Procedure: An example of this procedure would be asking, “What language do you usually speak
w ith your children?”, as on the planned interview schedule. If the interviewee happened to respond with
two or more languages, we followed up with questions such as “Do you speak one of these languages more often than the other?” This allowed the interviews to focus more on patterns of language use and
their impact on language vitality and shift than on other topics, such as generalized trends of multilingualism.
Sampling: Using the screening criteria listed in section 3.2, people of varying age, gender, and education level were chosen for the informal interview. We conducted interviews with at least ten people
in each site. Advantages: Depending on the length of the interview schedule, the time in administration can be
minimal, allowing for relatively large numbers of people to be interviewed. The informal nature of the interviews helps subjects feel comfortable and share openly, while allowing greater depth and context for
their responses. Disadvantages: Informal interviews are limited in that subjects may only report what they want the
researcher to hear, or what they believe the researcher would like to hear.
3.3.4 Dialect mapping participatory method
Description and Purpose: This method initiates discussion of existing dialects, their geographic location, and perceived levels of comprehension between varieties.
Procedure: Participants were invited to describe their perception of their linguistic situation by identifying other locations where their language is spoken. They then identified how different other
varieties of their language are from their own and how well they understand other varieties. They then identified which variety they use in conversation with people from each area, and which variety they
believe has the greatest potential to be a written standard. This whole procedure involves manipulating strings and placing various colored markers to represent dialects areas, intelligibility, and language use.
This method creates a clear visual representation of the insiders’ view. Appendix E-3A contains a detailed description of this method.
Advantages: This method provides a visual representation with which communities participants interact, and indicates how well participants understand other varieties, how their language may or may
not be altered in these circumstances, and their attitudes towards each variety. The tool allows everyone to participate in generating the information.
Disadvantages: The dialect mapping method may seem complicated or redundant to participants. Although the results are a useful indicator, emic perspectives do not always match linguistic reality.
3.3.5 Domains of Language Use participatory method
Description and Purpose: This method aids the investigation of language vitality. Its purpose is to help participants from the language community describe the varying situations in which they use L1, the
LWC, or other languages, and then identify the domains and languages that are used more frequently. The steps of this instrument are listed in Appendix E-1a.
Procedure: Groups of Yamphu people were asked to identify which languages they speak on a regular basis and then list a variety of domains in which each of those languages are used. The
participants then categorized the domains by their frequency using a visual graphic that all could participate in creating.
Sampling: A group of 15 Yamphu speakers seven ladies and eight men in the village of Hedangna participated in this facilitation.
Advantages: This method helps community members describe their patterns of language choice, aiding investigation of language vitality.
Disadvantages: Categorizing domains may be confusing or difficult. Some people may not be comfortable making comparisons.
3.3.6 Bilingualism participatory method
