Les défis dans l’étude des langues menacées et vulnérables en Serbie dans le cadre du projet « Langues vulnérables et variétés linguistiques en Serbie »: questions méthodologiques et ethiques
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.21301/eap.v19i1.12Mots-clés :
méthodologie des recherches sur le terrain, documentation linguistique, langues menacées, langues vulnérables, défis méthodologiques, problème ethiqueRésumé
Dans cet article nous rendons compte de l’importance de la documentation linguistique dans le processus de recherche sur les langues menacées et vulnérables en Serbie. À travers un aperçu des références théoriques et méthodologiques pertinentes nous définissons la documentation linguistique dans un cadre plus large des recherches sur le terrain et nous définissons les spécificités de cette méthode de collecte des données parmi des locuteurs des langues menacées et vulnérables. À l’aide de l’interview structurée auprès des chercheurs travaillant dans le projet « Langues vulnérables et variétés linguistiques en Serbie » nous avons obtenu des données sur d’importantes questions et problèmes méthodologiques et ethiques auxquels ils ont été confrontés dans le processus de documentation des langues menacées et vulnérables et des variétés linguistiques en Serbie. Parmi les défis méthodologiques nous signalons la conception de la recherche, le problème de l’échantillonnage, le problème de l’implication personnelle du chercheur, l’établissement du contact avec les interlocuteurs et leur recrutement, alors que dans le cadre des questions ethiques nous étudions l’accord donné par les interlocuteurs, le problème de la rémunération des interlocuteurs, les thèmes sensibles et la responsabilité ethique du chercheur envers la communauté qu’il étudie. Dans la conclusion nous rendons compte de l’importance et du potentiel méthodologiques plus larges de la documentation des langues, qui dépassent le champ des recherches linguistiques.
Téléchargements
Références
Austin, Peter. 2006. “Data and language documentation”. In Essentials of Language Documentation, edited by Jost Gippert, Nikolaus Himmelmann, and Ulrike Mosel, 87–112. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197730
Austin, Peter and Julia Sallabank, eds. 2011. The Cambridge Handbook of Endangered Languages. New York, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Berez, Andrea, Jean Mulder, and Daisy Rosenblum, eds. 2010. Fieldwork and Linguistic Analysis in Indigenous Languages of the Americas. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Berge, Anna. 2010. “Adequacy in documentation”. In Language Documentation. Practice and Values, edited by Lenore Grenoble and Louanna Furbee, 51–66. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.158
Bošnjaković, Žarko. 2008. „Fonetske osobine govora istočne Šumadije.“ Srpski dijalektološki zbornik 55/1: 7–321.
Bošnjaković, Žarko, and Dragana Radovanović. 2009. „Fonetske varijacije u govoru izbeglica u Novom Sadu.“ U Govor Novog Sada. Sv. 1, Fonetske osobine, uredio Žarko Bošnjaković, 310–348. Novi Sad: Filozofski fakultet.
Bošnjaković, Žarko, and Biljana Sikimić. 2013. Bunjevci: etnodijalektološka istraživanja, 2009. Subotica: Nacionalni savet bunjevačke nacionalne manjine.
Comrie, Bernard, and Lucía Golluscio, eds. 2015. Language Contact and Documentation. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Creswell, John. 2003. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Crystal, David. 2003. Language Death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139106856
Ćirković, Svetlana. 2015a. „Istraživanja srpskih zajednica u županiji Arad u Rumuniji: antropološkolingvistička analiza narativa o pravljenju česnice.“ Ishodišta 1: 455–472.
Ćirković, Svetlana. 2015b. „Uloga istraživača u kreiranju korpusa konverzacionih narativa.“ Filolog 11: 267–280.
Dwyer, Arienne. 2006. “Ethics and practicalities of cooperative fieldwork and analysis”. In Essentials of Language Documentation, edited by Jost Gippert, Nikolaus Himmelmann, and Ulrike Mosel, 31–66. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197730
Dwyer, Arienne. 2010. “Models of successful collaboration”. In Language Documentation. Practice and Values, edited by Lenore Grenoble and Louanna Furbee, 193–212. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.158
Đurić-Milovanović, Aleksandra, Biljana Sikimić, i Mirča Maran. 2011. Rumunske verske zajednice u Banatu: Prilog proučavanju multikonfesionalnosti Vojvodine. Vršac: Visoka škola strukovnih strudija za obrazovanje vaspitača „Mihailo Palov“.
Essegbey, James, Brent Henderson, and Fiona McLaughlin, eds. 2015. Language Documentation and Endangerment in Africa. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/clu.17
Fajgelj, Stanislav. 2010. Metode istraživanja ponašanja. Beograd: Centar za primenjenu psihologiju.
Flores Farfán, José Antonio, and Fernando Ramallo, eds. 2010. New Perspectives on Endangered Languages. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/clu.1
Furbee, Louanna. 2010. “Language documentation: Theory and practice”. In Language Documentation. Practice and Values, edited by Lenore Grenoble and Louanna Furbee, 3–24. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.158
Gerdts, Donna. 2010. “Beyond expertise. The role of the linguist in language revitalization programs”. In Language Documentation. Practice and Values, edited by Lenore Grenoble and Louanna Furbee, 173–192. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.158
Gippert, Jost, Nikolaus Himmelmann, and Ulrike Mosel, eds. 2006. Essentials of Language Documentation. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197730
Grenoble, Lenore. 2010. “Language documentation and field linguistics: The state of the field”. In Language Documentation. Practice and Values, edited by Lenore Grenoble and Louanna Furbee, 289–309. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ttps://doi.org/10.1075/z.158
Grenoble, Lenore, and Louanna Furbee, eds. 2010. Language Documentation. Practice and Values. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.158
Grenoble, Lenore, and Lindsay Whaley. 2006. Saving Languages. An Introduction to Language Revitalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615931
Hill, Jane. 2006. “The ethnography of language and language documentation”. In Essentials of Language Documentation, edited by Jost Gippert, Nikolaus Himmelmann, and Ulrike Mosel, 113–128. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197730.113
Himmelmann, Nikolaus. 1998. “Documentary and descriptive linguistics”. Linguistics 36 (1): 161–195. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1998.36.1.161
Himmelmann, Nikolaus. 2006. “Language documentation: What is it and what is it good for?”. In Essentials of Language Documentation, edited by Jost Gippert, Nikolaus Himmelmann, and Ulrike Mosel, 1–30. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197730.113
Jarić, Isidora, i Miloš Milenković. 2014. „Romi u Srbiji na preseku začaranih krugova siromaštva i identiteta: preliminarni rezultati istraživanja“. U Društveni i kulturni potencijali Roma u Srbiji, uredila Valentina Sokolovska, 143–159. Novi Sad: Filozofski fakultet.
Labov, William. 1971. “The study of language in its social context”. In Advances in the Sociology of Language, edited by Joshua A. Fishman, 152–216. The Hague: Mouton.
Macri, Martha. 2010. “Language documentation. Whose ethics?”. In Language Documentation. Practice and Values, edited by Lenore Grenoble and Louanna Furbee, 37–47. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.158
Maxwell, Judith. 2010. “Training graduate students and community members for native language documentation”. In Language Documentation. Practice and Values, edited by Lenore Grenoble and Louanna Furbee, 255–274. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.158
McLaughlin, Fiona and Thierno Seydou Sall. 2001. “The give and take of fieldwork: Noun classes and other concerns”. In Linguistic Fieldwork, edited by Paul Newman and Martha Ratliff, 189–210. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110363685-020
Migge, Bettina and Isabelle Léglise, eds. 2013. Exploring Language in a Multilingual Context: Variation, Interaction and Ideology in Language Documentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511979002
Milenković, Miloš, Isidora Jarić, i Ognjen Radonjić. 2014. „O uticaju benevolentne asimetrije na metodološki dizajn istraživanja na primeru jednog tekućeg interdisciplinarnog istraživanja Roma u Srbiji“. Antropologija 14(3): 27–44.
Milenković, Miloš, Isidora Jarić, i Valentina Sokolovska. 2014. „O nekim teorijsko-metodološkim problemima istraživanja romske populacije u sociologiji i etnologiji/sociokulturnoj antropologiji na primeru jednog tekućeg istraživanja u Srbiji”. Etnoantropološki problemi 9(4): 879–900. https://doi.org/10.21301/EAP.v9i4.3
Miloradović, Sofija. 2003. Upotreba padežnih oblika u govoru paraćinskog pomoravlja. Balkanistički i etnomigracioni aspekt. Beograd: Etnografski institut SANU.
Miloradović, Sofija. 2023. „Srpski dijalekti – dokumenti o tradiciji našeg narodnog života i neizostavni deo kulturnog nasleđa.“ Ishodišta 9: 163–176. https://doi.org/10.46630/ish.9.2023.12
Mirić, Mirjana, and Svetlana Ćirković. 2018. “Report on documenting the Gurbet Romani variety in East Serbia and creating the Romani-Serbian dictionary.” Studia Ethnologica Pragensia: Romové: etnologické reflexe/Roma: Ethnological Reflections 1: 105–113.
Mosel, Ulrike. 2006. “Fieldwork and community language work”. In Essentials of Language Documentation, edited by Jost Gippert, Nikolaus Himmelmann, and Ulrike Mosel, 67–85. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197730
Moseley, Christopher, ed. 2010. Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger. 3rd ed. Paris: UNESCO Publishing. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000187026
Pérez Báez, Gabriela, Chris Rogers, and Jorge Emilio Rosés Labrada, eds. 2016. Language Documentation and Revitalization in Latin American Contexts. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Prelić, Mladen. 2008. (N)i ovde (n)i tamo: etnički identitet Srba u Mađarskoj na kraju XX veka. Beograd: Etnografski institut SANU.
Radović, Srđan. 2020. „Naučno-istraživački rad u narodu i na (gradskom) terenu: etnologija grada u Etnografskom institutu i Srbiji u socijalističkom periodu”. Glasnik Etnografskog instituta SANU 68(1): 53–73. https://doi.org/10.2298/GEI2001053R
Radović, Srđan. 2022. „Studije granica i etnologija jugoistične Evrope“. Zbornik Matice srpske za društvene nauke 181: 35–45. https://doi.org/10.2298/ZMSDN2281035R
Rice, Keren. 2010. “The linguist’s responsibilities to the community of speakers”. In Language Documentation. Practice and Values, edited by Lenore Grenoble and Louanna Furbee, 25–36. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.158
Sikimić, Biljana, ur. 2004. Skrivene manjine na Balkanu. Beograd: Balkanološki institut SANU.
Sikimić, Biljana. 2005. „Izazov terenskog rada – Etnolingvistika ili antropološka lingvistika.“ U Etnologija i antropologija: stanja i perspektive. Zbornik Etnografskog instituta SANU, uredila Ljiljana Gavrilović, 235–244. Beograd: Etnografski institut SANU.
Sikimić, Biljana. 2010. „Ibarski Kolašin između tradicije i svakodnevice.“ U Kosovo i Metohija u civilizacijskim tokovima, uredila Sofija Miloradović, 275–289. Kosovska Mitrovica: Univerzitet u Prištini, Filozofski fakultet.
Sikimić, Biljana. 2012a. „Timski terenski rad Balkanološkog instituta SANU. Razvoj istraživačkih ciljeva i metoda.“ U Terenska istraživanja – poetika susreta, uredila Milina Ivanović-Barišić: 167–198. Beograd: Etnografski institut SANU.
Sikimić, Biljana. 2012b. „Višejezičnost banatskih Roma: romski, srpski i rumunski jezik u svakodnevnoj komunikaciji.“ U Promene identiteta, kulture i jezika Roma u uslovima planske socijalno-ekonomske integracije, uredili Tibor Varadi i Goran Bašić, 419–434. Beograd: Srpska akademija nauka i umetnosti.
Sikimić, Biljana. 2014. „Istraživač je prisutan: hrana kao tema i povod za razgovor i razmišljanje.“ U Obredna praksa – rečima o hrani, na materijalu iz srpskih govora Vojvodine, uredila Sofija Miloradović, 97–111. Novi Sad: Matica srpska.
Sokolovska, Valentina. 2014. “O metodologiji i uzorku istraživanja: društveni i kulturni potencijali romske etničke zajednice u Srbiji”. U Društveni i kulturni potencijali Roma u Srbiji, uredila Valentina Sokolovska, 7–26. Novi Sad: Filozofski fakultet.
Sorescu-Marinković, Annemarie, Mirjana Mirić, and Svetlana Ćirković. 2020. “Assessing Linguistic Vulnerability and Endangerment in Serbia. A Critical Survey of Methodologies and Outcomes”. Balcanica 51: 65–104. doi.org/10.2298/BALC2051065S
Sorescu-Marinković, Annemarie, Thede Kahl, and Biljana Sikimić, eds. 2021. Boyash Studies: Researching “Our People”. Berlin: Frank & Timme.
Sorescu-Marinković, Annemarie, Svetlana Ćirković, Mirjana Mirić, Anđela Redžić, Neda Pons, Valentina Sokolovska, Biljana Radić-Bojanić, Stefana Paunović Rodić, Dalibor Sokolović, Mirjana Ćorković, Dušan Vlajić, and Maja Miličević Petrović. 2022. “Vulnerable Languages and Linguistic Varieties in Serbia (VLingS)”. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7376595
Thomason, Sarah. 2015. Endangered Languages. An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139033817
Todorović, Dragan. 2011. „Romi na Balkanu i u Srbiji“. Teme XXXV/4: 1137–1174.
Todorović, Dragan. 2014. „Kulturni identitet Roma“. U Društveni i kulturni potencijali Roma u Srbiji, uredila Valentina Sokolovska, 57–77. Novi Sad: Filozofski fakultet.
Woodbury, Anthony. 2003. “Defining documentary linguistics”. In Language Description and Documentation vol. 1., edited by Peter Austin, 35–51. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.
Zakon o nauci i istraživanjima, Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije, 49/19. https://prosveta.gov.rs/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Zakon-o-nauci.pdf
Téléchargements
Publiée
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
Ce travail est disponible sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Partage dans les Mêmes Conditions 4.0 International.
ERIH PLUS - European Reference Index for the Humanities
World Cat
AnthroSerbia
