Project Description:
Omae«qnomeneweqnaesen mesek
Mo\hkoma\ne\weqnaesen We\hcekanan
(A Menominee-English/English-Menominee Dictionary)
[draft 6/3/02]
1. Introduction
A. Objectives
The principle objective of this proposal is the creation and publication (in both hard-copy and
electronic formats) of a set of bilingual dictionaries of Menominee, an Algonquian language
spoken in northeastern Wisconsin. These dictionaries will be derived from a single computer
database coded in such a way that versions with differing levels of complexity can easily be
produced. The language is highly endangered, and so development of dictionaries for language
teachers and learners at different levels is urgently needed for the tribe‘s language preservation
projects. At the same time, a dictionary containing morphological and grammatical information
will provide linguists with a much-needed resource for research on Menominee, and for
historical/comparative work on Algonquian languages.
Each format will be produced in both printed and electronic form. Although the electronic
versions will offer options and versatility unavailable in the printed versions, not everyone has
access to a computer, and so printed versions are still a necessity, especially for the classroom.
The co-PIs (Professor Monica Macaulay and graduate student Marianne Milligan) have been
working with the tribe for approximately four years now, documenting the language and
assisting with their language preservation programs. The proposed project allows us to combine
scholarly academic work with community outreach in that the final product will fill a large gap
in the resources available to scholars who work on Algonquian languages, but will also fill a gap
in the resources available to the tribe in their efforts to retain and revitalize their language.
B. Current Status of the Language
Menominee is extremely endangered. A speaker survey was done in 1996, which identified
36 people who claimed Menominee as their first language, and 26 who called it their second
language. The survey did not, however, ask about the degree of fluency of the speakers, and so
we have no figures for level of fluency. We believe that there are about ten fluent speakers
remaining at this point, all elderly. There is a somewhat larger group of middle-aged semi-
speakers, and a small but growing number of young second-language learners. Children get
some exposure to the language in the schools, and we are participating in projects designed to
improve the methods which are used in teaching the language, as well as the materials available
for teaching in the schools (of which the proposed dictionary is a part).
In 1997 the Menominee Legislature passed a bill requiring that the language be used in tribal
business whenever possible, and that it be taught in all of the schools on the Menominee
Reservation. Various language projects have been undertaken to achieve these goals, which are
2
run through the tribe‘s Language and Culture Commission, its Historic Preservation department,
the College of the Menominee Nation, NAES (Native American Educational Services) College,
and the tribal and public schools. These projects have a variety of specific goals: language
teaching (at all levels), training of language teachers, and creation of pedagogical materials such
as lessons and teaching videos.
Alan Caldwell, Director of the Language and Culture Institute at the College of the
Menominee Nation (CMN), had an ANA grant for a mentor-trainee immersion project in 1997-
2001, and David Grignon, the director of Historic Preservation, has a similar ANA grant now.
Such projects are creating a small but dedicated group of speakers who are devoted to the
preservation and teaching of the language, and who—it is hoped—will be the ones to carry the
language forward in the future.
C. Previous Work on the Language and Need for a Dictionary
The most extensive and best-known work on the language was done by Leonard Bloomfield,
who produced a grammar (published posthumously in 1962), texts (1928), and lexicon (1975;
also posthumous). These are extraordinary resources, but famously difficult to use. There are
also materials from the 1970s, created by the Wisconsin Native American Languages Project
(WNALP, under the direction of Ken Miner), which produced some teaching materials and a
vocabulary.
The idea for creation of a dictionary grows from witnessing the frustration that language
learners and speakers experience when using the existing resources. In what follows we describe
the materials available which serve as dictionaries and related resources, and explain their
shortcomings:
• Leonard Bloomfield, 1975, Menomini Lexicon. This is the main vocabulary resource
available, and at 289 pages, it contains a wealth of information. It is very hard to use, however.
Just a few of its problems are:
(a) It uses a different orthography than the tribe uses. Most saliently, it uses a raised dot for
vowel length instead of the macron used by the tribe, and this is very hard for community users
to interpret. Time and again we have witnessed people struggling with the raised dot, often
concluding that it marks a syllable boundary. In addition, epsilon is used for the low front vowel
[æ], an idiosyncrasy also found in Bloomfield‘s grammar of Menominee. (The tribe‘s
orthography uses the two letters to represent this sound.)
(b) One word is often listed under the entry of another, related word, and so the subentry is
difficult to find unless one knows what the related word is. Consider the following example (p.
277):
we·qsakan II ‗it is bitter‘; […] piakemen-we·qsakan ‗red pepper‘
If one were looking for the word for ‗red pepper‘ and looked under piakemen, one would
find ‗cranberry‘ (p. 216), but no reference to ‗red pepper‘.
3
Making matters more complicated, Menominee verbs usually come in pairs: intransitive
verbs often have one form for animate subject and another for inanimate subject, while transitive
verbs may have two forms depending on the animacy of the object.1 In the Lexicon, the form
with the inanimate argument is most often given as a secondary entry to the one with the animate
argument. This means that the ones with inanimate arguments can easily be missed, as shown in
the example below (p. 143):
nani·qtaksew AI, nani·qtakat II ‗he, it is lonely, lonesome‘. . .
By the rules of alphabetization in the Lexicon, one would expect nani·qtakat to be listed
between nani·qtakapew (‗he sits or dwells lonesomely‘) and nani·qtaka·hkihkiw (‗the lonely
woods‘). Because it is not there, one might conclude that the verb is not listed. Instead, one has
to continue down the page to nani·qtaksew in order to find nani·qtakat listed after it.
(c) The Lexicon gives third-person forms for the head entry. If the addition of a prefix causes
changes in vowel quantity and/or quality, then the first person independent order form is given
after the third-person form, without a translation. This is shown in the following (p. 86):
kesiatawapew AI ‗he has good eyesight‘; nek·syatawa·pem
However, if the word has an , , or in the first syllable, the third person changed
conjunct form is often given instead of the first person independent order form. This is seen in
the second example from (b) above (p. 143):
nani·qtaksew AI, nani·qtakat II ‗he, it is lonely, lonesome‘; n·ni·qtakset, n·ni·qtakah
The translation of these ‗extra‘ forms is only given in a handful of entries (and in fact it is not
given in either of these). The dictionary user must be able to recognize these different
inflectional forms to make use of them. Furthermore, if the user is searching for a prefixed or
changed conjunct form, in some cases a fair bit of sophistication in the fine points of Menominee
grammar is needed in order to figure out what the listed third person form would look like.
(d) Menominee exhibits vowel harmony, and words are only alphabetized under one of the
possibilities. For example, one inflected form of the verb ‗to dance‘ is nêmit (‗when he
dances‘), but the verb is listed under ne\mow, ‗he dances‘. If the dictionary user does not know
to look for the form with a long [e\], they will not be able to find the word.
(e) Most kinship and body part terms, plus a few other words, are obligatorily possessed.
These ―dependent forms‖ (as Bloomfield calls them) are listed separately in a section that
precedes the dictionary proper. Most users are unaware of this section (or forget that it is there),
and so are unable to find any of these high frequency items.
1
The abbreviations conventionally used for these verb types are: AI (animate intransitive), II (inanimate
intransitive), TA (transitive animate), and TI (transitive inanimate).
4
Furthermore, most of these forms are listed with a first person possessor only, which means
that they all begin with the prefix ne- (or variants of it). A dictionary user looking for a second
or third person possessed form must be able to produce the first person form and look that up, or
be frustrated in their search.
(f) The Lexicon was compiled from material collected in the 1920s, and although this is
important vocabulary, many forms that are currently in use are missing from it, and conversely, it
contains many forms no longer in use.
(g) Finally, it only provides the Menominee-English half of a dictionary.
Although we have critiqued the Lexicon here based on how difficult it is for a language
learner to use, we note that these problems also arise (to varying degrees) for the linguist trying
to use the Lexicon to do synchronic or historical/comparative work.
• Kenneth Miner, 1978, An English Key to Bloomfield’s Menominee Lexicon. This is an
invaluable aid to using the Lexicon because the Lexicon lacks an English-Menominee half, but
the words are all listed together under single key words without any of the finer points of their
meanings noted. That is, it provides a single word for each core concept, and then lists all of the
Menominee words which involve that concept—and does not distinguish homonyms. This
means that a user must check the Lexicon for each Menominee word given in order to find the
one which fits the precise meaning sought. Consider the following example from the English
Key:
FAST apae:qsaehkaq; ki:hkeqtaw; ki:hkohnaew; mesa:hkataewae:w;
wae:piacetonae:skaw; wae:we:pehaew; …
These are only the first six of the 27 forms listed under ‗fast‘ in the English Key. Looking
these six words up in the Lexicon, we find:
ap‰·qs‰hkaq AI, II interrogative ‗how fast he, it goes!‘
ki·hkeqtaw AI ‗he runs fast‘
ki·hkohn‰w AI ‗he walks right close up; he walks fast‘
mesa·hkat‰w‰·w AI ‗he fasts‘
w‰·piaceqtaw AI ‗he moves or acts too quickly‘
w‰·we·peh‰w TA, w‰·we·pehtaw TI ‗he makes him, it hurriedly; he makes him, it
hurry or go fast‘
It should be clear just from this sample what challenges and obstacles a user of this key
would face. Although one can usually find the desired word, it is a slow and tedious process.
Furthermore, as can be seen from the examples above, the English Key uses an orthography
which is closer to the one that the tribe uses, but is not quite the same. Instead of the macron,
this resource uses a colon for vowel length. And—as the examples above also show—because
this system is different than the one the Lexicon uses, the user has to translate spelling systems in
order to cross-reference the two works.
5
• Miner (ed.), 1975, A Basic English-Menominee and Menominee-English Word List.
Although this provides a basic vocabulary, it is very simple and provides very little information
on the forms it contains. Furthermore, speakers have told us that many of the words in this
dictionary are incorrect, and so it must be used with caution.
To sum up this section, although Bloomfield‘s Lexicon is a phenomenally rich resource, it is
extraordinarily difficult to use, even for those of us who are trained in linguistics and have been
using it constantly for years. It is clearly not a useful resource for speakers, child or adult
language learners, or even linguists who happen not to have put in the necessary time learning its
idiosyncrasies and tricks. The other resources can be useful as supplements to the Lexicon, but
clearly cannot stand on their own. A real dictionary is urgently needed.
2. Research Plan
The project is being coordinated between the co-PIs (and others) at the University of
Wisconsin-Madison, and a team of community language experts on the Menominee reservation.
As demonstrated above, the existing resources are grossly inadequate and largely ineffective.
We have made a formal proposal to the Language and Culture Commission of the tribe to
remedy this deficiency, and it was approved in February 2002. It was then taken to the
Menominee Tribal Legislature, which likewise approved it.
Our agreement gives the tribe (via the Language and Culture Commission) full control of all
decisions concerning this dictionary. We will work together on all issues of content and format,
with the goal of producing a set of reference works which are maximally useful to the
community. In addition, we have permission to produce a version which linguists will find
useful in scholarly work on the language (both synchronic and diachronic).
The number of issues to be considered when contemplating a project like a dictionary is
immense. (Note that for conciseness we will often speak in terms of ―a‖ dictionary of
Menominee throughout this proposal, but in fact—as described above—we plan not one but
several dictionaries for the target audiences that we and the tribe have identified.) We have
divided them here into the following five categories: computer program, audiences,
methodology and sources of data, content, and design issues.
A. Computer Program
We have been using the Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL) program Shoebox 5.0 as a
database program for about two years now. This program does interlinearization of text and
sorts data from those texts to create dictionaries. It is a powerful and flexible program, and
would be able to produce a print dictionary with a modest amount of programming. We are
familiar with another project which is using Shoebox to create a dictionary (Jicarilla Apache; PI
Melissa Axelrod), and they currently have a programmer working on Perl scripts to convert the
Shoebox database into web format. This is one possibility which we are considering, and we
6
intend to learn more from Dr. Axelrod and her coworkers over the course of our pilot project
year.
However, we have recently learned that SIL does not plan on producing further versions of
the Shoebox software, and so we are considering switching to another program. One good
possibility is the ITL (Indiana Text Lab) software package, currently under development by the
American Indian Studies Research Institute (AISRI) at Indiana University. The features of ITL
which make it attractive for our purposes include the following:
• it is designed to produce reports in dictionary format (among others);
• it can produce text format and XHTML format, which would allow for both print and
electronic versions of the dictionary;
• it allows for inclusion of sound files;
• in can import data from a Shoebox format.
We have an invitation from the AISRI group to participate in a test of the ITL program, and
plan to explore its possibilities thoroughly. In July of 2002 the co-PIs and the computer
consultant will travel to IU to be trained on the program as it exists now, and then over the
course of the year before the start date of the project, we will participate in testing it with our
database. By July of 2003 we will have had time to evaluate both the Shoebox and the ITL
programs with respect to their versatility, user-friendliness, and support, and will have chosen
and implemented one for the Menominee dictionary project.
B. Multiple Audiences; Multiple Formats
At the core of our proposal is the notion that one project can fill many needs. The database
will comprise a comprehensive and thorough dictionary of Menominee, including grammatical
notes, morphological analysis, and some cultural information. But because much of this
information is unnecessary and potentially distracting for some audiences, the database will be
coded in such a way that several different versions can be produced. At this point we envision
four versions, for child learners, adult learners, teachers, and linguists and others interested in the
complete analysis of the entries. Other versions could be produced as needs or target audiences
were identified. If our ideas about the appropriate target audiences change over the course of the
project, such changes will not be difficult to incorporate.
C. Methodology and Sources of Data
In this section we discuss where the data for the dictionary will come from and how we will
obtain and analyze it. Below that we address additional general issues which arise concerning
the various sources of data.
The most important source of lexical material for the project will be the fluent native
speakers. They will not only provide us with previously unattested forms, they will also serve as
a resource for checking data from all other sources. The co-PIs are both experienced
fieldworkers: Ms. Milligan has had formal training in linguistic field methods (working with the
Otomanguean language Chinantec) and has worked with speakers of Menominee for almost four
7
years. Dr. Macaulay has been a field linguist for twenty years, working with speakers of the
American languages Mixtec, Zapotec, Chinantec, Karuk, and Menominee, as well as the African
languages Dangme and Zulu. The methodology we have employed while working on
Menominee has involved collection of narratives and conversation, as well as elicitation of
specific lexical items and sentences. All sessions are taped, and the tapes are transcribed and
transferred to CD. We will continue this approach, entering lexical data from our sessions into
the dictionary database, and checking all new forms with the speakers as they are found.
However, as described above, there are already several written sources of data from which
we can derive a large portion of the material needed for the dictionary. We turn now to these
sources and how they will be used:
• A project assistant has already typed in all of the approximately 11,000 entries in
Bloomfield‘s Lexicon for us, in text format. We are currently in the process of converting those
text files to Shoebox files. This will be completed by the start date of the proposed project, and
will form the starting point for the dictionary. We plan to check as many of the entries as
possible with elders, however, because these forms were collected approximately 80 years ago
and many are no longer in use. This issue is discussed further below.
• Before entering any data from the WNALP‘s Word List, all entries must be checked. The
elders have told us that they are not confident that the forms contained in it are correct and have
requested that we work through this dictionary before using any part of it.
• Guile (2001) will be combed for words not appearing elsewhere. These will be checked
with speakers, but since the data for the book were collected between 1980 and 1989, all forms
found should still be in use.
• Hoffman (1896) contains a vocabulary which will likewise be checked with the elders, and
any terms not found in other sources will be entered in the database.
• There are a few collections of vocabulary in the Wisconsin State Historical Society (SHS)
Archives, e.g. Bridgman (1874-1897) and Bridgman (1875-1879).
• Finally, there are a number of ethnographic works which contain vocabulary as part of the
discussion of various cultural topics; e.g., Hoffman (1890), Skinner (1915, 1921), Densmore
(1932), and Slotkin (1957), among others. These need to be gone through carefully and the
forms will have to be checked with the elders.
With all of the older sources (including the Lexicon), several issues arise concerning archaic
language. First, on the one hand, we do not want to mislead dictionary users by presenting forms
which are no longer in use as if they were modern forms. On the other hand, we do believe that
those older forms should be available, for a number of reasons: (a) tribal members are often
curious to know the traditional words for objects and aspects of customs with which they are no
longer familiar, (b) in some cases speakers may want to bring back lost forms, either with the
traditional meanings or perhaps with modernized meanings, (c) linguists can use these data for
diachronic and comparative purposes, (d) the words in the Lexicon come from Bloomfield‘s
8
Menominee Texts and should be in the dictionary for those who want to read the texts, and (e) we
believe that it is desirable to create as complete a record as possible of the Menominee language
as it exists and has existed. (See Rudes 2002 for discussion of many of these issues.)
The second issue involves the transcription of forms in the older materials: while many of
the sources are quite explicit about the value of the symbols used, others are less so. In the
oldest sources, e.g. the collections in the SHS, there is no representation of glottal stop, and it is
clear that syllable-final /h/ was often missed. In cases like these we will resort to what Goddard
(1973) calls ―reconstitution,‖ whereby a best guess is arrived at by a kind of triangulation
between different sources, different forms with the same roots or affixes, and even using sources
from other, related languages.
We plan to do several things to accommodate these considerations; among these are marking
all forms with the source or sources from which they are taken, and devising a notation for
marking archaic and/or reconstituted forms. If the elders tell us specifically that a form is no
longer used, that too will be noted in the entry. This is the kind of information which would only
appear in certain of the versions; the simpler dictionaries (e.g., for children and adult learners)
would not contain archaisms.
D. Notes on Content
The vast majority of the entries in the dictionary will, of course, be every-day lexical items.
However, a few other matters of content must also be considered, as follow:
• The Lexicon contains a number of personal names. Most of these are names which appear
in Bloomfield‘s texts; others are family names. We will consult with the Language and Culture
Commission on whether they think it is advisable to include these (and others).
• There are several good sources of place names, including the Lexicon and Skinner (1921).
Again, a decision on inclusion of these will be up to the Language and Culture Commission. If
place names are included, a map of the reservation should also be added.
• The ethnographic works cited above contain information on the functions of ceremonial
objects, the roles of various people in specific rituals and ceremonies, etc. The complete version
of the dictionary could easily contain some of this information, but we will consult with the
Language and Culture Commission on each term to make sure that it is something that can be
talked about in public. That is, as we check the lexical data from the older sources, we will make
sure that it is acceptable to include each term in a dictionary which will be publicly available.
We will be very careful not to repeat the past mistakes of those who have published information
which the Menominee consider sacred and therefore private. If tribal members feel that it is
inappropriate to discuss certain words and/or topics, they will be omitted from the database.
• Dictionaries of indigenous languages often have accompanying grammatical sketches. We
do not plan to do this at this time, for several reasons. First, the task of compiling the dictionary
will occupy the entire team fully for the time period specified, and the addition of a sketch to our
goals would mean adding at least a year (if not more) to the project. Second, there are already a
9
few sketches of Menominee available, e.g. the one contained in Guile (2001). At some point in
the future we may begin work on an electronic version of a grammatical sketch, but that will be a
separate project.
E. Design Issues
Here we discuss a number of design issues which we have either already discussed with the
Language and Culture Commission, which are currently under consideration, or which will be
brought up and resolved during the course of the project. Additional issues, of course, will
continue to arise, and will be dealt with by the group as needed. A preliminary and core list
follows:
• Orthography: This is one of the few issues which is not difficult to resolve; the majority of
tribal members are accustomed to using the orthography which the WNALP project developed,
and this is what they want us to use. This orthography employs most of the letters of the Roman
alphabet, using for the low front vowel, for glottal stop, and a macron for vowel
length. We use a font called TransRoman, specially developed for Menominee by Linguists‘
Software, which contains the one difficult-to-find diacritic needed, the double-length macron
used for long .
The full database will contain representations of forms in the original orthographies of the
sources from which they were drawn, as well as in the tribe‘s orthography. These will not be
included in learners‘ and teachers‘ dictionaries—there, normalization will minimize confusion—
but they will be included in the scholarly version because we believe that it is important to retain
the original for the use of future researchers.
• Alphabetization: This is another relatively easy question; the usual ordering of the English
alphabet can be used, with the addition of ordering long vowels after short. The latter is done in
all of the other sources, and so everyone is quite used to it.
Perhaps the only difficult alphabetization issue is the placement of within the alphabet.
The Lexicon uses epsilon for this sound, and places it before . The English Key is
inconsistent on this point: some entries have before and others have it after . A
decision will be made by the Language and Culture Commission on this problem some time
during the coming year, and implementation will not be difficult even if changes have to made at
a future date.
• Head word form: The question of what form the head entry should be in is a much more
vexing one. Nouns are much easier to deal with than verbs, but we will have to make a decision
about the dependent nouns mentioned above. At this point our inclination is to list them in first
person form, following Bloomfield‘s practice, so as not to confuse those who have gotten used to
it. This is another issue that we will bring up with the Language and Culture Commission.
Menominee verbs are much harder to deal with because to our knowledge there is no
standard citation form, and verb forms cannot appear uninflected. Bloomfield‘s Lexicon lists
verbs under their third person ―independent order‖ form, and we believe that this is in fact the
10
best solution because unlike first and second-person forms of verbs, third-person forms do not
have a person-marking prefix attached. Consider the following forms of the verb ‗embark‘
(Bloomfield 1962: 150):
nepo\sem ^I embark&
kepo\sem ^you embark&
po\sew ^s/he embarks&
The independent order is the paradigm used for main clauses, and is the least marked and
most regular paradigm, and so is also the logical choice for the main entry.
Nonetheless, in many cases, other forms should be listed within the entry, as Bloomfield does
in his Lexicon. Again, nouns are simpler to handle than verbs; the main issues which arise for
nouns are irregular plurals and diminutives, which will be listed. Verbs, however, undergo a
number of morphophonological rules (e.g. vowel harmony and the metrical rules which affect
vowel quantity), which can create changes in the stem which might not be obvious to the learner.
Currently, our plan is to list the verb under its third person (singular, independent order) form,
and then also list other forms when there are changes to the stem. This is something that we will
need to get feedback on from teachers and language learners, however, before we come to a final
decision.
• Morphological Analysis: The full form of the dictionary (intended for linguists and others
interested in questions of etymology, morphological structure, etc.) will include the derivational
composition of each word: in Algonquianist terms, the roots, medials, and finals. The co-PIs
have several years of experience working with the complexities of Algonquian derivational
morphology, and Ms. Milligan has spent 9 months working under Dr. Ives Goddard of the
Smithsonian Institution, the foremost expert on the topic. Although providing this information
for all entries will be a time-consuming and arduous task, this is what will make the dictionary
invaluable for scholars and historical linguists.
• Examples: Several people have advised us that to make a dictionary of this type truly
useful for language learners, numerous examples should be included. Such examples, of course,
would be an option that would only appear in the more complex of the formats that the
dictionary will be produced in. We will draw examples from all available sources, especially
Bloomfield‘s texts and our own elicitations.
• Abbreviations: Our goal is to avoid cluttering entries with grammatical abbreviations, but
some will be unavoidable. (Again, these will only appear in certain formats.) In the electronic
version of the dictionary, all abbreviations will be linked to entries giving the full expression and
its definition.
• Cross-referencing: We plan to do extensive cross-referencing, to maximize the usefulness
of the dictionary for users. For example, if dependent nouns are entered in first-person form, the
second- and third-person forms will also be listed, with cross-referencing to the first-person
form. When vowel harmony and length make significant differences in alphabetization, forms
will be listed with a reference to the main entry. So for example, the verb ‗embark‘ will have its
11
main listing under po\sew ‗s/he embarks‘ (as described above), but the third person plural
conjunct form, pu\setuaq ‗when they embark‘, with vowel harmony, will be listed separately
with a reference to the main entry.
For verbs that begin with or which have or in the initial syllable, we will also
list the changed conjunct forms with cross-referencing to the main entry. The changed conjunct
of these forms involve ablaut and other changes rather than the addition of as a prefix or
infix (as is done in the majority of forms), as the following examples show (Bloomfield 1975:13,
172):
ahpêw ‗he comes to a place‘ ae«hpyat ‗when he came there‘
ohtae«sew ‗he benefits from that‘ wae«hteset ‗he who benefits from that‘
3. Schedule and Plan of Work
We have divided our activities and objectives into four year-long stages, as follow:
A. July 2002–July 2003
This is the pilot year for the project. A small amount of funding has been obtained through
the Graduate School of the University of Wisconsin-Madison which will provide a nine-month
Project Assistantship for Ms. Milligan. In addition, she has been awarded an NSF Dissertation
Improvement Grant (BCS-0132926) which, among other things, will fund fieldwork for the year.
Her dissertation project is on phonology, and much of what she elicits for the dissertation will
also be useful for the dictionary.
During this pilot phase, one of our primary objectives will be to explore the options that the
two database/dictionary programs provide. We are planning to travel to Indiana University in
July 2002 for a demonstration of and training on the ITL program, and will also continue
discussions with Dr. Axelrod‘s Jicarilla project to learn about their experiences with Shoebox.
We will initiate discussions with the programmer we intend to work with, to get her opinion,
although at this point have only a small amount of funding for her time.
We will continue fieldwork with the elders, reviewing forms and recording audio samples of
lexical items, with examples. We are already beginning to create sample sets of entries for the
different types of audience for the various forms of the dictionary, and will get community
feedback to determine what features will be most useful at each level.
At this point our database contains approximately 1,500 entries, almost all of which have
been entered as we have done interlinearization of Bloomfield‘s Menomini Texts. Most of these
already include morphological analysis and notes on grammar, etc. Data entry will continue
throughout the year, as we continue to work on the texts. The 11,000 entries from the Lexicon
will be converted to Shoebox format by July 2002, and at that point we will begin providing
morphological analysis and other information for those forms. In addition, we will begin entry
12
of material from our field notes, which contain more basic vocabulary than Bloomfield‘s texts
and lexicon do.
Finally, we have compiled a large bibliography of works on lexicography, and will continue
to read on that topic throughout the year to learn more about strategies and methods for
dictionary-writing. We also plan to continue consulting with linguists who have produced
dictionaries of American Indian languages, especially Algonquian languages. Professor J.
Randolph Valentine, also at UW-Madison, for example, is currently working on a dictionary of
Odawa, and will be a valuable source of advice.
B. July 2003–July 2004
In the first year of the funded project, we will hire personnel, both at UW-Madison and on
the Menominee reservation. If we have decided to use ITL, conversion of our Shoebox database
will already have been accomplished, and we will begin significant data entry. Data will be
drawn from all of the written sources described above, as well as from our field recordings. As
data are entered, the process of checking entries for accuracy, completeness, and consistency will
begin.
At this point we will also begin systematic investigation of dialect differences. Although the
differences of which we are aware are slight (e.g. use of the alveolar affricate [ts] vs. use of the
palatal affricate [cË]), they should be discussed and at least mentioned in the dictionary. We
will consult with the Language and Culture Commission on their desires in the matter, and they
will decide how such differences should be incorporated into the dictionary, if at all.
We will continue working with the elders, eliciting new forms, checking previously recorded
forms, and recording audio samples. We will concentrate on core vocabulary at first, with the
goal of producing two interim versions of the dictionary (hard-copy) at the end of the year that
will serve both as a valuable resource for the tribe‘s language programs, and as a sample for
evaluation. (The two to be produced are a draft of the children‘s dictionary and an interim
version of the adult learners‘ dictionary.) When these are ready we will ask the Language and
Culture Commission as well as language learners and teachers to provide us with feedback and
suggestions for modification.
C. July 2004–July 2005
In year two of the project much of the work will be the same as in year one: we will continue
to elicit, record, and check forms. Data entry will continue, as will the editing of entries,
including making changes suggested by members of the tribe.
We will begin a more systematic process of providing the derivational make-up of all words
(some of this will have already been done, but at this point we will start going back to
unanalyzed forms that have already been entered). There is currently no source that collects all
of the results of the morphological analysis done by Bloomfield in his decades of work on
Menominee. Miner (1974) provides a morpheme index to Bloomfield‘s grammar (Bloomfield
1962), but if Bloomfield cited a form without gloss—as is all too often the case—there is no
13
gloss in Miner‘s index either. This is an especially prevalent problem for the roots that
Bloomfield cites. Ms. Milligan, however, has located Bloomfield‘s lists of roots in the
Smithsonian archives, and these are, for the most part, glossed. Thus this information will
become generally available to linguists for the first time.
We will also begin checking for missing forms; for example when we have a verb in the TA
form (transitive with animate object) but not TI (transitive with inanimate object), we will check
with the elders to see if the corresponding form exists. The project assistant will begin to search
through Bloomfield‘s texts and other sources for examples of words in the Lexicon (and other
vocabularies) not recognized by the elders so that examples and expanded definitions can be
entered. During this year a system will also be introduced for cross-referencing entries.
The design of the electronic version(s) of the dictionary will be finalized during this year, and
by the end of the year we will produce an interim electronic version on CD for use and
evaluation by the tribe.
D. July 2005–July 2006
Dr. Macaulay will take a sabbatical during this final year of the project, and so will be able to
devote full time to completing the project. She will be relieved of her duties as chair (as well as
teaching, advising, and service duties) during this period.
During the final year we will finish checking forms and getting audio samples from the
speakers, complete the cross-referencing of forms, and finish elicitation of missing forms and
examples. Final editing of entries will be done, incorporating any changes suggested by the
Language and Culture Commission and other tribal members. We will find appropriate
illustrations for selected items and get permission to reproduce any photos or drawings used.
During this year the co-PIs will investigate locations for archiving the materials collected.
Copies will, of course, be given to all of the interested groups on the reservation, but a formal
archiving site will also be sought. There are several possibilities of which we are already aware
(e.g. The Endangered Languages Fund, which already has some of our Menominee materials
archived, The National Anthropological Archives of the Smithsonian Institution, the Wisconsin
State Historical Society, and the University of Wisconsin libraries); we will determine the best
one for these materials and with the permission of the tribe will deposit them there. The
Language and Culture Commission will decide whether or not to make them available to the
general public and/or other researchers.
The co-PIs will write and edit the introduction to the dictionary; we anticipate that there will
be slightly different introductions for the different versions to be produced. The introductions
will include notes and/or sections on orthography and pronunciation as well as explanation of the
uses and functions of the dictionary. Instructions for use of each format will also be written
(these will, of course, be much more complex in the case of the electronic versions). We will
produce, duplicate, and distribute both hard-copy and electronic versions by the end of the year.
E. Summary of Schedule
14
YEAR ACTIVITIES OUTCOME
2002-2003 • compare ITL and Shoebox programs • decision on computer program
(pilot) • elicitation • set up program
• create audio samples • preliminary design
• create sample entries
• some data entry
• get feedback from community
• continue reading literature on
lexicography
2003-2004 • hire personnel • interim hard-copy version of
• data entry dictionary/ies
• elicitation of core vocabulary
• create audio samples
• check forms from older sources
• preliminary editing
• investigate dialect differences
2004-2005 • data entry • interim electronic version of
• continue elicitation dictionary/ies
• create audio samples
• continue checking forms
• edit entries
• check for missing forms
• enter morphological analysis
• begin cross-referencing
• search texts for examples
• development of electronic version
2005-2006 • write introductions, instructions • final hard-copy and electronic
• continue elicitation versions
• continue checking of forms • arrange to archive materials
• finish audio samples
• find illustrations/get permissions
• finish editing of entries
• finish checking for missing forms
• finish morphological analysis
• investigate locations for archiving
4. Personnel and Responsibilities
The co-PIs will bear primary responsibility for the project. We will organize and conduct the
research on which the dictionary will be based. This includes work with native speakers as well
as philological work with printed sources. We will also organize the database and make
technical decisions.
15
A project assistant will be hired to do data entry at the UW project site, and a computer
consultant is already on board to work with the database program chosen. A community
research assistant will work be hired to work with elders and others on the reservation, and will
be responsible for entering their data at the reservation project site, and sending it to us.
(Specifics on the personnel to be hired may be found in the budget justification section.)
Design, format, and content issues will be decided by the Language and Culture Commission
of the tribe. We will submit regular reports to them containing updates on our progress and any
questions that may have arisen, and will incorporate their advice and feedback at every stage.
5. Conclusion
This project will make a significant contribution to scholarly work on Algonquian languages,
and at the same time provide the Menominee tribe with a much-needed tool in their quest to
preserve their highly endangered language. As we have described above, there is currently no
satisfactory dictionary resource available for language learners, teachers, or scholars interested in
Menominee and historical-comparative research on other Algonquian languages. The flexibility
of the database as we are designing it will maximize the usefulness of this project, enabling us to
create dictionaries for all levels and types of users.