The Bearer of This Letter: Language Ideologies, Literacy Practices, and the F

1. Before the Reservation: Language Practices and the Documentary Record

1. Before the Reservation Language Practices and the Documentary Record In discussing literacy among the Kaluli, Bambi Schieffelin writes, “How a community ‘takes up’ literacy, how it develops , how it is understood and deployed depends very much on the ideology and context of who is doing the introduction as well as on the ideology and context of those to whom it is being introduced.”1 Rather than being a mere technology that is adopted uniformly and provides predetermined results, literacy is incorporated into an existing cultural and communicative framework according to the precepts of the community. As Schieffelin also notes, this adoption is anything but neutral and is in fact governed by speciÀc and powerful beliefs regarding the nature of language and linguistic practice. Within a colonial context , there are two—often varying—language ideologies at work: that of the colonizing ofÀcials and that of the local communities. Both are critical in understanding how literacy practices are adopted and transformed. In a community that already uses and employs various other communicative registers, literacy does not transform linguistic practice but rather develops as a distinct form. Tribes initially adopted English and English literacy for limited functions associated with commerce and diplomacy, 18 before the reservation and local Indigenous languages were used for all other social business. Around the time of the introduction of English, however, missionaries and tribal members started writing in the local languages as well, usually in connection with religious and scholarly concerns. These early practices resulted in Áedgling Indigenous-language literacy traditions throughout the country. In the Northern Plains, vernacular literacy traditions began to appear during the early and mid-nineteenth century. These situations shifted as the U.S. government increased its control over tribal communities through its colonizing practices. Reliance on written documentation became more widespread with the development of the reservation system during the late nineteenth century, and tribal members found themselves interacting with English-language documents in all aspects of their lives. Accompanying this shift was an ofÀcial language policy that is an example of what Nancy Dorian terms “an ideology of contempt.”2 NonNative participants in positions of authority—such as the local Indian agent, missionaries, and reservation educators —voiced their belief that English literacy was crucial for participation in U.S. society and, further, that English was inherently superior to local Indigenous languages. Not surprisingly, at this time emerging Indigenous-language literacy traditions began to wane. The greater incorporation of English into the local communities , however, should not be viewed exclusively in imperialistic terms. English literacy was certainly used as a means of eradicating Indigenous language and culture, but Native communities were not passive recipients of government policy. American Indian leaders called for the establishment of day schools and for opportunities for their 19 before the reservation children to learn English so that they might deal more effectively with local businesses and government agencies.3 During the late nineteenth century, most Native communities were involved in a complex adaptation to and negotiation of the imposed reservation system, including the acceptance and use of English-language literacy. Their ability to readjust is illustrative of local language ideologies that had their roots in the rich, multilingual environment that predated European contact. As the opening quotation reminds us, the adoption of literacy practices concerns both ideologies and context. Chapters 2 and 3 will detail the ideological underpinnings of historical literacy practices at Fort Belknap. Here, I look at the context surrounding the introduction of English literacy by exploring the prereservation speech environment of the Assiniboine and Gros Ventre tribes and the changes brought upon the local communities with the formation of the reservation. Central to my examination is the approach of viewing the residents at Fort Belknap not as individual Nakoda or Gros Ventre speakers but as members of a large speech community that employed multiple languages when English was initially encountered. Coined initially by John Gumperz, the term speech community describes an aggregate of people who are in constant and regular communication.4 According to this view, variations of speaking within a community correspond to social organization, and individuals employ different linguistic registers for various social activities. This perspective , which emphasizes members of a speech community rather than language speakers, shifts the focus from studying languages to analyzing how people employ different speech varieties in the course of their daily lives.5 Further, 20 before the reservation it recognizes that...