Perspective Chapter: The Transmission of National Languages and the Conservation of Intangible Heritage

Abstract

The conservation and transmission of intangible cultural heritage is the most difficult thing to achieve. To be well done, it must go through field surveys. Among the elements that come into play for this preservation is the language. The latter constitutes the first vehicle for the transmission of heritage. A language, whatever its status, must be transmitted, because by transmitting it, one transmits an entire culture, that is to say all the habits, practices, and traditional uses relating to a given group as well as the set of notions relating to the past. Should higher education, in its programs, introduce training modules relating to the pedagogy of field surveys, especially since each field is situational? Field research is very important insofar as it constitutes an educational tool and a tool for learning and acquiring new methods of investigation.

1. Introduction

“To speak of linguistic heritage is first of all to dissociate language (its grammaticality) from language and to situate oneself within the explanatory framework of a sociology that constitutes the latter as a place of observation (or content) among others of the links and responsibilities between legators and heirs” ([1], p. 205). Language is the capacity that allows each individual to communicate with others. It depends on the natural faculties of human beings. Language belongs to a community; it is “a social product of the faculty of language and a set of necessary conventions, adapted by the social body to allow the exercise of this faculty of language and a set of necessary conventions” ([2], p. 25). Language and intangible heritage are therefore two closely related concepts. Language allows the dissemination of information and knowledge. It is through language that cultural heritage is transmitted. It consists of traditions or living expressions inherited from ancestors and passed on to descendants. These are immeasurable riches that a community can have. They contribute to the socio-economic development of peoples. States are therefore called upon to conserve them more. But how can they do this? Should they simply collect them, safeguard them, and teach them in schools with pre-established programs and methodologies? Or is it better to revise them? The curricula in most countries, especially in Africa, are superficial and folkloric. This is what Tourneux ([3], p. 32) notes: “there is already a module entitled ‘Music, song and culture’ in Cameroon’s official basic education programs […] These official texts are fairly vague and resolutely place ‘the’ national culture in the register of folklore and one of the objectives of its teaching is to provide exotic material so that pupils can animate the various official events […]”. The methodologies used so far are fieldwork and some writing. Are these sufficient (good)? If not, how and who should be trained in the field for a good methodology of teaching the linguistic heritage that is the language? The aim of this chapter is to demonstrate that the transmission of national languages is a great contribution to the preservation of intangible cultural heritage. The hypothesis is that the transmission of national languages can only be effective if the method of collecting field data takes into account the whole chain of transmission, namely: the community, the interviewer (teacher and learner), and his or her actual presence in the field. This assumption includes the interdependence between the researcher and the field. The approach used is purely sociolinguistic. This approach is mainly based on the survey that is used to collect the data to be analyzed: words, interactions, speeches, written documents, field notes, logbooks, interviews, and observations ([4], p. 1).

2. The concept of intangible cultural heritage

Cultural heritage is defined as all tangible or intangible assets of certain artistic and/or historical importance, belonging either to a private entity (person, company, association, etc.) or to a public entity (municipality, department, region, country, etc.). This group of cultural assets is generally preserved, restored, safeguarded, and shown to the public, either exceptionally (such as the European Heritage Days, which take place on a weekend in September) or regularly (castle, museum, church, etc.), free of charge or for a fee.

• The so-called “tangible” heritage is mainly made up of built landscapes, architecture and town planning, archaeological and geological sites, certain agricultural or forestry developments, art objects and furniture, and industrial heritage (tools, instruments, machines, buildings, etc.).

• The so-called “intangible” heritage can take different forms: songs, customs, dances, gastronomic traditions, games, myths, tales and legends, small trades, testimonies, capture of techniques and know-how, written and archival documents (including audiovisual), and so on ([5], November 9, p. 4).

In the past, intangible cultural heritage was limited to monuments and objects. Today, however, UNESCO has broadened the sphere of intangible cultural heritage to include living traditions and expressions such as oral traditions, performing arts, social practices, rituals and festive events, knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe, or the knowledge and skills necessary for traditional craftsmanship ([6], p. 1). UNESCO, in 2003, through the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, defined five main domains in which intangible cultural heritage is expressed: oral traditions and expressions, including language as a vehicle of intangible cultural heritage; performing arts; social practices, rituals, and festive events; knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe; and skills related to traditional crafts. Therefore, our topic on the transmission of languages and the conservation of intangible heritage is part of UNESCO’s concerns on the protection of this heritage.

In fact, the transmission of languages is referred to as a means of preserving cultural heritage, as local languages are losing their value. The transmission from generation to generation is no longer respected. If this continues, entire heritages will disappear from the world and, with it, knowledge and know-how.

Heritage appeals to the idea of an inheritance bequeathed by the generations that preceded us, and which we must pass on intact or increased to future generations, as well as to the need to constitute a heritage for tomorrow ([5], November 9, p. 4).

The use of local languages, especially in Africa, will help in the transmission of customs and traditions and their preservation. This will help in learning ways of doing and thinking that will enable the understanding and practice of languages and the preservation of heritage (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

The researcher’s place in the field.

3. Language as a cultural heritage to be safeguarded

Language is the natural, inherent, and universal ability of human beings to construct systems for communication. Language is that system belonging to each community that is used for communication.

Language is the natural, inherent and universal faculty of human beings to build systems for communication; its study is divided into two parts, one dealing with language (the code) and the other with speech (the use of the code). F. de Saussure.

Language is a system of vocal signs specific to members of the same community; it is an instrument of communication within that same community and, from a sociolinguistic point of view, a symbol of identity and cultural belonging. As a code, language remains a social convention, a priori independent of individual variations. F. de Saussure.

As a result, every language has its own way of thinking, its own identity, and its own culture. These three concepts are part of the tangible and intangible heritage of a given community insofar as they represent a certain wealth and contribute to the socioeconomic development of individuals. To know and understand a language is to know how the society functions, that is, its resources and its biodiversity in general. And this is how the preservation of cultural heritage will be effective.

Cultural heritage is, in its broadest sense, both a product and a process that provides societies with a set of resources inherited from the past, created in the present and made available for the benefit of future generations. It includes not only tangible heritage but also natural and intangible heritage. Nevertheless, as noted in “Our Creative Diversity”, these resources constitute “fragile wealth” and as such require policies and development models that preserve and respect the diversity and uniqueness of cultural heritage, because once lost, they are not renewable ([6], p. 132).

It is therefore time that every language, whatever it may be, be preserved, since the loss of a language is equal to the loss of a cultural heritage to be protected. Concepts, expressions, and objects, in some languages, cannot be easily translated into other languages just by words or phrases because they are full of meaning. A single word or phrase cannot translate them. One must use either phrases or images to do so. It is in this sense that each language has its importance to play in the conservation of cultural heritage.

The notion of heritage is important for culture and development as it constitutes the “cultural capital” of contemporary societies. Heritage contributes to the ongoing revaluation of cultures and identities and is a significant vehicle for the transmission of expertise, skills, and knowledge between generations. It also provides a source of inspiration for creativity and innovation, resulting in contemporary and future cultural products. Cultural heritage has the potential to foster access to and enjoyment of cultural diversity. Through the development of an individual and collective sense of belonging, it can also enrich social capital and contribute to supporting social and territorial cohesion. Furthermore, cultural heritage has acquired great economic importance for the tourism sector in many countries while, at the same time, creating new challenges for its conservation ([6], p. 132).

To preserve non-codified local languages, it is necessary to go into the field to study them.

4. The concept of the field

Field cannot be defined ex nihilo. “Terrain is not a thing, it is not a place, nor is it a social category, an ethnic group or an institution” ([7], p. 35). It must be associated with the researcher. This is why researchers who have already worked on the issue speak of “doing the field.” In this expression, we understand that there is an idea of interaction; that is, the researcher must not go into the field and work alone. He or she must be surrounded by informants of all ages and academic levels and must be a field rat, that is, go wherever there is information to be gathered.

Doing fieldwork refers, de facto, to a dynamic aspect. For the researcher, it is a question of going to the field, being accepted there, staying there, interacting, observing, noting, discussing, weaving links, trying to understand… this research tool—fieldwork—therefore presupposes a commitment of the body, a common experience, a sharing. p. 56.

Fieldwork is an eternal restart, a perpetual questioning to avoid failures. This is why it is necessary to train in the field in order to know its intricacies so as to be able to transmit.

5. Training in the field

Language, an essential element in the preservation of cultural heritage, must be transmitted in order to avoid its extinction. And to do this, training is needed. This training must take into account the field for the collection of data, if all African languages are not written. To carry out this work, the States must set up research structures, that is, laboratories and research centers, computer equipment, and financial resources, with the aim of training teachers in the training of learners and vice versa, a sort of chain, a collaborative work between teachers and taught. Clearly, either the teacher transmits to the learner the theoretical bases of the field, and once in the field, the learner applies it and reports back with possible difficulties and suggestions, or the teacher and the learner both go to the field and confront the realities of the latter so that they experience and transform together the field method to be adopted. This is because the field is a complex notion. It cannot be understood as a fixed object to be studied, and the researcher cannot claim to give an objective account of what he has collected. There will be an element of subjectivity that will be included especially when translating from unwritten local languages to written languages. The researcher has, as it were, an “intimate and subjective relationship with the field” ([8], p. 1).

One cannot rigidify the field by solidifying it and making it an object of research, comparable to the object of the hard sciences for example. The field pre-exists the one who analyses it and escapes the experimental procedures of the laboratory and therefore the production of stable evidence (quoted by [8], p. 1). In the same perspective, Bourdieu [9] speaks of “participatory objectification,” which presupposes certain reflexivity. The researcher is therefore a victim of his or her emotions, which he or she uses in his or her analyses and interpretations. In addition to this difficulty, there is the difficulty of expressing the particular realities of a given culture.

The subjectivity in question is imposed from the moment that what is collected in the field is not fixed; everything is dynamic. It is information that is constantly being acquired from generation to generation, which is subject to modification, addition, and removal. This training requires enormous resources from (political) decision-makers. It is important to have a large and well-trained human resource. To do this, start by training trainers in the development of manuals for learning traditional knowledge and practices. These concern almost all areas since it is the cultural heritage that needs to be transmitted. They can be:

• Technical: machines, instruments for technical use, means of transport;

• Human and animal health: medicines, activities, names of drugs and stimulants, work tools…

• Culture and communication: leisure, music, new forms of enjoyment, media, sports, new clothing…

• Agriculture: exotic agricultural products, new agricultural techniques, names of foreign foods;

• Wildlife: names of animals and landscapes;

• Customs;

• Songs and games;

• Riddles, proverbs, tales, songs;

• However, there is a difficulty in expressing certain realities on the ground.

6. The difficulty in expressing realia

Realia are those non-linguistic realities, whether objects or expressions, that are difficult to convey in words and for which one is obliged to use images or illustrations to express them.

Existing objects in the world perceived or considered independently of their relation with the sign`` [10]. Anyone who wishes not to sacrifice the inherent unruliness of the reality of facts soon finds themselves exposed to succumbing under the weight of documentation and, ultimately, in danger of producing work of little value. The solution lies first in a division of tasks: historians, sociologists, etc., are responsible for observing and describing the realia and their evolution, while grammarians are tasked with identifying the signifiers in their various aspects and presenting them clearly and orderly. (G. Antoine, L’Hist. de la lang., probl. et méth.ds Fr. mod.1981 t. 49, p. 146) ([11], p. 1).

The way of thinking, the culture, and the identity are specific to each language. Thus, without the field, it is almost impossible to transmit certain cultural knowledge; the way in which it is transmitted and those who transmit it must be in direct contact with those who gather the information:

What characterizes “fieldwork” above all […] is its human dimension; fieldwork necessarily involves a relationship with people: professionals, users, inhabitants… whom the researcher will regularly call “actors” or “subjects.”

It is in this way that researchers will be able to construct a new epistemology.

7. Toward a new epistemology of field education

Until today, traditional knowledge in Africa has only been transmitted orally to children and at home for those who still use their languages. Speaking of the Palenque people, Pabla Pérez Tejedor describes the transmission of this knowledge as being similar to that of other peoples, especially Africans, who have not yet codified their languages.

All this knowledge and practice is transmitted by the elders to the new generations, through observation, practice, and use of the spoken language. It is through the spoken language that the elders and adults of Palenque transmit their most valuable knowledge to their brothers, sons, friends, nephews, cousins, members ([12], p. 76).

This traditional transmission must give way to a methodologically well-thought-out academic transmission. It would therefore be wise for higher education to think and rethink the training of students and teachers in a new field methodology. This must be able to combine modernity and tradition. Thus, any field study must be designed in such a way that the involvement of those concerned is necessary, or even compulsory. In concrete terms, the field in question must be made up of the interlocutors of the languages in question but also of the speakers of these languages, that is, those who have learned the language as a second language (Language 2). They will consist of different age groups and genders. The learners should be accompanied by their trainers. In this way, knowledge will be gathered objectively as several sources are brought together, and those concerned, those who have mastered the language and are able to manipulate it, are also present.

What can be proposed is an epistemology based on the researcher (teacher or student). The researcher must be at the center of the whole methodology and at the same time all around. This means that we return to the reflexivity of the fieldwork in question. The researcher must go and find the objects, must go to the places and to the individuals:

[…] The method of transmission of this cultural heritage is essentially based on dialogue and the telling of stories by the elders, combined with observation and practice of the knowledge that is at the heart of the learning process. In other words, children and young people appropriate collective knowledge by observing and reproducing the activities of the elders and adults, thanks to a permanent dialogue between the two groups. Two languages are involved in this process. Tejedor ([12], pp. 76–77).

The figure below shows the place of the researcher in the field. This figure shows that the researcher must be at the center of everything. This means that he or she must go towards the objects, the things; surround himself or herself with individuals who will inform him or her, establishing interpersonal relationships; and actually be in the place of investigation. All of these elements combined will make it possible to carry out scientific fieldwork.

The field, here, is all those elements that surround the researcher. For a good field study, the researcher must be “in” the field, that is, be at one with the field for it to be properly understood and transmitted. All the elements around the researcher must also be interconnected with him/her.

8. The transmission of national languages and cultural heritage

Researchers (teachers or trainers and trainees or students) + interviewees gather in the field, study it, and find a modus vivendi for a good transmission of languages, which will be the basis for the transmission of cultures, including the cultural heritage of peoples. This group thus formed must study these languages in the field. Once the study is done, it will be necessary to train the trainers in order to train the students. Tourneux ([3], p. 25–26) mentioned that “it is especially important to have excellent teachers who are well trained in linguistic fieldwork and who are not stingy with their time.”

Example: safeguarding traditional knowledge and practices. Let us take the example of the Kotoko people, an indigenous people of the Logone Valley.

The Kotoko people are a water people because they live all along the Chari and Logone rivers. Their main activity is fishing. Appropriate means are therefore used for this purpose. The instrument used by this people for fishing is the “wàm zémí.” This tool is “made up of two distinct parts.” It is the “wàm,” which is the dugout canoe in which the fishermen carry out their activity, and the triangular net placed at the front of the dugout canoe, which is called “zémí” [13], p. 4. This knowledge can only be transmitted when one is in contact, including in the field, to observe and collect the data necessary to teach it.

It is a disappearing skill since today none of these pirogues exist on these rivers. It is perhaps time that a fieldwork with linguists, historians, sociologists, and geographers, a multidisciplinary team, be done on this very important material of the Kotoko culture with the aim of rehabilitating it because it is part of the cultural heritage of a people. This disappearance has impoverished the Kotoko, because they had to look for other sources of income apart from fishing. And yet, if the educational system already took into account the transmission of cultural heritage, there would certainly not have been this loss.

9. Conclusion

At the end of this work on “the transmission of national languages and the conservation of cultural heritage,” it emerged that language plays a major role in the conservation of a people’s cultural heritage. It was noted that because of the neglect of local languages in favor of official languages in most African countries, several aspects of culture are disappearing or have disappeared, with enormous consequences for the socioeconomic development of the populations. This transmission must be sustainable. It will therefore be necessary to do a great deal of fieldwork to collect and rehabilitate objects, elements of the natural environment, everything that is living and non-living in the environment, as well as everything that concerns human activities.