Peter Austin | School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London
In the last decade of the 20th century a new field of language research emerged that has come to be known as ‘language documentation’ or ‘documentary linguistics’ (Himmelmann 1998, 2002, 2006; Lehmann 2001; Austin 2010; Grenoble 2010; Woodbury 2003, 2011). In this paper we explore how it was defined in the seminal work of Himmelmann (1998) and others, including what were presented as significant characteristics that distinguished language documentation from language description, and how the field has changed and evolved over the past 20 years. A focus on best practices, standards, tools and models for documentary corpora appeared in the early years, which led later to more critical discussions of the goals and methods of language documentation. The paper examines some current developments, including new approaches to language archiving, and suggests that there are opportunities for language documentation to adopt a more socially-engaged approach to languages and linguistic research, including better engagement with language revitalisation. There are also opportunities to work towards addressing what is currently a language documentation output gap through experimentation with new genres and innovations in writing and publication.
2007Linguistic fieldwork: Setting the scene. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 60(1): 3–11.
Amery, R
2009Phoenix or relic? Documentation of languages with revitalization in mind. Language Documentation and Conservation 3(2): 138–148.
Aristar, A.R
2003The school of best practice. London: SOAS Workshop on Archives for Endangered Languages, November 21–22.
Aristar-Dry, H
2004E-MELD School of best practices in digital language documentation. Detroit: Presentation at
E-MELD Conference 2004: Workshop on linguistic databases and best practice
, July 15–18.
Austin, P.K
2006aData and language documentation. In Essentials of Language Documentation [Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 178], J. Gippert, N. Himmelmann & U. Mosel (eds), 87–112. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Austin, P.K
2006bDefining language documentation. Washington DC: Paper presented at the Georgetown University Roundtable on Linguistics, March.
Austin, P.K
2007Survival of languages. In Survival: Darwin College Lectures, E.F. Shuckburgh (ed.), 80–98. Cambridge: CUP.
Austin, P.K
2008Training for language documentation: Experiences at the School of Oriental and African Studies. In Documenting and Revitalising Austronesian Languages [Language Documentation and Conservation Special Publication 1], M. Florey & V. Rau (eds), 25–41. Hawaii HI: University of Hawaii Press.
Austin, P.K
2009Meta-documentary linguistics. Kioloa: Paper given at the Aboriginal languages workshop, March 2009.
Austin, P.K
2010Current issues in language documentation. Language Documentation and Description 7, 12–33. London: SOAS.
Austin, P.K
2013Language documentation and meta-documentation. In Keeping Languages Alive: Documentation, Pedagogy and Revitalization, S. Ogilvie & M. Jones (eds), 3–15. Cambridge: CUP.
Austin, P.K
2014Language documentation in the 21st century. JournaLIPP 3: 57–71.
Austin, P.K. & Grenoble, L
2007Current trends in language documentation. Language Documentation and Description 4, 12–25. London: SOAS.
Austin, P.K. & Sallabank, J
2014Endangered Languages: Ideologies and Beliefs in Language Documentation and Revitalization. London: British Academy.
Austin, P.K. & Sallabank, J
2015Language documentation and language revitalization: Partners or just good friends? Ms, SOAS.
Bell, J. & Bird, S
2000Preliminary study of the structure of lexicon entries. Philadelphia: Proceedings of the
Workshop on Web-Based Language Documentation and Description
.
Bentahila, A. & Davies, E.E
1993Language revival: Restoration or transformation?Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 14(5): 355–374.
Bird, S. & Liberman, M
2001A formal framework for linguistic annotation. Speech Communication 33(1–2): 23–60.
Bird, S. & Simons, G
2003Seven dimensions of portability for language documentation and description. Language 79(3): 557–582.
Blench, R
2008Endangered languages in West Africa. In Language Diversity Endangered, M. Brenzinger (ed.), 140–162. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bowe, C., Hughes, B. & Bird, S
2003Towards a general model for interlinear text. Proceedings of EMELD-03, 12 August, 2013. [URL]
Bowern, C
2011Planning a language documentation project. In The Cambridge Handbook of Endangered Languages, P.K. Austin & J. Sallabank (eds), 459–482. Cambridge: CUP.
Calvet, J.-L
2006Towards an Ecology of World Languages. Cambridge: Polity.
CELP
2007Adequacy of documentation. Document circulated at the
January 2007 meeting of the Linguistic Society of America Committee on Endangered Languages and Their Preservation
.
Childs, T., Good, J. & Mitchell, A
2014Beyond the ancestral code: Towards a model for sociolinguistic language documentation. Language Documentation and Conservation 8: 168–191.
Chomsky, N
1964Current issues in linguistic theory. In The Structure of Language, J.A. Fodor & J.J. Katz (eds), 50–118. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall.
Coelho, G
2005Language documentation and ecology: Areas of interaction. In Language Documentation and Description 3, P.K. Austin (ed.), 63–74. London: SOAS.
Cope, L
(ed.)2014Applied Linguists Needed: Cross-disciplinary Networking in Endangered Language Contexts. Abingdon: Routledge.
Crowley, T
2007Field Linguistics: A Beginners Guide. Oxford: OUP.
Crystal, D
2000Language Death. Cambridge: CUP.
Dimmendaal, G
2004Capacity building in an African context. In Language Documentation and Description 2, P.K. Austin (ed.), 71–89. London: SOAS.
Dobrin, L., Austin, P.K. & Nathan, D
2007Dying to be counted: Commodification of endangered languages in documentary linguistics. Language Documentation and Description 6, 37–52. London: SOAS.
Eisenbeiss, S
2005Psycholinguistic contributions to language documentation. Language Documentation and Description 3, 106–140. London: SOAS.
Farrar, S. & Langendoen, D.T
2003aA linguistic ontology for the semantic web. GLOT International 7(3): 97–100.
Farrar, S. & Langendoen, D.T
2003bMarkup and the GOLD ontology.
Proceedings of EMELD-03
, 12 August 2013. [URL]
Farrar, S., Lewis, W.D. & Langendoen, D.T
2002A common ontology for linguistic concepts. Seattle WA: Proceedings of the
Knowledge Technologies Conference
, 12 August 2013. [URL]
Fillmore, C
1992 ‘Corpus linguistics’ or ‘computer-aided armchair linguistics’. In Directions in Corpus Linguistics, J. Svartik (ed.), 35–45. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Fishman, J.A
1991Reversing Language Shift: Theory and Practice of Assistance to Threatened Languages. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Fishman, J.A
(ed.)2001Can Threatened Languages Be Saved? Reversing Language Shift, Revisited: A 21st Century Perspective. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Garrett, E
2014Participant driven language archiving. In Language Documentation and Description 12, D. Nathan & P.K. Austin (eds), 68–84. London: SOAS.
Gawne, L., Kelly, B.F., Berez, A. & Heston, T
2015Putting practice into words: Fieldwork methodology in grammatical descriptions. Hawaii: Paper presented at
ICLDC 4 Conference
.
Grant, C
2014Music Endangerment: How Language Maintenance Can Help. Oxford: OUP.
2011Language ecology and endangerment. In The Cambridge Handbook of Endangered Languages, P.K. Austin & J. Sallabank (eds), 27–45. Cambridge: CUP.
Grenoble, L.A. & Whaley, L.J
2006Saving Languages: An Introduction to Language Revitalization. Cambridge: CUP.
Grinevald, C
2003Speakers and documentation of endangered languages. Language Documentation and Description 1: 52–72.
Gullberg, M
2012Bilingual multimodality and language documentation. In Potentials of Language Documentation: Methods, Analyses, and Utilization [Language Documentation and Conservation Special Publication 3], F. Seifart, G. Haig, N.P. Himmelmann, D. Jung, A. Margetts & P. Trilsbeek (eds), 46–53. Honolulu HI: University of Hawai’i Press.
Hale, K., Krauss, M., Watahomigie, L.J., Yamamoto, A.Y., Craig, C., Jeanne, L.M. & England, N.C
1992Endangered languages. Language 68(1): 1–42.
Harrison, K.D
2005Ethnographically informed language documentation. Documentation and Description 3, 22–41. London: SOAS,
Haugen, E
1972The Ecology of Language. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.
Himmelmann, N.P
1998Documentary and descriptive linguistics. Linguistics 36: 161–195.
Himmelmann, N.P
2002Documentary and descriptive linguistics. In Lectures on Endangered Languages, Vol. V, O. Sakiyama & F. Endo (eds), 37–83. Kyoto: Endangered Languages of the Pacific Rim,
Himmelmann, N.P
2006Language documentation: What is it and what is it good for? In Essentials of Language Documentation [Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 178], J. Gippert, N.P. Himmelmann & U. Mosel (eds), 1–30. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Himmelmann, N.P
2008Reproduction and preservation of linguistic knowledge: Linguistics’ response to language endangerment. Annual Review of Anthropology 37: 337–350.
Himmelmann, N.P
2012Linguistic data types and the interface between language documentation and description. Language Documentation and Conservation 6: 187–207.
Hinton, L
1993Flutes of Fire. Berkeley CA: Heyday Books.
Hinton, L
2002How to Keep your Language Alive. Berkeley CA: Heyday Books
Hinton, L
2011Revitalization of endangered languages. In The Cambridge Handbook of Endangered Languages, P.K. Austin & J. Sallabank (eds), 291–311. Cambridge: CUP.
Hinton, L
2013Bringing Our Languages Home: Language Revitalization for Families. Berkeley CA: Heyday Books
Hinton, L. & Hale, K
(eds)2001The Green Book of Language Revitalization in Practice. San Diego CA: Academic Press.
Holton, G
2014Mediating language documentation. In Language Documentation and Description 12, B. Nathan & P.K. Austin (eds), 37–52. London: SOAS.
Hornberger, N.H
2010Language shift and language revitalization. In The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics, R.B. Kaplan (ed.), 365–373. Oxford: OUP.
Hymes, D
1964Introduction: Toward ethnographies of communication. American Anthropologist 66(6): 1–34.
Kapono, E
1995Hawaiian language revitalization and immersion education. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 112: 121.
Kroskrity, P.V
2015Designing a dictionary for an endangered language community: Lexicographical deliberations, language ideological clarifications. Language Documentation and Conservation 9: 140–157.
Lehmann, C
2001Language documentation: A program. In Aspects of Typology and Universals, W. Bisang (ed.), 83–97. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Linn, M.-A
2014Living archives: A community-based language archive model. In Language Documentation and Description 12, D. Nathan & P.K. Austin (eds), 53–67. London: SOAS.
Lüpke, F
2009Data collection methods for field-based language documentation. In Language Documentation and Description 6, P.K. Austin (ed.), 53–100. London: SOAS.
Lüpke, F. & Storch, A
2013Repertoires and Choices in African Languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Mayer, M
1969Frog Where Are You? New York NY: Dial Books for Young Readers.
Mühlhäusler, P
1992Preserving languages or language ecologies? A top-down approach to language survival. Oceanic Linguistics 31(2): 163–180.
Mühlhäusler, P
2000Language planning and language ecology. Current Issues in Language Planning 1(3): 306–367.
Nathan, D
2004Documentary linguistics: Alarm bells and whistles? Seminar presentation,
SOAS
. 23 November 2004.
Nathan, D
2006Sound and unsound documentation: Questions about the roles of audio in language documentation. Washington DC: Paper presented at the Georgetown University Roundtable on Linguistics.
Nathan, D
2009The soundness of documentation: Towards an epistemology for audio in documentary linguistics. Journal of the International Association of Sound Archives 33. [URL] (22 March 2012).
Nathan, D
2010aSound and unsound practices in documentary linguistics: Towards an epistemology for audio. Language Documentation and Description 7, 1–17. London: SOAS.
Nathan, D
2010bArchives 2.0 for endangered languages: From disk space to MySpace. International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing 4(1–2): 111–124.
Nathan, D
2014Access and accessibility at ELAR, an archive for endangered languages documentation. In Language Documentation and Description 12, D. Nathan & P.K. Austin (eds), 187–208. London: SOAS.
Nathan, D. & Austin, P.K
2004Reconceiving metadata: Language documentation through thick and thin. In Language Documentation and Description 2, P.K. Austin (ed.), 179–187. London: SOAS.
2009Fieldwork and fieldmethods in linguistics. Language Documentation and Conservation 3(1): 113–125.
Newman, P
2013The law of unintended consequences: How the endangered languages movement undermines field linguistics as a scientific enterprise. Seminar presented at
SOAS
, 15th October.
2004Towards a general model for linguistic paradigms. In
Proceedings of EMELD-04
, 12 August 2013. [URL]
Robins, R.H. & Uhlenbeck, E.M
1991Endangered Languages. New York NY: Berg.
Romaine, S
2007Preserving endangered languages. Language and Linguistics Compass 1(1–2): 115–132.
Sallabank, J
2012From language documentation to language planning: Not necessarily a direct route. In Potentials of Language Documentation: Methods, Analyses, and Utilization [Language Documentation and Conservation Special Publication 3], F. Seifart, G. Haig, N.P. Himmelmann, D. Jung, A. Margetts & P. Trilsbeek (eds), 118–125. Honolulu HI: University of Hawai’i Press.
Sallabank, J
2013Endangered Languages: Attitudes, Identities and Policies. Cambridge: CUP.
Schultze-Berndt, E
2006Linguistic annotation. In Essentials of Language Documentation, J. Gippert, N.P. Himmelmann & U. Mosel (eds), 213–251. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Seifart, F
2008The representativeness of language documentations. Language Documentation and Description 5, 60–76. London: SOAS,
Sherzer, J
1987A discourse-centered approach to language and culture. American Anthropologist 89(2): 295–309.
Spolsky, B
1989Maori bilingual education and language revitalization. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 10(2): 89–106.
Spolsky, B
2003Reassessing Maori regeneration. Language in Society 32: 553–578.
Sugita, Y
2007Language revitalization or language fossilization? Some suggestions for language documentation from the viewpoint of interactional linguistics. In Proceedings of First Conference on Language Documentation and Linguistic Theory, P.K. Austin, O. Bond & D. Nathan (eds), 243–250. London: SOAS.
Thieberger, N
2012Counting collections. Paradisec Blog29November 2012 <[URL] (6 June 2015).
Thieberger, N., Margetts, A., Morey, S., Musgrave, S. & Schembri, A
2012Assessing curated corpora as research output. Paper presented to the
Annual Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society
, University of Western Australia.
2013Response to Paul Newman. Blog post dated 3December 2013 <[URL] (27 March 2015).
Woodbury, T
2003Defining documentary linguistics. Language Documentation and Description 1, 35–51. London: SOAS.
Woodbury, T
2011Language documentation. In The Cambridge Handbook of Endangered Languages, P.K. Austin & J. Sallabank (eds), 159–186. Cambridge: CUP.
Woodbury, A.C
2014Archives and audiences: Toward making endangered language documentations people can read, use, understand, and admire. In Language Documentation and Description, 12: Special Issue on Language Documentation and Archiving, D. Nathan & P.K. Austin (eds), 19–36. London: SOAS.
Yamada, R.-M
2007Collaborative linguistic fieldwork: Practical application of the empowerment model. Language Documentation and Conservation 1(2): 257–282.
Cited by
Cited by 5 other publications
Avilès González, Karla Janiré
2018. Linguistique appliquée aux « langues en danger » : besoins transdisciplinaires. Éla. Études de linguistique appliquée N° 190:2 ► pp. 163 ff.
Barua, Souvik
2023. Language Documentation Accessibility in Indigenous Languages: A Study in the Chittagong Hill Tract. SSRN Electronic Journal
2020. The Status of Endangered Contact Languages of the World. Annual Review of Linguistics 6:1 ► pp. 301 ff.
Sinha, Chris
2021. Culture in Language and Cognition. In The Routledge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, ► pp. 387 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.