A Bookmaking Project to Sustain the Cherokee Language

• In Event: Bookmaking Projects to Sustain Indigenous Languages in Taiwan and the United States

Abstract

-Purpose
Led by a Cherokee-speaking graduate student, we conducted a bilingual bookmaking project with Cherokee leaders. We asked:
• How might university professors work with Indigenous leaders to create texts to counteract Indigenous language loss?
Our work with the Cherokee community revealed complexities and highlighted the need for reflexivity.
-Theoretical Framework
We drew on Community Cultural Wealth (Yosso, 2005), and Tribal Critical Theory (Brayboy, 2005; Hopkins, 2020) to honor unacknowledged cultural knowledge, skills, abilities, and social connections. This focus was supplemented by our growing awareness of historical/political issues related to Tribal recognition (e.g., NC Commission of Indian Affairs, 1979; Palermo, 2022).
-Methodology
The South Carolina Cherokee community was neither state nor federally recognized. Community members gathered regularly in family/community groups to celebrate holidays and plan activities.
-Data Sources
We recorded/transcribed meetings with the Tribal chief, Cherokee speakers, Cherokee linguists, and a Cherokee artist to identify topics, images, vocabulary and language structures for the books. We asked the Leadership team and the larger Cherokee community to provide feedback on book drafts. It was during this process that we recognized complexities in working with an unrecognized Cherokee community.
-Findings
We briefly describe illustrative data: 1.) the complexity of Cherokee Language; 2.) historical and continuing complexities of recognition and sovereignty.
*The Complexity of Cherokee Language
When drafting books about animals and birds (See Figures 1 & 2), we learned Cherokee has different verb forms for living and non-living things. Linguists consulted with Cherokee Elders to confirm correct forms. Other challenges involved Cherokee dialects, regional preferences, and contradictory Cherokee dictionaries (i.e., some written without sufficient input from Cherokee speakers).
*The Complexities of Cherokee Sovereignty
We noted the reluctance of recognized tribal members to provide feedback. One expert explained that there are close to 300 groups that claim Cherokee roots. This person’s organization did not consult on projects with unsanctioned groups. While this caused us to consider suspending the project, our ensuing reading of documents related to the history of recognition of Indigenous communities revealed the following:
• The Indian Removal Act of 1830 relocated many Cherokee people to the American Midwest causing remaining communities/families to seek refuge in isolated/remote areas making coalition difficult (NC Commission of Indian Affairs, 1979);
• Only the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians was awarded federal recognition before federal legislation in 1934 denied recognition to additional communities (Palermo, 2022);
• Since then, these has been no legal pathway for non-recognized tribal communities to be recognized, receive benefits, or claim Tribal land (NC Commission of Indian Affairs, 1979; Palermo, 2022);
• Contingences related to Tribal resources (e.g., membership benefits, casino profits) affect decisions related to tribal membership (Cramer, 2005).
We recognize the importance of Tribal People making their own decisions about membership, identity, and sovereignty. We have collaborated with a particular tribal community and our books do not represent the larger Cherokee community.
-Educational Importance
We recognize the importance of vetting texts with language experts alongside the complexity of colonizing histories that severely complicate collaborations with Indigenous Peoples and recognize the long-term effects of those histories.

Authors

• Anna Howard, University of South Carolina
  Presenting Author

• Asiye Demir, South Carolina University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Catherine F. Compton-Lilly, University of South Carolina
  Non-Presenting Author