This paper focuses on language and ethnicity. More specifically, the focus is the effects of a dominate language on indigenous cultures. The five top ranking languages in the world are 1) Chinese; 2) Spanish; 3) English; 4) Bengali; 5) Hindi. However, within these dominant language groups, numerous indigenous languages have been absorbed, lost or, if they still exist, are endangered.
In the Western Hemisphere, the establishment of dominant languages was not a natural process. Dominant languages were established through the European quest for dominion in the Western Hemisphere. This included various assimilative methods in which many indigenous languages were replaced by the dominant language base.
Because of the scope and depth of this subject, I have chosen to focus on one specific indigenous group -- the Arapaho. The effects of colonialism on the Arapaho and their language represents a commonality that affected, and affects, all indigenous languages in North, Central, and South America today -- indeed, it affects indigenous languages worldwide. Part One of this paper focuses on the historical processes between dominant languages -- i.e., Spanish and English -- and indigenous languages. Part Two focuses on the development of the Northern Arapaho language immersion program and the problems in revitalizing language among the Southern Arapaho people.
In 1492, Queen Isabella of Spain was presented with a copy of Gramatica. Written by Antonio de Nebrija, the Gramatica was “the first-ever grammar of any modern European language.”(1) Upon receiving the document, Queen Isabella asked Nebrija what it was for. Nebrija replied, “Language is the perfect instrument of empire.”(2)
At the time of the arrival of the Spanish over seven hundred indigenous languages were spoken in the Central and South America hemisphere. However, the languages of the Indios were not viewed as a proper languages, at least in the sense of civilized language; rather, the languages of the Indios were considered mere utterances of tongues of people who were, to the Spanish, inferior and uncivilized. In his journal of the First Voyage, Columbus noted: “I believe that they would easily be made Christians...I will carry off six of them at my departure to Your Highness, in order that they may learn to speak.”(3)
The language barrier was beneficial Columbus. In making landfall on the islands of culturally divergent peoples, Columbus could lay claim to those islands because he spoke in a language that was just as alien to the inhabitants as the language of the inhabitants was to him. As noted in European Voyages of Exploration:
If we examine [an] excerpt from the ship’s journal, it was clear that the first thing Columbus did after arriving on shore was to take possession of this new land in the name of the Spanish throne, imposing a European bureaucratic order and intellectual structure over a region that did not practice these particular customs. Care was taken to mention that a royal standard had been brought ashore and that the ceremony had been performed ‘in presence of all,’ including presumably members of the indigenous population who had been sighted before Columbus had even made his way ashore. Witnesses are formally noted in a parchment to verify that Columbus did claim the land in the name of the Spanish throne so that, if need be, they could testify at a later date that no one objected to the ceremony of its ultimate purpose. Perhaps it was with an eye towards eventual protests that he took advantage of the indigenous population by performing a strange ceremony in an equally strange language that Columbus takes time to mention later in the passage that “I observed that they quickly took in what was said to them.”(4)
To the Spanish, the languages of the Indios was, at best, rudimentary. Amerigo Vespucci wrote: “[I]n their conversation they appear simple...they speak little and in a low tone: they use the same articulations as we, since they form their utterances either with the palate, or with the teeth, or on the lips: except that they give different names to things. Many are the varieties of tongues: for in every 100 leagues we found a change of language, so that they are not understandable to each other”(5)
The overall perspective of the Spanish was that the Indios lived “like proper beasts”(6) and they committed “bestial obscenities.”(7) The humanist Juan Gines de Sepulveda wrote:
Compare then those blessings enjoyed by the Spaniards of prudence, genius, magnanimity, temperance, humanity, and religion with those of the little men (hombrecillos, the Indians) in whom you will scarcely find even the vestiges of humanity, who not only possess no science but who also lack letters and preserve no monument of their history except vague and obscure reminiscences of some things on certain paintings.(8)
What was clear to Spanish explorers and thinkers was that the Indios lacked a true language. The Indios had no written words or recorded history; however, they had the ability to make sounds and, therefore, could be taught to learn to speak a civilized language.
The advantage by which the Spanish made use of the language barrier was epitomized by the Requirimiento. The Requirimeinto was a document that informed the Indios of their rights as an oppressed people. In essence, “it informed the Indians in the simplest terms that they could either accept Christian missionaries and Spanish hegemony or be annihilated.”(9) The Requirimiento was a legal fiction that established a charter of conquest over the indigenous populations of Central and South America. “This elaborate dictum...was to be recited in the presence of the Indians although none of them understood a word of Spanish.”(10)
In all the journals, documents, and theological discussions of the Spanish, there was only one attempt to understand and categorize the languages of the Indios. In Chapter 40 of the Reacion, Cabeza de Vaca, a Spanish explorer who journeyed into North America in 1542, wrote:
I should like to catalog the natives and their languages all the way from the island of Doom to the farthest Cuhendados. Two languages are found on the island: those spoken by the Capoques and Han. On the mainland over against the island are the Charruco, who take their name from the forests where they live. Advancing along the coast, we come to the Deguenes and, opposite them, the Mendica. Farther down the coast are the Quevenes and, behind them inland, the Mariames. Continuing along the coast: the Guaycones and, behind them inland, the Yeguaces. After these come the Atayos, in their rear the Decubadaos, and beyond them many other in the same direction. By the coast live the Quitoles and, just behind them inland, the Chavavares and, adjoining them in order: the Maliacones, Cultalchulches, Susolas, and Comos. By the coast farther on are the Camolas and, on the same coast beyond them, those we call the “Fig People.” They all differ in their habitations, villages and tongues.(11)
Vaca was describing the native peoples of northern Mexico, Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. However, Vaca’s Reacion went unnoticed because to recognize that the Indios possessed distinct languages was to put a human face on peoples whom the Spanish regarded as little more than wild savage peoples.
Most important, the Spanish order of conquest focused not only on the subjugation of the lands and the peoples but also of the destruction of languages. While the conquistadors used military tactics to separate and divide the tribes and, hence, establish provincial colonies, missionaries sought the assimilate the survivors of the holocaust through the suppression of language and conversion to Christianity. The Spanish formula for conquest of language was simple enough. By suppressing the language and imposing the dominant language, cultural identity was lost and Christian conversion completed the process of assimilation.
In 1861, after the Fort Wise Treaty was signed, Little Raven, principal chief of the Southern Arapaho, said: “[A.G.] Boone came out and got (the chiefs) to sign a paper, but (they) did not know what it meant. The Cheyennes signed it first; then I; but we did not know what it was.”(12)
In negotiating treaties with the U.S. government, the experience of the Southern Arapaho was not unique. In 1779, John Killbuck, a Delaware signatory, wrote to Colonel George Morgan that “he had been deceived because of the interpreter.”(13) Morgan’s response was “[t]here was never a Conference with the Indians so improperly or villainously conducted as the last one at Pittsburgh...”(14)
Treaties were the means by which the colonizing European nations obtained Native land in North America. Unlike the Spanish, the French and the British chose a diplomatic process to establish colonizing land bases, trade, and peace with tribal nations. Initially, treaty-making was a conference in which the two sides met and discussed the issues at hand. Francis Jennings writes:
As in European diplomacy speeches were translated after having been delivered in the speaker’s own language. The interpreter often became a very influential person, for his skill and intentions might make or break a treaty. Few Europeans spoke Indian languages...[b]y the end of a successful treaty conference the parties had made a contract that existed in two forms, wampum belts and treaty minutes. Sometimes the English asked the Indian chiefs to subscribe their marks on an especially important contract to validate it indisputably...[t]he question is always asked, Did the Indians know what they were signing? The answer varies. Procedure usually called for the English to read the document aloud to the Indians before the signing, and they did not always read what was on the paper. The Indians signed for what they had heard. The English held them to what was written.(15)
The obstacle of language was resolved through the role of an intermediary, i.e., the interpreter, who translated the issues between the parties. However, most interpreters were white and their allegiance was to their own nations or, more often, for their own personal gain. With the establishment of the United States, the treaty-making process continued. The focus of U.S. treaties was the expansion of its national boundaries. There was also a change in the treaty process itself. Whereas former treaties with European powers were recorded as minutes, U.S. treaties were drawn up first in Washington and then negotiated with tribal nations. And the language abuses continued. Vine Deloria notes:
Although a “treaty” seems to imply an equal bargaining position, the Indians were often at a clear disadvantage when negotiating such arrangements. The actual document was always written in English and was generally interpreted by people who had a stake in a successful outcome of the proceedings, so the Indians were not always told the truth during these sessions.(16)
After the Louisiana Purchase of 1803, the United States began to initiate treaty-making methods in the West that had been successful in subjugating tribal land in the East. The experience of the Southern Arapaho epitomized the experience of nearly all tribal nations in dealing the U.S. government’s colonial policies via treaties of establishing U.S. land ownership, establishing tribal boundaries, creating a presence within tribal land and, through successive treaties, instituting assimilation through mission schools and boarding schools.
Most important, the language barrier played a pivotal role in the treaty-making process. In time, the United States would seek to resolve the language barrier by attempting to destroy tribal languages through specific treaty stipulations.
It is the language of the Arapaho that reveals their history as a people. In their early history, the Arapaho were one of many bands that comprised the Anishinaabe nation. The ancestral home of the Anishinaabe people was located in present-day New Brunswick, on the coast of the Atlantic Ocean. At an early point, Anishinaabe bands began to migrate westward. These bands were, in essence, proto-tribes, i.e., they would develop into tribes in their own right; however, they would preserve their connections as Anishinaabe people through language and customs.
At that time, the Arapaho were called the Kana-nav-ish, the Path People in the language of the Anishinaabe. Their migratory path took them across Canada, into present-day Ontario, and then south into Minnesota. They were most likely located in northern Minnesota, near the source of the Mississippi River, at the time that Columbus arrived in the Caribbean in 1492. Sometime in the late 1500s or early 1600s, the Kana-nav-ish began to, once again, migrate to the west, across the Red River and into North Dakota. As they moved into a new biome of flora and fauna, their language underwent extensive modifications of its sound structure in a relatively short period of time.(17) In their own developing daughter-language, they called themselves the Hinana-aeina. In the mid-1700s, the Kana-nav-ish broke into two groups and separated at the upper Missouri River. The group that migrated into present-day Montana were called the Atsina (Gros Ventre), and the group that crossed the upper Missouri River into present-day Colorado, Wyoming, Nebraska, and Kansas retained the name of Hinana-aeina (Our People).
Concerning the Arapahoan language, Zdenek Salzmann writes:
Arapaho has certain characteristic grammatical features, among them a highly inflected verb and complex derivational morphology; a formal distinction between animate and inanimate genders -- the former referring to most living things as well as to some others classified by the Arapaho as living (for example, rock, tepee pole, rope); the distinction in the first person plural of verbs and possessed nouns between exclusive and inclusive forms, the former being employed when the addressee is not among the persons referred to, as when a woman in the presence of her husband talks to a visitor about “our children,” who clearly are not the visitor’s children (by contrast, inclusive forms subsume the addressee, or hearer, among the person’s referred to); the obviative, marking a form or construction, whether in singular or plural, that relates to the subordinate of two animate third person referents in a given context (as in “her horse” or “the chief’s son,” where “horse” and “son” would appear in the obviative form); and dependency (obligatory possession) of certain nouns, especially body parts and kinship terms -- that is, their occurrence exclusively in possessed forms (someone’s heart, my heart, my father, your mother, and so on) rather than also in absolute forms (dog, rope, and so on)(18)
After their move onto the Plains, the Arapaho were joined by the Cheyenne. The Cheyenne were also an Anishinaabe band that had migrated to the west. On the Plains, the ceremonies of the Arapaho underwent changes. One of the most important was the Offerings Lodge (i.e., the Sun Dance). Certain elements of the Offerings Lodge retained ties to the Mide Lodge (Medicine Lodge) of the Anishinaabe. These changes in ceremonies, and the habitation in Plains biome, led to a further development in the Arapahoan language through which the Arapaho established their ethnicity as a Plains tribal nation.
On September 17, 1851, the Arapaho, Cheyenne, Sioux, Crow, Assinaboine, Gros-Ventre, Mandan, and Arrickara signed the treaty of Fort Laramie. Although several of the other tribal nations had previously signed treaties, it was the first treaty the Arapaho had signed with the U.S. government. The Treaty of Fort Laramie recognized and guaranteed the Plains homelands of the Arapaho - i.e., present-day Colorado, Wyoming, Nebraska, and Kansas - and the homelands of the other tribes as well. Essentially, the treaty established borders between the tribal nations and established borders between those tribal nations and the United States. Because the Cheyenne were allies of the Arapaho and lived within the Arapaho land base, they were included as part of the homeland of the Arapaho.
One of the treaty’s stipulations is that it provided the right of the United States to build forts in tribal lands. On the surface this may have seemed reasonable since the Plains nations retained their homelands. However, by obtaining the right to build forts within tribal lands, the United States was able to build a network of forts throughout Plains sovereign territories and, hence, establish a military presence within those lands.
By this time, the Arapaho and their Cheyenne allies had divided into two divisions -- the Southern Arapaho and Southern Cheyenne, and the Northern Arapaho and the Northern Cheyenne. The division among the Arapaho did not cause a division of their ethnicity as Arapaho people. Through their language and ceremonies, the Arapaho remained a single ethnic group.
In 1858, gold was discovered in the Rocky Mountains. By 1859, 100,000 goldminers invaded the winter camp sites, i.e., present-day Denver and Boulder, of the Southern Arapaho. The goldminers, through the Kansas Territorial Legislature, established towns in the sovereign land of the Arapaho and Cheyenne. Although the influx of whites and the townsites were in clear violation of the Fort Laramie treaty, the U.S. government choose to do nothing about it. Rather, the pattern of invading tribal sovereign land was the same that had happened to the eastern tribes. With the expansion of the status quo, i.e., the white population, the original treaties were renegotiated and the tribal land base was drastically reduced or the tribal land title was extinguished altogether and the tribe was removed elsewhere.
True to the colonializing pattern of the United States, the government sought to renegotiate the Fort Laramie treaty with the Arapaho and the Cheyenne. In 1861, a treaty council was held at Fort Wise, Kansas Territory. The government’s negotiator was A.G. Boone, the grandson of Daniel Boone. Boone hastily called for the treaty meeting in the absence of Left Hand. Left Hand was a Southern Arapaho chief was spoke Arapaho, Cheyenne, and English. He was instrumental in interpreting treaty stipulations to his people and to the Cheyenne. In addition, the treaty was made in the absence of the Northern Arapaho and Cheyenne chiefs.
One of the treaty articles introduced assimilative stipulations. Article Four provided for the building of homes and for the aid necessary for agricultural pursuits. Without a clear understanding of the meaningless words on paper, the Southern Arapaho and Southern Cheyenne chiefs signed the treaty. Interestingly, a special provision provided land for the two mixed blood interpreters, Robert Bent and John Smith.
Three years after the signing of the treaty, the U.S. failed to live up to its obligations as promised in the treaty. The homes were not built and the agricultural aid was not provided. By this time, the Southern Arapaho and Southern Cheyenne had been reduced to a state of destitution and starvation. The bison herds were scattered and armed resistance by the northern groups led to anti-Indian hysteria by the white population. The southern tribes were ordered to establish a village within their boundaries. The site chosen was located on Big Sandy Creek.
On the morning of November 29, 1864, the friendly camp of Arapaho and Cheyenne was attacked by Col. John Chivington. The men were away on a hunting foray. In the ensuing massacre, sixty Southern Arapaho and one hundred Southern Cheyenne, mainly women, children and elders, were murdered and their bodies mutilated by Chivington’s troops.
Although the southern groups had been attacked without provocation, had been within the parameters of the treaty land base, and had not violated any of the treaty terms, the government, in a purely Kafkaesque move, negotiated a treaty in 1865 that took the southern groups out of Colorado and placed them in Kansas. This treaty, the Treaty of the Little Arkansas, did not stipulate any assimilation provisions. Rather, it was clearly intended as a means to remove the Arapaho and Cheyenne from their Plains land base.
However, Kansas did not want an Arapaho and Cheyenne reservation located in their state. This led to the Treaty of the Council Camp on Medicine Lodge Creek on October 28, 1867. The treaty not only removed the Arapaho and Cheyenne to Indian Territory, i.e., present-day Oklahoma, but it was also a precise instrument of assimilative colonialization.
The treaty provisions included the placing of an Indian agent on the Arapaho-Cheyenne reservation and several buildings to house the agent, a physician, blacksmith, farmer, carpenter, miller, and engineer. The assimilative measures included the building of a school-house or mission-building for the purposes of providing an English education. Article 7 states:
In order to insure the civilization of the tribes entering into this treaty, the necessity of education is admitted, especially by such of them as are or may be settled on said agricultural reservation, and they therefore pledge themselves to compel their children, male and female, between the ages of six and sixteen years, to attend school; and it is hereby made the duty of the agent for said Indians to see that this stipulation is strictly complied with; and the United States agrees that for every thirty children between said ages, who can be induced or compelled to attend school, a house shall be provided, and a teacher competent to teach the elementary branches of an English education shall be furnished, who will reside among said Indians, and faithfully discharge his or her duties as a teacher...(19)
To complete the assimilative process, the Arapaho and Cheyenne were required to adopt Euro-American clothing in exchange for traditional clothing. The Medicine Lodge Creek treaty was an explicit document of assimilation. At the core of the treaty was the reformist ideal of assimilation through the eradication of tribal language. Twenty years later, this Protestant reformist ideal was best expressed by J.D.C. Atkins, Commissioner of Indian Affairs. “In his 1887 report, the commissioner of Indian Affairs expressed his commitment to monolingualism and stressed the ‘importance of teaching Indians the English language.’ He further elaborated upon the language issue by stating that ‘this language, which is good enough for a white man and a black man, ought to be good enough for the red man.’ Thus, the Indians’ expressions of culture were relegated to nothingness...”(20)
Six months after the signing of the Medicine Lodge Creek treaty, the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868 was signed by the Brule, Oglala, Miniconjou, Yankton, Hunkpapa, Blackfeet, Cuthead, Two Kettle, Sans Arcs, and Santee bands of Sioux and Arapaho. The Arapaho named here was the northern division who had allied with the Sioux and had taken up armed resistance after the Sand Creek Massacre. The Fort Laramie treaty was a mirror document of the Medicine Creek Lodge treaty. The Fort Laramie treaty included the same assimilation stipulations as the Medicine Lodge Creek treaty.
The land base provided for in the Fort Laramie treaty covered a broad area and, under the terms of the treaty, would include all the Indian nations named in the treaty. Because the treaty land base was centered in Sioux territory, the government had to renegotiate separate treaties with each of the tribes. On May, 10th, 1868, the Treaty of Fort Laramie, Dakota Territory with the Northern Cheyenne and Northern Arapaho was signed. In this treaty, the Northern Arapaho and Cheyenne agreed to the terms of the Medicine Lodge Creek treaty and that they would relocate to the reservation in Indian Territory provided for under the Medicine Lodge Creek treaty.
However, the Northern Arapaho did not want to leave their northern ranges. In September-October, 1876, a council was held and an agreement made with the Sioux, Northern Arapaho, and Northern Cheyenne. The agreement reiterated the assimilation stipulations set forth in the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868. Through this agreement, the Northern Arapaho were able to remain in their northern ranges; however, they were without a reservation. In October, 1877, the Shoshone consented to give up a southeastern portion of the Wind River reservation in Wyoming to the Northern Arapaho.
In 1869, the Southern Arapaho began moving into Indian Territory. The location of the reservation that had been provided through the Medicine Lodge Creek treaty was vague. In August of that year, President Grant issued a proclamation that provided a reservation for the Arapaho and Cheyenne that was located in the west central part of Indian Territory. The agency was located at Darlington, named after the agent who was in charge of the Cheyenne-Arapaho reservation. Brinton Darlington, a devout Quaker, was representative of President Grant’s peace policy of staffing Indian reservations with Quakers. It was the Quakers who could strongly implement the government’s three-point program of educating, civilizing, and Christianizing the Native populations on Indian reservations.
Beginning in 1871, “several different [government] schools were located on the Cheyenne and Arapaho land base. The first of these was the Arapaho Manual Labor and Boarding School at Darlington, followed by the Cheyenne Manual Labor and Boarding School at Caddo Springs [present-day Concho]. Seger Indian Industrial School at Colony was later instituted, followed by Red Moon School near Hammon and Cantonment School near Canton...”(21)
John H. Seger was instrumental in establishing and maintaining government schools on the Cheyenne-Arapaho reservation. After becoming the superintendent of the Arapaho Manual Labor and Boarding School, Seger noted in his annual report that ‘one of the major problems he encountered with students was their reluctance to converse in the English language,’ although they spoke it in the classroom. He therefore mandated use of the English language in every aspect of the school experience; those exhibiting the most fluency were extended certain privileges...”(22)
In 1880, the first Mennonite mission school opened at Darlington, followed by the Mennonite Mission School at Cantonment, and Mennonite Mission at Seger Colony. The missionaries and Indian agents were not only active in suppressing Southern Arapaho and Cheyenne ceremonies like the Offerings Lodge; “they were quite intolerant of tribal languages as well.”(23) The commissioner [of Indian Affairs] implemented his language policy on December 14, 1886, by directing Indian agents that ‘in all schools conducted by missionary organizations it is required that instructions shall be given in the English language.’ This was followed by another directive...ordering that ‘no school will be permitted on the reservation in which English is not exclusively taught.’”(24)
Although the Arapaho and Cheyenne were well aware of the Medicine Lodge Creek treaty stipulation concerning education, they refused to send their children to the agency school at Darlington. In 1880, Agent Charles F. Ashley reacted by instituting a policy of compulsory education. Under this policy, food rations would be withheld against families who refused to send their children to school. Arapaho and Cheyenne parents had no choice but to admit their children to school to learn the white man’s ways. Thus, in essence, Arapaho and Cheyenne children were held as hostages.
Henrietta Mann, a Southern Cheyenne, writes of her grandmother’s experiences at Cantonment:
The sadness, pain, alienation, and bad memories associated with deliberate destruction of a people’s verbal expression of their culture are indescribable. Prohibition, denigration of culture, harsh punishment, and forced acculturation are implied in the simple statement, “Oh! We were punished for speaking Cheyenne.” My grandparents’ facial expressions became masklike as they remembered the attempts to destroy their language.(25)
In 1890, the Jerome Commission initiated the allotment process with the Southern Arapaho and Cheyenne. On April 19, 1892, the 4,300,000 acre Cheyenne-Arapaho Reservation was reduced to 530,000 acres of allotted trust land.
One year later, “...the tribes numbered 3,086 (1,042 Arapahoes and 2,044 Cheyennes). Of them 600 could read, 750 could speak English, and 500 had adopted white dress.”(26) Five years later, Superintendent John Whitwell issued his first annual report. He noted that “instead of a ‘grunt’ the English language was used ‘in the schoolroom and playgrounds, in the workshops and on the farm...Whitwell concluded by stating: ‘The dark cloud of nonprogression which has cast a gloom over this district for so many years is slowly but surely being dispelled by the sun of civilization.’”(27)
On February 14, 1929, Public Law 760 was passed and it enforced “compulsory school attendance of Indian pupils, as provided by the law of the State.”(28) Mann writes:
Federal appropriations for the public school education of American Indian students had increased annually, but the goals of such an education, like the types preceding it, were still to “civilize” and homogenize. The public schools were no different in their attempts to transform American Indian children into marginal, dark-skinned white people, completely disregarding differences in orientation and world view that the tribal people had evolved since the beginning of time.(29)
The effects of acculturation on the Southern Arapaho culture were devastating. After the allotment act, the traditional chieftainship lost its political power. The younger generation that had attended the Carlisle Indian Industrial Training School and the Haskell Institute returned and, after the passing of the Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act in 1936, became the political leaders of the tribe. No longer versed in the language or customs of their culture, these younger leaders, whom the elders caustically referred to as the scholars, instituted a colonial styled tribal government as dictated by the Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act.
By the 1930s, the Offerings Lodge became virtually non-existent among the Southern Arapaho. With the passing of the elders into the Spirit World, there were no longer younger people who could carry on the ceremony because they could not speak their language. It was for this reason that the Southern Arapaho turned to their northern kin at Wind River for the maintenance of the Offerings Lodge.
The Southern Arapaho maintained their own obligations as the Keepers of the Sacred Wheel; yet, it was the Saeicha, the Sacred Flat Pipe, that held, and continues to hold, the Arapaho together as a nation. “While it belongs to the entire tribe and serves as the symbol of its existence and as guarantor of its safety, the Pipe is in the custody of a designated keeper from the Northern Arapaho.”(30)
The Northern Arapaho underwent the same pressures of acculturation as the southern division. The government boarding school was located at Fort Washakie; a Catholic mission, St. Stephen’s, was established in 1884 and, in 1913, St. Michael’s Episcopal Mission was established. All three espoused the government’s three-point program of educating, civilizing, and Christianizing on the Wind River reservation.
The Offerings Lodge (Sun Dance) was at the center of the government’s efforts to repress culture. “The [Northern] Arapahoes were strongly committed to the Offerings Lodge, and although some agents tried to enforce the Indian Office’s ban on the ceremony...the ritual continued to be held almost annually...the Arapahoes apparently convinced the Indian agents and military authorities at Fort Washakie that the Offerings Lodge would not interfere with the civilization effort.”(31) By 1923, the Offerings Lodge became an annual event that continues to the present day.
Like the Southern Arapaho, Northern Arapaho society was structured on an age-grade hierarchy. There were seven age-grades that began with youthhood and ascended to elderhood. The last age-grade, the Hinenniinoowu (Old Men’s Lodge), was the most sacred and the most powerful. The Hinenniinoowu provided direction for the tribe and it was through their approval that one could become a chief. “But ritual authorities faced serious difficulties that threatened to undermine their influence and minimize their role in reservation life. As priests died and agents took repressive measures to curtail the Indian ‘dances,’ the ceremonial elders found it increasingly difficult to pass their knowledge of tribal ceremonies on to younger men. Christianity was potentially competitive with the native religion and the government offered incentives and imposed sanctions to pressure the Arapahoes toward conversion.”(32)
With change, the Arapaho elders found a way for the continuity of their traditions. “Some aspects of the tribal rituals were altered or reinterpreted to accommodate the abilities of the men available to direct them. The elders emphasized flexibility in revising specific procedures and criteria for ritual leadership in order to perpetuate native religion in general. And so the rituals survived the crisis of leadership brought about by the deaths of priests and repressive government policies.”(33)
The Northern Arapaho overcame the problem by lowering the ages of the grades. Lowering the age requirements allowed younger men to gain status in Arapaho society. Most important, through the participation in ceremonies, the language was maintained. Loretta Fowler writes:
One of the puzzling facts about the Arapahoes has been that intermediaries frequently and convincingly maintained to whites that the Arapahoes wanted to “be like the white man,” yet they did not renounce their religion, cease speaking their native language, or replace native with white patterns of social interaction...[o]bservers often erroneously predicted the demise of traditional culture...[f]or example, in 1947 Feliks Gross found that Arapahoes gradually were losing their “traditional” cultural values. He based his conclusions on observations of behavioral innovations; young people, for example, spoke English more often and ‘better’ than they spoke Arapahoe. Contrary to Gross’s predictions, the elderly Arapahoe of today (the youths referred to in Gross’s study) speak Arapahoe often and, in the opinion of Arapahoes, expertly. Gross failed to inquire into the meaning of the use of Arapahoe as opposed to English in particular social contexts; in the Arapahoe view, Arapahoe was becoming culturally appropriate only in particular social contexts and most appropriate for speakers of particular age categories.(34)
Although Gross’s study was made in 1947 and Fowler’s remarks were published in 1982, it provides a key as to how the Northern Arapaho were able to maintain their language well into the 1950s.
Yet, the government’s efforts to eradicate the Northern Arapaho language was no less intense than the efforts that occurred on the Cheyenne-Arapaho reservation in Oklahoma. The young children who attended the government boarding school and mission schools were subjected the Protestant ideal of language and citizenship. This ideal was reflected in the policies and programs initiated by Indian Affairs commissioners in the late 1800s. David Wallace Adams writes:
Education for citizenship focused on language instruction and political socialization. The connection between language and citizenship stemmed from the belief that, along with all citizens, the Indian child should be compelled to read, write, and speak the English language. As Commissioner of Indian Affairs J.D.C Atkins argued in 1887: “If we expect to infuse into the rising generation the leaven of American citizenship, we must remove the stumbling blocks of hereditary customs and manners, and of these language is one of the most important elements.” According to Atkins, “no unity or community of feeling can be established among different people unless they are brought to speak the same language and thus be imbued with the like ideas of duty.”...[T]he bottom line was that Indians, as a colonialized people, could be expected to take on the tongue of their conquerors.(35)
In 1891, Congress authorized the Indian Bureau to deny rations and clothing to parents who withheld their children from boarding or mission schools. Interestingly, this official policy of compulsory education was the same policy that the Southern Arapaho had been subjected to eleven years before.
The Arapaho were one people, separated by northern and southern designations, who shared the same customs and ceremonies. And, they spoke the same language. Both were subjected to strenuous government policies that sought to destroy their language. Though greatly diminished, the language survived, more so among the Northern Arapaho than Southern Arapaho. However, it survived only to become one of many tribal languages that today have become endangered languages. Salzmann writes:
The Arapaho vocabulary is very rich and nuanced and is capable and ready to generate terms for new concepts that have entered the Arapaho cultural universe from the outside (words for automobile, radio, and the like). Whereas before World War II most adult Arapaho, at least in Wyoming, either spoke Arapaho actively or understood when it was spoken to them, the number of Arapaho speakers has declined dramatically to such an extent that the younger generations are for all practical purposes monolingual in English. Moreover, English has even come to influence the speech of those individuals who have managed to retain command of their native language. In short, Arapaho is no longer a flourishing or enduring language; rather, it is a rapidly declining language that has reached the initial stages of obsolesence. The only individuals among the Northern Arapaho who have full command of their language, even if they no longer use it habitually, are members of the oldest generation, which means that parents do not teach Arapaho to their children in the home. As a result, the numbers of active speakers and of those who have some passive knowledge of Arapaho are declining very rapidly; English is preferred in essentially all situations, including even some traditional ceremonial contexts, and the language is losing its communicative viability -- its capacity to adapt successfully to new situations -- not because of some inherent deficiency but as a result of disuse. Unless a prompt and massive revitalization and restoration program is undertaken, the rich and vibrant language of the Arapaho will cease to be spoken altogether within a generation or so.(36)
According to the 1990 Census, there were 1,038 speakers of Arapaho; this includes the Arapaho populations of the Wind River Northern Arapaho and the Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma. The total Arapaho population for both areas combined, in 1990, is approximately 12,000. Because both groups speak the same language, this means that approximately 10% of the Arapaho population spoke their own language.
If the Arapaho population is separated by their designated divisions, i.e., Southern Arapaho and Northern Arapaho, the numbers become even more alarming. Out of the original number of speakers, i.e., 1,038, approximately 200 hundred were Southern Arapaho -- out of a population of 7,000 -- and the remaining number of 838 were Northern Arapaho -- out of a population of 5,000. Thus, in 1990, less than 1% of the Southern Arapaho were fluent in their tribal language and 9% of the Northern Arapaho spoke their language.
However, even these figures are misleading because they are based on the assumption of 1,038 speakers. “[T]his is probably a conservative estimate of the threat, since the Census has no way of knowing whether these are fluent speakers. It [the Census] simply asks the rather vague and ambiguous question: ‘Does this person speak a language other than English at home?’ But not ‘How well?’ ‘How often?’ or ‘Under what circumstances?’”(37) In other words, an Arapaho person with rudamentary knowledge of Arapaho language could, and most likely did, respond affirmatively to the Census question of language.
In 1991, Joshua Fishman, in his book Reversing Language Shift, postulated a continuum of eight stages of language loss with stage eight being the closest to total extinction and stage one being the closest to dynamic survival. Fishman’s study was based on minority languages worldwide.(38)
Current Status of Language
Stage 8: Only a few elders speak the language.
Stage 7: Only adults beyond child bearing age speak the language.
Stage 6: Some intergenerational use of language.
Stage 5: Language is still very much alive in the community.
Stage 4: Language is required in elementary schools.
Stage 3: Language is used in places of business and by employees in less specialized work areas.
Stage 2: Language is used by local government and in the mass media in the minority community.
Stage 1: Some language use by higher levels of government and in higher education.(39)
Thus, under Fishburn’s stages, in 1990, Southern Arapaho were at Stage 8 and Northern Arapaho hovered between Stage 7 and Stage 8. The Arapaho language is one of 175 tribal languages spoken in the United States; 155 of these - 89% - are moribund, i.e., they are spoken only by adults who no longer teach them to the next generation.(40)
Michael Krauss, who has postulated a category system for endangered languages, writes:
Out of over three hundred languages [U.S. and Canada], two hundred and ten are left, but for how much longer? We need to assess the viability of those languages in terms of what I consider the most crucial factor: namely, are children learning these languages in the traditional way, the best way, that has worked since time immemorial for uncountable generations. I would categorize in viability Category A those languages that are still being learned by children in the traditional way.
Category A is unfortunately now the smallest category in North America. About 175 of the 210 languages are spoken in the United States; the other 35 are only in Canada. Out of those 175 languages in the United States, only about 20, or eleven percent, are still being learned by children from their parents and elders in the traditional way. Things are somewhat better in Canada, where about 30 percent of the indigenous languages are still spoken by children. This improves the North American total, but Category A remains the smallest.
The second category is Category B, with about thirty languages, seventeen percent, in both the United States and Canada. These are languages still spoken by the parental generation, which could theoretically turn around and start speaking their native language instead of English to their children but generally they do not. Category B is the second smallest category.
The largest categories by far, unfortunately, are Categories C and D. Category C consists of languages spoken by the middle-aged or grandparental generation and up only. Note that I am not citing the number of speakers, since it does not really make that much difference if such a language has a million speakers or only a hundred. If a language of a million people is not spoken by anyone under fifty, then it is not going to last much longer than such a language spoken by a hundred people. A large number of speakers in itself does not assure survival. Category C languages are found in about the same percentage in the United States and Canada.
Category D languages are those spoken only by a few of the very oldest people. These elders often do not have the chance to talk much to each other. The language may be completely out of use, or it may be only remembered, so not quite extinct. California is the state that has by far the largest number of indigenous languages in North America. Approximately forty of these languages are still remembered by at least one or two people in their eighties.Category C includes about 70, or 40 percent, of our languages in the United States, and Category D about a third. Whereas the United States has a very small number of Category A languages still spoken by children, Canada has a much smaller number of Category D (nearly extinct) languages.(41)
In the late 1970s, an Arapaho language immersion class had been initiated in the Wind River reservation public school system. “By 1984, Arapaho was being taught from kindergarten to grade 12. Language instruction was conducted for 15 minutes a day each day of the school week.”(42) In 1992, Northern Arapaho elders became concerned that the Arapaho language was not being taught properly to the children. What was being taught was limited to basic vocabulary words - names of animals, numbers, colors - and several simple phrases.
In 1993, Stephen Greymorning, who is Northern Arapaho and a University of Montana assistant professor of anthropology and Native American studies, and a language specialist, was brought in by the Northern Plains Educational Foundation to develop a more comprehensive language and culture program in the reservation public schools. Greymorning began by hiring six instructors who were fluent speakers of Arapaho. These individuals had to pass a review of elders who were fluent speakers and who composed the Arapaho language commission.
One of the main problems that Greymorning discovered was the lack of time allowed for language immersion. He found that fifteen minutes multiplied by the one-hundred eighty day school year equaled forty-five hours of language instruction per year. Greymorning was able to implement an 18 week pilot study in which a kindergarten class received an hour of language instruction each day.(43)
The language class was composed of 15 children who were divided into three groups of five. Each group rotated through three language stations that offered fifteen minutes of instruction. Each station focused on a specific area of language proficiency, e.g., vocabulary, asking questions, responding to questions. For the remaining fifteen minutes, the children were brought together as one class. This last station emphasized whole language learning. After twelve weeks, the acquired a command of 163 words and phrases(44)
Based on this success, Greymorning was able to expand the class time for pre-schoolers twice in 1994. In 1995, Greymorning was able to implement a weekly full day immersion pre-school class; a year later, a second pre-school immersion class was added. These two pre-school classes became the basis of the Hinono’etiit Hoowu’ -- the Arapaho Language Lodge. This is a non-profit organization that maintains a language environment that will generate new Arapaho speakers.(45)
Although the immersion programs have been successful in widening the vocabulary of the children, full fluency remains elusive. Greymorning writes:
The strong start of the class led me to hope that the elusive goal of fluency among the immersion class children would be realized. Unfortunately, as in previous years, while the children of both immersion classes were speaking far more Arapaho than children had mastered the year before, they were still only using the language within the confines of what they had been exposed to, and that, when compared to the fullness of the entire Arapaho language, was very limited. Again, the key that seemed to be lacking was an understanding of that facet of language acquisition that allows children to begin to independently use and manipulate language on their own. Thus, it is not enough simply to teach children language phases. If the objective is for the children to acquire our native languages, then children must be exposed to every facet of whatever native language they are meant to acquire...[t]he only way to get children to speak in such a full manner is to systematically expose them to speech forms in a way that requires them to not only hear the usage of such forms but also requires them to verbally respond to such speech acts by using a full array of speech forms...[f]or those who would wonder why anyone should have to worry about whether someone should actually be able to say such things, the response is that it is because of the fact that a speaker possesses the ability to go beyond saying isolated words and phrases to say such things, and much more, that they are recognized as fluent. Furthermore, if we cannot pass on to our developing speakers this ability our languages will be lost. Therefore, if we are to maintain any hope of keeping our languages viable and alive, it remains absolutely essential that we shift our focus from teaching our children words and phrases to passing on to them the ability to think and effectively communicate in our native languages.(46)
In 1994, the Walt Disney Co. and Greymorning worked together to translate the Disney animated classic, Bambi, into Arapaho. Thirty Arapaho members, including 18 children, were chosen for the speaking roles. Bambi is part of Greymorning’s multifaceted approach to language immersion: “This means that efforts should be taken to have the language seen and heard in as many places as possible, like on street signs, the radio, computers, and books. Some of those early efforts produced audio cassettes of children’s songs and stories that children could sing to or read along with, also animated computerized children stories, and a prototype for a talking dictionary with word phrases that linked to animated recreations of what was being said.”(47) Currently, Greymorning is working on Arapaho translations of the animated films, The Little Fox and Willie The Sparrow, as a continuing part of this multifaceted effort.
Despite the success of his efforts, Greymorning encountered a problem that often plagues native immersion programs. He writes:
It is interesting how some of our strongest efforts can at times bring about opposition from our own people. As our language efforts intensified so did the criticism. I frequently heard comments about the sacredness of the language and that it should not be used in a cartoon, in books, or on a computer. Comments like these made me wonder what benefit could come by keeping language locked away as though it was in a closet...[w]e have been given something sacred, and we recognize its sacredness, but instead of blessing our children with this Sacred gift, a vast majority of speakers seemed to have buried their language out of reach from our children and out of reach from our future.(48)
Among the Southern Arapaho, language has reached the extreme end of Category 8. To date (June 2000), there are among an Arapaho population of approximately 9,000, five fully fluent speakers of the Arapaho language. Unfortunately, there has been no concerted effort to establish an Arapaho language immersion program.
In 1995, efforts to create an immersion program was started by the staff of the Head Start program at Canton, Oklahoma. Initially the Canton staff attempted to access elders in their community. They discovered that several were in nursing homes and that the few who lived in their own homes in the community could not work with young children. The staff did locate one Arapaho elder who lived in Oklahoma City but limited Head Start funds prohibited transportation costs. The staff then hired a teacher’s aid who, though not a fluent speaker of the language, taught basic vocabulary words that consisted of numbers, days/weeks/months, birds, and animals (singular and plural). Although the children successfully learned to speak the words, funding limited class time to one short session a week.
Unfortunately, due to internal political problems, the Canton Head Start program, housed in the historic Cantonment building, has been shut down and the Canton staff is no longer employed. The other two Cheyenne-Arapaho Head Start centers in Watonga and Concho have never integrated language programs. Thus, there are presently no language immersion programs existing among the Southern Arapaho in Oklahoma.
The Southern Arapaho are in an unusual position. Although the language will become extinct among the Southern Arapaho, their language will in fact still exist. This is because the Southern Arapaho and Northern Arapaho share the same language and, as noted in the foregoing, the Northern Arapaho have revitalized their language through language immersion programs. Yet, there is the question of dialectal differences. What of Southern Arapaho vernacular, cant, and jargon? Are there terms, phases, and words that are specific to the language of the Southern Arapaho? What of flora and fauna? Are there specific plants -- in particular, medicinal plants -- that were used by Southern Arapaho healers? It is these nuances that will be lost forever once the language becomes extinct among the Southern Arapaho.
As mentioned previously, the main connection between the Southern and Northern Arapaho is culture. In their culture they are one nation. In July, the annual Arapaho nation Offerings Lodge (i.e., Sun Dance) is held at Wind River. The Offerings Lodge brings Southern and Northern together. The Offerings Lodge provides the opportunity for Southern and Northern families to reunite, and for reinforcing tribal solidarity.(49) Another important cultural link is the Saeicha, the Sacred Flat Pipe. The Saeicha, which has been among the Arapaho for thousands of years, continues to bind the Arapaho together as a people.
However, without language, the Southern Arapaho cannot become a living part of their own culture. And without language, what will be the effect on the unborn generations of Southern Arapaho? As Steven Graymorning has said: “...if we lose our language we won’t be able to think in the Arapaho way. If we lose our language we will lose our ceremonies and ourselves because our life is our language, and it is our language that makes us strong.”(50) Jon Reyner writes:
...[E]ach language carries with it an unspoken network of cultural values. Although these values generally operate on a subliminal level, they are, nonetheless, a major force in the shaping of each person’s self-awareness, identity, and interpersonal relationships. These values are psychological imperatives that help generate and maintain an individual’s level of comfort and self-assurance, and, consequently, success in life. In the normal course of events these values are absorbed along with one’s mother tongue in the first years of life. For that reason, cultural values and mother tongue are so closely intertwined in public consciousness that they are often, but mistakenly, seen as inseparable. For the majority of young Natives today, culture and language have, in fact, been separated. As a result, most of these young people are trying ‘to walk in two worlds’ with only one language. This is a far more complex and stressful undertaking than the ‘two worlds’ metaphor would suggest.(51)
Greymorning and Reyner suggest that without language, an individual cannot exist culturally. If one cannot think in the Arapaho way and there is not an unspoken network via language of cultural values, then how much longer can the Southern Arapaho exist as a culture? Certainly, the Southern Arapaho still have access to their language through the Northern Arapaho. Yet, how can the connection to that access become viable enough to revitalize language among the Southern Arapaho?
One of the obstacles to the revitalization of language is the political structure of the Southern Arapaho. Although the Southern and Northern Arapaho share the same ethnicity, their political structures differ. This is due to historical circumstance. The Northern Arapaho were able to maintain strong ties to their age-grade system whereas the Southern Arapaho were not. Through the Allotment Act and the subsequent loss of their land base, the Southern Arapaho were literally separated and divided on trust land. They faced strenuous efforts to assimilate and, once Public Law 760 was passed, they entered a blatantly racist public school system. The later generations that went through the school system are the leaders of today and they have little or, more often, no connection to their culture or, at best, their connection is tenuous. Indeed, most do not attend the annual Offerings Lodge. Unfortunately, these political leaders have totally overlooked the importance of language immersion programs.
Within the historical process, the Southern Arapaho chieftainship lost its power base. As the elders of the Southern Arapaho age-grade societies passed away in the early 1900s, so did the language. Without the language, ceremonial life diminished. Because the age-grade socieites provided direction and guidance to the chieftainship, the Southern Arapaho chieftainship - individuals who themselves were descended from the age-grade societies - lost their own power base. Although the chieftainship still exists, they have become mere cultural figureheads who have no political power nor cultural power. There are eight-ten Southern Arapaho chiefs, yet they are not fluent speakers in their language. Basically, these individuals serve in nominal, honorary positions as chiefs. Their lack of cultural power prevents an influence that could help lead to a revitalization of language.
The largest obstacle is the State of Oklahoma public school system. Whereas the Northern Arapaho were successful in breaking the racial barriers by establishing Arapaho language programs in the State of Wyoming public school system, the Southern Arapaho face a state school system that is seemingly intolerant of providing a sense of identity to its Native American population. And although public schools systems nationwide have historically opposed the integration of Native American curricula and language, there is a growing sentiment to incorporate culturally specific education. For example, in 1993, the State of Washington passed legislation that allowed Native students in public schools to take tribal language classes as part of their language requirements.
In a state with the highest Native American population -- 252,000 (1990 Census) representing twenty nine major tribes, and thirty eight small tribes that are not recognized separately -- it would seem that an educational initiative between the major tribes could seek to establish state educational legislation that would revitalize tribal language programs in public schools. With 23 of the twenty nine major tribes’ languages on the verge of extinction, the common goal should be tribal language classes that fulfill language requirements.
Certainly, the Southern Arapaho have access to the means of language revitalization. The Northern Arapaho language immersion programs are essentially a pilot programs that offers a way of revitalizing tribal language in the Southern Arapaho community. Yet, the Southern Arapaho needs to take the initiative to integrate language immersion into their community. Because without language, the Southern Arapaho may be doomed to become only a shadow of ethnicity. As Joshua Fishman writes:
The most important relationship between language and culture that gets to the heart of what is lost when you lose a language is that most of the culture is in the language and is expressed in the language. Take it away from the culture, and you take away its greetings, its curses, its praises, its laws, its literature, its songs, its riddles, its proverbs, its cures, its wisdom, its prayers. The culture could not be expressed and handed on in any other way. What would be left? When you are talking about the language, most of what you are talking about is the culture. That is, you are losing all those things that essentially are the way of life, the way of thought, the way of valuing, and the human reality that you are talking about.(52)
Recently I was at a niimiwin (powwow) and, as I stood in the dance circle after Grand Entry, I listened to the invocation offered by an Ojibwe-Anishinaabe elder. Throughout the years I have listened to this man speak. And I have listened like a man half deaf. My knowledge of my own language is limited to key words and several simple phrases. I knew that this elder was asking Kichi Manidoo (the Great Spirit) for blessings for all the dancers, the singers, the drums, the spectators, the young, the old, the infirm. And I knew that he was reciting the creation story of the Ojibwe-Anishinaabe -- from the point of our creation as Anishinaabe (Human Beings) to that particular point in time where we were gathered at that particular niimiiwin. I heard him but didn’t hear him. I heard him fully with my heart, but my mind only partially understood his beautiful words.
When he was finished, I looked up and I could see how much he had aged in those long years on the powwow trail. He was already an elder when I first heard his prayers sixteen years ago. I thought about something someone had said, that when we lose an elder we lose a library. And when I looked at this elder, I knew that when he passed homeward to the Spirit World, we would lose one more voice whose words connected us to our past.
I am a legacy of the perfect instrument of empire. Nind Na’wunena beshwaji (My Southern Arapaho close friends) are legacies. And there are many like us -- one people of many nations who live in the shadow of stolen and lost languages.
In 1990, Congress passed Public Law 101-477, October 30, 1990, Title 1 - Native American Languages Act. Ironically, the very government that sought to destroy, to rub out, tribal languages through its federal policies in the 1800s and 1900s, now seeks to save face by passing a law that has no teeth to it. Basically, Public Law 101-477 is like throwing an untied rope to a man clingling to a cliff.
As Greymorning pointed out, one must be able to think in the language for one to be fluent. To some extent, many of the tribal languages that are near extinction may never truly become extinct since many of the key words have been recorded and are taught in one-dimensional immersion programs. Rather, fluency will become extinct but the words will continue to be spoken. In this sense, then, our languages will become like the individuals who are descended from the peoples who spoke the languages. They will exist in a world in which the languages will be hybrid counterparts composed of red words and white.
As the example of the Southern and Northern Arapaho has shown, the path back to our languages is a difficult one. And, although many of our languages may never be restored to full fluency, we need to continue to teach what we know to the younger generations and to the unborn generations. In this way, the continuity and change of our languages will provide for the maintenance of our race, ethnicity, and cultures.
1 Williams, Robert A., Jr., The American Indian in Western Legal Thought: The Discourses of Conquest, New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992, 74.
2 Ibid., 74.
3 Sale, Kirkpatrick, The Conquest of Paradise: Christopher Columbus and the Columbian Legacy, New York: The Penguin Group, 1991, 97.
4 European Voyages of Exploration: Christopher Columbus, Internet, http://www.
acs.ucalgary.ca/HIST/tutor/eurvoya/columbus.html, March, 2000, 4.
5 Modern History Sourcebook: Amerigo Vespucci (1452-1512): Account of His First Voyage, Internet, http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/vespucci- america. html, March, 2000, 4.
6 Kirkpatrick, op.cit., 202
7 Ibid., 202.
8 Ibid., 202.
9 Williams, op.cit., 91.
10 Polzer, Charles W., The Problem of Conquest: Revisted, Internet, http://www.
English.swt.edu/CSS/CWPolzerCDV.HTML, March, 2000, 4.
11 Cabeza de Vaca’s Adventures in the Unknown Interior of Amerca (1542), Internet, March, 2000.
12 Coel, Margaret, Chief Left Hand: Southern Arapaho, Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1981, 121.
13 Prucha, Francis Paul, American Indian Treaties: The History of a Political Anomaly, Berkely/Los Angeles/London: University of Oklahoma Press, 1997, 33.
14 Ibid., 34.
15 Jennings, Francis, The Invasion of America: Indians, Colonialism, and the Cant of Conquest, New York/London: W.W. Norton Company, 1976, 122-123.
16 Deloria, Vine, Jr., American Indians, American Justice, Austin: University of Texas Press, 1997, 5.
17 Picard, Marc, Principals and Methods in Historical Phonology: From Proto-Algonkian to Arapaho, Montreal/Kingston/London/Buffalo: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1994, 39.
18 Salzmann, Zdenek, The Arapaho Indians: A Research Guide and Bibliography, New York/Westport/London: Greenwood Press, 1988, 11.
19 Kappler, Charles J., Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties, Volume Two - Treaties, Internet, Oklahoma State University/TechBooks, http://www.library.okstate.edu /kappler.html, April, 2000.
20 Adams, David Wallace, Fundamental Considerations: The Deep Meaning of Native American Schooling, 1880-1900, Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 58, No. 1, February 1988, 9.
21 Mann, Heniretta, Cheyenne-Arapaho Education, 1871-1982, Niwot: University of Colorado Press, 1997, 111.
22 Ibid., 88.
23 Ibid., 77.
24 Ibid., 78.
25 Ibid., 139.
26 Ibid., 98.
27 Ibid., 95.
28 Ibid., 106.
29 Ibid., 120.
30 Salzmann, op.cit., 8.
31 Fowler, Loretta, Arapahoe Politics: Symbols in Crisis of Authority, Lincoln/London: University of Nebraska Press, 1982, 114.
32 Ibid., 118.
33 Ibid., 120.
34 Ibid., 5.
35 Adams, op.cit., 8-9.
36 Salzmann, op.cit., 11.
37 Crawford, James, Endangered Native American Languages: What Is to Be Done, and Why? Internet, http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ JRCRAWFORD/brj.html, April, 2000, 2.
38 Reyhner, Jon, “Some Basics of Indigenous Language Revitalization,” Jon Reyhner, Gina Cantoni, Robert N. St. Clair, Evangeline Parsons Yazzie, ed, Revitalizing Indigenous Languages, Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University Press, 1999, 2.
39 Ibid., 2-3.
40 Crawford, op.cit., 1.
41 Krauss, Michael, “Status of Native American Language Endangerment,” Gina Cantoni, ed., Stabilizing Indigenous Languages, Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University Press, 1996, 1-2.
42 Greymorning, Stephen, “Running the Gauntlet of an Indigenous Language Program,” Cantoni, op.cit.
43 Greymorning, Stephen, “Going Beyond Words: The Arapaho Immersion Program,” Teaching Indigenous Languages, Jon Reyhner, ed., Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University, 1997.
44 Greymorning, “Running the Gauntlet of an Indigenous Language Program,” op.cit.
46 Greymorning, “Going Beyond Words: The Arapaho Immersion Program,” op.cit.
47 Greymorning, “Running the Gauntlet of an Indigenous Language Program,” op.cit.
49 Salzmann, op.cit., 8.
50 Greymorning, “Going Beyond Words: The Arapaho Immersion Program,” op.cit.
51 Reyhner, Jon, “Rationalizing and Needs for Stabilizing Indigenous Languages,” Cantoni, op.cit.
52 Fishman, Joshua, “What Do You Lose When You Lose Your Language?” Cantoni, op.cit.