The survey team recorded a total of 259 language use observations. According to these observations, the local language was used 64 percent of the time and Tok Pisin was used 36 percent of
the time see table 6. Language use percentages were also calculated for each individual language also shown in table 6.
It should be noted that three languages, Yabong, Nekgini and Neko, all show about the same percentages 63 percent to 67 percent vernacular and 33 percent to 37 percent Tok Pisin while Migum shows a
much higher use of Tok Pisin 45 percent and a lower use of the vernacular 54 percent. This seems to indicate a stronger shift toward Tok Pisin in the Migum language than in the other languages. Although
these percentages show a clear pattern, it is not known how accurate they are due to the uncontrollable variables involved in these observations.
Table 6. Total language use observations Language
Vernacular
a
Tok Pisin Total
Yabong 71
63 42
37 113
Migum 14
56 11
44 25
Nekgini 59
65 32
35 91
Neko 20
67 10
33 30
TOTAL 164
63 95
37 259
a
The percentages given for each language are comparing use of the vernacular and Tok Pisin in that language.
Adult language use is actually slightly lower than indicated by the above table because 42 of these observations were of children speaking see section 3.1.2 above. If these 42 observations are removed
from the above totals then the total number of adult language use observations is 217. There are 140 observations of adults using the vernacular 65 percent and 77 observations of adults using Tok Pisin
35 percent. The difference between adults’ language use and the language use of the total population is, however, slight.
3.1.5 Domains of language use
To determine the domains for individual languages, people were asked the following twelve questions in each village. Their responses are recorded in appendix A.3.
What languages do you use when: •
arguing with family •
praying at home •
organizing wedding or funeral feasts •
at the market •
joking •
playing sports •
talking with outsiders who do not know your language •
participating in court •
transactions in town •
you go to town •
most people are on the way to town •
most people are at the town’s market •
most people are in stores
With the exception of Baded village, where the Karo dialect is used for arguing with family, all responses to the above questions were either their own local language, Tok Pisin or both. To evaluate
responses, each village was given a three-part score. The number of domains where Tok Pisin was given as a response were counted and entered in table 7 on the line for that village under the heading “Tok
Pisin domains.” Then the number of domains where the local language is used were counted and entered on the same line in the table under the heading “Vernacular domains.” Next, the number of domains that
received a response of both Tok Pisin and the local language were counted and entered in the table for that village under the heading “Overlap.”
For example, in Masi, Tok Pisin was used in eight domains, the vernacular was used in four and there are no domains in which both were used. In Sorang, Tok Pisin was used in eight domains and the
vernacular was used in six, but Tok Pisin was also used in two of those six. Table 7. Language domains and overlap between languages
Language Village
Tok Pisin domains Vernacular
domains Overlap
Yabong Masi
8 4
Bidua 7
5 Basor
7 5
Baded 12
5 5
Migum Lamtub
12 4
4 Singor
12 4
4 Nekgini
Sorang 8
6 2
Asang 8
6 2
Reite 8
7 4
Serieng 12
5 5
Neko Damoing
12 7
7 Warai
12 8
8 Table 7 was reorganized to produce table 8, which ranks the languages from the most vulnerable to
shifting into Tok Pisin to the least. It was reorganized by using the criteria explained below. Since Tok Pisin has spread throughout the Rai Coast area in the last 70 years, we assume that the
situation in the area started without Tok Pisin being used in any domains and that the increase in Tok Pisin has been steady. The vitality of the languages becomes more threatened when Tok Pisin begins
dominating more domains. The languages where Tok Pisin is also used in all the domains in which the local language is used
are more threatened than the languages that have one or more domains in which Tok Pisin is not used. This assumption is supported by the basic ecological principle that no two organisms can live in the
same place. One will eventually overwhelm the other. The only time two languages will survive in a bilingual setting is when they each have at least one unshared domain.
Another indication that a language is under threat is when it is being used in fewer domains. This remains true even if it is the only language used for the domains in which it remains.
The ranking of language vitality shown in table 8, from least vital to most, is supported by data discussed in other areas of this report and by our general observations.
Table 8. Ranking of language viability by village Language
Village Tok Pisin
Vernacular Overlap
Migum Singor
12 4
4 Migum
Lamtub 12
4 4
Yabong Baded
12 5
5 Nekgini
Serieng 12
5 5
Neko Damoing
12 7
7 Neko
Warai 12
8 8
Nekgini Reite
8 6
4 Nekgini
Asang 8
6 2
Nekgini Sorang
8 6
2 Yabong
Masi 8
4 Yabong
Bidua 7
5 Yabong
Basor 7
5
3.1.6 Language use in schools
