INDIGENOUS ALASKAN LANGUAGES
by Lydia Alvert
This paper, which presents secondary and primary research, claims that the federal government of the United States should fund and implement language immersion and revitalization programs across Alaska. Because Alaska’s languages are dying, it would serve as a form of restitution. Programs in the past have proven successful, and it would be a step in recognizing the importance of Native Alaskan culture.
Language is an essential part of culture. It carries “philosophical and spiritual” meanings that cultures value (Breinig, 2006, p. 116). It brings to the present memories from the past. It unifies people and provides opportunities for self-expression. So, the devastation Indigenous Alaskan communities and peoples feel towards losing their languages is understandable. With the gradual loss of these languages, Alaska Native cultures begin to blur as other languages, cultures, and values are forced upon them. Individuals, communities, and villages have recognized the danger of dying languages and have made, and are making, an effort to revitalize them. While these efforts are valued and appreciated, they are, unfortunately, not enough to save some of Alaska’s Indigenous languages. Increased funding is needed to help solve this issue. This resource is something most individuals, communities, and villages cannot provide. The federal government should fund and implement Indigenous Alaskan language immersion and revitalization programs across Alaska. These programs should be implemented because many Alaskan languages are moribund, and the programs would serve as partial restitution in response to the damage forced assimilation has inflicted upon Indigenous communities in Alaska. More programs should be funded because past language immersion and revitalization programs have proven successful at restoring languages. Creating more programs to promote the learning of Alaska’s Indigenous languages would also be a step in recognizing the importance of Indigenous Alaskan culture.
Languages across the world are endangered, or even worse, moribund. Alaska’s Indigenous languages are only a small percentage of the total endangered languages heading for extinction, yet there is still reason for concern for the dying languages in Alaska. Micheal Krauss (1992), a linguist from the University of Alaska Fairbanks, reported that only 2 of the 20 Indigenous languages in Alaska were currently being learned, specifically by children (p. 5). Krauss stated that these two languages were Central Yupik Eskimo and Siberian Yupik Eskimo of St. Lawrence Island (p.5). Since these alarming numbers provided by Krauss were presented in 1992, the number of Alaskan languages being actively taught to children has changed. It is very difficult to find how many Native Alaskan languages are currently being taught to children, but after visiting villages in Western Alaska, it can be observed that the Inupiaq language is currently being taught to children in those communities. A language immersion school located in the MatSu borough, Ya Ne Dah Ah, currently teaches students the Ahtna language. These are two examples among many that demonstrate the intentional effort being invested in the expansion of Alaskan language education.
While the amount of Indigenous Alaskan languages being taught and learned has increased since 1992, other Indigenous Alaskan languages have become extinct, or close to extinction since then. Krauss (1992) brought to light that one of Alaska’s languages, Eyak, only had “two aged speakers” (p.4). The Alaska Native Languages website informed readers that, in 2008, the “last full-blooded Eyak and native speaker of the language” unfortunately passed away (https://www.alaskanativelanguages.org/eyak). Jeane Breinig (2006), an Alaskan Haida from Kasaan, Alaska, reported that there were “only about ten or so remaining once fluent Alaskan Haida speakers, and they are all seventy-five years or older” (p. 110). Breinig also reported that there was a time when Haida had not been learned for forty to fifty years, with English being the dominant language “used since about the 1930s” (p. 110).
Individuals might ask if the loss of language is truly detrimental. Ken Hale (1992), from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, pointed out people might argue that “language loss has been a reality through history” (p. 1). Extinct languages can be viewed similar to that of natural selection—they evolve and adapt to their surroundings and environments to survive. Are there truly any consequences for moribund languages?
The Eyak and Haida People have shown how they have faced, or are facing the consequences of a language going extinct. Alaskan Haida elders have expressed concern that new learners of the language will not grasp the deeper, philosophical, and spiritual meanings of the words (Breinig, 2006, p. 116). With the loss of language, culture begins to be threatened since many people turn to languages to “provide cultural identity” (DeJong, 1998, p. 42). The loss of culture can fracture communities, leaving people with little sense of belonging. The loss of language and culture also brings “an irretrievable loss of diverse and interesting intellectual wealth, the priceless products of human mental industry” (Hale, 1992, p. 36). The mental state of humans would decline as the extinction of languages rises. With a lack of identity, a nonexistent sense of belonging, and fewer diverse ideas, comes a lack of mental health. In a day and age where mental health is already a prevalent problem, the extinction of languages should be avoided.
The federal government should fund and implement language immersion and revitalization programs in Alaska because many of Alaska’s Indigenous languages are endangered. Funding these programs could also serve as partial restitution for the negative impacts cultural assimilation has brought upon communities in Alaska. Immersion programs can be defined as an attempt to bring individuals to a fluent and knowledgeable state of the target language, “who have positive attitudes regarding language use” (DeJong, 1998, p. 37).
Language immersion and revitalization programs require numerous resources to be successful. When discussing Native American immersion programs, DeJong (1998) claimed that in order to achieve a successful immersion program, “Native American communities need administrative support; community and parental support and involvement; trained language teachers; appropriate print materials in the target language; and staff development” (p. 44). The qualifications for a successful program are extensive, which in turn would require significant amounts of funding.
The federal government should fund these programs because it would serve as possible restitution for the loss of Indigenous Alaskan languages influenced by western culture. Krauss (1992) claimed that one of the main reasons for the extinction of languages is “language suppression in forced assimilation or assimilatory education” (p. 6). Joseph J. Brenckle, Jr. (1975) stated that “English has understandably been a cultural force since 1867,” in regards to Alaska native languages (p. 424).
The extent of force English culture has brought upon Indigenous Alaskan culture can be implied through many statements made by Native Alaskan individuals. Breinig (2006) stated that the English language was used as a “survival tool,” and the use of her native language, Alaskan Haida, began to decline since the use of the English language (p. 111). Using the term “survival tool” indicates a sense of danger to the Alaskan Haida peoples and their language. Speaking a language in fear of the dangers that may follow if other languages are spoken indicates that a language has forced dominance upon the other languages. In this instance, English dominantly forced over the Alaskan Haida language. This began the gradual endangerment of the Haida language.
An elder from a Yup’ik community shared with Jerry Lipka (1994) that white people “told us to get rid of our language, and now you tell us to keep it. These confusing messages create uncertainty” (p. 90). Though paraphrased, the elder told this to Lipka after he conducted a project through the University of Alaska Fairbanks in an attempt to improve language instruction in the Manokotak community. The elder continued, by saying that “the Yup’ik villages surrounding Manokotak having switched to English puts additional stress on Manokotak. The loss of Yup’ik greatly troubles the Yup’ik participants in this project and simultaneously, doubts exist about maintaining Yup’ik because of possible inference with their children’s success in the Western world” (p. 90). Through Lipka’s paraphrasing, it is revealed that there are others who oppose maintaining the Yup’ik language in schools. The reason for this opposition appears to be out of fear and worry for Native Alaskan children’s future in the Western world. This concern indicates that the value and measure of success in Yup’ik culture has been suppressed by the value and measure of success in western culture. With culture and values suppressed, the language also becomes suppressed.
While some people may not accept restitution provided by the government, the offer should still be made by the federal government in the hopes of implementing more language immersion programs. Implementing these language programs would contribute to restoring many Indigenous Alaskan languages, as well as Indigenous cultures.
Indigenous Alaskan languages can be saved without the federal government. With the help of grants from organizations such as the Indigenous Language Institute, Endangered Languages Documentation Programme, and the Foundation for Endangered Languages, many immersion schools and language restoration projects have been created (https://www.alaskanativelanguages.org/program-setup). These schools and projects have proven successful at restoring Native Alaskan languages for the coming generations. With help and funding from the Sealaska Heritage Institute (SHI) “education, language, and cultural programs for southeast Alaska’s Tlingit, Haida, and Tsimshian peoples” have been implemented (Breinig, 2006, p.113). The programs consisted of “immersion retreats, language workshops, and teacher training” and are responsible for the growing knowledge of the Alaskan Haida language (p. 113).
Since SHI has been successful in the revitalization of Indigenous Alaskan languages, more programs similar to theirs should be implemented. These programs would be increasingly successful if provided with more funding from the federal government. The growth of Alaskan languages would continue to advance due to the increased amount of successful language immersion and revitalization programs.
Implementing these programs would also be a step in recognizing the importance of Indigenous Alaskan culture. Culture offers identity, belonging, diversity, and many other traits necessary to the success, health, and overall betterment of communities. Because these traits are necessary, it is necessary to celebrate, respect, and value culture. Urging individuals to learn more about their language places importance on their culture. So, implementing programs to promote the learning of Indigenous Alaskan languages would help place value on Native Alaskan culture.
Immersion programs aim to “[foster] positive attitudes for those who speak the [targeted] language and [enhance] pride in their culture” (DeJong, 1998, p. 37). Many Native Alaskan students enrolled in schools across Alaska already feel a sense of pride in their culture. A survey conducted by Carole L. Seyfrit (1997) and Lawrence C. Hamilton concluded that students want more of their culture to be taught in school (p. 142, 143). Approximately 80% of students surveyed wished that their school spent more time teaching about Native culture and language (p. 142). A ninth-grader stated that they need to “learn more about our cultures and tradition so our cultures won’t die away. We need to keep our cultures going on forever” (p. 143).
Many students see the value and importance of Native Alaskan languages and cultures. They are requesting to be taught about Alaskan languages and cultures. Implementing more language immersion and revitalization programs would contribute to recognizing the importance of Indigenous Alaskan culture. It would also validate the desire and importance students already place in Native Alaskan culture. Since people are willing and desire to learn more about Indigenous Alaskan culture, it now becomes a matter of meeting this need and desire with effective and well-funded programs.
Language and culture go hand in hand together. Losing one will result in the gradual loss of the other. It is important to not lose Alaska’s Indigenous languages and cultures, despite the fact that many of them are already endangered. The federal government should fund and implement programs aimed to revitalize Indigenous Alaskan languages across Alaska. This action is necessary because many of Alaska’s languages are endangered and going extinct, it could act as a form of restitution for the damage caused by forced cultural assimilation upon communities in Alaska, and similar programs already implemented have proven successful. These programs will promote the learning of Native Alaskan languages and will contribute to recognizing the importance of Indigenous Alaskan culture.
Breinig, J. (2006). Alaskan Haida Stories of Language Growth and Regeneration. American Indian Quarterly, 30(½), 110-118. https://www.jsotr.org/stable/4138915
Brenckle, J. (1975). Russian Influence on Native Alaskan Culture. The Slavic and East European Journal, 19(4), 421-424 https://www.jstor.org/stable/305710
DeJong, D. (1998). Is Immersion the Key to Language Renewal? Journal of American Indian Education, 37(3), 31-46. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24398383
Hale, K. (1992). Endangered Languages. Language, 68(1), 1-42. https://www.jstor.org/stable/416368
Krauss, M. (1992). Endangered Languages. Language, 68(1), 1-42. https://www.jstor.org/stable/416368
Lipka, J. (1994). Language, Power, and Pedagogy: Whose School Is It? Peabody Journal of Education, 69(2), 71-93. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1492746
Seyfrit, C. & Hamilton, L. (1997). Alaska Native Youth and Their Attitudes toward Education. Arctic Anthropology, 34(1), 135-148. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40316429
Lydia Alvert is a Alaska Middle College School student at Mat-Su College. Selected by Annette Hornung.