die; who has no language has no origin or background; it is a carrier of Circassian history and culture; it is the link with the past; it makes us feel proud of ourselves; it is a unifier of the community; our language guarantees and maintains our entity” (p. 72) Given these response themes, and given data from the questionnaire and the language use surveys, Abd-el-Jawad argues that language has a symbolic rather than a communicative value for the community. Information about language maintenance in the Near East is exceptionally rare (Belew & Simpson, 2018), and as such this study offers a unique opportunity to consider language practice and language motivation in this under-represented context. However, the author sometimes uses problematic language to frame his observations of this language context. I reproduce one excerpt at length: "The majority of the informants' comments indicate that their main motivation was nothing more than to preserve heritage [...] The underlying general feeling seems to be simply an emotional and national one: their main concern is that it would be unfortunate if their language dies. Yet, language has never been a central issue or a subject of conflict in Jordan for the Circassians. They are content that their interests and welfare are better served by the majority language but not by their ethnic one." (Abd-el- Jawad, 2006, p. 71, emphasis mine) It is not clear from this article what this researcher’s position is with respect to this community, though given the use of the ‘they’ pronoun in the above excerpt (“they are content”) it seems that he is not himself a member of the Circassian community. Given what we know about the 38 experience of language maintenance in other parts of the world, it would be pertinent to revisit this context to investigate whether or not these speakers are truly “content” that “their interests and welfare” are served by switching to the majority language; given what we know about the importance of identity, heritage, and emotion in the motivation to maintain a language, it would be pertinent to critically revisit framing motivation as “nothing more than” preserving heritage, or “simply” an emotional feeling. 1.4.5 The gap The research reviewed in this section (1.4) is not well-known or represented in the L2 motivation literature. In fact, none of these studies were cited in MacIntyre et al’s (2017) study (Rooted L2 Self) which looks at heritage learners of Gaelic specifically. This could be attributed to two problems: first, disciplinarily, much of the work cited above has appeared in journals of the sociology of language, rather than applied linguistics; there is perhaps an as-yet unbridged disciplinary divide between these two fields. The other is perhaps terminological: MacIntyre, Baker, and Sparling situate their work within the heritage language space, and as a result the studies they cite as background literature include work primarily on university-level heritage learners of global languages (e.g. Chinese; Italian). This is despite the fact that the population that they are studying are adult learners of Scottish Gaelic, who are working to maintain their language not through formal university classes but through cultural activities including Gaelic music. This demonstrates a dilemma with current conceptions of “heritage language learning”, which tends to focus primarily on second-generation immigrant learners of widely taught global languages. McIvor (2020) raises this issue of terminology in discussing how to refer to learners in Indigenous language revitalization (ILR). She acknowledges that there are strong parallels 39 between HL and ILR, including “that of learning a language in an environment and social context where the target language is not the main language in use” (p. 84). She also notes that a key difference between HL, framed as immigrant heritage, and ILR is that “the land, atmosphere, and context has shifted around Indigenous people; they did not travel somewhere to a new environment” (p. 84) and also points out that unlike learners of foreign heritage languages, learners of Indigenous language have “no ‘other’ place in the world where they can practice and enhance their language skills in an immersion environment” (McIvor, 2020, p. 84). This might raise a question about the utility of framing language maintenance as a heritage language enterprise, or about lumping all these learners together under one umbrella term. On the one hand, the language situation is remarkably different for Gaelic versus Chinese, or Lushootseed versus Italian. That is, the sense of responsibility to the language and the future language community may be markedly different given the different situations of the language. On the other hand, the individual motivations seem to be strikingly similar – familial connections and identity. Settling this issue of terminology and categorization is beyond the scope of this current discussion. Far more troubling than the question of the defining ‘heritage language’ are the disciplinary divides that prevent sharing of knowledge and experience. As McIvor (2020) stresses, “[d]espite this decades-long attention to the need for language revitalization efforts, a general lack of additional language learning knowledge in Indigenous communities remains” (p. 81). In the field of L2 motivation theory, the dearth of research outside of L2 English contexts causes problems as discussed in section 1.3.3. In the field of language revitalization, learners of Indigenous and minoritized languages are significantly disadvantaged by the “lack of exposure to 40 relevant and accessible theoretical knowledge and practical skills of second language learning” (p. 81). This review is undoubtedly not comprehensive, but it does draw together many sources from many contexts, none of which are currently represented in the L2 motivation literature. The studies discussed here mainly come out of language revitalization cases that are better known in the literature, and more diversity in case studies is an ongoing need in the research literature (Peréz Báez et al., 2018). Even in the limited set of studies reviewed here, it is clear that language revitalization contexts call into question much of the assumptions of L2 motivation theory as described for learners of English (Dörnyei & Al-Hoorie, 2017). 1.5 An overview of the chapters in this dissertation This study is an investigation of motivations of individuals, recognizing all the while that the individual is inherently bounded by and co-constructing of their environment, and also that individual motivations are multidimensional, sometimes contradictory, and always changing. The approach I take to L2 motivation in language revitalization practice is ecological (van Lier, 2004; Mercer, 2016), and resonates with more social approaches to second language development (Atkinson, 2011a; Lantolf & Thorne, 2006) rather than strictly cognitive approaches. In what follows, I discuss L2 motivation with respect to dynamism and relationality. That is, motivation is not a static characteristic, purely internal to the individual, and operating in a linear way to drive a learner towards a particular outcome. Especially in language revitalization, the ‘context’ and ‘relationality’ of Ushioda’s (2009) “person-in-context relational view” are critical to understanding L2 motivations. In Chapter 2, I describe the Methods used in this study. I propose a model for applied research that is built on principles of relationship and reciprocity. I then describe the 41 methodological approach to qualitative data collection and analysis, as well as describing in detail the contexts that the practitioners in this study primarily operate in. Chapters 3, 4, and 5 present findings from qualitative analysis, organized by key themes. Chapter 3 deals with the theme of Goals, which includes questions of selfhood and identity, language ‘acquisition’ versus other kinds of goals, and the recognition that this is a long, dynamic process. Chapter 4 focuses on the major theme of Relationships, which includes both how relationships affect individual motivation to practice, as well as how language revitalization practice motivates relationship building in turn. Chapter 5, Time, includes discussion of how effort and persistence (two components of motivation) fluctuate over the temporal space of a language learning journey, as well as how learners situate themselves with respect to past and future perspectives and present environmental factors. Chapter 6, Coda, extends the discussion of relationality and context by considering the context of the research undertaking itself; that is, it locates me, the researcher, in a particular relationship with the research participants, and it locates the research project within a particular temporal context. In the concluding chapters, I propose practical implications from these findings (Chapter 7) and future directions for research both in L2 motivation and in language revitalization (Chapter 8). 42 CHAPTER II. METHODS 2.1 Introduction and framing In this chapter I discuss data collection and analysis methods. My data sources are of two distinct types: secondary data drawn from the Global Survey of Revitalization Efforts, which provides a broad comparative perspective; and primary data from interviews conducted with individual language revitalization practitioners, which provides an in-depth look at individual experiences as well as a more thorough picture of specific language contexts. For this dissertation, I am working within a framework for social science research that is centered on principles such as respect, relationships and relational accountability, and reciprocity. These principles draw from a number of research traditions, particularly in Indigenous-framed research methods (e.g. Wilson, 2008) and a growing body of literature in collaborative, community-based language documentation (e.g. Bischoff and Jany, 2018; Gerdts, 2010; Grenoble and Furbee, 2010; Yamada, 2007), as well as from personal conversations with colleagues and mentors at the University of Oregon’s Department of Linguistics, the Northwest Indian Language Institute (NILI), and the Institute for Collaborative Language Research (CoLang). I invoke these research and practice communities as a way of situating myself, and of underscoring that my research methods and my ethical principles have been co-constructed out of these contexts. I propose to give the framework developed here the working title of Relational Applied Research. This is operationally different in a few ways from the framework known as (Collaborative) Community-Based Research (CBR, Bischoff and Jany, 2018), but this model shares the ideological and ethical stances taken by CBR approaches. For example, articulations of CBR may include (adapted from Rice, 2018): 43 • A long-term commitment to and embedding with any one specific language community • Research question/research focus begins with call from community collaborators • Research proceeds by working with a team of interested parties – this is the ‘co-labor’ part of collaboration • Specific research product(s) are requested by the community and negotiated with them The framework which underlies this research project differs slightly in that: • The “community” is not interpreted as any one language community, but rather a broad community of language revitalization practitioners • The research focus arose out of the practitioner research and literature from this revitalization community • After consulting with colleagues within the language revitalization community, a solo researcher undertook the design and spearheaded the implementation of the research process • The researcher endeavors to share the research products via the avenues of the practitioner community, i.e. through public presentations and writings and through personal correspondence Thus I use the term “relational” rather than collaborative, because this model does not center around the kind of team-based co-laboring that language documentation projects often rely on, where different stakeholders play active roles in the design, implementation, and dissemination of the research project (see Rice, 2018). Rather than co-labor-ating with language revitalization practitioners, a researcher may instead endeavor to be attentive to practitioners’ practical needs and intellectual questions; to center and attend to relationships; and to pay heed to intricacies of respect and reciprocity. In this research framework, any one project may be undertaken as a solo 44 researcher, but the solo researcher acknowledges and affirms that the work is accompanied by others; even if not ‘working with’, always walking alongside. This is a way that ‘solo’ research can be carried out ethically and appropriately (Crippen and Robinson, 2013; Peréz Báez, 2018). A Relational Applied Research model emphasizes: • Acknowledging, building, and respecting relationships with and within a community of language practitioners • Researching topics that have been identified by practitioners as having relevance and real-world consequences • Consultations with key stakeholders in the development of the research project (see also Czaykowska-Higgins et al., 2018) • Observing appropriate avenues of introduction into new networks (i.e. “cold calling” participants may be inappropriate in many contexts) • Research participants maintain control of their contribution to the project at all stages • Research products are shared widely and accessibly These elements underly the methods described in this chapter. This framework may be most apparent in the description of interview recruitment and procedures, as these practitioner interviews are the most obviously relational elements of the data collection for this project. However, I wish to acknowledge here that this is equally true of the survey data that I am using. Though I did not participate in the survey design and collection myself, it was my relationship with the principal investigator on that project, who has since become a mentor and co-advisor for this dissertation, which allowed me to work with this data. Similarly, it was personal and professional networks and relationships which allowed the original researchers to create such a 45 project and to reach as wide an audience as they did. That is, interpersonal connections with language revitalization practitioners underly all the research used for this dissertation. With that in mind, I conclude this introduction by acknowledging that this methods chapter contains more first-person pronouns than may be customary for some social science dissertations. This follows from an understanding that every research project is shaped by the social identity and the lived experience of the researcher, and heeds calls from critical theorists and critical applied linguists (e.g. Talmy, 2010) to embrace greater reflexivity in research. That is, I am neither an absent nor a neutral party in the conducting and reporting of this research, and the use of terms like “I” and “my” is one stylistic way that I represent this fact. 2.2 The Global Survey of Language Revitalization Efforts – Survey data and analysis The data analyzed in this dissertation comes from two major sources: qualitative responses to a mixed-methods survey, and interviews with revitalization practitioners. In this section (Section 2.2), I describe the survey data and my methods for analyzing these data. Section 2.3 describes the interview data and my approach to data collection and analysis of interviews. 2.2.1 Introduction to Survey This first phase of this research uses data from questions from the Global Survey of Language Revitalization Efforts (Pérez Báez et al 2019), which I refer to henceforth as the Global Survey. These data were collected by Pérez Báez and colleagues as part of the first comparative study of language revitalization practices around the world (Pérez Báez et al 2018). The Global Survey was deliberately designed for mixed-methods analysis, with question items including both closed-ended (i.e. quantitative) and open-ended (i.e. text field or qualitative) types. The survey was administered via the SurveyMonkey online platform. Every individual 46 question in the survey was optional. In total, the Global Survey collected 245 responses, including the 30 responses from an initial pilot survey. Note that in an effort to avoid some confusion, I use the terms ‘response’ and ‘answer’ in distinct ways. A ‘response’ is the complete survey output from a single participant (on analogy with the term ‘respondent’), while an ‘answer’ is an instance of a reply to a single survey question. So, for example, one survey response came from an effort to revitalize the tiłhini language; in that response, the answer to question 25, “Why is the revitalization of your language important?” is “Because the language and the land is who we are” [ID 5]. As I discuss below, the dataset I analyzed here included 142 total responses, but there were only 87 different answers to question 25. 2.2.1.1 Survey questions to be investigated The Global Survey included 30 questions ranging across many different aspects of language revitalization practice. It was not specifically designed to investigate the construct of language learning motivation, but a few of the open-ended questions addressed factors that are acknowledged to be components of motivation. These questions are the focus of this investigation, and are presented here with the exact wording of the survey: 47 6. How did the revitalization efforts begin? Please explain. We are especially interested in learning what the motivation was, who got the efforts started and how they went about it. 10. What are the main objectives of the revitalization efforts? 25. Why is the revitalization of your language important? 26. Is there anything else you would like to share with us? Figure 1. Question items from Global Survey analyzed in this study Questions 6, 25, and 26 were followed by a large blank textbox for a typed response. Question 10 had five separate textboxes, allowing respondents to list up to five individual objectives. Additionally, question 10 was followed by a related assessment question: 11. How well is each objective met? Question 11 gave respondents four options: “very well”, “well,” “not very well,” and “not at all.” These options were given five times, that is, the objectives listed in question 10 could each be rated in Question 11 (up to five total). Because this question is forced-choice and more quantitative in nature, it was not included in the excerpt coding described in this section; however, the assessments for each objective were preserved in the data input to Dedoose, the qualitative data analysis software described in (2.2.3.1), so that correlations between objective types and their reported success rates could be included in discussion of results (see later chapters). 2.2.1.2 Descriptive information about the survey responses The 142 responses that are included in the survey data set represent efforts spread across all regions of the globe, and across a range of language vitality statuses. Figure 2 shows the geographical distribution of the survey responses, broken down into the twelve region categories established by the Catalogue of Endangered Languages (ELCat, 2018). I have arranged the regions in descending order of number of survey responses. 48 Total survey responses from each ELCat region 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Figure 2. Number of survey responses by region in this dataset As can be seen, efforts to revitalize languages in North America are overwhelmingly numerous; this is followed by efforts from the other regions of the Americas and Europe. This response pattern follows trends in the language revitalization literature, where case studies from the Americas and Europe are overrepresented (see Introduction 1.2.3). It is notable though that at least one effort from all 12 ELCat regions are represented in this sample. Another way to consider the diversity of the sample is by looking at the reported vitality statuses of the languages being revitalized by these efforts. Question 2 of the Survey asked “What is the situation of the language?”, and respondents were then given a set of eight choices from which they would select the one most appropriate to characterize their user population. Figure 3 paraphrases the choices that were given to respondents and then gives frequency counts for responses; this figure is arranged in order of the fewest current L1 users to the most. 49 Total number of respondents in this set 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 awakening no L1 few elderly many some adults most adults most adults all members speakers speakers grandparents, speak, but no speak, and some of the young people children children children community, generally do generally do speak including not speak not children, speak Figure 3. Number of survey responses by language situation in this dataset Responses are more evenly distributed across total user population. The original survey collectors found it remarkable that so many of the responses in the survey set overall came from efforts to maintain languages that still have fairly robust speaker populations, rather than being heavily dominated by efforts for languages in more advanced states of endangerment, which suggests that communities are in fact being proactive in responding to language shift (Peréz Báez et al., 2019); we can see that same pattern in this subset of survey responses investigated in this dissertation. In the data analysis chapters to follow, comparisons of trends in the survey findings are presented through the lens of either regional distribution or language situation. One additional interesting pattern to observe with respect to these categories is how they correlate with each other; that is, how are efforts to support languages of different vitality statuses distributed across different regions. Table 1 shows these correlations. 50 Awakening 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total for region North 7 7 16 10 6 1 0 0 47 America South 3 1 3 1 9 2 1 3 23 America Mexico, 0 2 2 3 3 6 2 1 19 Central America, Caribbean Europe 3 1 0 3 2 2 1 4 16 Africa 0 0 1 1 1 2 4 0 9 Australia 5 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 8 Caucasus 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 1 5 East Asia 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 4 Pacific 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 Southeast 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 3 Asia South Asia 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 Near East 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Total for 18 12 24 18 25 17 12 14 1408 vitality status Table 1. Correlations between geographic region and vitality status categories Note that for the sake of space, the column headers are abbreviated, but the order corresponds to Figure 3 above; for example, “1” is the category of “no L1 speakers”, and “7” is the category of “all members of the community speak.” As can be seen, efforts to support awakening and dormant languages are primarily concentrated in the Americas, Australia, and Europe. On the other side of the scale, efforts in lesser-known regions such as Africa and regions of Asia more commonly represent languages with broader speaker bases. This roughly follows trends found for languages in the Catalogue of Endangered Languages overall, where languages of Americas and Australia are in more advanced stages of shift than other regions (Belew & Simpson, 2018). 8 This total is 140, rather than 142, because two of the efforts included in this data set did not select an answer to the Language Situation question. 51 2.2.2 Methodology for survey analysis 2.2.2.1 Gap in the literature Questionnaires are most often used as tools for quantitative analysis – instruments utilizing standard question items to generate statistical data from a large sample. It is probably not surprising then that little attention has been paid to how to proceed with the qualitative potential of text data in surveys and questionnaires. But the Global Survey was specifically designed with mixed-methods inquiry in mind (Pérez Báez et al., 2019), and in fact open-ended questions precede quantifiable question items throughout the survey – for example, Question 16 asks an open-ended text-field question, “What activities does the revitalization initiative carry out?” which is then followed by seven structured questions that yield quantifiable data (checklist, multiple choice, and dropdown answers) related to the topic of ‘activities’. One of the major strengths of this design is in fact the possibility of rigorous qualitative analysis of text data alongside statistical analysis of quantitative item types. This type of analysis with questionnaire data has gone largely unaddressed. In the introduction to a special issue of the journal Language Teaching Research – focused specifically on the potential of questionnaires for applied linguistics research – Gu (2016) notes that “applied linguists have barely explored the major issues involved in the analysis of questionnaire data” (p. 568). Though the articles he introduces are meant to fill this gap, they offer very little by way of examples of text analysis, largely relying on the more usual discussion of Likert scale items. Only two studies in the issue included open-ended questionnaire items at all, and the description of their analyses of these items are quite limited; Buss (2016) says that qualitative data were categorized “follow[ing] an inductive approach” (p. 623), while Pawlak et al (2016) simply states that “qualitative analysis entailed identifying and categorizing recurring themes in responses to the open-ended items” (p. 660). 52 Prior to this special journal issue, Dörnyei & Taguchi (2009) published an entire book focused on questionnaires and surveys in SLA research. The book ends with a helpful checklist of 40 items to consider when designing, administering, and analyzing questionnaires and surveys. Unfortunately, only one item on this checklist of practical advice pertains to the kind of data I deal with in this study, and the item is this: “35. Process open-ended questions by means of some systematic content analysis.” (2009, p. 130)9 Given this relative paucity in methodological guidance, I here elaborate in some detail the steps I took for the processing and analysis of text data from this survey. While this section may include more minutiae than is strictly necessary, I include these details as a way of establishing an audit trail (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) to demonstrate the rigor of this study. 2.2.2.2 Grounded Theory/Constant Comparative method This study is an example of a sequential mixed methods design for cross-cultural comparisons (Schrauf, 2018). It is sequential in terms of the data collection itself; one component is secondary text data from the Global Survey conducted in 2014-2017, and the second is primary interview data collected by in 2020-21. It is mixed method in that the survey data, taken from a broad population sample, allows for basic quantitative comparisons of patterns, alongside the main thrust of the research, which is qualitative analysis of text and interview data. In conducting this study, I adopt analytical tools from a Grounded Theory-type approach to social science research. The Grounded Theory tradition is a qualitative approach originating in the field of sociology (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Its purpose is the creation and elaboration of theory, grounded firmly in data. It emphasizes theory building rather than simple description, and 9 Actually there is perhaps one other item that is relevant: “40. Enjoy!” 53 inductive, data-driven analysis rather than deductive or philosophical approaches to human phenomena. Researchers working within Grounded Theory in fact represent a range of different paradigms and procedures (Apramian et al., 2017). My objective in this research is not to adhere to any one theorist’s version of Grounded Theory – Apramian et al. discuss Glaserian, Straussian, Charmazian, and Clarkean as four major versions (among other alternatives), and my purpose is neither to weigh the different features of each one, nor is it to enter the “acrimonious debates” that have raged for half a century in the “contentious literature” (Piantanida & Garman, 2009, p. 79) about orthodoxy and orthopraxy. Rather, my purpose is to use some of the analytical tools of this well-established tradition to conduct a rigorous analysis of qualitative data about a social phenomenon, following Morse’s (2015) call for a return to the notion of ‘rigor’ in qualitative research methods. These tools include: • An inductive approach to data • A system of inductive tagging of the data to capture important points (i.e. ‘coding’) • A procedure for grouping tags into categories, and then building up more abstract categories from these groupings as the analysis proceeds • An iterative approach to comparison – categories are built from data, additional data is examined, categories are created or refined based on this new data, and the cycle repeats. This is what is known in Grounded Theory approaches as the ‘constant comparative method’ (Charmaz, 2006). The aim of this type of analysis is to build up a theory of a complex phenomenon by identifying and comparing patterns. This approach has been used to investigate many different types of data 54 sources for many social science fields. Though it is not a method used for analyzing the types of data that most descriptive linguists deal with, this method of comparative analysis and data- driven theory-building will almost certainly be recognizable to linguists who “think like typologists” (Croft, 2001, p. 7). 2.2.3 Procedures of analysis In this section I describe each of the steps in the analysis of Global Survey data, which was conducted using a qualitative data analysis software package. The first step in the procedure was to appropriately input the data into the software program, which required some conscientious readjustments to the raw data, as discussed in 2.2.3.1. The next step was to begin coding the data for content themes, discussed in 2.2.3.2, which also entailed making decisions about how to analyze texts in this project (discussed in 2.2.3.3). Following some initial coding, the codes underwent inter-rater reliability testing, which is described in section 2.2.3.4. Results from inter-rater testing led to further refinement of thematic categories and to refinement in excerpting practice, as discussed in section 2.2.3.5. An overview of this entire workflow is given in figure form in section 2.2.3.6. 2.2.3.1 Input procedures Data from the Global Survey of Language Revitalization Efforts were analyzed using the Dedoose qualitative data analysis software package (Dedoose, 2018). This software allows researchers to upload media files, such as documents and texts as well as audio, video, and visual realia, that can then be ‘coded’ by means of highlighting sections of the data and assigning descriptive tags to these sections. The coding of qualitative data in Dedoose is discussed in detail in section 2.2.4.2. Researchers can also assign descriptive information to each media file as a whole in order to keep track of the sources of the data, which facilitates comparison across 55 sources; these types of information are called ‘descriptor fields’ in Dedoose, and in what follows I discuss descriptor fields in more detail. Responses from the Global Survey which included an answer to questions 6, 10, 25, and/or 26 were selected for input into Dedoose. Responses which did not include any information in the text fields of these four questions of interest were not used. This left 142 individual responses. Note that not every respondent answered all four of these questions, but if they answered at least one of them their data was included for analysis. Note also that though the survey instrument was distributed in seven different global languages10, the responses that included text data for this analysis were given in only four of these languages – English, Spanish, Portuguese, and Russian11. The questions in the survey are of different types. For any survey analysis, it is important to distinguish between questions that elicit answers that are, essentially, independent variables, versus those that elicit dependent variables. In a hypothetical study of individual language learners, the independent variables might be captured by questions about demographics, level of education, years of language study, etc. In this survey of language efforts, the independent variables are categories like estimated number of speakers of the language, year of effort inception, geographic region in which the effort is located, etc. These are examples of ‘descriptor fields’ in Dedoose. Once these variables are defined, it is possible to make comparisons among them. In the Global Survey, I determined that the following questions gave descriptor field data: 10 The survey was written in English, re-written in Spanish by Pérez Báez, and translated into Arabic, Mandarin Chinese, French, Portuguese, and Russian (Pérez Báez et al 2019). 11 I have basic reading comprehension in Portuguese and Spanish and intermediate reading comprehension in Russian; translations in this dissertation are my own, occasionally verified by Google Translate. 56 1. List the language you are working to revitalize. This question included separate text fields for: Language; Alternate language name; ISO code if known; Where is the language spoken? 2. What is the situation of the language? [multiple choice] 3. How many people speak the language? [multiple choice] 7. In what year did the revitalization efforts begin? [dropdown menu with numerical choices] Figure 4. Survey question items used as Descriptor Fields in Dedoose Note that the answers to the sub-question “Where is the language spoken?” were given in text fields, but were subsequently categorized by earlier analysts (Pérez Báez, Vogel, and Patolo) into corresponding ELCat region codes (Catalogue, 2018; see distribution in section 2.2.1.2); I was able to use these region codes as categorical descriptors instead of the variable text. The remainder of the survey questions are of a different type, eliciting answers that are dependent variables in comparative analysis. It was essential to note this distinction early on and to attend to it, analytically but also practically. The crucial practical consideration is that SurveyMonkey, the platform that hosted the Global Survey, outputs survey results into a single Excel spreadsheet. Answers to all survey questions are in individual cells of this spreadsheet, with rows corresponding to individual respondents and columns corresponding to individual questions. In other words, this master spreadsheet treats all answer types the same. The Dedoose software, meanwhile, assumes that spreadsheet files represent information of the same type. It is possible to input a spreadsheet file as the data itself, in which case Dedoose assumes that the data has already been analyzed in a standard format, e.g. that rows represent independent variables and columns represent the outcomes of these variables. This was not appropriate for this dataset, as more than one question (i.e. column) represented an 57 independent variable for comparison. Even more problematic, this means that Dedoose does not allow the researcher to investigate text within individual cells in the spreadsheet data. The focus of my analysis was text answers to open-ended questions, which in the SurveyMonkey output meant that I needed to analyze precisely that – text within individual cells in the spreadsheet. The only way to proceed then would be to input data into Dedoose in a format other than the Excel spreadsheet. Because SurveyMonkey does not provide any other outputs, responses of interest had to be manually copied into individual document files, which could then be ingested into Dedoose and analyzed as text. It is also possible in Dedoose to input a spreadsheet file as the ‘descriptor set’, in which case again Dedoose assumes that all information is of the same type, and that every column represents a different kind of independent variable to categorize responses. Again, this was not appropriate for this dataset, as most of the columns in the master spreadsheet are not descriptor fields. To adjust for this, I created a new reduced version of the Excel spreadsheet that included only the columns to be used as descriptors (i.e. questions 1, 2, 3, and 7). Thus the input to Dedoose was 142 individual documents containing survey responses plus an Excel spreadsheet of descriptor fields. Individual documents were linked to their corresponding descriptor information once they were entered. These assembled responses yielded a corpus of roughly 20,000 words. The shortest responses consisted of short sentences in answer to a single question, while the longest were substantive and were 400-500 words in length. The mean length of the responses was 140 words. As mentioned earlier, all survey questions were optional, and responses that included answers to any of the questions under investigation were included for analysis. This means that not every individual response included answers to all of the questions of interest. As such, 58 though there are 142 responses included in this dataset, no single question was answered by all 142 respondents. Table 2 gives frequency counts for responses to each of the research questions. 6. How did the efforts begin? 139 10a. What are the main objectives? 133 10b. 122 10c. 110 10d. 90 10e. 61 10f. 20 25. Why is the revitalization of your language 87 important? 26. Anything else? 46 Table 2. Answer counts for survey questions in this study There was one final processing step necessary to clean up the data for Dedoose. Because the reduced spreadsheet used for the descriptor set was created using the complete master spreadsheet, it included descriptor fields for all the survey respondents (n=245). During my analysis I realized that Dedoose was calculating numbers based on this total (245) rather than the total number of responses under investigation (142). For example, Dedoose would display a total number of responses by region, but this did not accord with my actual investigation. Therefore I took the further step of removing from the Dedoose Descriptor list those responses which did not have media files associated with them – that is, those responses which did not have any text data pertinent to the research question under study here. 2.2.3.2 Initial coding With the data now appropriately organized in Dedoose, I began coding excerpts from the media files. The first step of this process was to go through files one at a time, highlight anything that seemed potentially interesting, and give it a tag/description (i.e. a ‘code.’) I did not have a predetermined set of codes. Rather, I gave each excerpt an initial tag consisting of a word or phrase that seemed to best describe it. Here are two examples of excerpts with their initial codes: 59 “I am so glad that I started relearning my language and so very proud to be mentoring even though it was a bit daunting as I am not completely fluent. It has helped me become more fluent and more confident.”  Codes applied: pride; confidence “The Gangtes do not have any children's books in their language”  Codes applied: children; reading material This gave me a plethora of codes that captured the points of the excerpts but did not necessarily relate to each other in an organized schema. This is what is known in Grounded Theory as ‘open coding’, the first step in an emic approach to the data (Lichtman, 2013). After I had proceeded through 10% of my media files in this way, I printed out the list of codes I had applied and began to arrange them into a framework and hierarchy. Some codes were subsumed by other, larger themes, and these became the ‘child’ codes to the overarching ‘parent’ codes. Once I was satisfied with my first attempt at a coding schema, I arranged the coding options in Dedoose in this fashion and then re-coded the previously coded media files according to this scheme. This is the step in Grounded Theory called axial coding (Lichtman, 2013). At predetermined points in the coding process, I stopped to look back at all of the work I had done so far, to refine my coding schema and also to refine my coding of individual excerpts. This self-check was performed at 10%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% completion of coding of media files. Occasionally a new pattern would start to emerge from the data, either because I gradually became more aware of its import or because certain respondents drew attention to it where others did not. In a Grounded Theory approach, this is a demonstration of the iterative or Constant Comparative (Charmaz, 2006) nature of category development in a Grounded Theory approach. For example, the more media files I read, the more noticeable it became that some respondents used words like “generations” or “intergenerational.” Some of the earlier media files had used such terminology, but I had not recognized it as an important pattern until I saw more examples of it. Another example is that many respondents in the last 1/3 of the media files I read 60 mentioned orthography, spelling, or something about standard written language, whereas responses I had read earlier did not mention this at all. In both of these examples, the emerging pattern needed to be accounted for in the coding, the new codes needed to be fitted into the overarching schema, and all files previously coded needed to be re-checked for the presence of the emergent pattern. This only happened a handful of times, and by the end of my coding phase I was no longer finding patterns that I thought might be significant. In other words I felt I had approximated what is known in Grounded Theory as data saturation, having continually sampled the data in this dataset until no new patterns emerged. 2.2.3.3 Analytic decisions about text All analyses are interpretations, in some fashion. Imposing categories on textual data is by definition an interpretation of that data; as such, all qualitative methods are expressly interpretive. Having said that, in my analysis of textual data from the Global Survey, I have tried to limit my interpretation to the organization of categories, rather than attempting to interpret the hidden meanings behind the words as written. That is to say, when coding the data for analysis, I code categories that are explicitly mentioned in text form by the respondents, rather than plausible interpretations and implicit connections. I give some examples here. 2.2.3.3.1 Examples categories from Language Ideologies In the Language Ideologies group of codes, there are two categories that I coded, one called “language = identity” and one called “language = culture.” Social scientists could legitimately argue that the self is inextricable from the environment, there is no identity without culture, etc. However, here my practice is to code only categories have been explicitly expressed by the respondent: 61 Language = identity Language = culture “Empower youth through language/identity” “To contribute a sense of authenticity to cultural revitalization efforts in the community.” “It [=language] makes us who we are as “Language and culture are linked and Indian people, as Ponca people.” language tells us about the land we live on.” Table 3. Examples from Language Ideologies categories There are some excerpts that receive both of these codes; however, this is only the case when the excerpt includes each of these categories mentioned distinctly. For example, the following excerpt, which mentions the link between language and culture (in italics), followed by mention of the link between language and identity (in bold), is coded for both categories. “To help Udis be aware and celebrate their cultural and linguistic heritage, to confirm Udis in their unique identity.” 2.2.3.3.2 Examples from Focus on Language Domain categories Another example of this analytical strategy is when looking at categories of language domains. One category has been marked as “regular use;” this code covers mentions of ‘everyday use’, ‘daily life,’ greetings, conversations, etc. Intuitively, one could interpret the other domain categories, such as “in the home” or “in school” as including the idea of regular use – if someone uses the language with her teacher or her parents, this use would presumably be every day and ‘regular’. However, for my study, this code is specifically limited to excerpts that mention language use in daily life or in public outside of the more specific domain categories. 62 Regular use in school in the home “El uso de estas lenguas “the first thing we did were “Household language use by indígenas en espacios banners for the local school, members of all ages” públicos y privados” containing animals and birds with their names in the language” “to promote the language in “To promote the teaching of “intergenerational the community as a whole” Kalanga in schools, colleges transmission in the homes” and universities.” “respond to requests for “The old people worked very “to provide support for names of organizations, short hard to have a language families where Inari Saami is speeches in Ngunawal” programme running in their used as home language” school.” Table 4. Examples from Language Domain categories Here again there are excerpts that may be double-coded, for both ‘regular use’ and another domain; this is because both are mentioned explicitly. In the following example, the domain ‘in school’ is shown in italics, while ‘regular use’ is in bold. “to make the language be more present at school and more visible in the villages” The decision to stick faithfully to only what is expressed in the text can be shown in the following example: “reclaim domains of use (e.g. home, parent to child)” Notice that it is plausible that the respondent had in mind many different domains of use – the plural ‘domains’ would imply as much. However, the only specific domain they mention is in the parenthesis, “(e.g. home, parent to child)”. Therefore, I applied the code ‘in the home’ to this excerpt, as this was explicitly mentioned, and did not add any additional codes that went beyond the text itself. 2.2.3.3.3 Examples of ‘speaking’ versus ‘speakers’ One of the interesting themes I have noticed in the survey responses is the explicit mention of particular linguistic skills. For example, some respondents specifically mention the need to develop literacy, or to develop a writing system, while others mention oral skills such as 63 comprehension and pronunciation. These skills are coded in the ‘Linguistic Goals’ parent category. At the same time, the general cover term for a language user throughout the survey responses is “speaker.” I interpret “speaker” to refer to a language user, and do not assume that the term also entails a focus on ‘speaking and listening’ as a linguistic skill. The table gives examples to demonstrate the difference: speaking and listening (=linguistic skill) creating new speakers (=language user) “To build a base foundation for “Create new speakers for the language” pronunciation” “Have the children sustain the language by “Home-based Nests to develop new 1st speaking to other children” speakers” Table 5. Examples of 'speaking' vs. 'speakers' coding I note that the term “speaking” and “speakers” was used through the survey responses themselves, and no survey respondent mentioned “signers” or sign language production skills; nonetheless, because one sign language is represented in the survey, I have renamed the codes ‘production and comprehension’ and ‘creating new users’, respectively, in order to more appropriately include the range of languages being revitalized. These are the code names that are used in the rest of this dissertation. The following excerpt is coded as BOTH ‘creating new users’ (content in italics) and ‘production and comprehension’(content in bold).: “More people speaking the language at high levels of fluency” 2.2.3.4 Inter-rater checks One of the key benefits of using Dedoose is its ‘Training’ functionality, by means of which users other than the original coder can apply the coding scheme to a set of data. This can be used to train a team of researchers who are collaborating on data analysis for a single project. It can also be used to provide a reliability check on a single researcher. Once I had a substantial subset of data coded and my coding schema elaborated, I created tests by which external users 64 applied my coding to a selection of excerpts from the data. Dedoose then calculated the overlap between my application of the codes and the applications of my two inter-raters. These results are then reported as a score known as Cohen’s kappa, which calculates the rate of inter-rater agreement as compared to the rate of agreement expected by chance (Cohen, 1960). The values range from 0 to 1, with scores > 0.80 generally accepted in the literature as “excellent agreement” between the raters (Dedoose, 2018). The kappa numbers for this first round of results is given in Appendix A; most individual codes fell within the ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ range of agreement. Any codes which scored lower than 0.80 were flagged for refinement. In addition to these Kappa scores, Dedoose also gives the researcher the opportunity to read over each test answer. A thorough reading of the inter-rater tests led to a refinement of my coding and of my procedure. 2.2.3.5 Refinement of categories After this first round of inter-rater testing, I compared the ‘trainee’ applications of my coding schema with my own and found three reasons for discrepancies: 1. Misunderstanding of the code by the trainees. 2. Under-application of codes by me. 3. Inconsistency in excerpting on my part. Usually what this meant is that I had one long excerpt to which I had applied one code, but then had also selected a shorter excerpt within that text to represent another code. However, the trainees only see one excerpt at a time, so they selected all the codes that might apply. Having never used this process before I had not considered how this excerpting practice, which made things clearer for me, would fail to translate in the inter-rater reliability testing framework, and so I would need to adjust accordingly. 65 To address the first problem, I further elaborated and clarified the descriptions for each code. I also had a meeting with my two inter-raters where we discussed ‘in person’ (via Zoom) the confusions they had had with my written descriptions and applications of the various codes and we collaborated on clearer articulation of the categories. To address the second and third problems, I realized it was necessary to look over all of the individual excerpts as a list. In previous checking, I had been looking at all the codes one at a time along with a list of excerpts that I had selected for them. This helped me to check against mis-application of codes; e.g. this excerpt is not really an example of ‘literature’ as a product, it is more suited to ‘literacy’ as a language skill. However, the inter-rater testing demonstrated that I also needed to be checking for missed applications of codes. For example, an excerpt might have been appropriately labeled “focus on youth, children”, but it might also need to be coded for “family”, and just looking at excerpts included under code headings would not alert me to the fact that I had not applied this additional code. Thus the next step in my analysis was to export a list of all of the individual excerpts with their associated codes from the Dedoose project. This gave me a list of 945 excerpts12 to hand- check. I proceeded through the list checking that each item had been appropriately excerpted and appropriately (and fully) coded. During this process of looking again over the whole dataset, I refined some patterns. For example, the category “funding and other infrastructure” seemed too heterogeneous to capture all the variation within it, and excerpts were given one of a set of more specific codes (‘academia’, ‘funding’, ‘NGOs & nonprofits’, or ‘other infrastructure’). New patterns also emerged; for example, a number of responses mention the desire to raise public awareness or to increase the visibility of the language among non-users, warranting the tagging 12 This total does not include the Assessment excerpts, i.e. the quantitative answers to Question 11, which as mentioned above are included in this dataset but not subject to interpretive coding. 66 of a category called ‘public attitudes.’ Most of the changes, though, were of the type anticipated: missed application of an appropriate code to individual excerpts. After checking this list, I made corrections to the excerpts and codes in Dedoose. I then exported this new list of excerpts and their associated codes and checked this new list once more. At this point I had read through the full set of my data three times – once during my 100% coding check, and twice during my excerpts checks. After this third round of checking, I created new inter-rater tests. At this point, the raters and I reached excellent agreement overall; two individual codes had very good agreement, and the rest of the individual codes had excellent agreement, well exceeding 0.80. A comparison of the average Kappa scores of the first round of inter-rater tests versus the second round is given in Appendix A. 2.2.3.6 Summary of workflow and survey data presentation As discussed in section 2.2.2.2, and as might be apparent from the discussion throughout this section 2.2.3, this methodological approach is iterative and constantly comparative (Charmaz, 2006). The iterative workflow for this project is given in figure 5. Figure 5. Survey analysis workflow In the figure above, curving arrows above the text blocks represent periods of data coding, which were punctuated by periodic self-checks and corrections. Self-checks were always cumulative, 67 meaning that for example at the 25% check, I re-read all the data coded to that point, not just the data I had added since the previous 10% check. Lower boxes with arrows in this figure represent stages of analysis checks with outside raters. After all the data had been coded, one final round of inter-rater tests was conducted to check the few codes that had not yet reached excellent agreement in the first and second rounds. This was the last step in the survey analysis. In the analysis chapters to follow, survey data is given both in the form of quantitative figures (charts or tables) to show trends, and also in the form of sample extracts to illustrate the theme. Excerpts are given without quotation marks, with survey ID number and given language name in square brackets for attribution, and are minimally edited; I corrected a handful of what seemed obvious typos, but otherwise reproduce spelling, capitalization, and punctuation exactly as entered by the respondent. One point to note about the quantitative results is that I sometimes give these to illustrate code application and sometimes to illustrate code occurrence. The difference is that code application refers to whether or not the code was applied anywhere in a single survey response, while code occurrence refers to how frequently the code was applied overall. That is, if only one respondent had mentioned the theme of ‘creating new users’, but had mentioned that three times in the response, the code application would be 1 and the code occurrence would be 3. I am explicit about which of these I display in any given analysis, and also explicit about why I am presenting the data in that way for the particular analytical point. 2.3 Interviews with revitalization practitioners – Interview methods and analysis The second major source of data in this project is in-depth interviews with revitalization practitioners. In this section, I describe the three case sites where I invited practitioners to participate in interviews (section 2.3.1), then discuss procedural matters such as informed consent and interview guide preparation (section 2.3.2). I then delve into both the logistical and 68 theoretical aspects of interviewing as a method (section 2.3.3) and of transcription of interview recordings (2.3.4). In sections 2.3.5 and 2.3.6 I discuss procedures for participant approval of prepared transcripts and for sharing early research products with participants. In section 2.3.7 I discuss the decision to add follow-up interviews to my initial research design. I end this section with a description of the analysis and presentation of interview data for this project (section 2.3.8). 2.3.1 Introduction to the case sites and participant recruitment 2.3.1.1 Multilingual Institute (MLI) An intensive immersion-style synchronous virtual workshop series known as the Multilingual Institute (MLI) took place over the course of two weeks in June 2020. This Institute offered an introduction to a unique method of language ‘nesting’ and regular language use, as well as extensive opportunity for language practice, to learners of six languages of the West Coast (see more details about this pedagogical approach in section 7.2.1). The organizer of this Institute is a friend and colleague, Dr. Zalmai Ɂəswəli Zahir, whose time as a PhD student at the University of Oregon overlapped with mine. Dr. Zahir (known to me as Zeke), is a language consultant for the Puyallup Tribe of Indians (in the Tacoma area of Washington) and has been learning, documenting, and teaching the Lushootseed language for over 40 years. Zeke served as a sounding board during the early stages of the development of this interview project, and himself volunteered to be interviewed. He also put me in touch with two of the instructors from the MLI (one of whom I knew previously from NILI; see below) who had already expressed an interest in being interviewed. He then suggested that he could highlight my research for MLI students and allow them to reach out to me if they were interested in participating. He also asked for my assistance in facilitating and observing the MLI, and I served as a volunteer tech assistant, 69 helping place people in breakout sessions and addressing any other issues that arose in the virtual environment. A second MLI took place in June 2021, and I assisted in this same role (but did not recruit new participants at that time.) In this role I was able to observe Zeke’s unique language learning method in action, and was occasionally invited by one of the Lushootseed teachers to participate in round-robin language practice activities. On the first day of the MLI 2020, Zeke formally introduced me to the students and gave me a few minutes to greet them and tell them about my project. I shared my e-mail address and asked them to get in contact with me if they were interested. In addition to this live introduction, Zeke also placed the following text on the website of the Institute: Graduate Research Allison Taylor-Adams is a graduate student in the Linguistics Department at the University of Oregon. She is looking for people she can interview about motivation for language revitalization. A summary of her research is listed below. If you would like to be a part of Allison’s research, you can reach her at: [email address] From this solicitation, 12 people reached out to me to express interest. Of those, I was able to arrange interviews with 10. Adding in the 3 organizers/instructors I had interviewed prior to this Institute, 13 of my total interviews (roughly half) came out of this context. These practitioners worked on three of the six West Coast languages taught at this immersion institute (Lushootseed, Nuu-wee-ya’, and mitsqanaqan). I note that, due to the strong relationship between this group of practitioners, participants in the Multilingual Institute make up a disproportionately large portion of my interview participants, and Lushootseed learners in particular are over-represented compared to learners of other languages. This is not a flaw in the research design, it is simply an outcome of convenience sampling built on a relational approach to participant recruitment (see section 2.1). 70 2.3.1.2 Northwest Indian Language Institute (NILI) At the same time that the Multilingual Institute was taking place, another remote workshop series was being offered by the Northwest Indian Language Institute. NILI was founded at the University of Oregon in 1997 in order to provide language teacher training for Native communities in the Pacific Northwest. NILI works with tribal communities throughout the year to support curriculum development, methods and materials development, and language documentation. In addition to these ongoing activities, NILI’s flagship program is the Summer Institute, a two-week full day workshop series hosted on site at the University of Oregon. This Institute hosts workshops on language pedagogy, technology, and linguistics for language revitalization practitioners, as well as organizing events for high-school age youth who are committed to learning their heritage languages. These Summer Institutes typically host 40-50 participants from communities in Oregon, California, Idaho, and Washington. In the summer of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic forced the cancellation of this annual event, but the NILI staff and community partners decided to offer a different format in its stead. This series was called the Language Revitalization Learning Series (LRLS) and consisted of one- hour live sessions every weekday for two weeks at the end of June. Each session focused on a different topic and was offered by a different revitalization practitioner recruited by NILI for the series. These live sessions were recorded and the series was also hosted on the University of Oregon’s learning management system, allowing for asynchronous discussions, viewing of videos, and sharing of resources and materials. Given the flexibility and accessibility of the format, hundreds of participants from around the world were able to join in and participate in this series. I have a close personal and professional relationship with NILI, having worked there as an administrative graduate employee for my first two years of graduate school, as well as serving 71 as the graduate assistant for their annual Summer Institute. I was also the lead organizer for an academic conference to celebrate NILI’s twentieth anniversary in 2017. My first research project as a PhD student (Taylor-Adams, 2019) centered on interviews with language revitalization practitioners I knew through NILI – including Zeke Zahir, who is now the director of the MLI (see section 2.3.1.1). These relationships continue to be foundational to my research and my understanding of how to go about this work ethically and respectfully. Participant recruitment from the NILI LRLS followed a similar format as the one used for the MLI. The NILI organizers talked to me beforehand about my research and offered to give me a formal introduction at the start of one of the weekday sessions. I prepared a slide to introduce my research project, and one of the organizers introduced me and gave me a few minutes to speak to the group. Because both the slide show and the presentation video were made available afterwards, my introduction and solicitation were available for asynchronous participants as well. As with the MLI, I invited participants to reach out to me via e-mail if they were interested in participating. From this solicitation, I was able to arrange interviews with 7 revitalization practitioners. All of the interviewees work on languages of North America, but the languages (Nez Perce, Yup’ik, X̱aat Kíl, Nuu-wee-ya’, and Nanticoke) are more broadly geographically distributed than the ones represented by the MLI participants. 2.3.1.3 Kodrah Kristang The third context in which I made contact with practitioners was through a nonprofit organization that is working to revitalize Kristang, a language of Singapore. Kristang is a Portuguese-based creole with significant influences from Malay as well as vocabulary from Hokkien, English, Cantonese, and many other contact languages (Wong, 2019). Kevin Martens Wong, the founder of a community effort known as Kodrah Kristang, reported in the Global 72 Survey that Kristang has 250 L2 learners and “an unknown number of heritage speakers” in Singapore (a larger heritage community lives across the Straits in Malacca). Kodrah Kristang organizes informal community classes open to anyone, hosts an online dictionary, spearheaded Singapore’s first Festa di Papia Kristang (Kristang Language Festival) in 2017, and promotes Kristang revitalization through social media, as well as receiving publicity and coverage in both Singaporean and international press. Another notable activity that Kodrah Kristang hosts is a “lexical incubator” called Jardinggu, a blend of jarding (‘garden’) and linggu (‘language’)13. As their website explains: The Kodrah Kristang team seeks to encourage more young people to learn and speak Kristang. Many young people, however, don’t see the value in learning a language that is not ready for the modern age, and lacks words for concepts that are important today, like “website”, “democracy” and “wifi”. The lexical incubator, then, is a place for speakers and learners of many different language backgrounds to meet and discuss new words to add to the Kristang lexicon. Jardinggu sessions include speakers of all of Kristang’s lexifier languages alongside heritage speakers of Kristang, and any member of the session may propose a borrowing or adaptation. Jardinggu team members debate proposals and come to a consensus on new vocabulary items based on appropriateness of the source of the borrowing, ease of learnability, and other linguistic and social factors. I had first heard of this effort when I attended the two-week Institute for Collaborative Language Research (CoLang) in 2016 at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, where I met Kevin Martens Wong. I had kept up with his work since that time. Kevin had also given extensive responses to the Global Survey of Language Revitalization Efforts, and I was eager to learn more about language revitalization in his context. 13 https://kodrah.kristang.com/jardinggu/ 73 I reached out to Kevin via e-mail and we arranged to talk on Zoom together about the project. He decided the best way to proceed would be to start with the three lead organizers, and so we arranged for an interview session for the four of us (Kevin, his two co-organizers, and me). Following that group interview, the three organizers agreed that the project was interesting and decided to discuss among themselves who in their community it might be best to introduce me to. From there, Kevin formally introduced me via e-mail to potential participants and invited them to reply to me if they would like to be interviewed. From this recruitment I was able to speak to 8 practitioners who are working on the Kristang language. 2.3.1.4 Summary The table below summarizes the participant recruitment contexts and outcomes. Recruitment My role in Recruitment strategy No. Languages context the context recruited represented Multilingual Volunteer Organizer introduction at 13 • Lushootseed Institute (West technical start of Institute; • Nuu-wee-ya’ Coast language assistant; solicitation posted on • Mitsqanaqan communities) observer website; participants self- (Ventureño (alongside the identified by contacting Chumash) organizer) me to express interest NILI Language Volunteer Organizer introduction at 7 • Nanticoke Revitalization breakout start of series; slide in • Nez Perce Learning Series group PowerPoint presentation • Yup’ik (international facilitator; made available for • X̱aat Kíl audience, both volunteer asynchronous viewing; (Haida) synchronous and social media participants self-identified • Nuu-wee-ya’ asynchronous organizer by contacting me to participation) express interest Kodrah Kristang None Organizers reached out 8 • Kristang (Kristang through their networks to language learning identify learners who community) might be interested in participating; organizers formally introduced me to interested learners via e- mail Table 6. Summary of initial interview recruitment, Summer 2020 74 2.3.2 Pre-interview preparation 2.3.2.1 Informed Consent Once practitioners contacted me to signal their interest in participating, I sent them a reply e-mail containing a brief description of the project along with the list of interview topics. This gave them more concrete information about the study and allowed them time to consider whether they were interested in proceeding. This also gave participants time to read over the questions, to think about their responses, and to consider what they might not be comfortable sharing. Some participants came to the interviews with written notes, and some even suggested topics that were not included on the interview guide but that they felt were important to share. When participants agreed to proceed with the interview, we scheduled a mutually convenient time to meet on Zoom and I sent them a Zoom link along with the Informed Consent document for the study. This document was available to the participants in two different formats, a .doc and a signable .pdf. At the beginning of our interview session, I began by going over the Informed Consent form verbally, and I allowed time for questions or concerns. The Informed Consent document includes several options for the level of consent to be given; at minimum participants must agree to speak with me and to have the interview audio-recorded for my analysis on this project. At maximum participants may agree to have their name used in publications, and/or to have their interview data made freely available to other researchers for future research projects. The full Informed Consent form is included as Appendix C. Participants either manually signed and scanned back a printed .doc version, or they used an electronic signature for the .pdf version. In either case, informed consent documents were returned to me by e-mail. 75 2.3.2.2 Interview guide Prior to the interviews, I developed a set of open-ended questions to guide the discussion. The questions were based around categories that have been described in the literature as being important components or having possible effects on motivation. I give some examples here; the whole interview guide is included as Appendix D. • Affect (Do you think language learning is fun? Do you ever get frustrated?) • Choice (Why did you decide to participate in this activity? Did anybody inspire you to start language learning?) • Persistence (How long have you been working on language? How do you stay motivated when things get hard?) • Effort (How much time do you spend on language? Do you work on your language even when you’re not in class?) • Future Ideal Self (What do you imagine for yourself as a language learner in 5, 10 years?) • Other topics (e.g. instrumental motivation; public attitudes) Interviewees were sent a copy of this interview guide at least one week prior to our interviews. I told them that the list of questions was merely a guide, that I would not necessarily get to all of them, but it was just some ideas for topics to discuss. 2.3.3 The interview via Zoom 2.3.3.1 Descriptive details of the interviews Interviews ranged from 30 minutes to just over 2 hours; most interviews were around an hour long. I note here that my four interviews with Kristang speakers were the four longest I recorded: 1:47:13, 1:21:11, 1:45:34, and 2:08:44. I speculate that this is the case at least in part because there was a lot of background information to cover, and a lot of general information 76 about Singapore and the linguistic, social, and political situation there, which the interviewees shared with me to give context to discussion of Kristang activities specifically. I also suspect that some of this may be due to the great distance, social and geographic, between us, and that much of this time was spent doing the preliminary work of establishing a relationship. I have some evidence for this, which I explore in section 6.3. As part of the research design, participants were given the option to be interviewed individually or in small groups of 2-3. Four of the 22 interviews were with groups: • A pair of Yup’ik speakers, the lead teacher and her elder • A pair of Lushootseed speakers, husband and wife who are learning together • A trio of Kristang speakers, the three main organizers of Kodrah Kristang activities • Another trio of Kristang speakers, three classmates from Kodrah Kristang classes and ‘lexical incubator’ activities With the exception of the husband and wife pair, each of the interviewees in these group interviews were separated from each other by distance. 2.3.3.2 Video of the interviews Though these interviews were all recorded via Zoom, it was part of my research design that only audio + transcript data would be analyzed for this part of the project – i.e. although I recorded video, in this study I do not be use it as part of my data analysis, which I made clear to all participants in advance. The reason video was not included in the initial design is that this project was conceived before COVID-19 had changed many aspects of research and human interaction. Anticipating face-to-face interviews, I determined that video recording would add a level of logistical complication and obtrusiveness that was not at all warranted in this project. Then, because interviews were conducted in Zoom, it required no extra effort to record video. I 77 chose not to amend my protocol because video was not strictly necessary for my analysis, and I anticipated that some might feel uncomfortable with video being shared, or might not have sufficient internet capabilities or webcam technology to allow good quality video anyway. As it turns out both of these instincts were correct: four of the interviewees were interviewed without camera input (I did not inquire about the reasons), and one of the interviewees who did have his camera on did so under the express condition that no video would be used for my data analysis or presentation. There certainly is information lost as a result of this – notable gestures being a salient example. Where necessary I have included gestures in brackets in the interview transcript; for example, several interviewees talked about the ‘ebb and flow’ of language learning using up- and-down waving motions with their hands. Sometimes interviewees would also take the opportunity to show me various important items, such as a language notebook or grammar they were studying. These examples do not constitute ‘analyzing’ the video to answer the research question, but rather fill in information explicitly denoted in the audio recording (e.g. one participant said “and here is my folder with my domains” and then held up her folder to show me.) 2.3.3.3 Theorizing the interview Interviewing is a pervasive practice in all branches of qualitative social science research. Interviewing is also pervasive in public life, a constant component of news and entertainment media. Atkinson and Silverman call ours the “Interview Society” (1997), and argue that because interviews are so common, we approach them “using the everyday language and commonsense reasoning of counsellors or media reporters” (Silverman, 2017, p. 148). Applied linguists such as Richards (2009) call for a more widespread “methodological interrogation” (p. 159) of 78 interviews in qualitative studies. Mann (2011) argues that interviews in qualitative research have been undertheorized, and that interview studies “tend to be bereft of context and methodological detail” and that “a critical reflective dimension is also often missing” (p. 6). Talmy (2010) provides a framework for considering qualitative interviews by describing two opposing orientations, the “interview as research instrument” orientation versus “research interviews as social practice” orientation (p. 129). We might paraphrase these two orientations as being concerned either with the what of interviews (the content to be found in the speech stream) or with the how of interviews (the interview as an interactive communicative event, or as a dialogic co-construction of meaning.) The research question and the unit of analysis often underly these orientations. Descriptive and theoretical linguists are most often concerned with the what of interviews, and many applied linguists are also interested in the insights to be found in the content of interviews. Others, such as discourse analysts, conversation analysts, scholars of pragmatics, and anthropological linguists, are more concerned with the how of interviews. Sociolinguists have a long tradition of attending to both of these aspects; thus I draw on insights from this field in section 2.3.4.1 on transcription. In design and in practice, the interview project described here blends the two orientations. I am careful to avoid the “commonsensical conceptualization” (Talmy, 2010, p. 129) that characterizes the interview as research instrument perspective; at the same time, my main analysis is not of the interviews as “social action” per se (for example, in this study I do not conduct discourse or conversation analysis). However, I do conceptualize the research interview as a social action. I acknowledge that my identity and positionality, my personality and my prior relationships with participants all have an effect on what is shared in the interviews. I also acknowledge that my actions within the interview have effects on the data; back-channeling, 79 encouragement, follow-up questions, and audible and visual reactions to interviewee contributions impact such things as the length of a response and the amount of detail offered. The resulting data is a cooperative accomplishment, rather than static “answers” to questions posed (Wooffitt & Widdicombe, 2006). There are some practical implications that follow from this theoretical conceptualization of the interview. The practical implications include important considerations about transcription. For example, Mann (2011) criticizes interview studies which claim to attend to interviews as co- constructive communicative acts, but present transcripts and examples in which the interviewer is completely absent. That is, the practice of transcription must follow from the theory of the interview. In section 2.3.4, I describe in detail the transcription of interviews in this project, which follows both from this conceptualization of interviews as well as from a theorized understanding of the act of transcription itself. 2.3.4 Transcription 2.3.4.1 Theorizing the transcript The practice of transcription is another research activity that is susceptible to a commonsensical approach. Ochs (1979) is the first text to demonstrate the power of transcription practice, and her argument (p. 44) that “transcription is a selective process reflecting theoretical goals and definitions” has been reiterated and affirmed repeatedly in the decades since. Despite the power and endurance of this claim, scholars routinely point out that transcription choices remain underdiscussed and undertheorized (e.g. Duranti, 2007; Lapadat & Lindsay, 1999). As Kendall (2009) says, “the act of transcription is often undertaken as a purely methodological activity, as if it were theory-neutral.” (p. 15). My approach to transcription rests on two key points: 80 • The research interview is a social practice (see section 2.3.3.3), and • The transcription of audio from interviews is an abstraction that involves a set of analytical choices (Kendall, 2009; Ochs, 1979). The unit of analysis for this research project is not any one discrete element in the linguistic signal per se. As such, it may be tempting to approach the transcription of interviews superficially, as a simple mechanical practice to capture “pure content” (as if such a thing can exist in communicative events.) However, I argue that transcription is a practice that should be theorized and understood by researchers in all fields and approaches. As Mishler (1991) notes, "the problematic relation between reality and representation, and between meaning and language, is not simply an abstract philosophical position but an inescapable feature of our work as empirical scientists" (p. 278.) In the rest of this section, I describe how I attended to this inescapable feature. 2.3.4.2 Analytical choices made by Zoom transcriber Because these interviews were conducted remotely, via the Zoom platform, I was able to utilize Zoom’s built-in automatic transcriber function while recording. At first glance, this seemed to be a reasonable and time-saving option, which would give me access to data for analysis quickly and easily. However, I soon realized that the Zoom function was making analytical choices – this is by necessity, of course, since every act of writing down spoken language is an exercise in abstraction. In this section I describe how some of these analytical choices were messy (section 2.3.4.2.1) and others were lossy (section 2.3.4.2.2); I discuss how these choices present problems for analysis; and I conclude (section 2.3.4.3) with my approach to the transcription of this data. 81 2.3.4.2.1 Messy Automated transcribers on any platform make mistakes in interpreting human speech. There were some common patterns in the mistakes that Zoom made which required manual correction. The first set of items in need of correction are non-English words that Zoom just does not recognize. The most salient and frequent of these are the names of languages being revitalized. I include here a collected list of language names and their mistranscriptions (Table 7). Table 7. Language names mistranscribed by Zoom Language name Zoom auto-transcription Lushootseed less you see language this you see language slushy exceed Lucy unless you see = “In Lushootseed” English food seed Wish you’d seen in the sheets, eat = “in Lushootseed” in English sheep seed = “in Lushootseed” lovely should see it = “with Lushootseed” the troubleshoot TV language = “txʷəlšucid language” Ventureño Vent rainbow too much language Chumash That train too much Then terranea = Ventureño Venture in your notes = Ventureño Mitsqanaqan Meets go knock on Barbareño Barbara rainbow Chumash Barbering, yo Barbara ano to much Nuu-wee-ya’ New way art New way I New Age community = “Nuu-wee-ya’ community” Nez Perce next person Wampanoag lump nog Ichishkíin It to scheme English team Into scheme It just seems to happen. = “Ichishkíin/Sahaptin” Tutnutni The two new 82 Table 7 continued. Language names mistranscribed by Zoom Language name Zoom auto-transcription Athabaskan A basket language language Nanticoke Africa the Navajo tribe = “the Nanticoke tribe” Fernando can just = “for Nanticoke just” the nine o’clock language then I cook well and I’m a community = “the Nanticoke-Lenni Lenape community” that’s not a cook, not a community = “the Nanticoke-Lenni Lenape community” Chinuk Wawa Cynical wall wall channel Allah Shanna Grandma and language = “Grand Ronde language” Alutiiq, and Allah and suffer Sugpiaq There were also some linguistic terms that Zoom did not recognize: Linguistic term Zoom auto-transcription Orthography/orthographies Or authority Or fog or fees Orthogonal fees Our warthog roughy = “our orthography” Ethnographers Ethnography errors “Ethnographies and stuff” The soccer fields and stuff Archival collections Are typical actions Retroflex sibilant retro flex civil answer Table 8. Linguistic terms mistranscribed by Zoom Many of these misinterpretations would be easy to notice just in reading the output text itself; “vent rainbow too much language” is obviously nonsense. Other times misinterpretations resulted in good English which nonetheless misrepresented what had actually been said. In one example, Zoom produced “an eloquent speaker” where the interviewee had actually said the phrase “an L1 speaker.” This misrepresentation would thus be incorrectly analyzed as being about the skill of the speaker in question, rather than being about a speaker who had acquired the 83 heritage language as a child. In another example, Zoom produced “as you went down in the lane” for an interviewee’s “as you learn the language.” Another set of features that had to be corrected were contributions from interviewees with any accent other than *Standard American English. (I note in passing that there is a growing body of literature on the poor job that computerized automatic transcribers do with “non- standard” accents and L2 speech.) A rather interesting example was that Zoom frequently cut off the last consonant of words uttered by the two Yup’ik L1 speakers; impressionistically I noted that their accents in English were characterized by unreleased stop consonants in word-final position. The messiest Zoom-produced transcripts came from the interviewees from Singapore, which is perhaps not surprising. The most bizarre mistranscriptions came from the interview with an L1 Brazilian Portuguese speaker. As an example, here is how he introduced himself at the start of our interview (note that he waived anonymity and wished for his name to be used in publications): “So my name is Evaristo Nunes de Andrade, Jr. but Evaristo Nunes is just fine.” And here is how Zoom transcribed this sentence: “So my name is nice to know Nice Dragon, Jr. But everybody should know. Nice. It's just fine.” Aside from the comic relief that these mistranscriptions sometimes provided, I think it is easy to see why it is important to correctly refer to a practitioner’s language, to correctly represent lexical items, and to correctly identify the speaker as Evaristo rather than Nice Dragon, Jr. The Zoom transcription is not just messy and in need of lexical correction; it is also lossy and in need of more detail. 84 2.3.4.2.2 Lossy Transcriptions of spoken interactions require the analyst to make a number of choices, including for example: 1. What to count as a “unit” and where to mark boundaries 2. What kinds of paralinguistic features to include 3. How to represent overlapping speech 4. How to represent false starts, hesitations, pauses… 5. How to write out filler words and confirmatory sounds (e.g. “uh” vs. “um”, “mmhmm,” “mm”) 6. How to represent intonation 7. What kind of punctuation to use in the final transcript The Zoom transcriber function makes all these choices when producing a text file from a speech stream. With the exception of marking segments, a Zoom transcript lacks all of these features. Zoom transcripts do not include paralinguistic features such as gestures (for obvious reasons) or non-linguistic sounds (laughter; clearing throat); it only transcribes one speaker at a time, meaning that in overlapping speech all of the other speakers are not transcribed (and in extreme cases Zoom does not successfully transcribe ANY speech when multiple speakers are talking); Zoom does not notate false starts, hesitations, or “ums.” The Zoom transcript does include some punctuation, but it often seems capricious, and I note that Zoom never uses a question mark or exclamation mark; this might make sense since judging something to be a question or an exclamation is a somewhat subjective interpretation, but placing commas and full stops is surely similarly interpretive. Many of these missing features are the very details that represent interviews and conversations as interactive events. For example, Silverman (2017) argues that a 85 conceptualization of meaning “as an interactional accomplishment implies that any robust analysis of interview data must begin with a transcript that preserves the basic features of interviewer-interviewee talk including ‘response tokens’ (‘mmm’), pauses and overlaps.” (p. 149). All these features are missing from automated Zoom transcripts, and that loss is significant; my theory of the interview requires these features to be represented. This loss can be tallied quantitatively by considering the number of segments in individual Zoom transcripts. Zoom breaks down the speech stream into segments; segment boundaries roughly correspond to utterance boundaries or pauses. Figure 6 gives an excerpt from a Zoom transcript file that includes four segments, which are numbered and timestamped in the transcript exported from Zoom. 47 00:04:27.120 --> 00:04:40.320 IE: my partner's fully supportive and thinks it's great that I'm doing this, you know, that's really important to me. And so I can you know I'm encouraged to I'm not discouraged. 48 00:04:42.750 --> 00:04:49.950 IE : And he even listens and he'll repeat things and you know try to pick up on a few things himself, which is great. 49 00:04:51.930 --> 00:04:56.760 IE: Yeah, so I guess it's hard to put like a number to it since it's 50 00:04:57.900 --> 00:05:05.610 IE: Always rolling in my head. And I'm finding that I am sharing words with people at Figure 6. Excerpt from auto-generated transcript of Zoom_14, with numbered and timestamped segments However, Zoom does not record a segment when the audio includes features that are not included in the transcription. That is, filler words (“um,” “uh”), response tokens, overlapping 86 speech, and moments of laughter, are simply not demarked in the Zoom transcript. For example, compare the auto-generated extract in Figure 7 with the same section, corrected to include response tokens. IE: My partner's fully supportive and thinks it's great that I'm doing this, he knows it's really important to me. And so I can, you know I'm encouraged to, I'm not discouraged to. ATA: mmhmm IE: And he even listens and he'll repeat things and you know try to pick up on a few things himself, which is great. Yeah, so I guess it's hard to put like a number to it, ATA: sure IE: since it’s always rolling in my head. And I'm finding that I am sharing words with people at various points in conversations, just a word that is especially meaningful in my language. Figure 7. Excerpt from transcript of Zoom_14, manually corrected Table 9 gives tallies for the number of segments in each transcript file before and after manual correction. Corrected for these missing elements, the final transcript file that I analyze contains many more segments (note that IE stands for “Interviewee”): Interview file Length of recording Number of segments Number of segments from Zoom in edited EAF file Zoom_04 1:12:18 ATA: 59 ATA: 256 IE: 440 IE: 593 Zoom_10 0:52:22 ATA: 65 ATA: 89 IE: 322 IE: 341 Zoom_16 0:46:17 ATA: 84 ATA: 283 IE: 285 IE: 461 Zoom_19 1:45:34 ATA: 133 ATA: 513 IE 1: 378 IE 1: 564 IE 2: 199 IE 2: 321 IE 3: 137 IE 3: 176 Table 9. Segment counts in transcript files before and after editing Note that I do not use a theoretical definition of “segment”; a segment is, roughly speaking, a unit of speech bracketed by pauses. This often corresponds to intonation contours or single 87 speaker utterances, but because I am not doing phonetic or prosodic analysis at this time, a stricter set of criteria for the ‘segment’ was not necessary. In the auto-generated Zoom transcription, segment boundaries correspond with pauses, and when in my editing I added to the total number of segments, it was almost always because Zoom had missed an utterance (rather than for example, because I chose to split long segments into two shorter ones on phonological grounds.) I end this discussion of the problems with Zoom auto-transcription with the observation that the point is not that Zoom is uniquely flawed, or to debate the merits of Zoom as a platform versus other possible automatic transcribers (there are likely some software packages that do a better job at interpreting accented speech, for example). Rather, I give this description to highlight the process I went through in the transcription of these interviews, and to underscore the point that all transcription of any type of recording involves analytical choices, and it important to at least be aware of those choices, and ideally to articulate them explicitly. 2.3.4.3 Transcription workflow Having explored the possibilities and problems of the Zoom automatic transcription generated, I developed a transcription workflow that followed from my own theoretical position. I used ELAN for my transcription work. I first used Audacity to convert the Zoom audio- only recording file, which is in .m4a format, to a .wav file that could be read by ELAN. I then used a Python script to convert the Zoom transcript text, which is given in a .vtt file format, into a tab-delimited text file. I then created a new .eaf file with the audio recording plus its corresponding auto-generated text transcript. The bulk of my transcription work was in editing these transcripts in ELAN to reflect my analytic choices, including adding segments, correcting for mistranscriptions, and adding the interactive features of the interview. As a final step, I 88 exported these edited .eaf files to a ‘Traditional Transcript Text’ file, and then edited these text files to produce manuscripts that could be sent to interviewees for review. Thus the output of my workflow is three pieces: an edited timed-aligned transcript in ELAN with its associated audio; a file which include only the text portion of this edited transcript; and a more ‘reader-friendly’ transcript edited for normal writing conventions. The ‘reader-friendly’ transcript is what the interviewees received in their interview follow-ups, and what I intend to use for most presentations and publications. The ELAN file and the linked transcription is what I use for analysis. Figures 8, 9, and 10 are examples of what these various stages of output look like in one particular segment of one interview. Figure 8 is what was transcribed by Zoom; Figure 9 is the text after I had edited the transcript in ELAN; Figure 10 is what I sent to Michelle for her to read (note that she also waived anonymity for this study). Michelle: Wow. That's exciting. Allison: How did it go Michelle: It was good. There was some students that I had been Michelle: In classes with as my you know companion students in my class. And so I'm like taking that step up to be like, well, now I'm your teacher there was like a little bit. I think it made me more nervous. Michelle: Than I Michelle: You know, um, but, but they were great and and as well. And my mentor sat in on a couple classes like forgive me encouragement you know Yeah. Allison: Was that Allison: Did that make you nervous also Michelle: A little bit. Michelle: A little bit. Allison: Um, so, what made you decide to start like yeah, what made you decide to actually start learning the language sort of formally Figure 8. Transcription of Zoom_16, 00:02:39-00:03:45, as produced by automatic transcriber 89 Allison: wow. Michelle: Yeah. {hahaha} Allison: That's exciting. {hahaha} Michelle: It's ... {hahaha} I was so nervous! Allison: {hahaha} Michelle: {hahaha} Allison: How did it go? Michelle: It was good. There was some students that I had been Allison: Good. [=in between previous sentences] Michelle: um, In classes with as my, you know companion students in my class, and so um, like taking that step up to be like, well, now I'm your teacher. Um, there was like a little bit - I think it made me more nervous. Allison: mm, mmhmm Michelle: That I... You know, um, but, but they were great. And, and it went well. And my mentor sat in on a couple classes, just like to give me encouragement, you know? Allison: Yeah. {haha} Michelle: {hahaha} Allison: Was that... Did that make you nervous also? Michelle: um, just a little bit. Allison: {hahaha} Michelle: Not a lot, but a little bit. {hahaha} Allison: That's good {haha} {haha} Um, so, what made you decide to start, like yeah, what made you decide to actually start learning the language um, sort of formally? Figure 9. Transcription of Zoom_16, 00:02:39-00:03:45, edited manually to correct for mistakes and to add interactive features 90 Allison: wow. Michelle: Yeah. {hahaha} Allison: That's exciting. {hahaha} Michelle: It's ... {hahaha} I was so nervous! Allison: {hahaha} Michelle: {hahaha} Allison: How did it go? Michelle: It was good. Allison: Good. Michelle: There were some students that I had been in classes with as my, you know companion students in my class, and so, like taking that step up to be like, well, now I'm your teacher. Um, there was a little bit - I think it made me more nervous. Allison: mm, mmhmm Michelle: That I…you know. But, but they were great. And it went well. And my mentor sat in on a couple classes, just like to give me encouragement, you know? Allison: Yeah. {haha} Michelle: {hahaha} Allison: Was that...did that make you nervous also? Michelle: um, just a little bit. Allison: {hahaha} Michelle: Not a lot, but a little bit. {hahaha} Allison: That's good {haha} So, what made you decide to start? Like yeah, what made you decide to actually start learning the language um, sort of formally? Figure 10. Transcription of Zoom_16, 00:02:39-00:03:45, lightly edited for written style, sent to interviewee 2.3.5 Post-transcription procedure Once the interviews were transcribed, I sent the draft transcripts to the participants for their review. My consent document stated that they would have 2 weeks to review the transcript and make any revisions or redactions; about 1/3 of the interviewees responded to me within that 91 timeframe. I sent follow-up e-mails and received a few more responses. After a third e-mail over the course of two months, I considered the transcripts approved as-is. While I was still waiting for some participants to review their transcripts, I gave a conference presentation based on initial analysis of the interview data (see section 2.3.6). My thinking about the topic was informed by all of the interviews; however, the example quotes I used for the presentation came only from those interviews that had been expressly approved by the interviewees (i.e. still unapproved drafts were not used as examples.) 2.3.6 Sharing of research product In March 2021, I presented at the 7th International Conference on Language Documentation and Conservation (ICLDC). Due to COVID-19, this conference took place virtually in 2021. The conference organizers strove to make the event broadly accessible, for example by charging a very modest registration fee, and by asking presenters to pre-record their presentations and upload them to a YouTube channel (rather than to a proprietary conference platform. This meant that I was able to invite all my interview participants to “come” to the conference to learn more about international language revitalization efforts (something that many of them had expressed an enthusiasm for.) Four of these interviewees did sign up for the conference, and one of them attended my live Q&A session and wrote to me afterwards about what she had noticed during that session, and about the inspiration she was drawing from learning more about Hawaiian language revitalization specifically. I was also given permission by the conference organizers to share my video link with my interviewees regardless of whether they had registered for the conference. In this way I was able 92 to share some early results of the work that they contributed to, and I hope to continue to share my research with them as I produce more academic results. 2.3.7 Follow-up interviews In the Spring of 2021, I reached out to some of these participants for possible follow-up interviews. Though this was not part of my original research design, there were several reasons for adding this element. • For MLI participants, follow-up interviews were important to check in about how they are faring several months past a very intense language learning experience. At the times of their interviews (which occurred either during or immediately following the Institute), several participants shared feelings both of exhilaration and exhaustion, of extreme motivation and fears of burn out. Since that time one of the participants had e-mailed me to let me know that she has continued on her language learning journey. I wanted to have the opportunity to check in with others about how their journeys might have progressed in the same time period. • For NILI LRLS participants, follow-up interviews could capture the long-term impacts of learning from the global revitalization community. Participants in initial interviews described feeling inspired by the examples given at the LRLS in 2020, and also feeling encouraged to use the concrete tools shared during the series. One participant described the series as being the impetus to re-start her own independent language learning. I was interested to see if this series helped to sustain long-term motivation. • For Kodrah Kristang participants, a follow-up interview would be a way to help me fill out my background understanding of this learning context, which is so different from what I am familiar with. There were also some long-term impacts questions to follow up 93 with in this context as in the others. For example, in initial interviews, many of the participants discussed the struggle with social isolation and pandemic exhaustion, and the effect this had on language learning, maintaining momentum, and maintaining community. I wanted to know how these learners in this effort were faring after an even longer period of these pandemic-related impacts. • For all participants, follow-up interviews helped enrich the understanding of motivation across different timescales, so as to build up a more robust picture of the persistence aspect of motivation (see section 5.2.2). I contacted eight interviewees for a potential follow-up and was able to schedule interviews with seven of them. These included 3 Lushootseed learners, 2 Nuu-wee-ya’ learners, 1 Xaad Kil learner, and 1 Kristang learner. For these interviews I developed a hybrid conversation guide personalized to each participant. I used some general check-in questions for all of the interviews, and then used excerpts from the participants’ initial interviews to generate follow-up questions tailored to each individual. This follows from Mann’s (2002) procedure and contributes to a richer dialogue between interviewee and interviewer; it also allows for what is referred to in the qualitative literature as ‘member-checking’ of analysis in progress. An example of one such guide is included as Appendix E. 2.3.8 Analytic methods Interview transcripts are analyzed using an adapted version of Grounded Theory, as described in detail in section 2.2.2.2 on survey analysis methods. I note that although this is the same method used to analyze text data from the Global Survey, the two analyses were kept separate in order to maintain an emic approach to these interviews. That is, though I had already 94 developed robust categories from the survey texts, I did not use these categories to analyze the interviews. Instead, I started the category-building process afresh with these interviews. In the analysis chapters to follow, the themes are largely organized by what emerged from the interviews, complemented by relevant patterns in the survey data. For the interview data, I used qualitative data analysis software (Dedoose) and constant comparative approach to develop a rich thematic analysis, more purely qualitative than the semi- quantitative results I utilize for the survey analysis. Interview codes were not subjected to inter- rater reliability tests, following arguments from the theoretical literature about the inappropriateness of imposing such measures on interview data specifically (Braun & Clarke, 2013; Morse, 1997, 2015). That is, whereas with the survey data I demonstrate rigor by providing descriptive statistics and quantitative data visualizations, backed up by inter-rater reliability calculations, with the interview data I demonstrate rigor through providing a clear audit trail of my data collection and analysis, by conducting member-checking in transcription and in follow-up interviews, and by providing rich evidence in the form of extended text extracts from interviews to illustrate themes (Mayan, 2009; Tracy, 2010). In the analysis chapters, long-form excerpts from interviews are indented, without quotation marks, with the interviewee name, the date of the interview, and the language they reported learning in square brackets for attribution. Short excerpts and paraphrases are given in quotations in the body of the text. Longer quotations may include response tokens from me (e.g. “mm”), which I give in italics in square brackets in the body of the quotation. Abbreviated sections of long excerpts have a square bracket and ellipses. I note that some interviewees did not consent to have their names shared, in which case I attribute their quotes to “learner” or “heritage speaker” (however they self-identified) followed by the interview date and the 95 language name. I also note that I give the name of the language exactly as articulated by the individual practitioner in all cases; so for example, Angel discussed her involvement with revitalization of a language she calls nimipuutímt, while her colleague Beth referred to the same language as Nez Perce. 2.4 Conclusion The research approach I have employed for this dissertation project centers around both rigor and relationality. I use a method for analyzing qualitative data that emphasizes inductive development of findings and an iterative, systematic procedure. This is built on a careful, principled approach to interview transcription, which follows from a theory of the interview that emphasizes interaction and co-construction. At the foundation of data gathering and analysis is relationality. This includes respecting networks of relationships within the language revitalization community, acknowledging my own place in these relationships, and reciprocating in the research relationship by sharing in research design and dissemination. The results of the analysis of these data are presented in three thematic chapters to follow: Chapter 3 Goals; Chapter 4 Relationships; and Chapter 5 Time. Following these analytic chapters, I reflect further on the relational and contextual nature of this research process (Chapter 6 Coda). 96 CHAPTER III. GOALS 3.1 Introduction In this chapter I describe the different types of goals for language revitalization articulated by practitioners in this study. In the SLA literature, motivation to learn an L2 has been specifically studied as “one of the variables that can help to explain why some language learners are more successful than others” (Ushioda, 2020, p. 6). That is, a central aspect of understanding motivation is to understand language learners’ goals and definitions of success. This understanding has practical consequences as well, as understanding the variety and typologies of language practice goals in language revitalization contexts may help to develop better supports to help learners achieve their unique goals, and to discourage deficit models of L2 ‘achievement’. Indeed, as is apparent in excerpts from interviews shared throughout, language learners in these contexts are highly aware of ideologies of ‘success’ and ‘failure’ in language learning. Examples of learners’ judgments of success or failure are salient in the literature on second language acquisition more broadly. In her textbook on SLA, Ortega (2009) compares the firsthand published accounts of two French L2 learners, Alice Kaplan (1993) and Richard Watson (1995). Ortega (2009) describes Kaplan as having learned French “more successfully” (p. 170) and Watson as suffering from “French failure” (p. 148). Kaplan is described as “committed to a life in which both French and English play prominent roles” (p. 147) having earned her doctorate in French language, while Watson, a philosophy professor, studies his hardest to learn French in order to deliver an important scholarly address, and ends up failing the final exam in his French class (p. 148). Importantly, it is Kaplan and Watson themselves who seem to have deemed themselves successful vs failure in their own accounts of their language 97 journeys, but it is notable that the measure of success (or failure) in both accounts appears to be the outcomes of advanced assessment instruments, such as a doctoral degree or a class exam. L2 motivation research is concerned with language learning ‘success’, as the Ushioda (2020) quote above highlights, and this success is “reflected in measures of intended effort, persistence, or achievement” (p. 60). Given the well-researched link between expectation of success and positive educational outcomes (see for example research in Expectancy-Value Theory, Eccles et al., 1983), a potentially promising intervention in language learning is to break down ultimate ‘achievement’ into more immediately achievable (as well as personally relevant) steps. This is the theme of section 3.6. The discussion of goals is perhaps especially relevant for language learning in language revitalization contexts – language revitalization, by definition, is a goal-oriented practice. The term itself assumes a goal within a language community, one where a language is returned to some measure of vitality it does not currently enjoy. The necessity of carefully articulating what this actually means for a particular community has been discussed in the literature at least since Danhauer and Danhauer’s cogent call for “Prior Ideological Clarification” to avoid feelings of failure and stagnation in a revitalization effort (Dauenhauer & Dauenhauer, 1998). Definitions of and benchmarks for success in fact have real material consequences for community efforts, as outside funders demand demonstration of “progress” in order to provide financial support. That is, goals are central to language revitalization generally as well as individually. The topic of this dissertation is individual language learning motivation, which includes attention to individual goals and goal progress. I first discuss the intricate relationship between organizational and individual goals in language revitalization settings (section 3.2). This is followed by a discussion of general linguistic goals (section 3.3). Revitalization practitioners also 98 identified goals for their language practice that extend beyond the traditional boundaries of language skills; these extra-linguistic goals are discussed in section 3.4. In section 3.5 I discuss two constructs that are very common in the literature on SLA outcomes and motivation: instrumental goals, and second language “fluency” as a benchmark of success. Finally, practitioners’ observations about their trajectories towards certain goals – including the importance of acknowledging progress at each step – are highlighted in section 3.6. 3.2 Community effort goals versus individual goals In this research project, I use two different sources of data: reports from community efforts in the form of survey data, and reports from individual practitioners in the form of interview data. The theme of goals is central in both sources of data, but the goals are elicited and articulated differently. Much of the relevant survey data for this topic comes from a question phrased as this: 10. What are the main objectives14 of the revitalization efforts? Respondents could give up to five different answers in free-form text fields to this question. In interviews, goals were shared at many different points, but some interview questions were specifically designed to get at this topic, and they are worded like this: o How do you stay motivated when things get hard? o What do you imagine for yourself as a language learner 5, 10 years from now? o What do you imagine for your language 5, 10 years from now? What about 100? o Do you think that revitalizing your language has any practical benefits? (e.g. getting a job) That is, ostensibly, goals articulated in the survey data are the goals of the community effort broadly speaking, while goals articulated in the interviews mostly refer to goals for individual 14 Note that Peréz Báez et al (2019) distinguish between the “general goal of language revitalization” and “the objectives of respondents’ efforts” (p. 464-5). This goal vs. objective distinction is not made in the literature on motivation or goal-setting in SLA or psychology, and in this chapter I use the term ‘goal’ to cover both general, underspecified goals as well as smaller, measurable goals. 99 language learning. This distinction is important, since the current research question focuses on the motivations of the individual, and goals as a component of that individual motivation. However, in practice these two different types of goals are less distinct and more symbiotic and intertwined. For example, one learner, Evaristo, shared that his personal goal is to contribute to the body of linguistic material available for future revitalization activities: And the more audios recorded, the more videos recorded, the more native speakers recorded, and registered, and…that can be revitalized from the point of time. Yeah, that, that’s what I want to contribute. To give the guys at least some inputs, have inputs. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] That is, depending on their role in the language community, an individual’s goals for language practice may overlap with the community’s collective goals, and individual motivations are closely linked with personal contributions towards those collective goals. The overarching goal for all participants in these activities is a revitalized community of individuals using the language, and each individual identifies for themself how they will contribute towards that goal. This close relationship between community-focused and individual-focused goals is discussed in many parts of this chapter; I start here with one key illustrative example, the relationship between a theme called “Focus on Language Products” in the survey and a theme called “Tools and Support” in the interviews. 3.2.1 Survey data – Focus on Language Products as a Goal Many survey respondents identified the production of language material as a key goal of the effort or as the impetus for beginning the effort. These include the following: 100 Code Description Number Example excerpts of responses Documentation explicit mention of language 54 Rescatar y documentar la documentation, including (38%)15 lengua a través de entrevistas recording, collecting, and con hablantes y investigaciones archiving; transcribing históricas y lingüísticas [ID recordings; or relying on 179, zapoteco de existing documentation, Macuiltianguis] recordings, and archives Literature includes reading material, 25 To promote and assist in the specific texts (such as the (17.6%) development, production and Bible), stories and story translation of literature for use books, and other kinds of in the education system16 and print publications, as well as any other societal spheres of poetry and the term "oral influence [ID 239, TjiKalanga] literature" Materials includes linguistic materials 53 Developing the corpus of development (e.g. a dictionary, a grammar, (37.3%) Cornish language resources [ID a corpus) and explicit 226, Cornish] mention of pedagogical materials (including curriculum development). Pedagogy, language education and 64 (45%) provide educational teaching formal teaching, as well as opportunities to teach the methods teacher training (note that the Myaamia knowledge system to creation of curriculum or youth, which language being learning materials are coded central to this effort [ID 241, as "materials development") Miami-Illinois] Technology specific mention of 20 (14%) Also provide them with a technological products (e.g. special keyboard to facilitate CDs, translation software, writing [ID 916, Cypriot web-based products like Arabic] DuoLingo) Table 10. Survey responses focused on Language Products These answers varied in interesting ways depending on the makeup of the speech community, as reported by the community effort. Figure 11 below shows the proportion of “Language Product” category answers for each of the Language Situation categories: 15 This is the proportion of survey respondents (out of the total 142) who mentioned this code at least once; excerpts here can be double-coded. 16 This is an example of a double-coded excerpt – this is coded both as “literature” and “materials development” as it fits the definition of each category. 101 Language situation x Language products 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Awakening No L1 Few elderly Grandparents Some adults Most adults Most adults All members speakers speakers speak but few but no but generally and some including younger children not children children children people speak documentation literature materials development pedagogy, teaching methods technology Figure 11. Stacked bar chart, proportions of responses in each language category As can be seen in this chart, the proportion of “technology” mentions is highest in the Awakening language category, while it was not mentioned at all in situations with only few elderly users remaining. Efforts with few elderly users mentioned pedagogy and teaching methods in a very high proportion, even higher than the mentions of documenting language with these few remaining speakers or generating general linguistic materials. Meanwhile, efforts representing larger user populations (including full community use) have relatively high proportion of mentions of literature and reading material, compared with other language situation categories. What this suggests is that, rather than being universally shared, the goals of revitalization efforts may be tailored to the unique assets and needs of the specific speech community; this pattern is seen throughout this chapter. In this focus on language product, one thing these efforts do all share is that the point of producing material is to support the expansion of language to new 102 users and to provide input for individual learners; that is, the goal at the organizational level is the support of the individual. And indeed, in interviews, individual practitioners specifically referred to these outputs in a category coded as “Tools and Support”, to which we now turn. 3.2.2 Interview data – Tools as a support and Creating Tools as a step towards goals The output produced by community revitalization efforts provide support for individual practitioners. Almost all the interviewees (24/29) mention linguistic input as an important and necessary support, e.g.: for us, we have a plethora of our traditional stories. And with that, those are our resources we have. Fortunately, we have recordings and they're written in our language, and so we have those old forms of speech that we can listen to, plus just the value of the indigenous stories, which that's the focus of my doctoral program. So we have, I start to think of what do we have that we can work with, you know? [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] And the same number (24/29) also specifically mentioned pedagogical tools and strategies, such as the way a teacher or community organizer conducts language learning activities, e.g.: I think [the activities are] really out of the box. And I think the way that we do them is, I just think it's generally really well tailored to the class. I've never seen anyone not enjoying activities. You know, sometimes we have traditional games […] Or we have a bingo one time. One time we played, um, you know those tubes that vibrate when you hit them? Set to certain notes? [uh huh] So one time we played the entire song as a class together. It's just um, I think it's just the small steps to make it feel more alive. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] That is, the output of collective efforts provides helpful supports to individuals. But many practitioners are more than consumers of these linguistic products – they are also active producers. As Atkins (2012) and Hall (2021) point out, in language revitalization contexts it is practitioners themselves who must create the material for their own learning. The practitioners interviewed in this study are all learners, and many are also teachers, materials developers, documentarians, and archival researchers. Creating language products for the community is one of the activities that they pursue; for example, Michelle talked about working 103 with her language mentor to create accessible material and Quizlet sets to share with learners (Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21), and Karelle talked about working with a linguist and another community member to collaborate on YouTube lessons based on archival research (Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20). This work is something that Karelle takes as a personal responsibility, indicated by the first-person pronouns “I” and “we”: And so, yeah, I'm just kind of looking for ways that we can sort of, you know, expand them out. Yeah, you know, get more people in the community to learn them. [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] That is, for these individuals, the goal of increased community language use motivates their individual practice. Because this community-level goal is personally meaningful, they put effort into creating materials for others, rather than only pursuing increased linguistic competence for themselves. In fact, this can be a virtuous circle, as many practitioners describe the process of creating language products as being helpful for their own language learning. Carson explains this about the outcomes of his work with archival recordings: personally, I probably transcribed 25 plus hours of audio recording, most of which is like phrase elicitation or short stories, but that really improved my ear. [mmhmm, mmhmm] And, they're not all good recordings, and now I can listen to, like, an L1 speaker on like, the phone on a grainy recording, and hear, and then you know if somebody's like, "Oh, is this this? or it sounds like this" I'm like, my ear is way better now. […] because I, you just spend hours and hours, hundreds of hours just listening. And uh, so that's been cool because I feel like it kind of broke me into a next level on listening, and then I can see that my speech is following that now. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/9/20] A heritage speaker of Kristang also described how contribution to a community effort pushed her personal proficiency, when she was asked by her teacher to contribute some reading material for other language learners: Kevin wanted to ask the older learners you know? [mmhmm] Those who spoke Kristang before, to sort of just write down something and just read it out to them. So I, I took up the challenge, and I wrote a little bit, just about my travel […] and then umm because I 104 was doing that, I also had to translate my English into Kristang [mm, mmhmm] And I found that that was, I had to refer to the dictionaries. [mmm] And that increased my knowledge of the words. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/29/20] Another heritage speaker of Kristang also said that participating in Kristang learning activities has benefited her. Having grown up speaking Kristang, she originally joined the group in order to offer her help, but said she has “ended up learning more than helping.” (heritage speaker, Kristang group 2, 7/31/20) She later elaborated: So what's interesting is that learning new words... finding out the older, I mean, the real Kristang words that were used by the older generation which is slowly coming in now, you know? [mm] As you attend classes, read more and go to the dictionary, then you say, "Oh yeah! I've heard this word" you know what I mean? Yeah, so it's coming back to me. So it's - it's great in that sense, yeah. [heritage speaker, Kristang group 2, 7/31/20] Other Kristang learners also identified the link between organizational efforts and individual motivations, as articulated here by Evaristo: I think the guys are very intelligent in the sense, because they are producing three different motivations. First, get together. [mm] Yeah. Because language dies if you don't get together. So if you don't meet, that's it. Language is gone. Yeah? Second is because uh they have to not stop the project. If they stopped the project, the project can have a discontinuation. And that can be mortal. [mm, mmhmm] Yeah. And that's a very, very important um, essential thing I think for projects of revitalization. […] And then the last thing is to deliver products that can be used by the next generations. [mmhmm, mmhmm] Right? And how to produce that [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] In fact, the practitioners who participate in Jardinggu activities (the Kristang “lexical incubator”) each articulated hopes that their contributions would be taken up by new speakers of the language, as for example this learner who shares his hope that Kristang will “literally come alive again in Singapore” as the result of his contributions: I would really, really, really love for them, for there to be native speakers of the language, [mmm] I mean, yeah, I think just having people who are - you know I come up with words, I help come up with suggestions for the words in Jardinggu, which people vote on eventually, right? And then I would just really love that, you know, a lot of these words enter the mainstream for example, that people actually start using these terms. Um, that - I don't know, I think just having it literally come alive in Singapore again would be really 105 amazing. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] This learner highlights the positive feedback loop at work when community and individual goals align; individual learners are supported by contributions from other individuals, and in turn are motivated to contribute. Other interesting comparisons between effort goals and individual goals can be seen in the next section, particularly in the discussion of Number of users/creating new users (section 3.3.2) and of Language domains (3.3.3); there is also relevant to the theme of Public Outreach and Program Growth in section 3.4.2. When the distinction between collective vs individual goals is relevant, I tease out these differences, and I also continue to discuss the ways these two types of goals overlap. Having set up a framework for thinking about how practitioner interviews and survey responses articulate goals that motivate language practice, I turn now to a discussion of one major category of goal types – the category of linguistic goals. 3.3 Linguistic Goals Language revitalization practitioners in both the interviews and survey responses identified linguistic goals, that is, goals related to specific language skills and the expansion of language domains. The first sub-category for discussion is language skills, which include oral language skills like pronunciation and listening comprehension, L2 vocabulary knowledge, and conversational abilities (section 3.3.1). The next sub-category is the expansion of language ‘domains’, meaning language use in particular activities and in physical spaces (section 3.3.3). The final sub-category includes examples of goals for personal language practice, for example the goals of consistent language use and developing multilingualism. 106 3.3.1 Language skills The goals described in this section cover those that traditionally fit within the purview of instructed SLA, such as pronunciation accuracy and vocabulary acquisition. In addition to these discrete target language skills, practitioners also described goals of communicative competence and conversational ability, skills which are familiar to teachers and researchers in a Communicative Language Teaching approach (see e.g. Lee & Van Patten, 2003; Richards & Rodgers, 2001). 3.3.1.1 Interviews The discrete language skills articulated in interview responses include 3.3.1.1.1 Reclaiming Pieces of Language (e.g. vocabulary or individual sounds), 3.3.1.1.2 Communicative Abilities (e.g. conversational proficiency), and 3.3.1.1.3 Being a Speaker (e.g. speaking proficiency and stamina). These subsections are arranged in an implicational order; that is, learners need vocabulary and pronunciation in order to have conversations, and learners describe these conversations as an important step to becoming full language users. 3.3.1.1.1 Reclaim pieces of language Interviewees identified the reclamation of discrete linguistic elements as goals for language work. For example, Michele described her efforts to improve her pronunciation of stop consonants that contrast at the velar and uvular places of articulation in her language: So practicing like, [qə], [qɛ], [qɪ], [qi], like [mmm] so doing that, and um, but, there's been days where I don't, because I, there's too much chaos for me to even concentrate on trying to make a /k/ sound, or to be alone for five minutes to do that. You know? {hahaha} [{chuckle} mmhmm {haha}] Um, so. It, that's still a major goal, and I feel like it has to become a non-negotiable in my life. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] Learners also mentioned vocabulary items related to specific social functions, for example vocabulary useful for certain social functions, like those prioritized by Karelle’s community: 107 sometimes we'll like you know teach people like a word or two in the language, or we can practice with each other, some greetings and um uh food items I think are some of the, you know, the bigger ones that people are trying to remember. [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] These responses highlight components of language that frequently fall under traditional SLA research – pronunciation accuracy and L2 vocabulary acquisition. Karelle’s excerpt also highlights the reclamation aspect of this specific goal – these items are not just the focus of individual acquisition, but are also the focus of community members “trying to remember”. This acquiring/remembering goal can be bound up in powerful emotions for some interviewees. Erin, for example, describes how her frustrated attempts to reclaim certain vocabulary items has very negative emotional effects for her: that’s another thing that makes me sad about the language, is I wish I could do astronomy in the language. You know, I wish I could talk to people about black holes and stuff like that. [mm] Obviously some of this language is gonna have to be invented. [mm] But some of it, I’m sure it’s there, and I just have this like…I, when I experience grief – I have learned this about myself – when I experience grief, I, it’s normally angry grief. [mm, mmhmm] And I have this like intense angry grief about just the fact that I don’t know what the word for the Pleiades is and I can’t find it. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/7/20] As Erin’s quote shows, even small language acquisition goals can have profound impact on emotion and motivation; in Erin’s case, being frustrated in her goal of talking about a particular topic causes “intense angry grief.” This can be compared with Michelle’s description of being on a “high” on days when she’s “nailing it” with her pronunciation of tricky sounds in her language (see section 3.7). 3.3.1.1.2 Communicative abilities Many of the interviewees identified proficiency in communication and conversation as a key goal (and a key motivator) for learning. In fact, whereas “reclaiming pieces of language” such as vocabulary or pronunciation was coded for 9 interviews, “communicative abilities” was 108 coded for 19. Interviewees described goals as wanting to be able to hold conversations with certain people, as exemplified by Karelle: ideally I would um, I would have, I'd like to have just sort of conversational abilities, so knowing enough sort of vocabulary and grammar to have some conversations. Um, and to kind of, to be able to - yeah, to have like these conversations with people at our, you know, at our gatherings. [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] Other learners discussed wanting to be able to “hold a conversation with anybody” in general (Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20). For one Lushootseed learner, this goal coincides with her goal to only speak Lushootseed in her home, a goal which she is “super passionate” about. This goal extends to a desire to hold conversations in language with her family members and language program colleagues outside of the home (learner, Lushootseed, 6/23/20). For Charlotte, this goal applies not just to herself but to the future speech community; after reflecting on her own struggles with listening comprehension and speaking proficiency, she shares: it's funny, I keep saying this, but I hope... I hope to see those [young] people not having to work to understand or be understood in the language because they've just come up in it and they're, you know, they're able to initiate conversations, or language learning themselves, because it's just what they know, like in- inherently. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] In our follow-up interview a year later, Charlotte described her progress in Lushootseed, and how it is precisely these growing communicative abilities that make her feel she has made good progress: right now I'm having a lot of fun being conversational in my Lushootseed, [mmhmm] which is a skill that I've never felt comfortable with and I, I'm getting to the point where I feel like I can just chit-chat, and I have dreams where I am making up Lushootseed {haha} thinking, you know things like that. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] The goal and motivation of communicative abilities can even extend beyond conversation with the immediate speech community. One interviewee relates how her growing skills as a 109 heritage speaker of Kristang (a creole with a large component of Portuguese vocabulary) was useful on her travels: Kristang is good because […] I went to Portugal. [mm!] And I went to Spain. And I could understand! [mmhmm] And they could understand me. [{ha}] {haha} So of course there are differences. [uh huh] But, so they were very happy. I remember the old woman who sold the tablecloth to me, just so happy that I could speak her language {haha}. And I think that is the beauty of language. [{haha} mmhmm] When you can speak to someone in his or her language, they are so happy, you know? You can communicate. [heritage speaker, Kristang, 7/29/20] This point echoes the notion of the Cosmopolitan Ideal Self (Lasagabaster, 2017); that is, in this speaker’s case, learning Kristang “is good” because it greatly increases her multilingual repertoire and allows her to connect with others on her travels to other continents (this is also related to section 3.3.3.3, Multilingualism, as a goal). In addition to the ability to communicate with others at this point in time, one Lushootseed learner shares a teaching from her mother about communicating beyond this lifetime: Yeah, the interesting thing about that, that saying that she used to put together as she got much older, she started really focusing on language use for herself, it wasn't as much as what's going on now, she just really felt, and that was teachings from her family, that when you pass from this world, to get to the side where your people are, you have to be able to communicate with them. And so she did pick that up. Just as, you know, a what-if kind of belief from her family. [mm.] And that's kind of motivating too. [learner, Lushootseed, 6/23/20] The ability to use language to connect to others is explored in more depth with respect to the theme of Relationships (see section 4.5); it is clear from these excerpts that so-called “discrete” linguistic skills are intricately tied up with these relationships. 3.3.1.1.3 Being a speaker Other examples show that “discrete” linguistic skills are also intricately tied up with personal identity. For some practitioners, the ultimate goal of language learning is not just proficiency, but a complete “switch” into a new kind of life fully in language: 110 I'd love for that to be the thing. Like if I could just switch off, and speak Lushootseed, tell stories, have conversation. Just basically live in Lushootseed, that would be, that would be a great goal. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] Carson also shares his “aspiration” that his language switches places with English as the primary language of his home: for me it's like my aspiration is to use the language actually as much as I can, which I think would be like, I think, then at that point I would not be filling out a census as English as the first language spoken in my home, it would probably be like the second language. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/9/20] This might be the most clearly articulated alternative to the Fluency as L1-like ability measure for ultimate attainment and mastery (see discussion in section 3.5.2.1). I note that in neither of these quotes (or in their immediate contexts in the interviews) did these practitioners refer to the goal of “fluency” in language; rather, what they describe are lives fully saturated by language and the resulting change to self and identity. This language identity is important for second language learners even as they acknowledge there is still much to learn. In our follow-up interview, Charlotte describes the year of pandemic isolation and remote learning as a time when she changed how she saw herself: I will also probably think of this year, this last year as, the time where my language, my Lushootseed...my comfort with Lushootseed moved to the next phase, if I can say that. [mm] Where, I went from feeling like, someone who takes Lushootseed classes, to someone who speaks Lushootseed. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] Beth even explicitly leverages this kind of identity work as part of her practice, as she guides undergraduate students in creative writing exercises: I think the most important thing that anyone can do in their own language is to pray, or to have a mantra, or to talk to themselves, to like somehow use language in a spiritual sense, of like, [mm] of your being in the world […] I think that's a really important thing. And sort of a decolonizing thing. Um, because I think we can be more...yeah, we can, we can be outside of those other paradigms. When we are inside of our language. And [mmhmm] And um, one of the writing assignments I have students do, or writing prompts is, uh do this like, 'who am I?' kind of exercise. Like "who am I in my language?" Like when you are like physically inside your language, who are you? Um, and people have written 111 amazing things. Like you discover amazing things if you do that exercise. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] All these excerpts encourage us to begin to think about these practitioners’ goals as not just about discrete language skills. At the same time, I want to underscore that all the goals described in this section relate to basic components of language acquisition as traditionally described in SLA – vocabulary and pronunciation, communicative competence and comprehension, speaking and writing. In the following section, I look at how these componential skills are also given as goals in responses to the Global Survey. 3.3.1.2 Survey The language skill goals in survey responses break down into types which echo the componential skills articulated for many language programs: writing, reading, speaking and listening, and grammar accuracy. Survey responses were also coded for the lexical item “fluency,” as discussed in section 3.5.2. Per that discussion, this term may imply a number of different types of goals, including specific speaking goals; such excerpts that explicitly referred to both (e.g. “to have fluent speakers”) were double-coded for “speaking and listening” and hence are included in the discussion here. Table 11 illustrates these different linguistic skill categories and the number of respondents who mentioned each one at least once: 112 Description Total Examples Writing includes mention of 15 Teach the script and ambahan in at least orthography, standard 10 elementary and secondary schools. [ID writing system; also 918, Hanunuo Mangyan and Buhid spelling, and learning to Mangyan]; write If they could just even learn the words on the list of a spelling bee or be able to say the words, and even learn to spell the words… [ID 146, Yup’ik] Reading this code applies to 16 to strengthen the literary language [ID 18, excerpts that use the Aanaar Saami]; words 'literacy', 'literary', Los talleres son para que los niños or 'literate', or that escriban y lean la lengua. [ID 170, mention 'reading' or Diidxazá] 'learning to read' or 'using the written language' Grammar includes for example 20 Descripción de la gramática hñäñho [ID objectives mention of linguistic 195, Hñäñho]; analysis, the rules of the Analyze the language for grammatical language, structure - conducted by multiple syntax/phonology individuals to varying extents.[ID 124, Meskwaki] Production and includes pronunciation 11 develop, maintain, extend oral language comprehension and other productive skills [ID 157, Wubuy]; language skills, as well learning to pronounce the word [ID 146, as comprehension Yup’ik] Table 11. Categories of Linguistic Goals in Survey Responses As might be expected, there is some overlap between “writing” and “reading”; eight excerpts mention both. The “grammar objectives” code usually referred to the goals of documenting and describing the language as part of the language revitalization effort, rather than as an individual learning goal, as might also be expected (although I note that it not just linguists but also community leaders and language students who articulated this goal). An interesting point of comparison is how these goals were distributed among efforts supporting languages with different distributions, as is illustrated in the bar chart below. This chart is code applications, not code occurrence (see explanation section 2.2.3.6), so if a respondent reiterated or rephrased the same type of goal in a different part of their response it 113 would count repeatedly here. These counts are normalized in proportion to the number of responses per descriptor category. Linguistic skills x Language situation 25 20 15 10 5 0 Awakening No L1 Few elderly Grandparents Some adults Most adults Most adults All members speakers speakers speak but but no but generally and some including few younger children not children children children people speak writing grammar objectives reading speaking and listening Figure 12. Linguistic skills in Survey Responses by Language Category What the chart illustrates is that writing (and, to a lesser extent, reading) are higher priorities among efforts to maintain languages with larger existing populations of users. This may follow from the security of already having widespread production and comprehension skills throughout the community, which makes writing and literacy more of a priority for maintaining these languages into the future. Meanwhile, the goal of production and comprehension is not the highest priority in any category, and in fact no respondents in the “most adults and some children speak the language” category (n=12) mentioned such an objective at all. In the largest category in the sample, “there are few elderly speakers17” (n=24), ‘production and comprehension’ is only mentioned once. 17 Note that these categories are worded exactly as they were presented as choices in the English version of the Global Survey, that is “No L1 Speakers” etc. But the Global Survey also collected responses from efforts to revitalize sign languages, and as such throughout this dissertation I aim to use more general terms such as “production and comprehension” rather than “speaking and listening,” and “user” rather than “speaker” when discussing survey data. 114 These results are in interesting contrast with the language skill goals as articulated by individual practitioners in interview responses; there are several possible factors that may contribute to this difference. First of all, survey responses represent goals of community efforts, rather than of individual language learners per se (though as I have stressed above, the lines between these can be quite blurry.) Perhaps, in thinking about the design and implementation of a larger community effort, practitioners see the goal as more widespread distribution of linguistic resources in the form of written material or better understood grammar (as opposed to productive proficiency, which is a matter of individual practice.) Secondly, many of the practitioners I interviewed are involved in language learning methodologies that explicitly emphasize speaking, often even to the exclusion of explicit grammar or literacy instruction. That is, to some extent there may be a sampling bias in favor of spoken language goals in the interviews; there may also be a sampling bias in favor of literacy goals in the distribution of the Global Survey instrument. Finally, I note that the methods and framing of the two strands of data collection themselves may have contributed to some of this discrepancy – note that the strong bias for written versus spoken language is evident in the survey, a written instrument for learning about these efforts, while the strong orientation towards spoken language emerges from interviews, an entirely spoken interaction. I suspect that these three variables, and perhaps others not yet identified, may explain some of the variety in the different goals articulated by language revitalization practitioners in these two formats. 115 3.3.2 Number of users/creating new users 3.3.2.1 Survey One frequent and salient goal for language revitalization efforts as reported in the Survey is, simply put, an increase in language user18 population. Twenty-seven different respondents (roughly 19%) stated some version of the goal “to create fluent speakers” (ID 53, Anishinaabemowin), “crear nuevos hablantes” (ID 169, Zapoteco), or “to increase the number of second language speakers” (ID 18, Aanaar Saami). Some respondents also mentioned that calculating the number of current speakers was an initial step in the effort: The Saginaw Chippawa Tribe did a survey to see how many speakers were in the community. [ID 52, Chippawa/Ojibway] I set about finding some of the remaining speakers in Singapore (I found 14) [ID 74, Kristang] Even in cases where increasing this number is not explicitly mentioned as a goal, respondents referred to the (small) size of the current user population as being motivating. In answering the question, “How did the revitalization efforts begin?”, one respondent wrote: The urgency to learn is motivating with the 10- fluent speakers available to learn from in all 3 Seneca territories. [ID 149, Onöndowa'ga Gawëno'] And in response to the question “Why is the revitalization of your language important?”, one respondent wrote: Because very few people under 30 speak the language, and because the language is banned from public schools, Kisii is likely to become extinct in the next two generations if immediate and drastic steps are not taken to reverse this trend now. [ID 93, Kisii, emphasis mine] 18 Many survey respondents themselves use the term “speaker”; i.e. the respondents each have their own working definition of what a “speaker” is, and these definitions are largely implicit rather than explicit in the responses. The issues of who is a “speaker” and how speakers/signers are counted is touched on briefly in this section. 116 In other words, awareness of the shrinking user population gives an urgency to the community effort. And, as noted above, increasing this number is an explicit goal for many efforts. This may seem obvious to practitioners of language revitalization, but it is one of the most crucial differences between these efforts and perhaps any other second language learning situation. It is hard to imagine a college French course, or an adult ESL course, or any of the other L2 instruction settings that are well-represented in current literature, whose explicit goal was to “increase the number of French speakers.” The awareness of user population, and the assumptions about who “counts”, are in fact on display in the descriptive information that each survey respondent gave about their language. Respondents were asked to identify information such as the language name, where the language is spoken, etc. before answering the quantitative and qualitative questions about their effort. Two of these questions are relevant for this discussion, so I reprint the exact wording of choices in this text box. 2. What is the situation of the language? • There are no first-language speakers. • There are a few elderly speakers. • Many of the grandparent generation speak the language, but the younger people generally do not. • Some adults in the community are speakers, but the language is not spoken by children. • Most adults in the community are speakers, but children generally are not. • Most adults and some children are speakers. • All members of the community, including children, speak the language, but we want to make sure this doesn’t change. • There is a new population of speakers or people are beginning to learn the language after a period of time in which no one spoke the language. 3. How many people speak the language? [none at the moment; 1-9; 10-99; 100-999; 1000-9999; 10,000-99,999; more than 100,000] Figure 13. Questions 2 and 3 from Global Survey of Language Revitalization Efforts 117 In question number two, the first and last options cover cases that might elsewhere in the literature be called “dormant” or “sleeping” languages. Using the kinds of counts often undertaken by linguistic researchers, it is likely that these languages would be reported as having “no speakers.” As an example, the project team working on the Ngunawal language of New South Wales, Australia, selected the last option to describe their language situation, and the Endangered Language Project listing for this language classifies is as one with “no known speakers.”19 But there is not a one-to-one correspondence between these language situations and zero speakers in the self-reporting of survey respondents; the Ngunawal team in fact selected “1- 9” as their current speaker count. Table 12 shows the correspondence between answers to Question 2 (columns of the table) and Question 3 (rows of the table), paying special attention to the dormant and awakening language category: There are no first-language People are beginning to speakers. learn after a period in which no one spoke the language None at the moment 4 (36.4%) 0 1-9 2 (18.2%) 8 (53.3%) 10-99 1 (9.1%) 4 (26.7%) 100-999 2 (18.2%) 2 (13.3%) 1,000-9,999 2 (18.2%) 1 (6.7%) Table 12. Surveys categorized by number of speakers, compared with language situation categories What this shows is that some survey respondents are aware of the subtle differences between these two questions. The first response in Question 2 specifically refers to “first-language speakers”, but Question 3 more broadly asks how many speakers are there currently. Thus some respondents choose to include learners as “speakers”, and recognize that L2 speakers are countable members of a growing speaking population20. This echoes Hall’s (2021) use of the 19 https://www.endangeredlanguages.com/lang/6682, accessed 11/17/2021 20 The import of this comparison was first observed by the survey designers themselves, when reporting results from the pilot survey in Peréz Báez et al., 2018. 118 term ‘learner-speaker’ to describe herself as a second-language user and practitioner of her language. Understanding this issue of who counts as a speaker/signer is key to understanding what a respondent might mean when they state a general goal of “creating new users.” 3.3.2.2 Interviews Individual interviewees are also aware of sheer numbers with respect to their speech communities. At the same time that they express the hope of being one additional member of this community (through gaining linguistic skills and “becoming a speaker” as described above), they also express their hopes for the community’s future in terms of population numbers. For example, Evaristo, in discussing his hope that the Kristang revitalization effort continues, said: Yeah, for extinct, a language that is almost extinct. But yeah, while you have like 100, 200, 1,000 speakers, it doesn't disappear. It didn't, it won't disappear that way. Yeah? It won't disappear that way. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] Carson gave his middle-term vision for his community in terms of numbers, and described what the outward signs of this increase would be: Yeah um, five years, it would be great to see like 25 to 100 people that are at the level of speech that I'm at now. [mm] And 10 years I think it would be really good to see a community of like 10 to 30 people who are at that level of speech that I was just describing to you as an aspiration for myself, and another hundred to 200 people that are spending, you know, a healthy chunk of time in the language every day […] some of the signs that that would be happening would be just like the amount of language that you're hearing spoken when you're around the community. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/9/20] Erin also shared a hope that the Nuu-wee-ya’ community would grow in number, and gave her estimate of what an “achievable” goal would look like in this respect: I don't necessarily think that in five or 10 years, we're going to have this massive speech community of like, you know, 10,000 people or anything. But if we could get like 100 people who I could reliably reach out to any of them and just say even five words in the language? Holy cow. That would be leaps and bounds beyond what we have now, and I would be...yeah, I think that - but I also think it's an achievable goal. [mmm] To get that place, you know? [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] 119 Highlighting the uniqueness of this language learning situation, it is hard to imagine any individual learner of English being aware of the total population of that global speech community, or having a specific estimate of what that number could be 10 years in the future. The quotes above, in particular Erin’s, also underscore the sense that individual motivation in these contexts may be spurred by individual contributions to concrete goals for the community as a whole. 3.3.3 Language domains In addition to particular language skills and countable numbers of speakers, language revitalization practitioners discussed the expansion of language domains as a goal of both individual and community language learning. I use the term ‘language domains’ to refer to physical and social domains of language use, as opposed to semantic domains for specific vocabulary items (which are part of Reclaiming Pieces of Language, section 3.3.1.1.1). This use of the term ‘domain’ is prominent in the Puyallup Method (see section 7.2.1) but practitioners in many different communities describe domain expansion goals. In interviews, these domain goals include the broad goal of language use being more widespread through the community (section 3.3.3.1.1); increasing the kinds of activities and physical spaces where language is personally used (section 3.3.3.1.2); increasing the use of language specifically in professional settings (section 3.3.3.1.3); as well as the more generally stated goal of language maintenance (section 3.3.3.1.4). In the survey, language maintenance was, perhaps unsurprisingly, a frequently mentioned goal for the community effort, as discussed in section 3.3.3.2.1; survey respondents also mentioned specific domains of use that are targeted for language expansion (section 3.3.3.2.2). 120 3.3.3.1 Interviews 3.3.3.1.1 Widespread in the community Just as they shared hopes for increased speaker populations as a goal for the speech community in general, individual practitioners in interviews expressed the hope that the language would be used more widely in the community. For example, Chris D said that staff of the Puyallup language department “always joke about how we’re trying to work ourselves out of a job,” because as he says, it would be great to hit the point where we go to a, you know any event and that it's fully spoken. I mean 10 years from now, I would love it if everyone who came on to the Puyallup tribal reservation spoke Lushootseed. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] He also said that he hopes Lushootseed language use spreads beyond the boundaries of the Puyallup tribe and sees positive signs in the growing collaboration between his department and other local Lushootseed-speaking tribes, as this quote illustrates: we've worked with, you know, Nisqually, we've talked to Nisqually, we've talked, we work really good with Suquamish, and uh Muckleshoots coming down now, and they're talking...we're, we have, there's a lot of different tribes who kind of come in and we're talking with them. And Tulalip - we have a lot of people who are working on the same goal. So if we put it all together, just imagine this whole, you know Puget Sound area just flooded with Lushootseed. Whether it be northern, southern or whatever. It's just having that ability - for me as someone who does try to speak Lushootseed er, I mean I speak it, you know, with people. [mmhmm mm] I’d love to be able to just, if I go to an event up in, you know, in Tulalip, I'd like to be able to say something and then you know get responses. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20; emph mine] I have chosen to highlight two different sections of this excerpt. In the first, Chris specifically references this extended language community as a goal that several people are working towards together. In the second, he describes this community goal as a vision for himself – he uses the first person “I” to situate himself in the future expanded community of speakers. 121 Others expressed the hope that official policies would be put in place to proactively bring this growth about. For example, Charlotte shared her hope that learning the language would be an official part of professional life: Um, I also, I also hope that the language is a matter of fact part of our tribe and our community. I would love to see everyone, all employees, be encouraged to attend language class. And that it's not having to take language during your lunch break, but it's like part of your day that you are going to be, you know, paid by the tribe to learn this language. I think that would be, that'd be huge. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] One teacher of Yup’ik even gave a reason why it would be good to have a larger and more diverse community of speakers. So, yeah, I, I try to encourage that, them that way, because I work with elders and they're like, "now you're carrying that torch" And even if they're like, not necessarily of Yup'ik background I say, "you're part of it, you encourage, you're encouraging our Native students to be proud of their culture and language because you're able to, you know, speak a little bit," even if it's just teeny weeny greeting words, [tʃɑmɑi] [xʷɑqɑ]. It like opens doors. I've had students who were […] counselors [who work with Native students] take the class and they say, "oh, they, speaking to them with the Yup'ik that I've learned, it opens doors for them to share more." [mmmm] Like there, there's a connection. [mmhmm] So it, it makes me feel good and excited that they are using it, because our language is still alive in that way. [Sassa, Yup'ik, 7/7/20] In addition to underscoring the sense that “our language is still alive”, as Sassa puts it, the above quotes all point to the sense that seeing the language widespread in the community will involve examining and expanding the definition of “the community” in these contexts. The roles and shifting boundaries between the “community” and those “outside” it is discussed in depth in section 4.2.2. 3.3.3.1.2 Increasing domains of use Another common goal shared in interviews is the goal of increasing the set of domains in the learner’s life in which language can be used. These tend to be very specific intermediate language learning goals. That is, whereas certain goals discussed previously, such as wanting to 122 “be a speaker”, are the work of a lifetime, bringing language into these domains provides discrete goals that learners have identified as steps towards that larger goal. In part, the frequency of this goal reflects the specific contexts from which I became acquainted with these practitioners. Zalmai Zahir’s approach to language expansion, which I refer to as the Puyallup Method (see description section 7.2.1) includes a technique called ‘reclaiming domains’ (Zahir, 2018), and hence everyone associated with the Puyallup Language Department or with Zeke’s Multilingual Institute has been trained in this way of talking about language learning. In fact, one of the ways progress is measured in this method is by counting the number of discrete domains that the learner has command of, as the quote below illustrates: Allison: how are you studying? Like are you using it, or how are you doing that? Randi: I am using it an hour a day in just my own personal domains that I'm reclaiming, and there's about 25 of them that I'm working on currently. [Randi, Lushootseed, 6/16/20] In this method, ‘domains’ typically refer either to a physical location in the home or to some activity that takes place within the home; for example, the kitchen is one setting for domain reclamation, within which individual domains may include frying potatoes, washing hands, or taking ingredients out of the refrigerator. Thus, rather than focusing on learning individual vocabulary items out of context, in this method learners grow in their language by self-narrating activities and practicing full phrases and sentences that relate to daily life and activities. Many learners report finding this idea revolutionary and game-changing, as Erin did when she learned of it at the Multilingual Institute: But so like, I can see a through line now though, where I can see like, "okay, I'm going to take over the bathroom […] I'm going to take over the whole house. I'm going to take over the car. I'm going to take over the office. And then I'm going to take over the world." And like...at a certain point, obviously, the words you need to be able to say are so much more complicated than like "I grabbed my hairbrush. I tie my hair with a hair tie." [mmhmm, mmhmm] "I finished taking my shower," whatever. Um, you know, having this conversation is waaaay outside of what I can see myself being able to do. But I would say in the next five to 10 years, if I can reliably talk to my nieces and nephews only in the language about things that relate to the interior of the house, that is a huge, 123 huge step forward. That I think I can actually achieve. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/7/20] For Jackie the domains are also a way of making sure she maintains her language ability, even after the goal has been “checked off”: Yeah. So, for me, that means like making sure that, you know I reclaimed those two domains. And I mean, I think I technically have like four domains reclaimed, so that just means for me like I need to make sure I'm - I want to make sure I'm practicing them. So if I'm gonna wash my hands...we don't tend to think, even in English, [mmhmm right {ha}] {haha} um "I'm getting the soap. I'm washing my hands. Now I dry my hands." [Yeah {ha}] So being intentional just about practicing those things. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] Some of these learners also take this domain reclamation concept and extend it into other important activities in their life, such as this learner and her carving practice: Allison: Does he [=your carving mentor] speak Lushootseed too? Like can you talk to him in… Randi: Yeah, he speaks some Lushootseed that that we worked on over the years. Allison: Mmhmm. That's cool. Randi: And right now I'm working on a carving domain with him. So we just started that recently. Allison: Ahh, that's really interesting. Yeah. I bet, are they're like a l- there's probably a lot of vocabulary for that, right? Randi: There is, yes. And that's, I think, Zeke researched and recovered a lot of that. That's where I've got my information from. [Randi, Lushootseed, 6/16/20] In fact, some of the teachers in this method see this learner-generated domain extension as one of the strengths of the method. Masa, a learner-teacher of mitsqanaqan, gave as an example the fact that all the language for ‘grooming’ domains have so far been written by men, but female learners may one day wish to reclaim the domains of shaving legs, or putting on makeup (Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20). Zeke himself observed: the other thing is I haven't had to decide for people what's the next function you're gonna add in Lushootseed. I've done a little bit of educating and pushing a little bit, but for the most part people will let you know. "How do I say ‘I'm gonna take the dog for a walk’? How do I uh tell the kids 'get ready for bed'? How do I use it in the classroom?" You know, they tell you, depending upon who they are. [mmhmm] Married people want terms - and people with kids - want terms of affection. "How do I express that?" [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] 124 In this way, increasing domains of use accomplishes many things simultaneously: it gives learners a chance for immediately relevant practice, it gives learners the chance to become aware of their own needs and habits and to take control of their own short-term language goals, and it also gives current learners the chance to generate new language material that can be used as input for future learners. This focus on increasing domains of use in fact is not exclusive to learners under the “reclaiming domains” methodology. Michelle, for example, gave this example of wanting to expand her language skills into a particular physical domain: Like right now I'm working on water. And you would think that maybe I would already know how to talk about water. It's right there. Or like, we live on an island. Everything in our life is about water. Like, everything! [{haha} uh huh uh huh] But I don't know how to talk about it. [mmhmm] Like {haha} okay. I know how to say 'water' {haha} [Yeah {haha} that's a start!] But like you know our water is so ever-changing, and sometimes it is [mmhmm] turbulent, and sometimes it's calm, and sometimes the current looks like you know there's something underneath it moving […] So that's what I've been working on right now, is just figuring out different ways to talk about the water. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] Michelle is not a student of Zeke’s and is not, as far as I know, aware of the ‘reclaiming domains’ technique; indeed she does not use the same kind of vocabulary to talk about what she is doing. But this goal echoes the explicit goals of the Puyallup Method, including the fact that it shows Michelle’s autonomy in choosing her goal, and the connection to Michelle’s daily life and physical environment. There is one other common way that practitioners discuss domain increase, and that is in the realm of the public sphere. As discussed in section 3.3.3.2.2, schools are a salient site for language revitalization and language revitalization efforts. In the case of Kodrah Kristang, this is also a goal that the team realized might be inappropriate. Luis’s brief discussion of this shows the practitioners going through the process of readjusting their goals: 125 Luis: And the plans changed slightly. For example, I remember the fact that we, I think in that original plan, there was the idea of trying to push Kristang towards public education, right? Frances: mmm, in public schools. Yep. Luis: Which is something that after a little bit of analysis, like we realize it's definitely not the thing to be fighting for, because you're just going to bump your head into more walls and, you know, just uh Allison: mmm Luis: opting for more, you know, umm less political - l-less Frances: unappealing learning facilities. Luis: Or less politicized infrastructure, right [Kristang group 1, 7/18/20] In this excerpt, the two organizers, Fran and Luis, recall altering the goal they had set for their community effort so as to avoid “bumping your head into more walls.” This is a team-level example of readjusting goals as language practice unfolds, which is discussed more for individuals in section 3.6.3. 3.3.3.1.3 Increasing language in professional life One specific domain that many people mention is the domain of professional life and employment. This is closely tied to the discussion of “instrumental” goals discussed in section 3.5.1, but that discussion focuses on language learning as a tool for economic advancement and career achievement. In contrast, the goals in this section pertain to increasing language use in the social domain of the workplace, for example by acquiring the necessary language to accomplish professional tasks. One such example comes from Chris D, who is on staff at the Puyallup Tribal Language Program. He observes that even though his job, officially, is to help increase the use of language in his community, he does not yet have the language he needs to accomplish key tasks in his workplace: And like, again, I'm a media developer, so I'm sitting there editing a video, or if I'm doing this it's like, I do have some language to be able to do that, but it's not like I'm - I have to process how I'm programming a website, or process how I'm cutting a video and the timing of stuff. So I can't process the, I guess the art side of it every time. And also try and process translating it. […] like if you just made an easy project and sat there and did 126 the "I cut, I paste", you know, I do whatever whatever, [mmhmm] maybe that would, that'd be easier. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] For many language teachers and language department staff, incorporating language into professional activities is a reasonably clear through-line. But many practitioners have different professional trajectories and strengths; that is, not all practitioners take on language teaching roles. Those learners aim to incorporate language into their professional lives as well. For example, Beth, a full-time university professor and creative writer, has deliberately incorporated language instruction and other revitalization activities into her pedagogical and research practice: And then I've taught classes in indigenous language revitalization. And I've taught sort of one-off workshops on using creative writing for language revitalization. [Oh, cool! That's really cool. {hahaha}] That's my current project, is creative writing for revitalization. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] Later she added that her professional work isn’t just about language revitalization in the abstract, but is actually a key piece of her language learning practice: I'm working on this project of, you know, doing creative writing for myself, and think, I'm trying to start a Nez Perce writing group and that seems like it's going to come together. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] Charlotte, a Lushootseed learner, is even studying to be certified as a language teacher, but she observes that her goal is not to switch career paths but rather to expand her language outreach into her own field. In our first interview, she explained: I currently work for our tribe's historic preservation department so [Oh cool.] Just because I may end up being a certificated teacher doesn't mean I'll like, leave my department and go work for the language department as a teacher, but I'll, like within my work in my field and the people I interact with would be able to teach it. That's my understanding. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] This was a major topic of our first interview, and continued to be a major point of discussion in our follow-up interview a year later, such as this example: this is more of kind of a work-related thing but there's um, I've wanted to incorporate Lushootseed into my work with historic preservation, and [mm] work on maps with place 127 names […] we have various documents that use you know like the phonetics of one linguist but also the phonetics of another, so I've wanted to take my somewhat newly- acquired linguistic skills and try to work through that. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] Jackie is also a Lushootseed learner, and has a career in a field that is not explicitly language teaching; she also lives at a distance from the main Lushootseed-speaking community. She discussed the fact that reconnecting with her heritage language has motivated her to incorporate language into her professional life in the next 5-10 years, no matter where that work takes place: Yeah, um, I... I've spent a lot of time kind of daydreaming and imagining how…How I even want this to play out in my uh prof-, uh like professional life. I, I would love to be able to continue working with more indigenous folks around mental health, and I have a lot to learn there too. […] I guess my hope for myself, even when I'm not local with the tribe is, anywhere that I'm at, to be involved however I can be with whatever local indigenous communities have going on where I'm at. [mmhmm] And um, if I can you know just help contribute and support language revitalization you know, in the local community I'm in [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] Finally, Kayla, who is a language teacher with the Puyallup tribe and also works full-time for a local public school, puts it simply: Best case scenario is that there are multiple chances for me to be speaking in all different areas of my life, not just at home, not just at work, not just out in the community, but that they have all come to coalesce. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] All of these are cogent reminders that although “professional life” may constitute a discrete social domain, learners view this as just one aspect of the growth of language in their lives. 3.3.3.1.4 Language maintenance Whereas the previous two categories are specific and discrete kinds of goals, practitioners in interviews also described very broad and general goals which I grouped under the subheading of “language maintenance.” This goal applies both to personal actions and future visions for the community, simultaneously. For example, some of the Kristang learners who are involved in 128 Jardinggu (the “lexical incubator”) activities, describe their individual efforts as driven by their desire to keep the language ‘viable’ as Evaristo says. He elaborates: my opinion is that, without Jardinggu, the word, the language will die. Because the world is complex, people need concepts to speak. […] if you don't have the word there, you will hijack the word from the other language. You will pick up the word from the other language. And that process - it's not bad to bring words from other languages, but the process of doing that in a massive way destroys the language. Destroys the whole thing. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] Tej also participates in Jardinggu, and describes it in similar fashion, drawing parallels to her own heritage language: for me it's just interesting to see like how you actually uh devel- make, make sure that the language is current enough to actually survive. [mm mmhmm] It's something I see happening with my mother tongue Hindi as well that they, that they are constantly, like new words are sort of being created, terms are being created to actually fit in with it. You know within the updated contexts and such. [Tej, Kristang, 7/31/20] This is another example of how individuals are personally motivated by their goals for the community. For both Evaristo and Tej, participating in Jardinggu is motivated by wanting to keep the language alive in the community, and this motivates them to expend personal effort on a language learning and revitalization activity. For Angel, this language maintenance goal is one of the things that she values even more than instrumental goals of salary and employment (see section 3.5.1): You know, you have to value that more than what your pay is as far as, you know, would you do this even if you weren't getting paid, which I have [{chuckle}] And I yes, I would like to get be getting paid a lot more like all of us. But those are the things that really kind of carry us, is because when, you know, the pay's is not there or whatnot, you don't have a job, but you still have your language, that's, that's...um you know reclaiming and retaking back the gift that the Creator gave us. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] Many practitioners (including Angel, in fact) have changed careers and/or deliberately turned their professional skills towards the goal of language maintenance, like Luis: But my personal goal is that, should there be interest, you know, should there be interest, there would be resources to do so. […] That is usually what I've been trying to do, you 129 know by providing infrastructure to have uh like online dictionaries, or, you know, pushing towards a collection of language data that we can organize in some little bit of corpora that eventually we can show to people instead of just having them written in pieces of paper and things like that. […] from my perspective, that is one of the bottlenecks for languages surviving even this century, right? [Luis, Kristang, 7/18/20] Thus, these domain expansion goals show how individual practitioners are motivated not to simply acquire language as an object of individual proficiency, but to participate in growing language both in their own lives and in the community. In the next section, we look at how respondents to the Global Survey articulated community-level objectives of language growth into new domains. 3.3.3.2 Survey Respondents to the Global Survey articulated objectives related to the expansion of language use in their communities as well. As with interviews, many survey respondents mentioned the overarching goal of language maintenance. The details of how this broad goal was articulated is discussed in section 3.3.3.2.1. Respondents also specified different social domains as targeted areas for language expansion, as discussed in section 3.3.3.2.2. Though survey respondents did not articulate the same specificity of domains that individual practitioners in interviews identified, they did elaborate ways that focusing on specific key social spheres might push language use forward. 3.3.3.2.1 Language maintenance The broad goal of ‘language maintenance’ also frequently mentioned in responses to the Global Survey of Language Revitalization Efforts. Such responses included goals articulated simply as “Preserve the language” [ID 143, Kanien'kéha], “Revive the language” [ID 145, Anishnaabemowin], “Language preservation” [ID 36, Gawri], and “to keep our language alive” 130 [ID 59, Hesquiaht]. This maintenance was given as a goal for languages regardless of their current vitality status, as one respondent observes: The vitality of the language is evident but constant vigilance is necessary. [ID 260, Marshallese] This ‘vigilance’ is a common theme, especially from respondents that note the imminent threats to their language’s vitality, similar to the discussion of “number of speakers” in section 3.3.2. This quote puts it bluntly: Without revitalization the language will die. [ID 66, Tlingit] Excerpts coded as language ‘maintenance’ also included articulations of reversing language shift, as the following quote (as well as others above) indicates: That change is to restore the NɄMɄ TEKWAPɄ as a living language once more [ID 1, Comanche] Finally, just as was the case with practitioner interviews, some survey respondents clearly articulated the overlap between the larger community goal of language maintenance and the motivation to pursue personal efforts: I, Ladan Babakodong, a native speaker of the language got the motivation and decided to use the NGO, BEST to promote the revival and sustenance of the language. [ID 27, Da̱jim] 3.3.3.2.2 Focus on language domains Survey respondents also identified specific domains where they hoped to see language used as a goal of the revitalization efforts. There were four types of these domains: Internet and the media, in school, in the home, and regular use. Examples of these different types and their distribution across the surveys are in Table 13. 131 Description Total Examples Internet and includes websites and 17 Tener videos y otros materiales de media mention of specific social multimedia en sitios de internet [ID 176, media platforms as well Mixteco del Oeste de Juxtlahuaca]; as general mention of Website for promotion of language [ID 36, 'social media' and 'media' Gawri] (as a domain) In school specific mention of 38 To promote the teaching of Kalanga in school, schools, schools, colleges and universities. [ID 239, classrooms, and courses TjiKalanga]; as an area for language; Began with evening adult classes, then e.g. perhaps mention of introduced lessons in the community an immersion school, or elementary school [ID 223, Kari'nja] other schooling and school environments In the home specific mention of ‘the 7 Household language use by members of all home’ as an area of focus ages [ID 113, Koasati]; for language use intergenerational transmission in the homes [ID 43, southwest ojibwe] Regular use this includes areas 40 To bring Alutiiq back into daily life [ID 73, outside the other three Alutiiq]; domains (i.e. it is El uso de estas lenguas indígenas en mutually exclusive with espacios públicos y privados [ID 182, Las other domain codes); lenguas indígenas de México] includes 'everyday use', 'daily life,' conversations, greetings, and other general language domain comments; also includes mention of domain restriction/attrition Table 13. Survey responses mentioning Language Domains As can be seen, the home was the least frequently mentioned domain, despite the fact that intergenerational transmission is often promoted as the key to language maintenance and revival (e.g. Fishman, 1991). One reason for this may be the fact that these respondents represent community-wide efforts, and domains like public school and other spheres of public life may seem more appropriate as points of focus for such efforts. On the other hand, I note that the Puyallup Method, which has been so effective for certain Puyallup and other Pacific NW language learners and which focuses specifically on the home rather than in school (see sections 132 2.3.1.1 and 7.2.1), is not globally well-known or widely discussed yet in the language revitalization literature. That is, for many survey respondents, it is possible that bringing the language back into the home is simply not yet seen as a possibility or a priority. It is also the case that the domains are not evenly distributed across language vitality status, as Figure 14 shows: Language domain x Language situation 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Awakening No L1 Few elderly Grandparents Some adults Most adults Most adults All members speakers speakers speak but but no but generally and some including few younger children not children children children people speak Internet and media in school in the home regular use Figure 14. Distribution of focus on language domains across language vitality categories For all categories, bringing the language into the school was mentioned more frequently than bringing the language into the home. In the case of languages in which “most adults” speak, bringing the language into the home is not mentioned it all, though in both categories it is clear that not all or not any children are speaking with their parents. This represents a disconnect in the language revitalization literature that has been discussed elsewhere (e.g. Peréz Báez et al., 2019). Meanwhile, expanding the language into the Internet and other media platforms, while mentioned in almost every category, only takes priority in language situations where all members 133 of the community are using the language (including the children presumably, in the domains of school and home already). That is, for efforts that aim to maintain existing community-wide use (“all members including children speak”), there is more emphasis on expanding into digital spaces, while efforts that are working to reverse more extreme cases of language shift (“no L1 speakers” and “few elderly speakers”) focus more frequently on the school as the space for expansion. There is no one-size-fits-all focus on language domains; community efforts must tailor their goals to their particular needs and priorities. 3.3.4 Language practice In addition to language skills and language domains, practitioners expressed goals related to specific kinds of language practice, including the habitual, consistent practice of language use (section 3.3.4.1), the goal of storytelling and narration as a practice (section 3.3.4.2), and the goal of a multilingual repertoire (section 3.3.4.3). The examples in this section all come from interviews. 3.3.4.1 Making Language a Habit Practitioners discussed the importance of making a consistent habit of practicing language. For Karelle, this habit is one way she maintains language use in her life even when time and energy are short: And then, you know, there are those, those weeks. um {hahaha} [{haha}] when {haha} I am...um I do try to incorporate like at least a couple of words every day. But usually it's like the ones that I, like "wanishi", which is a, like uh "thanks." Um, and so, like giving thanks like in the morning or something like that. So, but I'll do it in the language. [mm, mmhmm] And some, and like I said some, some days that's all get. {hahaha} [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] This simple goal of regular practice was also important for Jackie as she was just starting out on her language learning and didn’t yet have much language for many activities, but as she says: 134 At this point in time, I feel like I am, um, trying to constantly speak it in my mind, to like, to myself in my mind. [mm, mmhmm] Um, anytime I know a word for something I'm saying it in Lushootseed. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] This language habit is also important for an older learner of Kristang who is a heritage speaker, having grown up speaking Kristang in her childhood home. For her situation, perhaps proficiency goals or the idea of “being a speaker” (section 3.3.1.1.3) are not directly relevant, but increasing her language practice is something she articulates as goal: For me, I just continue speaking Kristang. {haha} [mmhmm {haha}] And uh, well, I'm retiring you know this year, so I have lots of time that next year, then maybe I could attend more classes with Kevin, help out a little bit more. Teach my granddaughter how to speak Kristang. {haha} [mmm! {haha}] Well basically just…um yeah. There's nothing much that I can say, unlike [others], because they're still so young and there's so much for them to do, yeah? For me, I'll just try and speak more Kristang, teach family members, get them more involved. Yeah. [heritage speaker, Kristang, 7/31/20] Kayla gave an example of how the goal of consistent language use has caused her to modify her language practice behavior after a career transition: it's harder now, I don't work within the tribe, I don't work for the tribal school anymore. [mmhmm] I work for um, like a state school district, a public school district. Um, and so, I would say there's been some quite some ebb, but also I have still stayed within the realm of Native literacy and Native cultural work and so, you know, every once in a while people are like, "Oh, can you, you know, do a land acknowledgement?" or whatever. So I get to do it for my job, but it's so much less so at my job that I have to then step it up at home. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] Kayla also articulated the mechanism by which this goal pushes proficiency. This quote illustrates her understanding of the relationship between goals, motivation, and language learning: you just have to decide to speak. This is something that [our teacher] tells us all the time. Like, you don't have to sit there and like pore over your notes for three hours a day, like you have to decide, "I'm going to speak Lushootseed for five minutes." And then when you sit in that five minutes and you realize like, "oh, I don't know how to do this," that's then your motivation. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20; emph mine] 135 That is, one of the benefits of setting a small measurable goal such as “speak Lushootseed for five minutes” is that it can highlight discrepancies between current abilities and desired abilities. The desire to reconcile this discrepancy is a key motivational mechanism (see discussion of Self- Discrepancy Theory in Introduction section 1.3.1). In addition to the goal of consistent practice (whatever the topic), interviewees also described the specific practice of storytelling as a salient goal. 3.3.4.2 Storytelling Several practitioners also mentioned storytelling as being both a goal and a motivational mechanism. Examples from five practitioners are illustrative. Angel describes a shift in the activities of her tribe’s language program as being motivating: And the kids are losing out on that indigenous knowledge that can, you know, it's like a spiritual connection that can really help a person. So when we, our program had started switching it to do - well we still do some of the basic things, but we also really started developing our stories into curriculum and story lessons. That's when it started becoming exciting to me again. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] Chris B also gave an example of how learning stories may help him to make concrete improvements in his language proficiency: I think what I need personally, is to spend more time studying the old stories, rather than [our office’s] materials. […] I've been trying to deal with how to think about this with my students, in that they've only been using a very limited number of sentence constructions. The ones that we taught them, and then all of my coworkers only use those limited numbers. But when you actually listen to the old stories, there's like huge varieties of ways of saying the same thing. [mm] And so I want to be able to command, have a um...I want to know what those differences are. But more importantly, I want to be able to use them in conversations. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] This is similar to Carson’s observation that understanding stories is the main way a learner can advance beyond an intermediate proficiency level: then second aspiration is to actually understand stories well enough to be able to learn them and tell them with a lot of meaning […] that's like, the logical next step for speakers in the community to go from like conversational to very strong speakers, it's actually in 136 my opinion, the only logical next step. Is to like... Yeah, once you're, once I'm using language for hours a day, it's the next thing that needs to happen. Because I'm reconstructing my ability to speak at a high level. And that's the only source of input. [ah, uh huh] For me to get to the next level. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/9/20] Being able to tell stories is also part of Jackie’s long-term vision for her language learning: I think it would be really cool to incorporate language very intentionally around traditions, and um our storytelling, so, to where I could, you know it's, it's different than a domain, but where I could even learn how to in Lushootseed storytell one of our you know important [mm] stories. […] I'm envisioning yeah an old version of me like sharing and teaching in a way of [mmhmm mmhmm] through storytelling. [mmm] I'd like to be able to in Lushootseed tell these little kids around me you know our creation story, and things like that. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] For Michelle, proficiency in stories is not only a goal; it is also a way that she hopes to measure her own language progress and to contribute a resource to future learners: Um, and a lot of these stories are, they're very old. [mm] You know? […] so there's words in there that I wouldn't, like, just on my day-to-day find? [mmhmm] Um, and so, I think that that is gonna be something I'm gonna do. And, that is gonna be really helpful. [mm] And then, you know like, maybe once I actually can read it and it sounds right, [mmhmm] then, then that could be shared. [mmhmm] Like, here's the book and an audio. [Yeah.] Now you can know what it sounds like and read along. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] Stories are, of course, not just connected to language proficiency or linguistic practice, and these storytelling goals again blur the lines between language goals and other kinds of goals. As Angel puts it: we're doing like a spiritual healing journey, you know. When we're taking, retaking back our language and our stories. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] This connection between language reclamation and healing is discussed further in section 3.4.3.3. Angel’s quote also highlights the connection between a discrete language practice and a more holistic outcome for the self, which many practitioners described in terms of a future multilingual life. 137 3.3.4.3 Multilingualism While some practitioners expressed their linguistic goals along the lines of one learner, who said she wanted to “shut English out” of her home (learner, Lushootseed, 6/23/20), or Chris D who wants to “switch [English] off” (Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20), other practitioners made it clear that their hopes for language were couched in visions of future multilingualism. That is, they saw learning their language as additive, rather than a replacement for English. In this section I share examples from eight practitioners illustrating this theme. Some interviewees expressed this future multilingualism in simple pragmatic terms, as Karelle did: 100 years from now, I want us to have, you know, full bilingual speakers coming up - because I also recognize that, you know, like English is still going to be very, like no one's dropping English in the near future. [mmm] It's just not a practical thing. But to have, you know, like children growing up in the home as learning Nanticoke and English like side by side. You know, and us being able to have our community gatherings where we're all speaking in Nanticoke to each other, and having, you know, if we're at like the powwow having sort of these bilingual communications. [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] Others framed multilingualism as a return to a pre-contact way of being with Indigenous languages, as Zeke does when he articulates the origin of his Multilingual Institute: I'm doing the Multilingual Institute. And we've got seven languages right now that are involved and not everyone, but a lot of them are saying, "I'm okay with this but if I'm the lead for this team can I still go over and learn that language over there?" {hahaha} [That's really cool. Wow. {hahaha}] "I wanna learn that language!" And so that's where we're headed is this multilingualism which was the foundation of education before contact. Speaking different languages. [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] For Zeke, multilingualism is an explicit goal of his language work, and he even shared plans to organize intertribal “foreign exchange student” programs so that culture and language can be shared. In addition to this larger sharing of language with outside groups, others like Charlotte shared a goal of bringing the practice of multilingualism into her home: one other thing that Zeke has I think helped me think about, is that my household is multilingual. My boyfriend speaks Mandarin, and his family's Taiwanese and so I think 138 having multiple languages in the house has also helped us you know […] that family support and household support, I think, is really huge. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] Some practitioners discussed the fact that ideologies around monolingualism and multilingualism can be a barrier that needs to be overcome in pursuit of this goal. This includes Frances discussing official state narratives around language ability: I remember a certain political leader saying that, I mean, this was his exhortation to parents and grandparents, that your child can only store two languages in the brain. [mmm] Right, if one of them is English, you're going to choose what the other one is going to be. Is it going to be the state-assigned mother tongue that connects them to their culture and their community? Or are you gonna make them learn the home language, which is the real connector to the culture and the community? […] they didn't really know much about language learning back then, or how the brain processes these languages. So people obviously would err on the side of…I guess the higher power. {haha} [Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] Masa sees ideas about monolingualism as unofficial but pervasive, and an obstacle to overcome: So 100 years from now, I would hope that our language would be totally being used again, and that we're multilingual, that we speak English and Spanish or you know whatever, and Chumash and, maybe other Indian languages, because that's what this Multilingual Institute's about, is to network with other Indian people, develop relationships with them. [mmhmm] And really just get past this whole idea that we can't be multilingual. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] Recognizing this monolingual ideology is part of Carson’s advice to learners just starting out: I would really encourage them to be nice to themselves about it. And just know that it's pretty typical to feel uncomfortable, learning a new language in the US anyways, because uh, monolingualism's kinda the norm. And so it's gonna be a lot of personal growth too, that can be exciting. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/9/20] The idea that rejecting the monolingualism norm can be a source of “personal growth” is echoed in Zeke’s stories of his experiences hosting dinners with other Native language workers who all decided to practice their own languages with each other: the first time, I hardly understood anything said outside of Lushootseed, but my brain, I could feel it in my head, and it felt really good. You know my brain was just…you know sparking here and there. The second time it got easier, the third time I was almost understanding everything that was said. And what would happen is we would fall between these four languages, you know back and forth, and then I got to where when I went, I'd try to get people to speak their language more. Because I already knew 139 Lushootseed, I want to work on theirs! {hahaha} [{hahaha}] And so I didn't do Lushootseed during those times, because I wanted to speak a different language. Now that, that I really enjoyed and that's what I want more people to experience. [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] The feeling that his brain was “sparking here and there” was so meaningful to Zeke that he went on to say that he hopes that neuroscientists do more cognitive studies analyzing the brain functions of multilingualism in practice. In addition to all of the social, emotional, and cognitive reasons the quotes above suggest, Chris B also gave a specific example where studying a third (closely-related) language actually improved his understanding of his second language: we don't have a lot of conversational Lushootseed. [hmm] All of our, most of our data comes from elicitation, or from recorded narratives. Whereas Klallam, they have that data, but they also studied elders, speaking elders who talked to each other, so there's a lot more conversational Klallam. [oh cool!] And it got me, and there are certain features of Klallam conversational style that I'm wondering if they work in Lushootseed conversational style. And so, by studying Klallam […] I've been trying to analyze a little bit more complicated versions of Lushootseed. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] For all of these learners then, multilingualism is pursued as a goal that adds to and enriches their (linguistic) lives. The practice of language revitalization is, by definition, concerned with the practice of language, and in this section we have seen the kinds of goals that practitioners articulate related to language acquisition and language use. There are a range of goals articulated by these practitioners, from the very specific and concrete (e.g. to be able to pronounce two consonants accurately) to the broad (e.g. to be multilingual) and the abstract (e.g. to revive the language.) It is important to specify this range of goal types in detail, as different goal types may have different effects on motivation to continue and motivation to expend effort. It is also important to recognize that the practice of language revitalization is not exclusively concerned with the practice of language divorced from its social, cultural, and 140 ideological context. Section 3.4 describes practitioner goals that transcend the boundary between ‘language’ and these other important aspects of individual and community life. 3.4 Beyond language - Extra-linguistic goals This section outlines the goals expressed by practitioners that relate to, but do not exclusively focus on, language itself. The term “extra-linguistic21” is not intended to imply that these goals are extraneous or superfluous to the practice of language; on the contrary, though these goals fall outside the scope of linguistic goals per se, they are intricately bound up with language in these communities. In this section, data from the Global Survey is interwoven with data from interviews to illustrate these themes. Extra-linguistic goals include the broad goal of Cultural Preservation and Revival (section 3.4.1), an extra-linguistic parallel to the broad linguistic goal of Language Preservation an maintenance (discussed in 3.3.3.1.4 and 3.3.3.2.1). It also includes programmatic goals such as program outreach, capacity building, and awareness raising, which are all discussed in section 3.4.2. It also includes personal growth goals such as self-confidence and personal well-being, discussed in section 3.4.3. That is, these goals, like Linguistic Goals, range from the abstract to the concrete, and from the outward-facing (community-wide goals) to the individual and internal (personal growth goals.) 3.4.1 Cultural preservation and revival The link between cultural preservation and language preservation as goals of language revitalization efforts are clearly illustrated in the responses to the Global Survey. Excerpts coded as “cultural preservation and maintenance” were given by 28 respondents, about 19.7% of the total number of respondents in this sample. Example excerpts include: 21 Note that I chose not to use the alternate plausible term “meta-linguistic” here, as that has a specific denotation in the SLA literature that I do not intend. 141 To promote the revival and practising of Kalanga culture through cultural festivals, collection of artefacts and historical documentation [ID 239, TjiKalanga] To prevent the demise of the modern Syriac civilization [ID 800, Ashriat Neo-Aramaic] Being part of the most disadvantaged Community within the United States it is important that we not let our cultural heritage die. [ID 9, Fernandeno / Tataviam] to recognise and restore south coast culture [ID 50, Dhurga, Dharrawal, Thaua] Some respondents even describe specific ways that language efforts contribute to this cultural preservation goal: To contribute a sense of authenticity to cultural revitalization efforts in the community. [ID 76, Coahuilteco] The Marshallese people have survived vast changes in the past century, and their language can be an important tool in cultural resilience if provided for its continued use. [ID 260, Marshallese] Others mentioned this goal specifically with respect to children and their schoolteachers: The young schoolteachers have been very active in cultural preservation. [ID 119, Wauja] Encouraging students to have pride in, understanding of and knowledge to practice Rotinonhsón:ni customs and promote cultural values [ID 10, Kanienkeha] For comparison, excerpts which were coded as “language preservation and maintenance” represent 47 respondents, or 33% of the total. These categories include some excerpts which were double-coded, such as: to keep our language and thus, our culture, alive [ID 111, Kaáⁿze Íe] For those of us who have been involved from the early stages it has always been about full language and community revitalization, not just using the language but living in a Washiw way (with respect and honor, a deep connection to our community and our homeland, etc.). [ID 125, Washiw] These two codes co-occurred in 8 of the survey responses. Figure 15 shows the distribution of these two codes across the reported language situations of the respondents. As can be seen, cultural preservation was a goal for respondents across the vitality status categories, and in the 142 “no L1 speakers” situation, it is mentioned even more frequently than language preservation itself. This may point to the fact that this advanced stage of language shift coincides with significant cultural shift, and these communities therefore feel a greater urgency to preserve the culture as a whole; it may also point to the fact that in situations with no L1 input, the most feasible priority is the maintenance of cultural practices, which are still preserved by community members even when the language is no longer being passed down. Language and Cultural Maintenance x Language situation 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Awakening No L1 Few elderly Grandparents Some adults Most adults Most adults All members speakers speakers speak but few but no but generally and some including younger children not children children children people speak cultural preservation and maintenance language preservation and maintenance Figure 15. Language vs Cultural Maintenance codes by Language category in survey responses “Culture” was also mentioned very frequently in interviews, and eight interviewees specifically mentioned cultural preservation as an explicit goal of language learning. To an extent, these interview responses are similar to the survey responses, in the sense that they represent goals for language programs, rather than individual language learning, as in Frances’s discussion of language and culture in the Kodrah Kristang effort: I think Kodrah Kristang isn't just a language revitalization initiative. It's very much a community and cultural revitalization initiative. Because when we started out, we thought we would just be teaching the language and learning more about the language for ourselves, but people bring all sorts of tokens and aspects of the culture to the class, 143 right? It's the only place where they can practice their culture. [mm, mmm] So if you think about it, they have, they bring food, they bring stories, they might bring heirlooms, or all kinds of things to class to share with other people, there would just be no other platform to do that. [Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] But cultural preservation is also mentioned by some interviewees as a goal for themselves and their families. Two Lushootseed learners described how their language mentor has “just motivated this family to really get it together”, not only in terms of language but in terms of traditions and traditional games (learners, Lushootseed, 6/23/20). That is, culture and language are tied together in language revitalization practice not just at the community-wide initiative level, but at the individual practitioner level. This overlap between personal practice and community efforts is also evidenced in goals related to programmatic growth and outreach, discussed next. 3.4.2 Public outreach and program growth As discussed in section 3.2, goals for the speech community and goals for individual language practice often relate and intertwine. This is evident in different kinds of goals that may be categorized as “public outreach” or “program growth” goals. In this section, through survey and interview data taken together, I discuss four such goals: Accessibility of material (3.4.2.1), capacity building (3.4.2.2), increasing awareness (3.4.2.3), and recognizing diversity (3.4.2.4). 3.4.2.1 Accessibility of material One main component of public outreach is the goal of making language material accessible to a wide audience. This was mentioned by some survey respondents as a goal for language documentation and materials development: Document and publish the conversation data for teachers and learners to use [ID 98, Halkomelem] 144 To archive materials so that if/when the language is lost, future generations of Guébie people will have access to language materials, as will researchers [ID 95, Guébie] Increase the amount of literature and media available in the language [ID 906, Cornish] Survey respondents also highlighted the potential for technology specifically to promote accessibility and sharing of resources: Increase opportunities for OSU and Oberlin College to share and explore best practices through distance learning technology [ID 919, Quechua] Ability to provide remote learning for people not residing in the community [ID 105, Wopanaak] In the interview data, Jackie echoed the perspective of this last survey response by highlighting the use of technology in the COVID-19 era of social isolation and remote learning: Allison: what would you like to happen in, in the, in the new normal? Jackie: hmm. mmhmm. umm...hmm. Good question. {haha} [{chuckle}] mm - my - specifically around my language learning, I would like, as many things to still be available through technology as possible. {ha} [mmhmm] And I know I'm not the only one there. I mean, there are a lot of us, you know, living away [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] The effect of the pandemic on technology and accessibility is discussed in more depth in section 5.3.2.1. I highlight the excerpt from Jackie here to show how a programmatic decision (to make material more accessible through technology) has affected her own personal language learning, and how she incorporates this program goal into her hope for the near future in her language learning. Carson gives an example of action he has taken as an individual because he wants to increase accessibility as a community goal: And I'm like, oh! I'm wanting to help the speech community, people do not have access to enough materials and classes and peer mentorship, [mmhmm] I can just run an online class. [Cool! Okay {haha} yeah.] {hahaha} yeah! {haha} And it's [that makes sense] really is that simple! {hahaha} [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/8/21] 145 In Carson’s example, the increased accessibility of the online class format gave him a “simple” way to achieve his personal goal of helping the community. This is related to his goal of growing capacity within his community so that more individuals will be able to support the work; this is discussed next. 3.4.2.2 Capacity building Another goal articulated by practitioners was building capacity within the community. This can be interpreted as an intermediate goal, necessary to advance towards longer-term goals for the language effort, as articulated by one survey respondent: I know I cannot speak for the attitudes of everyone in our community but from what I see as a teacher is that we are still building capacity within our program and communities so that we can take the next step and have a full fledged immersion school once again. [ID 125, Washiw] In the survey data, capacity building was frequently framed in terms of teacher training: Train language teachers. [ID 56, Tetsǫ́t'ıné] The activities extended to document other aspects of the language and culture, and to train members of the communities, and teachers, to teach the language. [ID 60, Desano] Preparing students to be teachers of future generations [ID 10, Kanienkeha] It might also refer to professional development opportunities more broadly construed: Provide opportunities for Faculty development through sharing best practices and engaging in external opportunities for Faculty to attend external workshops [ID 919, Quechua] Many survey respondents specifically mentioned attending institutes such as Breath of Life and the American Indian Language Development Institute (AILDI) for training opportunities, e.g.: One individual, Miguel Acosta, attended the AILDI summer program two years ago to gain training in this effort, and enlisted the involvement of the only (living) linguist who has studied the language (Rudolph Troike), at the University of Arizona [ID 76, Coahuilteco] 146 2 individuals from the community took the initiative to attend the Breath of Life workshop in Berkeley in 1996, and that started the revitalization movement. [ID 78, Mutsun] I note that in this last example, the goal of building community capacity appears to have been the impetus for attending the workshop, and the training was what in fact “started the revitalization movement” – another example of capacity-building as an intermediate goal that leads to larger efforts. Interview participants also discussed community capacity building as a goal of language work. For example, Angel shares her hope that speech community members beyond the official language department will seek training and professional development: I've always stated, what if we had a language expert within every department and program of our tribe? [mmm] And that they were trained, then they can be the language expert and not have to rely on this square building of, it's only seven disperse language program staff, that if we can grow in capacity, um, by it happening everywhere and just not here, then that way our capacity and sustainability can continue to grow. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] In Angel’s example, capacity building is seen as a goal for the language program. Other learners also articulated this as a programmatic goal, but one that was complimented by a vision of how individuals can contribute: I mean we do currently have resources in the form of, you know, one comic book that Andre's released, one movie, a couple of games, a card pack, and they're very diverse and they're very high quality, but they're just very few in number. [mmhmm] And just, I think just having quantity would be great. Um, you know, Kodrah is all of one organization, but I think in the future if you had, I don't want to say organization, per se, but perhaps just more dedicated individuals working towards creating media in the language [learner, Kristang group 2, 7/31/20] After articulating this goal, this learner turned to a another interviewee in the group interview group and proposed that the two of them make a Kristang TV show together. Carson also talked about how capacity building is related to his own language work specifically: 147 when I moved to southeast Alaska I was thinking a little bit of like, "okay, language work might go on the back-burner a little bit," or, "I'll just work on speech in my own home, and then come back and plug back in," and I think I've actually gotten more done than...as far as like, getting, being able to support people at Siletz, and just in the speech community in general who are like, interested but don't know what next steps to take, [mmhmm] um, I think I've done more in the last year and a half than...probably the rest of my life {haha} [{haha}] {hahaha} so, that's exciting. [uh huh {hahaha} ] That feels good, it feels really good. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/8/21] Like the survey respondents, some practitioners mentioned the need to build capacity in terms of language teachers in the community. Michelle gives personal reasons for wanting to see capacity building, as well as a plan for how to contribute to that goal: I, this might be far-fetched, but I have my heart and soul {haha} set on a preschool and beyond Xaad Kíl immersion. [mmm!] Um, I, I want by the time my daughter is old enough to go into preschool for us to have a school here that is completely in the language. And I want that for all the languages here in our area. Um, a Native charter school, if you will. And, and open to everybody, I think anybody who wants to learn should be able to learn. [mmm] But yeah, a culturally based school in the language is where I see my future [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] Finally, Kevin identified how his vision for the Kristang community’s impacts are tied to “manpower” concerns: So people really see that this is a model that works in Singapore. Um, which goes against those narratives, which counters ideas that it always has to be state-led, it always has to have state funding […] I'm hoping that Kristang can, can serve as a model for how that can work without all those things, and to show people that really, a lot of why we are we able to do be doing, it comes down to people really experiencing that very strong emotional connection to what's happening in a very positive way lah. […] I don't have high hopes. Um for, for...for really broadening the reach of the initiative at this point because we are rather manpower short. Um. But it's it's...I'm kind of a pessimistic optimist, does that make sense? [Kevin, Kristang, 7/18/20] Like Carson, Kevin realizes that he as an individual cannot possibly accomplish all of the tasks needed for community-wide language revitalization, and recognizes that building a stronger network of contributors is essential for continuing the work. In that sense, this capacity building is an intermediate goal these interviewees have set for themselves in order to facilitate their own ability to persist in the long-term. Kevin’s sense of “pessimistic optimism” and report of not 148 having “high hopes” highlight how de-motivating it can be when this goal seems out of reach; this can be compared with Carson’s report that it “feels really good” to be able to build a coalition and increase community capacity. 3.4.2.3 Public attitudes Practitioners also discussed improving the perceptions of the general public, for example through awareness-raising, as a goal for language revitalization efforts. This was true for many survey respondents, who expressed goals related to public attitudes about the language, such as: greater visibility for the language [ID 223, Kari'nja] Draw attention to outside the community to Gangte's existence and the need for its protection [ID 127, Gangte] Increase visibility of the language [ID 233, Frysk] популяризировать язык и культуру [ID 252, Karelian] (my translation: “to popularize the language and culture”) One survey respondent also reflected on why they felt this awareness raising was “crucial,” both for their language community and for others: Quechua in the most indigenous language spoken in the Americas. Creating awareness of its importance is crucial to attract most native and non native speakers to be part of indigenous languages communities [ID 919, Quechua] For some respondents, the focus on public attitudes centers around not only raising awareness of the language but also on reversing negative attitudes: Raising the visibility and status of the Cornish language [ID 226, Cornish] Revertir prejuicios negativos hacia los idiomas originarios [ID 198, Náhuatl] (my translation: “reverse negative prejudices directed towards native languages”) Reduce, or reverse, negative attitudes toward the language among the heritage community, as well as more broadly. [ID 84, Iquito] 149 Individual practitioners in interviews also mentioned awareness-raising as a goal for their personal language practice. This includes work to raise awareness within the language community (i.e. a community-internal “public”), as is Chris B’s professional role: I am a language teacher, I primarily do online classes though I do we do all kinds of stuff. My most visual um persona is as a language teacher for online classes, but I do a lot of um, uh, language curriculum development, I do online videos, and then as one of the members of our office, we do a lot of like public events. We do a lot of singing, a lot of speaking, just to get the language out there to be heard as much as we possibly can. yeah. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] This also includes making “language visible to the populace” at large (i.e. community-external awareness-raising), as Masa described his work in Southern California: So I work to get our language visible to the populace as much as possible. And so it's a growing thing. There are many people aware of it. Up in the Pacific Northwest, people are a lot more aware of it. [mmhmm, mm hmm.] Here in Southern California, we're pretty, uh…you know the Mexican populace is huge, and we're kind of invisible. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] Chris B included increased (external) public awareness in his vision for long-term outcomes of the language revitalization work: when I first moved to the area, somebody asked me, "so what do you do here?" I said "oh I teach Puyallup," and they were like, "what is that?!" [{ha}] "It's the language of the Puyallup Tribe." and they're like "Oh, I didn't know you guys had a language!" [hmm] It and it, so, and so that was a resident of Puyallup. The town of Puyallup. [{chuckle} mmm] And so there right now is not a general understanding that there is a language. And that's really all I want is that people everybody who lives here knows, that there is this language. So that's my long-term goal. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] In both of our interviews, Charlotte talked about how raising awareness of the language both inside and outside the Native community was part of her professional career. In our follow- up interview, she gave a specific example from her job, where she had been asked to sit on a committee that was working to rename an elementary school, at the request of the local public school district. After the committee suggested a Lushootseed word, members of the public responded that the word seemed “hard to say” or “looks funny”. She shares: 150 I've been able to use my background in Lushootseed I think for those moments, and then to educate further about how, the reason it looks funny and sounds funny and is hard to say is because of the entire history that we've had of people trying to strip that language from us and this place, and um, it's, it's been really fun and frustrating. {haha} [mmhmm {haha}] And exhausting. Um, to take like my language, my Lushootseed skills and knowledge, and my history skills and knowledge and, and try to use that to educate people [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] For Frances, the desire to raise public awareness was something she reports as having attracted her to learning Kristang in the first place: I think, another thing that came to my mind was also that very few people in Singapore knew about this language, and actually this, the people who spoke this language, and that part of Singapore's history. So it was something [mm] that was really novel, that I was, that I got quite into because there's just so much about Singapore that people don't know about, and therefore, and therefore they just neglect that. [mm] Umm, yeah and this language is one of them. [Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] Another Kristang learner said that raising public awareness of the language is something he “loves”: Um, I don't know, I just love telling people I'm learning Kristang. You know? I think there's always a nice moment when - like I mean, it used to be, I used to find it annoying at first, but I grew to like explaining it to them. And I think it just, you're letting people realize that this actually exists. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] Frances’s quote above points to public awareness as being part of her motivation to start, while this learner describes ongoing satisfaction; for a discussion of the relationship between initial and ongoing motivations, see section 5.2. These quotes and others make it clear that awareness raising can be both a programmatic goal as well as a personal goal; it is a goal for the community at large that individual learners see concrete ways to contribute to, and this contribution brings personal satisfaction, as well. For example, Erin described a hope to become proficient enough in her language learning to be able to contribute text material for the public: I would love it if we got to the place where you know, we were able to offer elder services in Nuu-wee-ya', that would be just the raddest thing on the planet. And 151 something I think about way too much is anytime I see like a governmental service, and you know how they have it translated into like Mandarin, and [mm, mmhmm] Spanish and all the other things, I want to have the Nuu-wee-ya' version. I just wanna submit it. Like you don't even have to pay me just, like, "here you go!" [mm, mm {haha} ] It's one of the indigenous languages of Oregon, you should post this as well. I would love to do that, has nothing to do with money just, point of pride. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] Similarly, a heritage speaker of Kristang shared a story of how she was able to combine her language skills and her creative writing skills to get “wider coverage” for Kristang: Kevin came to know someone, a friend of his, who was having an anthology, to bring together an anthology of poems written in different languages. Asian languages. With the translation. [mmhmm] And so Kevin gave my name, and I said, all right, you know? […] it's an online one. [mmhmm] You know the online one. And it's actually the uh one, I think the company, whoever it is, is actually from Australia. [huh.] So that means it will get a wider coverage. So the good news for, not just for me, but for Kristang. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/29/20] Her description of this as “good news” both for herself and for the community effort indicates that found this wider coverage to be a personally valuable goal for her language practice. Beth is also working to use her creative writing skills both to create more material for Nez Perce language learners, and also to promote awareness of language and language practice in the world at large: Well this is the thing, you know, like, this is why I decided to do this project. I'm like, "oh, Nez Perce people need more books to read." Because basically right now we have the Bible and other litur-, you know, liturgical things. […] so I, I published a collection of short stories, um, this last year. And in one of the stories, the main character is, works on language revitalization. [mm! oh that's cool! {haha} {hahaha} Wow that's pretty meta. Yeah.] Like I wanted to be actually represented in literature. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] To clarify, Beth is describing two different kinds of writing activities: in the first instance, she has been practicing writing creatively in Nez Perce language in order to contribute language learning materials to her community; in the second, she has been writing short stories in English to raise the profile of language revitalization practice to the broader general public. This demonstrates the varying and dynamic nature of the ‘community’ she engages with in her work: 152 both the community of Nez Perce learners-speakers and the larger language revitalization community (see discussion in 4.5.3), as well as the wider public. Finally, Frances gives a specific reason why she believes increasing awareness is an important goal for the Kodrah Kristang team: at the same time, I, I would like for us to have some form of a strategy to reach out to people who have just not heard of us. Because those groups, I feel, would help us to prevent ourselves from being in a silo, right? [mmhmm] Where we, where we think, "Kristang is like that. Or not like that." [Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] Frances’ quote highlights the connection between raising the public profile of the language and the important goal of growing capacity within a language community, as discussed in 4.2.2. Addressing public attitudes, then, includes both reversing negative attitudes and promoting positive attitudes, and both raising the profile among the general public and also reaching out to specific groups of individuals who could grow and enrich the language effort. It also includes, as Frances puts it, breaking down “silos” within the community itself. This goal of recognizing diversity within the speech community was mentioned frequently by Kristang learners in particular, a theme explored next in section 3.4.2.4. 3.4.2.4 Recognizing diversity Learners of Kristang discussed the ways in which language learning has helped them towards a goal of recognizing diversity, both within the speech community itself and within Singapore society at large. This is especially true for the learners who were not born and raised in Singapore, and whose Kristang learning coincided with learning more about the diverse culture: You know, before when I first came to Singapore the term 'Eurasian', I just thought it was used as a catch-all for anyone who didn't fit into the category. [mm] Then I go to this talk and I realized that, you know, a big part of this community actually descends from the 1700s, you know, this intermingling then. So, I think, yeah. I mean, I think that's, for me 153 that's been the biggest utility learning this language. [learner, Kristang group 2, 7/31/20] The same learner shares his hope that this is one of the outcomes of the Kodrah Kristang effort for others in Singapore: so while those goals might be more ambitious, I think it'd be really lovely to have a more societal recognition of the diversity of languages like this here. Kristang being one of them. [learner, Kristang group 2, 7/31/20] Tej also recognizes that the Eurasian population is diverse, and in this excerpt her goals for public awareness are articulated in terms of this ethnic diversity as well as in diversity of learning materials for Kristang: hopefully in the next five years, we see more Kristang speakers, and also maybe like a more diverse, sort of more diverse amount of Kristang material. […] just so that we can, I think, just so that we can have a diversity. And also hopefully that recognition that Kristang is still an evolving language as well. That it's not something dead or stuck in the past. And I think, accompanied by that also hopefully an acknowledgement that like, as mentioned earlier, not all Eurasians speak Kristang. So also acknowledging the diversity of the Eurasian community as well. [Tej, Kristang, 7/31/20] Tej also frames this awareness of cultural diversity as part of the goal of “personal development”: Kristang won't really help me get a job or anything like that. But I think it just helps in my personal development. And sort of helping me understand another culture as well. And also, even on the broader level I think there's the sort of recognition that like in Singapore move- in its rush to like move forward has dropped a lot of its indigenous and other local cultures that don't quite fit that framework of Chinese Malay Indian or other, or Chinese Malay English Tamil, that sort of thing. [mmhmm] So I think in that sense it really, I think it really does help me for my personal development. [Tej, Kristang, 7/31/20] Evaristo echoes this framing, discussing the learning of different languages and cultures through the metaphor of sampling new cuisines: language is something very weird, because it's like you can spend your whole life only speaking one or two languages, and that's it, that's fine. You will live. It's not a point to speak 4, 5, 6 languages. Learn distinct languages, whatever. But then it's like eating, like it's like your cuisine, or your habits of eating. If you spend your whole life eating hot dogs, you can live your life. Yeah, like eat hot dogs, hamburgers, but the moment you 154 find out that you have Thai cuisine? Vietnamese cuisine? [{chuckle}] You simply blow your mind. It's like, it's a simple totally different experience. For some people it's a distress to have these experiences. They want, they want safe and secure places and so on. [mmhmm] But on the other hand, they lose the great opportunities, that great avenue that opens up when you taste different, yeah different things. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] This concludes section 3.4.2, on public outreach and program growth. These final quotes underscore the fact that increasing awareness can be both a programmatic goal with benefits to language efforts and also a personal goal with benefits to personal growth. This provides a natural segue to section 3.4.3, which examines other personal growth goals. 3.4.3 Personal growth This section explores the ways that practitioners described language learning as a tool for achieving goals of personal growth. This includes the relationship between language and thought, and how learning the language is a means by which practitioners shift their perspectives (section 3.4.3.1); the relationship between language and identity, and how learning a language gives practitioners a greater sense of self (section 3.4.3.2); and the relationship between language and personal well-being, and how learning a language is part of personal healing processes (section 3.4.3.3). Because this section focuses on personal growth for individuals, I focus primarily on data from interviews where individuals clearly articulated these goals for themselves, and intersperse relevant data from the Global Survey to supplement the theme. 3.4.3.1 Gaining perspective → Language = Thought For many practitioners, an important future outcome of language revitalization is the development of new perspectives and patterns of thought. For example, Chris D said (6/19/20) that after an intense Lushootseed immersion institute, “your mind literally does shift.” In this section, I give excerpts from eight interviews as well as examples of survey responses to illustrate this theme. 155 Chris B gave a concrete example of how Lushootseed learning affects his perception of the world around him: The language makes you think differently. […] Like, an example of this is that our language is an analytical language, so instead of having just random words for things like soap, our word for soap literally means "the thing to wash your face." [mmm] And, almost everything around you is actually, could be could be literally a sentence, but if it's not a sentence, at the very least, it describes that thing in some way. What it does, what it's used for. And so instead of seeing the world as like a really static place, when I'm in those like really manic moments when I when, after, you know, if I went for a jog or something, I can start to see instead of a bunch of static items, a bunch of movements and uses. [mmm] And so language can literally change how you see things. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] Beth also described her joy at being able to show her creative writing students “the kind of thoughts you can have” when you learn an Indigenous language: I love teaching Native American literature and I always teach a Nez Perce story as the first thing, where we go through the grammar and we look at it and students are just blown away at the kinds of thoughts they can have [mm, mmm] Once they have these tools that you have in Nez Perce. Because for instance we have other time, other temporal markers. So you can have long ago time, you can have frequentive, remote time...you know like? {haha} [mmhmm] move across all the time zones. Um, and that's really like, "what?" [{haha}] It's cool! It's cool that you can do that. Or like the way the language is polysynthetic, and you can put these things together and there's all this action and motion just within the word. And so you can have these other thoughts. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] Charlotte talked about how learning Lushootseed has helped her in her professional field of cultural and museum education, as it helps her to interpret the connection between written documents and past worldviews: I'm definitely able to understand what I read, like some old anthropologists’ notes about something, I feel like I can have a deeper understanding of what they may have been talking about, or what their informant may have been talking about, because now I have an understanding of the language and therefore the worldview that they were coming from. Like I know for example, when someone talks about ‘the land’, they're not just talking about like the yard out front there, you know. There's a deeper meaning and philosophy and spirituality about one's connection to that land and all of this. But I wouldn't have known that without learning the language. And so I think that there's benefit in that. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] 156 Survey respondents also referred to this connection between language and thought in articulating why it was important to revitalize the language. This was mentioned by 22 (15%) of respondents, for example: It shapes how we see the world. [ID 14, Šmuwič] Porque mediante la lengua se expresa una visión del mundo. [ID 183, Zapoteco del valle] (my translation: “because through the language a vision of the world is expressed”) One survey respondent also gave this connection as a specific goal for the revitalization effort: Obtain a ukwehuhwe perspective [ID 12, On^yoteaka] For this survey respondent and others, the focus is not just on the general sense that language “shapes how we see the world,” but on the idea that each language contains a unique worldview that is itself worth maintaining: Our language allows us to express ourselves with a Quinault perspective. [ID 70, Quinault] Some languages as we know do not translate directly to another language. In this regard many Native languages are bundled into the culture and the religion of the people. These aspects change the way a person thinks. [ID 9, Fernandeno / Tataviam] Porque como sabemos la lengua es parte de la identidad de los pueblos y porque cada palabra encierra un cúmulo de saberes y reflejan la cosmovisión del pueblo en cuestión [ID 195, Hñähñö] (my translation: “because as we know that language is part of peoples’ identity and because each word encloses an accumulation of knowledges and reflects the worldview of the people in question”) Interviewees also shared the idea that their language contains a unique world view. For example, when asked why it’s important for him to learn his language, Masa replied: It's because our language has within it our philosophy, our way of looking at the world that comes from a long time ago. And in the- er the ability to understand our cultural expressions and our stuff, you need to learn it in the language. The filter of our language enables you to understand it. And trust me, I don't understand how that works all together right now yet, but I've had some insights into it. [mmhmm] I don't have any concise poetic cute sayings to express, to- yet. I will work on it. But I do know that the English translation falls short. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] 157 Just as Masa shared that language contains “our way of looking at the world that comes from a long time ago,” many practitioners specifically talk about the way the heritage language connects to the worldviews of their ancestors. For example, one survey respondent said: nos ayuda a entender a nuestros viejos abuelos y la cosmovisión que ellos tienen [ID 207, Zapoteco] (my translation: “it helps us understand our old grandparents and the worldview that they have”) Both Kayla and Chris B shared stories from language classes where they were able to learn the origins of Lushootseed words for ‘shoe’ or for ‘red huckleberry bush’, which they found particularly meaningful; as Chris B put it, learning such etymological facts “can give you insight into the way our ancestors thought.” (Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20). This is echoed in Karelle’s discussion of heritage learners’ motivations for learning language: I think most, like for our language, most people are interested in it for the like, for our ability to connect it to our, um you know, to our heritage and our ancestors and, and also like sort of their worldview. [mmm] So um because, like I said, when you express yourself in different languages, you are sort of reorienting yourself to the world. And so, you know, having that ability to sort of like reconnect with the ways in which our ancestors are viewing and moving through the world and speaking is, is important. [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] Karelle went on note that as a linguistic anthropologist, she finds this connection between language and “how we organize and see the world around us” inherently interesting, so even in moments of discouragement her interest in this connection helps her “get that motivation back in” (Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20). This is related to the discussion of becoming re-motivated after a pause or a setback, found in Time section 5.2.2. This interest in the perspectives of previous speakers of the language was even shared by Evaristo, who saw a link between learning Kristang, a Portuguese-based creole, and his attitudes as a native Portuguese speaker: I studied a lot of Portuguese, really really profound and, you know, acute Portuguese. Even though we don't, I feel myself unconfident sometimes when questions in Kristang 158 appear. Yeah, even though. Because these things are embedded in a very historical point of time. [mmhmm, mmhmm] And then you have to, as a native speaker, I have to stop my way of thinking, coming back to the roots of that language of that experience. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] In this quote, Evaristo describes his relationship to “the roots of that language and that experience” which are “embedded in a very historical point of time,” and how his Kristang learning motivates him to reflect more critically on that history. He goes on to say that reflecting on the history of the Kristang language helps him to “deconstruct the idea that you are superior” as a speaker of Portuguese: You, you free your mind from that perspective. That's a very great motivation of mine to learn the language. [mmhmm] How can you deconstruct some ideas? Yeah, how you melt down these ideas of superiority? [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] For Evaristo, being able to shift his own perspectives (on the history of the language, and about his own identity as a native Portuguese speaker) is a “very great motivation” to learn Kristang. For him, gaining perspective via language learning is a source of personal growth. For Zeke, watching this personal growth in his own students is something he “loves”: watching them grow into the language as well as grow direction and, where they wanna go with this when they talk about…and they'll talk about it in Lushootseed, how Lushootseed has changed their life. [mmhmm] How they'll never think the same again {hahaha}and they'll give examples, "For example, that one word", and they'll talk about that one word, what it means to them. That there's no English translation. That's where I just – oh, I just love it. [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] One salient goal for language learning then is the goal of improving your life by thinking differently. This beneficial shift in perspective can take many forms, including by increasing self-confidence and self-esteem, which I turn to next. 3.4.3.2 Strong sense of self Practitioners also described the ways that learning their language gives them a stronger sense of self and identity, as I illustrate here with excerpts from four interviews along with 159 relevant survey responses. This theme includes increasing confidence and self-esteem as an outcome of language practice; in fact Angel sees a link between gaining perspective (discussed in section 3.4.3.1) and gaining confidence: when we speak it, we're, you know, we're speaking with power, because the Creator gave us those words. And so, just really...What also just really inspires me, and I've told you is the indigenous knowledge within the language and the stories. When you dissect different words and, you know, it's like, "oh wow I understand it so much better now." And that's so much more interesting, that word compared to English word. You know, you just find those gems that really strengthen you. And boost your self-esteem and give you power. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] For one survey respondent, one salient outcome of language learning efforts is confidence in her own abilities and pride in her contributions: I am so glad that I started relearning my language and so very proud to be mentoring even though it was a bit daunting as I am not completely fluent. It has helped me become more fluent and more confident. [ID 17, Kwak̓wala] Jackie also articulates a link between personal confidence and a strong sense of identity: it's much more of an emotional, social...social-emotional type benefit for me. [mmhmm] um, all of those pieces of feeling connected, gaining, gaining more confidence, even in who I am, ancestrally. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] Survey respondents also expressed a link between identity and language effort goals: buscar elevação identitária [ID 187, Ofayé] (my translation: “to search for elevation of identity”) To help Udis be aware and celebrate their cultural and linguistic heritage, to confirm Udis in their unique identity [ID 228, Udi] The relationship between language and identity is a rich and complex topic, and identity theory is robust area of research in second language acquisition (Norton & McKinney, 2011). In fact, Norton and her colleagues propose that identity and investment could be more fitting alternatives to the construct of motivation in many L2 learning contexts (Norton, 2016; Norton Pierce, 1995). In this study, both interviewees and survey respondents frequently referred to personal, ancestral, 160 and ethnic identity in their discussions; a thorough treatment of this complex issue is beyond the scope of this current discussion and would be a rich one to explore in further research projects (see for example Ushioda’s 2020 discussion of Norton’s “critical counterpoint” to mainstream motivation theory, p. 10). For the purposes of the discussion here, what is pertinent is that developing or strengthening this identity is given explicitly as a goal for language learning and revitalization efforts. Some survey respondents use the lexical item “identity” (or translational equivalent) to describe this goal, as do the two quotes above; I note that what they specifically describe is an ‘elevation of identity’ in the Ofayé quote, and a celebration and confirmation of identity in the Udi case. These lexically specified examples were included in the larger category of codes related to a strong sense of self, which includes mention of constructs such as self-esteem, pride, and confidence: Increase the pride, self esteem and empowerment of community members [ID 82, Klallam] Raise self esteem, health and well-being [ID 224, Kaurna] Encouraging students to have pride in, understanding of and knowledge to practice Rotinonhsón:ni customs and promote cultural values [ID 10, Kanienkeha] Revitalization of my language is important because it brings such an amazing world view and it gives our children and adults an added confidence. [ID 17, Kwak̓wala] As the last two survey quotes suggest, this boost in self-esteem is often seen as particularly important for younger members of the speech community, such as children and students. Karelle specifically discusses this: I would say, the fact that like, having that connection, um having that strong connection to your heritage also helps you have like sort of a strong sense of self. [mmm] And I think that, like that's important for our kids as they're…I mean, most of them are in like sort of the public school systems, and they are, a lot of them, you know, can experience bullying for being different, or, you know, um like that all still sort of exists. And so I think that 161 like helping them to create this even sort of stronger foundation for self will just help them navigate the world better. [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] For Michelle, this strong connection to heritage is one of the most important reasons to learn language, one that she could “go on and on about”: the benefit is...So, I could go on and on about this, however, {haha} let me try to summarize. When you know your language that's a piece of who you are. And when you know who you are, you stand taller and stronger, and outside things, they can't affect you the way they do when you don't know who you are. So there's things like mental health problems, substance abuse problems, [mm] and you can lessen your need to turn to substances, lessen things like depression, um when you have a hold of who you are. They did this study, and there was a village where everyone in the village spoke their language. And their suicide rate went to zero. Their substance abuse rate went to zero. Because their people knew who they were. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] This quote illustrates how knowing “who you are” not only leads to the personal growth that allows you to stand “taller and stronger”, but it extends also to increasing mental and physical well-being. This theme is well-represented in other interview and survey responses, to which we turn in section 3.4.3.3. 3.4.3.3 Well-being Many practitioners described the ways that learning language contributes to the goal of improved wellness, and I give excerpts from six interviews along with survey data here. Beth states it plainly: “language is so central to well-being” (Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20). Survey respondents identified this as well: Reclaiming your own indigenous endangered language seems to be extremely healing in both personal and collective level. [ID 18, Aanaar Saami] it increases their sense of well-being and connection to the wider Singaporean community because now they have a language to call their own [ID 74, Kristang] In her interview, Cassy discussed how emotions are framed in Lushootseed, and gave the example of how the translation for the English phrase “I am sad” literally means “my mind is sick” in Lushootseed. She sees this insight as valuable for improving mental health: 162 it really makes, you are conscious about your mindset. [mm] So if you snap at someone, or if you get really sad, or really angry, that isn't something that's happening to you, that's you letting your mind kind of like get stretched out and not be in control. […] And so I think, practically with people that speak Lushootseed, it would, it will make them take ownership for their own... Feelings? So there's a lot of mental health there. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] Beth also mentions this link between language and worldview as a “benefit”, and goes on to specify that language learning can be part of healing on a spiritual level, a community level, and also a linguistic level: There are lots of benefits. Some of them are just like, getting to have other ideas and seeing the world organized in a different way, and in a better way. [mm {haha}] {haha} Like, but, being able to like really care for your spirit. Um, being able to heal yourself, being able to heal your community, being able to heal the, the suffering that the language has gone through, umm Re- this reconnection, this connection to your ancestors, like all those things are really, I think, valuable. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] Angel also described language reclamation as “a spiritual healing journey” (Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20; quoted in section 3.3.3.2 about her Storytelling goal). That is, this “healing” refers not to the repair of physical wounds, but to the care needed to address the grievous spiritual and social traumas suffered by these language communities – the same traumas that led to the loss of these languages. Some survey respondents echo Beth’s idea (from the above quote) that revitalization can heal “the suffering that the language has gone through”, when they articulate goals such as: healing from generational trauma [ID 43, southwest ojibwe] It helps us heal from the trauma of the past. [ID 14, Šmuwič] Another interviewee reflected on the traumas that previous generations of Lushootseed speakers had suffered (see related discussion section 5.3.1.2): I don't think that our generation has had any tragedies to live through. There, we've been through tough times, but [mmm] you know, when we were younger and our children were young, but, we don't have direct witness to the tragedies that they and their parents went through, and how they were treated. [learner, Lushootseed, 6/23/20] 163 She said that her grandfather urged his family to give up their Native ways, including language, and then compared her own attitudes towards language to those of this man and what he had “witnessed”: I think that we don't understand where he was, or what he had witnessed with his family that...you know, to me, I want to embrace it, I want to just, you know, share it with my family. I just think everyone's like, you know this is who we are. It's time we just, we, we appreciate that. We will never be right until we do. [learner, Lushootseed, 6/23/20, emphasis mine] The point that “we will never be right until we do” emphasizes the link between healing and well-being; healing from historical traumas is an important step towards being “right” and whole. Beth shares that framing language work in terms of healing helps her “not be overwhelmed” by the realization that she will never be an L1 speaker like her grandmother or auntie – that is, the way that language heals her, and the way that she heals language, helps her redefine success. She also shares: there's this term that some people use about, of revitalization workers, they call them language healers. And I really like that term. [mmhmm] And it's not because …It's not only because I feel like we have this work of healing our language, but that our language heals us. So like, I really like the term language healers because it can point both directions. […] I think about that work. Language healing. And having the relationship to the language. I always feel - like if I'm having a hard time, if I feel sad, can't concentrate on anything else, whenever I go to the language, I feel better. [mm] I'm, it's healing to me. The work itself is healing. The work itself is good, it makes you feel good. And yeah, I think that's what makes me want to get through it, is that feeling of like, it's it's this healing space, and it's this is healing work. And I can't, I just, I can't see the bigger picture, sometimes [mm] Of how my contribution is going to help anyone. [mmhmm] But I believe it will. I believe, I believe it will. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] Carson also said that this framing helps to remove the “pressure” of language work: but I definitely don't put the pressure on myself that I have to like save the language. [mmm] Yeah. [mmhmm] um I, I don't believe that. And I think that if anything, it's a benefit to us. Being here and being alive. It's like, an enrichment for us, and a benefit for us, rather than something that we're doing to take care of something else. [Carson, Nuu- wee-ya’, 7/9/20] 164 Practitioners mentioned “well-being” not only with respect to emotional healing, but also with respect to physical health, e.g.: Language supports everything: health, identity, connection to the past, ones ancestors, generations before and after, and fundamentally, ways of being human. [ID 98, Halkomelem] Three different practitioners, one survey respondent and two interviewees, specifically invoked research findings around the protective health factors of language learning: It provides hope for future generations. It grounds our children and studies (EDF) show there are less suicides, alcoholism and drug addictions in indigenous communities where language is revitalized. [ID 14, Šmuwič] And anytime I see anybody struggling with you know, anxiety and depression or substance abuse issues, alcoholism, drug abuse, I ask, "What do you do to hold on to who you are?" [mmm] Whether it be language, whether it be dance, song, um, traditional subsistence… [mmhmm] You know all those things, they add up. And if you don't have a hold of any of those things, then your soul can't be full. [mmm] You have to know who you are. And in order to know who you are, you need to know who your ancestors are. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] language is really important for wellness, and, you know, there's many studies that show that language, knowledge of indigenous languages has an effect on the youth suicide rate. [mm, mmhmm] And so I would say right there, like language helps keep people alive. [mm] To me there cannot be a higher calling for language than like, people want to live. [Yeah.] Where they're committed to the language. [Yeah.] The language helps them live. I know that things like suicide and mental health are extremely complex issues, and it's not just like "oh, well..." you know. It's, it's a piece of it. It's a piece of that well-being. And I think that's super important. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] These practitioners are referring to a growing body of literature on the link between language learning and mental and physical health, especially among young people (see e.g. Taff et al., 2018, Whalen et al., 2016). And even while acknowledging, as Beth does, that these issues of mental health and well-being are “extremely complex issues”, the link between language and health is salient and deeply motivating for these practitioners.22 This is, for many, the ultimate 22 The association between language learning and mental health is so strongly felt in language revitalization practice, in fact, that one member of the audience at a conference presentation I gave asked me to send her my L2 165 “higher calling” for language work, to use Beth’s words, and emphasizes the close relationship between personal healing (I do this work to improve my own wellness) and community healing (I do this work because “language helps keep people alive.”) Throughout this section, we have seen other examples of the links between individual goals and community outcomes, either in terms of cultural revival, public outreach, or health and wellness. All these examples also demonstrate the close links between linguistic goals and other kinds of goals, all of which are key for understanding L2 motivation in these contexts. In the next section, I discuss how these practitioners’ experiences relate to more common constructs from mainstream L2 motivation theory. 3.5 Discussion of goals typical from the literature In this section, I discuss practitioner reflections as they relate to two key constructs particularly common in SLA literature – instrumentality (as a goal orientation; section 3.5.1) and fluency (as a measure of achievement; section 3.5.2). 3.5.1 Instrumentality One of the enduring constructs in language learning motivation research is that of “instrumentality”, a construct whose salience in the field goes back as far as Gardner’s original work, where he set up a dichotomy between instrumentality and integrativeness as antecedents to motivation (Gardner & Lambert, 1959). Learners said to exhibit “instrumental orientations” are motivated by the promise of external rewards, such as better career prospects or advancement in school. Instrumental orientations then are extrinsic, and in Gardner’s formulation are related to the category of external regulation in Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985; see section 1.3.1). I note here that in the literature on education psychology, the term motivation interview guide, so that she could use it to craft questions in her work with Indigenous youth suicide prevention. 166 ‘instrumentality’ is also used to refer to the utility of a task for accomplishing goals (see e.g. Phalet et al., 2004). That is, a learner might be motivated by personally meaningful goals (identified regulation) to expend effort on tasks that are perceived as useful in moving towards those goals; these tasks then are perceived as ‘instrumental.’ Task instrumentality is different than Gardner’s notion of instrumentality, which characterizes an individual’s externally regulated orientation towards goals. A central question in the research programs of Gardner and his colleagues has been the extent to which this orientation versus other kinds of orientations is correlated with ‘success’ in language learning. More recent research incorporates instrumentality throughout models for motivation – that is, the question is not whether instrumentality is a factor, but how the learner is instrumentally oriented. In Dörnyei’s three-way Self System, for example, internalized instrumental motives are a component of the Ideal L2 Self, while extrinsic instrumental motives are associated with the Ought-to L2 Self (2009, p. 29). Though there may be many different types of instrumental outcomes for language learning, this orientation is commonly discussed with respect to professional goals and economic advancement. For example, in discussing Instrumentality in his model, Dörnyei (2009) opens with “in our idealized image of ourselves we naturally want to be professionally successful and therefore instrumental motives that are related to career enhancement are logically linked to the ideal L2 self” (p. 28) Because instrumentality is such a common topic in motivation literature, and because it is often specifically construed as professional advancement, I designed an interview question that was meant to elicit reflection around this topic with revitalization practitioners. The question in the interview guide sent to participants beforehand is worded as: 167 • Do you think that revitalizing your language has any practical benefits? (e.g. getting a job) Given the semi-structured and open-ended nature of the interviews, I usually rephrased this question in various ways during the course of the interviews themselves, and interviewees also shared reflections that were related to this topic at other points. Some practitioners shared ways that language could, in fact, be a career benefit: well, if I were to move back up to the reservation, it would actually probably help me get a job. [mmhmm, mmm] You know, if I want to work with, work with my people, and be more connected and mindful in that way. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] Others shared that jobs and job prospects were what initiated their involvement in language work in the first place; this was especially true for Lushootseed learners such as Chris D who have benefited from the Puyallup tribe’s robust language department and job openings there: my brother was actually offered the job of the media developer for the language program. […] he was in a good place in his job and he didn't want to like jump ship and move somewhere else. So he said, "Hey, you know, go down there and talk to them." […] So I was just like, "Yeah, I'll go check it out," had a conversation with them and you know just, I expressed my abilities, what I had, what I picked up and what I hoped to learn, and the things where I want to progress in my, you know, my abilities through digital media and [mmm] um, that's pretty much the exact direction they wanted to go, so they really were there to facilitate my learning as well as to bring it back to language [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] For her part, Erin noted that while Nuu-wee-ya’ language skills would not necessarily be helpful for securing a job, she has been able to use language practice as a way of simultaneously developing other skills that do improve her career prospects: Uh, yeah there, there's a reason that I put my language repo on GitHub. And it's because I work in tech, but I don't know how to use GitHub, and I am terrified {hahaha} about those two facts. [hahaha] together {hahaha} [haha] Um, yeah so being able to show a project like "oh yes. Look at me and my very impressive GitHub repo. Nobody cares what's inside of it. But look, I built a repo, things happened inside the repo. Look at all those commits!" [haha] I feel like that's going to be useful. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] 168 Charlotte sees learning Lushootseed as “very beneficial” for her career in museum and cultural education, but acknowledges, “I don't feel like I could put Lushootseed down as a language on an application […] somewhere and that they would be like ‘oh great! We have a Lushootseed speaker here!’ I don't totally think they'd see that as a benefit.” (Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20) In other words, there are professional benefits that she recognizes, but she does not expect that her language abilities will be recognized or rewarded by potential employers. In terms of extrinsic motivators, Charlotte is articulating an identified regulation (e.g. she sees the utility of the task for achieving personally meaningful career goals) while at the same time acknowledging that there is no external reward system in place (see discussion of these categories in Self- Determination Theory, Deci & Ryan 1985, in section 1.3.1). Others echoed the observation that proficiency in the heritage language would not be valuable in professional settings: And, that's one of the problems with...I mean one, is you to be able to learn the language, it's, there's a benefit, but as far as employment, there's not a lot to offer. [mmhmm] And so if you just, I think that once a person has training, you can get creative, and create your own type of language situation where you could get paid. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] In fact, this was identified by some as one of the primary challenges of sustaining effort in language learning: No one...oh I take that back. People are getting paid to revitalize the language. That's the smallest fraction in the world. Like the amount of people who can do this for their day jobs, [mmhmm] first of all, like, super awesome, that's great, but also like almost everyone else has jobs that they have to be at eight hours a day, they have children, [mm] Even people who work at the language department, you know, they, er do this for a living, they have children. They have lives outside. And so it's, you always have ebbs and flows. I mean, there's always things going on. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] This concern with whether or not language revitalization was “viable or economically beneficial” (Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20) was a major theme in discussions with Kristang learners in particular. Several of these learners connected the current language situation in Singapore to a 169 history of capitalism and strivings for national economic stability. For example, in discussing past generations’ insistence on learning English and rejecting minority languages, Luis said: This is, this is a very young nation, 50 years old, [mmm] and the things that it has achieved are amazing for such a young nation - who has no natural resources, by the way. So, of course, like there was a lot of things…I wouldn't say had to be sacrificed, but they were kind of like forced onto people slash convinced onto people, [mm] to say like "Oh do you want to maybe starve? or give up your language?" right? Like, and put in front of this question, people will probably easily say, "Okay, then let's forget about those languages." […] Like the question that lingers is, was that the only option? And you know, it's easy to say, "No, probably not." But we are dealing with that, with that past. [Luis, Kristang, 7/18/20] Thus he and other Kristang learners explicitly tie the current condition of Kristang to lack of economic incentives in the first place, and see this as a continuing threat to the expansion of the language effort. In fact, they see evidence that this state of affairs is not just threatening to Kristang, but to all minority languages without “perceived motivation or perceived incentives”, as Tej puts it (Tej, Kristang, 7/31/20). One learner said that in Singapore, “the attitude towards language is utilitarian.” (learner, Kristang, 7/31/20) In three different interviews with different Kristang learners, the word “useless” came up with respect to minority languages (note that I did not ever use this word myself.) Given such a strong emphasis on “perceived market value” (as Luis puts it, 7/18/20), on “use” and utilitarianism, the topic of (lack of) instrumental language learning motivations seems to be top of mind for these learners. In the face of this, these Kristang learners have chosen to reject the instrumental imperative. For example, Evaristo, a native Brazilian who learned English at a young age specifically and explicitly to increase his career prospects, shared that his capoeira instructor in Singapore had asked him why he was spending time learning a “useless” language, to which he responded: "why do you learn this? It's useless!" Yeah, of course, it's useless! {haha} [mm] But on the other hand, if we put this idea of useless or, or important, or profitable, or whatever. We not, we lose one aspect of learning something like that, that is to make friends. In the 170 sense of you broaden your ideas, your broaden perspective. [mmm] And somehow you understand better your own language. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] Tej actually said that this shift in attitude is one her personal goals for the future: Yeah, I mean, I would say that hopefully in the next five years, I get better at Kristang, and also better at the other languages that I'm trying to learn. Yeah, and I think also what learning Kristang has shown me is like, I think it's re-evaluating what I think of as 'useful'. [mmm] Because I mean, like, why can't something that makes me happy be useful? Because, I mean, it makes me happy, {ha} so it can't be use-less. […] that's sort of like a thought process that I'm hoping to develop over the next five years. [Tej, Kristang, 7/31/20] The rejection of “usefulness” as the sole value of language learning led some Kristang learners to propose changing the way I had originally phrased the interview question itself: Allison: So you've been talking a lot about like economic motivations to learn language, this is something that comes up a lot in a lot of language learning contexts, and I always like hesitate to ask this question of folks who are working on revitalizing languages, but I'm just, I'm curious about the answer. Can you think of some practical - like what do you see is the benefit of learning Kristang? That doesn't exist for Mandarin or one of those kind of things? Frances: Social capital. Kevin: Yeah. Luis: The practical, the 'practical' word has to be removed, I guess. Not everything needs to be practical. Allison: Yeah, I feel like that's a problematic word yeah. Luis: Right? Not everything has to be practical, in the sense of, you know, yielding economic gains or whatnot, but. Frances: Well, practical, in the sense that it helps develop a good sense of well- being. {haha} [Kristang group 1, 7/18/20] In fact, it was my first conversation with Jackie, a Lushootseed learner, that made me reflect more carefully about posing this question, as she shared that she had had an “emotional reaction” to the idea of practicality as a consideration for her language learning (Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20; see Coda chapter, 6.2 for detailed discussion). These reflections point to the fact that the concrete “benefits” may be construed very differently in contexts of, as Charlotte puts it, “learning a language that isn't necessarily like, mainstream beneficial, or I don't know how to- like Western world beneficial to an individual,” 171 (Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20). Other kinds of goals and rewards are much more relevant to these learners, as Angel expressed: And I yes, I would like to get be getting paid a lot more like all of us. But those are the things that really kind of carry us, is because when, you know, the pay's is not there or whatnot, you don't have a job, but you still have your language, that's, that's...um you know reclaiming and retaking back the gift that the Creator gave us. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] I note again that I, as the interviewer, explicitly initiated conversation around this theme. The goals that practitioners brought up themselves in response to more open-ended questions may better represent their orientations to linguistic goals (discussed in section 3.3) and extra-linguistic goals (section 3.4) rather than this externally imposed notion of instrumentality. 3.5.2 Fluency “During the late 90s there was a growing frustration among Lakota speaking elders about the fact that Lakota language instruction in reservation schools was ineffective in producing fluent, or even conversational, graduates.” -ID 55, Lakota “one of the things that we talk about – or that I talk about – is that fluency is an F word.” -Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20 Interviewees and survey respondents alike used the word “fluent” or “fluency” when discussing goals for themselves and for the community. As the two quotes above illustrate, the notion of “fluency” can generate strong feelings in language revitalization practice, and practitioners may feel ambivalent about using fluency as a measure of success. It is important to note, however, that there are actually multiple construals of the word “fluency” that appear in these discussions, and these nuances are very important for considering the notion as it relates to goals (and goal achievement.) The three main ways this key lexical item is used is discussed below. 172 3.5.2.1 Fluency as L1-like language ability One construal of the word conflates ‘fluency’ with ‘native-user proficiency.’ This is an absolute end state, such that anything short of achieving this proficiency means that the learner is not fluent. This is the sense in which practitioners such as Cassy, who has been working on their language for decades, describe themselves as “not fluent”: But, yeah, those ones...but I never got fluent in those. And I don't say I'm fluent in Lushootseed, I'd say conversational Lushootseed. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] It is also the sense in which Karelle frames her uncle’s goals (which in turn helps her to frame her own goals): I was talking with one of my uncles who, he said he was watching the videos and he, for himself like his goals, his expectations are not to become like a fluent speaker. Because he recognizes he's like, I'm an elder, I'm not, I'm probably not going to become fluent in my language, but um he's like, but I still have the opportunity to learn these phrases, like I can say these things. And, you know, for me that's important. And that's, and that counts. [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] This sense of fluency is a crucial issue in language revitalization. It is inextricably bound up in the loss of L1 speakers of the language, and the sense that L2 speakers constantly fall short, as Michelle’s quote highlights: I guess I would say, not having people to speak with, [mmm, mmhmm] is extremely hard. Um, so I have my mentor, and she is not a fluent speaker either even though she's been practicing the language for, I don't know 30 something years probably? […] and my family's doing all right at saying like a few basic phrases which is good. But to actually have a conversation, [mm] there's really nobody to have a conversation with. [mmm] We have two fluent speakers here in town, and they are, Dolores Churchill is 90, she's almost 91. And then Phyllis Olmquist is 94 now. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] It is also crucial for material support for language revitalization projects, as Angel discusses: It's not the best word to describe our situation, because you know, when they have us on grants and things like that, "describe your, you know, your state of condition, you know, what's the fluency?" you know, that whole chart thing, that's really kind of difficult because [mmhmm] Just, it's really hard to be determined. So that's why the f word. [mmhmm] Is, the "fluency" F word is like almost like a bad word, you know? [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] 173 Angel goes on to imply that the standard of fluency as an absolute end-state can also be a barrier to new learners’ motivations, as they look at her as someone who is “not fluent yet”: And people are going to think, well...I don't want to you know spend 21 years doing that, you know. And so it's up to us to get them to see a vision. [mmhmm] You know, otherwise they'll get so burnt out even before they're trying. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] This construal of fluency is both theoretically and practically problematic. A great deal of empirical research challenges the standard of the monolingual L1 speaker as the standard against which L2 proficiency should be judged (see e.g. Grosjean, 2013 and Wei, 2000 for discussions of the complex and dynamic linguistic repertoires of bilinguals). This is also bound up in the ongoing problem of ‘native-speakerism’ (Holliday, 2006) in second language teaching and learning. The theoretical problems of this standard are well-documented but beyond this current discussion to review thoroughly. More practically, this construal of fluency as the end goal of language learning imposes and impossible standard. This unattainability can be incredibly discouraging for some learners, especially in contexts of language endangerment (see Beth’s quote in the following section about this discouragement). That is, framed in this way, the goal of fluency can be very demotivating. 3.5.2.2 Fluency as relative ability In other cases, the word “fluent” is used as a scalar adjective, where a learner may become ‘more fluent’ as she continues to work on language. It is this sense in which Luis describes the team of organizers for Kodrah Kristang: we're not so much learning the language actively anymore, right? [mm] We have come to a level of fluency that we can use to teach, but we're always learning, you know, things that are more fringe, like idiomatic expressions and how you know things like, "oh, my mom says, this means that, why, why would be, why would that be?" and things like that. [Luis, Kristang, 7/18/20] Randi also uses this sense when talking about her vision for herself in 5-10 years time: 174 Just because we have Cassie George coming on board in our program in the near future, I see myself as...as fluent as I will ever get probably. Um I see, I see myself speaking about anything I want to talk about for as long as I want to talk about in the language. [Randi, Lushootseed, 6/16/20] The term “fluency” as a relative scale also encompasses speaking competence and flow. Etymologically, the term “fluent” evokes flowing water, and language learners often express the desire that their speech and conversations could flow naturally and with ease and smoothness. For example, Michelle shared that she has topics she wants to speak about fluently and she wants to be able to speak in longer more fluid sentences and to “flow better” (Michelle, X̱aat Kil, follow-up 5/25/21). It is also possibly in this sense that one heritage speaker and elder in the Kristang community describes her 5-10 year goal of refining her latent language skills: In the language? Yeah, I want to be able to speak very fluently, to be able and, and to be able to have people to talk to also, more people. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/29/20] This sense of ‘fluency’ as the ability to speak with competence and ease is closely related to other goals, such as communicative/conversational abilities (see section 3.3.1.1.2). In fluency as a relative scale, fluency may be a particular kind of skill or a particular proficiency goal, but it is one that the learner continues to improve towards. 3.5.2.3 Fluency as domain-specific ability A third construal of ‘fluency’ encompasses abilities within semantic domains. This is the sense in which Beth describes “fluencies” as a count noun, rather than ‘fluency’ as an impossible end goal: …as I was saying like the high pressure learning situation of endangered languages is so hard. And one of those aspects is around assessment. [uh huh] You know, and that assessment is usually this...like from zero to fluency. And people, like... {ha} [mmhmm] like well I'm way down here and that doesn't count. [{chuckle} hmm] But I think when we have different measures […] we need to think of ourselves as having fluencies. So, like I could say "I have 100% fluency in greetings." […] I have fluency in the longhouse. I have fluency in roots and berries. Whatever it is, we just have to keep claiming our fluency in whatever domains we have. And, and just keep building on that, and not be 175 overwhelmed, not be drawn under by um sort of some measure, of like, I'm not an L1 speaker. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] Michelle also sets for herself topic-specific fluency goals, as she notes when discussing the challenges she had faced during a particularly difficult period during COVID-19: So definitely like the last six weeks uh complete chaos, and craziness, and so not, I have, I don't feel like I've made any progress, or like, my goals that I had set for, you know, what new like topics that I was gonna be able to talk about fluently, or [mm] um all that just went [{chuckle}] out the window. {ha} [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, follow-up 5/25/21] This domain-specific ability resonates with the literature on bilingualism and the observation that bilinguals have different proficiencies in different domains depending on how they use their languages (Grosjean, 2013). 3.5.2.4 Summary These senses of ‘fluency’ can be used interchangeably by practitioners; note for example that Michelle uses all three in the examples above. One practitioner in fact spent part of both our initial and follow-up interviews describing her wrestling with the notion of “fluency” itself. In our first conversation, I asked Erin what she would ask an (imaginary) person who knows everything there is to know about language and how people learn language, and she responded: Oh gosh, um...The first thought that came to mind, was asking whether fluency is actually possible. Which I actually have really strong feelings about. [mm!] Which is that, no it’s not. But also, like, obviously yes, it is. So I think that’s the first thing that I would ask, is fluency actually possible for a second language learner. [{chuckle} hmm] My, my intuition goes in both directions on that one. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] She went on to say that she has spent time looking at the American Foreign Service guidance for the number of hours it takes to learn key world languages, and she had wondered what the “end goalpost” for those hours was, and whether or not it was ‘fluency’ or some other standard. 176 I was intrigued by this, and I asked her to expand on her thoughts in our follow up interview. By way of response she recounted the story of a friend who is a second-language speaker of English, having grown up in Quebec: And, my mind changed about fluency when I was talking to her one day, because we were just having a conversation, she has basically no accent other than like, a Canadian accent, um, and we’re talking, just having a normal conversation, and she made some kind of little grammatical mistake. And she didn’t catch it, she didn’t change it, she just moved on, just kept walking right over top of it. And I had this like moment, where, my brain pinged on the grammar mistake, and then it also started to just move on, as though she were just a fl- as though English were her first language. […] then I had this like moment where I was like “wait a minute, I realize that she made this mistake because everybody makes mistakes, and not because she doesn’t know English well enough. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/2/21] She went on to summarize her personal definition of fluency as having a level of language production and reception where “even if there’s a mistake, a native speaker will not think that the mistake is from a lack of understanding, they’ll just think it’s a mistake because everybody makes mistakes.” (Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/2/21) What Erin seems to be describing then is a moment when her definition of second language “fluency” shifted from one of L1-like language ability (an absolute, mistake-free, native-like proficiency) to relative ability (a scalar measure of skill). This shift in definition has implications for her own language learning goals, as the following quote illustrates: Yeah. It’s, it’s weird. Fluency is weird. But again if I could reach, if I could reach any level of fluency, any level of like just have a normal conversation with someone, [mmhmm] again even to the extent that I can do with Japanese, limited though my Japanese may be, man that’d be so cool. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/2/21; emphasis mine] Survey respondents also used the word “fluent” or “fluency”. The use of these terms can be divided up as follows23: 23 Note that some of the survey responses could not be clearly categorized here; ID 17 and ID 9 for example wrote “fluency”, the word on its own with no elaboration, as a goal of the effort. 177 Total Example Fluency as L1-like ability 9 Become fluent and eliminate English [ID 14, Šmuwič] Fluency as relative ability 8 More people speaking the language at high levels of fluency. [ID 240, Manx Gaelic] Fluency as domain-specific 1 To develop a group of people ability with sufficient fluency in the language to be able to carry out ceremonial activities. [ID 76, Coahuilteco] Table 14. Survey responses mentioning “fluency” It is interesting to compare tokens of the word ‘fluency’ in the responses from communities with different language vitality statuses: Fluency x Language situation 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 awakening no L1 few elderly many some adults most adults most adults all members speakers speakers grandparents, speak, but no speak, and some of the young people children children children community, generally do generally do speak including not speak not children, speak Figure 16. Mentions of “fluency” by language category As the chart shows, fluency was not mentioned by any respondents reporting the most flourishing language situations, but is mentioned relatively frequently in the categories where language transmission is most restricted. 178 Clarity around the use of the term ‘fluency’ is very important in these contexts. Fluency as L1-like language ability can easily contribute to deficit-model ideas of bilingualism and L2 achievement (see for example Valdes, 2005 for a similar discussion with respect to heritage Spanish learners). What I mean by deficit models here is that L2 learners might never meet this L1-speaker standard, meaning they will perpetually be in deficit, failing to reach an unattainable goal. Like many other examples above, Jackie is one revitalization practitioners who observes the unattainability of the fluency as framed this way: Um, hopefully, I do hope that you know my future comes with more... um, again I don’t – ‘fluent’ is such a specific word. I don’t, I don’t know if I’ll ever be ‘fluent.’ {hahaha} um, [mmhmm] But, being able to speak well enough, and have enough language to have like norm, kind of normal everyday conversation. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] Note that Jackie doubts the attainability of this kind of ‘fluency’, but she doesn’t doubt the attainability of conversational abilities in her language. Research in motivation emphasizes that a goal is motivational only insofar as the learner perceives it is within their ability to attain (Eccles et al., 1983). The standard of the monolingual L1 user – along with being an empirically suspect notion – is demotivational when it is perceived by learners as impossible to reach. And as discussed above, this can be discouraging for individual learners and can have practical consequences on the kinds of support that a community receives for its activities. On the other hand, the notion of ‘fluency’ as being relative or domain-specific abilities allows for learners to determine and articulate their own personal intermediate goals along a trajectory of increasing proficiency, and to set priorities and recognize important progress points. In the next section, we investigate in more depth the dynamics and motivational force of progress towards language goals. 179 3.6 Progress towards goals Throughout this chapter, we have seen examples of a variety of different types of goals articulated by language revitalization practitioners. In this final section, we look more closely at the link between goals (of any type) and motivation, primarily through the lens of progress in LR practice. This includes how survey respondents report progress towards community effort objectives (section 3.6.1), how interviewees evaluate their own individual progress (section 3.6.2), how interviewees describe moments when progress towards goals is either diverted or halted altogether (section 3.6.3), and how interviewees emphasized the need to celebrate any amount of progress by recognizing the accomplishment of goals of any size (3.6.4). Following this section, the chapter concludes with a discussion of how these goals, and these approaches to goal achievement, support and motivate practitioners. 3.6.1 Survey responses – Measuring progress In addition to identifying specific goals for the language revitalization effort, respondents to the Global Survey were asked to judge progress towards these goals, and to provide their evidence or reason for making these judgements. This was the topic of questions 11 and 12, reprinted here in their exact wording: 11. How well is each objective met? 12. Please comment on how you are gauging each objective. Question 11 gave respondents a choice on a scale from 1 to 4. From the 142 respondents in this data set, numerical assessments were given for 474 different community objectives (to reiterate, respondents could list up to five objectives each). Table 15 gives the distribution of these ratings: 180 Assessment of objective Objectives assessed Percentage of objectives assessed Not at all well (1) 26 5% Not very well (2) 138 29% Well (3) 180 40% Very well (4) 130 27% Table 15. Distribution of Ratings from survey question of how well goals are being met That is, assessment of progress towards objectives is overwhelmingly positive; 67%, or two thirds, reported that the objectives were going “well” or “very well.” There were also certainly some frustrations and disappointments reflected in the one third of negative responses. What is of interest here is not only the rating, but also how the rating was determined (i.e. the answer to Question 12). In some cases, objectives rated as being met “not at all well” were explained simply, as the objective had not yet begun, or it was too early in the initiative to see results: Not yet implemented [ID 7, Náhuatl] It is premature to make any assessments. [ID 76, Coahuilteco] Others who gave a rating of “not very well” (2) or “not at all well” (1) identified specific obstacles to the objective: Because we have postponed our revitalization efforts that is one reason why it is not well. [ID 9, Fernandeno / Tataviam] different groups are not working together. [ID 218, Kumeyaay] The Kenyan government forbids instruction of local languages in public schools after the first year. [ID 93, Kisii] More commonly, rather than explaining why an objective was not being met, survey respondents gave evidence and examples to back up their rating. Some examples given for the range of different assessments include: (1- Not at all well) Many stories have been recorded and transcribed, but not yet disseminated to the community. [ID 93, Kisii] 181 (1- Not at all well) No new speakers have emerged [ID 1, Comanche] (2- Not very well) through attendance at language classes [ID 53, Anishinaabemowin]24 (2- Not very well) current versions of the dictionary exist and are in use by teachers, but not yet by students (until the dictionary is finalized) [ID 94, Chitimacha] (3- Well) We have TV and radio stations as well as press in Catalonia but none of them in the Valencian Country [ID 72, Català (Catalan)] (3- Well) nùmero de personas que participan en la creaciòn de contenidos en zapoteco [ID 169, Zapoteco] (my translation: “number of people who participate in the creation of content in Zapotec”) (4- Very well) Number of signs, amount of positive media coverage [ID 226, Cornish] (4- Very well) Students were able to demonstrate their language skills at their final evaluations [ID 919, Quechua] In addition to specific examples and evidence, respondents also described types of formal evaluation mechanisms, such as community surveys, participant observation, and student evaluations. Thus, respondents demonstrate an awareness of progress towards goals and working hypotheses about how best to measure that progress; they also are able to identify evidence of community frustration and the sources of challenges to efforts. 3.6.2 Interviews – Recognizing progress In interviews, individual practitioners also discussed progress towards goals. They described observations of increased language use in the community as evidence of progress towards the community’s goals; they also described noticing their own increasing language proficiency as evidence of progress towards personal language-learning goals. 24 This assessment pertains to the stated objective, “to revitalize community language;” presumably, the poor assessment means that attendance by the community in general is low. Interestingly, the other stated objective from this effort, “to create fluent speakers”, was assessed as 3 (Well), “through preschool age group at Immersion School.” It might be inferred then that this community effort sees positive progress in the development of some individual fluent speakers based on outcomes at the preschool, but less positive results for the community-wide spread of language. 182 This includes Lushootseed learners, many of whom referred to, as Chris D put it, “our numbers, it's the most amazingly ridiculous thing to see where we started in 2014 to where we are now.” (Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20) Kayla described the growth in number of speakers as “explosive” and “insane” (Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20). For Randi, this progress in the community is personally exciting: And...and just from 5-10 years from what it was 5-10 years ago, and how far we've come. And and it's almost like we've come so far, but I see us going 10 times as far in the next five years, as we've done in the last five years. I mean, it seems like we've come thousands of miles already. [mm] But I think we're going to go 10s of thousands of miles. [mmm. Does that... is that exciting?] It is. It is. [Randi, Lushootseed, 6/16/20] Chris D also gave an example of a specific incident that vividly demonstrated speech community growth: there's a restaurant in Fife, which is just outside of Tacoma, uhh there's a place called Johnny's. And we, you know, we always went there, it's like a close place to - it was a close place to our office. […] [Zeke] always wanted it to be a place where at some point, we say, this is the place where tribal members can meet up and know that there will be other tribal members there who are speaking Lushootseed. […] And the last time he came up uhh was, we were sitting there, we were having lunch, and there's a couple of students from a couple of classes who came in, and they didn't know we're there, we didn't know they were coming, but that we just in passing had a whole conversation in Lushootseed, you know, "[LS conversation]" and it went back and forth and Zeke was just...tickled. {haha} You know? That this was happening. [Yeah {hahaha}] And he was like, "this is exactly what I'm talking about!" You know, and it's, it's that, and I think we're on that path. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] Interviewees also shared evidence of their progress in their personal language proficiency. In some cases, this involved external assessment mechanisms, such as a teacher checking off a reclaimed domain, or passing an exam to be certified as a teacher. In other cases, the examples were internally rather than externally measured and recognized, such as the case with “click” or “a-ha” moments, as in Chris B’s example: So, for example, our language has K's and Q's. […] And I remember for a long time, I couldn't hear the difference between [kə] and [qə]. [mmm] And I just, I couldn't do it. And then suddenly, I realized that I could, and that I could hear the difference for weeks 183 before that moment, but I didn't, it didn't click. And so at some point there was an aha moment that I didn't recognize until like weeks later on, I was able to transcribe what they were saying, I was like, "oh waitǃ I'm writing down the Qs" and then I went through my journal and I realized, yeah, I had been doing it for several weeks. So that was kind of a cool aha moment. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] Others, including a heritage speaker of Kristang, identified the moment when you no longer need to translate from your dominant language as being a significant point of accomplishment: You see, I think when you...When you can write in that language, that means you are getting a better hold of it. [Yeah!] Rather than thinking in this, and translating. [Yeah.] You know? [So did the poem feel like that to you?] So, yes, the first poem was a translation. Well it was more translation. [mmhmm] uhh...By the second poem I did, on St. Peter's Feast Day, I did it, you know I did it first in Kristang. [mmhmm] Then looked at it and said, "this word I must change," or you know that. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/29/20] This quote also highlights the sense of autonomy and competence that comes along with advancing language abilities. Another example of learner autonomy comes from Michelle, who was eager to share a new method she had devised for tracking her own progress: I was reading some short stories and, man, and I'm reading aloud, and my tongue is getting twisted, and I am just [mm {chuckle}] I'm like laughing at myself because I know I probably sound ridiculous, but like, as, you know, two paragraphs in, okay, I'm starting to sound a little bit better, […] And so I was thinking, I should […] record myself reading the story. [mmhmm] But don't, like don't read it over and over and over again. Just, have that recording, make sure I label it and organize well. And then continue on my day-to- day whatever. [mmhmm] And then, maybe a week later, read the story again, recording it, put it in the same folder, date it, go on. Keep learning. Keep working on my pronunciation of just general things, or whatever topic I'm working on, and then just go back to it again. And then like maybe after three or four weeks, listen {ha} to that first one. Have a good laugh. [Yeah.] Um {ha} and you know just [{ha}] just to uh, another way for me to track my progress. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] Michelle here shows reflexivity and creativity in her language learning practice; she recognizes improvements in her language use, and uses this recognition to design a new type of assessment to continue measuring her own progress. This is one example how motivated revitalization practitioners innovate in order to meet the challenges of learning and progressing in these contexts. 184 3.6.3 Interviews – Non-linear progress Of course, progress towards goals is not always a straight trajectory at a steady pace. Interviewees described times when their progress was frustrated or stalled. They also described times when they readjusted their goals, recalibrating their priorities and shifting the focus of their efforts. Like with some community objectives (see section 3.6.1), individual language learners also experience periods of stagnation and frustration. For example, Erin described her early efforts to learn her language independently and without much outside support: so it just became this slog. And it was just really hard because every time - again every time I would hit a little wall like I can't figure out what that word is, I can't figure out why the linguists who were originally recording the language decided to use this letter instead of that letter, when to me and the recording it sounds like this. I'm like, was it a typo? Nobody knows! [mm {chuckle}] It just got so overwhelming and tiring, that I couldn't make a lot of progress. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/7/20] Here Erin identifies many of the obstacles and challenges that other learners also shared: lack of resources, lack of instructional support, difficult emotions and exhaustion (see also discussion of the challenge of loneliness in section 4.4.2). Practitioners also articulated the difficulty in balancing multiple language roles. For example, Cassy relates her past experience as an elementary school teacher in a tribal school; she had been hoping to take the opportunity to expose her students to Lushootseed language, but found herself dealing with a distressing lack of institutional resources for basic educational support. As she shares: So then I attacked that problem, and it didn't work. [{haha}] And so then I, I was like I'm not going to support this, and I tried to convince families to not send their kids there, I'm like they're not going to get educated in academics here. And I wish they would. {ha} And it was really awkward place to be because they're like, "academics? oh they're learning how to carve, they're learning how to go clam dig, they're learning this," I'm like, "Yeah, that's great. But it's a big problem when we're graduating kids that don't know how to read and write." Like, you know? [mmhmm] So that sidetracked me away from my language goal. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] 185 In the face of challenges, practitioners sometimes readjusted goals rather than declaring something a failure. For example, Luis said of the Kodrah Kristang language team that “we keep reevaluating, like we do what makes sense for the time being, and I feel we have been fairly good at winging it” (Luis, Kristang, 7/18/20). For her part, Charlotte has adjusted one of her proficiency benchmark goals so that she can ride positive momentum in another area of her language practice: and so um I actually have chosen not to test for Level 2 at this point, because I feel like I don't want to hyper-focus on the domains and get through the 25 or however many, um, because right now I'm having a lot of fun being conversational in my Lushootseed, [mmhmm] which is a skill that I've never felt comfortable with and I, I'm getting to the point where I feel like I can just chit-chat, and I have dreams where I am making up Lushootseed {haha} thinking, you know things like that. Um, and I wanna like sit in that space for a little bit, [mm] and sort of not hyper-focusing on getting through domains. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] Practitioners also identified 2020 as a year full of frustrated plans and readjustments, like Erin: I'm such a plan person, and every plan I've tried to come up with, I don't wanna say that it's turned to ash, but I have had to generate more plans in the past [{ha} mmhmm] year, year and a half? [mmhmm] Than I have ever had to generate at one time. Probably ever in my entire life. […] it's all just been such a mess. Um, and I guess like if I were to give myself a little bit of a pat on the back, I think I'm doing a decent job of like, noticing a problem, making a plan, realizing that the plan doesn't work any more, throwing the plan away, [mmhmm] making a new plan...um, but man, even just making the new, like, dropping the old plan, making the new plan? Is very mentally taxing. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/2/21] The effect of the pandemic year on language practice and a comparison of interviewees’ reflections in their initial interviews (Summer 2020) versus follow-ups (Summer 2021) is discussed in sections 5.3.2 and 6.4. 3.6.4 Interviews – Any amount of progress is progress Practitioners articulated the importance of recognizing language learning progress, no matter how big or small. In fact, when asked what advice they would give to new language 186 learners, eight different interviewees gave some version of “any baby steps are steps forward” (Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20). As Michelle puts it: oh {sigh} I would say...It's never easy but it's so worth it. [mmm] Um, yeah. Because it's not. It's very challenging. [mmhmm] And even, even if you only know one phrase and use that phrase every day, that's still an accomplishment. That's huge. [mmhmm] And so uh finding, finding small victories. [mmhmm] Um, being proud of yourself for each word, each phrase. It…it's worth it. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] Karelle explicitly tied this point to the importance of breaking large goals down into discrete steps: I would, yeah, I would say, like, don't be discouraged. Baby steps are steps forward. Right? Like, and so I think that, like, it can seem very daunting to learn a new language […] if you haven't had sort of that experience, even learning a second language at any point in your life, um, you know, the idea can seem very overwhelming and daunting. [mmhmm] But, I'd say like, start a little bit at a time. And, um, and set little goals for yourself. You know, like, like nobody goes from being, from zero to complete fluency in a week. Like that's, it takes us years to learn languages. And um, yeah and every little bit of progress is progress. [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] This was echoed by a Kristang learner who also has experience formally studying many other languages: I think the problem with thinking long-term in Kristang, or like any language in general, is just that there's just so much you can know. And I think like what really helped me keep up motivation in Kristang was to just take it step by step by small step. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] Erin also tied this realization to her previous experience trying to teach herself Japanese outside of a formal class: And it was not very effective. And I learned almost nothing. Um - wow, wow that's really...discouraging. But, like, the good thing is that learning in that way, I feel like I have developed a level of scrappiness in terms of just the willingness to understand like, this is going to be slow. This is going to take forever. This literally might be the project of your lifetime. [mmhmm] And I think for that reason, even when I get discouraged and sad and like, feel like the weight of the world is on my shoulders, I can still look at it and be like any progress, like one micron of progress, is still progress. [mmhmm] Maybe I didn't learn anything over the past like three months, but today I learned this one new word. And that's progress. {ha} [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/7/20] 187 Beth shared that her own language mentor has given her this advice over the years: But I think having the teacher I have, you know, he was like, "Don't think about the whole dictionary." […] he's like, if you have five - if you want to make a dictionary, and you have five words, you have a dictionary of five words. It's not that you don't have a dictionary, because you only have five [mmhmm] Words, right? It's like you always have a dictionary. It's just your dictionary has five words in it. […] you always have the whole thing. And so I think that has been one of the things, that and the, you know, 'mama' story about being like supportive of like, being anywhere close to the word. That should be greeted with like love and celebration. [mmm, mmm] Both by yourself and by the people around you. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] Recognizing progress this way shifts the focus away from what individual learners have not yet achieved – and might never be able to achieve in their lifetimes – and onto progress towards measurable and attainable goals. As the excerpts in this section illustrate, this reframing can significantly reduce feeling of discouragement that can come with this challenging language task. 3.7 Goal achievement and motivation Recognizing these incremental moments of progress is motivating. Part of how it motivates is by lowering the affective filter, a term used in SLA to describe barriers created by feelings such as defensiveness and anxiety (Brown, 2007). Researchers hypothesize that lowering this filter helps facilitate learning (e.g. Krashen, 1982). In fact, Carson referred to this concept in his list of “tools” both for learning the language and for “bringing back positive aspects” of the heritage culture: It's like the same tools that you need to learn the language like letting down your, your affective filter, practicing daily, like those are all things that are going to help you build back those positive aspects of what you see as important in the culture into your life. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/9/20] This idea of the affective filter ties in with the need to remove discouragement in order to make progress. 188 In fact, recognizing progress not only lowers affective filters (such as feelings of being overwhelmed and discouraged); practitioners report positive spikes in motivation when small goals are achieved. Charlotte gave one example: And then today actually in language, Zeke asked us, and this is his first week of doing this, "just on the spot as best as you can from memory, tell me how you floss your teeth," or whatever. And today I did flossing my teeth and I did it. And he was like, “well, if you can do that, then my job here is done." [{hahaha}] I was like, cool. I actually did it. It doesn't happen super often but those, those moments are like, I'm hoping just to float on that for the next couple of weeks. {hahaha} [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] Michelle described how this positive spike pushes her to invest more time and effort into language learning: If I am like on a high, if I've had an amazing day, or you know we've talked about the unique sounds, and if I'm like just nailing it with my pronunciations [mmhmm] and, feeling really good, I, that carries. That carries into the rest of my day for sure. [mm] Um, to, to the point where sometimes like I, I'm not doing what I'm supposed to be doing, because I'm like, "oh I'm so on right now! I just wanna totally focus on language." [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] Michelle added that one reason she was eager to do periodic language assessments (see her quote in Recognizing Progress, section 3.6.2) was to increase her confidence by documenting progress: So, or every four months maybe, just to keep track and make sure that [mmhmm mmhmm] I am progressing, and especially in times I know we talked about before like, some days I feel like I know a lot. Ask me anything! [mmhmm] And other days I'm like, I don't know anything. [mmhmm] You know? And so this'll be good for my confidence [mmhmm] um, to be like, "oh yeah. Listen to how you said that! And listen to how you say it now." [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] Thus, defining success, identifying intermediate goals, and recognizing measurable progress are ways that language revitalization practitioners sustain motivation and effort in their language practice. In this chapter, we have looked at the wide variety of goal types that language revitalization practitioners articulated when discussing their work. Some of these goals relate to language skills, while others illustrate the connection between language practice and goals that 189 go well beyond the acquisition of linguistic skills. This typology demonstrates the wide range of goals available to language learners in these contexts. Even more importantly, this discussion of varieties of goals underscores the point individuals are motivated in their L2 learning tasks by goals which transcend the barrier between language and culture, between the language classroom and the outside world, and between individual attainment and community outcomes. In the next chapter, we delve deeper into these connections between individual and community by investigating how practitioners described the centrality of Relationships to L2 motivation. Following that, we take back up again the discussion of progress and trajectories by looking at L2 motivation through the lens of Time. 190 CHAPTER IV. RELATIONSHIPS It's still really boils down to the relational connection piece for me. But that, I guess is a really big part of that. My dad specifically and our relationship. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] 4.1 Introduction In this chapter, we investigate the “relational connection piece” invoked by language revitalization practitioners like Jackie in this opening quote. Practitioners’ relations may inspire and support; they may hinder or challenge; they may sustain practitioners through difficulties. Practitioners work to serve as inspiration, support, and guides to their relations in turn. Relationships are central to language revitalization practice and to motivation. 4.1.1 SLA Theory – Room for Relationships In the field of second language acquisition, some theorists and researchers have increasingly focused on the social and situational nature of language learning, in particular following Block’s observation of the need for a ‘social turn’ (2003) in the field. As Atkinson (2011a) notes, the “Cartesian-inspired cognitivism” (p. 7) which pervades the social sciences also manifests in the field of SLA, such that mainstream SLA is “dominated by a view of learners as computational systems and of learning as information processing” (p. 18). Several prominent ‘alternative’ approaches (Atkinson 2011b) to this individualistic, information- processing model include Sociocultural Theory (Lantolf & Pavlenko, 1995; Lantolf & Thorne, 2006), Identity Theory (Norton, 2000; Norton Pierce, 1995), and Language Socialization (Duff, 2007). Taken together, these approaches point towards second language learning as emergent from social interactions and mediated by relationships with others. Besides accounting for the socially constructed nature of language, SLA researchers also theorize the role of social interaction as a mechanism for language attainment. For example, Swain’s Output Hypothesis (2000; 2005) posits that language production helps learners to notice 191 gaps in their current skills, test hypotheses, and reflect on their current metalinguistic understanding. This focus on production is a pointed rejection of the earlier notion that comprehensible input alone is the primary source of language acquisition (i.e. the Input Hypothesis, Krashen, 1982). In the formulation of the Output Hypothesis, interacting with others affords a language learner the chance to discover gaps in their linguistic repertoires and to confirm and integrate new knowledge. Recently, the Douglas Fir Group (2016) argued for a transdisciplinary framework to researching second language acquisition, in particular by considering the nested ‘levels’, from individual cognition to family relationships to sociocultural factors, that constitute the ‘context’ of language learning. Despite the call from multiple SLA perspectives to recognize language learning as a fundamentally situated and social activity, the notion that L2 learning is primarily a mechanistic, individualistic, mentalistic endeavor is so pervasive that it is one of the eight ‘myths’ that Brown & Larson-Hall (2012) dissect. In their book aimed primarily at a language teacher/novice SLA researcher audience, they address what they call “Myth 8. Language acquisition is the individual acquisition of grammar” (2012, p. 145). They argue that “while admitting that it is the individual who ultimately learns, [we] would argue that language acquisition exists in context, and that social context, looking beyond the individual, is important” (2012, p. 147). This myth of the a-social individual language learner is, of course, not restricted to theorizing in instructed SLA specifically, but is also a common pitfall of research on individual differences, including motivation. 4.1.2 Relationships in L2 Motivation Research As noted in the introduction, earlier models of L2 motivation often portrayed L2 learners as individuals with stable, dichotomous ‘orientations’ towards the target language community 192 (e.g. Gardner, 2001). Recently, some motivation researchers have turned towards more a more contextualized and dynamic understanding of L2 learners and their motivations; of particular note are Ushioda’s (2009) ‘person-in-context relational view’ of motivation as well as the growing influence of Complex Dynamic Systems Theory in the field (Dörnyei et al., 2015; Larsen-Freeman, 2015). The dominant model in L2 motivation theory continues to be Dörnyei’s (2005) L2 Motivational Self System, or L2MSS. To recapitulate the discussion of this model from the Introduction chapter (section 1.3.3), the L2MSS includes three components: 1. The Ideal L2 Self (e.g. the person one would like to become is a speaker of an L2) 2. The Ought-to L2 Self (e.g. meeting expectations, avoiding negative outcomes) 3. The L2 Learning Experience In his 2009 iteration of this model, Dörnyei explains that the L2 Learning Experience component “concerns situated, ‘executive’ motives related to the immediate learning environment and experience (e.g. the impact of the teacher, the curriculum, the peer group, the experience of success). This component is conceptualized at a different level from the two self-guides25” (2009, p. 29, emphasis mine). The two points I have produced in bold here raise theoretical issues with this key component of motivation. The first issue is that it is the immediate learning environment only which is formulated as impacting language learners’ experience and motivational dynamics; in much of the literature this is narrowly confined to the walls of the language classroom. But the L2 learning experience is affected by many different historical, cultural, social, and interpersonal factors (Ushioda, 2020; Douglas Fir Group, 2016), and the strict distinction between the classroom and the world seems 25 Dörnyei uses the term ‘self-guides’ or ‘future self-guides’ to refer to the twin constructs of the Ideal L2 Self and the Ought-to L2 Self. 193 to be more a matter of convenience for researchers than it is a reflection on learners’ experiences in reality. Furthermore, from a practical standpoint, language learning involves a range of different activities in a range of different environments. This is particularly the case in language revitalization; some language learners never set foot in a classroom at all. This is not to say that revitalization practitioners are only impacted by macro-contextual factors, but rather to point out that motivation in these contexts is impacted by both larger macro-contexts as well as the immediate learning environment (including the language learning classroom for some). The impact of these different contextual levels is discussed in this chapter, in particular in section 4.2 about the types of relationships, as well as in the chapter on Time, section 5.3. The second issue with this quote is the idea that the experience of the learner “is conceptualized at a different level” from the ideas of the Self. Ushioda (2009) argues that this sets up a dualism between an individual and her context, which is approached as “something pre- existing, an independent background variable, outside the individual” (p. 218). This dualism also implies a one-way relationship between a learning context and the learner; the experience impacts the learner’s motivation, but never vice versa. Indeed, as Ushioda (2020) has pointed out, there is a growing recognition that many models of motivation are problematic in that they only account for contextual influences on the individual, and not the mutual influence of individual on context as part of a “dynamic interactive process” (p. 54). Given these critiques, Ushioda argues for a “person-in-context relational view of language motivation,” by which she means “a view of motivation as emergent from relations between real persons, with particular social identities, and the unfolding cultural context of activity” (2020, p. 215). This view of language motivation underscores that individuals have the potential to “act upon, shape, and transform their contexts in significant ways, instead of 194 positioning them (and their motivation) as objects that are necessarily determined or controlled by these contexts” (p. 55) In this framework, motivation in language revitalization takes into account the relationships that make up the ‘context’ of language practice as well as the dynamic and reciprocal nature of relationship. The ‘dynamic turn’ (Dörnyei et al., 2015a) in motivation research, which sees theorists engaging with ideas from Complexity Theory and Complex Dynamic Systems Theory, further engages with the nature of context in L2 motivation. As Mercer (2016) points out, “[f]rom a complexity perspective, context is not perceived as an external, objective, independent variable affecting the self, but rather is seen as an integral part of our self system.” (p. 12). That is, it is perhaps theoretically impossible to pose a role for context that is “at a different level” (Dörnyei, 2009, p. 29) than the images of the Self. Mercer (2016) argues that “it is not a binary question of whether the self is socially constructed or not, but rather […] the question of how our continually evolving, dynamic but phenomenologically real mental sense of self is defined by contexts past, mediated and defined by our interaction in contexts present, and determines our goals and future selves.” (p. 15). Dörnyei himself notes that constructs in the L2 Motivational Self-System may be inadvertently construed as “individualistic” and “community-independent” notions of the self, especially given the gross over-representation in the literature of L2 learners of Global English (Dörnyei & Al-Hoorie, 2017, p. 459). In this chapter, I argue that in language revitalization practice is inextricable from community, and hence motivational images of the “Self” are inextricable from context and relationship. 195 4.1.3 Relationships and Relationality in Language Revitalization Compared with dominant models of L2 motivation focused on learners of English, Ushioda’s (2009) ‘person-in-context relational view’ of motivation resonates more strongly with what Indigenous practitioners of language revitalization say about their motivations and experiences. For example, Hall (2021) described three different relationships which have been key to her language revitalization work. The first was her father, who started her off on her journey (p. 54-60); the second is with other Nuu-wee-ya’ learner-speakers, who inspire and support her (p. 84); and the third is her extended language revitalization community, which includes practitioners from other language communities as well as academic linguists (p. 85). Though she does not frame her discussion in terms of individual motivation, her argument about the nature of these relationships is reflects her motivational orientation: “Fundamentally my passion to continue this work exists because I exist in relationship with others.” (p. 84) Another Nuu-wee-ya’ practitioner, Carson Viles, conducted research on motivation in a multilingual community of language revitalization practitioners. He found that forming relationships with other language learners gave individuals in this community the opportunity to participate in activities that “combat feelings of loneliness, stress and being overwhelmed" (Viles 2013, p. 32; see also discussion this chapter, section 4.5.3). He also argued that by strengthening the link between individual language learning and family well-being may help to support motivation, due to the fact that working to revitalize a language for one's community can be dauntingly abstract; bringing it back to family helps make the work more concrete” (p. 33). That is, associating language learning goals with close personal relationships makes language learning more personally meaningful, which may have a strong impact on motivation. Relationships are also central to MacIntyre et al’s (2017) Rooted L2 Self construct, which arises out of research with heritage learners of Gaelic on Cape Breton Island in Nova Scotia. 196 They describe the concept of the Rooted L2 Self as being “a heritage-oriented concept defined by strong feelings of connection to speakers of the language, which can be tied to specific individuals (such as one's grandmother) but more generally a defined community” (p. 512). This construct speaks to the ‘context’ part of the ‘person-in-context relational view’ by incorporating both the immediate learning environment as well as “historical knowledge, connection to one's ancestors, identity, attachment, demographic trends, hopes for the future of the language and its meaning to future speakers, among other interrelated ideas." (p. 512). Thus the Rooted L2 Self expands the third level of the L2MSS beyond the immediate context, and more fully elaborates the relational aspects of this context. MacIntyre et al. (2017) also argue that in heritage contexts, the Ought-to L2 Self construct takes on a different form, given the nature of relationships and responsibility in these communities (see section 4.3.2.1). These examinations of relationality in language revitalization fit within ontologies that center relationships. Indigenous theorists in particular emphasize the centrality of relationships; as Wilson (2008) says, in Indigenous framed research, “relationships do not merely shape reality, they are reality” (p. 7). This is also echoed in the ‘agential realist framework’ of quantum physicist and philosopher of science Karen Barad, who argues that what we have discovered about the physical makeup of the universe evinces that “distinct agencies do not precede, but rather emerge through, their intra-action,” that is, “'distinct' agencies are only distinct in a relational, not an absolute, sense, that is, agencies are only distinct in relation to their mutual entanglement; they don't exist as individual elements” (Barad, 2007, p. 33 emphasis original). It is with this understanding, that individuals are defined by their relationships and mutual entanglement, that individual motivation can be construed as fundamentally relational. 197 4.1.4 Overview of chapter on Relationships This chapter illustrates the relational nature of L2 motivation in language revitalization practice. Section 4.2 elaborates a typology of relationships, as discussed in the Survey (section 4.2.1) and in interviews (section 4.2.2). Section 4.3 discusses varieties of motivational mechanisms that arise from relationship, such as feelings of reciprocity and responsibility or pleasure in sharing social activities through language. Section 4.4 discusses the challenges that can arise from difficult relationships or from lack of relationships. Section 4.5 then discusses the ways that relationship-building supports language learning, and, mutually, the ways that language learning strengthens and defines relationships. 4.2 Varieties of relationships Before describing the many ways that relationships impact language practice and motivation, I first highlight the many different types of relationships noted by practitioners in both the survey data and interviews. Section 4.2.1 outlines the types of relationships mentioned in the Global Survey, including some discussion of how these different types are distributed across different survey responses. Section 4.2.2 discusses the nature of relationship types mentioned in interviews. The point of this section is not to lay out a typology of relationships that are categorical and strictly delineated; rather, the point is to show just how diverse and extensive the networks of relationships are in language revitalization practice. 4.2.1 Interpersonal connections in the survey In the Global Survey, respondents frequently mention important people and important relationships when describing their language efforts and their objectives. Of the 142 survey responses in this set, 103 (72.5%) mentioned at least one type of relationship. The frequency of these Interpersonal Connections codes underscores how central these relationships are to 198 language practice in these contexts. There are several major sub-types of relationships mentioned in surveys, and Table 16 gives their distribution. Category Number of surveys that mention Family 33 (23.24%) Focus on elders, ancestors 25 (17.61%) Focus on youth, children 64 (45.07%) Generations 27 (19.01%) Key individuals 55 (38.73%) Outside connections 36 (25.17%) Table 16. Interpersonal Connections in the Global Survey To give a better sense of the role of these relationships in survey responses, I give examples from each category in the following sub-sections. I then end on a note about how three of these categories (Elders/Ancestors, Youth/Children, and Key Individuals) are differentially distributed among efforts representing different language vitalities. 4.2.1.1 Family In describing objectives for their language efforts, some survey responses mentioned family in language revitalization: To have families and community members rethink education [ID 86, Keres-Cochiti Dialect] To support families in their revitalization efforts [ID 86, Keres-Cochiti Dialect] to provide support for families where Inari Saami is used as home language [ID 18, Aanaar Saami] Respondents also specifically mentioned the parents: Trabajar con padres de familias = “Work with parents of families.” [my trans] [ID 205, Lenguas chatinas] teach the parents to speak the language also [ID 51, Chippawa / Ojibway] 199 Parents speak the language to their children26 [ID 156, Hokkien] dos pais de que os filhos estão falando mais o português que a língua nativa = “of the parents whose children are speaking more Portuguese than the native language.” [my trans] [ID 248, Ikpeng] Some respondents also reflected on the role family has already played in the effort, either families in the community who initiated the effort on their own or family who supported them in language: families from various villages worked collaboratively to revitalize our tiłhini language [ID 5, tiłhini] a tribal family began work in the home (1991) and these efforts eventually became a catalyst for a community effort beginning in 1996. [ID 241, Miami-Illinois] I began studying with help of my family who gave me recordings on cassette tapes, a Whistler dictionary from the 1980's, a chapter from a different dissertation (Wash) on adverbial clauses, another dictionary and topics discussion dissertation (Beeler) and homemade language kit they made for my generation of kids within the family. [ID 14, Šmuwič] In addition to the broad category of family, survey respondents also mentioned individuals with specific roles in the family and in the community, including elders/ancestors (discussed next in 4.2.1.2) and children (discussed in 4.2.1.3) 4.2.1.2 Focus on Elders, Ancestors Survey responses that focus on elders or ancestors may mention their central role in language maintenance: Elders called for help, and heritage organizations were formed as a result. [ID 128, Tlingit] Getting elders to teach children the language [ID 121, Western Apache] The old people worked very hard to have a language programme running in their school. It is a legacy and a commitment which needs to be supported and fostered. [ID 157, Wubuy] 26 This is an example of an excerpt that would be double-coded; this is coded and counted both as “Family” and also “Focus on youth, children.” Perhaps not surprisingly, there is a large overlap between the “Family” and “Children” codes. 200 ask old people questions to broaden my horizon in the socialization process of my people [ID 915, Yorùbá] There is no start, this has been going on since Elders resisted English and held onto our language and ceremonies [ID 43, southwest ojibwe] There is also the acknowledgement that the loss of elders brings a sense of urgency to language efforts: As Elders began to die, the language communities began to see the need for language maintenance and revitalization efforts [ID 145, Anishnaabemowin] Some of the elder speakers realized the language speakers were becoming scarce so started on their own some language classes. [ID 153, Ponca language] Survey respondents also shared that language practice is a way to reconnect with ancestors and honor their legacy: It is important to continue what our ancestors have passed on to us [ID 86, Keres-Cochiti Dialect] nos ayuda a entender a nuestros viejos abuelos y la cosmovisión que ellos tienen = “It helps us to understand our old grandparents and the worldview that they have.” [my trans] [ID 207] the efforts started with a series of dream visions that Jessie Little Doe had in which her ancestors were asking her to bring language back home. [ID 105] 4.2.1.3 Focus on youth, children The most common theme in survey responses was a focus on children and youth in the community. In some cases, survey respondents articulated their goals specifically with respect to education and outreach to young people: Teaching the language at K-12 level. [ID 121, Zapoteco] Children raised and educated in the language [ID 128, Tlingit] Bring young people up in the traditional longhouse community [ID 143, Kanien'kéha] El sueño del equipo es de tener una biblioteca donde attender a los niños. = “The team’s dream is to have a library where (they) attend to the children” [my trans] [ID 170, Diidxazá] One respondent shared three interrelated objectives that all center on the role of children in language revival: 201 Have the speakers teach the children [ID 218, Kumeyaay] have the children speak the language [ID 218, Kumeyaay] Have the children sustain the language by speaking to other children [ID 218, Kumeyaay] Respondents also detailed specific language proficiency targets for young people: sendo aprendido cada vez mais cedo pelas crianças. = “being learned more and more by the children.” [my trans.] [ID 248, Ikpeng] Getting all children to be bilingual again [ID 121, Western Apache] К 6-7 годам дети либо понимают язык хорошо, либо владеют им активно, на уровне своего возраста. = “By the age of 6-7, children either understand the language well, or speak it actively, at their age level.” [my trans.] [ID 252, карельский = Karelian] In addition to goals specifically related to language acquisition, respondents also shared their hopes that the language effort could have a positive impact on youth identity and cultural ties: Support, develop, and implement strategies to turn the hearts and minds of children toward, not away from, their indigenous language and culture. [ID 84, Iquito] I know what I am and who I am. And I know where I belong because of the language my community speaks. My children don't have that link to their identity. [ID 146, Yup'ik] To ignite and sustain interest in the language in young people [ID 27, Da̱jim] Motivar a los niños a que empiecen a querer el zapoteco como lo hacen los organizadores = “To motivate the children to begin to want/love Zapotec like the organizers do.” [my trans] [ID 170, Diidxazá] positively shape youth identity to strengthen connection to tribe [ID 63, Myaamia] There are many other ways that respondents expressed their hopes and dreams for children (including the children of their own family) and the role they see children playing in language maintenance: Ne kati tyotyelʌhtu i·kelhe akyaluhkhane nén kheyʌɁo·kuha yolihowanʌ ne tho nu aoliwake So then the first thing I want for the two girls to speak it is my children (two daughters) it is a great matter there where on that subject [ID 12, On^yoteaka] We want Gangte kids both now and in the future to have similar opportunities to other children - to be able to thrive in their language and culture. [ID 127, Gangte] We must past that on to our children and they will carry us forward. [ID 86, Keres- Cochiti Dialect] 202 Incentivar a los hablantes de zapoteco para que trasmitan la lengua a los jóvenes = “To incentivate the speakers of Zapotec so that they transmit the language to the youth.” [my trans] [ID 191, Zapoteco] This focus on passing down language is also clearly captured in the Generations lexical code, which I turn to next. 4.2.1.4 Generations Because intergenerational transmission is so central in the literature on heritage language maintenance (e.g. Fishman, 1991), I tagged survey responses that explicitly use the words ‘generation’ or ‘intergenerational’ (or their translational equivalents in other languages). Some respondents in fact refer specifically to “intergenerational transmission”, e.g.: intergenerational transmission in the homes [ID 43, southwest ojibwe] Incentivar a la transmision intergeneracional = “To incentivate the intergenerational transmission.” [my trans] [ID 167, Toba] to prevent the language death (to secure intergenerational transmission) [ID 28, Irish] The use of this specific phrase suggests some familiarity with the literature relevant to language revitalization. Other respondents described their own observations of the relevance of intergenerational transmission in their communities: Parents who still speak the language are at their child-bearing age. It's important that they are aware that their language will vanish if they don't pass it on to the next generation. [ID 156, Hokkien] Nuosu Yi is still transited to the next generation, but the losses of vocabularies, structures, cultures occur. [ID 114, Nuosu Yi] Other respondents framed this in terms of passing down to future generations: To document and preserve the language for future genarations [ID 34, Tjwao] Garantir a vitalidade da língua pelas gerações futuras = “To guarantee the vitality of the language for the future generations.” [my trans] [ID 248, Ikpeng] Preparing students to be teachers of future generations [ID 10, Kanienkeha] Still others used the term to express hopes for current generations. This might focus specifically on the community’s young generation: 203 to raise a young generation of speakers [ID 111, Kaáⁿze Íe] But one respondent used the term to express a goal for language across all ages: to create active language speakers' community penetrating all generations [ID 18, Aanaar Saami] It is perhaps notable that this is the second-least frequently mentioned relationship type coded for these survey responses; only 27 out of 142 respondents used the word ‘generations’ anywhere in their responses. This frequency might be artificially low due to the fact that it was lexical rather than semantic; that is, clearly some of the answers quoted above in the “family” and “youth, children” categories also pertain to intergenerational language transmission. The infrequency of intergenerational transmission as a stated objective for revitalization efforts was in fact already observed by Peréz Báez et al. (2019). However, I note that in my analysis, I am considering relationship categories holistically across different qualitative questions. For example, the Hokkien excerpt above is an answer to question 25 (“Why is the revitalization of your language important?”) and the Nuosu Yi excerpt is an answer to question 26 (“Is there anything else you would like to share with us?”), rather than to Question 10 about objectives. This suggests that intergenerational transmission might be a central concern of language revitalization efforts, even if it is not explicitly articulated as an objective. 4.2.1.5 Key individuals Another very common theme in survey responses is the mention of key individuals and their roles in the language effort. In some cases, these individuals are mentioned by name: Johnny Poahway is a member of the Comanche Business Committee saw the need to teach young people and started teaching in Oklahoma to highschool youth. Geneva Navarro began teaching in New Mexico in the mid-90's and moved to Oklahoma in 2003 to teach at the Comanche Nation College. She moved back to New Mexico and began teaching the Comanche language again in the Summer of 2016. She taught briefly in Santa Fe but the interest died out so now she is teaching in Albuquerque only. [ID 1, Comanche] 204 many people in the community had been drawn to the language in the years before digital archives. one woman in particular, liz27 dominguez was driven to learn the language and seek out the harrington notes and recordings. sadly she passed away in 2008, but many around her kept moving forward. [ID 236, shmuwich, chumash] Many other unnamed individuals are mentioned as being central to an effort: A husband-wife team of a Native speaker and anthropologist started the initiative, with the help and support of the Tribal Council [ID 113, Koasati] Muurrbay Language Centre formed by a very small group of elderly speakers working with a linguist to keep language from dying out. [ID 152, Gumbaynggirr] These efforts are being continued by one of the original students, now working as a teacher. [ID 111, Kaáⁿze Íe] Three sisters represent the last of their tribe and had not spoken the language themselves nor passed on what little they knew to their children. They approached me to help them form a group to begin revitalisation. [ID 47, Mpakwithi] In about 2007, a group of interested community members began meeting informally approximately monthly or bimonthly to practice language together. This was a group of about 10 total consisting of learners and speakers [ID 124, Meskwaki] Survey respondents also reflected on their individual role in the effort; that is, sometimes the “key individual” was the respondent themselves: I, Ladan Babakodong, a native speaker of the language got the motivation and decided to use the NGO, BEST to promote the revival and sustenance of the language. [ID 27, Da̱jim] Though many people have helped -- translating a paragraph or reviewing a few sentences and sharing their stories -- I feel like this effort has been primarily been driven by me. [ID 260, Marshallese] Me, a PhD candidate, started doing linguistic fieldwork in the Panará community [ID 89, Panará] As the previous quotes illustrate, individuals who play central roles in these efforts may be community members, or they may be external stakeholders, such as linguists: In ~1999, Lev Michael and I heard from contacts at NGOs in Peru that the principal Iquito community, San Antonio de Pintuyacu, was looking for help with documentation and revitalization efforts, so in 2001 we went to visit and see if they were interested in our help -- linguistic, technical, political, and financial and nature. [ID 84, Iquito] 27 Note that I reproduce survey responses exactly here, meaning spelling and capitalization etc. is preserved from the original. 205 4.2.1.6 Outside connections Survey respondents gave examples of relationships with those outside the community that have been important in some way. As noted above, this might include outside linguists or academics: 2 individuals from the community took the initiative to attend the Breath of Life workshop in Berkeley in 1996, and that started the revitalization movement. An outside linguist (me) joined them in 1997. [ID 78, Mutsun] They invited the outside linguist to assist them with their efforts to document and preserve traditional oral narratives. [ID 60, Desano] Dr. Ewald Hekking inició el proyecto en 1981 en la Universidad Autónoma de Querétaro y pronto encontró gente hablante nativa con la que ha realizado importantes trabajos. = “Dr. Ewald Hekking initiated the project in 1981 in the Autonomous University of Quereetaro and shortly encountered native speaking people ewith whom he has realized important works.” [my trans] [ID 195] In these examples, it is the outside community member who is supporting the language effort (see Peréz Báez et al., 2019 for further discussion of the role of individuals external to the language community). Survey respondents also described wanting to connect with – and even support – efforts in other languages as one of the objectives for their work: To network with other organisations of similar objectives in Zimbabwe and the world over. [ID 239, TjiKalanga] Linking the Asturian community with other communities of minority languages in Europe [ID 67, Asturian] share the materials with another band which also has no living speakers or curriculum [ID 98, Halkomelem] Respondents also expressed an interest in finding out more about what communities around the world are working on, in the hopes of learning from the global community of revitalization practitioners (see 6.2 for more discussion of these survey entries). I would like the possibility of guidance through workshops or consultations with others working on such projects. [ID 122, Kotiria] 206 I wonder how other SL revitalization activities are faring and if you could share any of the references and/or their activities and success with me? [ID 905, Tibetan Sign Language] Thank you for doing this survey. Is there a way to see the results - will they be published somewhere? Would be so great to see what other communities are doing to get inspiration. [ID 127, Gangte] 4.2.1.7 Comparison The vast majority of survey respondents mentioned relationships in their responses (103 out of 142, or 72.7%). But respondents did not always mention the same types of relationships as a point of focus. Interesting comparisons can be made between the application of the Elders, Ancestors code, the Youth, Children code, and the Key Individuals code, particularly comparing across different language situations, as Figure 17 does. Interpersonal connection focus x Language situation 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Awakening No L1 Few elderly Grandparents Some adults Most adults Most adults All members speakers speakers speak but few but no but generally and some including younger children not children children children speak people focus on elders, ancestors focus on youth, children key individuals Figure 17. Interpersonal Connections sub-codes by Language Situation As can be seen, a focus on children is attested across all language statuses, though it is proportionally more frequent in the higher vitality categories. Conversely, a focus on elders is significantly less frequent in communities with more first language speakers; in fact, in vital 207 languages in which every member speaks, there is no mention of elders or ancestors at all. This suggests that as language shift advances, older language users take on increasingly more important roles as an increasingly small core of knowledge bearers. Evidence that it is the vitality status of the language that correlates best with this role shift can be found when looking at responses from South America, specifically; these responses covered efforts at both the highest and lowest vitality statuses. Out of the total of 23 responses from South America, the only one to mention elders or ancestors (antepasados in this case) comes from an effort to support an awakening language: Como responsable de la iniciativa 'Curso de aproximación a la lengua chibcha o muisca' , mi principal motivación fue y sigue siendo que mis hijos hablen la lengua de sus antepasados y que este trabajo sea abierto tanto para descendientes de muiscas como para el público general = “As the one responsible for the initiative ‘Course of approaching the Chibcha or Muisca language’, my main motivation was and continues to be that my children speak the language of their ancestors and that this work be open both for the descendents of Muiscas and for the general public.” [my trans] [ID 166, chibcha] Though the data are too sparse to make strong quantitative claims about this pattern, the fact that no other effort in the region mentioned elders does suggest that there is something about the vitality of the language, rather than the geographic region, that might correlate with the emphasis on this relationship. Another important and related point to note in Figure 17 is the mention of Key Individuals. The distribution of this code indicates that specific individuals are significantly more salient in efforts to awaken or revitalize dormant languages. This is an important point to consider when discussing language awakening efforts specifically, as it underscores both the potential power and potential burden that an individual practitioner may hold in her community. 4.2.2 Relationship types in interviews In interviews, practitioners described a wide variety of types of relationships that have shaped them and their language work. These relationship connections are both within and outside 208 the language learning environment, within and outside the family, within and outside the community. Several different types of relationships are invoked in interviews, such as: • Family, including children; parents, grandparents; partners, uncles, nieces, nephews, and siblings • Extended family, including ancestors and elders; descendants (i.e. the family extended in time) • Community including classmates; colleagues and coworkers; friends; students; teachers; mentors; speech community in general • Extended community including communities of practice; outside community I have organized this list in roughly ascending order of distance from the learner; that is, one’s relationship with one’s child is closer than with future descendants, one’s relationship with family members might be presumably closer than with coworkers, and so forth. However, this conceptual organization does not always fit the relationships that practitioners describe, and often relationships blur the lines between these “categories”. An example of this might be when a sibling is also the language teacher: my brother is actually one of the language teachers at Puyallup. And so I think once he started teaching classes about three years ago, he said that his boss, and I think Zeke, were really encouraging the teachers to like reach out to their family and you know, grassroots recruitment, I guess, to start. So he got all of us to take his language class, and then from there, we all started our own language learning journeys. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] Or when students are also family members: What I like doing with language, here's a really neat thing that I like, is that all the women and the man you saw […] All of those people I call my nieces and my nephew. And, uh, they treat me like their uncle and, and some of them I literally am, in the language you call your cousins' kids 'nephews' and 'nieces'. And some of them I'm related to. [One of them] for example is my stepfather's grand-niece. [Okay. Mmhmm] And then 209 [another] I'm related to, and some of those other people I'm related to. [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] Many practitioners are partnered with people from outside the language community, and this family/outside member relationship is important for language as well: Um, my partner, yes. He's not like in the classes with me or anything, but he hears me speak it, I use it sometimes, I mean just this morning he facetimed me while I was brushing my teeth. And so I answered and I'm like, "c’aʔkʷdisəbəxʷ čəd" {haha} [{hahaha}] you know, and he's like "brush your teeth, brush your teeth" {ha} […] I put him on the spot one time in class when the teacher was asking like, who are we speaking it to? are they you know speaking back at all? And I was like "well he's learning a little bit" and like ran out with my computer, you know, and was like "hey! say what you just said a minute ago!" you know he's like [{ha}] "uhhhh" {hahaha} you know [{hahaha}] um, and he said it. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] Others described non-family members who are considered “family”, either through a mentee relationship like Michelle: There is a young woman, and I think of her as a niece, and she is Haida but she's also um Tsimshian and Tlingit and so, and those are the three tribes that are in this area, we're actually on the land of the Tlingit people, so traditionally, this was not our home. [mmm] But she's been learning all three languages, and um, and she won an award this year, and she thanked me. And so, I didn't really think I really deserved thanks but {hahaha} But that was nice. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] Or through the close bond shared among coworkers and friends: I think, part of it is that we all see each other as family, that it's okay to go farther joking with them, because we know them, and I mean 'know them,' we know who their parents were, and their parents were friends, their parents probably fought each other, their parents probably dated each other, you know so. [mmhmm] Um, there's this idea of instead of just being coworkers, you are a tribe [Chris B, Lushootseed, 5/27/21] Language revitalization practice might also call into question the distinction between the “speech community” and the “outside community”; for the Puyallup Tribe this is an explicit consideration, as Chris D explains: We kind of break it down in different ways. We say, you know, Puyallup tribal members, they're people who are enrolled Puyallup. But we also have Puyallup tribal community, so my wife is not Native, but she is Puyallup community. She's around us, she comes out to all these events with me. So she is a community member […] And then there's just, there's the other, you know Tacoma community, there's everybody outside of those two. [mmhmm] um, and I might be missing more but, basically like anybody who works in our administration, our school, our daycare, those people are a part of our community. And 210 it's just as important for them to learn and start speaking as it is for a Puyallup tribal member. So if, if a kid goes to school and they have, you know, five non-Native teachers throughout their day, we can't say "Nope, this is just for Puyallup tribal members," because they're going to miss a huge chunk of their day. Because, you know, so we want to make sure that everyone who has any interaction within our community speaks this language. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] Thus, the point of enumerating the different types of relationships that practitioners discussed is not to imply that such types are categorical, or that the different types necessarily have differential effects on motivation. Rather, the point is to show the sheer variety, breadth, and interconnectedness of meaningful relationships that form the ‘context’ for the ‘person-in- context relational’ view of motivation. Far beyond a narrow focus on the language classroom, these interviews highlight the importance of a broad and holistic picture of the ‘environment’ of language practice. In the remaining sections of this chapter, I discuss how relationships – of all types – matter to motivation in language revitalization practice. Section 4.3 outlines the many overt and covert ways that important relations can motivate practitioners; section 4.4 looks at the ways that practitioners might be de-motivated as the result of the importance of relationships; and section 4.5 concludes with a discussion of the ways that language practice and relationship-building are in fact intertwined, and how practitioners’ L2 motivation is also bound up in motivation to build relationship. 4.3 Relational motivations In interviews with practitioners, relationships are described as a central component to language learning motivation and language revitalization practice. Relations positively impact practitioners in many different ways, including through explicit encouragement and support, through setting positive examples and through instilling a sense of responsibility to the community, and through sharing meaningfully through language. The act of relationship building 211 and strengthening connections is also a strong motivator for many to pursue language. In this section, I will discuss each of these key relational motivations. 4.3.1 Expressions of support One obvious way that relations can motivate language revitalization practice is through overt expressions of positivity, pride, and encouragement. In this section I show examples of different ways that this can manifest. Needs a better introduction, and a synthesis of this external/internal thing. 4.3.1.1 Praise Perhaps the most direct way that someone can express support to another is by expressing positive words of praise for their efforts. Explicit words of praise were mentioned in interviews as being motivational. Here I give examples from three interviewees who mentioned receiving overt praise from an important relation. Charlotte describes “floating” on explicit positive feedback from her language teacher: And then today actually in language, Zeke asked us, and this is his first week of doing this, "just on the spot as best as you can from memory, tell me how you floss your teeth," or whatever. And today I did flossing my teeth and I did it. And he was like, “well, if you can do that, then my job here is done." [{hahaha}] I was like, cool. I actually did it. It doesn't happen super often but those, those moments are like, I'm hoping just to float on that for the next couple of weeks. {hahaha} [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] Beth also shared that her language teacher encouraged her to greet any language success “with love and celebration” – including greeting oneself with such praise: he's like, if you have five - if you want to make a dictionary, and you have five words, you have a dictionary of five words. It's not that you don't have a dictionary, because you only have five [mmhmm] Words, right? It's like you always have a dictionary. It's just your dictionary has five words in it. […] you always have the whole thing. And so I think that has been one of the things, that and the, you know, 'mama' story28 about being like supportive of like, being anywhere close to the word. That should be greeted with like 28 Earlier Beth had reflected on how excited we get when a small child learns to say ‘mama’ for the first time. 212 love and celebration. [mmm, mmm] Both by yourself and by the people around you. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] Jackie described how she and her classmates overtly celebrate one another’s successes: I think there's maybe only three other people in my class. There's four total. And then the teacher. - So anyway, seeing them practice their domains and reclaim them um, is just really encouraging, and we all support each other, and you know, somebody reclaims their domain and we're like "yaaaay" {hahaha} [{chuckle}] Um, so that's a great kind of community support that makes it like fun, too. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] She also mentioned words of encouragement that came from her aunt on her non-Native family side. Her aunt is not learning Lushootseed herself but who praised Jackie for her efforts to do so: my family with everything going on with quarantine […] we've been doing Zoom calls every week since the end of March, it's been really cool to connect with all of them that way. And so this past weekend my aunt...I use Instagram as a way to speak, I'll just practice Lushootseed on there and share with just like some close friends. And so my aunt sees those. And so on the Zoom call she had mentioned like "Jackie, that's so awesome that you're doing this" [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] That is, for these learners, overt positive feedback can come from a number of sources, including members of their learning community (teachers and classmates) as well as supportive family members. In each of these cases, the learners themselves initiate these interactions by using language in a way that can be witnessed by others; this externalizing of language practice gives others the opportunity to express positive messages of support. 4.3.1.2 Encouragement In addition to the overt praise, practitioners received other explicit messages of encouragement and support from relations. Quotes from ten different interviewees are shared here to illustrate the nature and effect of this theme. Interviewees discussed encouragement from language teachers. For example, Michelle discussed the many ways that her language mentor has supported her in her work, including sitting in on her first few classes as a language teacher “just like to give me encouragement, you 213 know?” (Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20). She also described her struggles with being a new mother, and how her mentor encouraged her in those difficult moments: I have a baby, she is 16 months old. And so like during my pregnancy, I felt like I lost my mind. Um, like I wasn't at, like I… [{chuckle}] I became less intelligent. {hahaha} [{hahaha}] […] And so, like simple phrases that I know, I do know! I didn't know. Um, and then I thought, "Okay. As soon as I give birth, it'll come back and I'll be fine." And it didn't immediately. And I was, and I just sat there and I'm like, I lost all these years, I don't know anything anymore. [mmm] But she was really amazing at just encouraging me and, "it'll come back" and "I've gone through it, too," and um, and I, it seems to be very common. That you know, it's, sometimes you just don't have as good of a grip as you would like. And, and it will come back, and you just have to persevere and push through those moments and times where you do feel defeated. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] In this quote, Michelle remembers the message of solidarity and identification that her mentor shared in a time of struggle (“I’ve gone through it, too.”) This is different than the words of praise that learners may receive from others when they experience highs (see Praise, 3.1.1). Michelle and her mentor acknowledge that language work is also sometimes the site of frustration and “defeat”, and Michelle remembered the message about needing to “persevere and push through those moments.” Encouragement from teachers and mentors also can also push practitioners to try new things that might advance their language skills. One example comes from a heritage speaker of Kristang, an accomplished poet. She had responded to the COVID-19 situation in Singapore by composing a poem in English, and she recalled the help and encouragement she received from her instructors when she decided to try translating it into Kristang: And then I said, "Why not try it in Kristang?" But it's got to be a bit simpler, not so complex. {haha} [mm {hahaha}] {hahaha} So, I did it, and again, you know, there were words that I didn't learn, so I had to ask for them, ask uh Luis, or Kevin, or one of them, "What's this, you know, can I say it this way?" or whatever. And then got them to edit and all that. So then that was one of the things that I did. So I finished that. And they said, "why not read that poem on the forum, you know, on the discussion group?" [mmhmm] 214 So I said, all right. I...so I read it out loud. And uh then they provided [=encouraged me]29 uh I also did a translation. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/29/20] She added that she had submitted the poem to the local newspaper, the Straits Times, and though the newspaper had unfortunately not selected her poem for publication, the experience of composing poetry in Kristang was good language practice. This learner also described Kristang language lessons as light-hearted and fun, and mentioned that part of that comes from the fact that teachers give out prizes such as stickers or chocolates for group activities “by way of encouragement” the teachers give out prizes such as sticks or chocolates for group activities (heritage learner, Kristang, 7/29/20). Practitioners who are associated with the Puyallup Language Department or the Multilingual Institute specifically mentioned the ways that Zeke, their teacher/mentor/organizer, encourages them. Chris B explained that a key to this encouragement is that it inspires feelings of goal attainability : [Zeke] has been the one that really has offered encouragement. But he does it in such a cool way. He doesn't, he's not like, "oh, good job." You know, instead he offers you - let me rephrase this. He offers you ways of looking at the language and language acquisition that make it seem logical and attainable […] he does it in a really stealthy way, where he makes you feel like you can do it without saying "you can do it." [mmhmm] He's kind of just like, he gives you the plan. And, you know, yeah, I really like his approach to all of that. Yeah. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] Masa also discussed his relationship with Zeke, who has been his friend and collaborator for many years, and has mentored and supported him in efforts with his own community in southern California. As he notes: And so that's why I've been really working with Zeke, because I think he gets it. We talk the same language and, um...I mean you know, figuratively. [Yeah. {chuckle}] But, um, and he's so inspiring and gentle and encouraging. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] 29 In the interview, this learner said the word “provided”, but when reviewing the transcript later, she clarified that she had misspoken and wanted to amend the transcript to say “encouraged.” (p.c. 2/2/21) 215 These two quotes point to the sense that Zeke not only offers explicit words of encouragement, but also creates an environment where others feel a sense of ability and ease. This is echoed in Randi’s assertion that with respect to language learning, “If it weren't fun, I don't think I would stick with it.” She described Zeke’s “fun teaching style” and his ability “to laugh and joke” as one of the reasons she takes pleasure in learning her language. She then listed other language teachers she has observed, and noted that “they really engage the person and encourage any effort, and that makes a lot of difference.” [Randi, Lushootseed, 6/16/20] Randi also discussed looking to other teachers as models for how to encourage her own students: Lately, my strategies for that have been to go online and watch other teachers teach. Audit some of the online classes just to watch them teach and listen to how they encourage and what they encourage and when they encourage, and that's made a difference in what I do, too. [Randi, Lushootseed, 6/16/20] That is, Randi is reflective and deliberate about how and when to encourage her own students, based on her experiences as a learner herself as well as the examples set by others in her support network (see related discussions in sections 4.3.2.2 and 4.3.2.3). Other language teachers also reflected on ways that they have encouraged their own students, and how and why they have done so. For example, Sassa shared that she actively encourages students to continue to deepen connections to elder Yup’ik speakers and to cultural activities: a couple students went back to their village after taking our first semester of Yup'ik and, I'm, I stay in contact with them, a lot of them are I have as Facebook friends, and they, I'll check on them, [one of them is] living with her grandma, and I say "she's the teacher, you learn as much as you can from her, speak to her in Yup'ik when you can, don't respond in English, if you can, you know, [Yup'ik phrase], talk to her in Yup'ik." And the same with my son […] and I encourage them, because they're smart, we have smart people, "you can make books. They're looking for children's books." And so I encourage them that way. I've had them join us. [mm] I keep my eyes and ears open for any events, like uh Native musical. I encourage them to, let's sing up there and we learn songs in Yup'ik, or even Dena'ina [mm] And they have sung there, so um, it's good for their morale [Sassa, Yup'ik, 7/7/20] 216 Cassy gave an example of what she says to non-Native students in her Lushootseed classes and the specific reasons she gives for this encouragement: And then when I have non-Native students I, my advice to them all the time is just like "please keep coming! please keep coming!" [{hahaha}] It may, you know, I just tell them, like it might feel weird, but you're here for a reason and any speaker is another opportunity for someone to speak to. And I just tell them like I could know how to say something, I can talk to my dog, and my dog won't talk back to me no matter how many times I tell her to [{hahaha}] "when are you gonna start talking?" Or a wall or, you know, [yeah] so another speaker is another you know, another opportunity. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] Both of these examples show teachers not only encouraging effort in language learning, but also highlighting the importance of building relationships as part of this practice: in Sassa’s example, encouragement to build a stronger relationship with the L1 community; and in Cassy’s example, encouragement for non-Native students to use the language in order to grow the L2 community (reminiscent of O’Rourke and Ramallo’s (2015) observation about the importance of neofalantes in the growth of minoritized language communities in Spain, discussed in section 1.4.1). The ways that language learning and revitalization practice build and strengthen relationships is discussed further in section 4.5. Not all teachers felt confident in how well they were encouraging their students. For example, as a relatively new mentor to other language teachers, Carson expressed some doubts about his approach: one of the people in my class is a language teacher, so, we talk a lot about materials development. [mm] And I think I've done sometimes a good job of encouraging them to be patient about it, and other times I think I've been too harsh critiquing that person for their desire to be able to understand and explain the language [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/8/21] This relates to the theme of finding ways to motivate others, discussed in section 4.3.2.3. 217 Though most of these examples are of teachers and leaders providing encouragement to students, Evaristo shared an example of being a student and attempting to encourage his teachers when he notices they are tired and discouraged: And then sometimes I feel them a bit like, you know, down, and I say, "hey, guys come on! Let's have fun! We, we are alive yet! La30! [mmhmm {haha} {hahaha}] We're alive la, let's go on, let's go on." Yeah, and everybody is like that. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] Learners in the Kristang context (including Evaristo) shared that they felt encouraged and supported by their teachers; in the example above, Evaristo demonstrates his sense of the importance of this support being mutual and reciprocal. In fact, one of these language teachers, Kevin, shared that he does feel encouraged by the Kristang-speaking community: I think actually we [=the organizers] all have a fairly close relationship to the community. I think we, they're definitely friends, a lot of the community are friends, and umm it's very, it's a very safe place lah31 [mm] It's…a lot of people who recognize that Singapore is a very diverse place. Beyond just the usual state narrative. There's an, there's a greater understanding of what exactly, you know because we're so diverse, what do we need to, how do we need to treat people? [mm] How do we need to speak to people? And I feel Kodrah is a lot of that lah. It's become that very organically, and it's, it's very encouraging to return to that. [Kevin, Kristang, 7/18/20] Others outside of the teacher-student relationship can also encourage practitioners to keep going. For example, Cassy shared that when she struggled with homesickness and the feeling that she was missing important cultural activities by being away at college, her uncle encouraged her to complete her degree and to spend more time living with her language mentor: And then I was going to come home and then my Uncle Joe, another big motivator, he said, "Just stay down there and get your teaching degree." […] he was really supportive, and said that, he said "you respect the hell out of what Zeke does, so you should stay there." He said, "all this that you're worried about will be here." He said, "like fishing, you know all that will be here, all, we'll still, we'll still be here." So, it kept reassuring, 30 In the audio recording, Evaristo’s embedded quote is uttered with sing-song intonation and clapping of hands, and as such I transcribed this utterance as “la!” as an expression of joy, rather than “lah” as the Singaporean discourse particle discussed in the following footnote; Evaristo did not correct this when reviewing the transcript. 31 This is a common discourse particle in Singaporean English, with a range of different functions; its function in Kevin’s interviews in particular is a very interesting question for future linguistic research. 218 you know, just, just go do that {ha} [mm, mm] That was helpful. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] That is, like with words of praise, important relations both inside and outside the language learning classroom play a role in motivating persistence in practice through their explicit words of encouragement. 4.3.1.3 Making others proud One other way that relations verbalize support is by expressing pride. A story shared by Jackie can illustrate what this might look like. Jackie’s father, someone she “shares Native ancestry with” (Lushootseed, 7/8/20), does not know their heritage language, but knows that Jackie had begun try to learn it. I asked her if she ever talked to her dad about the kinds of things she’s learning in language, and she responded that she doesn’t “go into a lot of depth or detail” every time they talk. However, a few weeks prior to our interview, her father had floated the idea of selling his land share back to the tribe, which started a conversation that demonstrated Jackie’s language ability. When her father observed that he only earns $2 a month on that land share, she replied: I'm like, "I don't care about that. Like I don't care about the $2 I don't, but this is like, our family. This is our roots, this is our land, this is our culture," like, um, and he's like "Okay, but like what, what can you even do?" And I'm like "Dad, I can take that piece of paper and walk into admin over there and be like '[introduction in Lushootseed]' - like, I can, you know, um like I can talk to them. And say some of this in, in language that is even, that they're going to understand from, from that um perspective." And he was kind of like, "...whoa. Okay!" {haha} He's like, "dang! That's really cool! Good for you, good for you," and just like, shocked and um, because I talk to him about the learning, but we don't really, I don't really speak it with him so much. [mm] Because he doesn't know any. So that was...yeah. That was something. {hahaha} [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] The surprise and obvious pride that her language abilities elicited from her father was a very rewarding “something” to Jackie. 219 Other learners also mentioned the hope that their ancestors would be proud as motivational, and for Michelle, this pride helps her stay positive even though she feels she has a lot left to learn: You know, there's a joke about like, um all I know is numbers colors animals, but my ancestors are still proud. {hahaha} [{hahaha}] Even though they're laughing. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] These expressions of pride, like expressions of praise (section 4.3.1.1) and words of encouragement (4.3.1.3), are all external to the learner. If practitioners are motivated to receive these positive words, then they are by definition extrinsinsically motivated and externally regulated (see discussion of these categories from Self-Determination Theory, section 1.3.1). Language revitalization practice in these examples might be said to be motivated by the desire for reward in the form of praise or other positive words from important relations. However, many of these examples hint at the idea that the positive attitudes of revered relations might not be so straightforwardly external to the learner or to the learner’s sense of self. An excerpt from Cassy’s interview highlights this point in particular. In thinking about her own students and other community members, Cassy observed: And then everybody has their own motivation. Most of them start with I want to be able to say a prayer, or I want to be able to introduce myself in big gatherings. So that kind of stuff. So they can go and speak it and be proud of it. And there's like that, that motivation to be able to do it in front of a lot of people, and make your family proud, and make your people proud, and be that person. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20; emphasis mine] In this quote, Cassy articulates the link between an extrinsic motivation (making your family proud) and identified regulation (“being that person”). In this formulation, receiving expressions of praise and pride might not be, strictly speaking, externalized rewards that the practitioner is motivated by, but rather verbal confirmation that the practitioner is on the path to becoming the self they aim to be. This link between the sense of self and the desire to meet community expectations is explored further in the next section. 220 4.3.2 Reciprocating and responsibility And so keeping um, just working with the people is, is a motivation. Because I know that, in that way I'm giving back. The gift of language. It is a gift. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] Another key motivation is the many ways that practitioners look to relations for models of good behavior, including their sense of personal responsibility to relations and their desire to not only be inspired by others, but to inspire others in turn. In section 4.3.2.1, we look at how interviewees framed language practice in terms of personal responsibility to relationships and to community. Section 4.3.2.2 further illustrates this through the theme of being motivated by others’ examples, as well as being motivated to set an example for others. Section 4.3.2.3 describes strategies that practitioners engage in to personally motivate others in their own language work. All of these themes engage with – and problematize – the notion of the Ought-to Self (L2MSS, Dörnyei 2009), particularly as it is equated with such constructs as Introjected Regulation (Deci & Ryan, 1985) and posited to be unmotivating and/or external to the individual. 4.3.2.1 Personal responsibility Many interviewees framed their language work in terms of individual responsibility to the community. Excerpts from eight practitioners are given here to illustrate this. One extended and illuminating example comes from Angel. When I asked her where she imagines she will be in 5-10 years, she shared that she is constantly reflecting on how she wants to “give of myself in the future”, and how this question relates to important teachings from stories: You know, I am asking that of myself. And I just shared a story with my class, and it's where everybody had to - before the human beings, animal people had to ask, what do you want to be? How do you want to give of yourself for the human beings to come? […] the animal people, the deer, the elk said, "I am going to be, I'm going to give of myself by giving the human beings my hide for clothing and my meat for them to eat for sustenance, and my antlers and things like that for tools." And so each and every one of them had a vision of the future, and how they were going to give to the people. So this 221 assignment, this is what our students have to come up with too, they have to figure out what is it that I'm going to do to give of myself. [mmm, mmhmm] So, you asking me that is very pertinent to what I have to think about now. What do I want? How do I want to give of myself in the future, so that other people can grow stronger and benefit? What can I do to sustain them in the future? And I, I think about that over and over and over. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] This shows that the question of “how do I want to give of myself in the future?” is deeply embedded in cultural teachings from traditional stories, and Angel also incorporates this in her own language teaching and in her reflections about her own practice. This link between culture and language (see also Goals section 3.4.1) is also part of why Masa feels “responsibility” to participate in language revitalization: it's important that we know our culture and our, our um ceremonies and stuff through our language. And so that's why it's important too, so that we survive as a distinct culture. And sovereignty is the ability to perpetuate that culture and the power to do that. And that's I think a responsibility. And so we need to work hard to get the language back so that we can reconnect with that. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] Cassy frequently used the words “obligated” and “obligation” to describe her motivation. For example, when discussing the opportunity she had had as a college student to move down to UO and work intensively with her language mentor, she said that she found it “scary” being that far away from home but also an opportunity that she had a responsibility to make the most of: So I just thought like, "Oh my gosh, there's this man, he's probably the only man in the world that I know that can do that for Lushootseed." And he invested time in me, and my mom made sure I went there. So I just kind of was like, kind of felt obligated to do it, but also I just was that passionate about it too. And I would love for our families to be able to speak Lushootseed, you know, just because they want to. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] The sense of obligation, brought on by the time and effort her mentor and her mother invested in her, coincided with Cassy’s “passionate” commitment to easing the way for future speakers of Lushootseed. Cassy also shared how her memory of witnessing the passing of the last L1 speaker of Lushootseed intensified her feelings of responsibility and of needing to take advantage of rare opportunities: 222 Because in 2008, a year before I graduated high school, is when Vi Hilbert passed away. [mmm] And I remember going to her funeral. And like realizing, "man, why didn't I talk to her before that?" You know, but I was so busy in high school and I, so I didn't go and speak with her a lot. And she was our last first speaker. The last legit first speaker. And I remember at her funeral like looking at some of the kids that came with us that were around my age […] you could tell from the way they were acting that they didn't understand the gravity of that day, like the significance of that day. And not because they're bad people, but because they're not, they never were exposed to the language. So they didn't realize what that really meant that we were burying that elder. [mmhmm] And so um, when I had an opportunity to speak with Ɂəsweli and actually go to school with him I'm like, "well, {ha} I can't say I didn't know he's getting older." {hahaha} […] so I better just go. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] For practitioners who feel this strong sense of personal responsibility, challenges in their own language progress can lead to feelings of letting down the entire community (see further discussion section 4.4.1). For example, when asked if she ever found language practice to be difficult or frustrating, Michelle said that she has found herself “bawling, like, ‘I don't know what I'm doing. I, what if, maybe, I'm not the right person to, to try to carry this on.’” (Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20) Erin also described how challenging it can be to feel solely responsible for language: Yeah, um, what I have on my GitHub right now, is probably, what is it, I think - honestly, it's not that much. But what I do have I'd say like 80% I built in like this, this happy frenzy where I was just like "this is the most brilliant idea!" you know, like with any project. [{chuckle}] "This is the most brilliant idea anyone's ever had! [{haha}] This will revolutionize the world!" and the other 20% was me like fighting the wall and being like, I have to make this happen. If I don't make it happen, it will never exist. And also, I must do it alone. [{chuckle}] There is no one else in the world. {ha} You know that kind of... [Yeah.] thing. So yeah, especially 2019, that was my year of really trying to force it. And failing quite hard to be honest. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] For both Michelle and Erin then, this feeling of responsibility can be a heavy burden, demotivating to the point of “bawling” on Michelle’s part or “fighting the wall” on Erin’s. Seeing the example of others in her community who are committed to the language has helped to ease this burden: it's really nice that, even though I wound up having to drop out of language class, um, what is it, about, at the beginning of March, um I don't feel as alone as I did when I talked 223 to you last. Where, previously I really felt like, the weight of language was on my shoulders, [mmhmm] if I didn't do this then like it was gonna die. [mmm] And, it's been nice to see that there are maybe not a huge number of people, but there are a small number of people who are hugely dedicated to making sure it doesn't happen. [mmhmm] And, being able to see that and be part of it has been really helpful. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/2/21] This realization that others are also sharing in the work may help to ease the stress of sole responsibility for the language. This in turn allows for feelings of responsibility to the community to be more positively motivational, rather than burdensome. Michelle for example discusses prioritizing “doing [her] part”, even though others are also doing the work: sometimes I do feel torn, I used to make a lot more money than I make now. {ha} [mmm] And so, and I have, you know, I've been offered other opportunities. But it's like...I mean, money is important, clearly. I need a roof over my head. I need to feed my family, you know, duhdeduhdeduh, we got bills. Everybody has bills. [mm {haha}] So {ha}, but, you know, And I've even been asked, like, "well, other people are doing it, right? So, you could just do it in your spare time and take this other position." And it's like, But I can't. Because I can't rely on other people. I have to know that I'm doing my part. Because if everybody, if every single person in the Haida Nation took a stand and said, "I'm going to do my part." Then, wow, what a beautiful place this would be. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] Because she knows that she, along with others, are all doing their parts, Michelle has an inspiring vision of working together to build a “beautiful place”. In some cases, practitioners receive explicit reminders from important relations about this responsibility, for example from elders as Sassa shares: Having worked with elders for years and years, and plus, being translator- transcriber for university, they will, it's like when they die they die with the language. So it's, they really, when we - a few of us work with the elders, I was the translator-transcriber, the others, they would work with them and they are recorded. And they...There's, they'd be so willing to share, and they leave it up to us, "now, you're the one to learn this. Now, you're the one to carry it on." [Sassa, Yup'ik, 7/7/20] I note here the way Sassa expresses this sense of responsibility and obligation; not stated as an admonition (e.g. “you should do this”), but rather as a reminder of who you are (“you’re the one to learn this. You’re the one to carry it on.”) 224 Cassy described how her sense of obligation to language work comes from her upbringing: at the beginning it was definitely just that I was taught you step up. Like if you know something needs to be done, you do it. [mm] And that's just how our family, family was telling us to do it. And if you didn't do it then that was your choice. And there's no excuse. Then you just own that, that you decided not to do something when you could have [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] This familial emphasis on stepping up and doing your part also underlies Kayla’s work, in particular her grandmother’s influence on her sense of responsibility and her need to persist: I mean my grandma, she is the language teacher for our tribal language back home […] I actually like called her one time when I wanted to leave, not like the language just my current job. And she was like, "if you're not speaking the language, you need to reassess what you're doing." Um, and so, traditionally, I mean, we, you know, obviously, our grandparents and our mothers and aunts and stuff like that are the people who call the shots. And it's not like a forcible thing, it's something that we've come to understand, like those are the people who keep the knowledge and the wisdom, and so we listen to them. So I would say um, you know, a part of me has like a...an ancestral like, I need to be doing this. […] It's not really um, you know, someone has forced me to do it. But I have clearly understood that this is something that needs to happen and this is the way that I can do it. Because I do catch on and I can speak it, then that's my job then to do that, and to continue to do that. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] Here again we can see the complex interaction between an ‘ought-to’ motivation (I do this out of obligation) and identified regulation (I do this because it is who I am). As Kayla says, her identification as someone good at learning languages (“I do catch on”) leads to her particular responsibility (“then that’s my job”). One interesting note here is that Kayla is not working on her own heritage language, but is helping to revitalize the language of a different Indigenous community; thus the sense of responsibility is not just to her own family and her own speech community, but to the awakening of languages in general. In addition to explicit instructions to do one’s part, the actions of an important relation can give practitioners the sense that they “owe” something, as Carson shares: you know Zeke's really promoting this model that is effective. [mmhmm] And I'm willing to take it on. And he invested his time in kind of recruiting people to do that, right? 225 Reached out to people, and I was one of those people, so [mmhmm] I owe him a lot of, um, just, a lot of that success has been due to him willing to reach out. [Carson, Nuu- wee-ya', 6/8/21] In this way, both words and actions can motivate practitioners via a sense of personal responsibility. Words and actions can also serve as models to emulate, as will be discussed next. 4.3.2.2 Setting an example Relations can serve as examples of persistence, of prioritizing language, and of successful strategies for language learning. For many, witnessing the hard work that others have put into language is motivational, as one Kristang learner says about her teachers: And I also think, you know, I mean we're behind...Kevin puts in a lot of effort. I mean, he's teaching full day you know? If he's going to class, hey, we better be there, you know what I mean? {haha} [{hahaha}] And Luis, and Fran, they're all working. [mmhmm] So yeah. And they are so nice, so, that makes it even easier for us to attend class. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] Randi also described the example set by her teachers as well as other learners she has observed: Cassie George and her just, you know, she started out at 12 teaching the language. And just to watch a young woman like that grow in that and become what she has in the language is, is motivation. And to watch Zeke's persistence over decades is motivation. Um, and then being around the Puyallup language program, all these brand new speakers that communicate a lot […] I may know some in other areas, but I believe they are able to communicate on the whole better, and that's where I want to get to. [Randi, Lushootseed, 6/16/20] As in these two quotes, these positive examples can come from the speech community; they can also come from the larger revitalization community. When I asked her if there were people outside her family who had been encouraging or inspirational to her, Beth said: I think, in the world of language revitalization, people like Jessie Little Doe um, or, you know, Mary Hermes, there are like a lot of amazing people just doing innovative incredible work. I don't even know them but I like, love their work. [mm] Um, and then you know in Nez Perce language Phil Cash Cash has been phenomenal, Angel Sobotta, umm Juwie Davis, his grandmother was super sweet. Um, yeah, there are, you know, other, other people. Of course, Virginia Beavert and the whole like Heritage University - like there are so many inspirational stories. Um, and people just very dedicated, um to the work. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] 226 The community of language revitalization practitioners has been important to Zeke for many years, including years spent living in a “language house” and hosting dinners with practitioners from other Indigenous language communities. He shared a story of one evening when an important elder came to visit their dinner, and not only modelled for them but also explicitly admonished them in how to behave: what would happen was that - and Virginia started it, she came to our house and we had a potluck, and she talked in Indian to us, and Regan was there, so Regan translated she said, uh, "Tux̠amshish is telling you guys that she had a dream about this and that she was supposed to come and talk to you, and she's telling all of you to quit speaking English, speak your language because as you speak English, you're unraveling everything that you're trying to do." [mm, mmhmm] And so we all went {gasp!} And then we started speaking four different languages all at once. [{hahaha}] [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] Angel shared that attending the NILI summer session was helpful in terms of seeing concrete examples from other practitioners: it was exciting to see Greg Sutterlict when he did his presentation with his Zoom meetings, you know? [mmhmm] And, it's like every community, you know, he said they started out with 20 and then dwindled down to eight, something like that. That's how it is with everything. But at least the, he did that and he had that, you know, and it showed me that things like that can be done. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] Angel shared another case where she has been able to draw on the concrete example of other language revitalization practitioners making do with limited language documentation: But for us, we have a plethora of our traditional stories. […] we have recordings and they're written in our language, and so we have those old forms of speech that we can listen to, plus just the value of the indigenous stories, which that's the focus of my doctoral program. So we have, I start to think of what do we have that we can work with, you know? And then you look at the Wampanoag, [mmm] and uh the Myaamia language, and then uh...is it the Karuk, or whatever in California. But, you know, many of them who didn't have...but they had documents, you know? And so, we have a lot. Really. Compared to what other people have, other languages have. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] Thus for Angel in this case, comparing her own situation to others makes her feel more hopeful for her own work. Similarly, Jackie finds that seeing examples of classmates struggling in the same way that she sometimes does can lower her feelings of “self-judgement”: 227 The other people in my class, we, we will sometimes, like our teacher will ask like what challenges, did you come up with. [mmhmm] Or come up to this week. And so, that's probably where I hear the most of that. And even that is helpful for somebody who can go to quick self-judgment. {chuckle} [mmhmm] {hahaha} you know [{hahaha}] Just to hear like, "okay this person just spoke their domain perfectly and that's awesome. And, they struggled through something too." {haha} yeah. [Yeah {hahaha}] Great. {hahaha} [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] This was in fact one of the common ways that classmates can motivate language learners. Charlotte also mentions classmates as being inspirational, and particularly the example of elder learners: I think all of the language teachers inspire me, and everyone in the classes. […] in some classes like the intro or the moderate classes, there's elders, like tribal members or community members over the age of we'll say 60, 55, and you know they're similar to my family. They might know a couple words here and there, but they're totally new to some of the phrases, or the domains, or the language nest ideas, and they're just, they're doing their best. And that, I think about everything that they've been through or their family had been through. And I think about what they've seen, like the progress that they've seen for the language in our community. […] it's very inspiring to me that they, they show up and you know allow themselves to maybe feel uncomfortable or insecure, just to learn the language. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] Charlotte also shared that she was raised to consider the example of her ancestors in maintaining language: I was very lucky to have parents that were also raised in a lot of, with a lot of traditional values, um and felt empowered, you know they felt empowered to pass that on to me. And I think a lot of emphasis was put on how lucky we are to have everything we have today because of the work that our ancestors did, and because of their sacrifices, and one of those things was even the language, even though it was just little remnants of the language here and there. […] Our family, especially my mom's side has a lot of trauma, and even still, you know, my aunts and uncles, who have experienced horrible things and you know may seem disconnected from the culture or community, they still say, huy’, when they say goodbye, or they still say [LS], 'I love you', and they still have those little things. And you know my sapa' [LS] my grandpa, even though he had stories of school teachers making fun of him for speaking the language or things like that, he still had little bits and pieces of the language too. And so I think it was always, it wasn't directly said, it was just kind of an understanding that, you know, our ancestors worked so hard to keep these little things alive for us, and the least we can do is keep it going, and, you know, pass more on to our descendants or whatever we can. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] This example of maintaining language in the face of trauma is also something that Chris B finds “powerful”: 228 the fact that...hmm how do I phrase this? The fact that the language was almost taken from us. Um, I remember somebody asked me, he said, "Well, how do you guys even lose a language? How do you lose your language?" And I was like, "we didn't lose it. People literally died because they refused to learn English." Well, they were 'disappeared.' [mm, mm] And the fact that we have the language today means that during the late 19th century and the early 20th century, people kept speaking the language when they knew that they could die for it. And that to me is really powerful. Just speaking the language could get you disappeared, and yet they still did it. And so I think there's a value in speaking it today. And anything, just to honor them. Um, also, there's a value in taking back something that was stolen from you. [mm, mmm] Yeah. So that gets me going. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] In all these quotes, we see how important relations serve as examples of resistance and persistence, for language maintenance and use. These relations serve not only to share experience and expert guidance, as is the case in the excerpts from Angel and Zeke above about the community of revitalization practitioners. They also serve as models and guides, analogous to Dörnyei’s (2009) ‘self-guides’ (i.e. the image of the Ideal L2 Self, and the image of the Ought- to L2 Self); that is, the model of an elder who endures discomfort in order to regain language, or an ancestor who fought to keep the language in the face of terrible consequences, becomes part of the vision for what practitioners want to be themselves. Images of the Ideal L2 Self then are at least partially created from memories and images of others. A quote from one heritage learner of Lushootseed illustrates this point; for this learner, language learning centers around a vision of simultaneously honoring the example of these ancestors while also serving as an example herself: Um, I think it's very important to learn this language, not just because we have an excellent opportunity with Zeke and the language program, but because if we bridge that gap of two generations, and keep it going, our family can look back later down the road and say, "we have been Lushootseed speakers for, for years." I mean, you know, a long time. There was just a short break. [mmm] And hopefully we can get our family back on track to know where, where this language came from, what it, what value it has to our people, all of that. [learner, Lushootseed, 6/23/20] In this way, practitioners are motivated to be an example to others in their turn. In the following section we see more examples of how practitioners aim to pass on L2 motivation to others. 229 4.3.2.3 Motivating others Like the heritage Lushootseed learner quoted above, many practitioners discussed their aspiration to serve as an example to and a motivation for others. This is true for teachers who aim to motivate their students, but it is also true of individuals who want to support and motivate family members and other important relations. Examples from eight interviewees are given here to illustrate. Carson prioritizes helping others take pressure off themselves, partially as the result of his own experience with this “crippling” pressure: Because a lot of people feel a lot of pressure that they have to like, take care of the language because it's an endangered language and uh… That's like telling yourself, it's like the finals in a sports game every practice, or whatever. You know? [{hahaha} uh huh {hahaha}] It's like a huge amount of pressure. [uh huh] And is like a pretty crippling thing, I think. So that's a lot of what I've tried to do is just like help people feel relaxed. But that's just coming from my experience and kind of journey. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/9/20] Teachers in particular reflected on their strategies and reasons for motivating their students, as Chris B did: I have to admit, one failure that I had um over spring break […] I kept telling the students, you know, “go ahead and take a rest. It's all right, you worked really hard,” [mmhmm] it seemed like a nice thing to say. But they took that literally, and when they got back they forgot everything, oh my gosh. [{ha} mmm] So I should have said something different. I should have said, "keep using your domains," you know, "keep using your conversation." So, that's something I'm going to have to work on and, and, find ways to motivate them...another opportunity to learn how to motivate people. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 5/27/21] Cassy said something very similar, reflecting on trying to find a balance between being understanding and being motivational for her students: I mean I think myself, mentally I've given myself permission to, you know, if some sort of an emergency comes up and I have to go here with the language, that's okay. If something happens with my students and they go here, that's okay. And it did take me a while to you know, you don't want to not motivate your students and be so relaxed that they don't think they have to do anything like, "yeah, haha, this is nice. We got this." And 230 just "oh I didn't do it haha I didn't do it." [mmm] But, but at the same time, like, give them…I don't know it's a weird balance. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] Cassy also said that she often reminds her students that they motivate her, and that teaching the class serves as an “incentive” for her to keep working. (Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20) In fact, many interviewees discussed how motivating others serves to motivate them in turn. For example, Chris B described a student who had not previously been very successful in his language class, and how “fun” it was to see her improvement: I saw her on a Tuesday, and I thought to myself, "well, she's probably really good at golfing or something." And then didn't see her on Wednesday and then saw her on Thursday, and she was a different person. It was, it was...I, and so I said, "So-and-So, you've been practicing haven't you?" And she's like, "Yes..." So it, so that felt really good to be able to, you know, just to see improvement, just like literally in like two days. [mmhmm] I think she had reached a breakthrough in that two days. So that was really fun to watch. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] Masa told of when he was invited to participate in a ceremony when his town government decided to use the Indigenous language of the area to rename an important landmark. He shared that he took the opportunity to “encourage” the non-Native community and how positively he felt about that opportunity: I flew down for it. I lived in the Northwest at that time. I came down for it and when it came my time to talk, I was just thinking about the whole situation. And I thought, I told him, I said, "you know, when the non-Indian, what non-Indian people think about our language affects us greatly. If we go to boarding school and we're told our language is savage and ugly and we're not to speak it, it affects our language, we tend not to speak it anymore. We feel shame. But if you're telling us it's important, and you like that the Creek is called Chumash Creek, and that it's cool that it's in the way you write your language, that's very encouraging. And so it's very important that we have your support and that you're aware." And it was just a great occasion. [mm] You know, to encourage them. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] And Beth gave an example of the an exercise she sets for her students which motivate them to use language for a particular purpose, and how she gets to “discover amazing things” as a result: I think being able to express yourself in a prayer, whatever that is for you in your language is a very powerful, strengthening thing to do. But also to be able to talk about your, your, your attributes, who you are, what you're like, to be able to describe yourself in your language, I think that's a really important thing. And sort of a decolonizing thing. 231 Um, because I think we can be more...yeah, we can, we can be outside of those other paradigms. When we are inside of our language. And [mmhmm] And um, one of the writing assignments I have students do, or writing prompts is, uh do this like, 'who am I?' kind of exercise. Like "who am I in my language?" Like when you are like physically inside your language, who are you? Um, and people have written amazing things. Like you discover amazing things if you do that exercise. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] These practitioners describe the outcomes of their efforts to motivate others as being personally rewarding, a “great occasion” in Masa’s case, “really fun to watch” in Chris B’s, and the chance to see “amazing things” in Beth’s. Practitioners also shared stories of how they have been able to model language practice for their relations. Michelle shared examples of how she has seen language practice spread to many different members of her immediate family, and reflects on her own role in motivating this change: so my nephew, he's getting, um better and better. Uh it's been six weeks since he came to stay with me, and he's definitely - he thinks 'kúunanggalaa' is just the funniest word because I'm always saying that Lorilei32 is kúunanggalaa, that's 'crazy,' [{haha} mmhmm] and, "Aunt Chelle, Lorilei's being kúunanggalaa again!" You know? {hahaha} [{hahaha}] It's a word used a lot in our house. Um {hahaha} [{hahaha}] but and then they, they know- like um, like 'pound it' ta k’id hlaa!, that's always - and my stepdad, he uses that all over the community, he's non-Native but he's really been picking up because he's like [mm] "if she's going to know it, I need to know it." And it's amazing how much him and my mom have really [mmm] and then my brother also, he's my baby brother, he's ten years younger than me, [mm] um, and he does his own thing, you know, but, I told him, I said "brother, you know you, you need to, you need to start coming over to the house and visiting more, like, because I wanna make sure that Lorilei knows you. [mmhmm] I wanna make sure that when you walk in the door she's not like, 'who's this guy that comes around every once in a while?'" [mmhmm] And so, he has been coming over twice a week, and his language usage has just like skyrocketed. And then he's using it within the community also. And then he's constantly like he'll do like Facebook message me, like "how do I say this?" and like "can you send me a voice recording?" you know, and so, that's been really really awesome. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] 32 Lorelei is her daughter, who was not yet two years old at the time of this interview. 232 Like Michelle is doing with her nephew and her “baby brother”, Erin is also hoping to model language use for younger members of her family, in particular her youngest niece (who was two years old at the time of this quote): she has certain words that she knows. And, she won't necessarily use them first, but if you say it to her, she knows what it means and she'll say it back. [hmm!] So like hvm’- chi’, which means "bye," um, if you say "bye" to her she'll say "bye," and if you say "hvm’-chi’" she'll say "hvm’-chi’" instead. Um, I call her In-stvm, which means 'little one,' and if I, if I'm like "ey In-stvm" she'll turn around and look at me. So, that's a good start. […] I'm trying to come up with names for all the kids in uh Dee-ni'. Or Nuu-wee- ya' I should say. [mmm!] And, I haven't come up with a name for her. So, we'll, we'll see how that goes. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/2/21] Interviewees also talked about being models for older relatives. Michelle mentioned this with respect to her non-Native stepdad in the above quote. Karelle also mentioned a parent when asked if she can think of a time when she motivated or encouraged someone else: I think...um actually like so when I'm talking with my mom. […] I've introduced different parts of the language that I've learned to her. And I think that, you know, that's, it's great to really like see her excited that this is a possibility. Because for her growing up like she didn't really expect to have, or to be able to speak more of the language than the, like, words or two that were sort of still there. [mm] But, you know, realizing that I was learning it, and like trying to um, teach her some of the words I think really sort of encouraged her for her own learning I think, and also just for the like, the community in general like this is actually something we can have in the future. [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] Like Karelle, Erin also reflected on the positive effect she hopes she has had on her mother: I think I am motivating to my mom. […] my mom has been plugging away at the community classes, I'm not joking, for probably eight or 10 years. And the amount that she has learned is extremely small for that level of investment. [mmm] And I think, at least in terms of showing that learning another language is possible, I have been motivating to her. And when I started learning, showing her that...uh showing her the techniques that I used, you know because I use a lot of the same techniques for Nuu-wee- ya' that I learned, or that I used to learn Japanese. [mm, mm] So showing her the techniques I think was really helpful and inspiring to her as well [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] And Michelle shared a story of how moving it was for her to be a model and example for her grandmother: 233 Yeah, my biological grandmother [Marina Jones Festa33], she passed away a year ago. She was just amazed at what I was doing. Um, she was taken to a residential school when she was six years old. And so she didn't know anything, and hence, you know, then my mother didn't, and I didn't. [mmm] And she lived in, she moved to Seattle after she got out of that school. And so, she wasn't around any Native people or anything. So she completely lost her culture. [mm] But when I started learning and, you know, I would call her, and I would use words and, and then I would fly down to visit. And she would say things, like, just out of the blue. And she'd say, "does that mean...?" you know, " ‘dagwáang’, does that, that means 'my dear,' right?" You know, it was just crazy for being, you know, she only heard her language from birth to six. And then these words like started coming back to her at the end. [mmhmm mmm] And so that was really exciting. And you know, when I would say things and it would trigger her, so to be able to do that and, um and teach her about ourselves, was really huge for me also. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] I want to note here that Michelle shared this story in response to being asked if anyone had “ever been really encouraging or really inspirational to you?”, rather than the other way around. For Michelle, as for other interviewees, seeing the positive effects that her own example has on others is personally motivational to her in turn, a kind of positive feedback loop. Thus this theme, like the themes of personal responsibility and example-setting, highlights the reciprocity underlying motivation to practice language revitalization. Though these themes might be characterized as examples of the Ought-to L2 Self and more externalized forms of regulation, what these practitioners describe is a strongly positive valence to this sense of obligation and giving back to others. This echoes MacIntyre et al’s (2017) argument that for the heritage learners of Gaelic in their study, “the ought-to self does not necessarily reflect unwanted obligation […] but rather a welcome (albeit challenging) obligation to continue the Gaelic traditions into which they were born.” (p. 513). Based on many of the experiences and thoughts described in this section 4.3.2, I would argue that not only is this obligation “not unwanted”; it 33 Michelle’s original words were “my biological grandmother”, but she asked to add this name to the interview transcript when she reviewed it. I believe this itself speaks to the importance of this relationship to her. 234 also affirms the sense of self and provides personally meaningful social rewards to those who strive to meet those obligations. 4.3.3 Sharing and socializing language is a way of communication. And if you can communicate with someone in a language that he or she knows, then, you know there is so much joy. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/29/20] The inherently social nature of language also provides motivation for language practice. That is, one way that relationships motivate is through the promise of being able to socialize and share something with family, friends, and new acquaintances. One interesting example of this is when language is considered “cool” within a peer network, as discussed in section 4.3.3.1. Relatedly, language learners are motivated by the way that language can be a special code shared among friends, discussed in section 4.3.3.2. Section 4.3.3.3 looks at other kinds of sharing in language that practitioners find meaningful. Finally, section 4.3.3.4 focuses on interaction itself, which is both a mechanism to advance language skills as well as a social motivator for language practice. 4.3.3.1 Social capital (aka “cool factor”) One sense in which language learning enables sharing with others is what the Kodrah Kristang organizing team (Kevin, Fran, and Luis) described as “social capital.” Kevin explains what this means in terms of people interested in taking Kristang language classes: I think we've, part of the reason why we seem to have some interest in the classes is because we have developed a little bit of that social capital which Fran mentioned. People like to come to class because Kristang is seen as, as of that heritage and it's, I think it's something that as Fran also alluded to, has been experiencing a little bit of a renaissance in Singapore in the last couple of years, more people are interested in heritage, more people are interested in questioning the narratives that we've been sold about how the country developed. [Kevin, Kristang, 7/18/20] Kevin added that he thinks “there's also some social capital in that uh Kristang is cool now.” Luis expanded on this idea of social capital in Singaporean society (and being “cool”): 235 I definitely think, you know, Singapore is reaching that point of wealth. Where not only, I don't think it's only cool in the sense of the secret language, which of course it is, but I think it's also cool in the sense of like, for lack of a better concept, I will call it like the 'hipster movement' where it's no longer cool to just care about, you know, your nine-to- five job, like when people ask you, "what do you do?" right, like, "oh, I work" okay no. "Yeah. But after work, what do you do after work? What do you like to do? who are you?" […] the people who we have in class are either people who are middle-aged, and again uh probably no longer seeking, like raising their life status, either because they have already fairly high life status, [mm] and because they're just like open to, you know, explore little bits of life that they maybe didn't allow themselves to explore. [mmhmm] And for the younger kids, we do have, I do see that. [Luis, Kristang, 7/18/20] He added that the “younger crowd” wants to explore things that make them “more interesting,” and emphasized that “it's not just cool in the sense that is cool. It's cool, in the sense that it's cultivating. It makes people more interesting.” (Luis, Kristang, 7/18/20) So in this sense, Kristang language learning is cool because it is seen as a cool activity by current society. There is also the sense, highlighted by Fran, that Kristang is cool because the language classes are fun: For a lot of the youngsters who come for our classes, that's one of the pros to learning Kristang. Because they feel like they can, you know, just talk secretly among their friends. So there is that, I think that adds to the cool factor that Kevin was talking about. And that really helps, right, in terms of language learning motivations, because if I think back to my own experience learning Mandarin, it was really a fuddy duddy language. [{hahaha}] We're taught, we were taught it in the least attractive way possible. {haha} um {haha} Yeah, so I think the cool factor for Kristang is really how we pick it up through the classes. It's not enforced. Right? It's something that people sign up for and it's something that people come back for because they think it's fun. Not because, not necessarily because they think they're learning the language, but they come back, also for the community spirit. [mmhmm] The social capital. [Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] This sense of playfulness and fun as a language learning motivation was also mentioned by Kayla in a very different language learning context: I think one of the motivations that happens - and this may just be in Puyallup specific - is that, when you see a trend happening, and you, like it starts to go a little bit more and then you all of a sudden are like, "oh god! Like, I don't want to miss out on that." I feel like that a lot of what's happening in the language. [mmhmm] At least here in Puyallup is that we have a lot of young like fun people who are doing this. And so then it feels like, this is like the party crew. Like, let's get on this and let's speak language. And I think that's, especially at the school, I feel like that's why we got so many kids in those classes was because, you know you have a fun, cool teacher. He's like your dude, he says hi in the hallway, [{haha}] and so then it's like, "well, I want to be in that, you know, I want to 236 do that." And so it's less of, you know, I highly doubt those kids were like "oh my grandma would love that I'm doing this," but they were probably like you know, I want to have fun. I want to go to a fun class. I want to enjoy myself I want to be with my friends. […] I would say that's one of the motivations, at least for the group that we're working with up here is like, it is, you know, we try to make it fun. We try to joke around. We try to just let it be another experience that you have. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] One key point here is Kayla’s hypothesis that “kids” are more motivated by their peer group (going to be with their friends) and by a sense of “fun” and being with a “cool teacher” who’s “your dude.” Though she is reporting on this second-hand, there is some evidence in the literature to support this hypothesis. For example, Lyngnes (2013) found that motivated young Sami learners would give statements such as “Many people think it's cool to be a Sami” (p. 235). The importance of peer networks over family networks was also found in Petit’s (2016) study of young Irish learners. These learners described themselves as being most motivated to practice language when they could engage with friends from a summer language class, even though they had been brought up in families that emphasized the importance of language learning and had taken many formal classes in the subject. As Petit (2016) describes, these summer experiences were turning points because “[f]or the first time the language becomes more than a subject because it is used to socialise.” (p. 54; see Introduction section 1.4 for a more detailed description of both Lyngsnes’ and Petit’s studies). Thus the importance of peers in the learning community (and peer judgements of ‘coolness’) may be especially important for young language community members. What this suggests is that teachers and organizers may do well providing multiple opportunities to socialize with peers in the language, and to foster not only a sense of connection to family members and the speech community, but also to each other (see related discussion in sections 4.5.3 and 4.5.4). But Kayla observed that it is not just the youngest members of a language community who are motivated by this ‘cool factor.’ When I asked Kayla if she meant that Lushootseed is 237 “cool,” she immediately answered, “Oh my gosh! I’m telling you. We’re so cool! You can’t tell by Zeke?? You’re telling me that Zeke isn’t cool for you?” We laughed together and I said that Zeke is very cool, and when I agreed that that must be a motivation for some people, she continued: It might just be me. I think it's cool. I mean, when I got to the first academy, right? Like you’ve seen the language department, they’re all like young, fun, I mean Amber’s like probably the most mature of them all, like the boys are just silly. They do funny things, you know, and so it’s like, when you see them, you want to be around them. But then when you’re around them, they only speak language so it’s like, “Oh, I have to be speaking language to hang out with these people? Totally I’ll do it.” I think it’s fun. I think they’re a blast. They do all sorts of fun stuff. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] Thus in Kayla’s observation, the “cool factor” adds to the motivation to gain social capital from language learning, as it does for the Kristang community. 4.3.3.2 Shared code Practitioners also discussed the special status of lesser-known languages to act as a code to share among peers. Illustrative examples come from six interviewees. In the previous section (4.3.3.1), Fran noted that “talking secretly among friends” is something that adds to the “cool factor” of Kristang, and she elaborated that she has heard learners discuss this directly: I think more than 10 times, we've heard of Kristang being used and actually we have used it as well as a 'secret language'. Right? It's not something that people very readily understand in the Singaporean context. [mmm] So if we're say outside, or we want to just talk to each other without people knowing about what we're talking about, it's Kristang. For a lot of the youngsters who come for our classes, that's one of the pros to learning Kristang. Because they feel like they can, you know, just talk secretly among their friends. [Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] A heritage learner of Kristang also mentioned this benefit of being able to speak Kristang with her children when they were younger: And I teach my children certain words. So that when we go out shopping we'll just say, "Hey, it's too expensive, move on," you know? and nobody understands. [{hahaha}] If it's awful looking then I'll say it in Kristang, they understand a few words. "Oh, it's not nice, it's not pretty, just move on" then they will just, "okay." When they were young, you 238 know? When they were just little children. But yeah, in that sense, it's good. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] One heritage learner of Lushootseed shared a similar story of using language as a code. When visiting Las Vegas with another Lushootseed learner, he found himself in an elevator with some people speaking a language other than English. He said that he thinks it’s “rude” when people talk in a different language and you cannot understand what they might be saying, and in response he started practicing his Lushootseed domains out loud to his companion. He said: So I just had a conversation and the conversation was - there was no conversation, that was me saying words and talking, because that was a couple years ago, but it made me feel better. Like, okay, well now I don't know what they're saying either. […] It feels good, if we ever needed to have a discussion without having people know what we're saying, we could potentially do that. So I think that's a good thing. [Joe, Lushootseed, 6/23/20] Masa in fact suggests that even historically language has been used for secret shared purposes: People that spoke the language together is probably, they spoke it visiting and they shooed the kids away, you know, to just speak amongst themselves. The kids didn't need to know the language because it wasn't going to help them survive economically. Plus, it was, we can use it among ourselves and not be understood. [Mm hmm. Mmhmm] I think that was the last throes of our language, but it also needs to be noted that when our last speakers died in the ’60s, that's about 200 years after contact. That's a long time. For a language. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] Practitioners observed that this social code-sharing happens with all languages, not just heritage languages that are only understood by a few. Evaristo observed that code-switching within a diverse linguistic repertoire is a “political” act among young people in Singapore generally: then it's so nice to see, they're speaking Singlish, And then {tchoo!} speak English. {tchoo!} come back to Singlish. [uh huh, uh huh] And one second. That, you see people doing that all the time. [uh huh] So it's like, it also political way to protect themselves from the foreigners. See? [mmm] "When we are talking to each other..." [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] And Angel also described the satisfaction she gets from being able to “code talk”: I think, I think that kids, and myself too, get a little bit of a kick out of being able kind of like code talk. [mmm] You know, we're doing this special talk that nobody else knows, 239 you know. And it's kind of cool because we can communicate, and they can't understand, you know. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] Thus practitioners identified the ways that language can be used as a tool to be shared within certain relationships, and which symbolically sets those relationships apart. This is related to the ‘cool factor’ discussed above (section 4.3.3.1), especially Kayla’s note that langauge is a special way of making a connection with the “party crew”. In the next section, we look at other ways that language is used to share something meaningful with relations. 4.3.3.3 Sharing something meaningful Outside of the “secret code” function of language, there are other ways learners use language to share with others meaningfully. For Erin, who had said that it was difficult to find joy in language learning when she felt lonely in the work, sharing language with her young niece was meaningful and “joyful”: so, {ha} she's in that stage of life right now where you - like everyone's very excited that she talks, but she doesn't talk very much, and so everyone's always being like, "say 'this'" or "say 'that'" [mm] And she's like, "no!" […] but the other day I was - what was, I was, carrying her around in the kitchen, I don't even remember what I was trying to...talk to her about, but I asked her to say something. And, she, she made an effort, but it was like six syllables full of like barred l's and {haha} and stuff [{haha}] {haha} and so, she gave me two really [{ha}] tryin syllables. And, so I looked at her, and I said, "say this word." [mmhmm] And then she said it. And then I said "say this word," and she said it. Again, like in her kind of, not perfect, or like her imperfect baby talk-ish kinda way. [mmhmm] But the fact that she kinda just met me there and she was like, in a way - this is probably just projecting again, but in a way it felt like she was like, "I understand that you're trying to do something important, [mmhmm] and I will do this important thing with you." [mmhmm] That was really cool. Um, yeah. Any time I talk to her and she responds like that...[mmhmm] it's, it's really nice. It's very, it's very joyful. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/2/21] Angel also shared that seeing a child understand something in language is one of the “gems” that keeps her going, along with moments where something clicks in her own comprehension: it's inspiring when you listen to things and you can pick out different things. Or if you're at a powwow and you can "Oh, I'm understanding what he said," you know, then you get that connection to our language and connection to our ancestors, and then it's also inspiring too when you're working with a little kid, and they'll you know greet you in a certain way, or say something and then, then I realize, "oh they understood what I said!" 240 you know, they reply to you. And so those different types of gems are what keep me going. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] Jackie used the notion of meaningful sharing as a metric for calculating the effort she puts into language practice: Yeah, so I guess it's hard to put like a number to it, [sure] since it’s always rolling in my head. And I'm finding that I am sharing words with people at various points in conversations, just a word that is especially meaningful in my language. [mmm] Yeah. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] She gave a specific example from her professional life of what this might look like: Um, I'm a therapist, and I work down in Klamath Falls, Oregon, and [mmm] We have a fairly high Native population down here, and so every once in a while I work with Native folks in my practice. And so like even a new intake this week, somebody that I was able to share, you know, some... in Lushootseed, if I'm saying it correctly, [LS] is our word for 'medicine' and he was talking about needing to find his medicine. [mm, mm] And so just being able to share through, even though his indigenous language is different. Um…yeah. [mm] Just be able to give that piece for somebody who is going to find a lot of meaning in that, to be able to share that with him [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] Charlotte also gave the example of becoming a language teacher as a way for her to “share my Lushootseed”: It's funny, Zeke just kinda like, signs you up for things and you're like "oh, I guess I'm doing this." {haha} So, I uh yeah the MLI I think I like the structure of it, because um, it, it provides an outlet for me to use my teaching abilities and to share my Lushootseed with folks in a, I think a little bit less...intensive format. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] Chris B gave a different kind of example from his teaching experience, wherein he shares something culturally meaningful that he learned from his family in his approach to language instruction: one thing, I've been thinking about this actually a little bit - mm, a lot lately. Um, my, both of my grandparents they, they went through boarding schools, they had really difficult lives, full of racism, incarceration because of fighting for Treaty rights and whatnot. But they both had amazing senses of humor. [mmhmm] I think more than you would expect, you would never guess how much b.s. they had to live through based on what hilarious people they were. And how happy they were, and joyful. And I remember my grandpa saying things like you know "you have to keep laughing or you'll start crying," or um, I remember one time he even said "soon as they make you mad, they win." And so I think, the sense of humor that they have is one of our tools […] I try to incorporate that into my classes, because I think that's an important part of Native culture 241 that I think, I know a lot of my students probably don't get um from their school experience. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 5/27/21] For Chris then, using humor and play is not just a way to develop a “cool factor” in language learning, but is motivated also by cultural authenticity and meaningful connection. Practitioners also described ways that talking about language helps them make meaningful connections with others. For example, one heritage Kristang speaker used language similarities and shared national histories to connect with her helper: at the moment because I have this maid, uh helper who is from East Timor, [mm] because I noticed that she spoke, when she spoke to her relatives, she was using a different language, not Indonesian! [mm] You know? So I said, I asked her about it, and she said "yeah, East Timor is very Catholic." And they have a lot of the Portuguese traditions which they have kept. [mmm] So it will be interesting to go there, in fact I think I want to sort of write down the words that she uses, which are in East Timorese, [Yeah. Yeah.] You know they are the same as - or similar, to Kristang words. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/29/20] Beth described how participating in a NILI Summer Institute gave her the opportunity to interact with learners from a neighboring tribe, and to learn about cultural and linguistic similarities: it was the other part of it was actually learning, or taking these intro classes, in Ichishkíin, um because it is adjacent to Nez Perce. And so it was the first time that I had the experience of thinking outside of Nez Perce and English. […] And also, it was really fun because some words are kind of similar. Like in Nez Perce, we say, 'me:ywi' for 'morning' and in Ichishkiin it's maitsxi. [mm] And so it's like, "Oh, those are kind of close." But then like, words for 'coffee' were completely off. For good reason! Words for coffee were different. But it, you know, it would just, there'd be moments of convergence, and then total difference and that was fun. Umm... but then there are also a lot of cultural similarities, uh like five is a special number for them. They also have the same kind of longhouse beliefs, practices around feasting, and salmon ceremony and all those things were really similar. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] In these ways, exchanging language tokens allows practitioners to forge and reinforce meaningful connections with others (see also discussion in section 4.5). That is, language is a symbolic tools for establishing and affirming relationships Being able to use language together in this way is a key relational motivation for some practitioners. 242 4.3.3.4 Interaction By far the most frequently coded relational motivation is “interaction”, which was coded for 23 of the 29 total interviews. Broadly speaking, this code refers to using language in interactions and exchanges with others. There are many ways this might look, depending on the relationship and on the context, and there are also many different ways that this motivates language learners. I give examples here from nine interviewees to illustrate what shape these interactions take and how they serve to motivate practice. Some ways that interaction motivates language practice is related to the Output Hypothesis (Swain, 2000; 2005) in second language acquisition, as discussed in section 4.1.1. That is, interacting with others pushes individuals to expend effort on using the language actively. Kayla gives an example of running into kids who know her from language workː the best part about being a culture teacher at a tribal school is that anytime I run into the kids, that's how they expect me to acknowledge them. Um, and so without like trying to do it. If I see a kid from the school obviously I'm gonna be like, "Oh, haʔł sləx̌il!" you know, because I'm hyped to see them and that triggers my response to then use the language. Um, so yeah that totally happens. Um, you know and I run into, like, just people, too, that we speak the language together. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] An important point to note here is that Kayla not only mentions her opportunity for language practice here, but also her “hyped” response to seeing other language users. Zeke recognizes that having other speakers to interact with is an important factor in the growth of his language community, as he explains: My expectation is – and I don't expect it, but there's indicators that Lushootseed is going to become a primary language again in the Puget Sound area. Now how that happens I'm not quite sure, I have ideas that probably it's going to need to be taught in the public school system, so that your network of speakers, when they interact outside of the community, there's interaction there. [mm, mmhmm] So the kids in the school may not speak the language, but when they interact with Lushootseed speakers, they'll understand what they're saying. Some of it. And at least greet them and say goodbye in the language. [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] 243 Michelle’s observation of her daughter’s language development underscores Zeke’s point by showing how young passive learners can be pushed away from language use if their interactions are primarily in the dominant languageː It's good, it's so funny because she'll be doing really good about using X̱aad Kíl, um you know body parts, or um she's really good - she always says 'háw’aa' which is 'thank you,' [mmhmm] sometimes she'll say 'háw’aathankyou' like it's one word um {hahaha} [{hahaha}] […] And it does vary like, when she's with her non-Native grandparents [mmhmm] they don't know any X̱aad Kíl. I mean I'm kinda trying to teach them a little bit, um, so they do know like kinda what she's saying sometimes, [mmhmm] um, but, like she'll come home and it's "eyes. ears. head." You know. [mmhmm yeah] And then I'm like "oh gyúu! Kaj!" You know? And then [Yeah] and then it's kinda back. So it, it definitely, uh, she knows it, but doesn't always use it. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] Thus, which language is used for social interactions can have a strong effect on development in very young (potential) bilingual children. Interacting in language serves another practical function, in that it helps learners recognize and celebrate progress (see also discussion in Goals 3.6.4). For Michelle, the opportunity to interact with other speakers remotely and to recognize when she can comprehend their conversation gave her a “huge boost” to her confidence: last week I was very fortunate to be able to join a study group of speakers from Masset, which is the village my grandmother's from, and it is in the Haida Gwaii in British Columbia. Um and so, because of COVID everybody is starting to do more online things like this, which is awesome because I would have not been able to connect with them on this level, had it not been...so to hear them, and they're a lot more advanced than I am. I can't always participate in the conversation, but I can like pick apart like for the most part, I can understand what they're saying. And that's been a huge boost for me to help with my confidence. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] In addition to providing opportunities for practicing language, interacting with others has emotional and motivational benefits. For example, Sassa shared how interacting with fellow Yup’ik speakers gives her the opportunity to continue to speak language, and also helps to keep her motivated in the face of pandemic-related social isolation: [My elder] had a good idea of having a Yup'ik circle. Although we haven't started it formally. I get invited to...I don't know what it's called downstates, we call it [mɑɣi], I get 244 invited to steam baths. It's mostly the Yup'ik ladies I get together with, and we all speak in Yup'ik. [mm] Or um doing subsistence, gathering greens we’re speaking Yup'ik. So, it's my only outing right now. […] that's my only outings. You know, social [mmhmm, mmhmm] Going to steam baths and I know it's the ladies that, they're not traveling and exposing themselves to the Virus. {haha} [mmhmm] Coronavirus. So I'm blessed to be able to do that right now. It keeps me motivated. [Sassa, Yup'ik, 7/7/20] And Erin described how getting to interact with her niece has helped her find “new wells of language”: I actually have been using language more than I would have thought, because I have taken the concept of the conversations, um, and I, like now that I live south, this is where my whole family is, and as I mentioned we're all vaccinated, um, and so, I have this little niece who is, she's not even two yet, and she is my language partner. And every time I see her, I try to only speak in the language and so, I have found like new wells of language I didn't know I had before. Um, just like, trying to talk to her and do stuff. [mmhmm] So that's been really cool. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/2/21] Beth also shared how a brief moment of practicing language with other community members was “one of the highlights” of her life: This is a great experience. Um, a couple years ago Phil Cash Cash and Juwie Davis and Angel Sobotta, all people who work in Nez Perce, um I brought them to the U of California to give a talk and to meet with Haruo and things like that. So we were in the linguistics building and we had to get on the elevator and go up to like the fifth floor or something. And so we were all on the elevator, and there was one other person who was not Nez Perce, but we spoke Nez Perce on the entire elevator ride. And it was like this amazing thing, right? And uh, you know, I remember I was getting some tea for them, because they were about to speak and I was asking them, you know, "do you want sugar?" you know, {haha} [mm {haha}] But that...It seems weird to be like, well one of the highlights of my life was this elevator ride where we spoke Nez Perce the entire time. [mmhmm] Those are the kinds of like rare experiences that you have. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] The excitement of that experience – partially stemming from the rarity of getting to interact in this way – is echoed in an example from a Kristang learner, who shared: I remember, I believe it was the start of this year, we had a Kristang potluck. [mm] Um, or a [Kris], which is a Jardinggu word for potluck. [mmhmm] And what happened on that occasion was, you know, you had a number of people from all classes, and you actually had some - Bernard, who is a native speaker of Kristang was there as well. And then getting the chance to speak to him, you know... it was sort of like that, official, a just pent-up release, of like being able to actually use it in a more live environment. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] 245 This learner also described how these interactions helped him overcome the feeling that language is an “arbitrary” set of sounds and meanings: But then I think secondly, languages don't live in a vacuum. Right? [mmm] This is something I struggled with starting Kristang first, I struggled with - I even struggled with it because I was self-studying Chinese right? I didn't have, I was doing it with a book. I didn't, I mean, I did have Chinese friends but I never used Chinese to talk to them. So for me for ages, it was just a, it just felt like I was making arbitrary connections between sounds and symbols and meanings, and never really gaining anything out of it. But then when I start using it with people, when I started watching TV shows, listening to songs, it just helps massively in like the learning process. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] Another learner of Kristang similarly said that maintaining interactions helps the Kodrah Kristang community stay “alive”: So I think the Jardinggu sessions have actually been sort of helpful and just, it's for me at least in keeping my links to this group actually alive. [mmm] Otherwise, it's sort of like, everyone just becomes strangers after several months of like no contact. So I think the Jardinggu has, group sessions have actually helped and also I think the Kodrah Kristang, like I think Fran and the others, they helped create like a Telegram group chat. So people can actually just interact socially on them. So I think that's sort of helping as kind of like a, it's not fully effective but I would say it's better than nothing. And it's sort of helping to keep that community still alive and active. [Tej, Kristang, 7/31/20] In these examples, learners identify how interacting with others breathes life into language. Interacting with others pushes practitioners to use language, which in turn increases their ability in language; not having the opportunity to use language interactively can have the opposite effect, as was seen in Michelle’s observation of her young daughter’s language use. Besides language practice, interaction also provides motivation, emphasizing and building on the social and relational nature of language learning. Throughout section 4.3, we have seen examples of ways that relationships support and motivate language revitalization practice. Practitioners shared how overt expressions of support helps to sustain them, how feelings of responsibility keeps them dedicated to the work, and how the opportunity to share language in social settings boosts their efforts and enjoyment of the 246 practice. In the next section 4.4, we look at the opposite impacts, where relationships – or, to be more precise, the importance of relationships – can lead to challenges to motivation. 4.4 Challenges associated with lack of relationship or difficult relationships In addition to the many ways that relationships motivate language revitalization practice, relationships can also de-motivate and create challenges. Language revitalization practice must persist in the face of sometimes overwhelming challenges, including loneliness and difficult relationships within the community. In fact, these challenges underscore just how important relationships are for motivation. 4.4.1 Navigating relationships as a language revitalization practitioner As noted in 4.2.2, most of the practitioners in this study are involved in multiple activities in their communities; they are not only language learners, but they are also teachers, organizers, materials developers, etc. Because of this, each individual may have to navigate different webs of relationship from multiple different roles. Balancing these roles can make practitioners feel unconfident, burnt out, overburdened, or uncertain. I give examples from seven individuals here. Practitioners who are teaching their language shared many examples of challenges they have had in teaching. In some of these examples, it is specifically navigating the teacher-student relationship that proves a challenge. For example, Cassy compared her experience teaching students she knew well with a group she did not have a strong relationship with: And I think it's always different based on who you know like, for Suquamish kids, or Suquamish students, it's easier for me because I know them, I either grew up with them or they raised me in some way. [mmm, mmm] But when I taught Squaxin, and I taught them the last couple years when I was down in Olympia […] And not knowing them, like not knowing their temperaments, or their history with each other, [mmm] I was a lot more like walking on eggshells and trying my hardest not to use those words 'should' or, you know, but then there was times where I think I had to…my second grade teacher came in, like where everybody was off topic and how to get everybody back. And I was afraid to do that because I didn't know them. [mm, mmhmm] But then a lot of them kind of relaxed after I did that, and like "Oookay", so I think I just need to be comfortable as a teacher, as 247 that facilitator. To be that even though I don't know them like family yet, I still can do that in a respectful way. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] That is, Cassy feels most sure of herself in classes where she has deep and lasting relationships with the students (including people who have helped to raise her); without this strong connection, she is unsure how to navigate questions of classroom management and teacher- student interactions. Charlotte also described her first teaching experience as being challenging given the “dynamic” of the class: I taught MLI in the Fall, I had a class. That was...it was a big learning curve. [{chuckle}] We had a group of people who all already knew each other, there were all in the same room, um and so the dynamic was really different […] I'll be honest, it was a tough group. Um, I taught with Paige, and, Zeke, you know he sat in and he said "you guys will probably never have a class this hard, like this is [{chuckle}] you're gonna start at the most difficult [oh good {haha}] and it'll be all downhill from here," so [{haha}] um, yeah the dynamic was just really strange. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] She admitted that this difficulty proved a challenge not only to her teaching but also to her own language learning, and how a different experience with different students has had the opposite effect: I thought teaching Lushootseed would take away from my time and energy on my own language learning. [mmm] Um or distract me from it. And I think that's how it was in the Fall, I was, the class dynamics were just really difficult, there was a lot going on at the time, and it did take away from my own language learning. Um I felt like I had to spend all my time planning for my class, and answering their questions, but this, this quarter especially I feel like in some way I'm kinda learning alongside them. [mm] maybe I'm not learning the domains, but I'm learning and seeing like a different level of um, information in what they're learning that I hadn't seen before. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] For Charlotte then, the problem was not necessarily her relationships with the students, but rather the relationships of the students with each other that caused a challenging “dynamic.” When the student-student relationships were of a different nature in her second term, she found herself more at ease, and even expressed some sense of solidarity with her students (“I’m kinda learning alongside them”). 248 Similar to Charlotte’s experience, Masa described his own experience with teaching students who had difficult relationships among each other: They didn't do their homework, as easy and simple as it was. They came more like as observers more than participants. Scrutinizing me, one woman gave another person grief for being there, made her feel uncomfortable. One person told me she felt uncomfortable being there because of the other person giving her...attitude. [mm] Totally unrelated to language learning. [mm] You know, just behavioral problems. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] He shared what he has said to students struggling with these dynamics, but admitted these difficult relationships within the learning community are an ongoing problem: I've heard other people say is, like, "I don't like that person," and I said, "Well, you know, this learning our language is going to bring us into contact with people in our group that aren't necessarily people we would get together with outside of this. We probably wouldn't develop friendships with them for one reason or another, but that doesn't matter. We should just think of it as an opportunity to speak our language with someone else. And we can always move people around so that you know you're... But just because you're not going to be friends, doesn't mean you have to be enemies." You know what I mean? [Yeah, yeah] But I'm experiencing that kind of an attitude among people [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] Masa here is identifying a salient reality of learning in these language communities: because the number of potential new users is so small, it is likely that people who don’t get along otherwise will need to interact with each other if the community of use is to grow. Thus strained relationships in Masa’s learning community presents a potentially significant hurdle. Being in a teaching position also presents the challenge of adjusting to others’ expectations, as Chris B noted: It's hard to think of myself as a teacher, [mm] There are still sometimes when I'm like "why the shit is somebody asking me? Oh wait. Because I'm getting paid to answer." [{haha}] That's still not something I'm entirely comfortable with [Chris B, Lushootseed, 5/27/21] For Carson, being in the position of teacher reminds him of fraught relationships he has had in the past, and navigating these dynamics is an ongoing challenge: It's a weird thing. Native language teaching is weird because uh…There's a lot of like, I see it as a lot of people being a lot like uncertain, or feeling uncomfortable, because 249 there's so little access to the language that then they meet someone who gives them access to the language they really don't want to mess a relationship with that person up. [mm, mmhmm] So like, I don't think people really tell you when they're struggling with stuff, because they want to make a good impression with you. That's how I have felt in the past anyways, with other people. And that was really a barrier in getting a relationship with the people that were teaching me the language that was like honest, you know? [mmhmm] Like wasn’t a, kind of a forced relationship. [mm] So it's weird starting to be on the other side of that. It’s funky. But, uh, yeah, so… {hahaha} [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/9/20] Carson described the ‘concern’ he has with navigating these relationships: there's also the pressure of interpreting expectation. So it's like when people start asking you questions about how the language works, it's hard not to assume that they want you to fill the role that the people that you asked questions to fill. And then from there, it's hard to figure out, like, what didn't work about that relationship for me, or how do I, you know, not want them to feel the same way I felt in having to approach that. So, so that's probably the main kind of pressure or like... yeah pressure. […] uh 'pressure' is not quite the right word, it's kinda like 'anxiety' is not quite the right word either. But, concern? Or like point of worry, or something around the work that I have. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/9/20] For Carson, part of navigating new relationships as a new language teacher causes him to reflect carefully on the nature of previous relationships. In addition to the “funky” position of being a Native language teacher, Carson also shared that he worries about being “stuck in this weird cultural expert space,” which he describes as: like a slow motion kind of inevitable like you, and maybe one or two other people - or, me, [{chuckle}] and maybe {ha} one or two other people will become language experts that people will want to do interviews at the tribe occasionally, and everybody will direct questions to them, and just like, you'll, then half of the community will hate you because the other half of the community will say you're fluent, and the other half will say that you're not. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/8/21] The pressure of these roles is such a challenge that Carson felt in danger of burn out if he was not able to build a support network for the work: I see that happening with the classes, but as far as like, the community of language learners slash teachers, I still see myself stuck in the network as a hub that if I stopped doing things, the work would slow down really dramatically. [mmhmm] And I might just be self-important or whatever, but I don't think so. It's not like, it would slow down because other people couldn't do the work, it's just the role I'm playing, [mmhmm] or the way that it's put together right now. [mmhmm] And I'm starting to talk with people about 250 how we can balance that out, because I'm, can feel for sure that I will burn out if I keep doing that. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/8/21] This danger of burn out under the pressure of expectations is something shared among teachers and community organizers across these contexts, as Evaristo noted: in Portuguese we say "they bought a problem." [uh huh] Yeah, when, when they did that they bought a problem. [uh huh mm, like they took it on themselves?] They REALLY bought a problem. [mm] A burden. A big burden. [mmm, mmm] Because it's a bless but it's a burden, because expectations, their expectation, society expectation, and community expectation got higher […] And then that brings of course honor, but also burdens, yeah and demands, and expectations that if frustrated, frustrates the others and frustrates them. [mmhmm, mmhmm] In this sense, I think it's also a very uh, opposite direction of motivation. [yeah.] So to revive a language, to revive a language is a burden. And if you are not able to keep the road, that can be also a source of disgruntling, of suffer. [mmhmm] Of you know…and sometimes I feel some, uh here and there I see uh…not depression, but some sadness. [mm] Of that, for the lack of achievements or for excess of work or whatever. [mmhmm] So, so this is not only blue ocean. Yeah? It's not a blue ocean. [Yeah.] That's not. Definitely not. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] In this excerpt, Evaristo is reporting on what he observed of the Kodrah Kristang organizers and teachers, rather than on his own experiences; but note that, because he observes these feelings of sadness and frustration in his relations, this compels him to express words of support and encouragement to lift them up (see his quote section 3.1.2). Thus, the burden of community expectations, which falls on the organizing team due to their close relationship with the community, is taken on at least in part by Evaristo, due to his close relationship with the organizing team. Thus all of the examples in this section illustrate ways that complex webs of relationships may be difficult to navigate. In the next section, we look at the difficulties associated with being unable to establish or maintain important relationships in the first place. 4.4.2 Lack of relationship In addition to difficult relationships, practitioners mentioned the challenge of feeling disconnected from others. For many, this includes geographical disconnectedness, which can 251 have practical consequences such as what both Masa and Carson described for their whole communities: Um, unlike the Puyallup tribe we don't have a, we're not federally recognized, we don't have a tribal school. [mm, mmhmm] Uh, all our people are spread out quite a bit, so it's hard to get everyone together, and those are challenges. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] it's also like, I think distance learning [mmhmm] is, especially for a community that doesn't have like a really big reservation land base, and is split up across a bunch of rezzes, is like, more feasible for people. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/8/21] Carson himself is currently living hundreds of miles from any of the reservations where Nuu- wee-ya’ heritage learners live. Another practitioner who lives far away from her community’s traditional territory, and she echoed the need for distance learning that Carson had described: Allison: what would you like to happen in, in the, in the new normal? Jackie: hmm. mmhmm. umm...hmm. Good question. {haha} [{chuckle}] mm - my - specifically around my language learning, I would like, as many things to still be available through technology as possible. {ha} [mmhmm] And I know I'm not the only one there. I mean, there are a lot of us, you know, living away [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] Even in the Kristang community, where all of the practitioners interviewed in this study live within the city-state of Singapore (an area of less than 300 square miles), geographic dispersal is a challenge. One heritage speaker compared the Singaporean Kristang community to their sister community in Malacca: it's harder in Singapore because uh the Kristang speakers are sort of all over in Singapore, you know? Whereas we go to Malacca is easier in a sense that most of, not most, but a big chunk of them, like about 2,000 over people, are in this particular village. Or settlement. And they all speak Kristang, so if you want to learn, you just interact with them every day and it's easier, you know? Then in Singapore, I mean one would be in the north one would be in the east, one would be south - I mean it's a small city but still, you know? They are dispersed. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] The fact that Eurasian Singaporeans have been dispersed throughout the kampongs (small villages or settlements within the city) is in fact the result of deliberate policies of the Singapore government, as Tej explains: So the scheme [was] in the 1950s to 60s or so when the government decided to sort of, upgrade the housing and make everyone move into the housing blocks, or the blocks of 252 flats, like the, I think what you know housing development board, HDB blocks. […] I think there's one historian who's written an entire book about the rehousing policies. Simply because I think those were very, I think in retrospect those were very impactful in sort of understanding how Kristang speakers are like as [she] said, are just scattered all over the island now. [hmm] And also why like there's a lot, like it feels like, it feels like there's not really a sort of enclave of Kristang speakers or Eurasian speakers anymore. [Tej, Kristang, 7/31/20] Due to this policy, heritage Kristang speakers find themselves physically disconnected from each other in similar ways that learners from Native North American contexts identified. As noted by Carson and Jackie above, having distance learning options is one way to reconnect across distance. Jackie shared more about how she worries about being disconnected from her community once again in a post-COVID world: Because I do a lot of my work too, being a therapist, I meet with folks, um telehealth. Sometimes throughout this past year. So yeah, I'm very ready to have everything go more in person, assuming, you know, safety and all those things in place. [Yeah.] And I'm actually a little bit, I don't know if um...The language department is maybe going to change things up again and not offer as much online. [mmm] And, so that's a little bit sad to think about, if that is the case. Because that will be a big disconnect for me then, again. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] And while moving online has enabled some language community connections to continue and grow, practitioners also acknowledge that it has been easy to lose connections with people in the virtual settings required by the pandemic. One Kristang learner shared: And trying to get, you know, members of the community to come in, um talk about certain Jardinggu choices […] we got decent reception, you know, you'd have people interacting on the chat, you have people coming, but even then participation would be limited to the same like regular faces. [mmm] It was very hard to sort of draw in other people to, to sort of… [get new people?] Yeah. [Uh huh.] So it's just, I think, yeah, I think it's just difficult. And then eventually, we'd have Zoom calls, we'd advertise them to a group of like 100 people to come along. And we'd tell them like a week in advance. And then, even then we'd have maybe 10, 12 people come. And the rest of them just radio silence. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] The specific effects of COVID-19 on language revitalization practice and community connections is discussed in more detail in 5.3.2.1. 253 In addition to physical disconnectedness, practitioners may feel disconnected from their cultural identity or their family history. This was a central part of Jackie’s experience prior to joining a Lushootseed language program, as she shares: how I'm connected with with my, with the tribe, Puyallup tribe is through my dad. And, um, he...our, we were essentially disconnected from that part of our family through, he was adopted, when he was baby. [mmhmm] And so it just kind of cut everything. And so, him and I have, um, like growing up, he would bring me even in Illinois to more of like our local Midwestern powwows that were happening there […] But it...We were so disconnected just even from the Tacoma area. [mm] And we, we came out to some pow- wows and, you know, we would hear the language and it was always just like, holy cow. {hahaha} like, This is hard. This is, it sounds confusing. Those sounds are difficult like, we'll never be able to do this. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] This sense of being “cut” from heritage has been difficult for Jackie, but in a way it is motivational – she is learning her heritage language precisely in order to repair this disconnect. And in fact this experience of being disconnected is something she was able to share with a new acquaintance in her local area, as she relates: I did recently meet a really amazing woman who's Indigenous Hawaiian, and [mmhmm] through her um, - she doesn't know her language. And she, she knows tiny bits. But we had a nice conversation just about culture, and connection, and the importance of language and how - I mean, of course, just through all of the things {sigh} the ways that we've been disconnected and cut off from it and um, the shame that can be carried around not knowing your Native language [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] This disconnect from heritage and language is a source of “shame”, but finding someone else who shares this same experience created the opportunity for a new connection. Practitioners may also struggle with loneliness. Erin described how feeling “so alone” in language work affected the effort she put into language work: Allison: so how hard, I don't know if you can quantify this, but like how hard would you say you work on the language at any given time? Erin: Ughhh, okay, here comes the giant pile of internal guilt. Um, not nearly as hard as I should be. [{chuckle}] Um, and I think a lot of it comes down to just...especially until recently, before the Institute, I just felt so alone. [mmm] It was really hard to get up the motivation. Right now, I'm just, you know, I'm generally taxed from uh work, and corona, and police brutality and, you know, just all those things. [{chuckle} mmhmm] That we're dealing with in 2020 right? And so I haven't had the energy for anything. 254 Other than like, doom-scrolling Twitter. [mmhmm, mmhmm] But even before 2020 I was not working nearly as hard on the language as I wanted to, just because, again, it's just so hard to be motivated when you're by yourself. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] She elaborated on what this struggle looked like as an independent learner: one of the big discouraging factors for me before the Institute was feeling like the entire weight of the language was on my shoulders. [mmm] Which like, intellectually I understand, that that's not realistic. You know, I know of a handful of people who know the language well enough to teach it or whatever. But the idea that, you know, I was one of maybe five people in the world who were interested enough to try and preserve it. Like I didn't know anyone else. [mmm] And it was just so overwhelming to think like, I'm alone. If I don't do this, it's not going to get done. The language will die, and that will just be such a shame for the world. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] In Erin’s example we can see the demotivating impact of loneliness combined with the sense of responsibility to the future community (section 4.3.2.1). Because Erin had not yet made relationships with anyone else working on the language, she felt lonely and burdened. This echoes Te Huia’s (2017) observation that for Māori learners, a strong sense of obligation to the future of the language was motivating for learners who had both the linguistic skills and relationships to support them, but very demotivational for lower-level learners and those who lacked such relationships (see Introduction section 1.4.3). Related to Erin’s feelings of loneliness and of carrying a burden along, one obvious challenge confronting learners of any revitalizing language is a sheer dearth of other language speakers to interact with, as Michelle shared: I guess I would say, not having people to speak with, [mmm, mmhmm] is extremely hard. Um, so I have my mentor, and she is not a fluent speaker either even though she's been practicing the language for, I don't know 30 something years probably? [mmm] And then {sigh} you know, other like classmates, and I try to teach my family so that - and my family's doing all right at saying like a few basic phrases which is good. But to actually have a conversation, [mm] there's really nobody to have a conversation with. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] In these contexts, there may not be either speakers inside the home as Kayla points out in the first example following, or in the surrounding community, as in Jackie’s example: 255 a lot of the time, you don't have a family that you can go, and go home and speak with, and that's something too that you have to come to terms with, either you're going to speak with or without them, or you're going to speak to yourself when they're not around. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] I...because I don't have any speakers, or anybody trying to learn it ar-, like right around me physically. [mmhmm] I'm finding I'm not speaking it out loud a whole lot. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] Kayla noted that this lack of a surrounding speech community can make it easy to “sit back” from language effort: I mean there's just, there's always chances for less language speaking. While there's chances to be speaking language more, there's always more chances to, to um kind of sit back from that. To, you know, there's more opportunities for you to not speak. [mm, mmm] The language. We're not in a society that acknowledges the language, right? You go to the store and it's English. And so...yes 100% I have ebbs and flows. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] Charlotte shared that this lack of relationship with others who prioritize the language is “discouraging” to her and presented a barrier to effort: I think it's also, on a little bit more philosophical level, it's discouraging sometime when you don't have that many people to speak to. So before this current structure of the class, this certification class, I was working, you know, not for the tribe, and it was really hard being in a class with people who had language speakers around them, who worked for the tribe, who worked for an organization that privileged or prioritized language learning, and then for me to go and work in like a non-Native organization, um and trying to incorporate language into my daily routine was just really hard, like I couldn't always make classes, or… [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] Because interacting with others is not always possible, both Kayla and Charlotte have found the Puyallup Method of combining conversation practice (when available) with self-narration (which can be practiced consistently even when alone) very effective; see discussion in section 7.2.1 for more about this method and some practical suggestions about how to support language practice in these contexts. Lack of connection to a speech community can also affect one’s perceptions of the language itself. For one Kristang learner, not being able to interact with heritage speakers made him feel at times as though he was learning “an artificial language”: 256 it's very frustrating for me occasionally, because, I mean […] all the other languages that I’ve played with have millions and millions of speakers, right? […] But Kristang […]in the start, you had a number of heritage speakers who came to see what was going on. [mm] But then, since I joined later on, I remember spending, you know, most of my year and I never sort of...because [she] wasn't in my classes, I never met a single person who natively spoke the language. So it was almost as if it just didn't exist outside of that class environment. [mmm] I mean, we could be learning an artificial language, for all I knew. {ha} And I mean in the sense that um, it all felt, it all felt really arbitrary if there was no one who actually use it that way. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] For this learner, this sense of learning being “arbitrary” and “artificial” was relieved after finally being able to interact with others in a “live” environment (see quote in section 4.3.3.4). There are specific language acquisition challenges that arise from this lack of a robust speech community. Carson said that not having speakers to provide “natural feedback” makes it difficult to understand complex aspects of grammar: how people choose to express, um, 'to be' statements, and changing states and stuff is pretty complicated. There's a bunch of different verbs you can use, but then I feel like the way as learners that we put it together is kind of clunky, and ugly, and like overly explicit, and then when you listen to how somebody else does, like an L1 speaker does it, it seems vague or like the meaning is not as clear but [mmm] I know that that's because like we're still figuring out the scope of the meaning of those words. So that's what I would say is the most challenging and frustrating part is not having the natural feedback of the speech community to like dial that in. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/9/20] Erin also noted that having a small language community means that there aren’t many people that can answer clarification questions or provide other kinds of explicit feedback: the Institute was really good for helping my mom develop her confidence, because I previously would try to talk to her, and um, just kind of like bounce stuff off of her, get her ideas. And her answer would always be "well, but I don't know anything about the language," and like, Mom neither do I! {haha} [{hahaha}] Like, like try with me. {haha} [{haha}] Um, but that like, you know, she was the only one. We do have a guy in the tribe, Bud Lane, who is super cool, very knowledgeable. But I just, like I have so many questions, and I always feel like I'm just annoying the crap out of him whenever I ask him like a really deep like grammar-y question. [{chuckle}] And so it was just really tough [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] Karelle pointed out that the lack of regular language practice overlaps with the challenge of learning a second language as an adult: 257 I don't know, language learning they say is a lot easier when you're younger, um but me as an adult like trying to learn a language where I don't have really anybody else that I can kind of use it with on a daily basis. [mmm] So a lot of it sort of me one on one with these YouTube videos, or me one on one with the individuals who are making them. [mmhmm] But those, you know, those conversations are sort of, um, intermittent. [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] Tej highlighted that this lack of others to practice with presents special problems for languages that also lack robust resources for independent language learning: I think for me, even like I haven't had time to study that much recently, but I think even my method of studying is also like what [he] described because there's not that much other independent Kristang material up on the internet. [mmhmm] So I think that's also sort of how I sort of study Kristang as well. [mmhmm] Yeah, and I mean I don't really have anyone else around me who actually speaks Kristang or who actually is interested in learning it. [Tej, Kristang, 7/31/20] In our follow-up interview, Tej shared that she found it difficult to have lost touch with Kristang learners as the result of the pandemic, and that she had “gotten used to” these relationships as part of her language learning practice: Allison: are you still studying Kristang? Or like, trying to learn new words or like keeping up with that at all? Tej: mm I'm trying to revise it, but it is a bit harder when there's no like weekly class, because I think for Kristang at least I got very used to learning it in that framework of a weekly class with other people. [yeah. yeah.] For, in terms of Spanish and Korean, I sort of started those on my own and like by myself, doing the online courses, [yeah] so in that sense it's easier for me to continue. But for Kristang I think it's harder for me to make that transition to full-on self study. [Tej, Kristang, 6/30/21] In these examples, practitioners describe how lack of connection to other language users presents significant challenges to motivation, persistence, and effort. This includes demotivating feelings of loneliness, lack of opportunities for language practice, and lack of the positive emotions that comes with being able to socialize in the language (see section 4.3.3). Some practitioners have been able to overcome these challenges by building networks of collaboration and support with practitioners in other communities, as discussed in section 4.5.1 and 4.5.2. Before turning to these strategies for building connection, we first examine one more challenge to motivation that arises from the centrality of relationships. 258 4.4.3 Barriers caused by important relationships Just as relations can motivate language practice through expressions of support (section 4.3.1), relations can also present challenges to language learning in the form of criticism. Cassy observes that this was a problem among Lushootseed learners in the past, and admits that she may have contributed to this environment: I think everybody's really afraid about saying things wrong. [mmm] And like just to be honest, I think a lot of it had to do with - you know I contributed to that too. When we first started teaching, there's so much focus on saying it right and making sure everything is correct. […] I think, like, not just me, but pretty much all the teachers really came with that mindset of, you need to say it correctly to honor the language, you need to make sure that you're using the right grammar, Oh, don't learn from that teacher because they're not Native or don't do that - So there's all this stuff that got stirred into it. So I think now a lot of people are afraid to say it wrong, do it wrong, learn from the wrong person. So I hope that that changes. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] Kayla pointed out that this possessiveness and criticism is something she has observed in many different language revitalization communities: I mean, I'm sure you've seen it with other people, is that it's easy to be like shot down, and made to feel bad that you don't know things, or that you haven't done so much. But it's just, you don't really see it in the language program that we're in now. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] This criticism can also take the form of possessiveness over the language, as Chris B described: [One] reason I did not study the language for a while is that when I grew up, there was a lot of negativity about the language. There are people that, it seemed like they thought...hmm. They had a certain command of the language, and they felt a certain entitlement or ownership over the language. [mmm] And they were always saying "oh, they don't speak the language right. They don't speak the language right. You know only my family speaks it right. My grandma spoke it right." And so I think maybe some of those ideas still persist in the tribe. It can be a challenge. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] As Chris highlights, the respect due to relations intensifies the negative impact of this criticism. Practitioners also shared that they experience the negative effects of colonization and forced assimilation through the words and actions of important relations. Chris B gave an example of the lingering damage that can be felt through the community: 259 I think most people are generally surprised that uh they're still speaking the, people speaking the language. I haven't heard anybody ever say a negative thing. Unfortunately, I think probably the closest thing to a negative comment or negative attitudes actually come from people in the tribe. [mm] And I think it's because...and I was exposed to this, and probably one of the reasons that I resisted studying it for a few years in my 20s, is that um...During the colonization process, we had to adapt really quickly. And so a lot of people really looked down on Native ways, and they were kind of embarrassed. They saw them as backwards, and negative. [mmm] And I definitely saw that in family, like "all those Indians look at them, being Indian" my dad would say for example. Um, and I think maybe some of those ideas still persist {sigh} in the tribe. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] Another Lushootseed learner remembered the last first language speakers in her family, and shared: It's probably my great-grandparents, and my grandparents understood, they just didn't encourage us to speak, because they wanted us to blend in with society, [mmhmm] and put those things away. You know they're of the generation that witnessed uh the abuse of children, and being taken from their families to make them stop, you know [mmhmm] put them in the hospital and all that stuff. [learner, Lushootseed, 6/23/20] She continued: Yeah, well you know like our age, we, I grew up always hearing from my grandparents "you need to focus on fitting in in society, you do not need to worry about these things," and they just kinda put up a wall. [mmm] And, uh it was just to help us to be okay in the world the way it's going. To get a good job, to be able to make friends and not, you know, worry about being with our Native people. [mmhmm] You know, being able to mingle amongst everyone. And so they just kind of shut it down for me. - Yeah, they shut it down for me, and um my, my cousins and my sister and brother. Yeah. […] they had a hard upbringing, as well. And so, they just wanted us to have a good life and to get out there and function. [learner, Lushootseed, 6/23/20] While the learner above experienced these effects directly from her grandparents in her own lifetime, these effects can also be passed down across multiple generations. Erin shared that this is “the most discouraging” part of language learning to her: one of the things, probably the number one thing that is the most discouraging to me, and the thing that I have to fight against the hardest, is that um…my [great great grandmother] Lucy, who was the last full blooded Chetco ever, she could speak the language of course, I think they, she went up to the rez when she was like 10 or 11. So she could obviously speak the language. […] [My] grandma [Amelia] did actually get the chance to meet Grandma Lucy and she asked her, you know, "why, why won't you to teach me our language?" and Grandma Lucy said that um, "If you sp- this is an Indian language. And if you speak this language that means you're an Indian. And if you're an Indian you're as good as dead. So I'm not going to teach any of you this language, 260 because that's my only way to protect you." And like, I have this weird thing - I mean it, maybe it's not weird, it's kind of a cultural thing, I guess. Where like, you know, you want to respect your elders. You want to do the things that, they knew what was good for you. And it's so hard to fight against that narrative where like, through the past from 100 years ago, Grandma Lucy is coming to me saying, "you shouldn't make this." [mmhmm, mmm] "It's a death sentence." And me having to fight back against that, like the cultural narrative of listen to your elders, do what they say, elders are the best, and then also {ha} like having to fight the fact that learning a language is really hard. Like, that's...probably the number one thing that slows me down. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] That is, for Erin and others, it is precisely the importance placed on relationships that causes the negative impacts of historical trauma to be felt so acutely; relationships are the mechanism through which pain is passed down. This section has looked at the ways that practitioners might be demotivated by difficult relationships or by disconnection and loneliness. The fact that these relationships can cause such strong impacts on the emotions and efforts of individual practitioners further underscores how central relationships are to language revitalization practice and to motivation. In the final section of this chapter, we look at ways that language revitalization practice itself can be a tool for healing relationships and for building new connections, which can in turn support motivation and practice. 4.5 Strengthening relationships I think being connected to the language is a way of feeling connected to life. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] As section 4.3.3 illustrates, language practice is seen by many as a means to create connections with others. In this final section, I discuss more deeply the ways that building networks supports language practice, and the ways that the goal of strengthening ties to relations – and understanding the nature of relationship itself – motivates practitioners. I also discuss ways that relationship-building is also one of the outcomes of language revitalization practice. Some revitalization activities involve setting up structures to support collaboration (section 4.5.1), or 261 more informally plugging into networks of support (section 4.5.2). Practitioners are motivated by a sense of welcome and connection in their particular language learning community (section 4.5.3), which helps sustain them in their language practice. They are also motivated to connect to their heritage and roots (section 4.5.4), which is a particularly common reason given for starting language practice in the first place (see Time chapter section 5.2 for discussion of start versus persistence motivations.) Finally, some practitioners find that learning their language helps them to better understand the nature of their relationships with others (section 4.5.5). Establishing and strengthening relationships in these ways supports L2 motivation, which serves to increase L2 understanding that can further strengthen relationships. 4.5.1 Collaboration For some, collaboration with other practitioners is one explicit goal of language efforts. Some survey respondents named building community as an explicit objective of their community efforts: build a network of internal and external relationships to assist in the effort [ID 241, Miami-Illinois] One of the main objectives was create a stronger Quechua community in Ohio through distance online learning. [ID 919, Quechua] Sumar esfuerzos para las acciones de revitalizacion kichwa [ID 175, kichwa] Interviewees shared similar objectives for their individual practice. For example, in discussing a particular language project that he had been involved in, Carson shared that while he does not want to do that particular type of labor again in the future, at the time he was “excited to be part of the team building that because of the doors that it was gonna open” (Carson, Nuu-wee- ya', 6/8/21). He also shared how being able to shift some of his work to collaborators in his learning community has helped to take “a load off” his shoulders: That I was like, starting to see that hap- like, just barely starting to see that happen in my life, and be like, I do not want to do this at all. [mmhmm] And then like, doing all this 262 stuff this year, I realize like, I don't have to do that at all. That there's a bunch of other people my age that are really passionate, that just need a little support to learn more, and then we can tackle this as peers, as friends and community members. [mm] So, I've been feeling really motivated from that kind of perspective of, feels like a load, kind of a load off my shoulders. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/8/21] Thus developing collaborations with other practitioners is for Carson both an end goal (in the first quote) and the means by which he can get re-motivated in his own practice. Michelle also articulated a goal of sharing in the workload with others in her community, when she discussed her hopes that intra-community virtual gatherings continue even after the pandemic is over: I, I definitely, I want like a, a consistent, firm, every week you know, for like an hour and a half, hour, just to be able to, you know [mmhmm mmhmm] hear other people talk, hear what other people are list- are, you know, working on, because we definitely don't want to be doing the same things [mmm] you know? So, if we're all working on something and then we can just share, instead of each of us trying to do the same thing. [mmhmm mmhmm] Um, so, that is a huge goal. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] That is, she hopes to continue these gatherings not only for the opportunity to practice language but also for the chance to check in about work and to collaborate. For participants in Jardinggu, the Kristang “lexical incubator” project, collaboration and cooperation are built into the operating procedure. As Evaristo explains: So there is no uh, yeah, so it's, it was, so in this process of Jardinggu, we are very dialectic, there is no right, wrong. [uh huh, uh huh] There is no hierarchical position. So sometimes the guy that speaks Malay says, "well, this is the way Malays speaks." And then we say, "well, that's nice. That's very nice." Even though it's very far from Portuguese is much better for Kristang. Because of the construction because of the phonetic, [mmhmm] it sounds perfect in the sense, it's closer to reality, it's close to the neighbors. And then, so there is no right and wrong, colonized thinking. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] When I suggested to Evaristo that this process sounds very “democratic”, he responded: It's, I think it's much more than democratic. Because democracy is a very open concept. [mm] It's an organic, dialectic way of constructing things without the idea of consensus. [mmm] Without the need of consensus, and nobody disgruntled because "we lost." You see? Just, there is no loser. [mm] We are open, we are really open to contribute with ideas, and let them there as a Jardinggu. If it will bloom, if the seeds will come out, that's 263 another point of time. […] That's it. That's the Jardinggu. It's wonderful, you should participate one day. Just to see that happening. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] That is, for Evaristo, collaborating to construct the lexicon is not only a productive language revitalization approach, it is also “wonderful” and decolonizing. Thus for Carson, Michelle, and Evaristo, part of the practice of language revitalization is the practice of collaborating with others on concrete language tasks. 4.5.2 Networks of support In addition to specific language projects that allow for collaboration-building, practitioners also described other ways in which being involved in language efforts enable them to plug into support networks. This includes strengthening relational networks among learners in the same language community, as well as building new networks of mutual support with others in the larger community of language revitalization practice. Beth described her network in detail, and credited a long-running listserv as bringing Nez Perce langauge workers together: Phil Cash Cash, who's a linguist, Nez Perce linguist, Nez Perce-Cayuse linguist […] he started a Nez Perce listserv around the time I started working on the language. So maybe around 2003? And that was a huge support for my work, and continues to be, and I think for everyone working in the language, just this regular sort of network... and it's, it feels so old school now. [mm {chuckle}] You know, to have a listserv? But it, it works. [{chuckle} mm] Right? I know other people are like on Instagram and doing all kinds of things, but we just kinda, get a word of the day. Our word of the day comes out like three times a week. [{hahaha}] And people post questions, or make observations. A lot of times people post photographs of, you know, old photographs, saying, "oh, can you identify this person? or "do you know what this means?" or, you know, so it's, it's a great community. And I think it really brought the language...language workers together. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] One interesting point to note here is that the listserv was originally created in order to share language (a word of the day), but also serves as a platform for other kinds of sharing and relationship-building, such as helping to identify relations in old photographs. 264 Carson also finds language class naturally “relationship-building”, which helps him take the pressure off of organizing these networks himself: And then, also um, personally I feel like getting out of the like planning, wishing, thinking about, and just into the like, okay this is not actually that complicated, I'm just gonna like, call all the people who have ever expressed interest in the language, and tell them I'm running a class. [mm] You know it doesn't need to be more complicated, I don't have to like build a...the class is gonna be relationship-building, [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/8/21] Fran also noted that having a vibrant community sets her Kristang language learning experience apart from other formal language learning experiences: I just learn a lot more than the language itself. Whereas when I think about my experiences learning German, or even um, even Cantonese, I don't have the same kind of support systems in learning the language. Umm…yeah. Simply because of where I am, like just geographically, I don't have that speech community for some of the other languages. But also because there aren't as many learners who are co-learning with me. [mmm] And I think that makes a little uh... That makes a big difference. For me, at least. [Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] That is, for Frances, being involved in Kristang language practice allows her to plug into a speech community and people who are “co-learning” together, which serves as a “support system” for language. Network of support can also come from the revitalization community, that is, other language learners who work on different languages. Cassy detailed one such important relationship that she found when she moved away to college: So whenever, like Shayleen and I became best friends at school, because we both were from our reservation, we both wanted to be home. We both had similar things going on at home. Like you know deaths in the family, um people in the hospital, all the things that happens with life and being far away. [mmm] And we're usually that person in our family that supports people. [mmm, mmm] So, we had to support each other in like staying in school. There are so many times where I just was like, I'm done. I want to go home. I'm done with this. So, those language meetings gave us an opportunity to learn other languages, and Shayleen and I just made it a point to do it. […] just a few phrases that we could do in both. Mostly Sahaptin and Lushootseed though, because those are the two that are actively learning. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] 265 For Cassy, finding support from a learner of another language helped relieve demotivating feelings of loneliness and being disconnected from family (see section 4.4.2). Michelle also found motivation from networking in the larger community of revitalization practitioners. She gave an example of connections she was able to make not with a neighboring tribe, but with language revitalization practitioners from half a world away; being able to discuss shared histories and shared personal experiences was “amazing” to her: I think my, my biggest, my like most exciting awesome thing was that when I was at the ICLDC34, [uh huh] I got put in, I don't even remember what workshop it was, but I was put into a room with an Aboriginal gentleman from Papua New Guinea, [uh huh] an Aboriginal gentleman from um Port Headland, Western Australia […] And then a linguist, um and I don't remember where he was from but he was in Western Australia, I can't remember what town. But, anyways so I get put in this group, with these three gentlemen […] the conversations that we had were just amazing. And one gentleman and myself, we, we really got to talk about like the generational effect on our, on our personal selves from the residential schools created [mm] um you know, by the, the churches, and you know, his, his family came from residential school, my family also came from residential school, um, and, we're both, you know, the product of survivors. [mmhmm] And, and it was just, it was so...amazing. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] Whether the support comes from inside the language community or from larger networks, these relationships help individual practitioners stay committed to language practice. This network of support was so vital for some practitioners in fact that one practical suggestion from this study is for individuals to seek out these networks in whatever way they can (see 7.3.9). 4.5.3 Connecting to other practitioners Practitioners discussed the ways that connecting to others within these networks of support help to motivate practice. This includes feelings of belonging and being welcomed into the class or the language community. In this section I give examples from five interviewees who discuss why this is important for motivation to practice. 34 This is the International Conference on Language Documentation and Conservation; see section 2.3.6. 266 Practitioners described the importance of feeling strong connections to others in the learning community. Learners who do not come from the heritage language community found this especially important, as Evaristo articulated: If I were a family that was, that has this um, has this background in Singapore, I should be more worried about family structure, family ties, and connections and so on. And that's so nice when you see the group together. […] in the end of the day, you want to belong. [mmm] Just to summarize. [mmhmm] In the end of the day, you are learning that because you want to belong. [mmhmm] You want to feel love and be loved in return. That's it. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] The “group” that Evaristo refers to in this quote is the Kodrah Kristang learning community; Evaristo summarizes his participation in Kristang learning as being motivated by wanting to “belong” to this community. Another Kristang learner echoed this experience and described the “welcome” he receives from the community: I think for heritage learners, it's a question of identity. [mm] And like for us, like me and like Tej, who aren't a part of the heritage, I think the community in itself is just so open and so welcoming. You know, it's inherently formed by such a diverse group anyway right? That, you know, really anyone in the Eurasian community just welcomes you with open arms. And I think, yeah, I think that's... been pretty cool. {haha} [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] Here again we see a learner who is not from the language community identifying how important it was for him to feel a sense of welcome and belonging. This is underscored in the motivation literature by educational psychologists who emphasize the importance of belongingness for academic motivation, in particular for learners from Indigenous and minoritized community backgrounds (Fong et al., 2019; Gray et al., 2018). This is also echoed in Norton’s work on L2 learner’s investment in classroom practices (Norton & McKinney, 2011; Norton Pierce, 1995). In addition to feeling welcomed into the learning community, practitioners also described the importance of social connections with classmates. Zeke describes his strategy to foster interpersonal connections in the Lushootseed learning community as being about “creating a stronger bond”: 267 I forgot to mention the reason why I told them to have lunch together today was because of, when we share food to, with each other, we connect more. […] they do conversation on their own on Tuesday afternoons, I, the first time they did it I was "oh!" I was gonna jump in I said "no, no no no I'm doing this to create a stronger bond between them. So that when the class is over, I want those bonds to be there." [mmhmm] So I'm being very deliberate not to participate {hahaha} [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] Charlotte described how important these connections developed through informal conversation hours have been to her. When asked if there were things that helped her push past difficult moments, she replied: Talking to other language learners. That's… [mmhmm] That's been huge. When I feel really insecure […] it's really easy to listen to the people going for Level Two and being like, "holy cow, why am I in this class? I'm nowhere on the same level as them." But since we've started this informal conversation, I've- we've been really honest with each other. And I've said like "I don't know guys, I feel like I'm really behind” or “I don't, I have no idea what you're saying sometimes." And one of my classmates came back actually a few weeks and said like "I don't even know what I'm saying, half the time." {hahaha} She's like "I just make it up!" [{hahaha}] And that made me feel a lot better, and a lot more confident and just, you know, she said, "you have to have those moments of insecurity and just like roll through it and keep trying." And hearing her experience really helped me... helped me, I don't know, I think, again, shake it off and realize that I'm not alone in, in this language learning. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] This moments of social connection and solidarity help Charlotte sustain her motivation past moments of struggle and loneliness (see section 4.4.2 on lack of relationship). In addition to helping her feel more confident, finding moments of connection are one way that Charlotte notices progress in her language learning: it's frustrating when you can't express yourself and it's frustrating when you can't understand someone. [mmm] And I, I've definitely had frustrating moments like when Zeke's talking and I'm like "I have no idea what he said." I get out of class I text the girls and I say, "Okay, what did he just say?" But then there's sometimes when he asks you a question, and you're like, "oh, I actually realized that he's talking to me and he asked me about this." And that's huge, because it just makes you feel connected to be able to understand one another and that's, it's a good feeling. It's just a relief. It's like taking a deep breath when you're listening so intently. And then you actually process it. [mmhmm] It's really exciting. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] In these ways, finding connection can motivate language learning activities. As Jackie observes, this motivation is about more than enjoyment and fun: 268 it's kind of one of those things that at this point I'm viewing as like, this is definitely fun, and it's culture building, community building, I enjoy it. And, with, as with most things it's also like a discipline, you know. [mmhmm mmm] Um, you have to commit to something or you have to practice {ha} or, of course, you're not gonna learn it. Or retain it. [mmhmm, mmhmm] And, yeah. I don't think I really put my, I don't go into it with that mindset, it is more of the like I'm having fun, I'm connecting, I'm learning my culture, and that has value, and, um, I enjoy this. When I only hold that mindset, though, is when I can like kind of get off track and not practice, and [mmhmm] um, especially not being surrounded like in person by other language s- um Lushootseed language speakers. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] That is, while there is pleasure that comes from connecting to others, and this pleasure might be part of the motivation, language learning still requires discipline and work, especially for learners who are geographically removed from the language community and need to expend effort to maintain those connections. Jackie also noted that finding connection through language also motivates her to pursue other related cultural activities: I would like to prioritize visiting more. Um, and, hopefully with that, there would maybe be people willing to come visit where I live, too. […] language has been my reconnection back to my Native family. And, [mmhmm] so I, I'm so grateful for that and I want to keep connecting and expanding my learning outside of language too. Just, um, you know, other cultural things, and [mmhmm] um, being a part of Canoe Journey, and um, I mean there's just, yeah. Getting up for a cedar harvest like, there's so many awesome things that happen [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] That is, language learning is about “reconnection” to family, to heritage, and to culture (see Goals discussion 3.4.1 about cultural maintenance). This connection to heritage is another main theme in relational motivations for these learners. 4.5.4 Connecting to roots A major recurring theme in interviews is that language learning strengthens connection to heritage. Excerpts from nine interviews are given in this section to illustrate this theme. For many practitioners, the motivation to reconnect to roots is one of the primary reasons to start to learn their language. For example, Jackie described her initial motivation as a way to repair a broken connection to heritage: 269 With, with the family cut off that my family experienced, you know, I feel I've been very aware of my lineage from a pretty young age, and, um, very aware of what I was missing in many ways. And so I think the language is just like a a fairly easy way- I mean it's hard, a hard language but also kind of an easy way to, um, to connect [mmm] Some of those ways that are missing. Just to even know, and hear and understand the meaning that you know my ancestors held in how they spoke and you know the words that they had, because that's a direct connection to their physical environment and the land and all of those things and just how they related to other people directly around them [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] Erin had a similar experience, having been cut off from her tribe not by distance but by blood quantum. Erin describes being motivated not only to reclaim heritage for herself, but also to reclaim heritage for her son, via the mechanism of language: honestly I didn't have really a strong cultural connection to, to the tribe, just because of like blood quantum reasons. [mmhmm] Which, like nobody wants to hear me complain about blood quantum for like the next, you know, 60 days. [{chuckle}] um, So {ha} I'll just leave it at that. But when my son was born, I kind of finally realized that I had to grow up. And I just, I couldn't just keep pretending like I'm not, you know, like it doesn't affect me or whatever. Like it's not just my heritage that was at stake at that point, it was his heritage. […] And so the way that I felt I could get basically my claws into it most easily was with the language, because I really love languages and I really love learning languages [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/7/20] Erin’s example is a clear illustration of how L2 learning is motivated by relationships and roots in these communities. Learning Nuu-wee-ya’ gives Erin the opportunity to “get her claws” into tribal connections via a skill she has an affinity for, and allows her the opportunity to give something to her child in return. Cassy also recognizes that this is a powerful motivator, and uses it in her teaching practice; when asked if she had a piece of advice for somebody who had never tried to learn language before, she responded: for people that are tribal, I just ask them to look at their family history, and just, do you know where language, you know, stopped in your family? [mmhmm] Then if they don't, I say "okay well let's write down your family tree just to find out, you know, just to find out, and then I'll explain where mine is." So I try to, I think I, not really advice, but I ask that question, just so they could consciously think of it because that was something that was motivating to me. [mmm] Was that these last people who spoke it are in the dictionary, like I can go look in the dictionary, "Hey, that's my great grandpa," or "hey 270 that's that person!" [mmhmm] And you feel closer to it. So I would ask them like, what their experience with the language, ask them about their family, get to know them [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] She later reiterated that she “tr[ies] to really push that and make them feel connected to it, so they’re, don't feel like they're outside of it” (Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20). Angel shared that she was motivated to learn her language because of “the connection to our people here”, and that one of the outcomes of this motivations was relocating geographically to be closer to language and to family: what motivates me to learn my language is the connection to our people here, and then also in the past. Uh, I lived in Seattle for about 10 years, and I just had this desire to come back home, and one was to spend time with my grandmothers, so that I can learn the language as best as I could. And I could marry a Nimipuu man, and also can get a horse. And I did that. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] Angel’s example illustrates how the activity of language learning is bound up with other relational activities, such as spending time with relations and expanding family networks. Thus, being able to reconnect to roots is implicated in L2 motivation for these practitioners. This connection to heritage was also shared by some learners of Kristang. The Kristang learning community includes some individuals who are L1 speakers, having been raised with Kristang in their childhood homes. One of these heritage learners describes how finding the Kodrah Kristang community has motivated her to return to her Kristang language and family connections much later in her life: And there's some words that I tell my children at home, or my husband, and friends. And um, the more I attend Kevin's classes, the more I sort of speak outside to other Eurasians, family members, and surprisingly I get to know that more and more in-laws actually understand and speak but they never wanted to speak before, [hmm] because they didn't, they always thought it wasn't a very a good language to know or to learn or whatever. But now slowly they are speaking. So in that sense, I think, that's how it has helped me in that sense. To find out more people speaking. I am more open in speaking to other Eurasians. And interestingly enough, I'm getting to know more people speaking Eurasian. I mean, speaking Kristang. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] 271 Many other Kristang learners are not ethnically Portuguese Eurasian themselves; that is, Kristang is not their language of ‘heritage’. Nevertheless, three of them described the parallels they have been able to draw between their own heritage languages and Kristang. For example, Evaristo is Brazilian and grew up in a remote and rural region of Brazil. He explained that his region of Brazil shares some important history and geography with Singapore: when I connected uh, the history of my place to the history of them and I said, "heyyyy, we have a banquet, We have a buffet of things to do here." Because {haha} Because my region is connected to theirs, to their history, you know, hand to hand, hand to hand. Because when the Dutch were in Brazil, and they invaded what was Brazil at that time […] And then the Portuguese sacked them from Brazil in 1640, as a revenge they sacked the Portuguese here, the Dutch sacked the Portuguese from Malacca and... Yeah. So it's a kind of geopolitical in Movement. [huh!] And (kristang) language was trapped in that geopolitical movement. So Kristang is a result of that geopolitical movement between two powerhouses of that time. And then, and then I could say, well, so here we have a connection, a very nice connection, so I can, you know, learn something different, and on the other hand is so close to mine. [mmm] And I didn't know how much close is that. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] Because of a shared history of Portuguese colonization followed by geographic isolation, Evaristo discovered that Kristang reminded him of his regional variety of Brazilian Portuguese. For him, the sounds of recorded Kristang was a revelation: So I started learning, not learning but listening to some speakers. Some registries in the internet and said, "wow, it sounds my grandma speaking. It sounds my grandma is speaking!" [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] Evaristo did not initially join Kristang language lessons in order to reconnect with the sounds of his grandmother; for him this strong connection back to family was a happy surprise. Other learners found a more abstract connection, recognizing that their own minoritized heritage languages are undergoing language shift in much the same way that Kristang is. This analogous history helped learners see the importance of revitalizing Kristang, and helped learners communicate this importance to other family members. For example, Tej, who is originally from the south of India, described her experience with her parents: 272 I think my fam- my parents were a bit confused. But I mean, I took my mom along to one of Kevin's talks as well, and then she kind of understood it, because she said that, she, because even she gets, even in India, at least, and even amongst our family, like they're sort of dialects and versions of the Tulu dialect that are kind of dying out because [hmm] no one really knows how to speak them, or there's, there aren't, there isn't like work being done to make the dialect relevant to the modern day itself. [Tej, Kristang, 7/31/20] Tej’s classmate, originally from the north of India, shared a similar thought: for my family, similar to Tej, um I have a native dialect spoken by my grandmother called Garhwali, so it's spoken in Uttarakhand in North India. And it's something that my parents never picked up, and - it's something they understood, but they didn't pick it up. And then for me, I don't understand it or speak it. Um, so I think part of the reason I got attached to Kristang was because it reminded me off the fact that, like, [hmm] I mean, I mean it drew, it was a parallel to I think my situation in the sense that you had speakers who knew, who had a vague idea that this was their language, but never really spoke it. […] So I think for my parents on when I sort of explained it to them, and it's connecting to like Garhwali, they sort of understood why people would want to learn it. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] In all the examples in this section, learning a revitalizing language affords revitalization practitioners the opportunity to connect meaningfully with their heritage; this is true even for practitioners who are working on a language that is not of their own heritage. This finding emphasizes that rootedness (MacIntyre et al., 2017) is a key motivation shared by language revitalization practitioners across many contexts. 4.5.5 Recognizing relationships Learning a language also gives practitioners the opportunity to reflect on the nature of relationship itself. For example, Carson described how learning the language can “give you a richer understanding” of your family and history: I mean, um, for anybody that's like trying to stay connected to their heritage, I think that learning and using the language is a pretty beautiful thing because it gives you a real different understanding of where your community's coming from. And, I think it can give you a richer understanding of like, the values and stories and history of your own family. And then I think it's also it's a pretty beautiful and powerful thing too. […] it's almost like finding a different connection back that you didn't even know about. [mmm] Within. So it's not like finding a new family member, but it's like finding that there's a new aspect of what that means. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/9/20] 273 In Carson’s observation, language learning is not only about establishing new relationships; it is about strengthening one’s understanding of the nature of existing relationships, “finding that there’s a new aspect of what [family] means.” Carson also described how his new local community provides a model that he wants to emulate in his own life and in work with his own language: putting up food is a pretty big cultural activity, and it ties into a lot of stuff like, um, you know up, up in Southeast people host really big, um, dinners, […] celebrations and also like memorials and stuff, so, [mm] um just like, contributing food to those for people um is one way that like, [my partner] is a really prolific and talented uh chef and food preserver, and [mm] also really good at getting food […] And so, that has like, opened up a lot of doors [mm] in uh, up there, to just like spend time with really cool people who are active in the community and in the culture, in the village. For sure. And been like, really nice, and positive, and healing, and like helped me to like ground myself in language work. And, and kind of like, see things that I want to emulate or build up in my own community. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/8/21] Carson currently lives a long distance away from his home community; being able to connect with and participate in a different community has helped him to develop an image of what he wants his future community relationships to be. For Chris D, identifying and characterizing relationships is a main reason why it’s important to revitalize Lushootseed. When I asked him to explain to me why it’s important for people to be speaking their language, he replied: I think it's going to have, there's going to be a lot of different reasons for a lot of different people. I will say that…through, through language, I personally have learned a lot more about my culture. I've learned a lot more about my history, and where I personally come from. I've also, like just the connection to my, so like for instance, this is like one of the byproducts of this was just that in my office, or in our office with all of us, I've realized that of the let's see, of the eight people…I am related to all but one. And I'm sure that I can probably dig far enough back to find some sort of link to that other person. [mmhmm] And just that, that idea of like this, this brings us together. You know what I mean? It's such a cool thing. Being able to go out and speak, being able to go out and sing, and be a part of this, the culture itself is just - I mean you can do culture without language, but it's really like, once you put the two together, it's just, it explodes. It's wonderful. […] I [have] learned just how tied in I am to these people, and this land and the, like every bit of it. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] 274 He continued: I don’t know how to like say it other than just, it kind of brings everything to focus in front of you. Like, this is my community. These are my people. And yeah, my mom always said, know your people. And through this program, through all the work we've done, I know my, I know - not all of them, but I know who my people are. We’re always meeting new people and I always try and make that connection. And I know that this is something that brings us all together. And it’s not just language, it's culture, it's, it's history. It's all of these things, but language is a huge part of that for me and the fact that I get to help share that, and get it out there so people can see that […] this is just, it's been such a huge part of my life, that it's, that's why it's important to me. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] Working on language revitalization gives Chris D the opportunity to discover relational connections to others and to continue to strengthen relational ties; these relationships are brought “into focus in front of you” through the practice of language. Two other practitioners identified the ways that the language itself carries knowledge about the nature of relationships. Chris B makes this point explicitly; by learning Lushootseed, he gained a greater understanding of who his “relatives” include: I think the other aha moment - this is so cute, um, my grandpa used to say, "the bear, the bear is our relative." The bear is our, you know, because of what we know from the old stories, we actually have - we're related. The bear and humans are related. And he used to call the bear [siyaya'] And so that's what I thought the word for bear was growing up. And then when I started working for, or when I started studying and working for the Department, there's other words for bear, [stʃɑtɬxəb] and um [stʃətʷəd]. And so I always just thought, well, maybe my grandpa, you know, maybe that's the Yakama word for bear? And then I realized [siyaya'] is "relative". [mmm] And so, he's literally calling the bear "relative." And so that was his word for, and so that was kind of a click moment [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] Because of his growing skills in language, Chris was able to understand his grandfather, and to finally hear the message he was giving about the nature of family and relationships. Similarly, Beth described how Nez Perce grammar marks different types of relationships, and thus how learning her language has given her “other ways of thinking about the relationships of things”: 275 I find language learning very healing […] I just think it's so gratifying. It's so beautiful. Like there's so many things you can say in Nez Perce that are so cool and beautiful and awesome, and just other ways of thinking about the relationships of things. [mm] Things that are related in Nez Perce - so because we had these root words. You know there are things that are related in Nez Perce that aren't related in English. And it's wonderful to see the world organized in a different way. […] And just ways of explaining relationships. Like one of the things in Nez Perce if you say, "this is my daughter," you don't use third person you use first person. So that you know you, you're expressing some sense of this is an extension of me. [mmm] You know, my daughter, you know, which in English would sound like, grammatically incorrect. And I think it's actually sort of grammatically incorrect to use first person in describing a third person. But, in terms of cultural understanding of your the depth of your relationship, it's such a beautiful expression. Like, we should all be saying that. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] In these ways, learning language sheds new light on relationships between individual practitioners, their families, their colleagues, their communities, even the natural world. Because these relationships in turn can support and motivate revitalization practice (see discussion section 4.3), language learning and relationship building can come to form a virtuous cycle of growth and enrichment. 4.6 Conclusion For revitalization practitioners, relationships are central to language learning motivation. Language learning entails establishing new relationships with a community of learners, strengthening relationships within a community of revitalization practitioners, and enriching relational connections within the family. Restoring broken connections and reaffirming existing ones comprises a major part of the motivation to practice language in these revitalizing contexts. This can be a dynamic process, a virtuous circle; motivated by relationships to learn language, they grow through language in their understanding of their role in relationships, their ties to relations, and the nature of relationship itself. This in turn supports and sustains continued motivation in language. In the next and final analysis chapter, we look how relationships those who have gone before and those who will come after shape practitioners’ motivational perspectives across time. 276 CHAPTER V. TIME "Time orientation refers to the preferential temporal direction in a person's thought and action. It is the tendency to be oriented predominantly to the past, the present, or the future." (Husman and Lens 1999, p. 115) It all goes hand in hand and cyclical and so, connecting to my ancestors, connecting to the present, connecting, helping, you know in the future, the future generations connect and be connected. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] 5.1 Introduction Actions and the motivations that give rise to them take place in a particular temporal context and across particular stretches of time. Motivation to learn a language is dynamic, and can vary from moment to moment; for example, de Bot (2015) notes that learners “may be influenced by different types of motivation on different timescales” (p. 36). In this chapter, I look at motivation in language revitalization along two sets of dimensions: Motivational Dimensions, which pertains to the nature of motivation at different points on a language journey; and Temporal Dimensions, which captures the ways that individuals’ experience of and perspective on the past, the present, and the future influence motivation and practice. The theoretical framework for these two sets of dimensions is examined in the introduction to their respective sections in what follows. 5.2 Motivational Dimensions Theories of motivation highlight the multidimensional nature of this construct. One key way of framing this comes from Dörnyei (2001), who identifies the three key components of motivation as: • “the choice of a particular action, • the persistence with it, • the effort expended on it.” (p. 8, italics original) 277 In my analysis, I propose a slightly different tripartite framework to capture the dynamic nature of motivation across time: initiation, which refers to the discrete beginning point of action; persistence, which refers to the longevity of action across a span of time; and effort, which refers to the intensity of activity at any one slice of time. These three components might be schematized as is shown in Figure 18. Figure 18. Schematization of three motivational dimensions in temporal space None of these three components necessarily entail the others; for example, the SLA literature (as well as personal experience) is rich with examples of learners who have strong motivations to start learning an additional language, but who quickly lose motivation and cease practicing altogether. Similarly, a learner may continue to enroll in language classes for various reasons that motivate persistence, but may expend very little effort in any one day or week of language learning. In the opposite situation, a learner may expend considerable effort on a task but lose the motivation to persist in the process, for example, by being disappointed with slow progress, or by simply getting burnt out. 278 In this section, I discuss the initiation (section 5.2.1), persistence (section 5.2.2), and effort (section 5.2.3) components of motivation that were articulated by language revitalization practitioners in interviews, including the way these three components interact with each other, and the temporal qualities of motivation that this tripartite dimensional framing highlights. 5.2.1 Initiation In the Initiation component of motivation, language revitalization practitioners make the decision to begin working on their languages. Some practitioners can point to an exact moment in the past when they began their language journeys. These distinct moments of beginning recall the concept, first introduced from research with new speakers of Catalan, of linguistic mudes (Pujolar & Puigdevall, 2015); these are particular events in one’s life that ‘trigger’ a particular action, including for example a decision to begin learning a heritage language (see discussion in section 1.4.1). Randi calculates the start of her journey as the birth of her nephew: Allison: And how long have you been working on language? Randi: Umm, my nephew is going to be 16 this year. So about 15 years. [All right. So did you start because of him?] Yes, when he was born, I told my sister I'd babysit him while she went to language classes and she said he was going, so I told her I would go with them. {hahaha} [Ah that's nice. So 15 years. Cool. Umm, how did you decide, er- were there any other reasons why you decided to start doing language work?] Nuh-uh. Only to babysit Carson. {chuckle} [Randi, Lushootseed, 6/16/20] In fact, the birth of children was mentioned by others as a clear and salient moment of new beginnings. When asked what made her to decide to start working on her language in the first place, Erin elaborated on the effect of her child’s birth: I've always really loved languages. […] but honestly I didn't have really a strong cultural connection to, to the tribe, just because of like blood quantum reasons. [mmhmm] Which, like nobody wants to hear me complain about blood quantum for like the next, you know, 60 days. [{chuckle}] um, So {ha} I'll just leave it at that. But when my son was born, I kind of finally realized that I had to grow up. And I just, I couldn't just keep pretending like I'm not, you know, like it doesn't affect me or whatever. Like it's not just my heritage that was at stake at that point, it was his heritage. [mm, mmm] And I can be as mad about 279 blood quantum as I want, but at the end of the day, he's Native too, and he deserves to have these things […] And so the way that I felt I could get basically my claws into it most easily was with the language, because I really love languages and I really love learning languages [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] The importance of relationships for motivating both beginnings and continuations of language practice is the focus of Chapter 4. Others were able to calculate their exact starting points for different reasons. Masa noted the exact year when he “came to participate in [his] community”, and hence when his language revitalization work began: Um, my previous education or focus was self-taught in, I just followed whatever my interests were and that was like literature and art and philosophy and relig- or spirituality, and I just let it dictate what I studied. So when I came to participate in my community, I knew immediately that language was very important, and that it was considered dead or something like that and I wondered... this, so that was like 94, 1994, and so I wondered immediately you know, like, is it possible to revitalize that? [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] Others remembered moments from their childhood when an important adult in their life started them learning language. For example, when asked how long she had been working on language, Cassy measured her time starting at specific events when she was 11 years old: I'm 29 now, my mom made me go to class when I was 11. Um, I remember it being something that I didn't want to do. It was weird, it wasn't because I didn't care about our language, but I never realized we didn't have one. […] And um, I was already involved in a lot of stuff at school, I was one of those kids I was way into my homework, band, I was into Youth Council. And so I was really busy. I was learning how to like ride horses on the weekends…and so I had a lot of things. And, you know, and my mom said, "we're going to start going to language class." {hahaha} Like on top of everything, like being at school all day, and now we're going to go here for a couple hours. But that's where I met Zeke, when I was 11. So I guess that must have been like 200...2? Yeah 2002. And I just caught onto it really, really fast. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] Angel also reflected on her experiences as a young learner, and a particular age in which her interest was “sparked” to learn her language: being in language revitalization in the beginning, we all talk about the CNAs or the CANs, the colors numbers animals. And we all used to s- [mm] teach in that way. You know? Colors numbers - and I, for a while, like years, years went by, where I was teaching I was like, "is this all we're going to revitalize as colors numbers animals?" you 280 know {ha} and then of course we expanded and develop better. But I will give the CNAs, or the CANs their, their credit and their due, because in third grade we learn colors numbers animals, colors animals numbers. And just from that it sparked an interest in me. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] Not all practitioners had the opportunity to learn the language at such a young age. Many of these individuals marked their start as the moment when they became aware of the language’s existence at all. This was particularly true of the Kristang learners, including the effort organizer himself: Uh Fran and I, Fran and I together with two others, we were working on a magazine called Unravel, and for that issue we decided to look at endangered languages around the region of Singapore. And in Singapore. Um, and it was during that research that I discovered Kristang existed. I didn't know about it, right? And that, that got me on the path of going to Malacca to understand how the language was still being used, and starting to learn the language. And I became very interested in it in university. So I did a lot of my projects and my thesis on Kristang. And that, that basically was my first encounter with the language, yeah. [Kevin, Kristang, 7/18/20] In turn, Kevin dedicated his personal efforts to raising awareness of the language, and all of the Kristang learners referred to Kevin’s awareness-raising work as important to their own beginnings, as in this example from an international student: and I've been in Singapore for about four and a half years now. So I'm actually not Singaporean, I moved here from India. But I'm very interested in sort of languages and language learning in general. So during high school I was learning Spanish, and um at one point I attended a talk by Kevin which introduced Kristang, so you know I’m not, I’m not a Eurasian or a heritage learner, um [mm mmhmm] And I think learning about it and like, its very sort of unique history, made me want to pick up the language. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] Luis recalled knowing about the existence of Kristang, but only considering learning it once he was made aware of opportunities at a specific moment in time: I did Asian Studies as my undergraduate, so part of that was the presence of Portuguese overseas and, you know, [mm] things like Orientalism and the relations that were created by Portuguese and multiple sites around the world, with a special focus in Asia. So I knew about what Kristang was a long time ago. […] Then when I came to Singapore […] I saw some Kristang being advertised in a Linguistics Facebook group that exists within NTU, uh our, my University here in Singapore. And they were just posting saying like, "oh, look at this, it's quite cool," and was Kevin singing in Kristang, and like, and he was like, there's a little snippet saying what he was doing, basically, it was Kristang and I got 281 that sensation like, "Oh, OK. So this is what I kind of knew about, I actually never heard it," or something like that. [mmm] And I guess I was curious, at first. So I wanted to check what is, what was it about [Luis, Kristang, 7/18/20] Finding out about learning opportunities was noted as a starting point for other learners. When Jackie and I first talked, she had just wrapped up her very first two weeks of language learning, and she noted that though she had always been interested, she was “really just at the beginning”: I had tried for a long time, I mean for years, I, you know, would look at words like in our tribal newspaper, you know, as language revitalization was becoming bigger and bigger within our tribe, they would include various words and try to kind of write out the um pronunciation and you have pictures and stuff in our, in our newsletters, and then eventually like seeing it online and hearing it, and then even at one point last year, I was like, "Okay, I'm just going to like get on the language department website. I'm going to teach myself." {chuckle} and that lasted all of like two days. [{hahaha}] You know, {hahaha} I was like, "I can't do this on my own," like...The...It's hard. {hahaha} So yeah. [{hahaha}] I'm really just at the beginning. {chuckle} [mmm] of my process. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] When I asked her how she had heard about the Multilingual Institute she had just participated in, she said: Yeah, um...the Institute came to my attention through Amber, who is the language department...person. [hmm] Yeah. She was like, "hey, you know, you've talked about this," like, "here's an opportunity" and so, fortunate enough to be able to revamp my work schedule enough to fit that in [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] For Jackie, the distinct beginning point was the moment of finally finding an opportunity to capitalize on a long-held desire to learn her language. Practitioners also might experience important “beginning” moments even several years into their work, such as when a particular learning activity finally “clicks” as it did with Chris D: And then fast forward, once we actually...What motivated me to actually start speaking and everything was really spending time with someone like Zeke […] and at the time I was like, some of the things he was saying I was, I remember vividly being like, man, you talk to yourself? [{ha} Yeah.] you know, all these different things, like you know reclaiming domains and like no, not really, for me. I'm cool with learning language, I want to speak the language though, I don't want to, you know, talk to myself. And then eventually got on board and just listened to what he had to say and it clicked. And once I 282 really started doing the things that actually made me start speaking language, it was almost like, you couldn't really take that away. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] Another example of this is Chris B, who had studied the language for years but marks the start of his employment in the language department as the beginning of language being his “life”: I've always been interested in it. And my mother, actually she learned some from my grandpa also, from her dad, and she also learned from other elders, and so it was always around me. So I was always kind of just a little bit studying it. But I started studying it intently um probably about, gosh, when I graduated from school in 2011, I spent hours a day going to libraries. I didn't have the materials myself, and I would go to the library to get the materials, intently studying them, since uh maybe 2011, so that would have been - I can't math. About nine years. [{haha} yeah] Um, and eventually I got a job three years ago, two and a half or three years ago, with the language department. And that's when, like so three years ago is when I actually started becoming a, well when I became a teacher and it became my life. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] Related to this, practitioners noted the importance of being able to start again at a particular moment when there has been a hiatus in language learning: I think, like I said motivation is this this uphill challenge. But, um, but I think, like for me...um, going to that, like that NILI Institute, you know, helped to create some motivation for me to sort of get started with my little goals for um, for the summer. [mmm] And so I think, I think, you know, sort of like setting reasonable goals, um like reasonable achievable goals. Like writing them out or somehow making them very concrete, is for me how I'm going to sort of help me get started. Because I feel like some of, so the hard parts are sometimes like, if you fall off for a little while, how do you get started again? [mmhmm] Because once I'm started I feel like I can keep the momentum going. And, you know when, when life interrupts, it like, thinking about sort of some small goals that I can achieve will really sort of help me get started again [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] Acknowledging the importance of this chance to start again is something both Chris D and Cassy mentioned as important elements of their teaching practice: we always want people to, once it's, you know, fine for them, once they feel right. That's when, you know, they can hop back in. Sometimes you hop in a class and you're like, I don't have time for this. You leave and then you're just done. And then a couple months later, it comes back. You know what I mean? [Mm hmm.] Yeah. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] So I think for people trying to do the work that we're doing, if you're facilitating it like at the level of like a teacher or organizer, that if a student can't do it one time don't write them off forever, because that opportunity to come back, you know, it is motivating for them. It was motivating for me. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] 283 These moments of starting, of making a choice in the moment, can have powerful, tangible effects on language acquisition, as Kayla describes: you just have to decide to speak. This is something that [our teacher] tells us all the time. Like, you don't have to sit there and like pore over your notes for three hours a day, like you have to decide, "I'm going to speak Lushootseed for five minutes." And then when you sit in that five minutes and you realize like, "oh, I don't know how to do this," that's then your motivation. Like, you don't have to decide anything other than, I will speak Lushootseed at this point in time. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20, emph mine] Thus, initial motivations can be many things, including the birth of a child, a dawning awareness of language loss, a relation offering a learning opportunity, or a teacher offering an opportunity to return. Whatever the initial motivations, practitioners also must find ways to continue in their work long past the moment of the initial spark. Perhaps especially for language revitalization practice, the motivational dimension of persistence is salient and central. 5.2.2 Persistence Practitioners themselves highlighted the difference between motivations to start and motivations to continue. For example, when asked if he had any advice for new learners, one Kristang learner shared: what I've found studying personally, like studying independently, and then studying in classrooms, and like my numerous failures and successes combined - more failure, much more failures than successes {ha} combined - I just think like I would tell him that [{haha}] Um...Okay, a couple of things. I think firstly, persistence is key, right? I have friends who start things on DuoLingo, drop them within a month, and then complain about not being fluent. [{haha}] Um, I have a brother who is trying to learn Japanese and who starts every couple of months, does it for a week and then gives up right? I think finding a motivation to keep doing this in the long term is really vital. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] Later in the interview, he reflected on his experience learning Chinese out of interest versus the experience of some friends who were learning Chinese just “because they think they should,” and summed up his observation by saying: 284 I think, I don't know, I think you need motivation. And I think you need a way to keep up that motivation over a long period of time. [mmhmm] That's what you need. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] Many practitioners shared stories of these long stretches of time and the persistence that they had to muster. For example, Angel gave a brief history of her language department and the ebbs and flows of staff support that has meant she sometimes has to “keep the boat afloat” all on her own: […] in the beginning it was one linguist who eventually worked - a soyapo, non-Indian um a white person who was a linguist who was the director of our program for many years. But then he eventually went to the local college to teach there. And then we had somebody that worked on Arts Council and language together. So it's just us three in the beginning where we would work with elders. We'd have storyboards or the reader boards with, in the beginning was just in English with pictures, or English and Nez Perce with a bunch of pictures. That's how I started learning. And then eventually they went away, and it was just me holding, keeping the boat afloat for a while. And then with grants and things like that, we were able to expand and now we have seven. And um, which is, you know, a better number then when it was just me. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] Similarly, Masa described his first few years of language work as an exercise in patience and persistence: I talked to a woman focusing on the Barbareño language and when I asked her, “is it possible to revitalize the language, is there enough data?” And she hesitatingly said, "yeah? Yeah, you could...." But I could tell the questioning wasn't whether there's enough data, it was whether we were up for the task. [mm, mmhmm] And um, I asked her a lot of questions, you know, to help me understand and to revitalize the language. And I learned right away that conclusions in linguistics are hard won. [{chuckle}] And so in the first bunch of years, I learned more patience than I did language. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] Cassy described the persistence that her language learning community displayed in the face of fluctuating resources over the first few years: So I don't remember how long it was, but it was long enough to where we moved our language lessons to our house and we just invited people to come to our house and it was potluck style and I remember us being in the yard because I think it was, it was nice outside, we were in the yard, so we would just have our papers and our posters and taught each other what we knew and um, then we had a couple other language teachers come in, Tammy Cooper and Nancy Bob. And they were there for a little bit, not too long, and then again, something happened with our funding and we were back to kinda just doing it 285 in our homes with the community members that were mostly family, close family that came. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] That is, Cassy and her family had to find ways to persist in language learning through periods of funding cuts that took away their access to language teachers. Practitioners evidently recognize the need for persistence in language learning. They also identified sources of this needed persistence motivation. Other community members often serve as important examples of this long-term persistence in the face of challenges (see section 4.3.2.2 about example-setting as a relational motivation). This was so important to Randi in fact that she asked that the following note be added to the text of her interview transcript: one thing that I omitted in the interview was my comments about our program coordinator Lena Maloney. She has never wavered in her commitment to learning, teaching the language but now more importantly she has pushed for growth and development of the program. She is the biggest reason I have stuck to it. She started her learning here in suquamish the first time it was offered by zeke zahir. [Randi, Lushootseed, 6/16/20] Important relationships also affect motivation through specific words of encouragement (see section 4.3.1.2) to persist through struggles, as in Michelle’s example: I have a baby, she is 16 months old. And so like during my pregnancy, I felt like I lost my mind. Um, like I wasn't at, like I… [{chuckle}] I became less intelligent. {hahaha} [{hahaha}] […] And so, like simple phrases that I know, I do know! I didn't know. Um, and then I thought, "Okay. As soon as I give birth, it'll come back and I'll be fine." And it didn't immediately. And I was, and I just sat there and I'm like, I lost all these years, I don't know anything anymore. [mmm] But she was really amazing at just encouraging me and, "it'll come back" and "I've gone through it, too," and um, and I, it seems to be very common. That you know, it's, sometimes you just don't have as good of a grip as you would like. And, and it will come back, and you just have to persevere and push through those moments and times where you do feel defeated. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20, emphasis mine] Practitioners, both teachers and students, shared experiences of needing to persist despite time constraints or other difficulties. Frances identified one source of her persistence as being the language community itself: it's always really inspiring because somewhere, sometime, we'll just find time to do this stuff. I remember a time when we were in undergrad, when we ran like four classes per 286 week. That was really crazy for everybody I think. But, in those moments when I'm really like I'm rushing an assignment, or I just have no time for life or whatever, I just, I go for class, and I always leave the class feeling like, "yeah, this is totally worth it." And that…like there's totally a push- or pull factor, for wanting to come back. [mmm] Every other session, or every other week. So I think it's the community, the community has a big part to play in making us feel like we're doing something meaningful [Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] Students also shared examples of things that teachers did that made them want to keep going: I think, for me, the motivation is in the one on one with Zeke mostly. […] What Zeke does is he will go over things. And he'll explain it to you. And he draws in some of the culture with it too, [mm] talking about you know, people used to use this, or they did that, and that's why it is the way it is. And that's really interesting for me, I enjoy it, it keeps me going, I just want more of that. [learner, Lushootseed, 6/23/20] For his part, Chris B identified one “failure” of his as a teacher (see section 4.4.1 for further discussion of challenges faced by teachers) as a failure to motivate his students to remain consistent over the course of a break: I have to admit, one failure that I had um over spring break […] I kept telling the students, you know, “go ahead and take a rest. It’s all right, you worked really hard,” [mmhmm] it seemed like a nice thing to say. But they took that literally, and when they got back they forgot everything, oh my gosh. [{ha} mmm] So I should have said something different. I should have said, “keep using your domains,” you know, “keep using your conversation.” So, that’s something I’m going to have to work on and, and, find ways to motivate them...another opportunity to learn how to motivate people. [mmhmm mmhmm {chuckle}] Over the summer, because I really want them to come back knowing at least you know, half of what we got through at the end of this quarter [Chris B, Lushootseed, 5/27/21] This need for consistency in language practice is an area where persistence and effort expenditure overlap; practitioners recognize that it is important to maintain their connection to language practice over the long term even as effort in the short term fluctuates. 5.2.3 Effort The third dimension of motivation is effort expended on the activity, and this can be thought of as the strength of a learner’s exertions over a particular slice of time. In fact, in the 287 Puyallup Method (see 7.2.1), effort is specifically calculated in units of time. Zeke explained the logic behind this: your focus is, [uh huh] "Oh you did an hour a day this week?" "Yeah, yeah!" "Okay next week, I want two hours a day" {hahaha} [{hahaha}] And it's that easy. Because what did you do? You- let's say they're using language four different ways, with an hour of language use per day. When you tell them to bump it up to two hours a day, they're going to have to find different ways of using it. [mmhmm, mmhmm] And what happens? Their functions expand naturally because they're using it more. [mmhmm] And other people then learn how to do greetings and so on, because all these people are running around greeting people in the language [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] Zeke regularly and explicitly equates effort and units of time, as illustrated by this substantive quote where he outlines his motivational strategy: So, part of the class time - I'd say five, no more than ten minutes every week - is "how did it go this week?" And, "this week was a good week, I used it for an hour, and I did this and that and that" but oftentimes it's, "I'm ashamed I didn't do it, I only did 30 minutes a day," And they go, you know, "I should have used it more," and I go "no, there's no 'should', there's no 'have to',” what happens – like yesterday, a couple were saying “well we got a bunch of plants and we were planting them and we're getting our house ready for the summer, and we were very very busy, and we did it, but we didn't do as much as we wish we had.'" [mmhmm] And I said, "Good! Now remember when you're very very busy, don't let that demotivate you. Just enjoy that time, and then when you have more time bring the language back in the home." You know. And what happens is, when they remove the 'must', the 'should,' the 'have-to', their efforts tend to double then. So they'll go like, twenty minutes to two hours, over the week, you know, because they realize they don't have to do it. [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20, emph mine] This equation of effort to units of time is so salient in the method in fact that multiple Lushootseed learners reacted the way that Kayla did, amused that I had asked her “such a Zeke question”: Allison: about how long do you think you spend in the language, like, a week? Kayla: Oh, this is such a Zeke question. [I know, I realize that {hahaha}] {hahaha} That's okay, I'll tell you what I tell Zeke. uh...[{haha}] We say that we spend about...um I mean, in order to be a teacher, you have to be spending around two hours per day during the week in the language. And this varies right from, like, week to week but also depending on what you're talking about. So if you're talking to yourself for the domains, if you're talking to your children or your dogs. So it varies, but that's generally average what they want, what we want people to be speaking. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] 288 Some learners admitted to having difficulty precisely calculating their language effort in terms of time, as Jackie shared: At this point in time, I feel like I am, um, trying to constantly speak it in my mind, to like, to myself in my mind. [mm, mmhmm] Um, anytime I know a word for something I'm saying it in Lushootseed. […] Yeah, so I guess it's hard to put like a number to it, [sure] since it’s always rolling in my head. And I'm finding that I am sharing words with people at various points in conversations, just a word that is especially meaningful in my language. [mmm] Yeah. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] Charlotte reported a similar difficulty: Zeke asks us that every week, like, "Tell me about your language this week." [I know it's such a big question for him isn't it {hahaha}] Yeah. It totally varies, I'd say. And also is different...it's hard to tally because, you know, do I do, I count, like when I'm saying goodbye to someone and I say like huy’ is that like, one second of the language that I add on to my {hahaha}, my total count for the day? [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] Despite this difficulty, Charlotte shared how this time calculation has been helpful for her to celebrate progress in her language practice: you know, every week, Zeke says, "How is your language this week?" or "How many hours do speak?" and it's hard for me to quantify speaking and I get really frustrated sometimes but - and he reminds me that, you know, even if you're only speaking 10 minutes a day, that's 10 minutes more than you were before you learned this language. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] “Time spent” can be a handy heuristic for “effort expended” in all language efforts, and many practitioners not connected to Puyallup figure language learning effort in these terms, as Angel does: And I think what we have now is doable, you know. Okay, year one you're going to concentrate on these 45 lessons that we have workbooks, and we have this, you'll be able to listen to it and you'll be able to work, you know, with whoever one on one or in groups, and just follow this plan, this plan will lead you to excelling in this proficiency. If you put in, you know, so many hours. The kids do an hour a day. Can you dedicate an hour a day studying on your own or with a group? [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] Beth also calculates her individual effort in terms of time in her day: I work on it 30 minutes a day. And then like doing translation work and then I usually do something else with it during the day, which can take between, you know, five minutes and an hour. [hmm] But I would say, yeah 30 minutes a day for sure, is always like, that's 289 the kind of [Every day.] mmhmm [hm! Wow] But it is usually translation. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] Effort expended can also be described in terms of the particular action or activity involved, and Michelle described her personal language practice both in terms of time spent and also the work undertaken: so I, I work 20 hours a week as a language apprentice. So I work directly with my mentor for about two hours a day, five days a week, where we just try to focus just on language and expanding my vocabulary and working on those Ks35. [{hahaha}] um {hahaha} you know, and then, uh I think it's, I mean it's kind of constant. Because I'm, throughout my day trying to stay in the language when I can. Especially with my baby. Most of her commands are in Xaad Kíl, and so trying to expand that base. [mmm] And remember all the different commands. And then even speaking to people who have no idea what I'm saying. Just to get it out there, you know? [mm, mmhmm] Um, so and then working on projects. So when I'm, I'm like, one step ahead of my students most of the time. [Yeah.] And so I'm like, think up something that I want to teach and then, so I'm working on that, and putting it into like games or, or creating you know materials, student materials. So I would say probably during a week I spend...Probably 50 hours trying to work on, you know, my language. And sentence structure and {ha} memorizing. And {ha} those Ks. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] Masa shared in detail his efforts over the course of his decades of language work. I present this quote at length, as it illustrates both the variety of activities that a language revitalization practitioner might be engaged in at any point in time, and also the strength of the exertions of this highly motivated practitioner: Originally, because we thought Barbareño had the most data […] I asked for Barbareño texts, so I could see how words were strung together. […] And so they mistakenly sent me notes on Ventureño material culture. And I thought, "oh, well, it all has to gets transcribed." And that's before I knew how voluminous it was [Yeah. Uh huh.] And how painstaking it was. And so I devoted myself to Ventureño which is the language I should focus on because that's where my family lived. […] And so I was transcribing like…then I decided, you know, I was doing this when I'd get home from work, working in construction, I'd get home and just grind on these notes. Then it dawned on me that this is a lifetime of work. So I went back to college, I finished up, I got enough credits in a community college to transfer into college and I went to Evergreen State College, where they allow you to create your own curriculum to some extent. And so I indulged in their 35 Michelle’s language includes contrasting plain vs glottalized velar and uvular stops, ([k], [k’], [q], and [q’]), and Michelle repeatedly referred to her efforts to master this particular pronunciation difference. 290 curriculum type ideas and then later wrote independent contracts to focus on my language. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] Many practitioners like Masa and Michelle seek out opportunities to increase the effort they are expending on their language. For example, Charlotte described preparing for her teacher certification test as a time of extra “effort and energy”, which in her case contributed to language growth: I got my Level 1 certification, [nice.] I don't know if that was before or after we talked. Um, and that was like a huge, uh, that was a big...push, and a big contributor I think to my language growth, is [mmhmm] testing and studying for {ha} the certification, we just like, buckled down, and, our entire group, we ended up meeting every day for two weeks to [mmm] just chat and work on our language and our domains. […] Just, ton of effort and energy {haha} went into that test. [{haha}] They didn't let us know if we got it for like five days after, too, so I was just like sitting there, [{ha}] waiting for them to report back. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] Extra efforts might also include particular language learning activities that are both temporally circumscribed and intensively effortful, such as the Multilingual Institute or the related Lushootseed Language Institute. One learner shared about her experiences in LLI: For me personally, it was, um, after attending the um LLI, what's it - the Lushootseed Language Institute, that the uh language program puts on […] it was last summer, [mmhmm] and, they kinda, you know you're so submerged in the language. And they prepared you to do this greeting for a canoe. And, being in, in the middle of it, hearing it day in day out, the language felt easier. When you're, when you're submersed in it so much - or immersed in it - so much, that it's all that you're hearing, um, I think that really helped to improve it. [learner, Lushootseed, 6/23/20] Chris D, one of the teachers at LLI, noted that such intensity of effort is not always possible for all learners: Versus when you throw a bunch of people in something like LLI, they're almost...not forced, but they're almost forced to do it because they've already committed to something so big, you know what I mean? [mmhmm, mmhmm] And seeing that, you, that's kind of where it's like...the workload is so huge that if you throw it at anybody, it's only going to stick to a handful of folks. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] 291 Extra effort might be needed at different stages of language attainment. Evaristo gave two different metaphors for the intermediate stages of second language learning in his personal experience. In one, he compared this stage to a turnstile that locks behind you: It locks, you can't go, yeah, you can't go, you can't come back [yeah, yeah.] So, for me, the point of more stress, is when I'm close to that point. [ah, uh huh] yeah, when you, when I'm getting close, I'm getting confident, now I can order number two in the McDonald's, {haha} And then I can make, I can be funny with one sentence or the other [...] that's a very pleasant way, but the moment you start to realize that more you push to get to the other side and don't come back, or you stop that moment, [{chuckle} mmhmm] And let it go by, that's a very, very hard. Uh peak moment of distress. Because you have to put more energy on that. If you don't put energy on, that you won't get to the [mm mmhmm] To the click moment. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] That is, while getting to the level of a beginning learner who “can order number two in McDonald’s” might be very “pleasant”, pushing past this level of attainment requires much more effort. He also compared this stage to the plateau on a mountain: it's a very stressful situation, when you are motivated, but you see that the mountain...because it's like climbing the mountain really, you see, you leave the bottom, and then you get like "whoa fresh air! Fresh air! Fresh air! Wow, beautiful! Oh, it's a nice flower, ohh!" Everything is new, fantastic and so on. And you go right in a new plateau, and you figure out that the mountain is much higher than you thought. [uh huh {hahaha}] So you have this, you have this dilemma. Stay here? Go down? lose everything that I did? Or struggle to go up? But each meter higher is much more effort and much less air. [mmhmm mm {chuckle}] And much more… {hahaha} [mmhmm] and much more time consuming. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] In both of these metaphors, he underscored that extra effort was needed to push into the next stage of the language journey. As the term implies, “expending effort” in language learning can be a laborious and draining part of the experience. Erin repeatedly used the term “brute force” to describe some of her efforts; this kind of effort can be demotivating, draining her of “the joy of it”: before all of this happened, you know, before we had the Institute I should say, um I didn't really know what to do. You know, I could, I could force myself to do the work, because you know everyone has, we all have things we have to do that we don't necessarily want to do, and that feeling of overwhelm was like the wall that was making me not want to do it. [mmm] And I have ways of overcoming that wall and making the 292 work happen anyway. And so I would employ those tactics, you know, things like having a Pomodoro timer, or like having an accountability group or [mm] um, but none of them really worked in the long term, where I could feel…like I was getting the joy of it back. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] Erin also observed that this amount of effort required to learn language is one of the most common obstacles that she sees her language community members confronting: but then also quite a lot of the problem we run into is that even if people are interested, it's just so hard to study a language. Like, you know, I studied Japanese in a university setting for three straight years. I, that's what I have my degree in, and to this very day, like would I consider myself even bilingual in Japanese? Absolutely not. Because languages are hard, and especially languages that are so different from English are that much harder. [mmhmm] And so I think a lot of people want to go in and just have like a connection to their heritage, and not necessarily have to put that much effort into it. Um, and you can't. [mm, mmhmm] Like I don't want to...yeah, there's just no other way. It takes a lot of effort, it takes a lot of time [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] In other words, while effort expended is one of the central components of motivation, the awareness of the amount of effort required can be a significant demotivator. In light of this, Erin said that finding a strategy to cope with her limited effort capacity is the only way she can move forward: for this particular project, especially because there's such a huge emotional component, because there's such a big bandwidth problem, I kind of have to focus on like, what's realistic for me. [mmhmm] And make, make the vision smaller. As much as I hate to do it. Like, I'm a very, I'm a big vision person. And making the vision smaller makes me upset, but I think that's the only way that I can like keep moving. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/2/21] This recognition of the need to “make the vision smaller” is part of the discussion of breaking large goals into incremental and manageable progress, see 3.6.4, and also the practical suggestion in section 7.3.5. Other practitioners also discussed the need to be deliberate and intentional with their efforts and energy. For example, one heritage learner noted that it was “fun” to practice language together as a family, but that it takes more than pleasure to keep up the practice: Yeah, I agree, I think that's the kind of fun, I mean I wouldn't say it's like, you know…going to the beach or anything, because it takes a lot of focus, and [{hahaha}] 293 and, um, work. So, there's got to be something more in you that drives you than "oh, this is fun to study" {haha} [learner, Lushootseed, 6/23/20] That is, learning the language requires effort in the form of “focus” and “work.” Jackie said something very similar, recognizing that she needs to supplement her enjoyment of the connections she’s building with self-discipline: it's kind of one of those things that at this point I'm viewing as like, this is definitely fun, and it's culture building, community building, I enjoy it. And, with, as with most things it's also like a discipline, you know. [mmhmm mmm] Um, you have to commit to something or you have to practice {ha} or, of course, you're not gonna learn it. Or retain it. […] I don't go into it with that mindset, it is more of the like I'm having fun, I'm connecting, I'm learning my culture, and that has value, and, um, I enjoy this. When I only hold that mindset, though, is when I can like kind of get off track and not practice, and [mmhmm] um, especially not being surrounded like in person by other language s- um Lushootseed language speakers. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] Chris D echoed this when he noted the detrimental effects of not putting in effort to practice language outside of class: importance of regularly practicing the language outside of the regular class hour: You can spend an hour a week, you want more than that but if you spend an hour a week in a class, and you don't repeat, you don't actually actively try to say these things, you're not going to do it throughout the rest of the week. [mmhmm] If I tell you to say "haʔł sləx̌il" every day from now on, and you're like, "ugh, I can't really make that sound, I can't do this," you're just not going to say it. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] The mention of putting in this effort “every day from now on” also highlights the relationship between persistence and effort in consistent language practice. In fact, all of the “dimensions” of language learning motivation – initiation, persistence, and effort – are interrelated. Practitioners have distinct moments of beginning, pausing, and beginning again; practitioners persist, struggle, and persist; practitioners lose energy in their efforts in moments of challenge and expend extra effort in moments of high motivation. Carson puts it succinctly: Allison: Is there anything else about like how you, you know, how you got motivated to learn your language, and how you stay motivated through all this time that hasn't come up yet? 294 Carson: Um, maybe the only thing I would add is that I haven't stayed motivated. It's been a really up and down process. So I think it's important to kind of normalize that, or have that be part of the discussion. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/9/20] That is, as can be seen throughout this section, motivation is a dynamic process where these components interact over the long course of a language learning journey. 5.3 Temporal dimensions Language supports everything: health, identity, connection to the past, ones ancestors, generations before and after, and fundamentally, ways of being human. [ID 98, Halkomelem] Human experience can be conceptually divided into three temporal dimensions: the past, the present, and the future. The present moment is the point from which other dimensions are calculated: the present is now, the past is everything before now, the future is everything after now. These dimensions are so conceptually salient that they are even embedded in many linguistic systems (e.g. verb ‘tenses’)36. The future is the dimension most central to the literature on learning motivation; as Nuttin (1964) argues, “the future is the time quality of the goal object; the future is our primary 'motivational space"' (p. 63). But language learners bring with them their personal histories and past experiences, and language learners are affected by their present experiences both inside and outside the learning environment. That is, though motivation is certainly concerned with movement towards some future object or goal, the past and the present are part of the context of that motivation as well. 36 Not all languages have this exact three-way distinction; some languages mark different degrees of remoteness in the past (meaning, they have more than this three-way distinction). Other languages lack overt marking for the past, or the future, or both; in the World Atlas of Language Structures, 88 out of 222 languages are reported to have no grammatical past tense, and 112 out of 222 have no overt marking for future tense (Dryer & Haspelmath eds., 2013). An interesting question in the field of linguistic relativity centers on the ways that linguistically encoded time affects speakers’ perceptions of time; this question is both highly relevant to and also far beyond the scope of this present chapter. 295 This is especially true for language revitalization practice. Learners in these contexts are not merely seeking to become a member of an existing speech community; their L2 futures involve much more than simply integrating into something that already exists in the present. What learners in these contexts strive for is the construction of a different future, a future which bears a complex and dynamic relationship with the past speech community and the current revitalization community. In fact, these practices are simultaneously etymologically backward37- looking and forward-looking etymologically. Referring to a practice as re-vitalization, re-vival, or re-claiming, evokes a sense of repetition and return. One practitioner described what this means to her personally: But the revitalization portion of it. I mean, just that that's even a word you know that we're using is so big and special and important when we're talking about Native communities […] We’re still here. We're still thriving. It's not just the story of disappearing and struggle and, all of that is part of it, because of historical stuff, and just life. But like we can, we can keep growing and keep showing up, you know, and revitalizing so many more pieces of our indigenous lives, too. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] This evokes the notion of “presencing” as a tool of resistance and decolonization (Simpson, 2017), a term that Hall (2021) describes as “making a conscious choice in the present to contribute to a different future” (p. 496). This present is always constricted by and constructed by the past, but the act of conscious presencing enables Indigenous activists to intervene, and to counter the oppressive narrative that the past is, as Jackie said in the above quote, “not just the story of disappearing and struggle.” This is why Simpson (2017) says that she begins her public talks by telling the story of what her community’s land looked like in the past, "as a quick glimpse, albeit a generalized one, of what was lost— not as a mourning of loss but as a way of 37 I use the term “backward-looking” here as a lexical parallel to “forward-looking”, recognizing that there are some potentially negative connotations to the word “backward” in this sense. My intention is not to imply that these perspectives are regressive, any more than it is to suggest that language revitalization practitioners are somehow “stuck” in the past. Instead, these perspectives are insightful, impactful, and, I will argue, motivational. 296 living in an Nishnaabeg present that collapses both the past and the future and as a way of positioning myself in relation to my Ancestors and my relations" (p. 3) In this sense, building a present recognizes the inextricability of the past and the future, as she notes that “[m]y Ancestors struggled, sacrificed, and fought much worse than I have to get me here, and I have the same responsibility to my future relations" (p. 7). In this section, I discuss the temporal dimensions of motivation in language revitalization practice in terms of perspectives on the past, experiences in the present, and perspectives on the future. 5.3.1 Past – contextual background and narrative memory Phenomenologically, human lives are experienced linearly, moving always away from the past and towards the future. However, evidence from the cognitive sciences suggests that the past and the future are intertwined rather than dichotomous. Neuroscientists have found that we use the same parts of the brain to recall episodic memories and to imagine possible futures (Schacter et al., 2007). Cognitive psychologists research the ways that the act of remembering our past experiences helps to shape who we are in the present and who we might become in the future (e.g. Strahan & Wilson, 2006). Psychologists who take a functional approach identify three particular functions for personal memory: the self function, by which recalling memories helps reinforce a sense of continuity of the self over time (i.e. I am the same person now as I was when I had that experience); the social function, by which we recollect memories in order to create and strengthen social bonds; and the directive function, by which we engage memories of past experiences to direct present and future behaviors (Bluck & Alea, 2009). This last function in particular is relevant to motivation; in this function, thinking about the past establishes the kind of future we want to move towards. 297 Memories of the past also play a role in Possible Selves theory (Markus & Nurius, 1986). Possible selves are images of what we might be able to become in the future; this theory is the basis of Dörnyei’s L2 Motivational Self System (see section 1.3.3). Working in the L2MSS, Falout (2016) notes that individuals’ possible future selves are based, at least in part, “on self- depictions from their pasts,” and that “remembering positive or successful past selves, and reliving the emotions, helps build belief in future self-potential” (p. 51). That is, if “possible selves act as ‘future self-guides’, reflecting the dynamic, forward-pointing conception that can explain how someone is moved from the present toward the future” (Dörnyei, 2009, p. 11), then these future self-guides are shaped at least in part by reflections on ‘past selves’. Thus the past has a mediated impact on the motivational space as well. This is also captured in the Rooted L2 Self construct for heritage language learning, with involves “a clear sense of rootedness-in- community for their ideal selves, integrating the future with the past.” (MacIntyre et al., 2017, p. 513, emphasis mine). In the psychological research, the focus is (perhaps not surprisingly) on the past lived experiences of the individual; ‘memory’ and ‘past selves’ are discussed specifically with regard to autobiographical memory (e.g. Bluck and Alea, 2009, Strahan & Wilson, 2006). Falout’s (2016) study of past selves from L2 motivation theory is specifically focused on individual learners’ memories of their previous language learning experiences, and what impact those past learning experiences have on motivated behavior in the present. In this present chapter, the excerpts found throughout section 5.2 (Motivational Dimensions) are in fact examples of autobiographical memory, as they are all retrospective accounts of past events that happened to the individual. But for individuals who are working to revitalize their heritage languages, it is also pertinent to consider collective memory, the shared narrative of what the language and the 298 community have experienced in the past, as part of language practice and motivation. This was a major theme in the research findings for this dissertation. This section looks more closely at how these shared narratives impact individual practitioners. In section 5.3.1.1, I show that community histories are inextricable from language, such that language learners in these contexts are aware of these histories even if they did not personally experience major historical events. This focus on community history as salient background for language learning further elucidates the ‘context’ part of the ‘person-in-context relational view’ of motivation (Ushioda, 2009). Section 5.3.1.2 looks at how practitioners grapple with the traumatic, distressing realities of the community’s past, the painful histories which led to language shift. Some practitioners experienced these pains personally, while others witnessed them through family members’ enduring suffering or through stories passed down through the community. Section 5.3.1.3 then discusses how practitioners are able to find motivation in spite of – or sometimes, because of – these painful memories of their community’s collective past, and how memories of those who have gone before help to shape the vision for what the future for the language might look like. 5.3.1.1 Learning language and learning community history In revitalization contexts, learning a language and learning about the history of that language are often intertwined. Some examples of this come from the Global Survey, where for example respondents connected community history to community identity, and articulated how this related to language: Revitalizing Guébie is important to speakers, who see themselves as having a distinct historical and cultural background from other nearby groups, and their language is the most obvious remnant of their history. [ID 95, Guébie] porque ha sido la identidad cultural por miles de años y es una forma de autonomía (= “because it has been the cultural identity for thousands of years and is a form of autonomy” my trans.) [ID 185, zapoteco] 299 Some responses also invoked a collective narrative of past individuals and past experiences that underlie present efforts: Johnny Poahway is a member of the Comanche Business Committee saw the need to teach young people and started teaching in Oklahoma to highschool youth. Geneva Navarro began teaching in New Mexico in the mid-90's and moved to Oklahoma in 2003 to teach at the Comanche Nation College. She moved back to New Mexico and began teaching the Comanche language again in the Summer of 2016. She taught briefly in Santa Fe but the interest died out so now she is teaching in Albuquerque only. [ID 1, Comanche] the last native speaker of their language died in 1940 [ID 94, Chitimacha] The language had fallen out of general community use in the late 1890's but the first modern book on how to learn Cornish was published in 1910 and this is taken as the start of the revitalization as it enabled new speakers to learn. [ID 226, Cornish] Usually the year 1893 and the foundation of Gaelic League (Conradh na Gaeilge) is seen as the starting point of modern revitalization efforts. [ID 28, Irish] These survey responses record the experience of a collective community effort, and as such these historical narratives reflect on the community as a whole rather than on the experience of any one individual learner. But the history of the language is salient even to individual language learners within those effort. In this study, interview participants also discussed the historical circumstances that led to language loss, suggesting that individual actions are undertaken with an awareness of the collective past. For example, in one of the Kristang small group interviews, one learner described what he had learned about the sociopolitical history of the language: In one of Kevin's talks, so when I learned about Kristang for the first time, he sort of explained that part of this was because of Singapore's rehousing policies that happened, was it the '60s? Um, maybe, I think it was the '60s or so, where you did have a sort of setttle- a Kristang settlement, but then due to their rehousing policies, they wanted a certain percentage of every race in um housing blocks so as to prevent racial riots. [huh!] Um, and a big part of the, this Kristang settlement got very diffused over most of Singapore. And since they were already constituted such a small percentage of the population, I think that's why you just, you know, that happened. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] 300 That is, learning about the history of the Kristang language, and how government policies contributed to its current state of endangerment, was actually the first step in this learner’s personal endeavor to learn Kristang. Another Kristang learner, Evaristo, recalled learning about the parallel histories of Portuguese-based Kristang in Singapore and the Portuguese of his home region in Brazil: then I met this news about the Kristang language. I said, "Kristang? This is weird. This is Portuguese Kristang? What does it has to do- Yeah. Religion, language, what has...What has this to do?" [mm] And then when I connected uh, the history of my place to the history of them and I said, "heyyyy, we have a banquet, We have a buffet of things to do here." Because {haha} Because my region is connected to theirs, to their history, you know, hand to hand, hand to hand. […] it's a kind of geopolitical in Movement. [huh!] And (kristang) language was trapped in that geopolitical movement. So Kristang is a result of that geopolitical movement between two powerhouses of that time. And then, and then I could say, well, so here we have a connection, a very nice connection, so I can, you know, learn something different, and on the other hand is so close to mine. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] This coincidence of shared history is a personally meaningful component of Evaristo’s work with the “lexical incubator” project for building the Kristang dictionary: So that is a very, very pleasant, because it makes me think about my history, makes me think about how the things evolved. And different from the guys that the mother, or the grandmother like Kevin used to speak Kristang, and then this language was almost lost, and then they are reviving this because of a family background, [mm, mm] in my case is to make the bridge of my own history. Coming here, coming from there. Yeah, having this interest, and put this all in a meltpot as um, as a way of understanding how the evolution of the language had [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] Thus by understanding the history of the Kristang community and Kristang language, Evaristo was able to find a (however indirect) with his own roots, which can be highly motivational for language practice (see discussion of his experience in section 4.5.4). In fact, many of the key organizers of the Kodrah Kristang language efforts do not identify as having a Eurasian ethnicity or Kristang-speaking heritage, but nonetheless find meaning for the work by reflecting on the history of the language. For example, Luis is a linguist from Portugal who is one of the main Kodrah Kristang organizers, and he noted: 301 for me again it's always slightly different, because I'm not a Singaporean. So I was not necessarily discovering parts of my country, or my country's history or, you know, seeing my neighbors as something different that didn't exist, that I didn't know existed. [Luis, Kristang, 7/18/20] However, he went on to discuss how learning about the history of Kristang caused him to reflect on the ambivalent history of Portuguese colonization, and motivated him to get involved in the revival effort: as a linguist, I guess I can accept that uh the linguistic landscape is bound to change. And I accept some change in a slightly less emotional way if that change is done natural, like if you cannot really understand what is going wrong. But in this kind of situation in Singapore at least, when I started to realize what was happening […] I understood, that these people were kind of, like made to give up this language. Like accelerated in a way that I felt was quite sad, and also the way that so many of the Kristang people see Portugal in, in this kind of uh…I mean, they kind of forget that – [Frances: Grandiose- like] Yeah, they try to forget the bad things that happen, and kind of cultivate the good things that happen, that were left by. And of course you can see that as endearing right? But at the same time, you see that, you know, Portugal has also not given a great umm…any kind of help towards the preservation of the language. [mmm] In the recent years. [Luis, Kristang, 7/18/20] By understanding the role that Portugal has played in the history of Singapore, Luis connects his own heritage with a sense of responsibility for the Kristang community. Another organizer, Frances, who is Singaporean but not of Eurasian heritage, also shared that learning language and learning about history are intertwined: I think it's really been a gateway into learning more about the history of this region, in general, not just Singapore, but also it opens up a lot of questions about [mm] [Kevin: Yeah.] You know, where did the early settlers come from, to question your place in this, in this area. Right? And how interactions have created this language. In your, across centuries. So it's just a really interesting portal or like way of seeking out some of these, some of this information that I would not have come across if I didn't look into studying Kristang or teaching Kristang. [Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] That is, one of the outcomes of learning the Kristang language is precisely this raised awareness of history and context. 302 The community history that is intertwined with the language is one factor that makes learning Lushootseed more “meaningful” to Chris B, in contrast with other languages he has studied that don’t have that same connection to history and culture: the whole historical and spiritual aspect. [mmm] Is meaningful as well, is that there's a lot of cultural relevance to everything we're learning, rather than just like cut and dry grammar. You can ask yourself, well, what does it actually mean to you on, I don't know, personal, maybe even spiritual level. Um, whereas with something studying another different language you just kind of you know that that whole level of understanding doesn't exist. [Mm hmm.] Or not for me anyway. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] In many cases, the meaningfulness of history is bound up with the importance of relational connections (see section 4.5.4), as in Chris D’s example of relationships stretching backwards through time: through language, I personally have learned a lot more about my culture. I've learned a lot more about my history, and where I personally come from. […] you know when you introduce yourself in Lushootseed, one of the things you do is you start going back, you say "my name is Chris, my mom's name is Lynette Duenas, my dad's name is Joe Duenas, my grandma's name on my dad's side is, you know, Judy Wright, my -" you know, and you keep going further and further back and like I said, once I started doing that it's like, "okay well I'm gonna keep going back" and I learned just how tied in I am to these people, and this land and the, like every bit of it. You know what I mean. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] For Chris D, being able to use language to trace his lineage means that he feels more “tied in” with his roots, an important part of making language practice more closely connected to his sense of self – an important aspect of L2 motivation. A heritage learner of Kristang echoed that this interest in historical relationships is one of the reasons she persists: I think it's probably also the interest, that I want to learn more, because I'm also interested in my history. [mmm] My past, and my, my generation, and…uh I tried searching for my grandparents' records, and they were in the church, later on they were transferred to the registrar. But when I went to look, I could only find it written in Portuguese. [mmm mmm] So that was very difficult lah. But from what the words were, I could understand some of it, through the Kristang language. [mmm] So that is one of the things that makes you stay motivated. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/29/20] 303 That is, Kristang language is the tool through which she can discover aspects of her personal and family history. Practitioners also shared that learning language can change one’s perspectives on just how much of the language and culture has endured through history and into the present day. Chris D shared one example of a particular lexical item: And the other huge piece of it38 is just like when you start kind of digging into things you - we all, Zeke always tells us, you know the, uh txʷəlšucid comes from the land. You know, it belongs to this area. And it's so crazy that when you hear stories like um [LS - sparrow spetsxʷ] when he sings - that's the sparrow - when he sings, it rains. And it's a very specific thing, and it's like, Zeke was like "no you'll hear it, if you go out and listen, just listen." And sure enough, you go out and go for walks, out in your normal neighborhood and you hear that, you know, that [LS sparrow call spetsxʷ, spetsxʷ], it's that specific sound and you're like, "Oh it is getting cloudy." [{hahaha}] You know what I mean? Like those, those little things that just draw you to, this is where we're from, and there's so much history there, and it's so interesting to know, to hear those things and to try and understand those things, and bring it back to, like, to me, it's still here. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] In this way, revitalization practice can illuminate what has not been lost, and to reinforce the enduring continuity between the past and the present. This affirmation of the importance of the past can make present language learning meaningful. But practitioners must also seriously grapple with the painful history of the language and the community, as discussed in the next section. 5.3.1.2 Memories of a painful past For many communities, the loss of language is the result of larger forces of oppression, discrimination, and violence. This history reverberates throughout teaching and learning in these contexts, as Kayla describes: we can't ignore these things, you know. [mmhmm] There's trauma built into the language. There's trauma built into bringing back the language. You know, we have to acknowledge that it was taken, we have to acknowledge that that we have gone so long without talking, 38 This was in response to the question of “Can you explain to me why you think it's important for people to be speaking their language?” 304 uh without talking it. And so, I would say that's one of the biggest things for adult learners is just making sure that you are emotionally able to support them. Because it's going to happen, whether it's anger, or sadness or um, anxiety for not being able to speak your - there's like a huge variety of emotions that people will go through, and you just have to be willing to...see it coming, and then also address it. Right? We don't just want to, like, leave them to have a meltdown in the hall. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] As Kayla emphasizes, learning languages under these historical circumstances can be an emotionally charged experience. Masa noted that confronting the loss of the language can be “depressing” and demotivational: and then on top of that, when you start to learn, you come into contact with how much you've lost. [mmm] And when you start to learn, you come into contact with how much you don't know, and how much you need to know. And it's all very daunting and kind of depressing and it brings up other emotions and…So those are challenges [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] Beth also described how the history of the language can put a discouraging amount of pressure of language learners, including herself: Where, you know, and...a part of it is there's so much pressure on indigenous languages. [mmhmm] That you get it right, that you get it right the first time, that you don't break this thing that has survived, you know 10s of thousands of years. And it's like down to your generation. You know, it's so much pressure not to make a mistake, not to be slow or not to {haha} you know just, it's, it's like the most negative… [mmhmm] learning environment you can imagine. The context of endangerment. [mmhmm] Is the most difficult learning environment. Now, I think that a lot of teachers and a lot of learners, you know, are finding ways around it. But I think just what's handed to you is very difficult. [Yeah. Mmhmm] And a lot of people just aren't going to open themselves up to it. [mmhmm] And I understand why. And I...can easily get discouraged. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] Younger generations of practitioners may not have had direct experience with this painful past. Older practitioners may have lived through these experiences themselves, as was the case with one Yup’ik elder interviewed. Confronted with the history of trauma and loss, revitalization practitioners may feel deeply discouraged and demotivated. But memories of the past can also serve as the foundation for healing, resistance, and hope. These motivational aspects of perspectives on the past are what we turn to next. 305 5.3.1.3 Perspectives on the past as L2 motivation Set against this background of trauma and loss, revitalization practitioners nonetheless find many ways that remembering the past makes them motivated to learn their languages. 5.3.1.3.1 Healing and resistance Some practitioners framed the practice of language revitalization as a direct response to the pain of the past. That is, though reflecting on the trauma that the community has gone through can cause feelings of depression and grief, it can also be the source of motivation to healing and resistance through language reclamation. Two survey respondents framed their community’s effort as being about ‘healing’ or ‘recovering’ from the past: It helps us heal from the trauma of the past. [Id 14, Šmuwič] восстановить историческую несправедливость (= “recover from historical injustice”, my trans.) [ID 252, карельский (Karelian)] Beth also described the way the term ‘language healer’ resonates with her in her revitalization work: Well, you know, there's this term that some people use about, of revitalization workers, they call them language healers. And I really like that term. [mmhmm] And it's not because …It's not only because I feel like we have this work of healing our language, but that our language heals us. So like, I really like the term language healers because it can point both directions. [Beth Nez Perce, 8/10/20] In this framing, individuals undertake language practice in order to heal the wounds inflicted on the language in the past, and at the same time the language helps to heal the psychic and emotional wounds that individuals feel when remembering the past (see related discussion in section 3.4.3.3). Multiple practitioners shared the idea that their actions in the present are at least in part motivated by the experiences of community members from the past. For example, one heritage 306 speaker of Lushootseed recalled family members who had experienced discipline in boarding school and his desire to reclaim his language “in their memory”: I know my mom, my mom would have been tickled pink if she was still alive, knowing our son is doing the language, and also her other, one of her other grandkids, my brother's son is in the language program, and they both speak really well. […] So I mean that, that, I go back to, we…Aunt Lavina […] she told us stories when she got taken away to boarding school and they would burn tongue when she spoke the language. And they were disciplined, um different kinds of discipline. And I remember I thought she said, even back when she was four or five years old when that happened. So I mean I think that overall, it would be good if we can do that in their memory, kind of. [Joe, Lushootseed, 6/23/20] Chris B also shared a desire to “honor” past community members who held onto language in the face of violence and existential threats: The fact that the language was almost taken from us. Um, I remember somebody asked me, he said, "Well, how do you guys even lose a language? How do you lose your language?" And I was like, "we didn't lose it. People literally died because they refused to learn English." Well, they were 'disappeared.' [mm, mm] And the fact that we have the language today means that during the late 19th century and the early 20th century, people kept speaking the language when they knew that they could die for it. And that to me is really powerful. Just speaking the language could get you disappeared, and yet they still did it. And so I think there's a value in speaking it today. And anything, just to honor them. Um, also, there's a value in taking back something that was stolen from you. [mm, mmm] Yeah. So that gets me going. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] That is, reflecting on the past gives practitioners a view onto the example set by past relations, as discussed in section 4.3.2.2 on setting an example. Some practitioners framed language revitalization as an act of resistance, and described how they are motivated by defiance and a sense of reclaiming justice for their language and community. This is captured in the quote above from Chris B, who said that “the fact that the language was almost taken from us” is what “gets me going” (Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20). That is, motivation is shaped by wanting to reverse the negative experiences of the past and build towards a different future (see discussion of ‘presencing’ in intro to this section 5.3) 307 Some survey respondents also characterized language revitalization as an act of reclamation and resistance: It provides access to a culture and understanding of history actively ignored and denied to Cornish people by the dominant culturo-linguistic group. [ID 906, Cornish] Even during Francoism (1939-1975) some initiatives were undertaken (secret courses, meetings, publishing books...). After the dictator's death co-officiality was implemented in several places and school through the language has been working since then. [ID 72, Català (Catalan)] Survey responses even include historical events that mark turning points in linguistic and political resistance: Surgió a partir de la revolución del 79, cuando las comunidades reclamaron sus derechos culturales y Lingüísticos (=“it arose out of the revolution of ’79, when the communities reclaimed their cultural and linguistic rights”, my trans.) [ID 165, Sumu-Mayangna] The 2007 cultural festival was held at Luswingo Ruins in Tokwana area, 40km North of Plumtree and it was for the first time attended by substantive chiefs of BuKalanga who were dethroned by the Rhodesian government in the 1940/50s. [ID 239, TjiKalanga] Other individual practitioners in interviews described the connection between being aware of the community’s painful past and being motivated to resist oppressive forces through revitalizing their language. The Yup’ik elder cited at the end of section 5.3.1.2 is one example from someone who experienced humiliation and shame for her language and culture firsthand, and who is now working to reverse these patterns by “teaching the pride” (heritage speaker, Yup’ik, 7/7/20). For others, the painful realities of the past are evoked in narrative memory rather than through lived experience. For Cassy, learning the history of the language from a close family member is what got her “hooked” on language learning as a young adult: And then at that time I finally learned you know the history and why we had to work so hard in the first place. [mmm] Because I like I said until, when I was 11 I had no idea we had a language, so I didn't know it was gone. […] But by that time, I found out that there's this terrible, you know language loss that was very systematic. And as I learned more about the language and the speakers, I all of a sudden was like “oh my gosh, our last speaker was my great grandfather on my dad's side. Oh, wow, our last speaker was 308 our - um you know, my great grandparents.” So I asked my grandma like, "how come you didn't learn the language? like your, your parents knew it?" and she got really sad about it, but basically said that it was a way to protect them. [mmm] That, you know that their parents were like, it would, was no use to them, and they didn't want them to get treated bad for being Indian, for sounding different [mmhmm] So. That's where it all started. And then I just got hooked from there. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] An interesting question is how practitioners become familiar with these collective narrative memories. Moore and Lemmon (2001) suggest that the scope of “empathic identification” may be established by conversations in the family during early childhood development. As they argue, “[O]ne identifies with those with whom one has shared past experiences, and this sharing is fixed through discourse on the nature of those experiences.” (pp. 11-12). This is one potential way that the experiences of others – including distant past relations that one has never met – is incorporated into ideas of the self and the motivation for personal action. Charlotte in particular reflected at length about the role of her early upbringing in influencing her perspective on the past experience of the language community: I was raised in a pretty... in a household that emphasized traditional Native values and culture. I was very lucky to have parents that were also raised in a lot of, with a lot of traditional values, um and felt empowered, you know they felt empowered to pass that on to me. And I think a lot of emphasis was put on how lucky we are to have everything we have today because of the work that our ancestors did, and because of their sacrifices, and one of those things was even the language, even though it was just little remnants of the language here and there. I have a lot of family who, you know, you can see the, the impact of generational trauma, intergenerational trauma in um…Our family, especially my mom's side has a lot of trauma, and even still, you know, my aunts and uncles, who have experienced horrible things and you know may seem disconnected from the culture or community, they still say, huy’, when they say goodbye, or they still say [LS], 'I love you', and they still have those little things. And you know my sapa', my grandpa, even though he had stories of schoolteachers making fun of him for speaking the language or things like that, he still had little bits and pieces of the language too. And so I think it was always, it wasn't directly said, it was just kind of an understanding that, you know, our ancestors worked so hard to keep these little things alive for us, and the least we can do is keep it going, and, you know, pass more on to our descendants or whatever we can. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] 309 Charlotte’s story highlights the ways that parents might establish ‘empathic identification’ through the sharing of memories of past family members and their experiences. This sense of identification with ones’ past relations and the impacts of that connection on L2 motivation is a major theme in section 4.5.4. Hall (2021) describes the impact of these close connections to her work in the following terms: “When I do language research, it impacts me because as I analyze the words, I feel a connection to my ancestors, a connection that I otherwise would not feel. When I see the words, I hear the voices of family members speaking in my mind, some of whom are gone now. This means that while I work, I am distracted by joy and sorrow.” (Hall, 2021, p. 77) By experiencing the language through the voices of others that they “feel a connection with”, language learning becomes more closely connected to the Self. Through collective narratives and empathic identification, reflecting on the past is a way that revitalization practitioners draw language learning closer to their present Selves. 5.3.1.3.2 Past is a model for the future Another way that perspective on the past is motivational is that practitioners can look to the past language community as a concrete model for what a vital language might look like in the future. For example, Masa referred to past practices of casual visiting as part of what he “envisions” for the future: [Zeke] asked one of his first language speaker teachers, uh, "Did television really affect the use of the language? You know, did that stop people from using the language?" And that elder said to him, "no, it was the radio." [mmm] The radio, you know, the radio came out first. [Sure, yeah.] But they said that basically when the radio came out they would focus on that in the home and listen to it. And they wouldn't visit so much. Previous to that, people would go visiting, they would go to someone's house and visit. [mmhmm, mmhmm.] And so, I envision that as being the case in the future. We want to be able to just visit and speak the language. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] Zeke also explicitly outlined the ways that his Multilingual Institute model is built on the premise of “reinstituting an older form of education”: 310 Because then what we're doing is we're reinstituting this older form of education, that…uh I like modern Western education, I'm not gonna knock it, it doesn't work for everyone, I know that, but I have benefitted. However, in some ways it's just now catching up to what was in place before they got - before contact. So upon contact their goal was to beat the language out of us and make us monolingual like them so that we would be smart like them. [mmhmm] And, it's too bad that English speakers didn't see the opposite would have been their benefit. […] us as a country I think would have been much more wealthy on that level, on an intellectual level, on an educational level. [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] Many communities no longer have living first-language speakers, and practitioners in these communities look to the past for their dreams of vibrant language practice. Chris D is one practitioner who shared his wish that he could “go back” to the language community of the past: You know, that's where it's like, I would love to go back and hang out with my great great whatever, and ask them questions and be able to have a conversation in Lushootseed. [mmhmm] um But I would be also fearful that I would botch it. {hahaha} [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] He also described a time when he and other language learners were experimenting with a list of icebreaker questions to try to stimulate conversation for language practice, and one question in particular reflected his perspective on the past: one of those questions was, would you rather go X amount of years in the future or go X amount of years the past? [{haha}] And it's like all of us obviously, we want to go back - when we're talking about language, you just almost get so dead set on it, it's like, I'd love to go back in the past. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20, emph mine] Chris’s use of the word “obviously” in this quote emphasizes his sense of the universal salience of the past for language revitalization practitioners. Charlotte said something similar about “time traveling”: I think there's also, there's so much motivation in listening to like recordings of first language speakers, you know those who spoke Lushootseed from the day they were born, or have heard it, and that feeling of like, “ah I wish I could understand them,” or “I wish I could do that” and, almost this idea of like time traveling, like if we could go back hundreds of years, would we be able to speak to our ancestors? And, and I think... I like to think that if ever given that opportunity {hahaha} reality or not, [{hahaha}] That you know I, we can at least understand each other and um…Yeah, I guess those are just some of the reasons. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] 311 One interesting point to note in the first sentence of Charlotte’s quote is that this desire to “go back” underlies the motivation that she gets in her current practice from listening to old recordings. 5.3.1.3.3 Comparing the past to the present One other way that reflecting on the past impact motivation is by giving practitioners a yardstick against which to measure their current situation. That is, if a practitioner can favorably compare the current situation of the language with past dire circumstances, this allows them to celebrate progress for the language community (this is comparable to celebrating individual progress as discussed in Goals section 3.6.4). This was especially true for Lushootseed learners, who described their community’s current “explosive” growth (as Kayla, 6/30/20, put it), as compared to the past period of language dormancy. Randy compared the recent past to the current state of the language in this highly motivational light: {hahaha} Yeah. Yeah. And...and just from 5-10 years from what it was 5-10 years ago, and how far we've come. And and it's almost like we've come so far, but I see us going 10 times as far in the next five years, as we've done in the last five years. I mean, it seems like we've come thousands of miles already. [mm] But I think we're going to go 10s of thousands of miles. [mmm. Does that... is that exciting?] It is. It is. [Randi, Lushootseed, 6/16/20] Randi even invoked an elder, no longer living, and shared what she thought her perspectives on the past, the present, and the future of Lushootseed might be: And I feel hopeful for our future here in Suquamish and throughout the Puget Sound. You know, in 2009 when Vi Hilbert died, she... she was sad in, you know, the last time I saw in 2008, she had blessed our waterfront house here in Suquamish and she was sad that the people weren't using the language, and that she couldn't get Natives interested in the language. [mm. mmhmm] And uh, and it seems like it took off like a mushroom right after that, just like a rocket. And uh…so I'm kind of glad that she's probably smiling down at it now. [Mm hmm. Yeah.] Because it's crazy out there for Lushootseed now. {haha} [Randi, Lushootseed, 6/16/20] Because she has been able to witness the “rocket” of language growth for herself over the past few years, Randi can imagine a future that is even more positive (“we’re going to go 10s of 312 thousands of miles.”) As examples throughout this section show, past perspectives in language revitalization are not solely “backward-looking”, but are complex, motivational, and ultimately inextricable both from visions of the future and experiences in the present. 5.3.2 Present Experiences Just as perspectives on the past affect current and future motivation, experiences in the present can have strong effects on motivation and perspective. That is, motivation to practice language can be significantly affected by both internal emotional fluctuations and external situational realities. In this way, the present is also an important temporal dimension in motivation. Chris B pointedly observed that emotional states affect the effort he expends on activities: There are times when, especially when I'm feeling...moody, and I get moody a lot, I kind of just - and of course, you don't want to do anything, right? But um [mm, mmhmm] Yeah definitely ebbs and flows. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] Charlotte also said that when it comes to challenges to her language learning, “I think it depends on the, the emotional place I'm in on any given day of how I feel about it.” (Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20). She elaborated on how the emotional tone of a day can affect her perceptions of present external circumstances: before this current structure of the class, this certification class, I was working, you know, not for the tribe […] for me to go and work in like a non-Native organization, um and trying to incorporate language into my daily routine was just really hard, like I couldn't always make classes, or… […] I've been thinking about it too is, like what's- who are we going to talk to? You know, could I put this, like what's really the value here? [mmm] Spending so much time on it, like, is it really worth it? And why is it worth it to me? And having to explain that to, to like non-Native people or employers is really discouraging sometimes. [mmhmm] But I think all of those things can also be totally encouraging. Again, it's just like depends on where you are in your life or with, whatever, the weight of the world and how it's sitting on that given day. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] 313 Because these practitioner interviews took place in the years 2020-2021, the most salient component of how “the weight of the world” sits in the present day was the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this section, I discuss logistical realities of language revitalization in the pandemic (5.3.2.1), the range of emotions associated with these turbulent times (5.3.2.2), and the effects of such turbulence on practitioners’ self-reported perspectives on the future (5.3.2.3). 5.3.2.1 Pandemic – opportunities and barriers Language revitalization practice in the pandemic era is characterized both by new language learning opportunities and by physical isolation and societal strain. In other words, present experiences include both highly motivational and highly demotivational elements – sometimes simultaneously for the same person. Many practitioners highlighted the increased opportunity for remote language learning and technological advances in social connection that have come about as the result of COVID- related lockdowns (see also Chew, 2021, for a related discussion of the role of social media in language revitalization practice during the early COVID-19 days). For example, Beth had told a story of an elevator ride with fellow Nez Perce language workers where the entire conversation took place in Nez Perce; she recalled it as one of the highlights of her language life. She then reflected that this was an experience she could recreate even in the present reality: And I really want to work on speaking, and I actually feel like, since this COVID thing like forced us all onto Zoom and then we realized, oh, we could actually just be talking to each other like whenever we want {chuckle} [mmhmm] You don't have to wait to get in the elevator. [{ha} right {hahaha}] {hahaha} We could be doing this. Um [Yeah. You could film a video of an elevator to put behind you.] Right. Exactly! {hahaha} in the background {hahaha} [Yeah!] Elev- we should just call it that. "elevator talk" [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] Many language teachers and learners also pointed to developments in technological tools for language learning as being a big boon to language revitalization, as Chris B described: 314 I like that in general virtual teaching has gotten easier, the tools and everything I use adapted to what I have to do. [mmm] There was just, everything took a lot more steps and a lot more pre-planning before the pandemic. Now because of what Zoom does and Google Docs and all that - it might be also, it's a combination of that stuff adapting to the new situation, and me being forced to use it much more often. It just, it made everything easier... [mmhmm] um...I don't wanna say easier. More streamlined, maybe. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 5/27/21] Practitioners repeatedly cited the increased opportunities afforded by remote technologies as the one aspect of present circumstances that they hoped would carry on into the future. When asked what she would like to happen in the “new normal,” Jackie said: umm...hmm. Good question. {haha} [{chuckle}] mm - my - specifically around my language learning, I would like, as many things to still be available through technology as possible. {ha} [mmhmm] And I know I'm not the only one there. I mean, there are a lot of us, you know, living away [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] She added that being able to connect with people through Zoom has been “a blessing and a curse”, as she struggles with Zoom fatigue but also is very grateful for the chance to re-connect with her tribe that she lives at some distance from. She continued: Because I do a lot of my work too, being a therapist, I meet with folks, um telehealth. Sometimes throughout this past year. So yeah, I'm very ready to have everything go more in person, assuming, you know, safety and all those things in place. [Yeah.] And I'm actually a little bit, I don't know if um...The language department is maybe going to change things up again and not offer as much online. [mmm] And, so that's a little bit sad to think about, if that is the case. Because that will be a big disconnect for me then, again. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] Charlotte expressed similar feelings, despite the fact that she lives close to the language community – in fact she works directly for the tribe, though not for the Language Department itself. She shared how important remote opportunities have been for her to work language practice around her professional schedule: to be honest it was really difficult, even working for the tribe, I...was able to, I had permission from my supervisor to take Lushootseed classes, and count it towards work, but, we didn't have wifi in the building I was in, so [mmm] there was a hurdle there of having to figure out how to log on […] so, it's gonna be tough trying to figure those things out. Also being in the office, um, you know like the, those extracurriculars I am nervous about losing, because maybe once the Language Department is all back in the office, they'll just have those things in person, and [mmm] they'll probably still invite me 315 to it, but it'll be hard for me to - we, our offices are in different buildings, so, it might be hard for me to actually like, drive to their office, participate, drive back, and justify that to my supervisor. So I don't know what normal will look like, I'm hoping that we can, we recognize the benefit of having so many remote opportunities, and keep that up. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] The organizers from Kodrah Kristang also recognized that technological possibilities arising from the pandemic could be useful for reaching out to potential future learners and heritage Kristang speakers, as Frances shared: So I mean, when we started in 2016, there were some bits that you could find online. Like we have podcasts on SoundCloud [mm] Um, we've got the Memrise app for learning vocab in Kristang, and there's like snippets of ways to practice or hear Kristang online. But we just stop putting in effort on that completely and just focused on the physical classes. [mmhmm] And I think the COVID situation has just accelerated discussions about the online medium. Right, previously, we would have people write in to say, "oh, I'm in a wheelchair. I can't come for physical classes," or "oh I'm based in Perth, or in the US, and I would love to join the classes, but - because I'm Kristang, or because I spoke Kristang, but I'm just not able to, are there online resources?” And these would sort of be reminders for us that, you know, we can reach out to more audiences with the online mode. [Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] She also acknowledged that developing these online resources take a considerable amount of time and effort on the part of the organizers, which conflicts with the increase in energy and effort they have needed to dedicate to other areas of their lives during this period. In other words, as of this interview, these remote opportunities were a largely unrealized potential, a way in which the COVID situation presents both affordances and barriers. The pandemic period had additional effects on learners who work in the Puyallup Method (see description section 7.2.1), which includes the practice of ‘language nesting in the home.’ Because this language method focuses on language practice in the physical space in the home, several learners described an increase in language use due to spending so much time in this space. Allison: How much time…how much time do you put into language during the week, do you think? 316 Randi: Well lately, just because you know I’ve been home and studying it a lot and taking classes online and giving classes online, I would say I study the language at least two hours a day. [Randi, Lushootseed, 6/16/20] Masa also reported that he has been able to spend more time on language during the pandemic (Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20). For Charlotte, this connection between staying at home and increased language use is so clear that it is part of her plan for maintaining practice going forward: I also am gonna be advocating for myself to work from home a couple times a week which will along with allowing me to remote, um, participate remotely in different events, it’ll also allow me to be like in my language nest. You know, I have domains hanging up, [mm! mmhmm] um, there are things that I do like when I walk my dog, I go through like my walking dog domain, so, I think in my house there’s just a lot more opportunities for that. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] However, even in for learners who practice reclaiming domains, being confined to the home was not an unmitigated benefit. Another element of the Puyallup Method is conversation practice with others using a set of stock questions to describe the day; as Masa observed, lockdown imposed restrictions on the possibilities for these conversations: And then, but you can also say, “I went to the store”, because “where did you go?” the first question that we learned, enables us to answer that. [mmhmm] You know, “I went to the bathroom. I went to…” During the pandemic we did a lot of traveling within the house. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] Chris D observed the same problem: so what other questions could you ask to get to “What did you do today?” You know, you say, where’d you go? Well, you go to several places throughout the day – pre-COVID um [mmhmm {ha}] But like, you know, so you wake up, you go to the bathroom, you go to the kitchen, you go to the living room, you go to your car, you go to work. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] Of course, the key element of policies aimed at stopping the spread of COVID was the halt of in-person socializing, and practitioners also experienced the negative effects of this social isolation in their language learning and motivation. For example, Karelle described the 317 importance of in-person social gatherings “back when we could see people,” and how her motivation ebbs without these events: you know back when we could see people, like when I'd be, when I would get to hang out with people who were also really interested in trying to use the language and we'd actively try to use, um use some of it, like with each other in person, that would motivate me to be like, all right, I'm going to learn these other things. And I'm going to, you know, keep practicing this. And that would sort of keep the momentum going for a while. But then, you know, if I was sort of on my own for a while, it would sort of, I feel like my motivation would just kind of fall off. [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] She later admitted to having done “a very poor job of prioritizing language in the time of COVID” due to a number of factors, including lack of motivation arising from social disconnection. Similarly, when asked what might cause her to have a surge in language speaking and motivation, Kayla described a situation that was not currently possible: Um, I would say...uh...a couple of things would cause that. I think the first would be...um, obviously, that there is somewhere outside of my house that I can go to speak. Obviously, not right now because COVID. But like, you know, [mmhmm] if I'm imagining a perfect week, there would be a community event happening [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] The dangers of COVID-19 were especially felt by practitioners who still have connections to elder speakers in their community, but who are keenly aware of the increased risks to these important community members. For example, Frances observed that the older generation of Kristang speakers are members of an “at-risk group”: Mmm but what I would like to have is to, is to be able to reach out to more of the older generation of Kristang speakers who have just not heard of us. And I know that there's still quite a number of families out there. But again, it's, it's a problem of um capacity. [mm] And the current restrictions also don't make it very favorable to do that, especially because they all fall into the at-risk group. [Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] Michelle also described the circumstances of the only two first-language speakers that live nearby, recognizing that health risks preclude in-person conversations with these elders: We have two fluent speakers here in town, and they are, Dolores Churchill is 90, she's almost 91. And then Phyllis Olmquist is 94 now? And um, her health is, has gone downhill and she's not meeting with us. She, she can't do that anymore, she, you know, she can still speak but she gets very easily distracted and it's just, you know. That point of her life of being, she was my mentor's mentor is...she's done with that now. You know. 318 [mm, mmm, mmhmm] um, [mmhmm] And then Dolores is a world-renowned weaver, and so pre-COVID, she was always traveling. And now her health is very at risk being that old, and so. Not like I'm going over to her house. {haha} [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] In an interesting reverse of this experience, Charlotte described how the pandemic created more physical closeness with a family member and fellow Lushootseed learner: also, also my sister stayed with us for a couple of months, I forgot, she moved back from the East Coast because of COVID {clears throat}, and, things were up in the air and we didn't want her to stay with my parents so she stayed with us, and she has, not as much but she has a foundation around Lushootseed. So, I felt like we could, I could use it a bit more, she, you know would engage in conversation more than my boyfriend would {ha}. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] So being confined to the home with other language speakers created more opportunities for home-based language practice. Kristang learners discussed how restrictions in Singapore had changed the format of previously scheduled activities: So in - yeah, and I think earlier, I think, Kodrah Kristang actually had I think like meetups and they were planning like social occasions for the students from different levels to sort of get together and practice Kristang with each other, but I mean obviously now because of the current circuit breaker and the current restrictions on the meetups, then that's all had to sort of move online. Or been postponed. [Tej, Kristang, 7/31/20] And while online opportunities may make continued meetups possible, one learner observed that it was hard to grow the community and maintain social connections in the online format: And trying to get, you know, members of the community to come in, um talk about certain Jardinggu choices. […] we got decent reception, you know, you'd have people interacting on the chat, you have people coming, but even then participation would be limited to the same like regular faces. [mmm] It was very hard to sort of draw in other people to, to sort of… [get new people?] Yeah. [Uh huh.] So it's just, I think, yeah, I think it's just difficult. And then eventually, we'd have Zoom calls, we'd advertise them to a group of like 100 people to come along. And we'd tell them like a week in advance. And then, even then we'd have maybe 10, 12 people come. And the rest of them just radio silence. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] This “radio silence” seems to have continued after this initial interview; in our follow-up conversation one year later, Tej shared: 319 I think for Kristang there hasn't really been any updates posted on like any group gatherings or sessions. Because I think everyone is A, busy with work and other [mm] commitments, and B I think, I think it, even the people in charge are slightly busy with other stuff as well, which is understandable. Because this is, yeah this is quite a difficult time for everyone. [mm mmhmm] So, yeah, in terms, in terms of that there haven't really been any gatherings either online or offline. [Mmkay. And that's been...like, since...for how long has that been true?] mmm I think it's been like almost since the start of this year. [Tej, Kristang, 6/30/21] That is, just because technology provided the possibility of continued community connections, technology does not necessarily overcome other barriers to participation and motivation. Because of the myriad upheavals of this time, many practitioners experienced frustrations in their language progress. For example, at the time of our follow-up interview, Michelle’s town had just recently re-shut down due to an alarming spike in COVID cases in Spring 2021. She described this time as “chaos”: So definitely like the last six weeks uh complete chaos, and craziness, and so not, I have, I don't feel like I've made any progress, or like, my goals that I had set for, you know, what new like topics that I was gonna be able to talk about fluently, or [mm] um all that just went [{chuckle}] out the window. {ha} [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] She also described activities she had been involved in that had been put on hold due to chaos in the community: it's probably been a good, two...to four months actually since I've met with anybody over in Haida Gwaii, but we were doing really good about, we were meeting once a week, and it was awesome. You know, people in Skidegate and Masset, um, [mmhmm] you know working on trying to collaborate with the different dialects […] but, it, with - they ended up eventually of course getting some positives in Haida Gwaii, [mmhmm] and then there was a big to-do about the um, QCL is the Queen Charlotte Lodge […] they're trying to allow people to still come there when Haida Gwaii is closed to save our elders and our people, so it's been a [aaah] it's been a lot. Um, the Haida people there were trying to protect their land, so a lot of people weren't able to meet because they were going out on the boats trying to stop boats from coming in, etc. [Oh wow. Uh huh. Uh huh] So, I haven't met with them in, in a while, and I keep, you know "oh my gosh, I wonder what everyone's doing!" Like, [mmhmm] "when are we gonna get back together?" You know? [mmhmm mmhmm] Um, but I feel like maybe I'm not the only one with chaos right now {hahaha} [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] Tej echoed this sense of frustrated progress; when asked if there was anything in the past year that she was proud of accomplishing, she responded, “I feel like, I mean it's very hard to feel like 320 you have achieved anything much, right?” (Tej, Kristang, 6/30/21). Similarly, when asked if there was anything she wanted to have accomplished in the past year that didn’t pan out, Charlotte said, “this entire year has been full of that” (Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21). The positive and negative effects of the pandemic were felt not only in practical terms. The experience of these times was also highly charged emotionally for many practitioners. 5.3.2.2 Pandemic – range of emotions In interviews, practitioners shared a wide range of emotions, from excitement to deep depression and everything in between, and how these emotions affected their language learning and motivation. Some practitioners were very honest about the negative effects on motivation caused by the anxiety of these times. Erin put it bluntly when she stated, “so much of it is that...2020 is a dumpster fire so it's hard to be motivated about anything” (Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/7/20). She specifically described the effects of this negativity on the energy she has for language practice: Right now, I'm just, you know, I'm generally taxed from uh work, and corona, and police brutality and, you know, just all those things. [{chuckle} mmhmm] That we're dealing with in 2020 right? And so I haven't had the energy for anything. Other than like, doom- scrolling Twitter. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] In our follow-up interview a year later, Erin was still feeling the effects of the pandemic along with other upheavals in her personal life: Um, {haha} and so what I'm trying to do [{haha}] is just stop running for a second, [mmhmm] um, and hopefully I'll have like a little more perspective, a little more calmness, in the fall. Maybe in the winter? I don't know. I have never been this like demotivated and weird for this long, ever before. I blame 2020. Um, [Yeah.] it's strange. I don't know. I literally don't even know where my life is right now. Everything is going great, but I'm just like, what is happening to me? [Yeah.] So. I don't know, it's weird {sigh}. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/2/21] In this way, despite present external circumstances being “great”, Erin is still experiencing the negative emotions and demotivation from the year before. 321 Tej also described the emotional strain that came with dealing with new COVID variants at a time when Singapore seemed to have finally turned a corner: Generally, I think everyone thought that we were sort of moving forward towards re- opening, then the Delta variant hit in like the mid- to end of May, and then it sort of, everything sort of just rewound back. [mmhmm, mmhmm] So yeah, yeah generally like especially in online forums like reddit and all there's just this sense of burnout. [Tej, Kristang, 6/30/21] Chris B described his concern that the charged political atmosphere of 2020 might permanently damage social cohesion in his language community: one of the many things I worry about, that during this time because of the political upheaval that coincided with the pandemic, I've lost a lot of friends. [mmm] I've - well not a lot, and none of them were close friends, but, for example, people in my tribe that I used to communicate with, I, I can't do it anymore, because it turns out [they have] political leanings that I just don't agree with. [Yeah.] And that's fine. They can believe whatever they want. But I go to Facebook for cultural um, uh...feel-goods. [Yeah.] And cat videos. [Yeah {haha} uh huh!] It's not that I hate them, it's that I don't want to see that. I don't need that bringing me down, I don't want to be surrounded by that. And so there, when this is all over these are people that are still going to be in my community, [yeah.] and, I just, that's going to be an awkward situation [Chris B, Lushootseed, 5/27/21] Because relationships within the language community have such a strong impact on motivation, the breakdown in these relationships as Chris describes could have serious ramifications for language practice (see Relationships 4.4.3). Reflecting a more mixed emotional experience, Jackie characterized the year as many different heightened emotions, including sadness and pain but also including hope and gratitude: Again kind of trying to go back to that like looking back on it timeframe like, um, in some ways, I have grown more in this past year than ever, and have had more gratitude than ever, and you know am more connected than ever, and those things are in such a different way than what we were used to, [mmhmm] that it's also been one of the hardest years ever, and I have been in darker places than ever, and um, so much sadness, and pain, and just seeing things that we maybe thought there had been progress on and clearly hasn't been, and um, yeah it's, it's such a strange, you know, holding so much hope and gratitude, and at the same time feeling hopeless and angry. {ha} [mm mmhmm] Like all the things. Yeah, I know that that's not really language-related per se but {ha} mm [I, I mean I'm assuming it it's all related. I don't know. Yeah. {ha}] Yeah. Everything's related. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] 322 For her part, Michelle described mostly positive emotions associated with present circumstances, despite the “ups and downs” and the frustrations that have come with the chaos of the time: Overall I would say the last year, with all the ups and downs, I've had amazing opportunities that I would not have had otherwise. I've gotten to attend multiple conferences, [mmhmm mmhmm] um, meet people that I would have never met before! And like just have these amazing conversations, and get revitalized, like, in my own you know goals, and uh strengthen my will to keep going when I'm having like right now in the last six weeks of complete chaos [{ha}] in my own life, or you know my community, um to be like, "okay well, yeah this is all crazy and yes you're not making progress right now, but it's gonna calm down and you, then you can continue." [mmhmm] So like, right now, I'm still doing language work, even through the craziness - I'm not retaining anything really. {haha} [{haha}] But I'm at least putting down, you know creating things, doing research, so that, once my brain is like, "okay, I'm ready to learn again," [mm] that I can just go and I'll like have this whole topic ready for myself. You know. [mmhmm mmhmm] So, ups and downs. [Yeah. {hahaha}] {hahaha} [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] For Michelle, the excitement and motivational boost she gained from unique opportunities gave her the perspective to see through present difficulties. Perhaps at the extreme positive end is Charlotte, who experienced a pandemic-related job furlough as a blessing that gave her the space to focus more dedicatedly on language: I mean obviously it's just been an incredibly wild year for everyone. Um, I think I will reflect on how lucky I have been this last year. You know I kind of shared that, where I think a lot of people had a lot of a lot of struggles, I felt like I actually, there were some positive outcomes of this last year for me. Um, you know, for example I was furloughed […] I was able to take that as an opportunity to float a little bit, and let myself focus on the things that I had wanted to focus on, and one of those was language. […] there's been a lot of things I think that I will think back and think about how lucky I was and I will also probably think of this year, this last year as, the time where my language, my Lushootseed...my comfort with Lushootseed moved to the next phase, if I can say that. [mm] Where, I went from feeling like, someone who takes Lushootseed classes, to someone who speaks Lushootseed. [mmm] And I think that was in large part because I just had time to dedicate to it. I had nothing else to do, I was playing video games and going to Lushootseed class {hahaha} [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] Her positive feelings about her progress even made her excited to see how the pandemic may have affected others in this research project: I'm really excited to see your research, because ...yeah, I don't know, I do feel like this last year has been a big time in my Lushootseed learning, and so I'm curious to see like, how that's reflected in your {haha} research I guess. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] 323 Thus, depending on the complex interaction of different internal emotions and external circumstances, language revitalization practitioners experienced the current moment in time both positively and negatively and everything in between. The experience of the pandemic also had powerful effects on practitioners’ perceptions of the future. 5.3.2.3 Pandemic – effects on perspectives It is perhaps not possible to overstate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on people’s perceptions of the future, and psychologists and sociologists will no doubt study these effects for years to come. In this interview study, language revitalization practitioners were asked to imagine different points in the future as it relates to language, and their answers revealed some ways that present experience has affected these future visions. For some, the negative effects of the pandemic are so strong that it left them questioning whether they could imagine a future at all. One stark example comes from Kevin: Uhhh errrr… I think...I don't know, honestly, because like...after this year, I'm like, "will there even be human society next year?" [Kevin, Kristang, 7/18/20] Chris B shared a similar worry about the future when we talked in 2021, at a time when the US was opening back up to a lot of social activities: The other situation that I'm worried about is, you know, variants39. [Right.] The whole point of a virus's life and existence is to overcome uh, vaccines. [Right.] And, there are variants. And so I'm wondering, are we going to come out of it? I think there's a possibility that we won't. We might need booster shots for now and forever. Um, so I think that's, that's another problem, possibility, and why I'm not super gung-ho about having in-person stuff already. [mm mmhmm] We should end one pandemic before starting another one, you know. One crisis at a time, please. [mm mmhmm {haha}] Kinda thing. So I, in other words, I'm really unsure about five years in the future. I really don't know. Yeah. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 5/27/21] 39 By the time this interview transcription was sent to Chris for his review, the Delta variant was in fact in full force in the US, and Chris asked if he had “jinxed us” with this observation. 324 While not everyone expressed equal hopelessness, the theme of uncertainty was very common in discussions about the future. For example, Erin described a mistrust of plans in a time of ongoing “flux”: I dunno. I'm trying to just play everything by ear right now. And also like, with things being up in the air with my mom and my grandma, [mm] um, my dad's like trying to retire but he doesn't know if he can retire, and my mom is the same thing, and they don't know if they're moving to Siletz, and so I feel like there's still gonna be a lot of churn. Um, so, yeah. I dunno, I think that 2021 at least it's still gonna be a ton of flux, [mmhmm] it's gonna be a lot of just weirdness and confusion, and I'm like hanging on as hard as I can, but...I dunno. Everything I say about like "oh yes, this is my plan" is like, that's me just pulling something uh out of thin air. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 6/2/21] Similarly, Evaristo expressed difficulty in imagining himself in 5 to 10 years: Oh in five, ten years...Oh during these times of COVID our idea of time has changed, yeah? [Oh, yeah. I know. It's a weird question. I know {hahaha} Predicting the future.] Yeah {hahaha} Or no, it's in fact, it's is not really the idea of predicting, but to have perspective of time. [ah] Yeah. [mmhmm] So, but I think you're right, we have to look ahead, really. Yeah, even though we don't control. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] More broadly speaking, Jackie detailed her feeling that the COVID experience is simply the most recent development in the turbulence experienced by her generation: just kind of a general timeframe for my generation of people, you know, we, we graduated college, and then we were in a recession and trying to get jobs, and then we were - high school or college - [mm mmhmm {chuckle}] um, and we had 9/11 and we, I mean, where we're at now, and COVID, and there's just been...a lot of things. {ha} [{haha}] And, um, and even just with, with the technology advances that we've had in like my generation, the amount of, I mean just everything that comes with that and the speed, the rate at which things have changed and access and all of that stuff […] [We’ve] been through a lot and there's a lot now, and I mean every generation has their stuff of course. But just to have that like acknowledged for me. So the way, the way that that then even impacts...{sigh} My mindset, my outlook, my, um, always waiting for the other shoe to drop, um, [mm] there's just so many things that come with it. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] Thus for Jackie, past unsettling experiences and present unsettling experiences are part of one cohesive generational narrative, and this past and present affect her view of the future. On an interesting, related note, the present pandemic experience evoked a specific past experience for one elder in another community. In their joint interview, the two speakers of Yup’ik discussed 325 the word for “pandemic”, which they shared was first devised for Yup’ik to describe the 1918 flu [Yup’ik pair interview, 7/7/20]. When faced with such stark uncertainty and social upheaval, many people’s priorities may change. Tej observed that this was the case with Kristang learners: Yeah, I mean, I think that's also unfortunately the current circumstances, like people's... like people are now a lot more focused on just like survival, and all of that stuff. [mmhmm] That level of survival. But yeah, I think about more the immediate pressing concerns. [Tej, Kristang, 7/31/20] Given these shifting priorities and ongoing uncertainty, Tej observed that “looking forward, I think it's about like how to balance that, along with this promotion of Kristang” (Tej, Kristang, 7/31/20). It is interesting to note that Tej herself had been reexamining her priorities in the light of present circumstances, and that this reexamination showed her new possibilities for her future: I would say that hopefully in the next five years, I get better at Kristang, and also better at the other languages that I'm trying to learn. Yeah, and I think also what learning Kristang has shown me is like, I think it's re-evaluating what I think of as 'useful'. [mmm] Because I mean, like, why can't something that makes me happy be useful? Because, I mean, it makes me happy, {ha} so it can't be use-less. […] I think especially now in the current situation, a lot of people are kind of re-evaluating what's useful to them. [mmm] And what isn't. [Right.] Yeah, and I think that this, I think that this isn't really just a short-term thing, that this will likely go on for the next few years at least. [Mmhmm] So yeah, I think, yeah, hopefully in the next five years I will gain more understanding and clarity and acceptance of that. [Tej, Kristang, 7/31/20] This harkens back to the discussion of instrumental goals in section 3.5.1, and emphasizes the point that language learning can be valuable even if the language does not equate to economic gains. Thus, it is important to note that the pandemic’s effects on future perspectives are not solely negative. In fact, for Michelle, the effects may even be strongly positive, as she imagines a future characterized by pride in resilience: Allison: what do you think in retrospect this year is gonna look like to you? Or, how you would characterize it? 326 Michelle: Oh. {sigh} Man. Those were the dark times. [{hahaha}] No I'm just kidding {hahaha} {haha} um, man. You know, I think, um, I think it's gonna go back to the constant resilience. [mmm] That no matter what is going on, I am resilient. Our people are resilient. Our community is resilient. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] This resilience in the community parallels Michelle’s own persistence in her language learning, despite the obstacles of the current situation (see 5.2.2). She and other language revitalization practitioners continue to work towards their visions of the future. 5.3.3 Future In this section, I discuss the hopes, worries, dreams and visions that make up these language revitalization practitioners’ views of the future. In the L2 motivation literature, Dörnyei ’s prominent L2 Motivational Self-System builds on Higgins’ Self-Discrepancy Theory (1987, 1996), which proposes that humans are motivated by to reduce the mismatch between their present self and the future self they would like to identify with. Dörnyei translates Higgins’ theory into an L2 specific theory for motivation, which consists of three components: 1. The Ideal L2 Self 2. The Ought-to L2 Self 3. The L2 Learning Experience The first – and most thoroughly studied – two components of this system have to do with the future. The Ideal L2 Self refers to an image of the future self that is desirable to achieve; as Dörnyei writes, “if the person we would like to become speaks an L2, the ‘ideal L2 self’ is a powerful motivator to learn the L2 because of the desire to reduce the discrepancy between our actual and ideal selves.” (2009, p. 29). The Ought-to L2 Self also has to do with a future imagined self, but “concerns the attributes that one believes one ought to possess to meet expectations and to avoid possible negative outcomes” (ibid., emph original). This includes what 327 Markus and Nurius refer to as the ‘feared self’ (1986); that is, whereas the Ideal L2 Self entails that the person I want to become speaks the L2, the Ought-to L2 Self includes the sense that the person I don’t want to become doesn’t speak the L2. Thus the Ideal L2 Self is strongly associated with approach/promotion orientations to motivation, while the Ought-to L2 Self is associated with avoid/prevention orientations. The hypothesis of this model is that the positive, promotion- oriented Ideal L2 Self will have a stronger impact on individual language learning motivation, and this has been demonstrated in the research literature (Dörnyei, 2009). In this theoretical approach, the Ideal and Ought-to L2 Selves are collectively known as possible selves, which “act as ‘future self-guides’, reflecting a dynamic, forward-pointing conception that can explain how someone is moved from the present toward the future.” (Dörnyei, 2009 p 11). Recent work in Dynamic Systems Theory has complicated the idea that there is one static, consistent set of “future self-guides” that are at work in motivating language learning (Dörnyei et al., 2015a). Many factors in the language learning experience can contribute to shifting future self-images (see for example Tej’s quote above about re-defining ‘use-fulness’ in her pursuits.) Henry (2015) in particular draws attention to the importance of considering timescales when considering motivational dynamics; he explains that “an everyday event in the course of language learning,” such as a comment from a teacher or classmate, or frustration with failing to communicate clearly in the L2, “can prompt reflection on the ultimate goal of becoming a proficient [target language] speaker/user. While across longer timescales the cumulative effects of such reflections can result in changes to the phenomenology of the ideal self, possibly shifting it closer to the actual self, across a shorter timescale the same events could have the opposite effect” (p. 88, italics original). Thus there is a need to attend not just to ‘the 328 future’ as a broad construct, but to the temporal distance between the present action and the future goal. In the field of educational psychology, one theory that explicitly operationalizes this temporal distance is known as Future Time Perspective, which is concerned with “the degree to which and the way in which the chronological future is integrated into the present life-space of an individual through motivational goal-setting processes” (Husman and Lens, 1999, p. 114). Individuals can be described as having long or short FTPs (Future Time Perspectives). An individual with a very short FTP for example articulates goals for the near future and does not pay much consideration to what comes later, while individuals with very long FTPs have more long-term than short-term goals and can be motivated by the distant future. These FTPs are framed as being an inherent characteristic of the individual; it is their “life-space”, “the temporal world in which they live” (p. 115). That is, a key “individual difference” variable in motivation is the individual’s particular orientation towards and perspective on the future. It might be possible for two different learners to have the same five-year goal (e.g. to study abroad in Paris), and the same positive feelings about that goal (e.g. they both imagine they would greatly enjoy this experience), but to differ in the lengths of their individual time perspectives; for the learner whose time perspective is very short, this goal is too far in the future to have motivational pull, while the learner with a longer time perspective will find this desirable future goal more effectively motivating. One articulation of FTPs involves two main components: the cognitive aspect, which includes the learners’ perception of the usefulness of the task at hand for accomplishing the longer-term future goal, and the dynamic aspect, which is the degree to which the individual ascribes a “high valence” to future goals (De Volder and Lens, 1982; Phalet et al 2004). In a 329 different formulation, Peetsma (2000) articulated three components: cognition, which includes the learners’ hopes and expectations for the future; behavioral intent, similar to De Volder and Lens’ (1982) cognitive aspect in that it deals with perceived instrumentality and the link between present actions and future goals; and affect, that is, whether feelings toward the future are positive or negative. In addition to these components, the motivational impact of FTP is also related to “the degree to which future goals are personally valued and endorsed” (Schuitema et al., 2014, p. 469). Though they are formulated differently, the L2 Motivational Self System and Future Time Perspectives approaches are not wholly incongruous, and in fact Dörnyei mentions conceptual similarities in his more recent formulations of his theory (Dörnyei et al., 2015b). Dörnyei’s Ideal L2 Self may be just one example of a personally valuable goal in a Future Time Perspective framework, and research results from both theoretical approaches confirm the connection between future orientations and motivated learning (Kauffman and Husman, 2004; Dörnyei et al., 2015b). In what follows, themes in interview data raise interesting empirical and conceptual issues for any theory of motivation, including the degree to which far-distant goals can be motivating, the way perceived “realism” (Husman and Lens, 1999) of goals affects emotions and individual efforts, and the complexity of envisioning the future for the “self” as an individual. 5.3.3.1 Intermediate and distant futures In interviews, I asked three questions related to future perspectives and the different lengths of these perspectives: 330 o What do you imagine for yourself as a language learner 5, 10 years from now? o What do you imagine for your language 5, 10 years from now? What about 100? Figure 19. Questions about intermediate and distant futures, as written in the interview guide sent to participants In this way, practitioners’ perspectives on the future might be classified along the dimensions of intermediate or distant future, as well as along the dimension of positive or negative affect associated with those perspectives. It is important to note here that “negative affect” in the sense of these future visions does not mean that the future was something to be dreaded, but rather that the future was uncertain; for these examples, “negative affect” is when practitioners expressed doubts about the possibility of hoped-for futures. An example of a positive perspective on the intermediate future comes from Chris D, describing his vision for the expansion of Lushootseed language: But I think throughout 10 years from now, hopefully that that just fills the whole, the whole reservation, if not more. Hopefully, like I said, the whole Puget Sound. You know, people speaking the language, it’s a totally possible thing. It’s totally doable. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] Negative perspectives on the intermediate future most often were framed in terms of the COVID- 19 pandemic and associated uncertainty and upheaval (see section 5.3.2.3). However, some individuals may be predisposed to these perspectives regardless of external circumstances. For example, Jackie first answered the question about the 5-10 year future by saying: I think I have a hard time having a like five to 10 year perspective. It - it’s almost more like I can only envision it from like, being, you know, an old woman {ha} [mm, mmhmm] like, [yeah {haha}] sittin in the rocking chair, talkin to the little, little ones around me about [{chuckle}] “oh, back during COVID-19” {ha} [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] When I asked her if her inability to imagine that future arises from this turbulent time in particular, or was a general perspective on life, she replied: yeah, that’s actually been a hard thing for me. Ever. [Oh! Okay] In the way that some people will ask, even in a job interview or in college, or whatever, when you have to talk about like, [uh huh] “Where do you see yourself in 5 to 10 years?” I’m like, “I don’t 331 know! I don’t know what I’m doing tomorrow.” [Right {hahaha}] {hahaha} I have no idea. {haha} um, [Yeah.] yeah and time is just such a strange thing that, like I don’t, my, my body doesn’t like conceptualize that very well. And so I’m like, I don’t [{chuckle}] I don’t know. {hahaha} [Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21] Another reason for ambivalence in the intermediate future is that a community’s language effort may be nascent and not yet well-established or well-supported; that is, while the Puyallup Language Department is robust and demonstrably growing, this is not the case with many (perhaps most) communities. In Karelle’s case, this means that the distant future is the more likely timeframe for major gains in the language: our communities are very small, and so we don’t really have that type of like infrastructure to say, anyone running for Council should have, you know, sort of this fluency in the language...like I mean maybe 100 years from now, maybe that’s a possibility, I don’t know. But that’s not something that’s going to work as a now incentive. {ha} [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] In the case of the Kristang learning community, almost every practitioner expressed some ambivalence related to the longevity of the project given the age of the main organizers and the difficulty in retaining volunteers long-term. One of the organizers described it in these terms: We’re all young right? Especially for, I mean Kevin and Fran also, they will speak for themselves. But the idea is that it’s very different if you were 40 or 50 year old people trying to revitalize a language that is local to your community, [mmm mmm] Where like your, I mean if you leave, you will be the exception, right? But if you’re talking about uh, you know, late 20s, early 30s like, finishing education and or things like, you don’t really know nowadays, it’s really hard. […] we do have to communicate about those things for the projects’ [mm mmhmm] um wellbeing right? So to say, like, Okay, for this year I’m still here, even though I might be busier in the late year because I’ll be submitting my thesis and whatnot. Right. But like and then next year, who knows. I’m still trying, my plan is to stay here, but who knows, really. That’s, that’s the kind of commitment we have had within the core group. [mm] We have talked honestly. But five to 10 years is really difficult. […] so much of it is out of your hands. [Luis, Kristang, 7/18/20] One learner described the problem similarly, and observed that this has been an ongoing problem for this community effort: [the organizers are t]rying to build up their career in another direction, trying to keep this going at the same time, right? Luis you know, so he’s doing a PhD and maybe he might not be in Singapore in like two, three years, right? Kevin’s trying to teach and do this at the same time. Fran’s started a job. I just think, like, you know – Andre already left. 332 Yeah. I’m not – Fuad, Fuad moved to Geneva, I think. Yeah. It’s just, you know…And Anirudh who was also with us for a while I think, went to graduate school. You know, it’s just like, I think it’s just scary to think about what might happen. [mmhmm] And like, in this community, whether the efforts that were so strong, that have been so strong for these past four years, can keep on, you know, chugging on. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] The inability to rely on continued support of language activities is a fundamental and serious challenge to language revitalization efforts logistically (Peréz Báez et al., 2019); the impact of this uncertainty on personal hopes for the future underscores the serious effects of this situation on individual learners’ motivations as well. Practitioners also viewed the distant future with a mixture of hope and doubt. Some expressed specific ideas of language vitality that they found exciting. For example, Chris B imagined language being used in his hometown in the 100-year future: This is really out there, but, I was just thinking about one of my, one of my biggest um moral compasses is Dolly Parton. And how she says, “y’all come back now, ya hear?” Right? [mmhmm] I think it would be cool for people to say, “hišəbəʔ!” or “hisk’ʷuʔ!” when – “thank you” – [mmhmm] when, when you’re, when you’re at Fred Meyer or at Walmart, have that kind of be like a local colloquialism in the area. Not Lushootseed, I don’t want everybody to speak Lushootseed – well, that would be awesome, but I’m not shooting that far – But I want people to know that there is a language here. [mmm, mmhmm] I want this casual understanding that Puyallup is language. And it’s spoken here. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] This long-term vision is part of Chris’s goal to raise public awareness of the language, as discussed in Goals section 3.4.2.3. Carson shared a more “ambitious” vision for the distant future: 100 years from now, I think we could be entering like our second generation of L1 speakers. Because age-wise, I think it won’t be my generation, obviously, that’s L1, and it won’t really be my niece’s and nephew’s generation that’s L1 […] even if things are going according to plan, most of those kids will be growing up predominantly in an English world, even if at home it’s pretty bilingual. [mmhmm] And then I think their generation is where you might get like, their kids’ generation is where you might get intentional communities of people that are like, most of their day and time is spent in the language and then, their kids, the hundred years or whatever, that would be where that’s like a normalized... so to me that’s like the most ambitious we can be with it, but that’s a lot bigger than myself. So who knows what’s gonna happen. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/9/20] 333 Carson floated this ambitious vision despite the fact that this future is “a lot bigger than myself”. For others, the recognition that the distant future of the language goes beyond their individual efforts to intervene can be a source of doubt and strain. For example, Erin shared her worries that the distant future that she hopes for Nuu-wee-ya’ might not come to fruition: Every person who I’ve asked – which are mostly my siblings – um, they will tell me directly, that they’re interested, but only if I do the work. [mmm, mmhmm {haha}] So like, if, if I could, yeah. Like if I could fashion, if I could fashion advice to just like, you know...[Put it in their...head.] Put it in their head. Yeah, just matrix it in there. [{hahaha}] They would sign up. [mmhmm] But if they have to do actual effort, like learning words, practicing grammar, coming and being uncomfortable, they’re not into that. [mmhmm] Which is one of the reasons that I worry that like even 100 years from now, we might still not be there, just because [mm, mm] It...learning languages is hard. [mmhmm, mmhmm] Being uncomfortable talking to people who you want to be comfortable with, is hard {haha} [mmhmm] um, [mm] And I just don’t know how many people are willing to be uncomfortable. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] Just as community context may affect what is realistic to accomplish in the intermediate future (e.g. 5-10 years), the plausibility of hoped-for distant futures may be very contingent on the current situation of the particular language and language community. This was discussed by Kayla, who first shared her hopes for the Lushootseed language specifically: Right, um...God, I don't know that's so far away. uh... [{haha}] I would, I would hope that in that, in 100 years there would be, we would start to have first language speakers again. I mean we're not at a point yet, I mean, we don't have enough Zekes, right? To be able to then produce first language, [mmhmm] to have children who are born who speak nothing but this language and they learn English second hand. We don't have that yet, although I feel like that is, there are structures being built now that would support that, should it come. And so I would hope, right, in that time that that's something that happens. For Lushootseed. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] It is noticeable that even in this thriving language learning community, Kayla initially expressed doubts about her ability to imagine a 100-year future. When considering efforts to revitalize languages in other communities, she expressed even more grave doubts: I get worried about {ha} language revitalization. I mean, you know, this, like the stats for how many languages lose all of their speakers in a day. And so I'm mostly worried for the - I don't see that. I don't see what happens in Puyallup happening across indigenous languages, mainly because they, they do models that […] people believe works, that 334 having people memorize certain lines and you test them and then you stress them out and do all this stuff, that's not how you create speakers. That's not...I mean, if at the end of the day, you've locked up your language and you have it all recorded somewhere, what happens when you don't have anyone to speak it anymore? Right? And that's [mmm] Of course, like it's happening all over the place. Puyallp is a prime, is a rare example of something that I would see grows in 100 years. I would say a lot of other language revitalization efforts um, would not show that, sadly. But that's just kind of the way that it's been going. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] Even the way that different individuals reacted to being asked to imagine 100 years in the future speaks to the variation in distant time perspectives. For example, Masa seemed to be so eager to answer the question that he preempted me asking it myself: So in five to 10 years that will be increased, hopefully people will be indulging more, the numbers of speakers will increase. And I see that you also said 100 years from now in your paper. [Sure! Yeah.] So 100 years from now, I would hope that our language would be totally being used again, and that we're multilingual, that we speak English and Spanish or you know whatever, and Chumash and, maybe other Indian languages, because that's what this Multilingual Institute's about, is to network with other Indian people, develop relationships with them. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] In contrast, Charlotte initially seemed startled by the question: Allison: What about, like, 100 years from now? Charlotte: Ah!! [{hahaha}] Oh man. It would be sooo cool if we had people, first language learners… [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] It’s important to note that after her initial exclamation, Charlotte did answer the question with a place-based vision of “being able to cruise from Tacoma to Seattle to Bellingham” and seeing and hearing Lushootseed everywhere you go. And it is clear that Masa had read the interview guide beforehand, while Charlotte may genuinely not have been expecting the question; the difference in reactions may simply be the result of pre-interview preparation. Nonetheless, it remains the case that different practitioners expressed different levels of ease and difficulty in imagining this far-distant future (for example, see Kayla’s response above.) In addition to perceived degree of plausibility, visions for the intermediate and distant futures also varied in degree of specificity. This can be seen in comparing Michelle’s 5-10 year vision for herself and her 100-year vision for her community. When asked about what she 335 imagines herself doing in 5-10 years with language, Michelle shared a very concrete and measurable goal: I, this might be far-fetched, but I have my heart and soul {haha} set on a preschool and beyond Xaad Kíl immersion. [mmm!] Um, I, I want by the time my daughter is old enough to go into preschool for us to have a school here that is completely in the language. And I want that for all the languages here in our area. Um, a Native charter school, if you will. And, and open to everybody, I think anybody who wants to learn should be able to learn. [mmm] But yeah, a culturally based school in the language is where I see my future [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] Her 100-year vision is less clearly defined, but is nonetheless positive and hopeful: Allison: What can you imagine in like 100 years for your family, for your community? Like, what can you imagine for Haida? {ha} Michelle: um...I imagine strength. I imagine people knowing, I think that there's a huge...I came home at the right time. I joined the revitalization at the right time. [mm] Because there is such a push right now, because we are, we're losing, our speakers are going quickly now. [mmhmm] And so because of all the resources that they're trying to do, and that you know we're trying to do as well, there's going to be so much resources that - And especially if we can get the school going, and it just be a part of the new normal. Right? That, that it's not going to be even a question of "do you speak Xaad Kíl?" Of course you do! Because all our people speak their languages. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] One thing to note about this 100-year vision is that she sees how her own efforts may contribute to that future; even though she will not be there in that distant time, she believes that with all the resources she and her coworkers are creating, language will be “part of the new normal.” This dynamic relationship between visions for self and visions for others is a salient aspect of future perspectives in these contexts, and I turn to this discussion next. 5.3.3.2 The role of the self in future visions When discussing future goals, practitioners described the individual roles that they imagine for themselves. For example, Charlotte talked about her career goals, combining her professional expertise with her burgeoning language skills: my background is more in uh museum and cultural interpretation, and, the tribe does not have a museum right now, [hmm!] that's something that we're really trying to get off the ground. And I actually see my role in the future as doing more community programming 336 um, that combines culture, language, and historic. Hopefully through a museum. […] I see and hope that my role is bridging those...silos? Right now the way the tribe is structured is we have the Culture Department, a Historic Preservation Department, and a Language Department. And there's so many things that, the lines are blurred on who is responsible for what. [mm] And so I think I see myself as being able to bridge a lot of that, and bring those respective departments and individuals and knowledge-bearers together to create programming for our community, the Native and non-Native community. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] Thus, Charlotte sees a connection between her future professional role and her current learning tasks, and ways that language revitalization efforts become more connected to larger cultural and historic preservation work. Practitioners also described the utility of their work in terms of what it may provide others in the future, as Masa shared: Because the way I've designed it is everything that I work on I leave a trail behind me, that can be used by other people, when they're ready and when they want it. [mmhmm, mmhmm] And so I, I've really used this pandemic time as a time to package it up. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] This framing is related to the discussion of personal responsibility as a relational motivation in section 4.3.2.1. As discussed there, Angel shared a story of animal people and “giving of yourself” to others when I asked her where she could imagine herself being in 5-10 years: You know, I am asking that of myself. And I just shared a story with my class, and it's where everybody had to - before the human beings, animal people had to ask, what do you want to be? How do you want to give of yourself for the human beings to come? And so I use that story now, their exercise is, they have to - like the animal people, the deer, the elk said, "I am going to be, I'm going to give of myself by giving the human beings my hide for clothing and my meat for them to eat for sustenance, and my antlers and things like that for tools." And so each and every one of them had a vision of the future, and how they were going to give to the people. […] So, you asking me that is very pertinent to what I have to think about now. What do I want? How do I want to give of myself in the future, so that other people can grow stronger and benefit? What can I do to sustain them in the future? And I, I think about that over and over and over. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] In this example, Angel is reflecting on her personal responsibility to the future community as part of the answer to the question posed by the animal people in the story: “what do you want to 337 be?” Thus there is an element of vision for the future self bound up in this sense of responsibility. Some practitioners described their struggles to see the utility of their work, and the effects that this struggle has on their motivation. For example, Beth shared that she sometimes questions whether anything she’s working on will matter: sometimes I don't want to do it. Sometimes I don't feel like it. But, or sometimes I just feel overwhelmed or like, why am I doing this by myself? you know, who cares? I have these notebooks full of translations. Will anyone...will it matter? {ha} You know, um…But I think about that work. Language healing. And having the relationship to the language. I always feel - like if I'm having a hard time, if I feel sad, can't concentrate on anything else, whenever I go to the language, I feel better. [mm] I'm, it's healing to me. The work itself is healing. The work itself is good, it makes you feel good. And yeah, I think that's what makes me want to get through it, is that feeling of like, it's it's this healing space, and it's this is healing work. And I can't, I just, I can't see the bigger picture, sometimes [mm] Of how my contribution is going to help anyone. [mmhmm] But I believe it will. I believe, I believe it will. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] In this example, Beth admits to not always being able to “see the bigger picture”, and during these times of being unable to envision the future, she questions the utility of her efforts. But even in the absence of certainty that her work will make a difference, her relationship with the future community and with the language itself keeps her going, and motivates her faith in the ultimate value of her contributions. In our follow-up interview, Michelle articulated hopes that her contributions would be helpful both to herself and to others in the future. Despite the fact that the weeks prior to the second interview had been full of COVID-related “chaos” in her community and other types of chaos in her personal life (see discussion of her experience in Pandemic section 5.3.2.2), she remained positive that her efforts in that moment would be useful to her future self: when I'm having like right now in the last six weeks of complete chaos [{ha}] in my own life, or you know my community, um to be like, "okay well, yeah this is all crazy and yes you're not making progress right now, but it's gonna calm down and you, then you can continue." [mmhmm] So like, right now, I'm still doing language work, even through the craziness - I'm not retaining anything really. {haha} [{haha}] But I'm at least putting 338 down, you know creating things, doing research, so that, once my brain is like, "okay, I'm ready to learn again," [mm] that I can just go and I'll like have this whole topic ready for myself. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] Similarly, she shared her vision for how her efforts during this challenging time could be useful to the community in the future: And so, like looking back at I, I think I'm going to be able to look back at this time, and, the progress that we've made, and think like, okay, that was, that was like a trying time that made us look outside the box. […] it, this gave us the foundation? Maybe? To, um, to try all those new things, and to have, like, it, just the amount of like, Quizlet sets - that's the one I do the most is Quizlet - um {haha} [mmhmm {chuckle}] like, if I keep going the way I'm going with these Quizlet sets and making these different topics, then by the time, you know five years from now, that, that's still gonna be an amazing resource. [mmhmm] And, um, and it's wide-reaching. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] In fact, her optimistic hopes for the short-term future were bound up both in personal well-being and in sharing with others: I, I have high hopes for, um, output over the, the um summer and fall months, [mm!] with just doing like I said the relatable like experiences40 right? Things that we do every year. [mmhmm mmhmm] And, I'm very, very hopeful that I'm gonna be able to really get some good focus time, and um, you know personal growth as well. Yeah. So that I can continue sharing. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] Kristang learners who participated in the Jardinggu “lexical incubator” project described their work in similar terms. For example, the youngest Jardinggu volunteer is not himself Kristang or even originally from Singapore, and at the time of this interview he was preparing to move to the US for college. When he described his hopes for the distant future of Kristang, even though he was unsure he would be able to actively participate in the Kristang community in the future, he still envisioned a future in which his current contributions would prove useful: I would really, really, really love for them, for there to be native speakers of the language, [mmm] I mean, yeah, I think just having people who are - you know I come up with words, I help come up with suggestions for the words in Jardinggu, which people vote on eventually, right? And then I would just really love that, you know, a lot of these words enter the mainstream […] I think just having it literally come alive in Singapore again would be really amazing. And I think that's a long haul. Um, well I mean language 40 This refers to some experiential language learning activities she was organizing for the upcoming months, as she had described earlier in the interview. 339 revitalization generally is, but I think it would be really, really nice to... just have some native speakers to speak with that were younger, that were using slang, that were texting each other in Kristang. [mmhmm] I think would really be something great. That's my hope for the language. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] Evaristo framed his contributions to the Kristang language future in similar terms. Like the young Kristang learner above, Evaristo is not originally from Singapore; he recognized that his connection to the Kristang project may not continue when his Brazilian foreign service posting in Singapore comes to an end. He described what he imagines he might be able to contribute to the future Kristang community, whether or not he is able to be a part of it himself: we had this beautiful moment of São João, and we, I made it a small text about my childhood, and the others did. And I put all my celebration things around, the guys also, and then we talked about Saint Peter, Saint John, how this is important because this is the cultural connection between all Portuguese variations. […] to deliver and register these things is a way also to prevent that in case we stop and we discontinue the effort, at least the archaeologists will have something to work with, yeah? [mmhmm] So if linguists won't at least the archaeologists or the historians, or the anthropologists, uh and, linguistic historians will have the opportunity to deal with, but also a way to produce materials that can be used in the internet, YouTube, and then keep this wheel non- stop. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] That is, Evaristo’s language efforts are not necessarily useful for his own long-term language learning, but he is still motivated to contribute to the Kristang community: And the more audios recorded, the more videos recorded, the more native speakers recorded, and registered, and…that can be revitalized from the point of time. Yeah, that, that’s what I want to contribute. To give the guys at least some inputs, have inputs. And that's it. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] Evaristo also shared a vision of how his involvement with Kodrah Kristang may play out in his personal future: So maybe that would be nice if I follow the project, continue with Jardinggu, depending on the time that I am, depending on the time the guys are. But in the end of the day, even if I stop in the middle of the mountain, I will have a lot of history to tell my grandkids about. [mm mmm] Um yeah, about the journey that was to learn an almost extinct language and still speak the language, and the day I take a flight, go to Malacca, speak with the guys and, you know, have a crab with them, sit in the hawk centre. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] 340 That is, whatever the exact future holds for him as an active participant in his community, the relationships he has already built and the experiences he has already shared have been incorporated into vision for his future self. Luis acknowledged that his time in Singapore as an international graduate student was soon to come to an end, and he did not know what his future involvement with the language would be. Nonetheless, he also was motivated to put in effort to support the future language community: I will start maybe doing what do I think Kristang... So is in five to 10 years. I mean, I don't really know, to be honest. […] But my personal goal is that, should there be interest, you know, should there be interest, there would be resources to do so. [mmm] And that's kind of like my background also has been shaping my contributions to the project. That is usually what I've been trying to do, you know by providing infrastructure to have uh like online dictionaries, or, you know, pushing towards a collection of language data that we can organize in some little bit of corpora that eventually we can show to people instead of just having them written in pieces of paper and things like that. [Luis, Kristang, 7/18/20] Many practitioners shared a similar goal of contributing language materials for the future as Luis is describing here; see Goals section 3.2.2. Luis also detailed specific ways that he imagined his work being utilized to reach a distant future goal for the Kristang language after he “moves on”: So what I would hope is that at least we can have a way that people have the resources, the language data, the dictionaries and things like that. And if someone wants to write, I don't know, a spellchecker, then there will be possible to do, if someone wants to learn the language based on data, write a little bit of a parser to use the data and try to, you know, just get the motor running for future projects that work with the language. Umm, I would like Kristang to be 22nd century ready. Whenever we move on. [Luis, Kristang, 7/18/20] The exact meaning of the phrase “whenever we move on” is ambiguous here. It may refer to the fact that he and the other organizers may not be able to continue the effort indefinitely due to geographic and professional reasons; but in saying that he wants Kristang to be “22nd century ready”, he invokes a future beyond his own lifetime, which may be the meaning of “moving on” 341 here. This underscores one key aspect of the far distant future: in imagining 100 years ahead, practitioners are imaging a future beyond their own lifetimes. 5.3.3.3 The lifespan and beyond Language revitalization practitioners themselves acknowledge that the work of revitalization extends past their own individual lifespans. As Evaristo put it, his and his classmates’ efforts all serve “to give stability to such a quest”; he continued: Because it's a quest. [mmhmm] It's a generation quest, it's a maybe two, three generations quest. It, you are just putting... yeah. I will be very cliche, but in fact you're really putting only one brick in this wall. [mmhmm] Then this, this thing will, like cathedral, you won't see it ended in your generation. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] Recognizing that they won’t see this project ended in their lifetimes, many practitioners envisioned close relatives in the distant future: I would love it if my niece, my youngest niece, who is...almost a year old now, oh my god, tomorrow's her birthday! [oh {ha} aww] If she could have kids, or grandkids, who can just fluently speak the language and they come and they talk to me, I'm, you know, great auntie. And they're like, "oh, Great Auntie, you talk so weird." [mmm {hahaha}] And I'll be like "yep, Great Auntie talks so weird, you talk so good." [{haha}] That would, that would be my dream. [mmm] I don't know if we're going to get there, but I want us to? I don't know. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya’, 7/7/20] Zeke envisions his current young adult students becoming the next generation of respected elders in their community, ensuring cultural and language continuity into the far future; he shared that this vision is so strongly motivating to him that he is making choices to maintain his physical health so that he can see the start of that future: So that's where I see that- I'd like to get another, you know, I'd actually like to be working up into my nineties, I don't know if my health is going to hang in there but, that's kinda my goal. [mmhmm] I'm literally trying to exercise and rest and eat right so that I can do that. I'd like to get another thirty-three years of work done, and one of the biggest things I'd like to do - and I don't know what culture you grew up in but, in Native culture, elders are incredibly precious. [mm] I mean, they're our gold, they're our- you know like the, Tuxamshish, like Virginia? [mmhmm] That's what I grew up with. […] so the exciting thing for me to see is the group you saw today, especially that group, I can't wait til they hit their seventies, because they're gonna be- they're gonna blow everyone off the [unclear] {hahaha} right? [{hahaha}] And there will be again, Vi Hilberts and Virginia 342 Beaverts again. [yeah, mmhmm] That's what I can hardly wait for. To see how…because I've watched Virginia work with people. And just by talking to them, nurtur- she nurtures them with her words. They- it physically changes them, and they're never the same. {hahaha} [{hahaha}] And this group will have that ability in, what, another forty years or so? Thirty years? [mmhmm] So I can hardly wait. {hahaha} you know? [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] One Lushootseed learner framed her language work in terms of being a bridge between the past and the future for her family: Um, I think it's very important to learn this language, not just because we have an excellent opportunity with Zeke and the language program, but because if we bridge that gap of two generations, and keep it going, our family can look back later down the road and say, "we have been Lushootseed speakers for, for years." I mean, you know, a long time. There was just a short break. [mmm] And hopefully we can get our family back on track to know where, where this language came from, what it, what value it has to our people, all of that. [learner, Lushootseed, 6/23/20] In fact, as described in section 5.3.1.3.2, practitioners often described the distant future with reference to the distant past. For Sassa, this gives her hope in her language’s continued strength: Yup'ik to me is an alive language. It's second to speaking Navajo, Navajo is the most spoken indigenous language in the nation, and then followed by Yup'ik. […] I'm hoping that our, it'll still be spoken 5, 10 years even 100 years from now. Like our Native corporation uh that I'm part of they're into language and culture, and even offer grants to have um, you know, the lang- the class that we took? Um digitizing? [mmm!] Yeah. They're into that and even have virtual Native dance. So I, I'm pretty sure that we're going to umm, still have speakers. Because Yup'ik is, it's a strong language. [mmm] It's been around for thousands and thousands of years. [Sassa, Yup’ik, 7/7/20] In all these examples, practitioners shared ways that they are motivated in their present practice by visions of a future that they may not personally get to witness. I want to end this section with two quotes from language learners from two different communities, who both described a distant future that is both beyond their lifetimes and envisioned as part of their meaningful personal experiences. one of the things my mom had always said, and she'd always said you had to be able to speak your language when you went to the other side. umm [mmm] I think - whether that's true or not - I just think it's good to learn, and have that ability to speak in your language. [Joe, Lushootseed, 6/23/20] 343 I think about, and I've heard other people say this too, I want to be able to communicate with my ancestors. I want to be able to hear messages from them. [mm] And they're speaking Nez Perce. They're speaking, you know, they don't speak English. And after I die, I want to be able to speak with them. And I think after I die, and I try to speak to my ancestors, I'm still gonna have a terrible accent, [mmhmm {chuckle} mmhmm] but I know they'll still understand me [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] When death is viewed as a passage rather than an end, the life-space beyond this life is where past and future, oneself and one’s beloved relations, all come together again, a full circle inscribed by language. 344 CHAPTER VI. CODA: (AUTO)ETHNOGRAPHY OF RESEARCHING LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION 6.1 Introduction In the analysis chapters (Chapter 3, 4, and 5), I have argued that L2 motivation in language revitalization, like the practice of language revitalization itself, is fundamentally relational and dynamic, inextricable from the particular community and historical context. I have argued that an individual’s motivation is intricately connected to webs of relationships, shared experiences, and negotiations of roles and meanings. To close out those findings, I offer this coda chapter as evidence that the same arguments can be made about the research process itself. This chapter is a brief case study/autoethnography of conducting interviews with language revitalization practitioners, using data from the interviews themselves to illustrate. The themes in this chapter are a postlude to the major themes in the findings chapters. In this chapter I look at the interview experience in terms of Goals, specifically the way practitioners and I discussed the goals of this research project; Relationships, including the ways that pre-existing relationships are invoked and enacted in one-on-one and group interviews, plus the ways that new relationships are established; and Time, including the realities of conducting these interviews during a specific temporal context (i.e. 2020-2021, during a global pandemic and social isolation). In a sense, this chapter offers a ‘person-in-context relational view’ (Ushioda, 2009), not of L2 motivation specifically, but of the experience of researching in the social sciences. This follows from the Relational Applied Research model I proposed as a methodological orientation for researching language revitalization (see section 2.1). This chapter also offers evidence of what qualitative interviewing affords that quantitative instruments such as questionnaires would miss. 345 In this chapter my own voice is more foregrounded than it was in the Findings chapters. This takes place for example in extended excerpts of dialogue between me and a practitioner, to illustrate a point about the research process. It also takes the form of reflections about how I learned and grew as a novice researcher. In some places, I share some personal notes about myself and about my experience, my thoughts, and my feelings during this time. I share this personal side for two reasons. The first is that, as this is a “case study” of the process of interviews, and as I maintain that the interviewer is an active participant in interviews (see Methods section 2.3.3.3), it follows that I should include myself in this case study. The second reason is that throughout this long manuscript I give numerous examples from interviewees (and survey respondents) who have candidly, openly, and honestly shared their thoughts and experiences, including sharing at times quite emotional and deeply personal stories. In the spirit of relationality and reciprocity (Wilson, 2008), I wish to offer some of my own stories with equal candor and honesty. 6.2 Goals The goals of my research project were often the topic of explicit discussion in the interview setting (and in some key examples, this topic was raised in survey responses as well). This came up when for example a practitioner would ask me to further clarify my goals as a researcher, or when the participants themselves would share some thoughts about the research goals and their participation in the research process. Several of the interviewees asked me to clarify my interest in this research project. Jackie’s first interview was the first time that I was asked this question, and I admit that I was surprised by it. In my role as the interviewer, I had prepared questions, but was not similarly prepared to receive questions and answer them myself. I reproduce this exchange in full here: 346 Allison: So yeah, did you have any questions about the study or anything? Jackie: No, no it all looked good to me. Allison: Okay. Jackie: Yeah, I guess like definitely no questions about, you know, the overall consent and things like that... Allison: mmhmm Jackie: um I guess I'm just curious, maybe a little bit more of like your personal interest or like what you're hoping to gain, or... Allison: mmhmm, um, I am... so like, I'm really interested in language learning and teach-, well, I'm interested in language revitalization. And then because of that I got into like applied linguistics. So language acquisition, language teaching that kind of stuff. So that's my background. And then I was trying to think like, there's a lot of work that's done on methods and stuff like that. Like, how do you teach languages like this. Um, but then I started having this realization that a lot of people were talking about why they're doing it. And that's a really important question, you know? Um, and so I, that's how I got interested in this topic. Jackie: mmm, mmhmm, cool Allison: I think there's a lot to talk about there, so Jackie: Okay, yeah. Awesome. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] This was an eye-opening moment for me as a developing researcher, and emphasized to me the importance of respecting the relational aspects of these interviews (see next section, 6.3) Another of these exchanges came during my discussion with the Kodrah Kristang organizers, which was my point of first contact with this learning community. Luis, a PhD student in Linguistics himself, asked if it was important for my project “that you don’t tell us exactly what you’re looking for,” which caused me to quickly reflect on my research design and approach. Here is that full exchange: Luis: If, can I just ask, Allison: Yes. Luis: is it important for your PhD, for your project that you don't tell us exactly what you're looking for? Or um Allison: No, it's not. No. I guess not. Luis: Then I would be interested to hear what you're, what you're trying to do. Is this the only people who, are you just focusing on Kristang? Are you comparing across different revitalization, like, what is the goal of the project? Yeah. Allison: Yeah. Yeah, that's a really good question. Um, yeah, I'm interested in um - it's a comparative dissertation. Luis: mmhmm 347 Allison: So I'm actually looking at a lot of different language revitalization contexts. And because I'm where I'm at, most of the folks I've been able to talk to are like Pacific Northwest indigenous folks. And so I'm really interested in talking to you all, because I know you have a very different context and very different situation there. And yeah, so um…And what I'm specifically interested in is motivations, like initial motivations and motivations over time, of being involved in language revitalization. Luis: mmhmm Allison: So, yeah. Yeah, no that's a good question. Frances: Sounds cool. Allison: Thanks. [Luis and Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] I will note here that transparency in the research goals was an important element of the design from the start: the Informed Consent document for the study does specify my research questions, and all the interviewees also received the interview questions beforehand. What Luis and Jackie both seem to be calling for is more context to help them understand my goals. Later on, a heritage speaker of Kristang asked specifically, “What's your interest in Kristang, Allison?” (heritage learner, Kristang, 7/31/20), a question which seems to pertain both to my research goals and to my positionality with respect to this language learning community. By the time of my last interviews, I had learned from these experiences and offered to share more about my goals without needing to be prompted: Allison: did, do you have any questions about the informed consent document? Or can I tell you a little bit more about the study or anything before we get started? Evaristo: Um, maybe just for my personal research curiosity to what, what is your focus on your research? What is the real, the core, the core problems that you are seeking to answer? Allison: Mmhmm. Um, yeah. So I'm interested in language learning motivation in language revitalization contexts. So I have an Applied Linguistics background, but I'm getting my PhD in Linguistics and um, yeah, it's an interesting question because um, there's a lot of research on language learning motivation in like learning English, or like taking classroom Spanish um, things like that. Evaristo: mmhmm Allison: And, you know, these are just, these are different contexts. {haha} um very different contexts. So yeah! Evaristo: Yes, totally. 348 Allison: Yeah, that's the general idea. So this is for my dissertation, my PhD dissertation. Evaristo: Cool! Cool, cool, cool. Allison: Yeah! Evaristo: Excellent. Let's go on. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] There was also a moment in my first interview with Jackie that drove me to be more transparent about my goals for asking a particular interview question. In the written interview guide, one question was worded as follows: • Do you think that revitalizing your language has any practical benefits? (e.g. getting a job) When speaking with Jackie, I phrased the question like this: do you find that there's like a benefit to it? Like, that you can put into words to having been studying this language? [Allison, 7/8/20] In response to this, Jackie shared: Last night, I was actually reading through some of your like questions that would maybe be asked, and [mmhmm] um, read the one about like if there's 'practical' use for it. And, so I like how you worded it just now, of like a benefit. […] I had noticed I was having like a reactive response to it, like emotional reaction when I read it. And it was like, "well, what does practical even mean?" [mmhmm] {hahaha} [Yeah. {hahaha}] Um, but it was interesting to think about even from that perspective because it's like, well, what...the way that you know we tend to think of 'practical' like what, what is that benefit, even with that. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] I explained that I had created the question in the interview guide to engage with the L2 motivation literature that is heavily weighted towards English and other widespread European languages, which many learners focus on for economic opportunities and career advancement. I acknowledged that I was unsure of how to word the question for these revitalization contexts. Jackie responded: Yeah. Yeah! Well and it's still a really interesting, like I said, even though I noticed I was having that emotional response to it, it was like, "well, this is still an important question too." [mmm] Like, what is the practicality of it? Like what, you know to look at it from that way. What, why are people doing this? [mmm] {hahaha} [mmhmm] Um, can it be... can it be more, can it be a bigger thing? [mmhmm] Do we even want it to be a bigger thing? I mean, yeah. Lots of questions that come up. [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] 349 In subsequent interviews, I found myself more frequently giving my rationale for asking particular questions, especially this potentially fraught question about “practical” benefits. My research goals were also evoked by interviewees when they discussed topics in linguistics and language teaching that they are interested in. For example, when discussing ways to improve his teaching, Chris B shared that he was interested in learning about ways to better motivate his students: Chris: so in other words, motivation strategies, which is what you're studying isn't it? Allison: {hahaha} Chris: Yeah. Allison: Yes. {haha} Chris: So, I would like to know more motivation strategies. Allison: mmm Chris: Yeah. So that's, that's kind of {sigh} Yeah, not, not necessarily a specific question, but yeah. Allison: mmhmm Chris: I guess if you were to phrase it as a question is like, "what is your most successful motive, motivation strategy?" There we go. Allison: mmm Chris: Yeah. Allison: Okay, cool. Well, if I find out anything I'll let you know {hahaha} Chris: {haha} Thank you! Allison: {hahaha} Chris: I'll be waiting. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] Charlotte also shared a question that she was wrestling with that she connected to the point of this study: And then I think... I know this is something that was part of your study, and I've been thinking about it too is, like what's- who are we going to talk to? You know, could I put this, like what's really the value here? [mmm] Spending so much time on it, like, is it really worth it? And why is it worth it to me? [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] Finally, at the end of my interviews, several interviewees expressed their appreciation for the project: Allison: Cool, thanks very much for your timeǃ Charlotte: Yeah. Good luckǃ This is an awesome project so I'm happy to be a part of it. 350 Allison: Thank youǃ Thanks very much. Have a good evening, Charlotte. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] Allison: Mmm. Cool. Um, thank you. I think - Beth: Thank you for doing this project! It's so cool! [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] Allison: Mmhmm, yeah. Okay, I think that's all my questions. Masa: Okay, great. Allison: Thank you. Thanks very much for your time. Masa: Yeah. Oh yeah, thank you very much for your interest and, uh, if you have any follow up questions you need answered, I'd love to help you. So feel free to contact me. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] Allison: Thanks Carson! Carson: Yeah. You're very welcome [...] I hope everything's going good, with the, with the research and with everything. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/9/20] Personally, I experienced these as powerful and treasured moments of reciprocal care in these relationships (see section 6.3). I also interpret them as affirmations that the goals of the research are also valued by these practitioners. There were other moments when practitioners evoked their own goals and motivations for participating in the research. These instances point to the hope of contributing to, and learning from, the larger community of revitalization practitioners. For example, Jackie closed our interview by expressing her appreciation that language revitalization is “out there” in the world: Yeah. Yeah. It's really cool. I'm glad it's being, uh, I'm just glad it's out there. [mmhmm] I'm glad that people are just this whole language revitalization is a thing [Jackie, Lushootseed, 7/8/20] Cassy specifically said that she was eager for me to share my research so she could hear from other practitioners: Allison: mm, mhm, Yeah. All right. Thanks very much. Yeah, thanks for talking to me. Cassy: Yeahǃ Hope it helped {haha} Allison: Cool. Yeah! {hahaha} Cassy: Okay 351 Allison: Yeah, and um, hopefully I mean it - I'm gonna, you know, think about stuff and try to, yeah… Cassy: When will your stuff be out? Because I wanna know what other people are saying too [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] Chris D also shared his excitement at getting to be part of this larger revitalization community: Allison: mmhmm. All right. All right, that was all I was curious about for today, I guess. Chris: Awesome. Allison: Thanks, thanks very much for your time. Chris: Yeah, for sure. I mean, anybody who's, who's trying to get people to learn languages, it's cool because like, you know, especially meeting Zeke, and his work, and the people that - like I did go end up going to NILI at one point, but we just went to go visit [mm] And you meet all these people who are working on a lot of different languages. […] it's really cool to [mmhmm] to be a part of that, and have, uh, to meet all these people who are working on languages. […] there's all these people who are trying to work on this stuff, and anything that we can do to kind of get other people speaking languages, whether it be Lushootseed, you know, Siletz, whatever, those - that is just great. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] Several respondents to the Global Survey also described their hopes of contributing to and learning from this global community: The language feels like it's in a perilous state. All the more so for having gone through this process on reflecting on it. Hope this information is of use to your study. [ID 906, Cornish] I would like the possibility of guidance through workshops or consultations with others working on such projects. [ID 122, Kotiria] Since our goal is to initiate family classes, I would be interested in learning various methods of how to support family language learning. [ID 70, Quinault] I wonder how other SL revitalization activities are faring and if you could share any of the references and/or their activities and success with me? [ID 905, Tibetan Sign Language] Thank you for doing this survey. Is there a way to see the results - will they be published somewhere? Would be so great to see what other communities are doing to get inspiration. [ID 127, Gangte] Charlotte specifically expressed a desire to learn about what other practitioners’ experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic had been, so that she could compare it to her own: 352 Charlotte: I'm really excited to see your research, because ...yeah, I don't know, I do feel like this last year has been a big time in my Lushootseed learning, and so I'm curious to see like, how that's reflected in your {haha} research I guess, but Allison: Yeah! Charlotte: Yeah. Allison: Yeah! And it's, I mean, it was interesting for me because like I, I wanted to...you know be with folks - you know I was gonna go be with folks last summer, like maybe come up to Puyallup and talk to people in person, and then, obviously that didn't happen. But as the result of that I got to talk to people in like, Alaska, and Delaware, and Singapore, {haha} Charlotte: Wow. Allison: and like, just because, this was available. And so, yeah it's Charlotte: Yeah. Allison: it's been really...interesting. It's like...yeah. Charlotte: Will COVID- Allison: A weird blessing. Charlotte: Yeah. Will the pandemic play, like have a part in your thesis? Or dissertation? Allison: I guess! I mean it's hard to {ha} It's hard not to at this point. I mean, Charlotte: Yeah! Allison: yeah, I um I, I think it's really, it's interesting. It's, it's just Charlotte: mmhmm! Allison: and, and seeing like language revitalization in, in this time. And like how people have adjusted and stuff like that has been really interesting. Charlotte: Yeah. So cool. That's exciting. Allison: Yeah! Charlotte: Can't wait to see it. It'll be a great dissertation. Allison: Oh! Thank you. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] This extended passage highlights many of the themes of this Coda chapter: mention of a larger revitalization community and an indication that engaging with this community was one of Charlotte’s goals in participating in this research; the realities of carrying out this project during the COVID-19 pandemic, and its impact on the research; and the centrality of relationship- building and reciprocal care in these settings. 6.3 Relationships Relationships were and are central to this research project. I am an outsider in every sense to these communities; I am a White researcher, not a member of an Indigenous community and not a language learner; I am an American, born and raised in Oklahoma and going to school in 353 Oregon, and I have never even visited some of the places where my interviewees trace their linguistic heritage. It was crucial for me to take care with relationship building and respect, and this was enacted both in the observation of relational research design and observing appropriate protocols (see section 2.1) as well as in discussions in the interview settings themselves. In several of the interviews, the first encounter between myself and the practitioner was the moment of opening the Zoom window to start the interview. There were many explicit ways of establishing a new relationship in such cases. One heritage speaker of Kristang asked me questions about my background and knowledge throughout our conversation together, for example when she was describing her challenge in confusing her multiple additional languages: Learner: So sometimes I say things, I mean I put the Kristang word {hahaha} Allison: {haha} Learner: So it's a bit difficult to separate. And sometimes the Hokkien word comes in, as well. Allison: {haha} Learner: {haha} So I don't know. Do you speak many languages? I'm sure you do, right? Allison: Well, I've, I've studied a few, I'm not very fluent in many of them. But like, um, yeah, I used to have that... So I lived in Russia for a little while, I studied abroad. Learner: oo, Russia! oo! [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/29/20] She also checked to see if I had familiarized myself with one of the Kodrah Kristang activities: Learner: But then I continued, because they invited me to, to like have discussions, we have these Jardinggu discussions. Allison: mm, mmhmm! Learner: You heard about that? Allison: I think I, yeah I saw it on the website, I think. Yeah. Learner: Yes. Because uhh the old dictionaries are very old, and they do not have the new words […] [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/29/20] And she asked if I had “read up” about the history of the Kristang language prior to our interview: Learner: […] you see Kristang was not really a written language. Allison: mmhmm, mmhmm Learner: Did you, did you go back and read up about it? 354 Allison: Yeah, a little bit. I read the um, uh Kevin wrote a pretty long article that got published a couple years ago. So I, yeah, it's really interesting, like the history is so complicated and interesting. Learner: Very complicated. Allison: Um, yeah. mmhmm Learner: It's also complicated because of the, you know, when the Portuguese went to Malacca, then they were there for about 100 over years. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/29/20] She so prioritized us getting to know each other better, in fact, that at the end of the interview she asked me to turn off the recording so we could chat informally: Allison: Um, and yeah, if you have any other questions and hopefully…yeah! Learner: Not for this, uh not for the interview for recording. Allison: Oh, I'll turn this off. Oh, oh wait not leave meeting, not leave meeting, whoops sorry sorry no. Let me turn off the recording. Learner: Please. Allison: There we go, there we go. [heritage learner, Kristang, 7/29/20] After I turned off the recording, she and I spent another half hour on Zoom together and we talked about our families, our homes, our travels, and our hobbies. Other interviewees used comprehension checks to make sure I could follow what they wanted to share. For example, Evaristo wanted to describe the learning of multiple languages with a metaphor about trying different cuisines from different parts of the world; as part of that, he asked if I was familiar with an ingredient unique to his region: Evaristo: But on the other hand, they lose the great opportunities, that great avenue that opens up when you taste different, yeah different things. Like here in Southeast Asia, have you ever heard about durian? Allison: uh huh, yes. Evaristo: Durian? Allison: I've never had it, but I've heard of it. Evaristo: oh man. Allison: {hahaha} Evaristo: So it's, that's the type of thing, you say, "how can you eat this thing?"41 Allison: Yeah. 41 This fruit is famous for its odor, which is so strong and off-putting that it is banned on Singapore’s mass transit system. 355 Evaristo: How can you eat this thing? It's a, you know? but you are, you are so trapped in your senses that you are, you are in a cage. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] Masa also used comprehension checks when discussing methods, for example when he first mentioned Zeke’s language nesting method: Masa: People will learn language through using it, and I found it to be true because...so it's basically three different projects: conversation, games, and nesting language in the home by reclaiming domains. Allison: mmhmm Masa: Do you know all about this already, or should I give it in a nutshell? Allison: Um, I know some about it, I mean I know, like I've talked to Zeke about the reclaiming domains piece of it, but I'm, yeah... No, tell me anyway. Masa: The beauty of it is it bypasses the classroom. Everybody has a home and the language should live in the home. It's probably the last place that it did live in somebody's home, in somebody's kitchen. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] Masa also checked that I understood an acronym he had used, and when I responded affirmatively, he continued to describe teaching methods common in language revitalization – without checking my comprehension: Masa: Because when, I'm on the board of AICLS, you know? Advocates for In- Allison: uh huh Masa: Okay. And when they brought me on, I noticed, I just sat for a year and observed what everyone else was doing just to learn where I was. And um I- in retro- in looking back on that, I realized that at the time, everyone was versed in TPS. And they were indulging in the Greymorning method. And uh, Master-Apprentice trainings. Allison: mmhmm [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] I interpret this to mean that Masa assumed that if I was familiar enough with language revitalization practices to recognize the AICLS acronym, then he did not need to explain these terms and concepts further. Another way that we established relationships was by calling out experiences we had in common prior to the interview. For example, Karelle referred to the NILI Language Revitalization Learning Series, which is how she had first become acquainted with this project, as “that NILI Institute”, indicating that we were both familiar with this referent: 356 um, going to that, like that NILI Institute, you know, helped to create some motivation for me to sort of get started with my little goals for um, for the summer. [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] At the time of our interview, Karelle was also in the late stages of her PhD program and was working on her dissertation, and before we got started with the formal interview we talked a little bit about our graduate school experiences. In the interview itself, Karelle referred back to this conversation and compared the project of language learning to the project of dissertation writing: and sometimes I'm, you know, when I think, um, like we were talking earlier about our dissertations. When you think about the whole, doing a whole dissertation, it seems overwhelming. [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] She also mentioned graduate school circumstances when describing her struggles to stay motivated on language learning, and I indicated that I understood the dilemma: Karelle: And I, for me personally it's also been really hard to focus on it at the same time that I was taking my, like my grad student classes. Allison: mmm Karelle: So, like while I was enrolled full-time in classes and also TAing undergraduate courses. It was, you know, sort of like...yeah Allison: That's enough. {hahaha} [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] Other interviewees recalled situations where they had seen me before even if at the time we had not yet been introduced. For example, I had sat in on one of Zeke’s teacher certification classes, an experience that Charlotte called up in our first interview together: And then actually with the certificate class, the ways Zeke has structured it this year so far is like - you were, I think, yeah, when you attended, like we all ate lunch, everyone brought food. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] I read all of these discursive moves as efforts to situate me with respect to the language learning context, to establish both a personal relationship and also a common understanding with which to frame our discussion. Interviewees also invoked mutual relationships. One form of linguistic evidence for mutual relationship is the phrasing of first mentions. That is, when the interviewee first mentioned someone they assumed I did not know, they prefaced and explained 357 who this person was to them. For example, I don’t know Charlotte’s household well, so I have not met her partner: so my, my boyfriend speaks Mandarin, and he really wants us to try to nest Mandarin […] there are some things I know from Greg, my boyfriend, um, [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] This can be compared with Carson’s first mention of his partner, whom I have met: then, Miakah met me in Seattle and we did a bunch of doctor's visits, because there's no specialists um near to us in Alaska [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/8/21] Carson also mentioned a family member that he knew I had not met, and he prefaced his first mention of this brother: And then um, what else is new? Um, my brother Ty I don't think you've met, he just bought a house [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/8/21] Carson also brought up other language revitalizationists, and he mentioned them in first name only: I've also, I've taught about revitalization at NILI in the past, but I haven't um... I don't think, unless I'm misremembering, no, I don't think I've taught a Nuu-wee-ya' class. Because, uh every year that I've been involved teaching, um Pyuwa and/or Loren has been coming up, [mm] so it seemed kind of redundant to try to sit in and... really up until this year when we had more access to Tututni materials and I would be able to contribute something additional, rather than just being like a second person there... [mmhmm] who's like, less knowledgeable {hahaha} [{hahaha}] {hahaha} [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/9/20] In this passage, Carson is calling upon what he knows to be shared understanding and mutual acquaintance (with NILI, with Pyuwa and Loren, and with what they mean to the Tututni/Nuu- wee-ya’ language community.) Among practitioners who are learning Lushootseed and/or working with the Multilingual Institute, the mutual relationship with Zeke was frequently evoked or implied. These practitioners mentioned Zeke’s effect on their language practice without preface, like Chris D does here: What motivated me to actually start speaking and everything was really spending time with someone like Zeke [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] 358 Cassy in fact referred to him interchangeably as “Zeke” and “Ɂəsweli” throughout our interview, without explicitly explaining that this name refers to the same person; I take this as evidence that she assumed I would understand the referent: But that's where I met Zeke, when I was 11. So I guess that must have been like 200...2? Yeah 2002. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] So Ɂəsweli started to have me do little things, like going through the alphabet right away. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] These two examples can be compared with her mentions of other previous teachers, who she introduced to the conversation by full first name and last name: then we had a couple other language teachers come in, Tammy Cooper and Nancy Bob. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] This mutual familiarity with Zeke was invoked both as a relational connection and a shared understanding. For example, Kayla mentioned one aspect of her language practice that she hypothesized “might have been something you guys have talked about,” meaning she hypothesized that I would be familiar with the phenomenon already because of my previous acquaintance with Zeke: um, I'm, Zeke might have - this might have been something you guys have talked about, but, being someone who doesn't come from the community of the language that you speak, you kind of have to like double down a little bit more, so that if someone is saying like, "this isn't even your language," you have to be more than like a regular person would speak for instance. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] Kayla even called upon this shared understanding when suggesting to me that I interview people outside Zeke’s sphere of influence: Allison: Um, do you ever get discouraged in the work? Kayla: Um...I hate to be like "no! I love it all the time!" [{hahaha}] {hahaha} Uh, and I mean, it's also like - I hope, on a side note, I hope you're talking to people who don't work with Zeke, I think that Zeke has such an influence on people that I think a lot of what you'll hear is, like, "Yeah, but also, like, no." [mmhmm] Um, because that's just kind of the way I feel like Zeke raised me in my language, and so um, it's okay to be discouraged and so you're never actually super discouraged, if that makes sense. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] 359 Even Zeke himself, with whom I have the longest standing relationship of all these interviewees, worked to situate me in terms of cultural background and shared experience: Zeke: I'd like to get another thirty-three years of work done, and one of the biggest things I'd like to do - and I don't know what culture you grew up in but, in Native culture, elders are incredibly precious. Allison: mm Zeke: I mean, they're our gold, they're our- you know like the, Tuxamshish, like Virginia? Allison: mmhmm Zeke: That's what I grew up with. Now Virginia's the last one I know that's like that. And that's…you know what I mean? Allison: yeah. Yeah. [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] Because of our shared previous experiences, Zeke is aware that I know who Virginia is and what she means to her community, but he also knows that I was not raised in a Native community; because of this shared knowledge, he worked to clearly establish my understanding of the preciousness of this type of relationship. Besides the important moves to build relationships between interviewer and interviewee, other very clear examples of relationships in the research setting took place in the small-group interviews, where 2-3 practitioners joined each other online. One of these interviews took place between two Yup’ik speakers and co-teachers. One of them, Sassa, repeatedly deferred turn- taking privileges to the other, who is her elder: Allison: Um, yeah. So can you start by introducing yourself and saying, where you're coming from and what language you're working on? Sassa: {haha} I'll let my elder go first. [Sassa, Yup'ik, 7/7/20] This elder and Sassa had not had the opportunity to see each other since the pandemic shut- down, and Sassa ended our interview time with a greeting to her elder: “[Yup'ik greeting42] 42 Sassa did not provide a translation when she reviewed her transcript, and as I am unfamiliar with the Yup’ik language I am not confident in supplying a transcription for this manuscript. Whatever it was she said, her elder laughed and agreed. 360 sometime. Lord willing.” That is, these two practitioners were able to use this interview not only as a chance to share their ideas with me, but also as a chance to reaffirm their care for each other. Another group interview was among three main organizers of the Kodrah Kristang efforts. These three have all “bec[o]me quite good friends” according to Luis (7/18/20), and this close relationship was enacted throughout the interview: Luis: Yeah, it's fine Allison: Cool. Anything else? Luis: I see your grandma, Fran. Allison: {hahaha} Frances: She says hi. [Kristang group 1, 7/18/20] Their friendship and cooperation was invoked when Luis, a graduate student from Portugal finishing his studies in Singapore, discussed his thoughts about the history of Portuguese colonization and the Kristang language, and Fran declared that Portugal “gave us you”: Luis: Like accelerated in a way that I felt was quite sad, and also the way that so many of the Kristang people see Portugal in, in this kind of uh…I mean, they kind of forget that- Frances: Grandiose-like Luis: Yeah, they try to forget the bad things that happen, and kind of cultivate the good things that happen, that were left by. And of course you can see that as endearing right? But at the same time, you see that, you know, Portugal has also not given a great umm…any kind of help towards the preservation of the language. Allison: mmm Luis: In the recent years. Frances: They gave us you! Kevin: Yeah! Luis: Uh Yeah, but they didn't give, they didn't give me, I ran away. No. I just came. Frances: {hahaha} Allison: {hahaha} [Kristang group 1, 7/18/20] Later, Luis shared his hope that he can continue to contribute to this relationship in the future: Kevin: But I think that's always going to be, I won't say an issue, but always going to be something that umm fairly...something that needs navigating in most revitalization initiatives, honestly. Especially ones that aren't mone...tary - I mean, nobody gets paid lah {ha} so Allison: {chuckle} 361 Frances: We get paid in other ways. Kevin: Right. Luis: If I can get a big Singaporean grant to study Kristang, we can all get paid, yeah. Kevin: Yeah. Allison: {hahaha} Frances: {hahaha} [Kristang group 1, 7/18/20] A few weeks later, I interviewed three other Kristang learners together, and throughout this interview, they evoked their shared experiences and mutual understandings. For example, two of these learners are immigrants from different parts of India, and they reflected on this common experience with the expectations that Singaporeans have about their linguistic backgrounds: Tej: But it's very confusing, it's - especially for me because like I'm a South Indian, but I don't speak Tamil. So like that's already like one... Learner: mmhmm Allison: {chuckle} Learner: People don't wrap their head around it. Tej: Yeah, I think some people just find it - Allison: {hahaha} Learner: You know [unclear] that North Indians speak Hindi and South Indians speak Tamil. So, so that's the most you can sort of explain. So for me, the better educated people can guess that I speak Hindi. But, I can imagine it's worse if you're from the south and you don't speak it. Allison: uh huh Tej: Yeah, yeah I think like, I'm from the South, I don't speak Tamil […] [Kristang Group 2, 7/31/20] This shared experience was also evoked with respect to the relationship to Kristang learning specifically: I think for heritage learners, it's a question of identity. [mm] And like for us, like me and like Tej, who aren't a part of the heritage, I think the community in itself is just so open and so welcoming. [learner, Kristang group 2, 7/31/20] At the end of this interview, this group shared their mutual hope of getting to spend time together again: Allison: Thanks again for your time! Learner 1: Thank you very much! Learner 2: Thank you. 362 Tej: Thank you. Learner 1: Yeah. Learner 2: Yeah. This discussion made me miss our Kodrah and get-togethers. Tej: Yeah. I was just thinking about this. Allison: {ha} Learner 2: {haha} Learner 1: Yeah, don't worry. I'm sure, I'm sure we can have an online substitute, in a couple of months or so. Learner 2: Yeah. Learner 1: That would be nice. [Kristang Group 2, 7/31/20] These are discursive enactments of the value these practitioners hold for these relationships. Like the two Yup’ik teachers in the examples above, these Kristang learners were able to use the interview to get back in touch with each other and affirm their continuing relationship. The kind of mutual care that was expressed in these group interviews was also in some cases shared between me and an individual in one-on-one interviews. I call these moments of reciprocal care; Chris B’s quote from our follow-up interview exemplifies this reciprocity: Allison: Well, I really appreciate your time again, Chris. It's been really nice talking to you. Chris: Oh, you, likewise! Thank you. Well, I know that you are here to interview me, but how has your year been? [Chris B, Lushootseed, 5/27/21] Everyone I spoke with in follow-up interviews asked some version of this question, reciprocating my check-in with them. In Erin’s follow-up, she specifically referred back to the ICLDC conference that I had invited participants to attend and watch: Allison: Cool. Um, I think those were kinda all the things I was thinking about. It's just good to...it's good to catch up! And, yeah. Erin: Yeah! Allison: Yeah. Erin: It's true. Man what a whirlwind of a year. Allison: I'm glad - Erin: {haha} Allison: What a whirlwind of a year! I'm glad you've had some highs. Erin: Yeah. Allison: Yeah. Erin: How are, how was your year? I know you had at least one high. The uh conference. Allison: That was so fun! Yeah. That was, 363 Erin: That's cool. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/2/21] As I got more comfortable with interviewing and with establishing relationships with these practitioners, I participated more in this exchange of reciprocal care. For example, when Erin expressed her deep sense of guilt in response to a question about her language learning effort, I intervened to check in with these feelings and try to clarify my intention: Erin: But like I haven't worked on it at all. Allison: mmhmm Erin: Which makes me feel bad. Allison: {chuckle} Erin: I don't know. Allison: Um, Erin: My whole life is me feeling bad about things. So. {haha} Allison: Yeah. I get that. {hahaha} And um, uh, I'm, I'm not like trying to give you a guilt trip, because I very much identify with like, yeah. I just...I don't have the bandwidth! I feel like I have a lower bandwidth, especially right now, for...stuff. Erin: I totally feel that. Allison: So. Erin: Yeah no, I'm not picking up any shame from you, it's all, it's all coming from inside. Of, of me. Allison: {ha} {haha} Erin: Um {hahaha} [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/2/21] This is similar to my focus on clarifying my goals and intentions, discussed in section 6.2. Though we had never met before this project, Erin and I quickly established a level of comfort and rapport that was represented in these moments of mutual care: Allison: It was really good to talk to you Erin. Erin: You too! I always have such fun with our chats, oh my gosh. [Erin, Nuu- wee-ya', 6/2/21] I strongly believe that these moments of exchange and of enjoying each other’s company go beyond surface-level pleasantries. These moments of care in both group and individual interviews are part of the relational nature of the research process itself. A central aspect of my approach to this research is the centrality of relationships, and the importance of attending to these relationships (see Methods section 2.1) By mentioning shared acquaintances, by recalling 364 shared experiences, by checking in with each other about possible misunderstandings, and by expressing mutual care, all of us in these interviews enacted our mutual entanglement (Barad, 2007). 6.4 Time One other key way that research relationships were alluded to in these interviews was through the invocation of time – specifically, the shared experience of a particular time. Some examples of this are when interviewees brought up a past period of time and checked in with my memories of it. For example, Zeke brought up a particularly exciting time in his language work, and asked me to situate myself with respect to that time: Zeke: Language use is, especially after what we did - I don't think you were here yet, I think it was before you came to the U of O when Cassy - yes it was, when Cassy and I had this language house at the same time, um, Carson and Jerome and his family, and Pyuwa and Ruby, do you know them? Allison: mmhmm, I know them, and I know what - it was before my time but I read Carson's bachelor's thesis about this and it, yeah - that was so cool! {hahaha} Zeke: okay, yes! yeah {hahaha} okay [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] Cassy in fact brought up this exact same situation, and asked me an almost identical question. People that I spoke with in follow-up interviews a year later also situated some of their remarks with respect to the time of our first interview, and both Charlotte and Erin asked me to remind them of when those had taken place: Charlotte: I don't even know when our last interview was, do you? Allison: It was like, almost a year ago. It was like July, I think. Yeah. Charlotte: Okay. So, by July, I think I may have just been returning - I was furloughed for three months and I don't remember if I was Allison: oh okay! Charlotte: furloughed when we talked but um, there, it worked out okay [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/9/21] Erin: I kept doing language stuff - um Carson kept going throughout the year, so I did...let's see that was the Summer Institute last year, right? Allison: mmhmm Erin: Or was it Spring? Allison: It was, yeah it was summer. It was like late June. Something like that. 365 Erin: There we go. Allison: Yeah. Erin: Okay. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/2/21] Time was in fact a particularly salient component of the research context in this project. The year 2020 has such strong associations, such a commonplace sense that this is a particular “era”, a very marked moment in time, that I find it impossible to extract this research out of its temporal context. I do not claim that anyone should want to “extract” any research project from any aspect of its context, but in the darkest moments of this era, when all I wanted was to go back to the way things used to be, I found myself deeply resistant to giving COVID-19 any space in this manuscript at all. But this is the context that I was doing research in, and this is the context that these practitioners were practicing in, and that context had effects on both the research and the practice. As discussed in Methods (section 2.3.3), the practitioner interviews took place remotely via Zoom. This was not initially how I had planned to meet and speak with these practitioners, but this became a practical necessity due to restrictions on travel and social contact. As many practitioners expressed, and I personally experienced, having social contacts mediated exclusively via Zoom was both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, remote technology afforded me the chance to speak with practitioners in a diverse geographical range; on one single day in July 2020, I was able to speak with Karelle in her home in New Jersey, Cassie in her home in Washington, and Angel at her office in Idaho.43 I doubt that I would have been able to learn from speakers in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest and Singapore in a single project if it had not been for these technical affordances. This also gave me the opportunity to speak with 43 This was also the day that I learned that three individual interviews in one day was difficult for me in terms of energy and focus, and I limited myself to two from then on (most interviews I had were the only interview of that day.) 366 practitioners who don’t currently live close to their traditional tribal territories, meaning I might have not been able to connect with them during a physical visit to that central hub. Having said that, being completely reliant on Zoom was not without its challenges. There are moments in 11 of the 29 interviews where the Wi-Fi cut out (either on my end or their end), or one or both of us froze, or one of us dropped off the call all together. Chunks of audio are missing from some interviews due to these technical problems. In these cases I might have to ask the interviewee to repeat themselves, and in more than one case they had to ask me to repeat myself and restate the question. One particularly challenging example comes from my follow-up interview with Tej, where internet connectivity was a major issue: Allison: mmhmm. Um, are there things that you like, would have wanted to have accomplished? {ha} That you didn't get to? Tej: Also, I also learned how to use the - [[unstable wifi]] Maybe meeting more people in real life. Allison: Sorry, I cut out, what was that last part? Tej: Uh meeting more people in real life. Allison: Oh! I see. Yeah. {haha} Tej: yeah. Allison: Yeah. That's something you would have wanted to have done? Tej: Yeah. Allison: mmm Tej: [[unstable wifi]] Allison: mmhmm Tej: I mean I [[unstable wifi]] Yeah I did [[unstable wifi]] I, also I figured out how to use the streaming function on Discord. Allison: oh! Tej: So that was actually very helpful. [Tej, Kristang, 6/30/21] During my interview with the two Yup’ik speakers, the elder was dropped off the call when her Zoom session froze, though she was able to rejoin fairly quickly and we were able to continue the interview. And in my interview with the Kodrah Kristang organizers, I was the one who got dropped off the call, though interestingly Zoom continued recording while I was not there, and so I was able to capture this exchange: Luis: Most of them are uh, let's say racially part Kristang. 367 Frances: Oh wait hold on Luis. I think her internet is down. I saw her frozen. Luis: Oh, okay. Frances: Um. Kevin: Yeah I don't think she heard. Luis: Now she's gone. Frances: Okay. I don't know, I think nighttime Wi-Fi is just worse. Luis: I think nighttime in the US, nighttime in the US Wi-Fi is terrible. Frances: In Singapore, too. Kevin: Yeah. Luis: Well, but Frances: Well, at my place. {chuckle} Luis: No but, for me nighttime, it's really no different. The internet infrastructure in Singapore is many, many years more modern than the US. Because the US was first. So the internet infrastructure in parts of the US, you don't get like fiber and things in most of the US. Frances: mmm Luis: Then when you do you still are restricted by uh like bottlenecks, of all the data coming from very large cities, for example, that do present itself a bottleneck. Frances: mmm Luis: That's actually one of the things in their uh infrastructure agenda. But yeah. [Kevin, Luis, and Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] They went on to chat with each other until I was able to rejoin the interview. Although in the moment this was a frustrating experience for me, I appreciate that I was able to collect this unprompted bit of social commentary.44 There are some other minor downsides to the modality. For example, both Michelle (Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21) and Jackie (Jackie, Lushootseed, 5/26/21) used the phrase “Zoom fatigue” to describe how they were feeling after over a year of their professional and language work being entirely online. I certainly also felt this fatigue at times during the period of this project; I also felt the loss of physical interaction in these settings. Pandemic-era feelings of isolation, anxiety, and depression came up at times in the interviews. In section 5.3.2.2 I discuss these experiences in terms of their effects on motivation to practice language, but they also were expressed as moments of shared experience between me 44 Just to reiterate that both Luis and Frances read this transcript and okayed the inclusion of this section. 368 and the interviewee. For example, in our follow-up interview, Carson reflected on the experience of the year past: I think that that was part of a bigger year for me personally of just like, being willing to confront just generally a really shitty year. And work through stuff even when it was like, a freefall of just kind of {haha} just trash {hahaha} I mean, interpersonal, health, pretty much everything, habits, health habits. Just, just a freefall of like, this could get bad. [{ha} {haha}] And, and so I'm happy that it didn't get really bad for myself, and I feel like a lot of positive change was able to come out of it. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/8/21] When I asked him if he could identify the source of that positive change, he said: Carson: I would like to think it was me really like, making my life better but I, I got vaccinated and the town lifted their lockdown and then I felt like a normal human again right? {haha} So it's Allison: oh my god. Carson: {hahaha} Allison: It makes such a difference, yeah. Carson: Yeah. {haha} Allison: Yeah. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/8/21] We continued our conversation about this, and I reproduce this exchange at length as it touches specifically on many of the shared societal anxieties of this time, including “craziness” around the presidential election and uncertainty about the future of public health and social interactions: Carson: That was like December-January, and, there was only like 5 or 6 hours of daylight, Allison: {chuckle} Carson: at that point, and it was just like, no end in s- like no vaccine, I mean like...in retrospect I think it's easy for us to forget how it felt then. Like, there was no solid vaccine news, it was like the height of, uh, the kind of craziness around the election... Allison: I was gonna say like political {ha} turmoil? Yeah. Carson: Oh like big time too, where I'm like, are we even like, do the elections even count? Like, what the hell is going on? Right? Allison: mmhmm Carson: And, and then in Kake45 it was also like, uh dark, all of the time. {hahaha} Allison: {haha} Carson: And uh, I just was doing a poor job, of staying like, on pace. You know? Allison: y- sure. 45 Kake is the small town in southeast Alaska that Carson had relocated to shortly before the start of the pandemic. 369 Carson: And, so then through the Spring I really have been buckling down and trying to do better on that, and, it has been going really good. Um, but that was for sure my main challenge. Allison: mmhmm uh, yeah. I imagine, I don't know, yeah Seasonal Affective, like depression, {haha} I'm sure is, Carson: Yeah. Allison: mmhmm Carson: Oh, it's real. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/8/21] Erin was also someone who shared a lot of her anxiety about the era; as she put it: It was really hard to get up the motivation. Right now, I'm just, you know, I'm generally taxed from uh work, and corona, and police brutality and, you know, just all those things. [{chuckle} mmhmm] That we're dealing with in 2020 right? And so I haven't had the energy for anything. Other than like, doom-scrolling Twitter. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/7/20] The effect of these anxieties on motivation to practice are discussed in section 5.3.2.2. For the purposes of the discussion here, I note that Erin invoked these anxieties as a shared experience (“all those things that we’re dealing with in 2020 right?”). Even knowing what to call this period of time became a topic in some interviews. For example, in our first interview, I asked Erin if her past feelings of “forcing it” had changed in the present context: Allison: Do you still feel like you're forcing it? Uh like this is a new year. It's a new era. Whatever this is. um {haha} but Erin: {hahaha} It's something, yeah. Allison: Yeah {haha} [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/7/20] The following year, as I was asking practitioners to imagine what the post-pandemic future holds, we had this exchange: Allison: Yeah. Um, so, assuming that we're entering...the...bef- {haha} I was gonna say the End Times, that's not what I meant. Erin: {hahaha} Allison: The, the After Times, um Erin: The After Times. {hahaha} Allison: {hahaha} The After Times. Erin: {hahaha} Allison: {haha} Um, yes. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/2/21] 370 For his part, Chris B shared that he had taken to calling the pandemic “the Fuckoning” (Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20), though a year later he said that he had toned it down to “the Heckoning” so that the term would be more classroom-appropriate (Chris B, Lushootseed, 5/27/21). This is not to say that this period of time was exclusively a period of struggle and stress; in fact, as is discussed in section 5.3.2.1, many practitioners (including Carson, Erin, and Chris B) found valuable, motivating, and positive aspects of these circumstances. But I want to acknowledge here that the physical, social, and political realities of the years 2020-2021 did bring significant hardships, grief, anger, and sadness. All of us as individuals have had to respond to these realities in our own ways. Given these realities, it was not just these practitioners who found it difficult to keep going. The lowest I have ever felt, in my mind and in my heart, were the months during which these interviews happened to take place. The chance to hear this voiced by others, the expressions of shared experience and reciprocal care, and the opportunity to see a familiar face on Zoom and to share laughter, these live in my memory as moments of light and warmth on (sometimes very) dark days. These were un-hoped-for gifts from what is on paper a scholarly exercise; they are the generous gifts of what is at its core a relational undertaking. 371 CHAPTER VII. MOTIVATING LANGUAGE GROWTH: SUGGESTIONS FOR REVITALIZATION PRACTITIONERS 7.1 Introduction In this chapter, I summarize some practical implications of the findings about L2 motivation in revitalization contexts. In particular, I share some methods and techniques that language revitalization practitioners describe as beneficial to language learning and motivation (section 7.2), and then offer some practical suggestions for language learners, teachers, and planners (section 7.3). L2 motivation researchers have long noted that “the amount of research devoted to motivating learners has been rather meagre relative to the total amount of research on L2 motivation” (Dörnyei & Csizér, 1998, p. 207; see also Ushioda 2020 for a similar observation). While this dissertation did not collect data from direct observation of learner behavior or teacher interventions, many practitioners, especially in interviews, articulated specific ways that their motivation has benefitted from particular approaches and strategies. Staying motivated in language revitalization contexts is not easy, and it is not trivial. Beth described the situation like this: there's so much pressure on indigenous languages. [mmhmm] That you get it right, that you get it right the first time, that you don't break this thing that has survived, you know 10s of thousands of years. And it's like down to your generation. You know, it's so much pressure [mmhmm] not to make a mistake, not to be slow or not to {haha} you know just, it's, it's like the most negative… learning environment you can imagine. The context of endangerment. […] Now, I think that a lot of teachers and a lot of learners, you know, are finding ways around it. But I think just what's handed to you is very difficult. [mmhmm] And a lot of people just aren't going to open themselves up to it. [mmhmm] And I understand why. And I...can easily get discouraged.” [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] In this negative, challenging learning environment, ideas for getting and staying motivated may be of great help to practitioners. I hope that language revitalizers who read this chapter find some of the following ideas supportive and motivational. 372 7.2 Methods that motivate In this section I describe revitalization methods that interviewees in this study discussed, and in particular the aspects of these approaches that the practitioners found motivational. I go into most detail with the Puyallup Method, due to the fact that most of the interviewees were participants in that method and due to the fact that I am most familiar with it myself, including from observing the Multilingual Institute for four weeks (see section 2.3.1.1). Practitioners who are part of other communities that use other methods also shared some features of their learning experiences that have been particularly helpful and motivational. 7.2.1 Puyallup Method for Expanding Language Use The method most well-represented in this study is what I have been calling the “Puyallup Method”, which originates with Zalmai (Zeke) Ɂəsweli Zahir’s work with the Puyallup Language Program of the Puyallup Tribe in the Pacific Northwest (https://www.puyalluptriballanguage.org/). Zeke calls this a ‘multidimensional method’ (p.c. 5/10/22), and stresses that each dimension is important. Key dimensions of this approach include: • Language nesting in the home: designating a physical area of the home (e.g. the kitchen; the bathroom) as the place to “nest” the language, a place where one avoids the use of English. • Reclaiming domains: ‘domains’ are activities that are performed within the language nest. For example, if the language nest is the bathroom, domains would include washing hands, drying hands, brushing teeth, flossing, etc. In order to turn these activities into opportunities for language practice, domains are reclaimed through self-narration; 373 learners narrate to themselves, out loud, each step of the activity they are reclaiming (e.g. “I turn on the water; I grab my toothbrush; I put the toothpaste on my toothbrush”, etc.). • Conversation practice: in addition to the solo activity of reclaiming domains through self- narration, learners practice using language in conversation by learning a series of questions (e.g. “What did you do today? Where did you go? Who did you see?”) along with vocabulary to be able to answer these questions. This allows learners of all levels to participate in interactions and information-exchange practice; as their skills increase, they can answer these questions in more detail, and can ask follow-up questions beyond the standard set. • Measuring progress in time and domains: in this approach, language learning progress is measured not in terms of grammatical proficiency or other standard assessment instruments, but rather in terms of amount of time the person spends in the language as well as how many domains have been reclaimed. For example, teacher-trainees are certified after demonstrating that they can maintain a conversation in Lushootseed with another speaker for 10 minutes, and that they can self-narrate 25 domains. During a class session, the teacher – Zeke prefers the term ‘facilitator’ – first asks the learners how much time they have spent in the language since the last meeting, what challenges they have met, and what successes they have had. Class then consists of practicing conversation and then learning or reviewing vocabulary for domains that are being reclaimed. Outside of class, learners are encouraged to practice conversation if they can find a partner, and otherwise to stay consistent in their self-narration practice in their language nest. The self-narration of domains serves several purposes. First of all, it allows individuals to practice their language even when they are not interacting with other language users. This aspect 374 is especially important for learners who don’t have many opportunities to practice with others, for example because they live away from the main language community or because they are independently working to awaken their language. Secondly, it builds consistency into language practice. If the learner commits to speaking their language every time they brush their teeth, this means that they are practicing a little bit every day. Zeke shared that he began developing this technique after many decades spent trying to teach Lushootseed via traditional grammar-translation techniques and explicit grammar instruction: Um, that wasn't until I came to the U of O and, um, started rethinking, it - actually what happened is I had a talk with an educator […] he's the one that got me rethinking how to get people using language, and don't teach language, get them using it and that that would be the motivation [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] As he has observed in his writing, “it is very difficult to remain motivated to use the target language on a regular basis if there is no circumstance that necessitates it” (Zahir, 2018, p. 159). Many practitioners I spoke with have indeed found this approach to be highly motivational. For example, Randi compared her initial language learning experiences with this reclaiming domains practice, which she says “turned a light bulb on”: [in the beginning] it was brutal. And uh, and slow, and then more brutal and more slow and years of brutal slowness, of feeling like I was getting nowhere and feel that we were just um, going through vocabulary, and and…and I was really frustrated with not being able to use any of the vocabulary for anything to communicate with. And that changed with one of Zeke's online classes, um... When he taught me to, I guess, reclaim my first domain of frying potatoes and full sentences, and just like turned a light bulb on. And I guess that's where it became more than the brutal slowness of vocabulary repetition. [Randi, Lushootseed, 6/16/20] Like Randi, many Lushootseed practitioners I interviewed shared different ways that this method has been motivational and has increased their language use. Learners of other languages who have participated in Zeke’s Multilingual Institute have said similar things, like Erin: 375 it kinda surprised me how effective it was, just like [mmhmm] get your brain into the language. Even if it's stuff that you're never going to like, say to another person. [mmhmm] Just the fact that you're using the words, and making yourself pronounce them is a lot more helpful than I thought it would be. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/2/21] Both the reclaiming domains and the conversation aspects of this method push learners to practice language regularly and to begin to feel comfortable. Chris D described how these two elements go hand in hand to make it “easier to just keep spitting [language] out”: That and conversation, conversation was another big piece to our um to our language use and Zeke, really, you know, we played around with it quite a bit, but conversation, just sitting down and again, building up to that "what did you do?" which spans pretty much your entire day […] you know, so you wake up, you go to the bathroom, you go to the kitchen, you go to the living room, you go to your car, you go to work. And so once you start doing this for repetition's sake - that was another thing, it's like once you realize that the repetition makes it so much easier just to keep spitting it out, you know what I mean, I guess it goes hand in hand with domains, because you're repeating it. You know what I mean? Every day. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] Teachers also find this model to be helpful for increasing their own language use and sense of confidence. When I asked Carson how he felt his new duties as a language teacher was affecting his own learning progress, he replied: The teaching for sure is a positive, because you know, we're not teaching, I'm not teaching people how to speak Nuu-wee-ya', I'm teaching people how to use Nuu-wee-ya' every day. [mmhmm] So, it's directly a benefit to me. Because I'm practicing a model of using the language every day, and, recruiting other people to speak with. [mmhmm] So, it's really beneficial. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/8/21] Zeke acknowledges that “the methodology that I use now does not work for everyone. However, it works for some, and before this it didn’t work for any of them” (5/14/20). In particular, many learners are initially resistant to the self-narration aspect of reclaiming domains. For example, Joe shared that he initially thought this was the “stupidest” thing: I, I thought the domains at the beginning were the stupidest things in the world. I thought, "who would, who would do this? and who would -" And you know what, if it wasn't for those, and I've told Zeke that, they helped a lot. [mmm] Um, just reading it over and over and over and trying to say it over and over and over, that I originally, I just thought, "well, this is stupid. I'm never gonna do this." {ha} [Joe, Lushootseed, 6/23/20] Chris D recalled his first exposure to reclaiming domains similarly: 376 at the time I was like, some of the things he was saying I was, I remember vividly being like, man, you talk to yourself? [{ha} Yeah.] you know, all these different things, like you know reclaiming domains and like no, not really, for me. I'm cool with learning language, I want to speak the language though, I don't want to, you know, talk to myself. And then eventually got on board and just listened to what he had to say and it clicked. And once I really started doing the things that actually made me start speaking language, it was almost like, you couldn't really take that away. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] Zeke is familiar with this resistance, and noted a pattern he has observed with his method: a lot of people have a hard time with that idea. And a year after, they, they're doing it and they're speaking hours a day and so on that's when they go "wow, I never thought that would ever work" you know. That's when they give me the feedback. [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] That is, once the initial awkwardness of this novel approach wears off, many learners find it remarkably effective – as both Joe and Chris D described about their own experience. For more information about this method and how it was developed, see Zahir (2018). Many of the suggestions for practitioners that I discuss in section 7.3 of this chapter come from the experiences of learners and teachers in this method, including 7.3.1 Find Ways to Use Language, 7.3.2 Make It Personal, 7.3.3 Don’t Be Afraid to Make Mistakes, and 7.3.4 Recognize that There Are Ebbs and Flows. 7.2.2 Kodrah Kristang approach In the effort to revitalize the Kristang language, the Kodrah Kristang (‘Awaken, Kristang’) team have employed many strategies to make language learning approachable and engaging. For example, one learner described the classroom atmosphere as such: the interesting thing about these activities is they're all just so creative. And then they're so um, I think they're really out of the box. And I think the way that we do them is, I just think it's generally really well tailored to the class. I've never seen anyone not enjoying activities. […] It's just um, I think it's just the small steps to make it feel more alive. So that, even though we knew that out of this class, we're not going to find - it's not, we can't easily access that sort of music, that sort of culture, that sort of community, they sort of integrated that in such a way that, you know, we'd be having fun while learning. […] So yeah, I think if there's one, two words I would use to describe this class, one would be 'educational', and the second is definitely definitely 'fun.' I've never regretted going to a Kristang class. And I think that's what's kept me coming back for 1A, then 1B, then 2A, 377 then 2B. And I think it's the same for a lot of people actually, when they start. [learner, Kristang, 7/31/20] Keeping the classes fun and lighthearted helps the language feel “alive”, and it also lowers resistance to attending the classes. This learner also noted that the organizers have worked to lower other barriers to entry, including working hard to keep the cost of attending low (at the time of this interview, the fee was $20 for the full 20-week term). Frances shared that she thinks one of the reasons Kristang classes are so successful at retaining students is because there is a “cool factor” associated with learning this little-spoken language, along with the “fun” associated with their teaching style: For a lot of the youngsters who come for our classes, that's one of the pros to learning Kristang. Because they feel like they can, you know, just talk secretly among their friends. So there is that, I think that adds to the cool factor that Kevin was talking about. And that really helps, right, in terms of language learning motivations, because if I think back to my own experience learning Mandarin, it was really a fuddy duddy language. [{hahaha}] We're taught, we were taught it in the least attractive way possible. {haha} um {haha} Yeah, so I think the cool factor for Kristang is really how we pick it up through the classes. It's not enforced. Right? It's something that people sign up for and it's something that people come back for because they think it's fun. Not because, not necessarily because they think they're learning the language, but they come back, also for the community spirit. [Frances, Kristang, 7/18/20] Evaristo described a hands-on project that he recalled from class, which served both to give learners practice with real archival resources and to give them the opportunity to “sit together” as classmates: we were going to the archives…so the ideas were, was to learn how to use the archives, the public archives, that's where are the information about the families and the influences of the past. […] So we were supposed to make a research and deliver a product for the course. Considering um, someone that was very famous in the Kristang history of the city, or the family. So, like, make them the genealogy of the family...so everyone trying to find his or her in, uh personal or interest. But again we would meet, we would sit together. The archives, the sources, the primary sources, the secondary sources and then we would like do a project in the end. So it was a project-driven learning which is, I never had that opportunity to do, even in English or in French and Spanish. Never. [Evaristo, Kristang, 8/4/20] 378 Similarly, Kristang learners also talked about Jardinggu, the Kristang ‘lexical incubator’, as a project-based activity they were excited to participate in. These projects, whether it be archival research or collaborative lexicon development, allow learners to actively contribute to the linguistic input that can be used by the community, which many found to be very motivational (see section 3.2.2 for discussion). For more about this effort, its history and its activities, see Wong (2019). Aspects of the Kodrah Kristang approach are also highlighted in suggestions in section 7.3, including 7.3.1 Find Ways to Use the Language and 7.3.6 Develop an Assessment that is Appropriate to Your Situation. 7.2.3 Master-Apprentice approach/mentor relationships Practitioners also described the importance of mentor relationships in order to maintain motivation. One common method in revitalization that centers this relationship is known as Master-Apprentice (Hinton et al., 2002). Michelle is employed part-time as an ‘apprentice’ in this method, and meets one-on-one with her mentor (the ‘master’ speaker in this pairing) two hours a day, five days a week. This is how she learns and practices her language and prepares to teach it to others. She described many ways that her mentor keeps her motivated in her language work, for example by sharing words of solidarity and encouragement when she was struggling after the birth of her first child: I have a baby, she is 16 months old. And so like during my pregnancy, I felt like I lost my mind. Um, like I wasn't at, like I…I became less intelligent. {hahaha} [{hahaha}] […] um {hahaha} And so, like simple phrases that I know, I do know! I didn't know. Um, and then I thought, "Okay. As soon as I give birth, it'll come back and I'll be fine." And it didn't immediately. And I was, and I just sat there and I'm like, I lost all these years, I don't know anything anymore. [mmm] But she was really amazing at just encouraging me and, "it'll come back" and "I've gone through it, too," and um, and I, it seems to be very common. That you know, it's, sometimes you just don't have as good of a grip as you would like. And, and it will come back, and you just have to persevere and push through those moments and times where you do feel defeated. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] 379 She also shared that maintaining momentum in the language is significantly affected by the regularity of her interactions with her mentor: even something as simple as like missing a day with my mentor, can kinda throw me off. [mmm, mmhmm] She had to leave town this week {hahaha} so, uh I, I haven't had my couple hours with her all week. [mmhmm] And I miss her so much. And so, like, I'm listening to her voice, you know, she made a special Quizlet just for me on Ks. Um, so {haha} [mm {hahaha}] like I sit in my office, playing her voice over and over again. And like I'm texting her so that I'm not totally disconnected, but um yeah, when we, when we lose our daily momentum. [mmhmm] It definitely throws us off. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] Other learners described their relationships with important mentors and how that affects their motivation. For example, Beth got started working on her language after contacting a linguist who had documented some of the last L1 speakers. She described their working relationship as follows: So it started out where we would meet for three hours every Friday afternoon. So I would drive over to Berkeley, and we meet for three hours and basically, he started teaching me by teaching me these Nez Perce texts. So we would listen to the recording, and then we'd start going through the texts word by word, and he would show me how the grammar worked. […] he, even, he's 90 years old, he still has this incredible capacity with the language. I write to him about every third day going, "what is this word?" {haha} and he sends it, you know, an hour later, "here's the morphology." [{haha}] And uh, you know he's just an incredible person. But that, you know he basically gave me a free seminar, and there's no way I could ever, you know, thank him enough, or do anything to repay this incredible gift that he gave me. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] This is not the same relationships as a Master-Apprentice, but it does share some of the positive aspects of that approach, including the passing of knowledge in a one-on-one relationship and consistency in interaction over the long term. In addition to helping provide language input, Beth also described how this mentor helps her stay motivated by encouraging her to “be gentle with yourself” (see section 7.3.3 and 7.3.7). These are just some examples of the positive effects mentors have on revitalization practitioners (I note for example that many Lushootseed practitioners talked about Zeke as an important mentor). For further discussion of these and other important relationships, and the 380 effects they have on learner motivation, see Chapter 4: Relationships. For more about the Master-Apprentice Approach, see Hinton, (2011); Hinton et al. (2002); Hinton & Hale (2001). To see some practical suggestions that follow from these important relationships, see 7.3.1 Find Ways to Use the Language, 7.3.4 Recognize that There Are Ebbs and Flows, 7.3.5 Celebrating Progress, and 7.3.9 Find a Community of Other Practitioners. 7.3 Ten suggestions for revitalization practitioners In this section, I outline ten practical take-aways46 for learners and teachers of revitalizing languages. Many of these suggestions come directly from practitioners themselves based on their own experiences of what has worked. Many also follow from what practitioners describe as not working; that is, in this section you will find examples of things that practitioners have found very de-motivating, and suggestions for how to avoid demotivation to give learners’ language efforts room to flourish. There is certainly much more to learn about effective ways to motivate language revitalization practice, but the knowledge and expertise shared by practitioners in this study is a significant contribution. I am very grateful to all these learners and teachers and new language users for what they have shared. I hope that some of the ideas and suggestions offered here are helpful and encouraging, to them and to others; as I hope that this dissertation as a whole might help to support individual practitioners and contribute towards a more vibrant future where languages are awake and thriving. 46 I nod here to the title of Dörnyei & Csizér’s (1998) article, “Ten Commandments for Motivating Language Learners”, but I deliberately replace the word ‘commandment’ with ‘suggestion.’ My hope here is to share some practical insights that come from practitioners’ experiences, without trying to impose prescriptive rules about how learners and teachers should proceed. 381 7.3.1 Suggestion 1: Find Ways to Use the Language The first suggestion is to find – or create – opportunities to use language. This could mean practicing memorized conversation prompts with other learners and learning new vocabulary to answer those prompts; it could mean practicing storytelling; it could mean memorizing a greeting and using it every time you greet someone; it could mean using the language to narrate your regular activities, even if you are doing this alone. Using the language gives learners opportunity to practice, which leads to increase in comfort and confidence. Learners who have access to organized group activities, such as those described in 7.2.1 or 7.2.2, find great benefits from taking full advantage of those opportunities to use language; as one learner of Kristang said, hearing another learner use Kristang creatively “helps massively in terms of making the language feel alive, making it feel real” (learner, Kristang, 7/31/20). Using the language also motivates consistency in practice, especially if you commit to using the language at regular periods in the day. While this might seem intuitive, it is certainly not trivial for learners of revitalizing languages. There might be only a few other language users that learners can interact with, or there might not currently be anywhere in the world where learners can use their language. That is the case for many learners of Lushootseed and other awakening languages, who find the Puyallup Method of self-narration to be very helpful (see description section 7.2.1) Other language learners in other communities have used similar techniques, either because they have been trained by Zeke or because they devised a similar method on their own. Hall (2021), for example, learned the domain-reclaim method from Zeke and adapted it into what she calls ‘word-reclaim’ (p. 501); that is, because she does not yet have all the language she needs to fully self-narrate activities, she selects certain words to only use in Nuu-wee-ya’. This allows her to maintain a consistency in her language practice even within her constrained resources and time. 382 In the interviews I conducted, Karelle (who, as far as I know, does not know of Zeke or his approach) mentioned a similar strategy, which she has been able to maintain even as she has been very busy finishing her graduate studies: I do try to incorporate like at least a couple of words every day. But usually it's like the ones that I, like "wanishi", which is a, like uh "thanks." Um, and so, like giving thanks like in the morning or something like that. So, but I'll do it in the language. [mm, mmhmm] And some, and like I said some, some days that's all I get. {hahaha} [Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20] That is, for learners in many different communities, dedicating a particular activity or a particular set of vocabulary words guarantees that language is used regularly over long stretches of time, even when effort may fluctuate (see Suggestion 4 section 7.3.4, as well as Time chapter section 5.2) 7.3.2 Suggestion 2: Make It Personal A second suggestion is to make language practice personal; that is, by finding ways to make language activities fit with your own goals, your own habits and learning styles, and your own culture and values. One example of this comes from Michelle, who described a pedagogical strategy she is developing that combines experiential “learning by doing” with traditional activities that are meaningful to Haida learners: Also, the, we've been talking about it for a while and it's uh, a lot of people learn by doing, right? [uh huh] So, if you're not, uh, you can learn some words. [mmhmm] But if you, if they're not words that you would actually use in your daily life, then you're not going to remember them. […] so right now it is berry-ripening season. So, [mm] the flowers are starting to bloom on the bushes, pretty soon we will have berries to pick, so if we sit down and do like a whole lesson on picking berries, so this is how you say different berries, this is how you say "I am picking this berry," or "I am eating this berry," […] and then have like a small group […] And then actually being able to be together, and go and do that activity [mm mmhmm, yeah.] So, all right now we're gonna actually go out together and we're gonna go berry picking, and then make that portion fully immersed. [mmhmm] So, okay, here's all the knowledge, now we're gonna go do it. You can't use English! [mmhmm] So, make sure you study that Quizlet! {hahaha} […] just doing things like that. You know? [uh huh] Doing things that are what we do. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] 383 One reason this activity might be motivational is that, as Michelle puts it, if the words you learn “are not words that you would actually use in your daily life, then you’re not going to remember them”; this harkens back to Suggestion 1: Find Ways to Use Language. It also gives learners an incentive to practice language, by reconnecting language use to the ability to socialize and participate in traditional activities. Other learners described adapting the techniques of the Puyallup Method to fit their personal needs and habits. For example, Chris D said that when he first started, he tried to use the sample language for the ‘brushing teeth’ domain, but realized that the narration didn’t fit the way goes about this daily activity; as he put it, “this is missing stuff. This is not the order that I do things. It's, it's my boss's brushing her teeth. This is how she does it. It's not how I do it.” (Chris D). He then described working with Zeke to make the narration “fit me”, and how beneficial that was to his practice: And so he sat down with me and we reformatted domains to fit me. And then I was just like, that was the moment I was like, once I got home and started using it, that I realized that once you use this for you, and you make it fit to you, and you actually use it, that you're speaking does go up. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] This experience is related to the notion of ‘autonomy’ in language learning; an autonomous learner takes charge of making language learning work for them, and this autonomy is highly correlated with learner motivation (see Ushioda, 2011). Erin also shared a similar experience. Prior to attending the Multilingual Institute, she had been trying to write curriculum materials for the Nuu-wee-ya’ community herself. She said that it was helpful to turn the attention to what was useful in her life, as opposed to what might be useful to others: I think when I was working through the curriculum, I was trying to approach it from that angle, but also, having never written a curriculum before, I was trying to think of like, what does everyone need to say? What do other people need to say? And not thinking about, what do I need to say? [mmhmm] And I think, in a way stepping away from the 384 curriculum, and kind of stepping more into the Institute and language class, has really put more of the onus on me to think about like, what's useful in my life? […] for this particular project, especially because there's such a huge emotional component, because there's such a big bandwidth problem, I kind of have to focus on like, what's realistic for me. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 6/2/21] For Erin, narrowing the focus of resource creation to what best serves her personally helps to eliminate the heavy “bandwidth” burden of awakening a language for a whole community, and in turn the materials she creates for herself will be helpful for other learners as they get started on their journey. That is, ‘making it personal’ is not about being selfish or individualistic; it is about lowering demotivation while also ensuring increased opportunities to use and live with language. 7.3.3 Suggestion 3: Don’t Be Afraid to Make Mistakes Another suggestion that comes directly from practitioners is to not be afraid to make mistakes. In fact, when I asked what one piece of advice he would give to new learners, Chris B said exactly that: Oh...um {sigh} Don't be afraid to make mistakes. I think that's my biggest thing. [mmhmm] Um, as an online teacher, I mainly teach adults. And […] you know how they always used to say it's easier for kids to learn languages than it is adults. [mmhmm] I've read that recent research has proven that that's not actually true, that adults can learn languages as easy as children, but they don't, because they're afraid of making mistakes. And when you think about 'bisgetti', when kids say 'bisgetti' it's adorable! Right? We even get out our phones and we take pictures of them speaking goofy. But when adults do it, you're like, oo. […] It's beneficial if we give up those feelings about ourselves anyway, and just go ahead and make that mistake. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] Masa had a nearly identical response when I asked him what his piece of advice would be: Just have fun playing with sounds in your mouth. Just repeat it and play, you know, say it different ways, kind of like actors do, you know when they do [aiyayaya] [{hahaha}] You know, just crazy exercises to loosen up, like that. Just don't, you know when you're learning a new language, you're going to be making new sounds with your mouth and it's not going to be normal at first. Go slow. And then shorten the space between - I mean, go slow, say it slowly, you know, each sound, and then shorten the gap in time and then slur it together, do all sorts of playful things. [mmhmm] Yeah. […] Get really comfortable in making mistakes. [Masa, mitsqanaqan, 6/18/20] As Angel says, “we are baby speakers, you know, you don't come born out of your mom's belly being perfect. It takes some time.” (Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20). Beth also acknowledged that it 385 is hard to find a way to practice language where “it’s okay to be stupid”, and how important it has been to her that her mentor has encouraged her to be gentle and supportive towards herself: my teacher Aoki was so generous in this way. And he said, "you know, think of-" he's like "you have to be really gentle with yourself." You know, don't judge yourself. You know with children, they have the advantage of just laying around listening to people talk for like two years. {haha} And then the second they tried to say anything even close to a word, the whole world is like [{chuckle}] "Come on! You're doing it! It's beautiful! [{haha}] 'Mama', you're saying it!" you know, or whatever. [Yeah.] It's totally not like that when you're an adult trying to learn an endangered language. […] Because first of all the clock is ticking every second. You know? [mmhm] And then there just aren't that many contexts where people are going to stay in the language that whole time, you know, long enough for you to just listen and not know. […] one of the things that I do is listen to the recordings of these narratives. And, so I feel really familiar with the sounds of certain words and I try to, you know, I hope that the rhythm of the language is somehow filtering into my body. Um, but then, there's still a gap between that sort of taking in and being able to practice, and being able to practice in a way that just feels safe and like it's okay to be stupid. You know? [mm {chuckle}] It's really, really hard to find that that level of supportive environment. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] The reason that this is so important, as practitioners articulated, is that feeling embarrassed or afraid of mistakes can be greatly demotivating, and can cause learners to avoid trying to use language at all. Chris D talked about the problem this way: the biggest hindrance for adults to learn language seems to be pride. [mmmm] It's that, I don't want to say it wrong in front of somebody. […] You can spend an hour a week, you want more than that but if you spend an hour a week in a class, and you don't repeat, you don't actually actively try to say these things, you're not going to do it throughout the rest of the week. [mmhmm] If I tell you to say "haʔł sləx̌il" every day from now on, and you're like, "ugh, I can't really make that sound, I can't do this," you're just not going to say it. [mmhmm] But if you, if, even if you say, "haʔ sləhil", or if you say whatever, like you know whatever version of it, you're going to say it. And then you're going to comfortable with it. And you're going to understand and, you know, that kind of goes into the whole facilitating an environment where this language is you know, accepted. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] In this excerpt, Chris shared an example of a greeting in Lushootseed that contains some sounds that new learners have difficulty with – “haʔł sləx̌il” – but emphasized the importance of practicing the greeting in “whatever version of it”. This is important for learners who are working to incorporate Suggestion 1: Find Ways to Use the Language, but who may not yet have 386 acquired difficult words or pronunciations. Kayla even incorporates this idea into her teaching practice: so oftentimes I see a lot of the same things come up. Right? The first is like, you're uncomfortable. These are weird sounds that you have never made before, or that you don't know how to make. And so one of the things that I have done, and it's because I followed a lot of the teachings of the language department, is to just make it really fun. Like, let's not avoid the elephant in the room […] we have these weird sounds, and sometimes we spit and that's totally normal. But if I call it out at the beginning and I say "if you spit, you're doing it right. Like, don't even be ashamed. That's the way to do it." [{chuckle}] So that's like one of the greatest things, I think it just as far as getting anyone to start speaking. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] By letting yourself feel okay about making mistakes at first, you lower the barrier to using the language, which can increase motivation and effort. 7.3.4 Suggestion 4: Recognize That There Are Ebbs and Flows Another suggestion to lower demotivation is to recognize that there are ebbs and flows to language practice and motivation. This is discussed in detail in the sections 3.6.3 and 5.2.3. Many factors may affect how much effort you can expend on language learning at any one time, but you can still stay persistent and committed to language even through these ebbs and flows. Here is how Zeke describes it: So, part of the class time - I'd say five, no more than ten minutes every week - is "how did it go this week?" And, "this week was a good week, I used it for an hour, and I did this and that and that" but oftentimes it's, "I'm ashamed I didn't do it, I only did 30 minutes a day," And they go, you know, "I should have used it more," and I go "no, there's no 'should', there's no 'have to',” what happens – like yesterday, a couple were saying “well we got a bunch of plants and we were planting them and we're getting our house ready for the summer, and we were very very busy, and we did it, but we didn't do as much as we wish we had.'" [mmhmm] And I said, "Good! Now remember when you're very very busy, don't let that demotivate you. Just enjoy that time, and then when you have more time bring the language back in the home." [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] Kayla described how important this attitude has been to her as a learner: You know, whenever you say, if he goes like, "how much have you been speaking a week?" and you say, "oof, like, not even that much" he's like, "that's fine! That's normal. That happens. Try better next time." And so while you can feel discouraged, you can be in kind of a lull, it never really stays because you're never harped on it for...he [=Zeke] 387 never harps on you for it. And so that's something, that's a practice that we do as well within the language department, but also like outside us folks who have been like birthed out of the language department, kind of. [hmm {hahaha}] Um, that's the philosophy that we have. [Kayla, Lushootseed, 6/30/20] Cassy also talked about times when she has had long lulls in her language practice, and how Zeke responded: he was always just really encouraging and every time we stop talking, it was like, just like he says in those, his talks that we've heard a million times, it's true, after you have that long break, and then you're given the go ahead to "oh good, you had a break. Okay, well, when you're ready, this is what some people are doing. [mmm] Do you want to try it?" And it's like, "oh yeah I wanna try that" and you do it. [Cassy, Lushootseed, 7/1/20] For these practitioners, it has been important to recognize that effort fluctuates over time as a matter of course, rather than as a matter of personal failing or something to be ashamed of. This removes discouragement and demotivation, and makes them feel free to return to language over and over again. Charlotte also acknowledged that sometimes the ‘regimented’ nature of language effort is not always possible, but she tries to focus on the positives of language in those potentially discouraging moments: I think what I get discouraged by oftentimes is the formality, and feeling like, regimented, and I need to get two hours of language in every day, and [mm] Sometimes that's not possible. And I think, thinking about the language and the role it's had in our community, and listening to those recordings of first language speakers, it helps me kind of shake out of it and think like, this is something that I'm not doing for a degree. […] this is something that I'm doing just because it's who I am, it's who my family is, and it should just be a natural fluid fun thing. Yeah, so it does help. It helps redirect the importance and why I'm doing it. [Charlotte, Lushootseed, 6/25/20] Thus for Charlotte, one way of dealing with these ebbs and flows is to remind herself of her initial motivations, which are about relationships and identity rather than external rewards (see discussion of ‘extrinsic motivation’ in section 1.3.1). In this way she is employing both Suggestion 2: Make It Personal and the suggestion to recognize ebbs and flows. 388 7.3.5 Suggestion 5: Celebrate Incremental Progress Another very common suggestion from practitioners is to recognize and celebrate small moments of progress along the way. One example comes from Karelle, who said that her advice to new learners would be “don’t be discouraged. Baby steps are steps forward.” (Karelle, Nanticoke, 7/1/20) Another example comes from Michelle, who said: oh {sigh} I would say...It's never easy but it's so worth it. [mmm] Um, yeah. Because it's not. It's very challenging. [mmhmm] And even, even if you only know one phrase and use that phrase every day, that's still an accomplishment. That's huge. [mmhmm] And so uh finding, finding small victories. [mmhmm] Um, being proud of yourself for each word, each phrase. It…it's worth it. [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20] This is discussed in detail, with many examples, in section 3.6.4. 7.3.6 Suggestion 6: Develop an Assessment That Fits Your Situation Related to the suggestion to celebrate incremental progress, practitioners also may find it beneficial to develop assessments that fit their own unique situation. This can be important for lowering demotivation; if assessment instruments are designed to measure something that is not currently possible for learners to achieve, this leads to inevitable feelings of failure and can be very demoralizing. Beth described the situation like this: …as I was saying like the high pressure learning situation of endangered languages is so hard. And one of those aspects is around assessment. [uh huh] You know, and that assessment is usually this...like from zero to fluency. And people, like... {ha} [mmhmm] like well I'm way down here and that doesn't count. [{chuckle} hmm] But I think when we have different measures […] we need to think of ourselves as having fluencies. So, like I could say "I have 100% fluency in greetings." […] I have fluency in the longhouse. I have fluency in roots and berries. Whatever it is, we just have to keep claiming our fluency in whatever domains we have. And, and just keep building on that, and not be overwhelmed, not be drawn under by um sort of some measure, of like, I'm not an L1 speaker. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] The problem of the notion of ‘fluency’ as ultimate achievement is discussed in detail in Goals section 3.5.2. As Beth highlights, assessments that set learners up to inevitably fall short can be 389 harmful and leave learners feeling “overwhelmed”, but thinking about progress in positive ways can help learners stay motivated and celebrate progress (see 7.3.5, Suggestion 5). Appropriate assessment can be very helpful for curriculum developers and community programming. Two Kristang learners described how the Kodrah Kristang team uses assessment in this way, to help with programming and planning while not causing learners to “freak out”: Tej: They always emphasize that the tests are more like for the teachers to understand, like, how to improve their teaching methods, and sort of more diagnostics on that end, rather than any sort of, oh, you, you need to do this to actually pass or something like that. Like the tests are never really sort of an end goal, so to speak. Learner: Yeah. It was funny because we'd freak out about tests, in the last couple classes we'd be like, "Oh, there's a test coming, we haven't learned any vocabulary!" and then Kevin’s just there going "{sigh}, don't worry about it." […] I think just the fact that everyone was there out of pure interest anyway, just helped us to create an environment where everyone was very engaged. [Kristang learner group interview, 7/31/20] Angel described an assessment measure she was developing for the language program she is in charge of: And if they test and go through all those lessons, you know, then we have a session where we're going to have like a family night, where we can kind of assess them, in that way we assess them, then we know how successful our resources are. But it's also, you know, we can assess by just, "okay, let's you and I get together and let's talk." [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] That is, Angel is planning to use this assessment to “know how successful our resources are”. She is also planning to center the assessment on language use (getting together and talking), which is directly related to how the language department hopes the community will start to use the language again. To be clear, the suggestion here is not that language revitalization programs should forgo assessment entirely at the risk of demotivating learners. Assessment can be an important tool for language programs to ensure that their efforts are effective and well-received; it can also be important for individual learners to be able to track their progress and to identify areas for 390 improvement. The suggestion here is to tailor the assessment to measure progress towards achievable goals, to measure progress towards the many different goals that might be personally meaningful to learners (see discussion throughout Chapter 3: Goals), and to measure progress through modalities that are fitting for the language community. One alternative assessment that may be helpful and appropriate for language revitalization practitioners is the ‘benchmarks’ developed by the Northwest Indian Language Institute, which measures language progress in positive terms of what learners can do in their language as their skills develop (see https://nili.uoregon.edu/language-proficiency-benchmarks/). 7.3.7 Suggestion 7: Try Not to Put Too Much Pressure on Yourself This suggestion follows from many of the earlier suggestions, including Suggestion 3 (7.3.3), Suggestion 4 (7.3.4), and Suggestion 5 (7.3.5). The point here is to acknowledge that, as Beth said in the quote in section 7.1, language endangerment is a very difficult learning environment, and the pressure of this situation can easily overwhelm and demotivate practitioners. Erin described what this burden can feel like to individual practitioners: one of the big discouraging factors for me before the Institute was feeling like the entire weight of the language was on my shoulders. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/7/20] Carson noted that he had both observed and felt this pressure himself: a lot of people feel a lot of pressure that they have to like, take care of the language because it's an endangered language and uh… That's like telling yourself, it's like the finals in a sports game every practice, or whatever. You know? [{hahaha} uh huh {hahaha}] It's like a huge amount of pressure. [uh huh] And is like a pretty crippling thing, I think. So that's a lot of what I've tried to do is just like help people feel relaxed. But that's just coming from my experience and kind of journey. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/9/20] Undoubtedly, it is easy enough to suggest that learners not take on this ‘crippling’ pressure, but much harder actually to relieve this pressure in practice. For both Erin and Carson, finding others to share the work has eased their sense of pressure and loneliness (see Suggestion 9, 7.3.9). 391 Beth shared an idea that comes from her language mentor that helped relieve the pressure of ‘thinking about the whole dictionary’: But I think having the teacher I have, you know, he was like, "Don't think about the whole dictionary." […] if you want to make a dictionary, and you have five words, you have a dictionary of five words. It's not that you don't have a dictionary, because you only have five [mmhmm] Words, right? It's like you always have a dictionary. It's just your dictionary has five words in it. [mm] Or ten words. Or whatever. [mmhmm] But you always have the whole thing. [Beth, Nez Perce, 8/10/20] That is, it can be helpful to break things down into smaller units, and to celebrate what you do know in the language rather than what you still need to learn (see also Suggestion 5, 7.3.5). Another way to relieve some pressure might be taking opportunities for review, as Chris B observed with his students: I have a lot of people who want to go back to quarter one who are now in quarter two. And I feel fine about that, I think, like I was saying earlier, our office doesn't really set up things for review and I think review can be really important. [mmhmm] It is for me and my language learning. […] I noticed these people that asked to go back to quarter two, they're like, "I'm so sorry, I'm really embarrassed, I wasn't, I wasn't able to study. I've fallen so behind." And I just try to stress to them, it's not a matter of, you know, going, like falling behind, I think it's beneficial for people just just to repeat stuff, just because. Even if you did everything perfect, it's, you're going to be even better at it, if you do it all the time, that's just, that's just how your, how brains work. Well, most people's brains work. So it's, I try to stress to them it's not a failure at all. [mmhmm mmhmm mmhmm] It's just, you know, it's an opportunity to be really good at it so. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 5/27/21] For Chris B and for his students, it was helpful to recognize not only that effort ebbs and flows (see suggestion 4, 7.3.4), but also that language learning benefits from returning again and again to the same material. 7.3.8 Suggestion 8: Be Aspirational At the same time that it is important for goals to be attainable goals, it is also important for them to be aspirational. If the bar is set too low for learners, they won’t be excited about the possibilities or motivated by a sense of urgency and promise. Carson shared his aspirational goals, and described why he had set them this way: 392 That's me coming from the perspective of wanting to see a vibrant bilingual speech community. I think a lot of people's aspirations are kind of tethered to the ground because they don't see the language spoken every day. Like ours. So, then their concrete, kind of, "I want to learn so that..." is, like, "I want to be able to introduce myself traditionally, or say a rote prayer", which are all good things, but…they're not actually aspirational. [mmm] Which sounds harsh and judgmental of me, but like, you know, it's like somebody whose body works fine just being like, "Man, I want to be able to check the mail." [{hahaha}] You know, like, man, that's depressing. We can do much more than that. So that's another big benefit I feel like of actually speaking and learning, it opens up people's minds I think a lot to the fact that we are placing like boundaries on ourselves. [mmm] In general in life, but especially with the directions for our own selves and communities and family. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/9/20] Erin described a “through line” in her language learning which sets her up to use language in every aspect of her life; though she admits this goal might not be within immediate reach, she can see how reaching for that goal will help her take “a huge step forward”: But so like, I can see a through line now though, where I can see like, "okay, I'm going to take over the bathroom. […] I'm going to take over the whole house. I'm going to take over the car. I'm going to take over the office. And then I'm going to take over the world." And like...at a certain point, obviously, the words you need to be able to say are so much more complicated than like "I grabbed my hairbrush. I tie my hair with a hair tie." [mmhmm, mmhmm] "I finished taking my shower," whatever. Um, you know, having this conversation is waaaay outside of what I can see myself being able to do. But I would say in the next five to 10 years, if I can reliably talk to my nieces and nephews only in the language about things that relate to the interior of the house, that is a huge, huge step forward. That I think I can actually achieve. [Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/7/20] Chris D also described his mom’s ambitious goal as one that is “great to aspire towards”: This is always going to be something - my mom told me just a few, like a few months back […] that her goal is that when she is an old woman she just wants to, like she wants to completely switch over. She doesn't want to speak English anymore. At a certain point in her life. [uh huh, huh] uh I don't know when that will be. I think that's, I think that's 10 years from now or so, is what she was shooting for. But - and again, I think that that's one of those things, you can't beat yourself up if you don't make it to that point, but it's a great goal to aspire towards. [uh huh, mmhmm] And I think she has, she's been working so hard on this that I feel like it's an entirely possible thing. Um I feel like that that's, I mean, that's kind of where I want to be. I want to be able to speak to the point of where...uh I can hold a conversation with anybody. [Chris D, Lushootseed, 6/19/20] Again, as Chris highlights, while making sure to not “beat yourself up” for not meeting ambitious goals, being optimistic and aiming for aspirational goals can motivate increased effort; and with increased effort, aspirational goals become more possible. 393 7.3.9 Suggestion 9: Find a Community of Other Practitioners Another suggestion for practitioners is to find a community of others working on language revitalization, in whatever way that is possible. This follows from many interviewees describing how lonely the work can be, and how important it is to find others to share in it (see also Suggestion 7, 7.3.7). As Erin succinctly put it, “it's just so hard to be motivated when you're by yourself” (Erin, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/7/20). The importance of relationships of all kinds is discussed fully in Chapter 4: Relationships; there you will see examples of the many ways that different relations can motivate language growth. There you will also see examples of practitioners who don’t have regular contact with a network of other language learners, and how challenging this can be. Carson describes the problem, and the solution he has found to it: …it's more of a roller coaster when you're alone, in terms of motivation and demotivation…finding community really helps accelerate the work, even if that community is across different languages or experiences or different places in terms of where you are as learners. [Carson, Nuu-wee-ya', 7/9/20] That is, for Carson, being able to work with friends and colleagues in other language communities – in his interviews he mentioned colleagues working on Lushootseed, mitsqanaqan, Pit River, Tolowa, and Ichishkíin – has helped him stay motivated and committed to Nuu-wee- ya’ learning and teaching. Michelle also described how getting to connect with other language learners in other communities has helped her “get revitalized” in her own goals and strengthened her “will to keep going”: Overall I would say the last year, with all the ups and downs, I've had amazing opportunities that I would not have had otherwise. I've gotten to attend multiple conferences, [mmhmm mmhmm] um, meet people that I would have never met before! And like just have these amazing conversations, and get revitalized, like, in my own you know goals, and uh strengthen my will to keep going when I'm having like right now in the last six weeks of complete chaos [{ha}] in my own life, or you know my community, um to be like, "okay well, yeah this is all crazy and yes you're not making progress right 394 now, but it's gonna calm down and you, then you can continue." [Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 5/25/21] That is, connecting with other language practitioners, no matter where they are geographically or where they are on their language journeys, can be very nourishing and motivational. One of the conferences that Michelle talked about is the International Conference on Language Documentation and Conservation, which is held every two years and will be held virtually again in 2023; this conference draws practitioners from all over the world to share their knowledge and to share encouragement, and is a great opportunity to build connections with a community of revitalization practitioners (see http://ling.lll.hawaii.edu/sites/icldc/). Practitioners might also be interested in the annual offerings of the NILI Summer Institute, which now includes an online workshop series known as the Tuxámshish Revitalization Learning Series (TRaiLS; see https://nili.uoregon.edu/summer-institute/summer-institute-2022/). 7.3.10 Suggestion 10: Share Your Knowledge My final suggestion is for both practitioners themselves and for people in their networks of relationship, and that is to share your knowledge. By this I don’t mean to make more work for overworked learners and teachers. But, if you are a learner or teacher with a desire to share what you have experienced, what challenges you have and what successes you celebrate, know that that will be valued. The field of language revitalization can always benefit from the expertise of more practitioners, and some of the people interviewed in this study specifically called for this. For example, Erin said she would like to ask: Yeah, so, how do you, how do you learn the language? If you have no option for immersion, [mmhmm] And if you have no curriculum {ha} like how do you claw the information out of the ether? [mmhmm] Those would be my questions. [Erin, Nuu-wee- ya', 7/7/20] And Chris B, when asked what part of language acquisition he wants to know more about, specifically said: 395 I would want to know their strategies for getting people to practice. You know? [mmm] uh, so in other words, motivation strategies, which is what you're studying isn't it? [{hahaha}] Yeah. [Yes. {haha}] So, I would like to know more motivation strategies. [mmm] Yeah. So that's, that's kind of {sigh} Yeah, not, not necessarily a specific question, but yeah. [mmhmm] I guess if you were to phrase it as a question is like, "what is your most successful motive, motivation strategy?" There we go. [Chris B, Lushootseed, 7/6/20] As described in the Introduction (Chapter 1), there is currently very little information available about motivation in language revitalization contexts. Similarly, as described in section 7.1, very little of what we know about L2 motivation in any context is informed by actual teaching practice. Practitioner expertise can be very valuable and motivational for others, whether shared via informal communities of practice (see Suggestion 9: 7.3.9) or via more public venues like websites and journals. In the next chapter (Chapter 8), I suggest some ways that researchers like myself might also contribute towards sharing this knowledge. 396 CHAPTER VIII. RESEARCH IMPLICATIONS, FUTURE DIRECTIONS, AND CONCLUSION 8.1 Theoretical implications – L2 Motivation In Chapter 1, I shared a quote from Carson Viles (2013, p. 23), which comes from his thesis about motivation in a multilingual revitalization community: “[w]e can use motivation as a lens for understanding larger issues within language revitalization, such as the existence of worldviews within endangered languages, the role of the family in learning, and the importance of community support in deterring or enabling successful language revitalization efforts.” In this final chapter, I summarize what we have seen in this dissertation by looking at language revitalization through this motivation lens, and also what we have seen about motivation through the lens of revitalization practitioners’ experiences. 8.1.1 L2 Motivation is about more than learning an L2 One key finding from revitalization practitioners is that language learning is not a discrete, decontextualized domain of activity. This challenges research that theorizes a special and domain-specific ‘L2 motivation’, distinct from motivations to participate in any other activity or educational task. As Ushioda (2020) observes about SLA theorists: “in our efforts to capture the distinctive theoretical features of motivation relating to the language learning domain, we tend to look at L2 motivation in isolation from the broader social context of human activity and experience in which it is situated. As a consequence, we tend to operate with a rather restricted notion of the language learner, who becomes in a sense narrowly defined by this single isolated domain of learning activity and motivation.” (p. 37). Practitioners in this study have illustrated the many ways that motivation to learn a revitalizing language is bound up with the drive to engage with many other associated activities. This can be seen for example in the wide variety of extra-linguistic goals discussed in Goals section 3.4. This can also be seen by the fact that the practitioners interviewed in this study are 397 engaged in many different activities associated with revitalizing a language; that is, they are not just language learners, they are also teachers, teacher-trainers, archival researchers, community organizers, curriculum writers, and materials developers, among other roles they play in the lives of their families and communities. Revitalization practitioners articulate how important their languages are to them, and how dedicated they are to bringing their languages back; they also articulate the ways that language is central to, rather than distinct from, other social, cultural, and relational aspects of their rich and varied lives. 8.1.2 The L2 Self is shaped through relationships As noted in the introduction (section 1.3), L2 motivation pertains to the experiences and behaviors of an individual, but that does not mean that motivation to learn an L2 is a purely individualistic phenomenon. The practitioners in this study challenge the “learner-internal and L2-community-independent” nature of Dörnyei’s L2 Motivational Self-System (Dörnyei and Al- Hoorie, 2017, p. 459) by articulating ways that their images of themselves are significantly shaped through relationships. The image of the future Self is not sui generis; it is a blending of personal emotions, reflections on past experiences, and images of people admired and respected (see 4.3.2.2 and 5.3.1.3.2). Practitioners also describe ways they are motivated by future visions of themselves as L2 users as well as by visions of how they can contribute to future community members (see for example section 3.2.2). One particular way language revitalization practitioners challenge the L2MSS as the current dominant theoretical model is by problematizing the notion of the ‘ought-to self’. In particular, the findings here problematize the idea that personal obligation and responsibility is equated with external/introjected regulation, and negatively correlated with motivation and L2 progress. For many practitioners in this study, being responsible to the community is tied to 398 feelings of identity; they learn the language so that they can contribute, because that is the kind of person they want to become. Based on these findings, L2 motivation theory needs to address more carefully the relationally constructed nature of the ‘self’ and the complicated entanglement implicated in the ‘ought-to L2 self.’ 8.1.3 Motivation to Learn an L2 is Complex and Dynamic As has been argued about L2 motivation generally (Dörnyei et al., 2015; Mercer, 2015), motivation in language revitalization practice is dynamic, variable, and complex. Over the course of the long trajectory of language learning, revitalization practitioners’ effort will ebb and flow, their motivation will wax and wane (see section 5.2.3). Their motivation will be affected by competing forces of doubt and discouragement, triumph and hope. At any given time, a learner’s motivation might be simultaneously impacted by memories of her grandmother, hopes for her child, challenges from her students, exhaustion in the moment and optimism for the future. The variable nature of motivations may also change over the course of a lifetime. As practitioners observed in Chapter 4 on Relationships, young learners may be more motivated to interact with a group of peers, while learners at other ages may be more motivated to pass on language to younger family members, or to learn language in memory of ancestors. These shifts in motivational priorities reflect the notion, introduced by researchers of Catalan revitalization, of linguistic mudes, biographical turning points in the lifespan that mark the beginning of new chapters (Pujolar and Puigdevall, 2015; see discussion section 1.4.1). Presumably, the motivations of individuals may also shift as language use becomes more widespread in a community, reflecting an evolution in the responsibilities borne by any one person and the new networks of language relationships that arise from language growth. 399 The findings and the three theoretical implications discussed in this section 8.1 point towards many future research directions that can continue to expand our understanding of L2 motivation theory and language revitalization practice, the topic to which I turn next. 8.2 Future research directions The insights shared by revitalization practitioners, both through responses to the Global Survey and through interviews, point towards many rich areas for future research. Many of the findings highlighted in this dissertation signal promising potential for transdisciplinary collaboration with researchers in SLA, educational psychology, anthropology, and sociology, among many possible connections. In this section, simply for expediency, I limit the discussion to questions that pertain specifically to the overlap between L2 motivation and language revitalization. I can envision future paths to terrains well beyond the scope of this current discussion, and I hope readers can also see new possibilities for expanding both our theory and our practice. I start with an example of a continuing gap in the research (8.2.1), and then discuss questions that follow from the findings in this study (sections 8.2.2-8.2.5). 8.2.1 A major research gap – motivation to learn sign languages In this dissertation, we have considered the motivations of learners of Indigenous and minoritized languages. This group of learners, like learners of any language other than English, are vastly under-represented in the L2 motivation research literature (Dörnyei & Al-Hoorie, 2017). As such, this investigation makes great strides toward diversifying the kinds of learners represented in the literature. Another group of learners that are exceedingly under-represented in the L2 motivation literature are learners of signed languages. Very few studies look at the motivations of learners of sign languages of any kind, and the few that could be found in an initial search of the literature 400 primarily focus on sign languages of Anglophone countries, such as ASL, Auslan, and New Zealand Sign Language. A recent exception to this is Marton & MacIntyre, 2022, which reports on an L2 motivation questionnaire study with hearing learners of Finnish Sign Language. In fact, many studies of L2 sign learners investigate the motivations of hearing learners; and while, as Bickford & McKay-Cody (2018) point out, new hearing users of sign languages play an important role in maintaining the vitality of these languages, we are reminded by de Meulder (2019) that motivation studies need to take into account both deaf and hearing new signers, especially in developing pedagogy and policy meant to support deaf communities. A limitation of the survey portion of this dissertation is that only one effort to revitalize a sign language is represented, in the form of the Tibetan Sign Language response to the Global Survey. Future research in this area would be a great contribution both to SLA and to language revitalization; research could, for example, focus on learners enrolled in classes to learn Plains Indian Sign Language (see Bickford & McKay-Cody, 2018). 8.2.2 Motivation across time Given the finding that motivation fluctuates over time, an important area for future research would be more robust longitudinal investigations of learners. Many researchers working in Complex Dynamic Systems Theory indeed call specifically for longitudinal data to get a better picture of interacting and changing motivations across time (de Bot & Larsen-Freeman, 2011; Larsen-Freeman, 2015). In this study, we have seen a small step towards longitudinal findings in the form of follow-up interviews one year after initial interviews; these findings give a fuller picture of fluctuations in emotions and effort, as well as a clearer sense of how the larger social contexts (e.g., the COVID-19 pandemic) affect motivation over time (see section 5.3.2). Because language revitalization itself is a multi-generation project which extends beyond the effort and 401 lifetime of any individual learner (see 5.3.3.3), future research which expands our knowledge of long-term trajectories will be of great value for researchers and practitioners. In addition to the focus on change over longer periods of time, future contributions could also investigate motivation at different timescales. That is, a study could investigate learners’ attitudes and motivated behaviors within a single class period and compare that with their motivations across the week, the term, and the year. This would speak to de Bot’s (2015) call for more investigation of rates of change in L2 motivation across different timescales in a complex dynamic systems theory approach; it would also help develop teaching strategies that would be useful for learners at these different levels of time. 8.2.3 Motivation and learning across the lifespan Much of the literature on language revitalization focuses on methods of introducing young children to language, or to immerse young children in language, or perhaps to support caregivers of young children in sharing language in the home. There are many reasons for focusing on this age group, including the fact that full language revitalization depends on a return to full intergenerational transmission, as well as fact that brain plasticity in early life means that childhood is a particularly optimal time for language learning. However, language revitalization activities are undertaken by community members of all age demographics, as has been demonstrated in this study as well as in the overall results from the Global Survey of Language Revitalization Efforts (Peréz Báez et al., 2019). The experiences of some communities who focus on adult language acquisition rather than child language acquisition provide interesting arguments for supporting learning across the lifespan. For example, Welsh language maintenance programs have centered around adult learners, due to the fact that adults have “position and influence within society” that children do not have, and 402 therefore adults can be more active agents in language restoration (Baker et al., 2011, p. 46). This is an argument that Zeke Zahir makes about efforts to revitalize Lushootseed as well: for some reason American culture, and many cultures, think the way you revitalize a language is you teach the kids, and then they'll go home and speak it to their mom and dad and siblings. [mm. mm.] Well, that works when they've got language in the home too, or language somewhere else, outside of the classroom, otherwise it doesn't work very well, because there's no reason for it to work. […] kids don't make rules, they follow the rules. In fact, we tell our kids, "obey" […] So it doesn't work well to leave it up to them to do it, because they really don't have that much control, nor do they have that much motivation to. [Zeke, Lushootseed, 5/14/20] By looking at language revitalization through an L2 motivation lens, we have seen how adult learners make conscious choices for themselves and their relations to bring language back into the community. But there is still much to learn about the role of adults of all ages in these efforts. For example, one couple I interviewed described feeling too old to participate in much of the social life of the learning community; the young adults who form the core of the effort are this couple’s children and their children’s friends, and as such they described feeling uncomfortable and without peers at times. They also said they were aware that revitalization activities in general are focused on children and on the caregivers of children, given the importance of intergenerational transmission. But despite the fact that they are past the age of raising their own children, they are still motivated to learn language for themselves, for each other, and to serve as a model for future generations. In any revitalization effort, every new user plays an important role, and knowing how to support learners of all ages across the lifespan is a key and understudied aspect of supporting language growth. Future research could, for example, investigate the shifting social-emotional needs of aging learners. Future research could also valuably contribute to larger research questions about language acquisition after puberty and the cognitive aspects of late bilingualism. 403 8.2.4 The learning context – social, physical, and ecological In their call for a ‘transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world’, the Douglas Fir Group (2016) argued for the need to focus on L2 learning at three different levels: the ‘micro level of social activity’ (which includes the individual, the individual’s cognition, and the individual’s interactions with others), the ‘meso level of sociocultural institutes and communities’ (which includes the family, the school, and other social organization) and the ‘macro level of ideological structures’ (which includes political power, belief systems, and cultural values). (p. 24). Crucially, they argue, “no level exists on its own; each exists only through constant interaction with the others, such that each gives shape to and is shaped by the next, and all are considered essential to understanding SLA.” (p. 25) This argument pertains to SLA in general. Because the specific field of L2 motivation has primarily been associated with the cognitive-psychological side of SLA, much of the research is limited to the Douglas Fir Group’s ‘micro level’. Ushioda (2020) argues that this is a critical limitation for the field, noting that “[w]hat our field of inquiry somehow does not do is look beyond individual-psychological and associated pedagogical perspectives to examine language learning motivation from political, ideological, or sociological perspectives, and to consider critical implications for language and education policy, social integration, social justice, or other locally and globally relevant societal challenges” (p. 3). As we have seen in the findings in this study, learners of revitalizing languages are aware of and affected by aspects of all these levels. At the macro level, learners and their motivation are impacted by the history of political violence and intergenerational trauma (see section 5.3.1.2), cultural values (section 3.4.1), and public ideologies (section 3.4.2.3). At the meso level, learners are greatly affected by their relationships with family and community (see entire Chapter 4: Relationships), as well as their experiences in a particular learning institute or 404 approach (see Chapter 7). And at the micro level, learners are affected by interactions with peers and by feelings of capability and aptitude. Other issues that are especially relevant for language revitalizers, for example cultural and social identity, cut across all these levels. Therefore, future research could address many questions about the ‘context’ (in the sense of the ‘person-in-context relational view of motivation,’ Ushioda 2009) at both micro and macro scales. Even more concretely, future research with language revitalizers could look at the relationship between physical space and language practice. In this study, this point was especially highlighted by Angel in her interview, when she observed: when I'm teaching stories in the classroom, in this square institutionalized classroom, sometimes when I begin I almost want to, I feel my stomach, like I can throw up. Because it's just not the natural setting and place, and it frustrates me you know to do it in that place. Because we need to rebuild the relationship with the land. [Angel, nimipuutímt, 7/1/20] Other interviewees also described the strong connection between language and land in these communities. This connection between the natural world and language revitalization has been observed by other researchers, for example Harasta’s (2017) finding that concerns about “ecological and climatic instability” was implicated in the motivation to practice revitalization of Cornish (p. 257). Because of this strong connection, many practitioners find place-based pedagogy (Gruenewald, 2008; Smith, 2002) to be an appropriate and affirming approach to teaching language for revitalization (Jansen et al., 2013). Future research in this area could look at the effects of place-based learning on supporting and sustaining motivation. This topic could also usefully draw on the different aspects of ‘ecology’ – that is, both the sociocultural and the environmental – of van Lier’s ecological approach to language learning (2004). One unforeseen reality of this dissertation project was that the research was conducted entirely remotely, which was not part of the original research design (see section 2.3.3 and section 6.4). Considering how important place is to language learners in these contexts, and how 405 important relationship-building is both for the practice and for research, future research conducted in person could greatly enhance the findings here. Future research could also take a more ethnographic approach to supplement individual interviews, to better elaborate the contextual and relational aspects of the individuals’ experiences. 8.2.5 The learning context – characterizing relationships and community One of the key findings of this dissertation is the centrality of relationships in language revitalization practice and motivation. Continuing to elaborate and describe the nature of these relationships is rich area for future research. One question that was raised in section 4.2.2 concerned the definition of ‘community’ in these contexts. Practitioners described important and motivational relationships within communities that included their language community (i.e. the heritage community, whether or not community members use the language currently), their learning community (which might include other learners who are not of the same heritage), the local community surrounding the language learning activity, and the larger community of language revitalization practice (i.e. practitioners who work on different languages). Individuals may simultaneously play different roles in many different communities, and have relationships with other individuals that vary depending on the community of focus. Future research could investigate how these multiple and intersecting communities operate within an individual learner’s support system, and how individual learner’s different orientations towards different communities impacts their motivation to practice. This research direction would more substantively engage with Sociocultural Theory (Lantolf & Thorne, 2006) as a way of framing these complex relationships and their effects on language learning. 406 This future research direction could also engage with the construct of ‘imagined communities’ and bridge the divide between mainstream L2 motivation theories and critical theories of identity and investment (Norton, 2016; Norton & McKinney, 2011). It could also inform conversations around heritage language learning more broadly speaking, by addressing the similarities and differences between heritage learning of global languages and heritage learning of Indigenous languages at the identity and community levels (McIvor, 2020). This research could also answer questions about the best ways that members of different communities and social networks can contribute to a flourishing multilingual world. 8.3 Methodological implications In this dissertation, I have shown how language revitalization practice is built on relationships, respect, and responsibility to a community. I have also attempted to demonstrate a model for research which follows the same principles. I call this model Relational Applied Research (see section 2.1), and it uses principles of respect, relationality, and reciprocity to inform research questions, research design, and research dissemination. Though other researchers will no doubt pursue other questions and other methods of analysis, my hope is that this dissertation will stand as an example of one way to conduct language revitalization research ethically, especially for researchers who are not members of these language communities. I recognize that I am still, and always will be, learning how to do this work appropriately; I recognize that I may make missteps, and I am grateful for my relations in the language revitalization community who have guided me and taught me how to step as rightly as I have been able to so far. Future researchers, especially those interested in questions of L2 motivation or those interested in broader comparative or longitudinal data, may be more inclined to use quantitative 407 methods. Quantitative research can also follow the principles of the Relational Applied Research model; I would also like to point to recent developments in ‘QuantCrit’ methods in the field of education research (i.e. quantitative methods approached through Critical Race Theory; Garcia et al., 2018), which may be especially pertinent for considering quantitative research with learners of Indigenous and minoritized languages. Another implication of this research design is that operating transdisciplinarily can expand our research in fruitful ways. Language revitalization practice is well served by breaking down the boundaries between language documentation (associated with descriptive linguists) and language pedagogy (associated with applied linguists; see Penfield and Tucker, 2011), and by breaking down the silos between applied linguistics research and Indigenous language revitalization expertise (McIvor, 2020). In this dissertation, I have drawn on relationships with networks of linguists and language revitalizers and utilized data analysis methods drawn from the qualitative social sciences to address a research topic of interest to applied linguists and educational psychologists. My hope is that this transdisciplinary project demonstrates the rich potential for future work of this sort. 8.4 Conclusion When I asked one revitalization practitioner what she imagines for her community 100 years in the future, she replied that she imagines “it's not going to be even a question of ‘do you speak Xaad Kíl?’ Of course you do! Because all our people speak their languages.” (Michelle, X̱aat Kil, 7/16/20). Language revitalization is not an easy task; it requires significant effort on the part of many individuals, most of whom recognize they will not get to see the results of their work in their lifetimes. It is also, in many ways, an unprecedented task. Throughout modern history we have seen countless examples of the deliberate suppression of languages, but many 408 communities are now working to reclaim and reawaken what was once considered lost. Individuals who learn these languages as second languages face enormous odds with enormous determination. My hope is that this dissertation might, in some small way, help those individuals stay motivated in their journeys, and might contribute in some small way to a future where all people have the chance to speak their languages. 409 APPENDIX A Table of inter-rater test results Dedoose suggests the following rules of thumb for interpreting kappa values: <.50 = poor agreement, .51-.64 = fair agreement, .65-.80 = good agreement, and >.80 = excellent agreement (Dedoose, 2018). In the following table, values that demonstrate “excellent agreement” are in bold. Almost all codes achieved fair to excellent agreement on the first round of inter-rater reliability tests, but anything that fell outside of the ‘excellent’ range (>.80) was re-evaluated and re-tested (see discussion section 2.2.3.4) The codes in this table are organized by the chapter(s) they appear in, for ease of cross- referencing when looking at survey results in the analysis chapters to follow. Chapter for Parent ID Title (child ID) Round 1 Final Kappa reference average Kappa score score 2. Methods Language language = culture 0.54 0.83 ideologies language = 0.615 1.00 identity Focus on regular use 0.5 0.81 language in school 0.61 0.975 domains in the home 0.85 0.895 Linguistic goals speaking and 0.635 0.92 listening Speaker creating new 0.655 0.83 population speakers 4. Goals Emotions and determination, 0.72 0.84 attitudes passion pride, confidence 0.85 0.85 public attitudes NA 0.84 unity, connection 0.72 0.93 Focus on in school 0.61 0.975 language in the home 0.85 0.895 domains Internet and 0.9 0.95 media regular use 0.5 0.81 Focus on documentation 0.73 0.845 language literature -0.0447 0.89 products materials 0.64 0.855 development pedagogy, 0.53 0.87 teaching methods technology 0.63 0.94 47 This figure was a computational error from Dedoose caused by an abortive test attempt by one of the raters. 410 Chapter for Parent ID Title (child ID) Round 1 Final Kappa reference average Kappa score score 4. Goals Language language = culture 0.54 0.83 cont’d ideologies language = 0.615 1.00 identity language = 0.72 0.93 thought Linguistic goals fluency 0.87 0.88 grammar 0.89 0.94 objectives reading 1 0.88 speaking and 0.635 0.92 listening48 writing NA 0.95 Prevention and cultural 0.75 0.93 maintenance preservation and maintenance language 0.6 0.69 preservation and maintenance Speaker49 creating new 0.655 0.83 population speakers number of 0.51 0.93 speakers Well-being [well-being] 0.76 1 5. Interpersonal family 0.725 0.85 Relationships connections focus on elders, 0.715 0.9 ancestors focus on youth, 0.795 0.80 children generations 0.54 0.80 key individuals 0.615 0.84 outside 0.335 0.76 connections 6. Time Temporal future 0.57 0.85 dimension history/the past 0.39 1 specific 0.89 1 dates/events 48 This category was renamed ‘comprehension and production’ after the coding process was complete, in order not to exclude sign languages; see discussion in this chapter section 2.2.3.3.3. 49 For the codes the word ‘speaker’ has been replaced in the rest of this dissertation with the word ‘user’, for the reason stated in the previous footnote. 411 APPENDIX B Sample interview recruitment text This is a brief summary of my research that I provided to the organizers of the NILI LRLS institute. They shared this summary with participants as part of my recruitment and outreach for this project. I provided very similar copy to the organizers of the MLI and Kodrah Kristang for the same purpose. Dissertation research summary Allison Taylor-Adams, June 2020 For my dissertation research, I will be looking at the big question of “What drives language revitalization practitioners?” There are many components to this; for example, how do language revitalization efforts get started in the first place? Why do individual teachers and learners decide to start working on their language? What kinds of things do learners find encouraging, and what kinds of obstacles cause them to become discouraged? And, how do language revitalization practitioners stay motivated in their work? These questions tie into some thinking and research about language learning motivation in general, but no one has really looked at motivation in the context of language revitalization, so I suspect there is a lot to be discovered. In order to start to answer these questions, I am interviewing people who are currently working on language revitalization – that can mean organizers, community leaders, teachers, learners, parents, whoever considers themselves practitioners of language revitalization. The interviews can either be one-on-one or in a small group; for example, if family members or partners or friends would like to be part of the same interview we can arrange that as well. I am also interested in the possibility of having focus groups of language practitioners from different communities sharing together about how they get inspired and how they stay motivated. 412 APPENDIX C. Informed Consent document for interviews Consent for Research Participation Title: “What Motivates Language Revitalization Practitioners?” Researcher(s): Allison Taylor-Adams, University of Oregon Researcher Contact Info: Phone: 202-413-4817 E-mail: ataylora@uoregon.edu You are being asked to participate in a research study. The box below highlights key information about this research for you to consider when making a decision whether or not to participate. Carefully consider this information and the more detailed information provided below the box. Please ask questions about any of the information you do not understand before you decide whether to participate. Key Information for You to Consider • Voluntary Consent. You are being asked to volunteer for a research study. It is up to you whether you choose to participate or not. There will be no penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled if you choose not to participate or discontinue participation. • Purpose. The purpose of this research is to understand the initial and ongoing motivations of practitioners of language revitalization. Specifically, we hope to learn about why language revitalization efforts start, why individuals decide to start working on language revitalization, and what factors help to sustain motivation over time. Practitioners from 3-5 language revitalization contexts will be taking part in this study. • Duration. It is expected that your participation will last 1-2 hours. You may also be invited to participate in a follow-up interview, which will last 1-2 hours. You do not need to agree to a follow-up interview to participate in the first interview. • Procedures and Activities. You will be asked to respond to some interview questions, and to have your responses recorded with an audio recorder, or using an online meeting platform’s built-in audio recording function. You will be sent a copy of some sample questions before the interview so that you may think about your answers. You can decline to answer questions, and you may stop the interview at any time; you can also share related thoughts that those questions bring up. You will then be asked to review a written transcript of your interview before the researcher publishes any research findings. • Risks. There may be risks of stress, emotional distress, inconvenience and possible loss of privacy and confidentiality associated with participating in a research study. The most probable risk is that you may answer a question or provide an opinion that you would not usually be comfortable sharing with other people. • Benefits. There are no known direct benefits to you from participating in this study. However, it is hoped that information gained from this study will help other 413 communities learn about strategies for sustaining motivation, will help to bring together knowledge about language revitalization and knowledge about language learning motivation, and will help us all better understand the complex phenomenon of language revitalization. • Alternatives. Participation is voluntary; the alternative is to not participate. What happens if I agree to participate in this research? Participants in this study will sit down with the researcher, who will ask interview questions and record the responses. The responses will be recorded using an audio recorder (in the case of face- to-face interviews) or using the built-in recording function of the chosen online meeting platform (such as Zoom, if we are meeting remotely).If an online meeting platform is used, participants and the researcher may have their cameras on for face-to-face conversation, but only the audio track of the recording will be used for the research. The researcher will also take notes about the interview. Participants may choose to be interviewed either individually or in small group settings. You may be responding to a recruitment call for a “focus group”, which will consist of 4-6 individuals sitting together in a room having a conversation. If at any time you wish to leave this group, you may; if, instead of speaking in a group, you decide you may be more comfortable with a private conversation, you may let the researcher know this and she will make arrangements for a one-on- one conversation. You may on the other hand be responding to a recruitment call for individual interviews. If so, you have the option of teaming up with another research participant (for example, if you have a close friend or coworker, and would like to talk about these questions together with the researcher). You, the researcher, and any conversation partner(s) will arrange together for a mutually convenient and comfortable time to have your interview. The interview will probably take about one hour. You will receive sample questions beforehand, so that you can consider your responses and consider which questions you might not wish to answer. The questions are not a script; the researcher will use them more as a guide to the conversation, rather than as a checklist. You may decline to answer any question; you may also choose to end the interview at any time. You may also wish to offer ideas or information related to the topics that the researcher does not specifically ask you about; you may offer any additional information at any time. You may also be invited by the researcher to participate in a follow-up interview 6-12 months after your first interview. This interview will also last about 1-2 hours and will follow the same procedure. You do not have to participate in the follow-up interview to participate in the initial interview. After your interview(s), the researcher will type up a transcript of your audio recording. You will receive a copy of this transcript, and you will have two weeks to read over it and make any changes, questions, or redactions that you wish. What happens to the information collected for this research? Information collected for this research will be used to write research papers that will be presented at academic conferences and published in academic journals. If you wish to receive attribution for the thoughts you contribute to this study, you may consent to have your name used in these research products; otherwise, your contribution will remain anonymous in publications. 414 Your anonymized data will also be shared with other researchers at the University of Oregon in the early stages of analyzing the data, so that they may assist the PI in conducting good analysis. (Note that no one other than the PI of this study will know the identity of the sources of this data.) The information you provide in your interview may be helpful for future research, conducted either by this researcher (Taylor-Adams) or by others. As part of this Informed Consent document, you will be able to select from several options about how your information can be used outside of this particular study. How will my privacy and data confidentiality be protected? We will take measures to protect your privacy including conducting interviews in private, quiet locations. Despite taking steps to protect your privacy, we can never fully guarantee your privacy will be protected. We will take measures to protect the security of all your personal information including keeping audio recordings and typed transcripts in secure, password-protected computer storage; and giving all participants a numbered code so that their information remains confidential. Despite these precautions to protect the confidentiality of your information, we can never fully guarantee confidentiality of all study information. The most obvious risk to privacy and confidentiality would be if you participate in an interview with other individuals. In those cases your identity and the information you provide will be known to the other participants in that interview setting. If you do not feel comfortable sharing information in a group conversation, you may arrange with the researcher to have a confidential, individual interview (or you may decline to participate at all). The researcher on this study is a PhD student; therefore it is possible that her faculty advisors may request and may be permitted access to the research records for this project. This may include access to your private information, audio recordings, and transcripts. What if I want to stop participating in this research? Taking part in this research study is your decision. Your participation in this study is voluntary. You do not have to take part in this study, but if you do, you can stop at any time. You have the right to choose not to participate in any study activity or completely withdraw from continued participation at any point in this study without penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. Your decision whether or not to participate will not affect your relationship with the researchers or the University of Oregon. Will I be paid for participating in this research? You will not be paid for taking part in this research. Who can answer my questions about this research? If you have questions, concerns, or have experienced a research related injury, contact the research team at: Allison Taylor-Adams 202-413-4817 (cell phone) 415 ataylora@uoregon.edu An Institutional Review Board (“IRB”) is overseeing this research. An IRB is a group of people who perform independent review of research studies to ensure the rights and welfare of participants are protected. UO Research Compliance Services is the office that supports the IRB. If you have questions about your rights or wish to speak with someone other than the research team, you may contact: Research Compliance Services 5237 University of Oregon Eugene, OR 97403-5237 (541) 346-2510 STATEMENT OF CONSENT I have had the opportunity to read and consider the information in this form. I have asked any questions necessary to make a decision about my participation. I understand that I can ask additional questions throughout my participation. I understand that by signing below, I volunteer to participate in this research. I understand that I am not waiving any legal rights. I have been provided with a copy of this consent form. I understand that if my ability to consent or assent for myself changes, either I or my legal representative may be asked to re-consent prior to my continued participation in this study. As described above, you will be audio-recorded during the research activities described above. Recordings will be used for data analysis. Additionally, with your permission, segments of the audio recording may be used by the researcher for conference presentations and for educational purposes. • Initial the space below if you consent to the use of audio recordings as described. ____ I agree to the use of audio recording for data analysis. ____ I agree to the use of audio recordings for conference presentations/educational purposes. With your permission, your name and information about your language revitalization practice will be used in published work, such as conference presentations and published reports about this study. • Initial in the space below if you consent to the use of your name as described. ____ I agree to the use of my name and information about my language and my work With your permission, the audio recordings and/or transcripts of your interview may be used for further research projects, either by this researcher or by others. If you do NOT with for your information to be used outside of this study, the information will be archived and restricted to all 416 future access. If you give permission for future use, the researcher will grant access on a limited basis according to your preference. • Initial in the space below if you consent to the use of your information for research outside of this study. ___ I agree to the use of my information for future research conducted by this researcher (Allison Taylor-Adams). ___ I agree to the use of my information for future research by researchers other than Taylor-Adams, but ONLY if I give written consent to the researcher beforehand. ___ I agree to the use of my information for future research by researchers other than Taylor-Adams, but ONLY if she (Taylor-Adams) gives written consent to the researcher beforehand. ___ I agree to all uses of my information for future research, conducted either by this researcher or by others. I consent to participate in this study. Name of Adult Participant Signature of Adult Participant Date Researcher Signature (to be completed at time of informed consent) I have explained the research to the participant and answered all of his/her questions. I believe that he/she understands the information described in this consent form and freely consents to participate. Name of Research Team Member Signature of Research Team Member Date 417 APPENDIX D Interview guide text sent to participants in first round of interviews Some sample questions for semi-structured interview • Affect o Do you think language learning is fun? o Do you ever get frustrated learning your language? o Can you think of a high point in your language learning (e.g. you figured out a difficult word, or you were able to have a conversation with someone, etc.)? How did you feel when that happened? • Choice o Why did you decide to participate in revitalizing your language? o How did you decide what kind of activity to participate in? o Did anybody inspire you to start language learning/teaching? o Can you remember what it was like when you first got started? • Persistence o How long have you been working on language? • Effort o How much time do you spend on language? o How hard do you work on it? o Do you work on your language even when you’re not in class (or whatever)? o Can you think of things that make language learning really hard for you? o Do you ever feel discouraged? What makes you feel that way? o Can you think of things that make language revitalization hard for your community in general? o How do you stay motivated when things get hard? o Has anyone ever helped you stay motivated or get remotivated when you were discouraged? (e.g. a teacher, a parent) o Have you every helped anyone else stay motivated? • Future ideal self o What do you imagine for yourself as a language learner 5, 10 years from now? o What do you imagine for your language 5, 10 years from now? What about 100? • Other types of motivation o Do you think that revitalizing your language has any practical benefits? (e.g. getting a job) o Do you think people outside your community think your language is important? o Do you think your language is harder or easier to learn than other languages? o Have you ever studied other languages? Did you enjoy it? Were you good at it? • Questions for future research directions o Imagine you met a person who wants to know all about learning languages but knows there is a lot left to learn. What is one thing you’d like to tell her? o Imagine you could meet a person who knows everything there is to know about learning languages. What would you ask her? 418 APPENDIX E An example follow-up interview guide Interview with Chris B - Guide for follow-up conversation | May 27, 2021 Reflecting • General thoughts – what has this year been like for you with your language? • Did you have any accomplishments this past year? Did you meet any goals or have any particular successes? • Are there any goals you had set for yourself (either vaguely or specifically) that you weren’t able to accomplish this past year? • What are some ways you’ve been able to connect to other language learners or other people doing language revitalization work over this year? • Who else have you been able to connect with over the course of this year that has effected your language work? • Have you been able to have any in-person conversations? • Have you had any opportunities for remote conversations that were remarkable? Following up first interview • Have you been teaching more? How has that been going? How do you feel about your teaching? • Have you been studying Ichishkíin as well? • You had mentioned wanting to know good strategies for motivating students to practice. Have you come up with any good strategies yourself recently? • I have noticed a lot of folks I talked to play a lot of different kinds of roles – like very few people are only language learners. In your work, can you tell when you’re switching the hat you’re wearing at the time? • Can you talk about the effect of different roles on your progress in another? (I’m thinking for example of, if you’ve had a particularly good teaching day, or a particularly stressful working day, how does that impact your language learning? And vice versa) • I noticed that you mentioned specific struggles with pronunciation and sounds in your language (this was a common theme in the interviews!) Could you tell me about a sound that is particularly difficult that you feel like you are pretty good at? How did you get good at it? And are there any sounds that you’re still working on? Looking forward • What are your plans for the summer? • What are your plans for the rest of the year? • What do you imagine for language work as we “return to normal”? • Imagine you’re looking back on this year five or ten years from now. What can you imagine thinking about your language work during this time? 419 REFERENCES CITED Abd-el-Jawad, H. R. (2006). Why do minority languages persist? The case of Circassian in Jordan. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(1), 51–74. Al-Hoorie, A. H. (2018). The L2 Motivational Self System: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8(4), 721–754. Apramian, T., Cristancho, S., Watling, C., & Lingard, L. (2017). (Re)Grounding grounded theory: A close reading of theory in four schools. Qualitative Research, 17(4), 359–376. Atkins, M. (2012). Strategies for an indigenous self-apprenticeship language learning program [Unpublished MA Terminal Project]. Atkinson, D. (Ed.). (2011a). Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition. Routledge. Atkinson, D. (2011b). Introduction: Cognitivism and second language acquisition. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition (pp. 1–23). Routledge. Atkinson, P., & Silverman, D. (1997). Kundera’s Immortality: The interview society and the invention of the self. Qualitative Inquiry, 3(3), 304–325. baird, jessie little doe. (2016). Wopanaak language reclamation program: Bringing the language home. Journal of Global Indigeneity, 2(2). https://ro.uow.edu.au/jgi/vol2/iss2/7 Baker, C., Andrews, H., Gruffydd, I., & Lewis, G. (2011). Adult language learning: A survey of Welsh for adults in the context of language planning. Evaluation and Research in Education, 24(1), 41–59. Baldwin, D., Baldwin, K., Baldwin, J., & Baldwin, J. (2013). myaamiaataweenki oowaaha: “Miami spoken here.” In L. Hinton (Ed.), Bringing Our Languages Home: Language Revitalization in Families (pp. 3–18). Heyday Books. Baldwin, D., Hinton, L., & Peréz Báez, G. (2018). The National Breath of Life workshops and institutes. In L. Hinton, L. Huss, & G. Roche (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language revitalization (pp. 188–196). Taylor & Francis Group. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Duke University Press. Belew, A., & Simpson, S. (2018). The status of the world’s endangered languages. In K. L. Rehg & L. Campbell (Eds.), Oxford handbook of endangered languages (pp. 21–47). Oxford University Press. Bickford, J. A., & McKay-Cody, M. (2018). Endangerment and Revitalization of Sign Languages. In L. Hinton, L. Huss, & G. Roche (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Language Revitalization (pp. 255–264). Routledge. Bischoff, S. T., & Jany, C. (Eds.). (n.d.). Insights from Practices in Community-Based Research: From Theory to Practice around the Globe. 420 Block, D. (2003). The social turn in second language acquisition. Georgetown University Press. Bluck, S., & Alea, N. (2009). Thinking and talking about the past: Why remember? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1089–1104. Bommelyn, P. (2011). Dee-ni’ Mee-ne’ Wee-ya’ Lhetlh-xat: Dee-ni’ Home Language Class [Unpublished MA Terminal Project]. Boo, Z., Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S. (2015). L2 motivation research 2005-2014: Understanding a publication surge and a changing landscape. System, 55, 145–157. Bousquette, J., & Putnam, M. T. (2020). Redefining Language Death: Evidence from Moribund Grammars. Language Learning, 70(S1), 188–225. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. Sage. Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (5th ed.). Pearson Education. Brown, S., & Larson-Hall, J. (2012). Second Language Acquisition Myths. University of Michigan Press. Buss, L. (2016). Beliefs and practices of Brazilian EFL teachers regarding pronunciation. Language Teaching Research, 20(5), 619–637. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. SAGE Publications, Ltd. Chen, J. F., Warden, C. A., & Chang, H.-T. (2005). Motivators That Do Not Motivate: The Case of Chinese EFL Learners and the Influence of Culture on Motivation. TESOL Quarterly, 39(4), 609–633. Cheng, H.-F., & Dörnyei, Z. (2007). The Use of Motivational Strategies in Language Instruction: The Case of EFL Teaching in Taiwan. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 153–174. Chew, K. A. B. (2021). #KeepOurLanguagesStrong: Indigenous Language Revitalization on Social Media during the Early COVID-19 Pandemic. Language Documentation and Conservation, 15, 239–266. Chrisp, S. (2005). Maori intergenerational language transmission. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 172, 149–181. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46. Comanaru, R., & Noels, K. A. (2009). Self-Determination, Motivation, and the Learning of Chinese as a Heritage Language. Canadian Modern Language Review, 66(1), 131–158. Crippen, J. A., & Robinson, L. C. (2013). In Defense of the Lone Wolf: Collaboration in Language Documentation. Language Documentation and Conservation, 7, 123–135. 421 Croft, W. (2001). Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford University Press. Crystal, D. (2000). Language Death. Cambridge University Press. Czaykowska-Higgins, E., Daniels, X. D., Kulchysi, T., Paul, A., Thom, B., Twance, S. M., & Urbanczyk, S. C. (2018). Consultation, relationship and results in community-based language research. In S. T. Bischoff & C. Jany (Eds.), Insights from Practices in Community-Based Research (pp. 66–93). Mouton de Gruyter. Dauenhauer, N., & Dauenhauer, R. (1998). Technical, emotional, and ideological issues in Reversing Language Shiftː Examples from Southeast Alaska. In L. A. Grenoble & L. J. Whaley (Eds.), Endangered languagesː Current issues and future prospects (pp. 57–98). Cambridge University Press. Davis, J. L. (2017). Resisting rhetorics of language endangerment: Reclamation through Indigenous language survivance. Language Documentation and Description, 14, 37–58. de Bot, K. (2015). Rates of Change: Timescales in Second Language Development. In Z. Dornyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational Dynamics in Language Learning (pp. 29–37). Multilingual Matters. de Bot, K., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2011). Research Second Language Development from a Dynamic Systems Theory perspective. In M. Verspoor, K. de Bot, & W. Lowie (Eds.), A Dynamic Approach to Second Language Development (Vol. 29, pp. 5–23). John Benjamins Publishing Company. de Meulder, M. (2019). “So, why do you sign?” Deaf and hearing new signers, their motivation, and revitalisation policies for sign languages. Applied Linguistics Review, 10(4), 705–724. de Volder, M. L., & Lens, W. (1982). Academic achievement and future time perspective as a cognitive-motivational concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 566– 571. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press. Dedoose: Web application for managing, analyzing, and presenting qualitative and mixed methods research data (8.0.35). (2018). [Computer software]. SocioCultural Research Consultants, LLC. www.dedoose.com DePalma, R. (2015). Learning a Minoritized Language in a Majority Language Context: Student Agency and the creation of micro-immersion contexts. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(4), 426–442. Dorian, N. C. (1994). Purism vs. Compromise in Language Revitalization and Language Revival. Language in Society, 23(4), 479–494. Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and Researching Motivation (1st ed.). Pearson Longman. Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 422 Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 Motivational Self System. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity, and the L2 self (pp. 9–42). Multilingual Matters. Dörnyei, Z., & Al-Hoorie, A. H. (2017). The motivational foundation of learning languages other than Global English: Theoretical issues and research directions. The Modern Language Journal, 101(3), 455–468. Dörnyei, Z., & Csizér, K. (1998). Ten commandments for motivating language learners: Results of an empirical study. Language Teaching Research, 2(3), 203–229. Dörnyei, Z., Csizer, K., & Nemeth, N. (2006). Motivation, Language Attitudes and Globalisation: A Hungarian Perspective. Multilingual Matters. Dörnyei, Z., MacIntyre, P. D., & Henry, A. (2015a). Introduction: Applying Complex Dynamic Systems Principles to Empirical Research on L2 Motivation. In Z. Dornyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational Dynamics in Language Learning (pp. 1–7). Multilingual Matters. Dörnyei, Z., MacIntyre, P. D., & Henry, A. (Eds.). (2015b). Motivational Dynamics in Language Learning. Multilingual Matters. Dörnyei, Z., & Taguchi, T. (2009). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. Routledge. Douglas Fir Group. (2016). A Transdisciplinary Framework for SLA in a Multilingual World. Modern Language Journal, 100(Supplement 2016), 19–47. Duff, P. A. (2007). Second language socialization as sociocultural theory: Insights and issues. Language Teaching, 40, 309–319. Duranti, A. (2007). Transcripts, like shadows on a wall. Mind, Culture and Activity, 13(4), 301– 310. Dyers, C. (2008). Language shift or maintenance? Factors determining the use of Afrikaans among some township youth in South Africa. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics, 38, 49–72. Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., & Meece, J. L. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives. Freeman. Falout, J. (2016). Past Selves: Emerging Motivational Guides across Temporal Contexts. In J. King (Ed.), The Dynamic Interplay between Context and the Language Learner (pp. 47– 65). Palgrave Macmillan. Fishman, J. A. (1991). Reversing language shift: Theoretical and empirical foundations of assistance to threatened languages. Multilingual Matters. Fong, C. J., Alejandro, A. J., Krou, M. R., Segovia, J., & Johnston-Ashton, K. (2019). Ya’at’eeh: Race-reimaged belongingness factors, academic outcomes, and goal pursuits among Indigenous community college students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 59, 1–15. Garcia, N. M., López, N., & Vélez, V. N. (2018). QuantCrit: Rectifying quantitative methods through critical race theory. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21(2), 149–157. 423 Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning. Gardner, R. C. (2001). Integrative motivation and second language acquisition. In Z. Dörnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and Second Language Acquisition (pp. 1–20). University of Hawai’i Press. Gardner, R. C. (2007). Motivation and second language acquisition. Porta Linguarum, 8, 9–20. Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1959). Motivational variables in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13, 266–272. Gerdts, D. B. (2010). Beyond expertise: The role of the linguist in language revitalization programs. In Language Documentation: Practice and values. John Benjamins North America. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine Transaction. Gray, D. L., Hope, E. C., & Matthews, J. S. (2018). Black and Belonging at School: A Case for Interpersonal, Instructional, and Institutional Opportunity Structures. Educational Psychologist, 53(2), 97–113. Grenoble, L. A., & Furbee, N. L. (Eds.). (2010). Language Documentation: Practice and values. John Benjamins North America. Grosjean, F. (2012). Bilingualism: A Short Introduction. In F. Grosjean & P. Li (Eds.), The Psycholinguistics of Bilingualism (pp. 5–25). John Wiley & Sons. Gruenewald, D. A. (2008). Foundations of Place: A Multidisciplinary Framework for Place- Conscious Education. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 619–654. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312040003619 Gu, P. Y. (2016). Questionnaires in language teaching research. Language Teaching Research, 20(5), 567–570. Hall, J. N. (2021). Indigenous Methodologies in Linguistics: A Case Study of Nuu-wee-ya’ Language Revitalization [PhD Dissertation]. University of Oregon. Hammarström, H., Forkel, R., & Haspelmath, M. (2022). Glottolog 4.6. Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. https://glottolog.org/ Harasta, J. (2017). “Because They Are Cornish”: Four Uses of a Useless Language. Heritage Language Journal, 14(3), 248–263. Henry, A. (2015). The Dynamics of Possible Selves. In Z. Dornyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational Dynamics in Language Learning (pp. 83–94). Multilingual Matters. Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340. Higgins, E. T. (1996). The “self-digest”: Self-knowledge serving self-regulatory functions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(6), 1062–1083. 424 Hill, J. H. (2002). “Expert Rhetorics” in Advocacy for Endangered Languages: Who is Listening, and What Do They Hear? Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 12(2), 119–133. Hinton, L. (2003). Language Revitalization. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 23, 44–57. Hinton, L. (2011). Language revitalization and language pedagogy: New teaching and learning strategies. Language and Education, 25(4), 307–318. Hinton, L., & Hale, K. (Eds.). (2001). The Green Book of Language Revitalization in Practice. Academic Press. Hinton, L., Huss, L., & Roche, G. (2018). Issues of Theory and Practice. In The Routledge Handbook of Language Revitalization (pp. xxi–xxx). Routledge. Hinton, L., Vera, M., Steele, N., & Advocates for Indigenous California Language Survival. (2002). How to keep your language alive: A common-sense approach to language learning and teaching. Heyday Books. Holliday, A. (2006). Native-speakerism. ELT Journal, 60(4), 385–387. Husman, J., & Lens, W. (1999). The Role of the Future in Student Motivation. Educational Psychologist, 34(2), 113–125. Jansen, J., & Beavert, V. (2010). Combining the goals of language documentation and language teachingː A Yakima Sahaptin case study. In S. Rivera-Mills & J. A. Trujillo (Eds.), Building communities and making connections (pp. 62–80). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Jansen, J., Underriner, J., & Jacob, R. (2013). Revitalizing languages through place-based language curriculum: Identity Through Learning. In Responses to language endangerment: In honor of Mickey Noonan. John Benjamins North America. Kaplan, A. (1993). French lessons: A memoir. University of Chicago Press. Kauffman, D. F., & Husman, J. (2004). Effects of Time Perspective on Student Motivation: Introduction to a Special Issue. Educational Psychology Review, 16(1), 1–9. Kendall, T. (2009). Speech Rate, Pause, and Linguistic Variation: An Examination through the Sociolinguistic Archive and Analysis Project [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. King, K. A. (2001). Language revitalization processes and prospects. Multilingual Matters. Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second langauge acquisition. Pergamon Press. Krauss, M. (1992). The world’s languages in crisis. Language, 68, 4–10. Lantolf, J. P., & Pavlenko, A. (1995). Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15. Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. Oxford University Press. Lapadat, J., & Lindsay, A. C. (1999). Transcription in research and practice: From standardization of technique to interpretive positionings. Qualitative Inquiry, 5(1), 64–86. 425 Larsen-Freeman, D. (2008). On the need for a new understanding of language and its development. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3, 281–304. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2015). Ten “Lessons” from Complex Dynamic Systems Theory: What is on Offer. In Z. Dornyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational Dynamics in Language Learning (pp. 11–19). Multilingual Matters. Lasagabaster, D. (2017). Language learning motivation and language attitudes in multilingual Spain from an international perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 101(3), 583–596. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press. Lee, J. F., & Van Patten, B. (2003). Making Communicative Language Teaching Happen (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill. Leonard, W. Y. (2008). When is an “Extinct Language” Not Extinct? In K. A. King, N. Schilling-Estes, L. W. Fogle, J. J. Lou, & B. Soukup (Eds.), Sustaining Linguistic Diversity: Endangered and Minority Languages and Language Varieties (pp. 23–33). Georgetown University Press. Leonard, W. Y. (2017). Producing language reclamation by decolonising “language.” Language Documentation and Description, 14, 15–36. Lichtman, M. (2013). Qualitative research in education: A user’s guide (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications, Ltd. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications, Ltd. Linn, M. (2021, March 6). Sustaining Minoritized Languages of Europe (SMiLE) II: Impact from case studies in community responses to revitalization. International Conference on Language Documentation and Conservation, University of Hawaii at Manoa. https://youtu.be/6pD2xR0Fpbk Lyngsnes, K. M. (2013). “I really want to save our language”: Facing the challenge of revitalising and maintaining Southern Sami language through schooling. International Education Studies, 6(3), 228–239. MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., & Sparling, H. (2017). Heritage Passions, Heritage Convictions, and the Rooted L2 self: Music and Gaelic language learning in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia. The Modern Language Journal, 101(3), 501–516. Mann, S. (2002). The development of discourse in a discourse of development [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Mann, S. (2011). A critical review of qualitative interviews in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 32(1), 6–24. Markus, H. R., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954–969. Marton, E., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2022). L2 Motivation among Hearing Learners of Finnish Sign Language. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(3), 984–996. 426 Masgoret, A.-M., & Gardner, R. C. (2003). Attitudes, Motivation, and Second Language Learning: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by Garnder and associates. Language Learning, 53(1), 123–163. Mayan, M. J. (2009). Chapter 7: Rigor. In Essentials of Qualitative Inquiry (pp. 100–113). Taylor & Francis Group. McEown, M. S., Noels, K. A., & Chaffee, K. E. (2014). At the Interface of the Socio-educational Model, Self-Determination Theory and the L2 Motivational Self System Model. In K. Csizér & M. Magid (Eds.), The Impact of Self-Concept on Language Learning (pp. 14–42). Multilingual Matters. McIvor, O. (2020). Indigenous Language Revitalization and Applied Linguistics: Parallel Histories, Shared Futures? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 40, 78–96. McLachlan, S., Keatley, D., Stiff, C., & Hagger, M. S. (2009). Shame: A Self-Determination Theory Perspective. Psychology of Neuroticism and Shame, 1–14. Mendoza, A., & Phung, H. (2019). Motivation to learn languages other than English: A critical research synthesis. Foreign Language Annals, 52, 122–140. Mercer, S. (2015). Dynamics of the Self: A Multilevel Nested Systems Approach. In Z. Dornyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational Dynamics in Language Learning (pp. 139–163). Multilingual Matters. Mercer, S. (2016). The Contexts within Me: L2 Self as a Complex Dynamic System. In J. King (Ed.), The Dynamic Interplay between Context and the Language Learner (pp. 11–28). Palgrave Macmillan. Mishler, E. G. (1991). Representing Discourse: The Rhethoric of Transcription. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 1(4), 255–280. Moore, C., & Lemmon, K. (2001). The Nature and Utility of the Temporally Extended Self. In C. Moore & K. Lemmon (Eds.), The Self in Time: Developmental Perspectives (pp. 1–14). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Morse, J. M. (1997). “Perfectly Healthy, but Dead”: The Myth of Inter-rater Reliability. Qualitative Health Research, 7(4), 445–447. Morse, J. M. (2015). Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25(9), 1212–122. Mufwene, S. S. (2017). Language vitality: The weak theoretical underpinnings of what can be an exciting research area. Language, 93(4), e202–e233. Nathan, D., & Fang, M. (2013). Re-imagining documentary linguistics as a revitalization-driven practice. In Keeping Languages Alive: Documentation, pedagogy, and revitalization (pp. 42–55). Cambridge University Press. Newland, B. (2022). Federal Indian Boarding School Initiative Investigative Report. United States Department of the Interior. 427 Newman, M., Trenchs-Parera, M., & Ng, S. (2008). Normalizing bilingualism: The effects of the Catalonian linguistic normalization policy one generation after. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 12, 306–333. Nishida, R. (2013). The L2 ideal self, intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, international posture, willingness to communicate and can-do among Japanese university learners of English. Language Education & Technology, 50, 47–63. Noels, K. A. (2009). The Internalisation of Language Learning into the Self and Social Identity. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity, and the L2 self (pp. 295– 313). Multilingual Matters. Noels, K. A., Lou, N. M., Vargas Lascano, D. I., Chaffee, K. E., Dincer, A., Zhang, Y. S. D., & Zhang, X. (2019). Self-determination and Motivated Engagement in Language Learning. In M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry, & S. Ryan (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Motivation for Language Learning (pp. 95–115). Palgrave Macmillan. Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning. Pearson Education. Norton, B. (2016). Identity and Language Learning: Back to the Future. TESOL Quarterly, 50(2), 475–479. Norton, B., & McKinney, C. (2011). An Identity Approach to Second Language Acquisition. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition (pp. 73–94). Routledge. Norton Pierce, B. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 9–31. Nuttin, J. R. (1964). The future time perspective in human motivation and learning. Acta Psychologica, 23, 60–82. Ó hAdhmaill, F. (1985). A survey on the Irish language in West Belfast. Glór na nGael. Ochs, E. (1979). Transcription as theory. In E. Ochs & B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Developmental Pragmatics (pp. 43–72). Academic Press. O’Rourke, & Ramallo. (2015). Neofalantes as an active minority: Understanding language practices and motivations for change amongst new speakers of Galician. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 231, 147–165. Ortega, L. (2009). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Routledge. Pawlak, M., Mystkowska-Wiertelak, A., & Bielak, J. (2016). Investigating the nature of classroom willingness to communicate (WTC): A micro-perspective. Language Teaching Research, 20(5), 654–671. Peetsma, T. (2000). Future time perspective as a predictor of school investment. 44, 177–192. Penfield, S. D., & Tucker, B. (2011). From documenting to revitalizing an endangered language: Where do applied linguists fit? Language and Education, 25(4), 291–305. 428 Peréz Báez, G. (2018). Slowly, slowly said the jaguar: Collaborations as a goal of linguistic field research over time. In S. T. Bischoff & C. Jany (Eds.), Insights from Practices in Community-Based Research: From Theory to Practice around the Globe (pp. 112–131). Mouton de Gruyter. Peréz Báez, G., Vogel, R., & Koller, E. O. (2018). Comparative Analysis in Language Revitalization Practices. In Oxford Handbook of Endangered Languages (pp. 466–489). Oxford University Press. Peréz Báez, G., Vogel, R., & Patolo, U. (2019). Global Survey of Revitalization Efforts: A mixed methods approach to understanding language revitalization practices. Language Documentation and Conservation, 13, 446–513. Petit, K. (2016). Successful learners of Irish as an L2: Motivation, identity and linguistic Mudes. Studia Celtica Posnaniensia, 1(1), 39–56. Phalet, K., Andriessen, I., & Lens, W. (2004). How Future Goals Enhance Motivation and Learning in Multicultural Classrooms. Educational Psychology Review, 16(1), 59–89. Piantanida, M., & Garman, N. B. (2009). The Qualitative Dissertation (2nd ed.). Corwin: A SAGE company. Pujolar, & Puigdevall. (2015). Linguistic mudes: How to become a new speaker in Catalonia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 231, 167–187. Rice, K. (2018). Collaborative research: Visions and realities. In S. T. Bischoff & C. Jany (Eds.), Insights from Practices in Community-Based Research (pp. 13–37). Mouton de Gruyter. Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Communicative Language Teaching. In Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nd ed., pp. 153–177). Cambridge University Press. Richards, K. (2009). Trends in qualitative research in language teaching since 2000. Language Teaching, 42, 147–180. Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749–761. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67. Schacter, D. L., Addis, D. R., & Buckner, R. L. (2007). Remembering the past to imagine the future: The prospective brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8(9), 657–661. Schrauf, R. W. (2018). Mixed methods designs for making cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 12(4), 477–494. Schuitema, J., Peetsma, T., & Van der Veen, I. (2014). Enhancing Student Motivation: A longitudinal intervention study based on Future Time Perspective Theory. The Journal of Educational Research, 107, 467–481. Silverman, D. (2017). How was it for you? The Interview Society and the irresistible rise of the (poorly analyzed) interview. Qualitative Research, 17(2), 144–158. 429 Simpson, L. B. (2017). As We Have Always Done: Indigenous Freedom through Radical Resistance. University of Minnesota Press. Smith, G. A. (2002). Place-Based Education: Learning to Be Where We Are. The Phi Delta Kappan, 83(8), 584–594. Strahan, E. J., & Wilson, A. E. (2006). Temporal Comparisons, Identity, and Motivation: The Relation between Past, Present, and Possible Future Selves. In C. Dunkel & J. Kerpelman (Eds.), Possible Selves: Theory, Research and Applications (pp. 1–15). Nova Science Publishers. Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning (pp. 97–114). Oxford University Press. Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning. Erlbaum. Taff, A., Hall, M. Y. dulitseen, Martin, K. N., Hall, J. N., Chee, M., & Johnston, A. (2018). Indigenous Langauge Use Impacts Wellness. In K. Rehg & L. Campbell (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Endangered Languages (pp. 862–884). Oxford University Press. Takahashi, C., & Im, S. (2020). Comparing self-determination theory and the L2 motivational self system and their relationships to L2 proficiency. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 10(4), 673–696. Talmy, S. (2010). Qualitative interviews in applied linguistics: From research instrument to social practice. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30, 128–148. Taylor-Adams, A. (2019). Recording to Revitalize: Language Teachers and Documentation Design. Language Documentation and Conservation, 13, 426–445. Te Huia, A. (2015). Exploring goals and motivations of Maori heritage language learners. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 5(4), 609–635. Te Huia, A. (2017). Exploring the role of identity in Maori heritage language learner motivations. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 16(5), 299–312. Teimouri, Y. (2017). L2 selves, emotions, and motivated beahviors. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39(4), 681–709. Thieberger, N. (1995). Paper and talk: A manual for reconstituting materials in Australian Indigenous languages from historical sources. Aboriginal Studies Press. University of Hawaii at Manoa. (2018). Cataloge of Endangered Languages. Catalogue of Endangered Languages. http://www.endangeredlanguages.com Ushioda, E. (2009). A Person-in-Context Relational View of Emergent Motivation, Self and Identity. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity, and the L2 self (pp. 215–228). Multilingual Matters. Ushioda, E. (2011). Why autonomy? Insights from motivation theory and research. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5(2), 221–232. 430 Ushioda, E. (2020). Language Learning Motivation: An Ethical Agenda for Research. Oxford University Press. Valdes, G. (2005). Bilingualism, Heritage Language Learners, and SLA Research: Opportunities Lost or Seized? The Modern Language Journal, 89(iii), 410–426. van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learningː A sociocultural perspective. Kluwer. Viles, C. (2013). Dɑɑ-nɑɑ~-yɑsh/Hədiw’ [Unpublished Honors Thesis]. Watson, R. D. (1995). The philosopher’s demise: Learning French. University of Missouri Press. Wei, L. (2000). Dimensions of bilingualism. In L. Wei (Ed.), The Bilingualism Reader (pp. 3– 25). Routledge. Whalen, D. H., Moss, M., & Baldwin, D. (2016). Healing through language: Positive physical effects of indigenous language use. F1000Research, 5(852), 852. Wilson, S. (2008). Research Is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods. Fernwood Publishing. Wong, K. M. (2019). Kodrah Kristang: The initiative to revitalize the Kristang language in Singapore. Language Documentation and Conservation, Special Publication(19), 35–121. Wooffitt, R., & Widdicombe, S. (2006). Interaction in interviews. In P. Drew, G. Raymond, & D. Weinberg (Eds.), Talk and interaction in social research methods (pp. 28–49). Sage. Wright, M., & McGrory, O. (2005). Motivation and the adult Irish language learner. Educational Research, 47(2), 191–204. Yamada, R.-M. (2011). Integrating Documentation and Formal Teaching of Kari’nja: Documentary Materials as Pedagogical Materials. Language Documentation and Conservation, 5, 1–30. Zahir, Z. (2018). Language Nesting in the Home. In L. Hinton, L. Huss, & G. Roche (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Language Revitalization (pp. 156–165). Routledge. 431