The Summer Institute of Linguistics: Its Works and Contributions 9783110806175, 9789027933553

Citation preview

The Summer Institute of Linguistics

The Summerlnstitute of Linguistics Its Works and Contributions

edited by

Ruth M. Brend • Kenneth L. Pike

Mouton • The Hague • Paris

ISBN 90 279 33553

© Copyright 1977 Mouton & Co. B.V., Publishers, The Hague No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publishers. Printed in The Netherlands

PREFACE

For some time there have been requests for a report on the Summer Institute of Linguistics, Inc. which would give an introduction to its origins, current scope, and future outlook. In the history of the world, as we see it, there has never been an institute which attempted so much in its drive to reach preliterate languages, study their structures, provide them alphabets in cooperation with the interested local governments and their educational institutions, and leave them some small amount of written material. I myself was a student in the Institute in the summer of 1935, the second year of its existence. Even then its founder, W. Cameron Townsend, was talking of working in five hundred languages, and publishing scientific material concerning them. Today the Institute is at work in more than that number of languages, but with the expanding knowledge of the number of languages which could profit by such work, its goals have expanded to two thousand languages - or more - still to be studied. The early goal of a generation ago is now in sight, even while the current goal is much greater than the original one. Eunice Pike, who has been with the Institute since 1936, provides a brief historical summary of the development of the Institute. Wares, corporation bibliographer, discusses the general technical bibliographical output. Gudschinsky, 1 author of books on literacy and primer formation for such cultures, describes the achievements in this area. The training of over two thousand members of the Institute in linguistic technology is no mean task; the way it has been handled is mentioned by Robbins, in charge of our academic training centers, and by Kietzman, as far as field training for nationals is concerned. Special summaries of linguistic involvement are given by Rensch (who is also currently responsible for arranging field seminars to provide consultation for our linguistic teams); of translation theory by Moore, who works closely with Beekman (chief consultant for our Bible translation activity, which accompanies our other study) and anthropological studies by Merrifield and Dye (consultants for our cultural research). Elson (Secretary) indicates directions for which further development is postulated. Many government officials in countries where there are small minority indigenous language groups are concerned for these peoples in two ways. On

vi the one hand, it seems clear to these officials that a nation needs the support of all its citizens, and that it is difficult to get this coherence unless they all share the ability to speak some national language. Therefore they are desirous of seeing the aboriginal groups trained in the national language. On the other hand, they realize that for strong citizenship an individual needs self-respect, dignity of culture, and integration with his local community. These characteristics are often obtained directly through the local culture and language, which in addition serves as a bridge to the national culture and national dignity. Here, then, where national interest and personal development coincide, the Institute has tried to cooperate through its scientific program. There are, of course, people who do not understand this view, and would opt to leave all groups alone, under the supposition that they would then be unchanged, and happy. Here, it seems to us, they fail to see the realities of cultural dynamics and of current population pressure. Some fifteen years ago Aberle (1959) pointed out that 'If there is any one point that emerges from American diffusion studies, it is the length of the chains for the transmission of information under purely "native" conditions' (76), and that 'mediate contact' (e.g. information about Europeans before contact with them) 'may result in wholesale transformations of the social order long before direct contact occurs' (78). 2 For this reason, it seems to me that change cannot be prevented. No cultural isolation can be achieved, even if it were considered desirable. Change is inevitable, and is being greatly accelerated by the pressure of populations expanding into lightly populated areas, as well as by strong economic expansion. Isolationalism and the status quo is not an option. For us, however, there is an option: To try to soften the shock of contact by giving to the indigenous groups tools which in turn leave them a greater set of options. By helping them to write and read, to be able to accept the academic tools available from their national culture for learning to cope with the larger problems of involvement with that culture, one step is taken. By helping them to become articulate in print, expressing themselves in writing on topics of their own choice, their innate capacities for artistic and cultural initiative are developed. Along with this may grow those qualities of the inner spirit which can help them survive the impact of a world changing so fast that it may otherwise upset their cultural stability. To this, also we would like to contribute. We realize, of course, that mere book learning is not enough. Physical, medical, economic and spiritual problems abound for us all — but how much more for the preliterate groups. Governments, through agricultural projects, medical programs, and community development projects are in many instances pushing ahead vigorously to meet many of these problems. In some

vii instances we have been privileged to help them, in a small way, as they tackle this immense task, so vital to the interests of many. KENNETH L. PIKE, President, Summer Institute of Linguistics, Inc. and The Charles C. Fries Professor of Linguistics, University of Michigan

1. We are all saddened by the death of Dr. Gudschinsky in 1975, not long after writing her contribution. But we rejoice in her release and in the fulfillment of her oft-spoken desire to meet her God. 2. Aberle, David F., 1959. The prophet dance and reactions to white contact. Southwest Journal of Anthropology 15, 74-83.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface, by Kenneth L. Pike

v

Historical Sketch, by Eunice V. Pike

1

Bibliography by Alan C. Wares

15

Literacy, by Sarah C. Gudschinsky

39

Training in Linguistics, by Frank E. Robbins

57

Field Training Programs, by Dale W. Kietzman

69

The Contributions ofSIL in Linguistics, by Calvin R. Rensch

85

Information Processing from the Field, by Joseph E. Grimes

129

Translation Theory, by Bruce R. Moore

147

Anthropology, by T. Wayne Dye and William R. Merrifield

165

SIL's Future: Plans and Prospect, by Benjamin F. Elson

183

Index

189

HISTORICAL SKETCH Eunice V. PIKE

By 1973 the Summer Institute of Linguistics 1 was working in more than twenty countries, listed about 2,000 members, and those members were studying more than 500 indigenous languages. But in 1933, forty years earlier, SIL had yet to start its first language, even though its founder W. Cameron Townsend, was dreaming about 500 and believing that it would happen. In 1917 Townsend had been selling Spanish Bibles in Guatemala, but the Book he was selling was useless to the many Indians who neither spoke nor understood Spanish. He remedied that for the Cakchiquel-speaking people by translating the New Testament for them. (It was published in 1931.) Townsend still felt his job to be unfinished, however, since there were many more ethnic groups who did not have the New Testament. In 1920 he met L.L. Legters, a man who first felt concern for the Comanche people of Oklahoma, and later for the small groups of the Amazon basin as well. Legters and Townsend decided that together they would start a school that would help prepare young folks to learn aboriginal languages. They would call the school "Camp Wycliffe" in honor of John Wycliffe (1320?1384) the first to translate the Bible for English-speaking people. Townsend had learned the Cakchiquel language, but it hadn't been easy. He was sure that phonetics and a knowledge of non-English, non-Spanish grammar would have helped. The first session of Camp Wycliffe, held in 1934, had two students. Townsend taught grammar, literacy, and about life in an Indian village. Legters taught a bit of anthropology, Dr. Elbert L. McCreey, who had learned one of the minor languages of Africa, taught two weeks of phonetics. In the summer of 1935, there were five students and one of them was Kenneth L. Pike. The curriculum was much the same as that of the previous year, and Pike was impressed both by the intricate Cakchiquel verb system, and by the nail kegs which substituted as chairs in the Arkansas farmhouse turned school. From Townsend's point of view, the rustic surroundings were an advantage since they were good training for life among aboriginal people. Students went with Townsend to Mexico both in 1935 and in 1936. In fact, before the end of 1936, Townsend himself was studying Aztec, and his

2 students were studying Maya, Tarascan, Mazatec, Otomi, Mixe, Tarahumara, Mixtec, and Totonac. It was the ideal time to begin such a project since Lazaro Cardenas was president and very much interested in the underprivileged people. He sensed in Townsend a man who really wanted to help and he welcomed with open arms the 'Townsend group" as they were called in those days. Townsend not only lived in an Indian village himself, learning to speak Aztec, helping the people to pipe in water, teaching them to plant vegetables, helping them to plant an orange grove, but he urged the rest of his group to do similar things. Their program had to be threefold: scientific, cultural, and spiritual. (1) Scientific. The sound systems must be analyzed. Grammars and dictionaries must be prepared, as well as occasional descriptions of the folklore. (2) Cultural. They should help the people acquire the art of communication by means of a written message. They should make themselves useful in such ways as teaching Spanish, doing simple medical work, preparing literacy materials. (3) Spiritual. They should translate the New Testament and help their friends to understand its message. For all three of those aspects, a good knowledge of linguistics was needed. Townsend was cognizant of that fact. He knew that Edward Sapir was going to be one of those teaching that summer at the Linguistic Institute, University of Michigan, and he urged Pike to attend. He wanted him to prepare to write a book on phonetics for beginners. Acutely aware of his own ignorance, Pike went to the American Book Store in Mexico City and from their copy of Books in Print in English, ordered sight unseen everything on phonetics listed there. That winter he studied and read carefully all that reached him. When he attended the University of Michigan in the summer of 1937, he was ready to benefit from the classes there. Pike was greatly stimulated by Edward Sapir, both in the class taught by him, and by his casual conversation outside of class. Charles C. Fries was the one who, in 1938, encouraged him to write a dissertation on tone languages — he had asked Pike to lecture on Mixtec tone. Then, when Pike's interest temporarily shifted to phonetic theory and the description of sounds, Fries directed him to further reading of the literature on that topic. Pike received his PhD in 1942. That same year he became a Research Associate of the English Language Institute of the University of Michigan. His responsibility was to prepare the section on pronunciation (including intonation) for a textbook on the teaching of English as a foreign language. The year 1942 was a memorable one. That was the year the Summer Institute of Linguistics was incorporated, although that name had been used since 1936 to represent the scientific work of its graduates to the United States' and other governments.

3 The name Wycliffe Bible Translators, however, was first used in 1942, and was to be a sister organization of the Summer Institute of Linguistics. It was founded then to better represent the translation aims of the SIL members to the church people, their supporters, who did not easily understand that they were a scientific organization. It was also in 1942 that the Institute first held its sessions on the University of Oklahoma campus. (The name "Camp Wycliffe" was dropped at that time.) In 1938 Townsend had turned the direction of the summer sessions over to Eugene A. Nida (now with the American Bible Society), to Pike, and numerous others. The staff was unique in that each member was spending the winter working with an Indian language (or languages), using the same linguistic tools that he was teaching during the summer time. It gave the classes a freshness that would have been hard to achieve otherwise. That summer of 1942, there were more than a hundred students enrolled in the linguistic classes at the University of Oklahoma, and fifty-one of them joined the SIL organization and went to Mexico. With that many new members, SIL doubled in size. That is, in the spring of 1942 there had been fortyfour members studying seventeen indigenous languages. By fall there were ninety-five members. Each of the ninety-five shared the belief that every individual should have the opportunity to hear God's message in his own language, and each was prepared to do what he could to make it possible for more language groups to hear. Without some such motivation as that, they would not have been willing to put up with the inconveniences and dangers which often accompany the task. But willingness was not enough. Not only did they need the technology and linguistic tools for language analysis, but they needed to know how to stay alive in primitive environments. The change from an Arkansas farmhouse to the campus of the University of Oklahoma had many advantages, but preparation for life in isolated areas was not one of them. Townsend was insistent that city-bred young folks needed help in adjusting to such places. That type of training was not so necessary for those who would be working in Mexico, but SIL was thinking of expanding to Peru. Pike had gone to Peru in 1943 as a consultant for the American Bible Society. While there he had contacted government officials, and told them about the SIL work among the indigenous people of Mexico. They responded with a cordial invitation for SIL to do similar work among the language groups of the jungle. Then Townsend really put on pressure to get a course started where young folks could be taught to survive in almost inaccessible areas. "In an unhealthy, hostile jungle, an ever present problem is to exist." He wanted a good site. 'The place to learn how to live in the jungle is the jungle", he said. In 1944 he found the ideal location on the edge of the Central American

4 rain forest in southern Mexico. By the fall of 1945 under the direction of Townsend, a few young folk expecting to go to Peru were already in training there. In the 1947-1948 session, Pike was one of those in charge of their training. Just to have the city-bred people adjusting to a rigorous life was not enough for him. Not only should they learn how to kill a chicken, make furniture, thatch their own shelter, hike along a muddy trail, travel with only a compass as guide, but he wanted them to have a research attitude. How could soap be made? How could meat be preserved? What kind of food could they find in the jungle? (They tried snail chowder.) And, of course, in preparation for river-travel in Peru, they needed to know how to swim, and how to manage a dugout canoe. Perhaps hardest of all, they needed to learn how to work productively under pioneer conditions. Earl Adams, who was jungle-camp director for many years, said that during the three-month sessions most of the recruits lost their fear of the unknown and replaced it with the confidence that they could make it. Approximately 475 young folks had taken the jungle-camp training by 1957, and by 1973 about 120 recruits were taking it every year. At the present time all recruits from North and South America, as well as those from other places who expect to work in North or South America, attend the jungle-training sessions in Mexico. Then, in 1958, at the beginning of the work in Alaska, there was a session there in which the young folks were taught, among other things, how to handle a dog team, and how to survive and work in subzero weather. In addition there is a training camp in Papua New Guinea for Australian recruits and those from England who expect to work among the language groups living in the desert of Australia, or in the highland or river areas of Papua New Guinea. In Nigeria there is a field orientation course (no jungle) for those who expect to work in Africa. The first workers reached Peru in 1946, and teams were in six different language groups within a year of their arrival. It wasn't easy. For example, a girl among the Piros wrote of the mosquitos, "I have double-thickness slacks and three sturdy thicknesses of socks, and they're still biting through!" A team of two girls shared a shelter with a Cashibo chief and fifteen of his people for two and a half months. The young folks found that they needed not only all the training they had received, but also faith that the Lord Himself was directing them. It was the lack of communication and the dangerous, slow, and exhausting means of transportation that concerned Townsend most. Two girls had been out among the Machiquenga-speaking people for five months without receiving mail. One young couple had two weeks of travel on a dangerous river, a four-day walk, and a day and a half by mule in order to go from their tribal location back to headquarters. When he saw how worn-out and how near to collapse they were, Townsend declared that no more translators should go

5 into the jungles until they were assured of adequate transportation service. (When that couple with their new baby were flown back sometime later, they made the trip in an hour and forty-five minutes.) SIL of Peru had already used some airplane transportations, but while the one plane was being repaired, those in the jungle could only wait or find other means of transportation. At Townsend's insistence, JAARS (Jungle Aviation and Radio Service) was organized in 1948 as a subsidiary of the organization. By 1950 a third plane had arrived and the SIL members never tired of comparing the trips before and after. For example, two men had traveled six days by raft to reach their destination, but they had flown back in only thirty-five minutes. But the difference was not merely a matter of time, nor of hardship versus ease, danger versus safety. The work among some of language groups in the jungle would have been impossible without air transportation. If the language team was going far from the base, all the food supplies that could be carried by canoe would have been used up before they had arrived there. For example, the two girls who went to the Shapra-speaking people couldn't have reached and lived among those people but for the airplane. They flew five hours in the JAARS plane, and then went on seven more hours by canoe. (The plane, on floats, could not have landed any nearer because the river there was not big enough.) Radio was another important part of opening up the jungle, and of the JAARS program. The pilots checked in every fifteen minutes as they flew, so that the tower always knew just where they were and where they were heading. Two-way radios were stationed with each language team so that they could call in and ask for a flight, or ask advice from the director or from the base doctor. But the radio was also useful as a morale builder. Each morning the radio man at the base gave a summary of world and local events, and two or three times a week the translators out living with the indigenous people reported in with a sentence or two of news. In this way the language teams not only knew what was going on at the base, but they listened in on each other, and they no longer felt so alone. The JAARS planes and radios soon began to be useful, not only to the SIL members, but to almost anyone who had reason to travel in the jungle: businessmen, missionaries without other air transportation, government officials, military engineers, Indians who needed to be brought out for medical help or to attend the bilingual school. The Peruvian Ministry of Aeronautics was very glad to get the weather reports called in by the language teams from the various parts of the jungle. By 1951, with the help of radio and air transportation, teams in Peru were studying the languages of eleven different ethnic groups, by 1958 it was twenty, and by 1973 it was thirty-eight. As SIL expanded to other countries, JAARS expanded too. By 1958

6 JAARS had a fleet of twenty planes with twenty-four pilots, nine aviation mechanics, and fourteen radio technicians working in Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, Brazil, and the Philippines. By 1973, JAARS had forty-nine planes, seventysix pilots, twenty-eight aviation mechanics, and forty-three radio technicians. (It is the Mission Aviation Fellowship which flies for SIL in Mexico). Once a language team had arrived among an ethnic group, almost before living quarters were set up, language study began. A knowledge of the language was essential to enable them to communicate with the people around them, but also from the very beginning Townsend had insisted that they contribute to linguistic science. In 1937 nine members had given papers at the conference of the Instituto Mexicano de Investigaciones Lingüísticas. Eight of the papers were describing languages recently studied. SIL members continued writing up descriptions of the languages they were studying with, once in a while, an article on the theoretical implications. A number of them presented their material at the Linguistic Society of America meetings. For example, six SIL members presented papers in the summer meeting of 1946. In the 1948 meeting, a resolution was passed by the members of the Linguistic Society strongly commending the work of SIL and welcoming it as "one of the most promising developments in applied linguistics in this country". Looking back, Pike points out (1972:20-24) some of the reasons why, even when such a young organization, SIL was able to contribute to the linguistic discipline. SIL began in 1934. Bloomfield's Language had been published in 1933. Under his stimulus and that of Edward Sapir, linguists were attempting to explain language by pointing out, among other things, the pattern of relationships in language. They also felt that in order to understand language, they needed to study all varieties. Therefore SIL's study of littleknown languages, although done by beginners, was of interest even to the world's scholars. In 1942 Pike tried to provide help for those who were attempting to write up the analysis of the languages they were studying. He organized a consultant committee to give advice by correspondence — that was difficult. So, in 1943, he had the summer sessions of SIL include a second year course. Most of the students who took the course had already been studying an indigenous language a year or more and during the summer they wrote up their conclusions. For several years the majority of the SIL publications on linguistics came from that course. By 1948 seventy-nine linguistic or ethnographic articles had been published. These had been written by thirty-seven different authors. Eighteen of the articles had appeared in the International Journal of American Linguistics, four in Language, two in the American Anthropologist {Steam from the Kettle, Jan. 3,1948, p. 3). But the leaders of SIL were still not satisfied with the output. (At that

7 time SIL was working in forty-four languages in Mexico, seven in Peru, and two in the United States.) They wanted the newer workers to receive help without going back for another session at SIL. Occasionally Eunice V. Pike and Kenneth L. Pike had been helping their colleagues with one language at a time, but Richard Pittman, then director of the Mexico branch, thought there should be some way of speeding up the process. So three small workshops were scheduled. At the first, January 1950, those working in various Otomi languages gathered for help from various consultants. Then, workers from Trique, Cuicatec and from three Mixtec languages gathered to study under Pike's guidance for the month of October. In December, workers from three Zapotec languages studied under William L. Wonderly's direction. (He is now with the American Bible Society.) There was no doubt that the time had been well spent. The participants had made good progress. From then on an effort was made to get more consultant help to the language teams. By 1954 so many students, without previous experience in aboriginal languages, were attending the second year course that it was not possible to give the others the help they needed in writing up their analyses. So, in that year, a seminar was started in which the students continued on with the analysis of the language they had been studying, and with the help of a consultant, wrote it up for publications. (See Chapter 4 for more about the SIL schools.) The seminar was good, but it was impossible for many to attend. The Peru branch, at the urging of Townsend, arranged to have Pike go to Peru to help the members there find solutions to their linguistic problems and to guide them in getting technical articles ready for publication. A workshop was held there from October 1955 through April 1956. Teams from twenty-one different languages attended and much was accomplished. In November and December of 1957 Robert E. Longacre conducted another in Guatemala. He helped teams studying in six different languages with their grammatical analyses. Several of the teams completed papers for publication. In March 1958, Pike headed up a workshop in Mexico. Teams from at least eight languages were there and everyone concerned was enthusiastic about the progress that had been made. The workshops were one more factor in SIL teamwork that resulted in articles being published in scientific journals. In fact, everyone seemed to be convinced of their value. They were valuable not only for linguistic studies, but also in speeding up and improving translations, and in producing literacy materials. Eventually there were even language learning workshops. Ben Elson, then director of the Mexican branch, began to plan for a center which would provide good study conditions, and where the living quarters would be more convenient than they are in primitive areas. Language teams and someone from each ethnic group could spend sessions there (usually three months long), and having access to a consultant, the teams could make

8 good progress in their linguistic studies. By 1962 one such center was completed about a hundred miles north of Mexico City. A few years later the branch was building another about 350 miles south of the city. Other branches, too, had found both workshops and study centers to be helpful. The details from one branch to another differed, but all found that language teams needed a place where they could study a few months at a time without the time-consuming responsibilities of village-life among the people whose language they were learning. And they all found that a consultant who would guide them in their studies saved much time and helped them over linguistic hurdles. Therefore more and more consultants were needed. Many times, but not always, that consultant was one who had received an M. A. or a Ph. D. degree. For that reason branch directors frequently encouraged members to take time off from work in the field, to get the advanced training. By 1960 the technical material published was considerable. (See Chapter 2 for specific information on the bibliography.) Because of the linguistic schools, a high priority was put on textbooks. As the staff faced the students each year, they endeavored to find better ways of teaching the material they felt to be important for language analysis and Bible translation. It was in the early 1950's that methods of teaching syntax and grammar in general were greatly improved by the tagmemic theory developed by Pike (1954-1960). Pike (1972:22) explained why the SIL textbooks were useful to other linguistic schools also. During the decades from 1935-1955, the approved way to test an analysis was by showing that the results were arrived at by a certain set of procedures. SIL needed procedures in order to analyze the languages they were encountering. Therefore the textbooks written for that purpose were of theoretical interest. At times, some of the students and even the staff would concentrate too much on immediate goals. Then they would reject some part of the theory as "not practical". Again and again Pike would bring them back with, "We cannot afford to ignore impractical theory!" He urged his staff to study theories other than his own — parts would undoubtedly prove to be useful. Because the staff members had been studying other theories in various universities, the different SIL schools did not necessarily emphasize the tagmemic theory of linguistic analysis. But all the schools were striving to prepare their students for field work and language analysis, and often the courses were affected by feedback from the various branches. For example, some branch would report that new workers were, or were not, progressing well in such and such an aspect of their field work. (For more information about the SIL schools, see Chapter 4.) SIL members were also interested in helping the minority groups to learn to read and write in their own languages. One of the motivations is again connected with the New Testament — they want people to be able to read it.

9 But, in addition to that, the ability to read helps the indigenous person to learn the national language, to benefit by the national culture, and many times improves his self-image. (See Chapters 3 and 5 for more information about the literacy programs.) The SIL member has to be flexible in his methods and in classroom hours on the field. For example, workers among the Choi-speaking people of Mexico wrote, in 1949, that their class for men was from 6:15 until 8:30 A.M. (After class the men went out to work in their fields.) The class for housewives was from 9:30 A.M. until noon, and for young fellows from 7:00 until 9:00 P.M. In some parts of Mexico the SIL members make primers and other literacy materials in coordination with the Instituto Nacional Indigenista and with the Secretaría de Educación, and have occasionally helped train the bilingual teachers. In Peru, in 1953, the SIL members brought Indians in from the jungle and, in cooperation with the Peruvian Ministry of Education, taught them at a school on the SIL base. Some of their teachers were SIL members and some were Peruvians. Sincé many of the students knew no Spanish, an SIL member who spoke the student's language audited the classes in order to tutor him and help him to understand the lectures. (See Chapter 5 for more detail about SIL's cooperation with governments in literacy programs.) As for the students, it took courage for them just to be willing to come, with their families, so far from their jungle home. In 1954, two of the SIL girls spent seven days drifting downstream with a party of Piro-speaking people. On the last day, while floating down the river, the girls talked by radio with the SIL base. To string up the antenna, three rafts formed a row, and the wire was stretched from one to the other. Reception at the base was good, they said. Someone there arranged to have a truck meet them when they disembarked and take them the rest of the way to the base. Later when graduation time came, ten government officials came out from Lima to attend. It was a big occasion because, by means of these teachers, bilingual government schools were to be set up in the jungle. People who would never have had a chance otherwise would learn to read, learn a little Spanish and a little about the nation in which they lived. The program continued growing. (See Chapter 5, section 3.2 for more detail about the bilingual schools in Peru.) The methods and means also vary from branch to branch, but all branches have a literacy program. In 1965 Sarah Gudschinsky was appointed literacy coordinator for the entire corporation. She traveled extensively directing literacy workshops and advising on the use of the vernacular in primary education. Within recent years, SIL has been putting more effort into helping the indigenous people to write their own literature. They encourage them to write about their own culture and to put into print the stories that the old

10 people have been handing down verbally. Peggy Wendell was the one who, in 1970, headed up the first workshop which had native authored literature as its primary aim. (Back in the 1940's under the stimulus of Maxwell Lathrop, the Tarascan Indians of Mexico were writing and distributing their own newspaper. In Peru, in the 1950's, students in the bilingual schools were writing materials for their own booklets.) See Chapter 5, section 3.3 for more detail about the writing programs. Help in literacy is one of the things appreciated by most of the governments where SIL works. This was very apparent in the Philippines when, on 31 August 1973, the Ramon Magsaysay Foundation presented its 1973 Award to SIL. The press release announcing the award read in part, "The Institute pursues its mission of research and service to each nonliterate minority with broad creativity. Employing the science of descriptive linguistics, primers are prepared with glossaries in the tribal tongue, main regional and national languages. Apt pupils are trained as teachers and help conduct literacy classes for adults and youth. Dictionaries, folk stories, songbooks, simple readers on arithmetic, hygiene and the Scriptures all become vehicles for new ideas that spur social and spiritual change toward national integration" (Translation Nov .-Dec. 1973 p. 11). The Brazilian government, in 1967, awarded Townsend the Cruzeiro do Sul decoration. The citation mentioned, in addition to work in thirty-seven primitive tribes, the extensive cooperation in national literacy campaigns, and in the founding of the linguistics department at the University of Brasilia {Translation July .-Aug. 1967 p. 12). The Ecuadorian government showed their appreciation to the SIL branch there for their program of bilingual education. In 1969 they awarded Rachel Saint and Catherine Peeke the "Decoration of Merit for Educational Activities" (Translation July-Sept. 1969 p. 12). The Papua New Guinea branch, in 1970, was awarded the bronze UNESCO medal by the International Jury of the Mohammad Reza Pahlavi Prize. The citation read in part, ". . . for its untiring activity in the various spheres of literacy, in some 55 vernacular languages. . ." (Translation JulySept. 1970 p. 13). In 1973 South Viet Nam's Ministry for the Development of Ethnic Minorities gave an award to Richard Watson the director of the Viet Nam branch, and to Eugenia Johnston the literacy consultant. The award was given in appreciation for SIL's literacy program (twenty-one languages) (Translation J an.-Feb. 1974 p. 13). The other SIL branches also have effective literacy programs. Because SIL has literacy programs, they must also have a means of publishing books. Most of the branches have started out small, with equipment which would allow them to duplicate letters or to print booklets. But gradually the plant grows. For the way printing is done in the various branches, see

11 Chapter 7. The desire to help provide ethnic groups with the Scriptures is, of course, what gives SIL its driving force. Translation, however, presupposes learning to speak the language and linguistic analysis. Therefore it is years after work has begun in a language group before the goal is achieved. By now, however, some of the results can be tallied. By the end of 1973, thirty-five 2 New-Testaments had been published, 3 and many more were in various stages of completion. The Gospel of Mark had been published in 240 different languages. (Because Mark is the shortest gospel and has less theological terminology, it is usually the book the SIL members choose to translate first.) Matthew had been published in 29, Luke in 53, John in 79, Acts in 120, one of the various epistles in 492, a book of the Old Testament in 17. In addition there are numerous abridgements of Genesis and many books of Bible stories from both the Old and New Testaments. Medical work is something the SIL members find themselves doing even though that was not the reason they went to the jungles, the desert, and the small villages. Once they are in those places, however, they find that the people there need help. The way the problem is handled varies with the SIL member involved, and with the area in which he is working. Each language team working in an ethnic group may take care of the simple medical needs of those around them. Or, as in Peru and the Philippines, there may be a medical service in which a doctor sets up clinics in various hard-to-reach locations. The Peru branch also has a program in which some of the Indian people themselves are trained to give medical assistance. The personnel that makes up SIL has the one uniting factor — the belief that every person should be able to have the New Testament in his own language. In addition to that belief each member feels that he is in part responsible to bring that goal to completion. Aside from that uniting motivation, the personnel is made up of more than 2,000 independent individuals who enjoy making their own decisions, and running their lives in their own way. Some are linguists. But the linguists couldn't do the job by themselves. People with other occupations join with them to give a hand. Among them are: accountants, buyer-shippers, plant engineers, secretaries, publication department personnel (artists, photographers, printers, computer operators), typists, teachers of indigenous people, teachers of SIL children, agriculturists, builders, hostesses, mechanics, medical doctors, nurses, pilots, aviation mechanics, radio operators, radio technicians. The SIL personnel comes from everywhere. Specifically in 1966 (Translation Sept.-Oct. 1967 p. 20) the count was 1,875 members from the following countries: Australia 150, Canada 112, Germany 24, Great Britain 120, Mexico 1, Netherlands 1, New Zealand 10, Peru 2, South Africa 1, Switzerland 21, United States 1,433. Since then the number from the Netherlands

12 has increased by about ten and a member or two has also come from Finland, Hong Kong, Japan, Nigeria, Norway, and Sweden. SIL is organized into branches. Each branch is autonomous, but must function within a few basic principles and goals defined by the corporation. As SIL spreads throughout the world, the number of branches increases. There is not room here to describe all the branches, but each one has a different personality, shaped by the individuals of which it is composed, and by the country where it is working. A new branch usually starts, not only with a group of new members, but also with an appointed director, and a few old-timers who are transferred over from one of the older branches. These are the seed that helps the branch to get under way. Probably in all branches the initial years are hard. Living quarters are inadequate, transportation and supply lines from base to the location of the various language groups are not yet established, and members have not yet adjusted to the national culture. But the thrill of being part of the advance contingent for reaching more minority groups makes up for the inconveniences. SIL BRANCHES 4

Mexico North America Peru Central America Ecuador Philippines Bolivia Brazil Papua New Guinea Viet Nam Australia Colombia-Panama Ghana Nigeria Nepal-India Surinam Togo Cameroun Indonesia Ivory Coast Total

Year begun

Languages studied

Members in 1973

1935 1944 1946 1952 1953 1953 1955 1956 1956 1957 1961 1962 1962 1964 1966 1967 1967 1968 1971 1971

100

140 73 223 51 62 138 74

33 38 19 7 44 17 40 94 21 12 43

218

3 2 4 2 8

393 65 52 194 36 71 82 12 3 16 8 18

551

1,929

10 23 31

13 In addition to the members listed on the chart, there were 227 Short Term Assistants. These are young folk or retired people who have volunteered to help for a specific period of time. After a few years the members of the new branch choose their own director, and others to make up an executive committee. In this way they govern themselves. Every year (or in some branches every two) they have a conference. There are days of discussion and everyone has a chance at the floor. The topics may range from basic policies of the branch to such matters as whether or not members should be permitted to have dogs on the base. Everyone is very much in earnest, and debate can go on and on. Each branch elects delegates to go to the corporation conference held every other year. There, also, policies and plans for the future are discussed. The Board of Directors is elected: a certain number from the membership, and a certain number who become members when elected to the Board. There is the office of Founder held by Townsend. President is Pike. He is supposed to keep the organization progressing toward its goal, and the members going on to greater accomplishments. Executive Vice-President is Frank Robbins. He is in charge of the day-by-day business of the organization. Vice-President of Academic Affairs, Calvin Rensch, is in charge of the SIL schools. The Vice-President of Operations, Alan Pence, relates to the branches, advising them, helping to coordinate their efforts, to take advantage of the experiences of other branches. Vice-President of International Development, Francis Dawson, relates to the people, in whatever country, who are helping SIL members. Treasurer, Kenneth Waiters. How is the organization financed? Thousands of non-rich people, from more than fifteen countries, send in donations. For the most part they are evangelicals who, like the members of SIL, believe that even people speaking one of the lesser-known languages should have the New Testament, and they feel that they, in part, are responsible to see that they get it. They send their donations to WBT-SIL because they are confident that the money will be used in some way to further that purpose. So the linguists move ahead, and they realize that they are doing so only because of the generosity of other evangelicals, many of whom don't know what linguistics is.

NOTES 1. Much of the data for this article was gleaned from the news bulletin Steam from the Kettle issued biweekly (1946-1954) by the Mexico branch for its members. Another source of information was Translation published bimonthly by Wycliffe Bible Translators ( 1 9 4 3 - ) . 2. The information for the years 1934-1969 came from Wares, 1970:vi-ix. The information on Scripture published from 1970-1973 came from Ware's personal file. 3. Other organizations such as the American Bible Society, Scriptures Unlimited and the

14 World Home Bible League are usually the actual publishers of Scripture portions. 4. The information is taken from the Translation Prayer Directory, 1973, p. 12-17. REFERENCES Bloomfield, Leonard 1933 Language (New York: Holt) Pike, Kenneth L. 1954-1960 Language in Relation to a Unified Theory of the Structure of Human Behavior (Glendale [now Huntington Beach]: SIL), 2nd edition 1967 (The Hague: Mouton). 1972 "Language and Faith", Language and Faith, Cornell Capa and Dale Kietzman, eds. (Santa Ana [now Huntington Beach], Calif. WBT/SIL) 18-30. Steam from the Kettle 1946-1954 (bi weekly news organ of the Mexico branch of WBT/SIL) Mexico City. Translation. 1943- (bimonthly organ of Wycliffe Bible Translators) Santa Ana [now Huntington Beach], California. Wares, Alan C. comp. 1970 Bibliography of the Wycliffe Bible Translators (Santa Ana [now Huntington Beach]: Wycliffe Bible Translators).

BIBLIOGRAPHY ALAN C. WARES

Less than two years after their arrival in Mexico, the first members of the Summer Institute of Linguistics began to publish the results of their investigations. In 1937 Investigaciones Lingüisticas, the organ of the Mexican Institute of Linguistic Investigations, founded several years earlier by Mariano Silva y Aceves, published a dozen articles by SIL members, most of them being preliminary reports of language analysis by the investigators among the Aztec (Townsend), Maya (Legters), Mazatec (Hansen, E.V. Pike), Mixe (Miller), Mixtee (K.L. Pike), Tarahumara (Nida), Tarascan (Lathrop), and Totonac (Christiansen). There was also a morphology questionnaire by Townsend and a didactic article on phonemic analysis by K.L. Pike. The following year the same journal published an article by Pike on a common orthography for Indian languages, the first of many such articles that reveal more than a mere academic interest in the languages being studied by members of the Summer Institute of Linguistics. For several years after this first spate of publication, there are no technical articles recorded in the Bibliography. Then in 1942 the English Language Institute of the University of Michigan published Pike's Pronunciation, the pedagogical materials in which were rewritten and incorporated into An Intensive Course in English for Latin-American Students by Charles C. Fries and staff, published the following year; the research materials in the same volume were later incorporated into Pike's monograph on intonation (1945). The year 1943 saw the publication of a preliminary mimeographed edition of Nida's classic volume on morphology (1943a) and his informal introduction to linguistics (1943b). Two of Pike's major works were likewise published that year in preliminary editions (1943a and 1943b), and his dissertation came out in a linguistic series of the University of Michigan (1943c). Wonderly's Zoque study came out also in 1943 in a preliminary edition (Wonderly, 1943). The first of many linguistic articles by SIL members to be published in Language was Pike's "Taxemes and Immediate Constituents", published in 1943. The following year his "Analysis of a Mixteco Text" appeared in the International Journal of American Linguistics as the first of 174 items to be published by that journal to the end of 1972.

16 There is no point in continuing this chronological listing, as the rate of publication increased considerably after 1945. The Institute had more than doubled its membership by that time, many more languages were being studied, and members were being encouraged to write articles for publication, based on what they were learning. Although only 34 technical items 1 had appeared by the end of 1945, this figure was more than quadrupled during the next five years, with the appearance of 148 additional items. By this time the work of the Summer Institute of Linguistics had extended to Peru, and articles by members working among the jungle Indian tribes were beginning to appear (see, for example, Osborne, 1948; Matteson, 1949; Townsend, 1949; Shell, 1950). From the end of 1950 to the end of 1955 there were 152 items published, and during the next five-year period, 205 items. By the mid1960s well over a hundred technical items (including articles and monographs) were added to the SIL Bibliography each year, reaching a yearly maximum in 1970, when 179 items appeared. The rate o f growth o f this section of the SIL Bibliography is well illustrated by the graph in Figure 1.

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0 1935

1940

1945

1950

Fig. 1.

1955

1960

1965

1970

17 By the end of 1972 over 2000 items had been written by members of the Summer Institute of Linguistics or published by either the corporation or its branches. This figure is exceeded by the number of items published in vernacular languages for the purpose of teaching reading to members of minority language groups or providing them with literature that they can understand so that they will not lapse into semi-literacy. At the same time most of these authors, as members of Wycliffe Bible Translators, Inc., were translating portions of the Bible, publishing Bible-related (though not doctrinal or sectarian) materials in the vernacular languages, and writing articles dealing with translation and exegesis. These works are listed in a separate Bibliography (Wares, comp., 1970) which lists more than 1,200 entries. As a matter of policy, members of SIL acquire a speaking knowledge of the language they investigate, and since a knowledge of the sound system of a language is essential in learning to speak it acceptably, it is not surprising that approximately one-eighth of the total number of entries in the technical section are concerned with phonology. No single model is followed in these analyses. The earliest articles are concerned with significant contrasts in sounds; many later articles deal with phonological hierarchies as well. Several articles (e.g., D. Davis, 1969; Huttar and Eslick, 1972) are concerned with distinctive feature analysis; some (e.g., Frantz, 1972; Gordon, 1972) follow a transformational model, with phonological rules for generating the sounds of the language being described. A little more than half of the phonological studies listed in the current edition of the SIL Bibliography are journal articles. Of the remainder, many originated as theses (e.g., David Blood, 1964; Sommer, 1969) or dissertations (e.g., Crawford, 1963; Cunningham, 1969), and others were published as monographs or in collections of essays like the one compiled to celebrate the 25th anniversary of SIL (Elson and Comas, eds., 1961). A number of phonological studies of African languages have appeared in the Collected Language Notes series, published by the Institute of African Studies of the University of Ghana. In Nepal, SIL and Tribhuvan University have published a dozen or more Tibeto-Burman Phonemic Summaries in mimeographed editions. Many phonological analyses of languages of the Pacific area have appeared in Papers in Philippine Linguistics, Papers in New Guinea Linguistics, and Papers in Australian Linguistics, three series of collected language studies published by the Australian National University in Pacific Linguistics. Studies of some of the languages of Vietnam have appeared in Mon-Khmer Studies, four volumes of which are now available, published jointly by the Linguistic Circle of Saigon and SIL. Other collections have been made of studies of indigenous languages in various parts of the world, including the Philippines (Healey and others,

18

1958; Wolfenden, ed., 1963; Wolfenden and others, 1964), New Guinea (Dean and others, 1962), Vietnam (Thomas, ed., 1966), Colombia (Waterhouse, 1967), Nepal (Hale and Pike, eds., 1970), and Brazil (Gudschinsky and others, 1971). These studies are largely confined to phonology and grammar; other collections dealing with discourse analysis are mentioned below. In 1958 the Summer Institute of Linguistics of the University of Oklahoma began publishing the series of Summer Institute of Linguistics Publications in Linguistics and Related Fields. The first monographs of this series were devoted to text material in specific languages, as indicated by their titles (Canonge, 1958; Mayers, 1958; Dyk, 1959). Later issues covered a broader range of linguistic interest, including several phonological studies (Waterhouse, ed., 1967; Loos, 1969). Some were themselves collections of essays on languages of a particular country (Peeke and others, 1962; Pence and others, 1964; Waterhouse, ed., 1967; Larson and others, 1963; Matteson, ed., 1967), or of a particular linguistic family (Townsend and others, 1960; Robinson and others, 1969; D. Bendor-Samuel, ed., 1971). Many of the essays in these collections deal with the phonology of specific languages. Several series of monographs have been published by branches of SIL in different countries. The Serie Lingüistica Peruana has consisted mainly of vocabularies of Peruvian Indian Languages. Notas Lingüisticas de Bolivia, a series begun in 1959 by the Bolivia branch of SIL, is concerned only with phonology. In 1973 the Brazil branch published the first volume of Série Lingüística, with phonological and grammatical studies of various kinds. Besides being descriptive of the sound system of a particular language, many of the phonological items reveal facets of language analysis that are of interest in the development of linguistic theory. Canonge, for example (1957), presents data from Comanche to substantiate his conclusion (and that of others) that voiceless vowels are phonemic in that language; Hoogshagen (1959) presents evidence for three phonemic moras of vowel length in Mixe; Robbins (1961) gives illustrations of words without vowels that occur in the Quiotepec dialect of Chinantec; Burgess (1971) contrasts a phonemic analysis of Xavante with a prosodic analysis and finds the latter more useful for describing that language, a conclusion that J. Bendor-Samuel (1960) arrived at a decade earlier with regard to the analysis of Tereno. Works on grammar outnumber those on phonology and are perhaps more diverse, as writers focus on a particular facet of the grammar of the language they are describing - clause, phrase, noun, verb - and relate it to some aspect of linguistic theory. There is variety also in the theoretical background of the writers. Although a large majority of the linguistic studies during the past two decades have been strongly influenced by tagmemic theory, there have been others that have followed the transformational model (Frantz, 1971; Daly, 1973), and some that have combined insights from both theoretical frameworks (Longacre, 1965; Elkins, 1970). Several items reveal the influ-

19 ence of Lamb's stratificational theory (Merrifield, 1967; Cowan and Merrifield, 1968; Austin, 1966; cf. Fleming, 1969), and others of Fillmore's case theory (Grimes, 1971; Glock, 1972). The development of tagmemic theory can be seen in many of the articles and monographs written by SIL authors. Since these have been dealt with extensively elsewhere in greater detail than is possible here, it will suffice to mention a few of the major works. Pike's monograph on language (19541960; 1967) presents the basic concepts of tri-modal structure of emic units of language which may be parts of larger units on various levels of a particular hierarchy (phonological, grammatical, or lexical). Tagmemic theory has been vigorously debated, and vigorously rejected by some. Since it was not woven in an ivory tower out of gossamer notions of language, but developed painstakingly in the search for satisfactory solutions to problems in the analysis of dozens of non-Indo-European languages, it has been found to be a useful theoretical tool by a number of linguists and anthropologists. This may be seen in the bibliographies of Pike (1966), Brend (1970, 1972), Brend, ed. (1973), Waterhouse (1973), and Brend and Pike, eds. (1977). Not confining themselves to the analysis of sentences, a number of SIL scholars have concerned themselves with the structure of discourse. Wise (1971) and Grimes (1971) deal with the question of identifying participants in discourse. Longacre conducted language workshops in the Philippines and New Guinea which resulted in several monographs written or edited by him (Longacre, 1970,1972b, and 1972c; Longacre, ed., 1971). Similar workshops that Pike conducted in Nepal and India have resulted in two multi-volume works in the SIL series based on findings in languages of those countries (Hale and others, 1973; Trail, ed., 1973). Other workshops in Brazil, New Guinea, and the Philippines, led by Grimes, have resulted in several dozen linguistic articles by many of the participants in addition to a monograph on discourse (Grimes, 1972). Among early publications dealing with indigenous languages under investigation by members of SIL are vocabularies (Aschmann, 1949; Harrison, 1948; K. and N. Weathers, 1949), some of which were microfilmed by the University of Chicago Library for its Microfilm Collection of Manuscripts on Middle American Cultural Anthropology (now Microfilm Collection of Manuscripts on Cultural Anthropology): Aulie, 1949; Law, 1951; Mcintosh, 1951; McKinlay, H. and M. Key, 1951; Pittman, 1951. In 1959 the Mexico branch of SIL began publishing the Mariano Silva y Aceves series of vocabularies (Hilton, 1959; McMahon, 1959; Pickett and others, 1959). Sixteen vocabularies have appeared in this series to date, two of them being in languages of Ecuador — Cayapa (J. and C. Lindskoog, 1964) and Quichua (OrrandWrisley, 1964). As mentioned earlier, the Serie Lingüistica Peruana, which the Peru branch of SIL began to publish in 1963, has been mainly devoted to vocabularies of languages of that country (Tuggy, 1966; Larson, 1966; Leach, 1969).

20 Beginning in 1962, the Bolivia branch of SIL published a handful of vocabularies of languages of that country (R. and J. Judy, 1962; D. and M. Van Wynen, 1962), including a vocabulary of regional Spanish (M. Key, 1966). Monographs of a similar nature have been published from time to time by other branches of SIL: Australia (B. and H. Geytenbeek, 1971), Brazil (Wiesemann, 1971), Ghana (Rowland, 1966), Papua New Guinea (Healey and Steinkraus, 1972), Philippines (Barnard and Forster, 1954; R. and B. Elkins, 1954; Newell, 1958), the United States (D. and L. Saxton, 1969). The Nepal branch has also published mimeographed editions of vocabularies of a number of languages of that country. In spite of the relatively large number of vocabularies that have been published, very little has been written to date on lexicography. As Newell has pointed out (1970: 109), the entries tend to be either verbose and vague or else merely one-word glosses, making the vocabulary or dictionary (both terms have been used in the titles of the above-mentioned publications) little more than a word list. Irwin (1970) discusses some kinds of lexical problems that confront a translator or language learner in using the average dictionary, and recommends the inclusion of idioms as well as literal meanings of words in a dictionary. Kilham's article on bilingual dictionaries (1971) is concerned with the purpose, scope, and format of dictionaries intended primarily for the use of indigenous peoples. The desirability of having dictionaries or vocabularies that are more than mere word lists was considered at a linguistic workshop in Mexico that was devoted to dictionary making. Out of that came Robinson's manual (1969), a three-volume work of which the first volume is a textbook on lexicography and the other two a word list in Spanish with illustrative sentences for use in the Spanish-to-idiom section of bilingual dictionaries prepared for Mexican Indians. A dictionary of Northern Totonac, now in press, was compiled following the principles laid down in Robinson's volume. Numerous texts in indigenous languages have been compiled by members of SIL. Many of these have been used as the basis for computer-produced concordances at the University of Oklahoma. Although in the majority of cases neither the texts nor the concordances have been published, they are an invaluable help to field workers in the preparation of vocabularies and often provide additional insights into grammatical structures. A great deal of text material has been published, however. The series of SIL Publications in Linguistics and Related Fields, the first numbers of which consisted of analyzed texts in vernacular languages, has already been mentioned. In Mexico, more than thirty texts in Indian languages, compiled by SIL members, have appeared in Tlalocan, a periodical that publishes source material for the study of native cultures. The Microfilm Collection of the University of Chicago Library, mentioned above in connection with vocabularies, also includes text material. In Guatemala, the collections edited by

21 Shaw in English (1971) and in Spanish (1972) contain a wealth of text material in the Indian languages of Guatemala and Honduras. Three major collections of texts in languages of India and Nepal are to be found in the works of Hale and Pike (eds., 1970), Hale and others (1973), and Trail (ed., 1973). Other texts have appeared from time to time in folklore journals (Adams, 1962; Neunswander and Shaw, 1966), in linguistic journals (P. Healey, 1958; Wonderly, 1952), or in other publications (Popovich, 1971; H. and E. Blood, 1969). Language comparison has been one of the major goals of SIL from the beginning of its existence, when Townsend's morphological comparison between Cakchiquel and Nahuatl was published in Investigaciones Lingüisticas (1937b). His interest in comparative linguistics as a means of discovering much about "lines of migration and intercontinental as well as inter-tribal relationships" was expressed several years later in an article in Boletín Indigenista (Townsend, 1944). Little was done in actual comparison of languages for the first two decades when SIL investigators were learning the indigenous languages and studying their phonology and grammar. In 1953 Gudschinsky published her reconstruction of Proto-Mazatec, followed six years later by a more comprehensive comparison of Popolocan and Mixtecan (Gudschinsky, 1959), an area of interest in which Longacre also published (1957, 1962). Linguistic investigations in other languages and dialects of the state of Oaxaca were used in comparative works that were submitted as doctoral dissertations by Kirk (1966) and Rensch (1966). Bartholomew, working in a dialect of Otomi, proposed a revision of Proto-Otomi consonants (1960) and wrote her doctoral dissertation on Otopamean (1965), a reconstruction of Otomi and Pame. Bascom, working farther to the northwest in Mexico, made a comparative study of Tepehuan and Pima (1965), and going still farther to the northwest of Mexico and into Arizona, Wares made a phonological comparison of several languages of the Yuman family (1968). Other comparative studies of Mexican Indian languages have been done by Mak and Longacre (1960), Upson and Longacre (1965), and by Waterhouse (1969). Comparative studies have been made in South American Indian languages by I. Davis (1966), Moore (1962), Orr and Longacre (1968), M. Key (1968), and Shell (1965). The volume by Matteson and others (1972) deals not only with language groups in the northern part of South America, but also with language families of Mexico and Central America (F. Jackson, 1972) and with macro-groupings of these (Matteson, 1972). Some comparative work has been done also in Papua New Guinea (Bee, 1965; Trefry, 1969; A. Healey, 1970), the Philippines (Newell, 1953), Nepal (Pittman and Glover, 1970), the United States (Miller and Davis, 1963), and Vietnam (Doris Blood, 1962; Barker, 1966; M.A. and M.E. Barker, 1970; David Thomas, 1964; and Dorothy Thomas, 1963). With the publication of

22 more phonological and grammatical descriptions of individual languages, there will very likely follow a great many more comparative works in those areas of the world where SIL investigators have only begun to undertake such studies. Closely related to comparative linguistics is the classification of languages, in which a great deal has been done by members of the Papua New Guinea branch, working in an area where an estimated 500 to 1,000 languages are spoken. "In view of the very large number of languages and the very small number of field workers available to study them," writes McElhanon, "it is not surprising that field workers quickly adopted lexicostatistics as a classificatory tool" (1971: 122). SIL had begun work in the Australian New Guinea highlands in 1956, and many of the early survey reports reflect the result of cognate counts from Swadesh's 100-word list in their diagrams of language relationships (Allen and Hurd, 1963 and 1965; McElhanon, 1970). In West Africa, J. Bendor-Samuel joined Swadesh and others in applying the same techniques for classifying the Gur languages (Swadesh and others, 1966). Gudschinsky had reservations about the lexicostatistic method (1955, 1956a and 1956b), and Longacre pointed out erroneous conclusions based on the use of the technique in Mexico (1960, 1961), but it had gained a certain amount of popularity among anthropologists, to judge by the articles upon which Gudschinsky commented (1960, 1966). Rather than relying on resemblances between words, Longacre advocated comparison of language systems (1967), and described how the techniques of comparative linguistics have been applied to indigenous languages (1968). A somewhat different approach to dialect surveys was taken in Mexico, where the main concern was the degree of intelligibility between dialects. A detailed account of the techniques employed for testing intelligibility, and some of the results obtained, has recently been published (Casad, 1974). In addition to the volume of analytical works that have been produced by members of SIL, there are a fair number of didactic materials for use in the annual linguistics courses. Among the earliest of these are the textbooks in phonology by Pike (1943a, 1943b, 1943c, 1945) and in morphology by Nida (1943a, 1946, 1951). Others followed as a need was felt for newer materials using a somewhat different approach (Elson and Pickett, 1960,1962; Grimes, 1969; Hale, 1965, 1967). For use in phonology courses, Robinson (1970b) compiled a workbook containing data from languages spoken in many different parts of the world. At the SIL in England, a series of textbooks called Introduction to Practical Linguistics is being produced under the general editorship of J.T. Bendor-Samuel. Most of the items are in pre-publication mimeographed editions, but a phonetics textbook has already appeared in printed form (Chapman, 1971). Both English and French editions are planned for this series. A Portuguese edition of the morphology textbook by Elson and Pickett (1973) has been published in Brazil.

23 The classroom is not the only place where didactic materials are needed, so a number of helps have been prepared for workers on the field. An early work of this nature, on ethnology, was Gabler (1945). For those just beginning to learn an indigenous language, a manual was prepared by Healey (ed., 1970), which has since been revised under the title Language Learner's Field Guide. For those farther advanced in language analysis, Longacre wrote a manual (1964) which has also been published in a Spanish edition by the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos in Lima, Peru (Longacre, 1972). Gudschinsky's literacy volumes (1951,1973) fill a need in the preparation of materials for teaching reading, particularly in non-literate cultures. Since 1966 Gudschinsky has been editing Notes on Literacy, a quarterly bulletin published by SIL at Santa Ana. That same year the Papua New Guinea branch of SIL began publishing Read, a periodical dealing with literacy matters, mostly related to the peoples of that country. In the area of ethnography, Chenoweth has made a notable contribution to the study of indigenous music with her manual on ethnomusicology (1972). In this work, principles of tagmemic analysis are applied to native folk music to discover significant ("emic") and non-significant ("etic") variants of melodies, examples of which are given from native music of Papua New Guinea. A number of textbooks have been written for teaching specific languages, such as Quechua (Burns and Alcocer, 1964), Quiché (Fox, 1965), and Ilocano (McKaughan and Forster, 1952). Most of these follow the traditional approach, with lessons explaining some point of grammar, and exercises for the student. An interesting departure from this format is Litteral's textbook on Pidgin English (1969), which was "developed to meet the needs of new members of the New Guinea branch of the Summer Institute of Linguistics" (see his Preface, p. iii). Tape recordings were prepared to accompany the text and enable the learner to follow the pronunciation and intonation as well as the written material. The previous pages of this chapter have referred to technical articles and monographs by members of SIL or written and published under the auspices of SIL. In the current edition of the Bibliography there are about two thousand entries dealing with such items; there are more than that number of entries dealing with items published in vernacular languages. Ever since Townsend's first psychophonetic primer in Nahuatl of Tetelcingo appeared as a supplement to Investigaciones Lingüisticas (1935), one of the main items published in the various branches of SIL has been primers for teaching people to read. They have varied in size all the way from the fourteen booklets of the Soyaltepec Mazatec primer (Gudschinsky, 1954) or the seventeen of Teréna (Perkins, 1958), to a single large volume such as that prepared for the Atta of the Northern Cagayan Province of the Philippines (Whittle and Lusted, 1971) or for the Guanana Indians of Colombia

24 (N. and C. Waltz, n.d.). Generally the non-literate individual needs someone to teach him to read from the primer in his own language. In Huichol (Mexico), however, a self-teaching primer was prepared which presumably requires a minimum amount of explanation for the one who is learning to read (Grimes, 1961). In some instances, transition primers have been published for those who are literate in the national language but who have never read anything in their own mother tongue. Pre-primer materials have been prepared in many languages. These often take the form of alphabet books or number books, or picture books with a brief caption under the pictures. For those who have learned to read, there is a wide variety of literature to be found in the vernacular. For the Atta people of the Philippines there is a book of riddles (Whittle and Lusted, 1970) that offers familiar material on an elementary level. Some of the earliest readers in Mexico consisted of familiar folktales, one of which, from the Sierra Juárez dialect of Zapotee, was translated into a number of other languages (N. and J. Nellis, 1954). Folk tales have provided reading material for the Ekajuk people of Nigeria (W. and R. Kleiner, n.d.), the Western Bukidnon Manobos of the Philippines (R. and B. Elkins, 1968), and the Zunis of New Mexico (Cook, 1972), to mention only a few examples. In recent years vernacular publications have included writings of native authors who have become literate in their own language. Dozens of phrase books have been published to provide a transition between the vernacular and the official language of the country. Although many of these are general in nature, some are limited to a specific theme, like that in Navajo for one who is looking for work (Edgerton and Hill, 1958) or for the Mazatecs who buy and sell in the market (E.V. Pike, 1958). In Papua New Guinea, triglot phrase books have been published for introducing speakers of the vernacular to Pidgin English as well as to standard English. Vocabularies have already been mentioned as technical publications, but one of the main purposes of these is to help the indigenous speaker learn the official language of his country. Booklets dealing with health or hygiene have been published in dozens of indigenous languages. In Mexico a series of booklets dealing with various phases of agriculture have been used with success by the Tzeltal Indians (Jarvis, 1969-1970), and have been translated into at least one neighboring language. In Papua New Guinea several years ago a pamphlet by the Currency Conversion Commission was translated into a number of languages to help the indigenous reader understand the change that was to take place from pounds, shillings, and pence to dollars and cents as the medium of exchange (e.g., Strange, 1965). More recently a number of books have appeared in several languages to prepare New Guineans for independence and self-government (Strange, 1972a, 1972b;D. and G. Strange, n.d.). In most cases, the publication of primers and readers has been largely the

25 responsibility of individual members, often assisted financially by SIL-branch subsidies. In several countries, however, notably Peru and Vietnam, the Ministry of Education has published these for use in the school systems of the respective countries. Other organizations that have provided financial assistance in publishing are the Alliance for Progress (in Central America) and Evangelische Zentralstelle fur Entwicklungshilfe E.V. of West Germany (in Papua New Guinea). One final type of publication that should be mentioned in this chapter is bibliographies. Some members of SIL have published annotated bibliographies dealing with a particular subject such as tagmemics (Pike, 1966; Brend, 1970, 1972), stratificational grammar (Fleming, 1969), American Indian linguistics (I. Davis, 1963; Loriot, 1964), or linguistics in Latin America (Bartholomew, comp., 1969,1971; Wares, comp., 1973). These have all been journal articles or included in larger works. Two monographs have been compiled that are largely bibliographical in nature, one on the languages of India and Nepal (Hugoniot, comp., 1970), and the other on languages of Bolivia (H. and M. Key, 1967). As regards bibliographies of works by members of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, the first was a modest eight-page pamphlet listing 73 works by 33 authors (Wonderly, comp., 1948). Three years later there were 325 entries in the Bibliography, mainly literacy items in 32 Indian languages (Waterhouse, comp., 1951). The third edition was in Spanish (Waterhouse, comp., 1955), and covered twice as many languages as the previous one. The fourth edition was the twenty-fifth anniversary edition (Waterhouse, comp., 1960). The fifth, which was made from a computer printout (Waterhouse, comp., 1964), listed 1,622 items covering 214 languages. The sixth edition, for which the present writer was responsible, was published in 1968, representing the work of more than 670 different authors working in close to 300 languages. Four supplements to the Bibliography have appeared since then, published semi-annually during 1971 and 1972. In 1959, SIL in Peru published a bibliography of works pertaining to that particular branch (Shell, comp., 1959) since its inception thirteen years previously. Two additional branch bibliographies have been published in Peru (Wise, comp., 1964, 1971). The Papua New Guinea branch has twice published its branch bibliography as two separate booklets each time, one dealing with linguistics and anthropology (Nicholson, comp., 1966; Gammon, comp., 1969a) and the other with literacy and translation (Messer, comp., 1966; Gammon, comp., 1969b). In 1973 a separate bibliography was published pertaining to translation, listing items that were produced by members of that branch from 1956 to 1972 (P. Healey, comp., 1973). Other branch bibliographies have been produced in Bolivia (Garrard, comp., 1970), Brazil (Waller, comp., 1973), and Colombia (Walton, comp., 1973). The seventh edition of the Corporation Bibliography (being prepared for

26 publication as this is written) shows an increase of 70% over the previous edition. This may be accounted for partly by the annual growth in membership of the organization, and consequent increase in the number of authors, but perhaps it is mainly due to the increased productivity of writers in the developing program of workshops in linguistics, literacy, and translation. The current edition of the Bibliography differs slightly from previous editions in including items by authors who are not members of SIL but whose work has been published under the auspices of SIL. This includes literacy items written by native authors as well as linguistic items included in SIL publications (e.g., W.S. Jackson, 1972). The majority of technical articles in the Bibliography are in English, with Spanish as the next most frequent language, but items have appeared in German, French, Portuguese, and Vietnamese as well. As members from other countries are added to the ranks of SIL, we can expect to find many more languages other than English represented in future editions, including nonIndo-European ones.

NOTE 1. The term "technical" is used here in a broad sense, covering not only linguistic and ethnographic articles and monographs, but also book reviews, bibliographies, reports on the work of SIL, and similar items written for the most part in English or Spanish. Technical items stand in contrast to vernacular items published for the benefit of speakers of minority languages.

REFERENCES Adams, Patsy 1962 "Textos Culina", Folklore Americano 10, 93-222. Allen, Jerry and Conrad Hurd 1963 Languages of the Cape Hoskins Patrol Post Division of the Talasea Sub-district (Port Moresby: Department oflnformation and Extension Services). 1965 Languages of the Bougainville District (Port Moresby: Department of Information and Extension Services). Aschmann, Herman 1949 Vocabulario de la Lengua Totonaca (Mexico: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano), [revised 1950, 1956, and 1961]. Aulie, Evelyn 1949 "Choi Dictionary" (= Microfilm Collection of Manuscripts on Middle American Cultural Anthropology, 26) (Chicago: University of Chicago Library). Austin, Virginia M. 1966 Attention, Emphasis and Focus in Ata Manobo (= Hartford Studies in Linguistics, 20) (Hartford: Hartford Seminary Foundation). Barker, Milton E. 1966 "Vietnamese-Muong Tone Correspondences", Studies in Comparative Austroasiatic Linguistics, ed. by N. Zide (The Hague: Mouton). Barker, Muriel A. and Milton E. Barker 1970 "Proto-Vietnamuong (Annamuong) Final Consonants and Vowels", Lingua 24, 268-85.

27 Barnard, Myra Lou and Jannette Forster 1954 Dibabaon-Mandayan Vocabulary (Manila: S1L). Bartholomew, Doris 1960 "Some Revisions of Proto-Otomi Consonants", International Journal of American Linguistics 26, 317-29. 1965 "The Reconstruction of Otopamean" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago). 1969 "Linguistics", Handbook of Latin American Studies, 31, ed. by H.E. Adams (Gainesville: University of Florida Press). 1971 "Linguistics", Handbook of Latin American Studies, 33, ed. by D.EJ. Stewart (Gainesville: University of Florida Press). Bascom, Burton 1965 "Proto-Tepiman (Tepehuan-Piman)" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington). Bee, Darlene LaVerne 1973 "Usarufa: A Descriptive Grammar", The Languages of the Eastern Family of the East New Guinea Highland Stock, ed. by Howard McKaughan (Seattle: University of Washington Press). Bendor-Samuel, David, ed. 1971 Tupi Studies I (= SIL Publications in Linguistics and Related Fields, 29) (Norman: Summer Institute of Linguistics of the University of Oklahoma). Bendor-Samuel, John T. 1960 "Some Problems of Segmentation in the Phonological Analysis of Tereno", Word 16, 348-55. Blood, David L. 1964 "Applying the Criteria of Patterning in Cham Phonology", Van-hoa Nguy£tsan 13,515-20. 1967 "Phonological Units in Cham", Anthropological Linguistics 9 (8), 15-32. Blood, Doris 1962 "Reflexes of Proto-Malayopolynesian in Cham", Anthropological Linguistics 4 (9), 11-20. Blood, Henry F. and Evangeline Blood 1969 "The Origin of Dak Nue: A Mnong Rolom Legend Obtained from Muom Nom", Mon-Khmer Studies 3, ed. by David Thomas (Saigon: Linguistic Circle of Saigon and SIL). Brend, Ruth M. 1970 "Tagmemic Theory: An Annotated Bibliography", Journal of English Linguistics 4,7-45. 1972 "Tagmemic Theory: An Annotated Bibliography, Appendix I", Journal of English Linguistics 6,1-16. Brend, Ruth M., ed. 1974 Advances in Tagmemics (= North-Holland Linguistic Series, 9) (Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co.). Brend, Ruth M. and Kenneth L. Pike, eds. 1977 Tagmemics (2 vols.) (The Hague: Mouton). Burns, Donald 1952 "Sistemas Foneticos de Lenguas sin Escritura" (B.A. thesis, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos [Lima]). Burns, Donald and Pablo Alcocer 1964 Quechua Hablado: Unidades 1-8 (Ayacucho: Universidad Nacional de San Cristobal de Huamanga). Canonge, Elliott D. 1957 "Voiceless Vowels in Comanche", International Journal of American Linguistics 23, 63-67. 1958 Comanche Texts (= SIL Publications in Linguistics and Related Fields, 1) (Norman: Summer Institute of Linguistics of the University of Oklahoma).

28 Casad, Eugene H. 1974 Dialect Intelligibility Testing (= SIL Publications in Linguistics and Related Fields, 38) (Norman: Summer Institute of Linguistics of the University of Oklahoma). Chapman, William H. 1971 Introduction to Practical Phonetics (= Introduction to Practical Linguistics) (Merstham, England: SIL). Chenoweth, Vida 1972 Melodic Perception and Analysis: A Manual on Ethnic Melody (Ukarumpa: SIL). Christiansen, L.C. 1937 "Totonaco", Investigaciones Lingüisticas 4, 151-53. Cook, Curtis, ed. 1972 Ho'n a.wan Delapna.we (Our Stories) (Gallup, New Mexico: Gallup-McKinley County Schools). Cowan, Marion M. and William R. Merrifield 1968 "The Verb Phrase in Huixtec Tzotzil", Language 44, 284-305. Crawford, John C. 1963 Totontepec Mixe Phonotagmemics (= SIL Publications in Linguistics and Related Fields, 8) (Norman: Summer Institute of Linguistics of the University of Oklahoma). Cunningham, Margaret C. 1969 "Alawa Phonology and Grammar" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Queensland). [revised 1972 and published under the name of M.C. Sharpe (= Australian Aboriginal Studies, 37) (Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies)]. Daly, John P. 1973 A Generative Syntax of Peñoles Mixtee (= SIL Publications in Linguistics and Related Fields, 42) (Norman: Summer Institute of Linguistics of the University of Oklahoma). Davis, Donald R. 1969 "The Distinctive Features of Wantoat Phonemes", Linguistics 47, 5-17. Davis, Irvine 1963 "Bibliography of Keresan Linguistic Sources", International Journal of American Linguistics 29, 289-93. 1966 "Comparative Jé Phonology" ,Estudos Lingüísticos 1, 10-24. Dean, James C. and others 1962 Studies in New Guinea Linguistics by Members of the Summer Institute of Linguistics (= Oceania Linguistic Monographs, 6) (Sydney: University of Sydney). Dyk, Anne 1959 Mixteco Texts