patterns; and wordlists to investigate language and dialect boundaries. Interviews with church and school leadership were used to determine the level of institutional support towards a language
development project.
2.1 Tools
2.1.1 Observation
Language use observations were collected alongside reported language use to investigate the vitality of the languages.
2.1.2 Sociolinguistic interviews
The team used the language use, contact patterns, culture, education and church questionnaires from the sociolinguistics section of SIL-PNG see appendices D.1 through D.5. Although not every question was
asked in every village, these questionnaires were used to guide the interviews in each village.
2.1.3 Wordlists
Wordlists were elicited from each village visited in order to determine dialect grouping within a language as well as lexical similarity between languages. We used the 190-item SIL-PNG wordlist 1999
Revision.
2.2 Fieldwork procedure and route
Fieldwork was completed by Dunc Pfantz, Dan Richardson, Hannah Paris nee Cockerill, Barbara Hodgkinson and Juliann Bullock nee Spencer. In each village, the survey team leader explained the
work to the local people and asked their permission to proceed. This was granted in all cases, at which stage the local village leaders and the survey team separated those present into appropriate groups for
data collection.
Language use, contact patterns and culture interviews were conducted in a group setting with male and female representatives from different age groups when possible. Occasionally culture interviews
could only be conducted with men due to local cultural practices that prohibit the presence of women when certain traditions are discussed. Interviews regarding school and church institutions were done on
an individual or small group basis with the appropriate leader. Where there was no school, a group community education interview was conducted to get an overview of levels of education in the village.
The survey team observed patterns of language use. We paid particular attention to children’s language use, but observations were also made of the languages used by young, middle-aged and older
males and females. The survey team observed the languages being used in the village setting including village meetings, during church services and at a school.
The wordlists were elicited in small groups of speakers including people of various ages and both genders although there was typically one spokesperson for the group. There were both male and female
spokespeople who ranged in age from 22 to 65. Group elicitation allowed for discussion of the most appropriate term for each gloss. Working in a group is also more culturally acceptable than isolating
individuals.
The following table shows the dates on which data was collected in each village.
Table 2. Fieldwork route Date
Location Language
5 March 2008 Masi
Yabong 6 March 2008
Bidua Yabong
7 March 2008 Basor
Yabong 8 March 2008
Dein Karo dialect
a
9 March 2008 Baded
Lamtub Yabong
Migum 10 March 2008
Singor Migum
11 March 2008 —
— 12 March 2008
Sorang Nekgini
13 March 2008 Asang
Nekgini 14 March 2008
Reite Nekgini
15 March 2008 —
— 16 March 2008
Serieng Nekgini
17 March 2008 Damoing
Neko 18 March 2008
Warai Neko
a
Karo is a dialect of the Rawa language found further inland. The village of Dein is located on the coast in the Mindiri language area; Dein is in map 2, and the Mindiri
and Rawa language areas can be seen in map 3. According to Jens Meyer, an SIL literacy worker in the Rawa language, there are many Karo settlements along the coast
near Dein but there is no evidence that the Mindiri language boundaries have changed; language use patterns in these settlements indicate shift from Karo to Tok Pisin Meyer,
personal communication, September 2012.
2.3 Critique
