Digital Literacy and Language Maintenance: The Case of the Seri language (Mexico)

Elin  Emilsson; Fany  Muchembled; Tania  Santos; Oscar  Miranda; Carolyn   O’Meara

Elin Emilsson Universidad Pedagógica Nacional; Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Fany Muchembled Instituto Tecnológico de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Hermosillo https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8250-4728
Tania Santos Universidad Veracruzana https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9546-0661
Oscar Miranda Instituto Tecnológico de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Estado de México https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3180-889X
Carolyn O’Meara Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2878-8795

Keywords: digital literacy, language maintenance, indigenous languages, intercultural education, language in use, Mexico

Abstract

This article describes a project in North-western Mexico, in the State of Sonora, in conjunction with the Seri community (known as Comcaac as an exoterm), centred on digital materials and literacy practices that are culturally relevant and encourage not only strengthening the Indigenous language among youngsters, but also the dissemination of cultural practices and ways of seeing the world. Financed by the National Council for Humanities, Science and Technology (CONAHCYT) with a policy that is centred on creating horizontal links among members of the community, educators, and researchers, it aims to establish a vigorous digital platform with activities and interactive materials that are actively used, created in a collective manner based on the cultural values of this unique ethnic group.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Elin Emilsson, Universidad Pedagógica Nacional; Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

Professor

Fany Muchembled, Instituto Tecnológico de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Hermosillo

PhD, Faculty Member

Tania Santos , Universidad Veracruzana

Student of the Doctoral Programme “Language Studies and Applied Linguistics”

Oscar Miranda, Instituto Tecnológico de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Estado de México

Assistant Professor, Researcher

Carolyn O’Meara, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

PhD, Associate Research Professor

References

Bennett Ruth, Mattz Pam, Jackson Silish, Campbell Harold. (1999). The Place of Writing in Preserving an Oral Language. En Revitalizing Indigenous Languages. Jon Reyhner, Gina Cantoni, Robert N. St. Clair, Evangeline Parsons Yazzie (eds.). Flagstaff, Arizona: Northern Arizona University. 84-102.

Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters

Catalogue of Endangered Languages. 2021. University of Hawaii at Manoa.http://www.endangeredlanguages.com

Comisión Nacional para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas (n.d.), Índice de reemplazoLingüístico, Retrieved on January 8th, 2020, from https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/35730/cdi-indice-reemplazoetnolinguistico.pdf

Council of Europe (2020), Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment – Companion volume, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg, available at www.coe.int/lang-cefr.

Cummins, J. (2000) Language, Power and Pedagogy: Bilingual Children in the Crossfire. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Dietz, Gunther (2009). Multiculturalism, Interculturality and Diversity in Education: ananthropological approach. Münster, New York, München & Berlin: Waxmann

Eberhard, David M., Gary F. Simons, and Charles D. Fennig (eds.). (2021). Ethnologue: Languages of the World. Twenty-fourth edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Online version: http://www.ethnologue.com.

Feltes, J. M. (2017). Metodologías pedagógicas para el desarrollo de las habilidades del -bilingüismo, la biliteracidad y la comprensión intercultural en dos o más lenguas nacionales. México: INEE.

Fishman, J. (2013) Language maintenance, language shift, and reversing languages shift. In Bhatia, T. K. y Ritchie W. (Eds), The Handbook of Bilingualism and Multilingualism. Malden: Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 466-494.

Grenoble, L. A y L. J. Whaley (2005). Saving Languages. An Introduction to Language Revitalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hamel, R. E. (2016) Bilingual education for indigenous peoples in Mexico. En O. García et al. (eds.),Bilingual and Multilingual Education, Encyclopedia of Language and Education. Cham, Suiza: Springer, pp. 395-407. DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02324-3_30-2n.

Hinton Leanne (2015) “What counts as a ‘success’ in language revitalization?” Video de Youtube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNlUJxri3QY&t=181s

Hornberger, N. H. y King, K. A. (1996). Bringing the language forward: School-based initiative for Quechua language revitalización in Ecuador and Bolivia. En Hornberger, N. H. Indigenous Literacies in the Americas. Language Planning from the Bottom up. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 299-320.

INEE (2014). Comca’ac, Desemboque de los Seris, Pitiquito, Sonora. Consulta previa, libre einformada a pueblos y comunidades indígenas sobre la evaluación educativa. México

Johnson, G. M. (2016). Technology use among Indigenous adolescents in remote regions of Australia. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 21(2), 218-231.

Johnson, G. M., & Oliver, R. (n.d.). Small Screen Technology Use among Indigenous Boarding School Adolescents from Remote Regions of Western Australia. Perth, Western Australia.

Juanita L. Watters. (2008). Ownership through knowledge: Introducing a hands-on literacy method to indigenous people of Mexico. Santa Barbara papers in Linguistics. Volume 18: Proceedings from the Ninth Workshop on American Indigenous Languages

Kaplan, R. B., Baldauf, R. B., & Kamwangamalu, N. (2011). Why educational language plans sometimes fail. Current Issues in Language Planning, Vol. 12. No. 2, 105–124.

Li, K. Y., Zahiri, M. A., & Jumaat, N. F. (2020). Understanding Digital Media Literacy in a DigitalAge: A Review of Current Frameworks. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(05), 1010-1015.

Manuela Guilherme & Gunther Dietz (2015) Difference in diversity: multiple perspectives onmulticultural, intercultural, and transcultural conceptual complexities, Journal ofMulticultural Discourses, 10:1, 1-21, DOI: 10.1080/17447143.2015.1015539

Marlett, S. A. (2010). A place for writing: Language cultivation and literacy in the Seri community.Revue Roumaine de Linguistique 55(2). 183-194

Marlett, S. A. 2020. A bibliography for the study of Seri history, language and culture. Tucson AZ: SIL. http://www.mexico.sil.org/resources/archives/53261

Miranda-Villanueva, O. M. (2020). What Undergraduate Students from Tecnologico deMonterrey, State of Mexico Campus, Learn within Digital Environments. Differences in Gender, and use of Digital Media, and Social Media. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 15(1), 24-37.

Miranda, O. et. Al. (2023). Diagnóstico de la interacción de profesores,estudiantes, niñas, niños, adolescentes y hablantes delengua Seri de Punta Chueca, Sonora, con mediosdigitales. Unpublished report.

Müfin S. (2007) The Semiotic Approach and Language Teaching and Learning. In Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies 3(1). Cognizance Research Associates

Online ISSN: 1305-578X

Nigh, R. and Bertely, M. (2018) Conocimiento y educación indígena en Chiapas, México: un método intercultural. Indigenous Knowledge and Education in Chiapas, Mexico: An Intercultural Method. In Diálogos sobre educación. Temas actuales en investigación educativa, vol. 9, núm. 16, pp. 1-22, 2018. Universidad de Guadalajara, Centro Universitario de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades. Retrieved from: https://www.redalyc.org/journal/5534/553457901003/html/

O’Meara, Carolyn (compiler). (2015). Comcaac coiziixquihiticöipactojxah, ziixquihocoaajxahHai quihptiimmistajcoiiicp hac. Instituto de Investigaciones Filológicas, UNAM. (Compilation of texts in the Seri language with an introduction in Spanish)

Outakoski, H. et al. (2019). Researching Writing Development to Support Language Maintenanceand Revitalization: Design and Methodological Challenges. En: Cocq, C. y Sullivan, K. P. H (eds.).Perspectives on Indigenous Writing and Literacies. Leiden: Brill, pp. 165-185.

Piller, I. (2011). Intercultural communication: A critical approach. Edinburgh, UK: EUP.

Prayaga, P., Rennie, E., Pechenkina, E., & Hunter, A. (2017). Digital Literacy and Other FactorsInfluencing the Success of Online Courses in Remote Indigenous Communities. In J. Frawley,S. Larkin, & J. Smith, Indigenous Pathways, Transitions and Participation in Higher Education. From Policy to Practice (pp. 189-210). Singapore: Springer Open.

Richards, J. (2006) Communicative Language Teaching Today. New York. CUP.

Risager, K. (2011). The cultural dimensions of language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 44, 485–499. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444811000280

Rodríguez-de-Dios, I., Igartua, J., & González-Vázquez, A. (2016). Development and Validation of a Digital Literacy Scale for Teenagers. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (TEEM’16) (pp. 1067-1073).New York: ACM.

Samuel-Azran, T. (2012). The Mobile Phone and Indigenous Teens: A Comparative Analysis ofBedouin and Tel-Aviv Teens. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 41(2), 153-171.

UNESCO (Grupo especial de expertos sobre las lenguas en peligro). (2003). “Vitalidad y peligro dedesaparición de las lenguas”. Paris: UNESCO

UNESCO, 2020. Declaración de los Pinos (Chapoltepek). Construyendo un decenio de acción para las lenguas indígenas. https://www.cultura.gob.mx/dgai/descargas/los-pinos-chapoltepek.pdf

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Woolhiser, C. (2007). Communities of practice and linguistic divergence: Belarusophone studentsas agents of linguistic change. Harvard Ukranian Studies. Vol. 29, No. 1/4, pp, 371-404.