CC BY
19
УДК 371
José Antonio Flores Farfán
Revitalization Experiences in Mexico: Building a field
Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social (CIESAS), Мексика
Abstract. This text offers a brief but profound review of various experiences in the field of revitalization of languages in Mexico. Furthermore, it shows the existing theoretical and methodological debate in the definitions of the concepts considered for this task, such as revitalization itself, together with presenting the proactive and non extractive, democratic and decolonial premises on which the development of the Revitalization, Maintenance and Development Project developed in Mexico are based. The foregoing is compared with a series of reviews of other micro-, meso- and macro- revitalizing policy projects in Mexico from a comparative perspective that contributes to the advancement of the development of proposals for the defense of linguistic diversity, especially minoritized languages.
Keywords: revitalization of languages, decolonialism, language policies, indigenous peoples, language education, past, present and future of languages, languages and native cultures; multi-dialect communication of children, disappearing languages, language activation of children and young people, Mexico.
Хосе Антонио Флорес Фарфан
Опыт возрождения языков в Мексике
Исследовательский и образовательный центр социальной антропологии (CIESAS), Mexico
Аннотация. В статье представлен краткий, но глубокий обзор разных практик в области возрождения языков в Мексике. Определены существующие теоретические и методологические разногласия в определениях соответствующих концепций, таких как само возрождение, вместе с представлением активных и неэкстрактивных, демократических и деколонизирующих предпосылок, на которых основан Проект возрождения, сохранения и развития языков, разработанный в Мексике. Вышеизложенное сравнивается с серией обзоров других проектов в области микро-, мезо- и макровозрождения в Мексике в сравнительной перспективе, которые способствуют продвижению разработки предложений по защите языкового разнообразия, особенно языков малочисленных народов.
Ключевые слова: возрождение языков, деколониализм, языковая политика, коренные народы, языковое образование, прошлое, настоящее и будущее языков, языки и коренные культуры; многодиалектное общение детей, исчезающие языки, активация языка у детей и молодежи, Мексика.
Introduction
Nowadays, the field of language revitalization integrates diverse initiatives and processes. There are, above all, a number of experiences in the world, which are considered outstanding references (e.g. the Maori language nests or Hinton's teacher-apprentice: 2001). Yet, strictly speaking, we lack an explicit, theoretically discussed definition of revitalization. In general, these are more or less successful experiences, which imply a collaborative type of work combined with some other tools that strive to overcome neocolonial academicism, or what conventionally has been called applied
FLORES FARFAN José Antonio - is a researcher professor at the Center for Research and Higher Studies in Social Anthropology (CIESAS) since 1984. Currently he coordinates the Digital Archive of Indigenous Languages (ADLI), of the Language and Culture Laboratory "Victor Franco Pellotier", at CIESAS, and serves as the director of Linguapax in Latin America. He is also a member of the Mexican Academy of Sciences and the National Researchers' System. For more than two decades, he has worked with endangered languages, generating multimodal materials that promote the linguistic and cultural strengthening, empowerment and revitalization of threatened languages and cultures.
ФЛОРЕС ФАРФАН Хосе Антонио - профессор-исследователь, Исследовательский и образовательный центр социальной антропологии (CIESAS), Мексика. Координатор Цифрового архива языков коренных народов (ADLI) Лаборатории языка и культуры «Виктор Франко Пеллотье» в CIESAS, директор «Linguapax» в Латинской Америке.
(i.e. practical) work. Theoretically, revitalization is inscribed in the frontiers of pedagogy, linguistics, sociolinguistics and anthropology, always from a critical viewpoint, as part of an academy committed to closing the gaps between academia, native peoples and institutions, developing a new kind of paradigm - a none extractive, democratic one, which deploys a proactive decolonial approach in favor of languages and their speakers -understood as an effective exercise of linguistic rights, beyond mere discursive declarations. To develop an analysis and provide some useful guidelines in this direction, we will review two (micro-meso-macro) revitalizing language policy projects, which we are currently working on, Yucatec Maya and Nahuatl, in Mexico, critically reviewing the results of these two (micro) language policy experiences. Taking these experiences as case studies, we will discuss the main theoretical-methodological and empirical intervention effects and challenges of these type of experiences. From this comparative perspective, we will briefly discuss the state of the art in the field, highlighting the most successful strategies for the exercise of revitalizing projects in diverse contexts, paying tribute to the progress of the development of well-formed and informed proposals for the defense of linguistic diversity.
It should not be forgotten that the field of revitalization of languages constitutes a relatively recent academic scenario, which requires much more reflection and, above all, raises a series of theoretical, methodological and research challenges, that fundamentally question the paradigms that still predominate in the humanities and social sciences. In fact, as part of the struggle for power in the academy, there is a conservative discourse in linguistics that denies the scientificity of revitalization, arguing that this is not science. In its most extreme form, such discourses correspond to a conservative position - neoliberal if you will - of science, which ignores the contemporary debates on scientific revolutions (Kuhn, 1962) that point to a committed science with a decolonial perspective (de Sousa, 2018). Decolonizing of language edducation is not just another slogan, but a call for a change of paradigm, especially required in contexts of extreme threat such as the current ones, in which however vital certain cases may be (e.g. Tzeltal, Yucatec Maya, or Purepecha in Mexico), the threats are multiple: ideological as well as factual, manifested in the presence of market forces, in the form of the interests of large transnational corporations in Indigenous territories, and in extractive projects, which often understand the value of languages before the national states, in order to irrationally exploit their knowledge of biodiversity.
In this context, under the term revitalization, too many things are subsumed and none yet explicitly, much less in detail. Strictly speaking, its definition depends on the type of ideologies and practices at stake. Some advances in the necessary "ideological clarification" (Kroskrity and Meek, 2017) of revitalization of languages still require and would require much more debate, both in the sense of giving a precise definition to a wide range of not well defined and ideologically biased notions, as linguistic vitality or displacement. In our case, we operationally define revitalization of languages as a collaborative, democratic approach at the crossroads of diverse paradigms: what is conventionally known as applied work - here defined along the lines of sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology - and understood as a science committed to the past, present and future of endangered languages and their respective communities.
These thoughts invite us to close the gaps between the academy and native peoples - and institutions, if this is still possible - in order to establish a new type of non-extractive, decolonial, proactive relationship between diverse sectors and highly heterogeneous voices. Therefore, operationally, if we want to give revitalization an explicit content, this would have to be understood as the exercise of linguistic rights, as part of the decolonial paradigm, as part of a project of (micro-meso/macro) politics that vindicates the languages and the native cultures together with their speakers. In our conception, the validity of language rights comes from their exercise in the communicative vindication of language practices and as processes of primary socialization and social reproduction of community roots and epistemologies.
In practice, the right to express one's own renewed and recreated epistemologies exists, among others, in magical-religious rituals, word games - such as tongue twisters, which become riddles (or vice versa) - intergenerational games of primary socialization - fundamental for the reproduction of
the original culture, niches of socialization that resist - as in the recognition of dreams as a divinatory and premonitory methods of communication with the sacred, among other outstanding cultural practices that we seek to reproduce and enhance, without purist desires. These are presented as part of diverse genres of interaction, which must be maintained and defended, as a nodal part of the unity of cultural and linguistic consciousness, as expressed in for instance prominent Mesoamerican and Amazonian cultures which on many occasions, are in a recessive situation or at least under ideological or often de facto threats
1. Revitalization Experiences in Mexico
In Mexico, there are still few efforts that deploy explicit, well-defined revitalizing proposals with different activities; on many occasions, such efforts are linked to rather formal approaches, if they come from the academy, where even attempts have been made to revitalize endangered languages through the schooling (cf. the case of Purepecha, Hamel et al., 2004) or via teaching and strengthening processes in high education institutions, as in the PUIC (University Program of Studies on Cultural Diversity and Interculturality), at the National University (UNAM). It should be recalled that it has been said that the school, as a field of secondary socialization, falls short in reversing language shift (Fishman, 1991). However, not only the Mexican experience shows that through the appropriation of the school apparatus it is also possible to contribute substantially to reversing language shift (cf. Hamel et al., 2004), since the same has happened in other contexts, such as the North American context, with languages such as Dine ('Navajo'), in the USA, or the European context, with languages such as Catalan or Euskara, in Spain.
2.1. Examples of Revitalization Processes: The Case of Nahuatl
If we want to talk about (re)vitalization in the case of Nahuatl - the Uto-Aztecan language with the largest number of speakers in Mexico, with around a million and a half speakers distributed throughout the country - there are, of course, the manifestations of the speaking communities themselves, as in any other community, which in fact constitutes the most solid and lasting basis for achieving linguistic equity and respect for diversity, its continuity and validity. This is the case of the Tosepan organization in the Sierra Norte of Puebla, Mexico. In fact, the condition of Nahuatl at Sierra Norte of Puebla, and in Tosepan in particular, should be examined in detail, but the initial impression shows a more or less balanced bilingualism, linked to a high sense of language and cultural loyalty, although not necessarily free of challenges and dilemmas. The vitality of the Nahuatl language in the case of Tosepan is high, especially among women, which constitute a fundamental nucleus of linguistic reproduction, at least apparently. However, as far as we can see, there is no direct cultivation of the language in the form of courses and teaching methods or use of languages beyond the informal, "natural" sphere, much less the production of teaching materials in the language, which invites us to think of revitalization as a more spontaneous phenomenon, linked to high levels of vitality, ethnic population density, and community pride. Theoretically, this suggests a contradiction in terms, to the extent that if we speak of vitality, we should precisely stop talking about (re)vitalization, eliminating the prefix re-, and perhaps talking about vitalization or, better yet, cultivation and development. In our case, by putting the prefix re- in brackets, we try to capture the idea of a continuum or continua: a kaleidoscope of sociolinguistic relations at different levels, which make up the complex multilingual reality of endangered languages.
On the other hand, there are deliberate projects to revitalize Nahuatl, among which the one led by Olko & Sullivan (2013) stands out. Consider the workshops on the analysis of writing and structure of the languages, carried out using ancient Nahuatl documents - texts of which there is an abundant quantity, comparable to any classical legacy in the world, in different stages of the colonial and modern eras - a distinctive feature, which makes Nahuatl unique, in the concert of the world's threatened languages. There are practically no projects of this type, at least in Mexico, since, as we have suggested, the spheres of (re)vitalization occur more spontaneously, as forms of multilingual resistance, through which they seek to introduce Indigenous languages into the labor market and create new Nahuatl varieties.
In the example of Olko & Sullivan's project, while analyzing colonial texts in Nahuatl, interdialectal workshops are organized, with the conviction that we are dealing with a single language - although considerable dialectal divergences are observed -, in contrast to the general conception in linguistics, according to which Nahuatl languages are rather existent (Campbell et al., 1986). This already speaks of the ideological dispute for the control of the notion of "language" and its political and power circumscription. In this context, Olko & Sullivan's project involving communities in the revitalization of Nahuatl starts from a language ideology of unity, contrary to the more evangelical ideology of the Summer Institute of Linguistics (or ILV (SIL), by its acronym in Spanish), which represents linguistic diversification in an exacerbated form.
Through workshops conducted by the authors, developed exclusively in Nahuatl, the language is deployed in practice in areas rarely cultivated for most of its speakers, an outstanding objective of their (re)vitalizing agenda, developing an emerging academic variety where Sullivan, as workshop leader, works primarily with a base of Huastecan Nahuatl, seasoned with Classical and neologistic elements. By this, through the oral analysis of colonial documents, mixed varieties of the language are produced and, at the same time, interdialectal comprehension and accommodation between speakers takes place, favoring a multidialectal communication between them one of its outstanding assets.
In contrast, part of the paradoxes presented by this project, like the majority of (re)vitalization projects, is precisely that its limitations are encoded in its bets. Among others, the generation of a "borrowing-free" or "hegemonic-language free" variety could produce a level of purism that could paralyze speakers - a negative effect that could contribute to linguistic shift and which, rather, should be transformed into a positive force.
In any case, the game of contradictions involved in presupposing an awareness of linguistic unity among speakers can have a positive impact, to the extent that it is deployed in important and highly prestigious practical fields, such as the morphological analysis of Nahua texts, in institutions such as the National General Archive (AGN, by its acronym in Spanish: Archivo General de la Nación), favoring the formation of the already mentioned multidialectal competence, which has also been favored by somewhat less formal activities, such as celebratory Nahua festivals, which the Olko & Sullivan team has fostered in Nahua communities, such as in Contla, Tlaxcala, or the Huasteca itself. These activities seek to reclaim ancestral community practices, such as the use of the temazcal (sacred sweat lodge), while at the same time developing discourses in Nahuatl by various local participants, together with a series of publications exclusively in Nahuatl.
What some speakers have criticized of this project is the fact that the programs are exclusively designed by external agents, without the participation of local protagonists, and without further discussion with the community. This is also a key issue in the (re)vitalizing agenda, which educators, linguists and anthropologists need to discuss until a healthy balance is found between the commitment and involvement of researchers and the commitment to the agency and agenda of priorities the communities themselves.
Although in the monolingual materials produced by Olko & Sullivan there are some clear attempts to approach children, the concept and editorial care of these materials always falls on to the leaders of the academic group too and certain Nahua authors, not to speak of the lack of an editorial children's suitable conceptualization. Therefore, while validation of these materials is allowed, at least from certain individuals - generally native intellectuals - a process of greater appropriation by other sectors of the community is at least not actively encouraged. Therefore, to the extent that individual authorships are encouraged in genres such as poetry or short stories, "new" Nahuatl varieties are also developed. In turn, new dangers arise, such as the development of the already mentioned purism or the creation of "ideolects" (relatively unintelligible because of their written and individual character), a type of logocentrism coupled with the lack of the habit of writing in Nahuatl, not to speak of the reproduction of Indigenous peoples' stereotypes in the form of the illustrations.
Both the project of Olko et al. and the one developed by INALI (the Mexican National Institute of Indigenous Languages) for the creation of the catalog of Indigenous languages and the standardization
of Nahuatl assume that it is a single language. In these, as in most cases, an ideology of uniformity is reinforced, which seeks to manage diversity through "normalization".
2. The Linguistic and Cultural Revitalization, Maintenance and Development Project (PRMDLC)
In the PRMDLC, (re)vitalization, is conceived as an exercise of linguistic rights, involving the vindication of one's own verbal art, adding original authors in (co)authorships and collaborative research processes, which give rise to the creation of groups of activists and revitalizers, always in favor of their languages and cultures. This is what has been understood by "(re)vitalization", a concept developed through the PRMDLC, and in which an attempt has been made to develop a model of its own, until now understood as an indirect (re)vitalization of languages, and which, in the current phase, aims at (re)vitalization of languages through the arts (Flores Farfan, 2019). One of its most tangible results is the conformation of a wide (re)vitalization corpus in diverse Mexican languages -notably, Nahuatl and Yucatec Maya. Along with this, it seeks the formation and/or strengthening of groups of champions, who have either recovered their language, at least partially, from auditory to performative uses, or who have strengthened, consolidated and cultivated language skills, as a result of their participation in PRMDLC (cf. Flores Farfan, 2017).
Strictly speaking, various degrees of vitality/threat are recognized, expressed through a typology of speakers that ranges from 'pseudo', through 'quasi', to 'full' and 'language holders or guardians' (i.e. the most prominent speakers), whether monolingual or bilingual (for these developments, cf. Flores Farfan 1999; and, more recently, Flores Farfan and Olko, in press). All of the above, inserted in highly complex dynamics, topographies and typologies, have not yet been fully understood by either pedagogy, linguistics or anthropology. Unlike countries like Brazil, in Mexico, although individuals and even important groups exist in multilingual areas, multilingualism is not recognized as much as in Brazil or the Vaupes area shared by Brasil and Colombia.
In the face of multiple adversities - such as the current cultural hegemonic models, which often carry with them exogenous, monolingual, linguistic and ethnophagic forces associated with practices of linguistic discrimination and destructive ideologies of languages - the role of critical pedagogy and sociology is crucial in several aspects. Among others, it offers a well-formed and informed critique of the official model or models, which, in short, can be characterized as subtractive, substitutive and assimilationist, and at the same time, it opens up alternatives to promote the development of native epistemologies - almost always linked to the celebration of nature and the territory in native languages, as part of the exercise of their linguistic rights.
In the case of the PRMDLC, living original practices and codices are recovered, such as those related to the iconography of the Nahua people of the Alto Balsas, Guerrero, in addition to other prototypical Indigenous peoples' art, such as Mayan art, in the case of Yucatec Maya or Nu Savi (Mixtec). Thus, a revitalizing corpus is produced, which is disseminated as an exercise of cultural and linguistic reanimation, through linguistic activism with children and young people, and which aims to reverse negative ideologies and, likewise, opening spaces for the revaluation of languages, through total immersion in short, medium and long term workshops. These workshops aim to establish continuous, uninterrupted activities, rooted in the communities, and to accompany and empower the agencies of their speakers, in the form of co-authorships and professional growth, always celebrating the attachment to one's own verbal aesthetics, creativity and manifest talent. Perhaps the greatest challenge is to give continuity and sustainability to the actions undertaken and lead them to other areas, creating new uses and even generating new linguistic repertoires. Therefore, we could speak of seeds of revitalization, which would be successful to the extent that the actors themselves are committed with enrichening the work achieved. However, the challenge remains greater in the face of the scarcity of resources and institutional support, among other linguistic forces. Having said that, let us look at an example of how to address, at least partially, some of these challenges.
3.1. The PRMDLC's Indirect Revitalization Methodologies
PRMDLC's methodologies are developed in workshops led by native specialists and indigenous leaders, in their respective languages, to promote the linguistic and cultural revitalization of Mexico's Indigenous legacy. In general, these are meetings convened by community authorities, teachers or
spokespersons, such as chroniclers or scholars of their language. The space where the workshops are held depends on the resources we have in situ: a classroom, an auditorium, the main esplanade, the cornfield or even households. These are open activities that seek to promote oral and written language, perhaps comparable to linguistic nests: places where the use of language in its different contexts is encouraged, always trying to ensure that interaction takes place in the Indigenous language. Although there is a lot of flexibility due to its emerging structure of participation, the idea is that there is an active appropriation that transcends the workshops themselves, favoring a consumption and even a cultural industry itself, as in the case of the Amate or the Hunes (bark wood paper illustrated and sold by Indigenous peoples' themselves).
In these workshops the imagery and linguistic Indigenous iconicity are materialized in prestigious media such as TV-screens or computers. Therefore, between linguistic games and projections of animations and books, all the participants - mainly young people and children - enter into a playful dynamic, a healthy exercise that contributes to active linguistic empowerment, from an ascending logic, in different media and supports. One of the dynamics to which the participation of the participants gives rise is to grant them the books and audio-books produced, especially for young people and children. During these activities, new elements always arise from which processes can be detached, such as those of re-establishing the intergenerational link in the transmission of languages, as well as different opportunities to think on the original language and its possible ways of strengthening it. In addition, with the recovery of dormant verbal genres, a direct relationship with the speakers and their language on a different scale is fostered, expanding areas of use.
We reiterate that for all this it is crucial to have people from the community actively involved. First and foremost, linguistic leaders in processes of total language immersion in L1, although it is also necessary to work on the recovery of the language as L2. Thus, when the initial reluctance of members of the community is overcomed, often reactions of astonishment, laughter, pride and others in which the effective use of their language are manifested. When they see their community, their language and themselves on the screens and in the spotlight, new workshops and other forms of empowerment are often proposed. The documentation of the workshops generates, therefore, audiovisual material that is mobilized (cf. Nathan, 2007: 415); and returns to the community, to revive the experience of their active participation in the same or other practices.
3.2. The Case of Yucatec Maya
Yucatec Maya represents a situation with relatively favorable conditions for a project of language and cultural (re)vitalization. This generates a high awareness of linguistic and cultural unity, with about 1 million speakers throughout the Yucatan Peninsula and beyond. It could even be said, under the criterion of intelligibility, that Yucatec Maya is the language with the greatest number of speakers in the Mexican Republic, unlike official estimates, which consider Nahuatl to be the language with the greatest demographics.
In the case of Yucatec Maya, its intelligibility is so high that a speaker of this language can even communicate with speakers of other Maya languages, such as Lacandon in the Chiapas jungle, or Mopan in Guatemala, which again subscribes to a pan-Mayan ideology. The high value, albeit mystified, that mainstream society places on ancient Maya culture has a positive side insofar as the Maya is seen as a sign of prestige and high civilization: Mestizos even go so far as to sing songs in Yucatec Maya, in the famous Yucatec trova, a symbol of the Yucatan. Of course, we must always overcome such one-sided mystified conceptions of Maya and any other language, because they are clinging to a glorious past that does not contemplate its present, to which oftentimes the living original languages are confined. However, we must not lose sight of the fact that these can also be appropriated and applied in the vindication of the original languages: an excellent example of this are the Maya rappers.
At least apparently, the context of the Yucatec Peninsula does not seem to be as hostile as some others, although Yucatec society, in general, is highly racist and class oriented. Here, too, we should add that there are a good number of Maya writers, intellectuals, artists, and activists, and there are even associations of Maya activists and a Maya Language Academy. These niches of creativity and institutionalization of minoritized languages have been explored by native creators as well, especially
young people, along with the relative and precarious support of the state institutions, which are highly politicized most of the time. In contrast to these state approaches, Indigenous peoples have developed micro-policies of linguistic (re)vitalization, encouraging the creation of groups of Maya artists and thinkers, which shows how propitious the context is for (re)vitalization. Even though there are other clear destructive forces, such as schools or the labor market, not to mention the interests of transnational corporations in Indigenous territories and resources. Maya groups develop materials and workshops that encourage local cultural consumption, rooted in Mayan oral aesthetics and genres, and through which ancestral Maya art forms, traditional life and worldviews are recovered and recreated. As an example, we can see the Maya movement of young rappers known"ADN Maya", with whom we have produced a record from the Maya published books.
We have also worked on the varieties of Mexican Spanish as an educational resource that gives value and importance to the original languages and cultures. In the case of Nahuatl, for example, we have produced material for the general public (cf. "Las Machincuepas del Tlacuache", The opossum somersaults), which reiterates the importance of working on this type of projects for the Spanish-speaking society too, gaining respect and interest for Indigenous cultures.
3. Conclusion
An active documentation project or a documentary activism project (or collaborative documentary projects) focuses precisely on documentation with revitalization in mind. They even extend and enhance preexisting repertoires of use such as those described for the PRMDLC, accompanying more spontaneous processes of linguistic revitalization, in indirect ways, in the sense that they encourage the recreation and production of new genres, thus recovering and cultivating at least part of the living linguistic memory of a community. The creation of such groups for the exercise of fundamental linguistic rights could and even should be one of the goals of (re)vitalizing agencies and agendas. To this end, it is desirable to evaluate certain issues first:
1. The conditions of documentation and the material and human support available to a language. For example, in the case of Mesoamerican languages, Nahuatl and, to a lesser extent, Yucatec Maya, and certain Otomanguean languages such as Tu'un Savi (Mixtec) and Dixazá (Zapotec), there is an enormous amount of historical documentation that should be restored to the original communities, together with the development of documentation projects of the living legacy, in a comparative perspective, which would allow a productive dialogue between the past and present, with initiatives that foster the pride of their own memory, recreating it.
2. The areas of use of the languages in contact, highlighting the vitality of the original language in both public and private areas. Here, among other issues, the question of the degree of hybridization of the languages of contact and the associated conflicts is raised, a need to evaluate translinguistic continua.
3. The ideologies that persist in the concert of the native languages in the larger society, as well as in the communities themselves, including both positive and negative ideologies (e.g. purism), so as to evaluate the possibilities of their strengthening and transformation, respectively.
4. The existence of speakers of the community who are or can become language champions in the defense of their language and culture. For example, in the case of Yucatec Maya, there are a number of actors actively committed to the future of their language and culture and concerned with the defense of their territorial rights. If they are more empowered, they could well represent a very promising future for their language and culture.
5. The resources that can be mobilized in favor of the original languages and cultures, and of course their speakers, whether from "outside" or "inside" of the communities. In this case, the role of a committed academy should be highlighted in that it can provide elements in the development of projects that would otherwise be very difficult to carry out, generating financial resources for, for instance, scholarships to professionalize speakers in different areas of cultural and artistic production.
6. Both instrumental (e.g. financial) and affective or ethnic motivations (e.g. self-recognition as original subjects and their open identity affirmation; the link with grandparents, the land, etc.).
As shown by the most successful revitalization experiences around the world (e.g. Maori, Hawai'i, Euskara or Catalan), the commitment of speakers to the defense of their linguistic rights is a sine qua non condition for the viability of any linguistic and cultural (re)vitalization project. However, we should not idealize or romanticize this, but rather accompany it from different sectors committed to the future of linguistic diversity, such as academia and civil society.
References (Литература)
1. Andrews, Richard J. (1971). Introduction to Classical Nahuatl. Vol. 43, No. 3. pp. 245-248. Chicago. University Chicago Press.
2. Campbell, Lyle/ Kaufman, Terrence/ Smith-Stark, Thomas C. (1986). Meso-America as a Linguistic Area. Linguistic Society of Americ. Vol. 62, No. 3, pp. 530-570.
3. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274741607_MesoAmerica_as_a_Linguistic_Area
4. De Sousa Santos, Boaventura. (2018): Construyendo las Epistemologías del Sur. Buenos Aires. CLACSO.
5. Diebold, A. R. (1961). Incipient bilingualism. Language 37 .97-112.
6. Dorian, Nancy (1989). Investigating obsolescence. Studies in Language Contraction and Death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Fishman, Joshua (1991). Reversing Language Shift, Clevedon. Multilingual Matters.
8. Flores Farfán, José Antonio. (1999). Cuatreros Somos y Toindioma Hablamos. México: CIESAS.
9. Flores Farfán, José Antonio (2010). "Hacia una historia sociolingüística Mesoamericana", Explorando el náhuatl clásico", en Barriga, Rebeca/ Martín Butragueño, Pedro (eds.), Historia Sociolingüística de México Vol. 1. México: El Colegio de México: 185-205. https://www.academia.edu/32008771/Hacia_una_historia_ sociolinguistica_mesoamericana_explorando_el_nahuatl_clasico
10. Flores Farfán, José Antonio (2017). "Performing for the future. The power of arts and the media in language revitalization". Revista LinguíStica / Revista do Programa de Pós-Graduajao em Linguística da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Volume 13, n.1 jan de 2017. Pp. 188-214. https://revistas.ufrj.br/index. php/r
11. Flores Farfán, José Antonio (2019). "Los soportes multimedia en la revitalización lingüística: una experiencia" en Tequio Revista Interdisciplinaria de Investigación e Innovación, No. 7. Universidad Autónoma Benito Juárez de Oaxaca, México.
12. https://www.academia.edu/39558158/Los_soportes_multimedia_en_la_revitalizaci%C3%B3n_ ling%C3%BC%C3%ADstica_una_experiencia_A_multimedia_experience_in_linguistic_revitalization
13. Flores Farfán, José Antonio y Olko, Justyna. (in press) "Types of communities and speakers in language revitalization" In Justyna Olko y Julia Sallabank, Revitalising endangered languages: a practical guide. Cambridge University Press.
14. Hamel, Enrique/ Hecht, Ana/ Erape, Ana/Márquez, Helmith: (2004). Qué hacemos con la castilla' La enseñanza del español como segunda lengua en un currículo intercultural bilingüe de educación indígena. https://cpue.uv.mx/index.php/cpue/article/view/2559
15. Hinton, L.; Hale K. (2001): The Green Book of Language Revitalization in Practice. New York: Academic Press.
16. Kartunnen, Frances: (1983). An Analytical Dictionary of Nahuatl. Austin: University of Texas Press.
17. Kroskrity, Paul V./ Meek, Barbra (2017): Engaging Native American Publics.Linguistic Anthropology in a Collaborative Key. London: Routledge.
18. Kuhn, Thomas S. (1962) La estructura de las revoluciones científicas. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
19. Lockhart, James: (1992). The Nahuas After the Conquest. A Social and Cultural History of the Indians of Central Mexico, Sixteen Through Eighteenth Centuries. Stanford:. Stanford University Press.
20. Nathan, David (2007). 'Interfaces 'densas': movilización de la documentación lingüística mediante recursos multimedia'. En: Haviland, John B./ Flores Farfán, José Antonio (coords.) Bases de la documentación lingüística. México: INALI.
21. Patrick, Peter., (2004). The Speech Community. In: The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. London: Blackwell. 573- 597. 9781405116923
22. Olko, Justyna/ Sullivan, John (2013). Empire, Colony, and Globalization. A Brief History of the Nahuatl Language. Colloquia Humanistica 4: 181-216.
23. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281801338_Empire_Colony_and_Globalization_A_Brief_ History_of_the_Nahuatl_Language
24. Ruíz, Richard (1984). Orientations in Language Planning, NABE Journal, 8:2, 15-34.
25. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08855072.1984.10668464
