With the accelerating loss of linguistic diversity in our world, it is a time for serious thought about how to record as much as possible of the richness still around us. In many cases what we choose to document may be the principal record of an entire linguistic tradition, both for the descendants of the speakers and for others seeking to understand the possibilities of the human mind. It is a time to consider not only how to fill recognizable gaps in current knowledge, but also how to provide the basis for answers to questions we do not yet know enough to ask. In most cases, these goals can best be met by a mix of styles of collaboration between speakers and linguists. The product of fieldwork will ultimately be shaped not only by the nature of the language, but also by the methodologies chosen, by the roles assumed by the speakers, and by the preparation and sensitivity of the linguist.

Methodology

The record that results from linguistic fieldwork depends of course on the goal of the particular project, which in turn determines the kinds of methodologies that will be effective. The goal may be quite specific, such as understanding patterns of vowel harmony. It may be as ambitious as the documentation of an entire language in as much depth as possible.

Central Alaskan Yup'ik is a language of the Eskimo-Aleut family, spoken in southwestern Alaska by over 10,000 people. Like other languages in the family, Yup'ik has much to contribute to the study of valency-changing derivation, particularly because of its explicit specification of grammatical relations and its wealth of valency-changing devices. The roles of participants in events and states are distinguished both by case suffixes on nouns and by pronominal suffixes on verbs. The language is highly polysynthetic, with hundreds of derivational suffixes, many of which affect argument structure. The rich inventory of valency-changing devices provides a fruitful basis for cross-linguistic comparison, showing us ways in which such devices can vary in their semantic, syntactic and discourse effects.

The basic grammatical structures of the Eskimoan languages are well understood, thanks to pioneering work on Greenlandic by Egede (1750, 1760), Kleinschmidt (1851), and many others working with Eskimo-Aleut languages since that time. Fine descriptions of Yup'ik are now available, especially Woodbury (1981), Jacobson (1984, 1995), Miyaoka (1984, 1987, 1996 and 1997) and Reed, Miyaoka, Jacobson, Afcan and Krauss (1977). These works have proven invaluable in the investigation of the structures discussed here. Additional studies are in Mithun (1996). Material cited in the present work comes primarily from conversations among members of the Charles family and their friends of Bethel, Alaska, especially Nick Charles (NC), Elena Charles (EC), George Charles (GC) and Elizabeth Charles Ali (EA).

Basic morphological structure

Yup'ik words are classified as either uninflected (particles) or inflected (nouns and verbs).

At long last the tragedy of language loss worldwide has begun to enter the public conscious. In the past, individual communities and linguists have grieved over the disappearance of particular languages, but until recently the general public has been unaware of the accelerating loss of one our most valuable human intellectual resources. As the drama is repeated over and over around the world, it is easy to forget a crucial feature of the phenomenon: the very diversity that makes the loss irreversible. A great variety of languages are being threatened by a multiplicity of factors, in a wide range of community situations. Attitudes toward the impending loss differ both across and within communities. The human and material resources available to those hoping to work toward revitalization and documentation are similarly varied. Because of this diversity, the kinds of goals that are envisioned and feasible differ as well. What these communities do share is the significance of the moment: what they choose to do now, as well as what they fail to do, will have irrevocable consequences for future generations. With business as usual, all will be lost to the descendants of current speakers.

The diversity of languages

Many modern residents of North America are themselves unaware of the phenomenally rich linguistic diversity indigenous to their continent. We will never know exactly how many languages were once spoken in North America, but documentation survives of around 270 distinct, mutually unintelligible languages north of Mexico, and there were once many more.

Cayuga, an Iroquoian language, was originally spoken in what is now New York State. When first encountered by Europeans, the Cayuga lived in villages around Cayuga Lake, surrounded by the other related Five Nations Iroquois. To the west were the Seneca, to the east the Onondaga, beyond them the Oneida, and finally, the Mohawk. Due to a series of unfortunate events, Cayuga speakers now live in two distantly separated communities, one in Ontario and the other in Oklahoma. While the language is still very much alive in Ontario, it is receding in Oklahoma, as fewer and fewer speakers use it on rarer and rarer occasions. Not surprisingly, the Cayuga spoken in Oklahoma has begun to differ in subtle ways from that spoken in Ontario.

Historical background

The Cayuga had occupied the same land for centuries before the American Revolution. When war erupted, they were drawn into battle on the side of the British, and in 1779 an American expedition destroyed their villages. This led to their dispersal. Some Cayugas remained with their land, but others went to live with Senecas at Buffalo Creek, and still others went with other Iroquoians to Ontario to form the Six Nations Reserve. By the end of the Revolution, only about 130 Cayugas remained at Cayuga Lake, 350 were with the Seneca at Buffalo Creek, and 382 were at Six Nations. (For a detailed discussion of the history of the Cayuga, see Sturtevant 1978; White, Englebrecht and Tooker 1978.)