Purism, prescriptivism, and privilege: Choctaw language ideologies and their impact on teaching and learning

301 Pages·2015·3.156 MB·English

by  Elizabeth A. Kickham

UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA

GRADUATE COLLEGE

PURISM, PRESCRIPTIVISM, AND PRIVILEGE:
CHOCTAW LANGUAGE IDEOLOGIES AND THEIR IMPACT ON
TEACHING AND LEARNING

A DISSERTATION

SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

By

ELIZABETH A. KICKHAM
Norman, Oklahoma
2015
PURISM, PRESCRIPTIVISM, AND PRIVILEGE:
CHOCTAW LANGUAGE IDEOLOGIES AND THEIR IMPACT ON
TEACHING AND LEARNING

A DISSERTATION APPROVED FOR THE
DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY

BY

______________________________
Dr. Sean O’Neill, Chair

______________________________
Dr. Gus Palmer

______________________________
Dr. Misha Klein

______________________________
Dr. Lesley Rankin-Hill

______________________________
Dr. Marcia Haag
© Copyright by ELIZABETH A. KICKHAM 2015
All Rights Reserved.
For: Jamey, Sean, Rheannon, and Aidan. Just keep swimming.
Acknowledgements

As no work is completed in isolation, several entities and individuals deserve
recognition for their support of this research. First, and foremost, I would like to
thank the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma and the Choctaw Language Department,
specifically, for graciously allowing me to conduct this research. I want to
specifically thank Joy Culbreath, Executive Director of Education at Choctaw
Nation of Oklahoma, and James Parrish, Director of the Choctaw Language
Department, for their consideration and support throughout the research process.

I would also like to acknowledge the National Science Foundation and
Documenting Endangered Languages for supporting this work through a
Dissertation Improvement Grant (1061588), which funded the fieldwork process.
The University of Oklahoma Department of Anthropology also deserves
appreciation for supporting preliminary research through the Bell Research Grant
and later conference travel to present and refine findings and analysis through the
Opler Memorial Travel Grant. The University of Oklahoma Women’s and Gender
Studies Department supported the preliminary research for this dissertation through
an Alice Mary Robertson scholarship. Granddaughter of a missionary to the
Cherokee and daughter of missionaries to the Creeks, Alice Mary Robertson was
not only the second female U.S. congressperson and the first Oklahoma female
congressperson, but was instrumental in documenting and preserving the Mvskoke
Creek language. I am honored to continue her tradition of language work.
iv
I would also like to express deep gratitude to the members of my committee, who
generously shared many hours of their time to discuss issues concerning
negotiating working with consultants, understanding theory, and interpreting
interactions. Each member contributed significantly to this project in unique ways,
from enhancing my understanding of the dynamics of working within a
community, to discussing the intricacies of ethnicity theory, to teaching me to
embrace narrative and simply exhorting me to persevere. This committee taught
me to think critically, challenge my own assumptions, and to view obstacles as
opportunities.

Thanks are also due to the friends, colleagues, and family who supported me during
this process. The University of Oklahoma Writing Center provided early guidance
on the writing process and, through their innovative program “Camp Completion”
gave me the final push needed to move from drafting to completed draft. Moira
Ozias, my writing consultant and Lisa Bradley, friend and librarian, are owed a
debt of gratitude for their generously and selflessly listening to me think through
issues and theory, reviewing several drafts of this work, and providing valuable
editing services when I was too close to the product to see my own errors. My
family are also to be thanked, not only for putting up with a dissertation writer, but
for their encouragement and tolerance during my years of education.

Finally, I would like to thank the many consultants without whom this work would
have been impossible. First, Dannielle Brannam, Coordinator of the Choctaw
v
Nation of Oklahoma Institutional Review Board proved instrumental during the
editorial review process. The University of Oklahoma Choctaw teachers were
generous with their time in allowing me to visit and survey their classes. Several of
these university teachers also served as key consultants, helping me to better
understand class dynamics, teaching choices, and Choctaw cultural and speech
norms. Leroy Sealy, in particular, helped me to understand the nature of Choctaw
narrative and how to engage in the community in a meaningful and respectful
manner.

The Choctaw community class teachers and students openly welcomed me into
their community, taught me to sing, fed me, and on occasion, even housed me.
Teachers and students were not only open with their time, but showed sincere
interest in the project and its goals, and referred me to other community resources.
Among these teachers, a few became close mentors who were essential as
collaborators, reviewing writing, suggesting revisions or refinement, and providing
deeper understanding. Most of the teachers and students who helped with this
project remain anonymous by request, but one deserves specific recognition by
name. Richard Adams, former Assistant Director of the Choctaw Language
Department, is a man I am honored to call mentor and a friend. Richard is a
treasure to the Choctaw language community and was invaluable in collaborating
in the design and management of this project. Under his considerable, yet gentle
guidance, this project developed into a community-focused, dialogic ethnography,
vi
not just about teaching and learning the Choctaw languages, but about
understanding what and why Choctaw learning is.
vii
Table of Contents

Acknowledgements……………….…………………………………………. iv
List of Tables……………………….………………………………..…..….. x
List of Figures……………………….……………………………................. xi
Abstract……………………………………………………………................ xii
Chapter 1: Introduction: Chahta Kilanumpa: Let’s Speak Choctaw….…...… 1
Chapter 2: Language Ideology and Second Language Learning
in the Native American Context………………..………….....….. 29
Chapter 3: Humanizing Research: Critical Discourse Analysis
and Collaborative Ethnography……………………………..…... 85
Chapter 4: No Elephants or Choclish Here: Language Purism,
Identity, and Strategically Employed Ethnicity………….......….. 107
Chapter 5: That's not how my grandmother said it!: Prescriptivism,
Dialect, Geography and Power in Oklahoma Choctaw………..… 151
Chapter 6: The Dictionary and the Bible: Privileging Literacy and
Linguistics in Choctaw Language Education………………....… 201
Chapter 7: Opening a Dialog: Language Ideologies and
Teacher Training……………………………………………..…. 240
Chapter 8: Conclusion: Understanding Language Ideologies
and Community Language Work…………………………….…. 260
References………………………………………………………………....… 267

viii
Appendix A: University of Oklahoma Institutional Review Board Approval… 283
Appendix B: Statement of Support from Choctaw nation of Oklahoma
Director, School of Choctaw Language………………………..... 284
Appendix C: Statement of Support from Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma
Executive Director of Education..……………………………... 285
Appendix D: Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma
Institutional Review Board Approval Letter………………..… 286

ix