Re: Anishinaabemowin language

Susan Brill (brill@bradley.bradley.edu)
Tue, 4 Apr 1995 15:57:45 -0500

I'd like to concur with Timothy Nitz' comments. Yes, what is most
important is that the languages are being taught. Granted, ideally the
instructors ought to be tribal members or at least non-tribal members who
are *fluent* to the extent that they can really [re]present the language
as fully and accurately as possible. I guess that I was fortunate since
my years of study of Navajo were all with Native speakers (UNM-Gallup and
UNM-Albuquerque).

I do have one specific comment in response to Timothy Nitz' thoughts
which I append:

On Mon, 3 Apr 1995 nitz@unixg.ubc.ca (Timothy A. Nitz) wrote:

> Anyway, I guess I am most inclined to think that all efforts at teaching
> or studying Native languages are more important than the all too common
> silence. Has anyone yet figured out what the ratio of courses in the
> so-called 'Modern Languages' to Indigenous Languages is in North American
> Universities and primary schools? And how about 'foreign language require-
> ments' in BA's MA's and PhD's? Now there's an interesting question, eh?

The University of New Mexico doctoral program in English permitted me to
offer Navajo and French (the language of my high school boarding school)
in fulfillment of my PhD language requirements. I believe that I was the
first person to do this in that program.

Susan Brill brill@bradley.bradley.edu
Bradley University