From elicitation to text: a note on linguistic fieldwork
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22201/enesmorelia.26832763e.2025.15.166Keywords:
fieldwork, language documentation, natural discourse, Yuman languages, endangered languagesAbstract
The main activity that informs language documentation is the collection of a sample of naturally occurring speech (texts) in a community of speakers. Textual data are often supplemented by elicitation sessions that allow to clarify the grammatical status of phrases and words out of context. In the case of severely endangered and moribund languages, the collection of natural speech becomes a challenge, as the last speakers often use their native language on very limited occasions. Based on the experiences of documenting the Ko’alh language (Yuman family, Baja California, Mexico), this paper discusses the possibility of encouraging native-speaking collaborators to produce natural speech during elicitation sessions in order to obtain a more balanced sample of linguistic data. The criteria to be taken into account in elicitation are illustrated with concrete examples. An analysis of its advantages and limitations allows for the proposal of some methodological guidelines for combining traditional elicitation and oral text collection within the same activity.
References
Austin, Peter K. (2016). Language documentation 20 years on. En Luna Filipovi´c y Martin Pütz (Eds.), Endangered languages and languages in danger: Issues of documentation, policy, and language rights (pp. 147-170). John Benjamins.
Berman, Ruth A. y Dan Isaac Slobin (Eds.) (1994). Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bochnak, M. Ryan y Lisa Matthewson (2020). Techniques in complex semantic fieldwork. Annual Review of Linguistics 6; 261-283.
Bowern, Claire (2008). Linguistic fieldwork: A practical guide. Palgrave Macmillan.
Burton, Strang y Lisa Matthewson (2015). Targeted construction storyboards in semantic fieldwork. En M. Ryan Bochnak y Lisa Matthewson (Eds.), Methodologies in semantic fieldwork (pp. 135-156). Oxford University Press.
Caldecott, Marion y Karsten Koch (2014). Using mixed media tools for eliciting discourse in indigenous languages. Language Documentation & Conservation 8; 209-240.
Chelliah, Shobhana L. (2001). The role of text collection and elicitation in linguistic fieldwork. En Paul Newman y Martha Ratliff (Eds.), Linguistic fieldwork (pp. 152-165). Cambridge University Press.
Chelliah, Shobhana L. y Willem de Reuse (2011). Handbook of descriptive linguistic fieldwork. Springer.
Clark, Thomas L. (1971). Elicitation in linguistic fieldwork. American Speech 46(1/2); 52-57.
Crane, Thera Marie y Axel Fleisch (2019). Towards a fieldwork methodology for eliciting distinctions in lexical aspect in Bantu. En Lotta Aunio y Axel Fleisch (Eds.), Linguistic diversity research among speakers of isiNdebele and Sindebele in South Africa (pp. 129-179). Finnish Oriental Society.
Dahl, Östen (1985). Tense and aspect systems. Blackwell.
Dale, Ian R. H. (1978). Beyond intuition: The use of questionnaires in linguistic investigation. Anthropological Linguistics 20(4); 158-166.
Evans, Nicholas (2001). The last speaker is dead – long live the last speaker! En Paul Newman y Martha Ratliff (Eds.), Linguistic fieldwork (pp. 250-281). Cambridge University Press.
Everett, Daniel L. (2001). Monolingual field research. En Paul Newman y Martha Ratliff (Eds.), Linguistic fieldwork (pp. 166-188). Cambridge University Press.
Field, Margaret y Amy Miller (2018). Documentation of the Baja California Yuman languages Kumeyaay and Ko’alh. Endangered Languages Archive. Recuperado el 18 de febrero de 2025 de https://www.elararchive.org/dk0357/.
García Landa, Laura y Roland Terborg (2011). La vitalidad de las lenguas indígenas de México: un estudio en tres contextos. En Roland Terborg y Laura García Landa (Coords.), Muerte y vitalidad de lenguas indígenas y las presiones sobre sus hablantes (pp. 11-28). Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Hayes, Alfred S. (1954). Field procedures while working with Diegueño. International Journal of American Linguistics 20(3); 185-194.
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. (1998). Documentary and descriptive linguistics. Linguistics 36(1); 161-195.
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. (2006). Language documentation: What is it and what is it good for? En Jost Gippert, Nikolaus P.
Himmelmann y Ulrike Mosel (Eds.), Essentials of language documentation (pp. 1-30). De Gruyter.
INALI (2010). Proyecto de documentación inicial de la lengua ku’áhl. Informe ejecutivo. Instituto Nacional de Lenguas Indígenas. Recuperado el 19 de febrero de 2025 de https://site.inali.gob.mx/pdf/estudios_opiniones/Documentacion_kuahl.pdf.
Jakobson, Roman (1944). Franz Boas’ approach to language. International Journal of American Linguistics 10(4); 188-195.
Joel, Judith (1964). Classification of the Yuman languages. En William Bright (Ed.), Studies in Californian linguistics (pp. 99-105). University of California Press.
Kassian, Alexei; George Starostin; Anna Dybo y Vasiliy Chernov (2010). The Swadesh wordlist: An attempt at semantic specification. Journal of Language Relationship 4; 46-89.
Kinloch, A. M. (1971). The use of pictures in elicitation. American Speech 46(1/2); 38-46.
Krauss, Michael (2007). Classification and terminology for degrees of language endangerment. En Matthias Brenzinger (Ed.), Language diversity endangered (pp. 1-8). Mouton de Gruyter.
Kroeber, Alfred (1943). Classification of the Yuman languages. University of California Publications in Linguistics 1; 21-40.
Lee, Nala Huiying y John Van Way (2016). Assessing levels of endangerment in the Catalogue of Endangered Languages (ELCat) using the Language Endangerment Index (LEI). Language in Society 45(2); 271-292.
Lehmann, Christian (2001). Language documentation: a program. En Walter Bisang (Ed.), Aspects of typology and universals (pp. 83-97). Akademie.
Lewis, M. Paul y Gary F. Simons (2010). Assessing endangerment: Expanding Fishman’s GIDS. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique 55(2); 103-120.
Matthewson, Lisa (2004). On the methodology of semantic fieldwork. International Journal of American Linguistics 70(4); 369-415.
Miller, Amy (2018). Phonological developments in Delta-California Yuman. International Journal of American Linguistics 84(3); 383-433.
Mithun, Marianne (2001). Who shapes the record: the speaker and the linguist. En Paul Newman y Martha Ratliff (Eds.), Linguistic fieldwork (pp. 34-54). Cambridge University Press.
Owen, Roger C. (1960). Baja California: Paipai indians. Katunob 1(3); 19.
Pfeiler, Barbara, Juana I. Sánchez Hernández y Josué E. Villegas Chin (2014). La vitalidad lingüística del maya en cuatro localidades de la zona metropolitana de Mérida, Yucatán: Cholul, Kanasín, Umán y San José Tzal. En Ricardo López Santillán y Luis Alfonso Ramírez Carrillo (Eds.), Crecimiento urbano y cambio social: escenarios de transformación de la zona metropolitana de Mérida (pp. 445-475). Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Robles Uribe, Carlos (1964). Investigación lingüística sobre los grupos indígenas del Estado de Baja California. Anales del Museo Nacional de México 17; 275-301.
Sánchez-Fernández, Manuel Alejandro (2022). La investigación lingüística de las lenguas yumanas en México (LYUM). Expedicionario. Revista de Estudios en Antropología 2(4); 31-43.
Sánchez-Fernández, Manuel Alejandro y Luis Miguel Rojas-Berscia (2016). Vitalidad lingüística de la lengua paipai de Santa Catarina, Baja California. LIAMES: Línguas Indígenas Americanas 16(1); 157-183.
Sánchez-Fernández, Manuel Alejandro e Ivette Selene González Castillo (2023). Narraciones y recetas tradicionales pa ipai de Santa Catarina. Tlalocan 28(1); 73-113.
TFS Working Group (2011). The Woodchopper. Totem Field Storyboards. Recuperado el 18 de febrero de 2025 de https://www.totemfieldstoryboards.org/stories/.
Trujillo Tamez, Alma Isela (2012). La vitalidad lingüística de la lengua ayuk o mixe en tres comunidades: Tamazulapam del Espíritu Santo, San Lucas Camotlán y San Juan Guichicovi. [Tesis de doctorado, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México]. Repositorio Institucional de la UNAM.
Velázquez, Virna (2011). El desplazamiento del matlazinca en el Estado de México. En Roland Terborg y Laura García Landa (Coords.), Muerte y vitalidad de lenguas indígenas y las presiones sobre sus hablantes (pp. 241-258). Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Vinogradov, Igor y Manuel Alejandro Sánchez-Fernández (2025). El relato de El riano: una narración ku’alh. Tlalocan 30(1); 253-281.
Woodbury, Anthony (2011). Language documentation. En Peter Austin y Julia Sallabank (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages (pp. 159-186). Cambridge University Press.
Yegerlehner, John (1955). A note on eliciting techniques. International Journal of American Linguistics 21(3); 286-288.
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Diálogos de Campo

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.





