EHANNI
WICOWOYANKE:
ILLUMINATING LANGUAGE AND CULTURE IN A LAKOTA NARRATIVE
University of California, Davis
Kathleen J. Martin
1107 Balboa
Street
Morro Bay, CA
93442
(805) 772-5299
ABSTRACT
This paper presents a translation, textual analysis
and interpretation of a Lakota (Sioux) narrative that illuminates cultural and
linguistic differences embedded in the text. Analysis of the narrative began with the translation of a Lakota
narrative, followed by textual analyses using multiple methods of
interpretation. Translation revealed the story of a Lakota woman as an
independent person serving her community and deserving respect. Textual
analyses offered implicit and explicit content understanding of the narrative.
Awareness of cultural differences is important to maximize opportunities for
all students. Translation and interpretation n methods that employ multiple
viewpoints can benefit teachers’ and students’ appreciation of cultural
differences and bridging the gap to mutual understanding.
EHANNI WICOWOYANKE: ILLUMINATING LANGUAGE AND CULTURE IN A LAKOTA NARRATIVE
The United States has within its
borders, many rich oral traditions that use stories in ways that support
traditions and cultural perspectives, however, the transcription, translation
and interpretation of Native American oral literatures have not always provided
accurate representations of the meanings in the texts. In part, this can be
attributed to a belief in the "lack of literary value of Native
literatures and a distortion of the originals, caused by the diction process,
an emphasis on content, and a pervasive deafness to oral qualities"
(Tedlock, 1983b, p. 74). In addition, the direct implications of stories and
narratives with regard to traditional ideals and values have been, only in a
few instances, based on sociolinguistic, and cultural norms and values (See
Basso, 1996; Hymes, 1981; Rice, 1994; Tedlock, 1983a; Swann, 1992). Further,
efforts that utilize translation and interpretation have rarely found their way
into classroom presentations by teachers or students. On the rare occasion when
they are part of the discussion, superficial treatment or flawed translations
of the text and narrative do not allow for an expanded understanding of the
language, content and culture.
This paper examines a Lakota (Sioux)
narrative through a free translation, analyses and interpretation for: 1)
poetic and narrative structure, and cultural traditions ; 2) the ways interpretation can enhance depth and breadth of understanding; and 3) furthering appreciation of social and
context specific traditions embedded in
narratives. Originally, transcribed and translated into English by Ella C.
Deloria in 1937, the narrative, “A Sioux Captive Rescued by his Wife” (in Rice,
1994), presents material with unique qualities and content. The Lakota and
English texts were used in the verse and narrative analyses to arrive at a
richer understanding of the text that illuminated cultural constructions and
social relationships present in the narrative.
Many scholars have written on the
importance of stories for bridging differences and offering perspectives that
provide insights into communities and traditions (Basso, 1996; Bruner, 1986;
Delgado-Gaitan & Trueba, 1991; Dyson & Genishi, 1994; Witherall &
Noddings, 1991). These insights assist in the learning and understanding of
social norms, customs, rules and facets of community life. More importantly for
community members, stories provide support for and maintenance of culture and
traditions. Further, all peoples use stories to enhance, illuminate and define
aspects of culture for the benefit and enjoyment of their members. Nora and
Richard Dauenhauer (1990) in research in Alaska note, Tlingit stories connect
people and are "like a gaff hook reaching out across a distance” between
the storyteller and another person who is hooked" by the story (p. ix).
Jerome Bruner (1986) identifies narratives as a way to put “timeless miracles
into the particulars of experience, and to locate the experience in time and
place” (p.13). These notions of narrative reflect the multidimensional nature
of story and, the way in which stories told, through the avenue of language,
pave a path to connectedness, empathy, and
cultural cohesiveness. Connecting
across time and generations is another contribution of stories and narratives
to cultural cohesiveness. Communities considered “interdependent”, such as many
American Indian Nations, value the wisdom and knowledge of elders and consider
these individuals important community resources for helping children and adults
gain in knowledge and understanding (Greenfield, 1994). Stories provide
teaching and learning opportunities for children to learn about their place in
the community, their family and themselves. Stories often convey community
expectations and encourage relationships among and between individuals,
increasing personal responsibility through an understanding of self (Martin,
2000). According to Cavender Wilson (1996), “stories are reflections, more than
a simple educational process…rooted in a deep sense of kinship responsibility,
a responsibility that relays a culture, an identity, and a sense of belonging
(p. 7). This is not a one-way sharing of information or teaching, but rather a
reciprocal relationship between listener and storyteller encapsulated in the
Lakota expression woiwahyahke wouhspe or (looking at oneself to see what has been learned).
In Apache tradition, "oral
narratives have the power to establish enduring bonds between individuals and
features of the natural landscape, and that as a direct consequence of such
bonds, persons who have acted improperly will be moved to reflect critically on
their misconduct and resolve to improve it" (Basso, 1996, p. 40). Howard
Gardner (1983) states, “knowledge of self comes largely from an ever increasing
appreciation of how others think about the individual" and self-knowledge
ensures the smooth functioning of the wider community (p. 239). Contributing to
community relationships through the path of story is an essential part of a
life-long learning process for all concerned.
The next section will present a
brief discussion of Ella Deloria and her work and the author’s interest in this
topic.
PRELIMINARY
REMARKS
Ella Cara Deloria
Ella Deloria (Ahpetu Waste Wih, 'Good Day
Woman') was born in 1888 on the eastern South Dakota Sioux reservation of
Yankton. She was known throughout the Dakotas as having an interest in
storytelling. Often, friends and relatives would relate stories to her so that
she could record them in the Sioux dialect in which they were told. She was
fluent in “all three dialects of the Sioux language, although she was most
familiar with the ‘d’ dialect. She also had great fluency in the ‘l’ dialect”
(Deloria, V., 1998, p. xiv.). She believed this work important, and in a letter
to H. E. Beebe in 1952 said, "I actually feel that I have a mission: to
make the Dakota people understandable, as human beings, to the white
people" (Deloria, E., 1998, p. 237).
As a scholar, she was prolific, and
although funding was sporadic and family responsibilities numerous, she
accomplished much during her lifetime. Notable publications during her lifetime
include: Dakota Grammar, written with
Franz Boas (1941) and reprinted in 1982; and Dakota Texts 1932/1978 a compilation of sixty-four narratives with
line-by-line translations. Franz Boas and other members of the academic
community believed this method of translation provided the highest degree of
accuracy for translation with a minimal amount of subjectivity. However, her
nephew Vine Deloria (1998) comments, “Ella did not like this kind of translation,
which suggested that words and ideas could be easily matched across linguistic
traditions. She felt a better rendering of the nuances of the Sioux language
could be achieved by translating whole phrases and speeches in a free form” (p.
xiv).
Some of her work has been published
posthumously such as Waterlily
(1988), a fictional story that reflects social and cultural norms of Lakota
life. The book details the life of a woman, Waterlily, and her mother, Blue
Bird, in their Lakota tiyospaye (extended
family) in the time before European contact. In addition, three edited volumes
of her work have recently been published: Deer
Women and Elk Men (Rice, 1992); Ella
Deloria’s Iron Hawk (Rice, 1993); and Ella
Deloria's The Buffalo People (Rice, 1994). The singularity or her work, and
the excellence with which she pursued it, characterizes her efforts as a
significant achievement in the preservation of a North American Indian
language. Raymond DeMallie (1990) observes, "a written record of such
magnitude and diversity does not exist for any other Plains Indian
language" (p. 236). Further, Deloria’s work is exceptional due to her
precise documentation, linguistic and literary skills, knowledge of the Sioux
language, and most importantly her dedication to the people as a Yankton Sioux
woman.
Ella Deloria completed the original
transcription and translation of the narrative, “A Sioux Captive Rescued by his
Wife”, in 1937. It was told to her by a relative and recently published as one
of the stories in Ella Deloria's The
Buffalo People. It is the story of a Lakota woman who loves her husband
deeply and is willing to risk her life to save him. She is an independent
person, capable of achieving great things in the service of those she loves,
therefore, an exemplary role model of a traditional Lakota woman deserving
respect.
Personal Context
I began this
project as a graduate student at the University of California, Santa Barbara
while completing advanced degrees in the study of American Indian traditions
and the philosophy of education. Study of a North American Indian language was
part of the degree requirements, and I believed a translation project would
help me to learn the grammar, vocabulary and structure of Lakota language.
However, this project became more than a vocabulary and grammar exercise . I
became fascinated with the language and the use of storytelling in Lakota
culture.
Original translation work began in
1996. Since then, Reading and Writing the
Lakota Language, an excellent resource, has been published by Albert White
Hat, Sr. (1999). This text and subsequent language study has provided
additional insights into the translation of the narrative, and my study of
Lakota language in general. Initially, I didn’t understand some things as well in the beginning as I did at
the end of the project. Even now, I am sure errors remain, and I apologize for
these and any misrepresentations. Given that I am not Lakota, I am certain
there are aspects and meanings present in the text that I have not defined,
identified or understood. Lakota language is particularly expressive, and, in
fact, provides speakers with innumerable opportunities to “turn a phrase that
pinpoints a target…[and] with a slight change in pronunciation, allusions can
be made that simply could not exist in other languages” (Deloria, V., 1999, p.
xi). However, I hope you the reader find as I did that the multiple dimensions
that are present in "A Sioux Captive Rescued by his Wife" are best
appreciated by using a variety of lenses. As Dell Hymes (1981) observes we
cannot simply analyze speech, or interpret author’s voice, or seek surface
cultural images; we must strive to attain many different styles and forms
before we can reach any depth of understanding. Therefore, this project
utilizes a variety of styles and methods to more fully understand the meaning
and significance of the narrative.
The interpretation of the narrative was
based on three levels of analyses: 1) a line-by-line literal translation of the
Deloria Lakota transcription and a free translation; 2) a textual analysis of
Deloria's Lakota transcription and English translation; and 3) an
interpretation of the text that employed Lakota exegesis for an understanding
of traditional concepts and values implicit in the text.
Literal Translation
The literal
translation utilized three primary sources: Franz Boas and Ella Deloria (1941),
Dakota Grammar; Rev. Eugene Buechel,
S. J. (1970), Dictionary of the Teton
Sioux; and Ella Deloria's the Buffalo
People (Rice, 1994). A table of three lines was prepared that included: the
Deloria Lakota transcription (Rice, 1994) on Line 1; a phonemic and morphemic
breakdown of the words on Line 2; and third, a literal translation of the word
fragments on Line 3. Table 1 is representative of the line-by-line translation:[1]
Table 1: Presents a
sample of the line-by-line translation: Line 1, Lakota text; Line 2, phonemes
and morphemes; Line 3, literal translation.
|
1. Tank´si,
woya´kapi iyagnin 2. kinship term wo ya
ka pi iya
gni 3. younger sister I tell
state of being they to speak, go to one’s own |
|
s’a keyapi can´ke lecala ke ya pi le cela always that say they and so, and then this, that little while ago |
|
Blo-ok’eta wai k’un e´l heca anugoptan Potato Creek
I his, hers at such like give ear to, listen |
|
waun yunkan
le oya´kapi oya ka pi 1st person
also, then this to relate a story, stick to, state of being they |
|
Nawa´hun ca eya tanyan na´h´ta´kya na
wa hun nah tak ya and I
tell you that some, any well I something say |
|
mic’ila le wagli yelo mi c'ila wa gli my,
mine desire, want this I arrive at
home emphasis, stress |
|
He lece´tu keyapi’: he le ce tu ke ya pi that
this, that right, correct
this to say they |
|
Wica´sa wan Kan´gi-wica´sa wayaka wica sa Kangi
wica sa wa ya
ka a man/Lakota
man a certain one Crow
man one tie up state of being |
|
yuzapi
´ske'. yu za pi by
pulling caught hold of they it is said. |
Ella
Deloria’s English translation of the Lakota text (in Rice, 1994):
My younger sister, they tell me you are one the lookout for stories right along, so this time I was at Potato Creek I kept my ears open and heard this legend which I think I have done a good job of stamping (engraving, printing) on my mind, and I have returned. It was like this they say: A man was captured by the Crow (p. 30).
Textual
Analysis
The
theoretical perspectives that guided the textual analyses were based on the
work of: 1) William Labov (1972) and Michael Toolan (1988) for narrative
structural analysis; 2) Dell Hymes (1994) for poetic organization and
structure; and 3) Dennis Tedlock
(1983a, 1983b) for an oral expressive analysis.
Narrative
structural analysis
The Deloria
English translation and the free translation were used with William Labov’s
“fully-formed oral narrative analysis" method (Toolan, 1988, p. 152) to
identify structural components and
temporal representations in the narrative. Labov (1972) describes the
components of a “fully-formed oral narrative” as abstract, orientation,
complicating action, evaluation, result or resolution, and coda (in Toolan,
1988, p. 152). The abstract introduces the story, the orientation indicates
who, what, where, and when, and the complicating action is described as the
“obligatory nucleus” of the story in which most of the fixed narrative clauses
appear (Toolan, 1988, p. 153). The storyteller’s evaluation statements are “all
the means used to establish and sustain the ‘point', the contextual
significance and tellability, or reportability of the story” (p. 156). These
evaluation statements indicate the storyteller’s perspectives or feelings about
the story, and can occur anywhere in the text, but they often appear primarily
in the orientation. The evaluation statements also signal a change from
narrative time to current time and reveal the storyteller's feelings, the story
itself, and what is happening. The result or resolution is the concluding
section of the story that typically includes a statement or coda by the
storyteller that signals she/he is finished speaking.
Poetic
organization analysis
Deloria’s
Lakota transcription was used for this analysis since it is through features in
the Lakota language text that many structural and cultural characteristics are
evidenced (Hymes, 1981, 1994; Tedlock, 1983a). “By structure, I mean here
particularly the form of repetition and variation, of constants and contrasts,
in verbal organization” (Hymes, 1994, p. 42). In addition, the Lakota
transcription has a natural meter within the text, “and the elements that
appeal to the esthetic sense of the hearer [could] not be appreciated” without
it (Hymes, 1981, p. 7). This approach to verse analysis was important for
identifying the poetic language of the Lakota story, and the relationship
between language function and form. "When we analyze a narrative in terms
of poetic organization, we gain insight into the story told; at the same time
it is the story itself which provides the overall organization of the
narrative" (Hornberger, 1992, p. 441). Further, "the treatment of
oral narrative as dramatic poetry has a number of analytical advantages"
(Tedlock 1983b, p. 71) such as an understanding of the use of repetition,
alliteration, and content analysis. More importantly, it provides a
re-orientation from a conception of narratives as things—texts, items,
artifacts—to verbal art as a way of speaking, a mode of verbal communication
from the position of performance (Bauman, 1977).
The verse analysis utilized several
guiding principles that provide a framework for structuring the narrative: 1)
lines of the narrative were organized according to relationship between the lines; 2) words were identified that
indicated the end of a phrase or the beginning of additional information; 3)
poetic units were examined in two to four unit sets; and 4) commentaries made
by the original storyteller were isolated.
Oral
expressive analysis
After the text
was organized into a poetic structure, it was analyzed based on the work of
Dennis Tedlock (1983a) to illuminate affective and expressive dimensions of the
narrative. According to Tedlock (1983a), "what oral narrative usually does
with emotions is evoke them rather than describe them directly" (p. 71).
In Lakota language, this is evident through the use of linguistic features and
the repetition of phrases in Deloria's Lakota transcription, but not in
Deloria’s English translation. In part,
this may be attributed to a Lakota form of performance in which “speakers have the
opportunity to enunciate differently depending on the mood and intention of the
speaker to give a certain effect” (Deloria, in Rice, 1992, p. 10). For Lakota
speakers, this flexibility to adapt voice, tone, pauses and affect provides a
freer form than is available to English speakers. Most significantly, Deloria
was careful to note these linguistic features in the original transcriptions,
even if they were considered unnecessary by Franz Boas. Deloria tried to
“recapture these tales as they sing themselves to me, from my memory of the way
they sounded as various storytellers told them” (Deloria, in Rice, 1992, p.
11). Therefore, we have access to subtle differences in language and oral
presentation as they were presented in the oral telling of this story.
Finally, the
narrative was reviewed in terms of Lakota exegesis to illuminate cultural
traditions, values, and beliefs. This level of analysis revealed aspects of the
narrative not overtly explicit in the text from two perspectives: 1) specific
words in the Lakota text that refer to traditions and beliefs and embed meaning
into the story; and 2) examination of Lakota culture as emphasized in the
story. This provided a broader interpretation of the text as a traditionally
based narrative, and is "an approach to the sociolinguistics of language
in which the use of language in general is related to social and cultural
values (Fasold, 1990, p. 39). For “to understand a narrative one must grasp the
intentions and expectations of protagonists, the engine of the narrative
usually being the thwarting of those intentions by circumstances and their
rectification in the denouement” (Bruner, 1996, p. 177). This could not be
accomplished without Deloria’s meticulous transcription, an understanding of the
implicit cultural values as represented in the text, and a variety of
interpretations. As Hymes (1981) reflects:
Interpretation, which excludes speech falls short, as would
a treatment of painting that excluded paint. Interpretation, which seeks only
an individual voice, the author’s or the interpreter’s, falls short as well.
Interpretation that attends only to what is culturally defined, excluding both
the mode of existence of the work and the personal voice...yields only a
surface image (p. 9-10).
Through the use of these multiple methods of analyses, we will look in depth into the explicit and implicit meanings in the text. The following is the author’s free translation of “A Sioux Captive Rescued by his Wife” from the original Lakota transcription by Ella C. Deloria (1937) and printed in Julian Rice (1994). The original storyteller evaluation comments as recorded by Deloria are presented in italics.
“A Sioux
Captive Rescued by his Wife”
Translated
from Ella Deloria’s 1937 Transcription.
My younger sister, I was at Potato Creek a little while ago and I heard a story that I want to share with you. I tried to listen and pay close attention so that I could tell it to you accurately when I arrived back home. This is the way it was told to me and has been told for many years.
A
Lakota man was captured by the Crow, and they took him to their camp and held
him prisoner. They took him to their camp, and, as if in a bad dream, they
treated this man very badly as was done long ago. They tied his arms down as they
say, with “arms outstretched”. And this
is something important to talk about. I believe this was the way it was back
then, but I have never seen such a thing with my own eyes. It was said long ago
and has been often repeated. So it seems that it really did happen this way.
Not just the arms, but both arms and legs are pulled and tied apart! It was
done purposely in such a way so that the toes barely touched the ground, and
gradually the person sinks closer and closer to the ground. This was done where
everyone could see the captive and dance around him. They could inflict pain on
him and everyone could praise the captors, so the story goes. Now the torture
of this Lakota man had been going on for many days and nights, and the dancers
must have been very tired and exhausted from their arrogant and vain
celebration. So, everyone was sleeping except for six old men who were watching
the captive. They were old Crow warriors and guarding the captive reminded them
of their youth and their victories when they went on war parties.
Now
the captive had a wife he was living with who loved him so very much—so much so
that she cried and cried for him. Finally, as the story goes, she decided to go
and bring him home. She took two very fast and swift horses, one that she rode
and one that she led behind her. Then, as the story is told, she started off to
bring him back home.
Now
when she arrived at the enemy Crow camp, her husband was in a very weakened
state. She tied the horses within a hollow so they could not be seen. Then, I
suppose, she figured out a plan of how to save her husband. That is the way it
has been told. She decided she would go to the middle of the tent area within
the camp. I believe this would be very
hard to do without being noticed. Now, it was near sunset and this woman
had to go slowly, using cover, and walking carefully so as not to be noticed. I do not know how this Indian woman was able
to do this! She took a shawl and put it tightly around her shoulders, and
picked up a rotting piece of wood about the size of a baby. In her arms, it
looked like she was walking with a baby and the shawl was covering the baby’s
head. She went right into their camp as if she were any other woman with a sick
child that was crying. She was rocking the child and singing a lullaby –
holding this rough piece of rotting wood and trying to get it to go to sleep –
holding it just so and singing as she walked along! She was as brave as any soldier. From a distance, these people
didn’t notice that she was not a Crow woman putting her child to sleep. Anyway,
she was very thankful to have managed to convince them so well that not one of
them noticed her.
So
in this way, she went around the outside of the camp circle very confidently.
Not one of them thought of her as someone other than a mother who was very
concerned and affectionate with her child and singing it to sleep. In this way,
she walked all around the camp and returned to her starting point. By then she
knew where her husband was being kept. In the center of camp there was a lot of
excitement around one tipi and so, in the darkness, she went to take a look,
supposing the greatest excitement would have been around her husband. She knew
she could mingle with the people and not be noticed. The people were all
crowding to see the captive and she stood with them trying to see something of
what they were looking at. She had an idea that it was her husband and she was
anxious to see him. Then, she saw her husband hanging there in the midst of the
tent with his arms tied – weak and abused – unable to see or perceive anything.
Now, he must have been like this for many days with the rope pulling at his
feet for his face was very thin and drawn and he looked very bad. It had been a
very great ordeal, that could be seen in his face and he was shaking and
trembling like a tree in the wind. He wore a loincloth around his hips and,
otherwise, he was naked. His stomach was so sunken that his ribs seemed to
stand way out. When she saw him, so pitiful, she wanted to cry out and to go to
him, but she stood back, only moving slowly among the crowd. How in the world did she keep her presence a
secret!
She
continued to walk around until she understood how he was tied; and after
awhile, she quietly left that place and went back to her horses. Now she
prepared everything so that she was ready to leave in a hurry. She put a knife
in a leather cord around her waist so that she could cut her husband’s ropes
and then she returned to the center of the camp. By now, it was night and since
this had been going on for many days already, most of the dancers had gone home
early. She continued to walk around as if she had no particular place to go,
carrying the rotting piece of wood for a baby. Even if someone did notice her,
they would not perceive any purposefulness in her movements. They would only
see a woman outside walking and rocking her baby. I think, if these two lived, it would be through her bravery and strong
heart that these two would be able to survive. At least that is the way it
has been told. Anyone might have been afraid in that place and thought, “If any
of these Crow people find out or think I am not one of them, I do not know what
will happen.” Ho! But perhaps, while this woman was there she
tried not to think of this. And, also at that time—I think I can say this—she had a lot of patience and was not in a
hurry no matter how sad she was. She only wished to be able to make small
movements, little by little, with great detail and without giving anyone cause
to notice or see her.
Ho! Because of the long time she had been there,
she was tired, but she continued to walk and caress her rotting wood until,
slowly she was able to get closer to the place where her husband was staked and
stretched. Now then, the old men who were guarding him were without a doubt
very tired as well from all the long days of activities and they were all
sleeping. Her husband was the only one awake and still standing – so from a
distance she motioned him and said endearingly; “Old man, it’s me – I have
traveled a long way and come for you. Stay awake and don’t let anyone hear us.”
Then, for those that were guarding him, she took a sword that was sticking in
the ground in the center of that tipi and repeatedly struck all the old men in
the head with it. I speak the truth!
Then,
as the story goes, she took the hair from all six of them right then and there.
Shaking and trembling – she cut the straps that they had tied her husband with
and they left. She took back her husband from his captivity, and, somewhere in
the darkness, they found their way to the place where she had the horses. She
sat her husband on one of them and sent him off for home. And then, she went
all the way around the camp circle again for the very last time with the
rotting wood. But everything was quiet and so she started for home. This is the
way it has been told.
Younger sister, one thing I forgot to say. When she cut off the old men’s heads it wasn’t until the second time going around the circle and after sending her dear old man home that she scalped them. I got the story a little mixed up. Ho! That woman makes me laugh – to have a husband that she loved so dearly and valued so highly that she would do what only a man can usually do, is something! And that’s the way the story has always been told.
DISCUSSION
The analyses and interpretation of the
narrative are presented as follows: 1) discussion of the oral narrative
structure, and the poetic and organizational structure; and 2) a discussion that reflects Lakota
exegesis.
The narrative
contains components described by William Labov (1972) and Michael Toolan (1988)
as features of a “fully-formed” narrative and are discussed based on this
author’s free translation. In the first paragraph, the storyteller begins with
an introductory statement and an appropriate greeting for his audience, Ella
Deloria. In this way, he requests an extended period of talk, signals intent,
and expresses concern over his ability to retell the story with precision.
Deloria listens attentively, and then transcribes the text of the story at a
later time in the way it was told to her. In reality, there are two
storytellers and two audiences: first, the original storyteller with Deloria as
the audience; and second, Deloria as storyteller and we the readers as the
audience. It is not possible to know precisely which emphasis was added by
Deloria and which was included in the original version. However, Deloria was
sensitive to Lakota traditional ethics of listening, paying careful attention
and including specific details as related by the storyteller. This is evident
since her transcription includes gender specific endings in statements made by
the male storyteller, and terminal glottal stops to indicate pauses and timing
in his oral presentation. Often, these stops were omitted or given limited
attention by Boas in his transcriptions, however, Deloria recognized the value
and importance to the context of the story, if not also to the content.
In paragraph two, the teller presents
the abstract: the story of a man captured and tortured by the Crow, and
comments on the truth of the story and his opinion regarding that truth.
Paragraphs two through four orient the audience to what is happening to the
captured Sioux man, where it is happening, who will help him, and what happens
when his wife arrives at the enemy camp. During this orientation phase of the
story, the teller’s evaluation statements occur more frequently than during the
complicating action phase, and, according to Labov (1972), they help to build anticipation. Fewer
evaluation statements occur within the next five paragraphs, the complicating
action phase of the story. However, statements describing the wife's actions
prior to the event are greatly increased.
From the title, the audience assumes
the resolution or conclusion of the story will be how a woman rescued her
husband from the Crow. The actual resolution, however, is different from the
direction indicated in the title, abstract, and narrative clauses within the
complicating action. The final paragraph of the story reveals an unanticipated
result and describes the wife’s actions after she frees her husband. The
culminating action, which is the killing and scalping of the old men guarding
her husband, is an action normally attributed to a man, and yet in the story it
is completed by a woman. Thus, illuminating the premise—the story of a woman’s
bravery and how her actions are out of the ordinary. The coda statement
presented in the last two sentences of the narrative reveals the storyteller’s
belief that this is an important aspect of the story. He comments on the irony
of the situation and how it makes him laugh (with pride) to think of a woman
being able to perform these actions.
Components and features in narratives
that Labov considers important such as a linear time progression to the
narrative, and the sequencing of the narrative event are not present in this
narrative. In Lakota philosophy, the time and sequence of an event(s) is not as
important as the fact that it occurred. Lakota language differentiates between
actions which are either completed or not completed, not the process or stage
of completion. However, it is important who performed the action and what
feelings or emotions surrounded the event, which is evident throughout the narrative.
The wife’s rescue of her husband takes
place over two nights and one day. Although this is not specifically stated,
the time frame is embedded within the text. The wife arrives at the Crow camp
at sunset, and the storyteller describes how most of the camp has gone to bed
early because of all the celebrating over the capture. The storyteller explains
how the Lakota woman was able to walk around the camp all night long without
being noticed until she finds where her husband is being kept. Once she knows
where he is, she continues to walk around the camp as if nothing is wrong
except that her baby needs attention. She checks on the horses and makes sure
that everything is in readiness for their departure. The storyteller indicates
that the Lakota woman was undetected in the morning because of all the camp
activity when people are waking up. At this point there is a temporal break in
the story, and the next reference to time indicates it is night again and the
woman is continuing to walk with her baby. The storyteller assumes that the
audience must have been wondering how this woman has been able to maintain this
posture over such a long time without detection, so he tells the audience of
the woman’s strength and patience. The sequence switches again to the following
night when the woman finds that her husband is the only one still awake. The
storyteller does not focus specifically on the number of days needed for the
rescue or the sequence of events in terms of time. The storyteller concludes by
telling his younger sister (Deloria) he made a mistake, first the woman killed
the guards, then she sent her husband home, and then she returned to scalp
them. His correction relates to the telling of the actions the woman took not
the time frame. He indicates a belief that the sequence of actions is important
because it indicates the woman's attention and love of her husband, and bravery
and patience while accomplishing her task.
A limitation of this method of analysis is the reliance on Western
notions of narrative structure, particularly
when applied to stories from cultures whose frames of reference are
substantially different.
Poetic Structure and Expressive Analyses
The poetic
organization and structure illuminates features in the Deloria Lakota
transcription based on the verse analysis (Hymes, 1982, 1994) and oral
expressive analysis (Tedlock, 1983a). The story can be structured in even
meters of twenty quadruplets and one sextuplet, with the exception of paired
lines containing the storyteller's comments. In this organization of the
narrative, the beginning of stanzas are generally marked by words that tell the
listener (or reader) that this is a new section of information in the story.
The Lakota words that mark the beginning of each quadruplet are: wana
‘now’, na ‘and’, hecun
or heyin ‘then’, yuhkah ‘also then’, hecel ‘thus and so’, cahke ‘and so’, and ho untranslatable but closest to ‘oh my
gosh'. Stanzas of four and six lines coincide with Lakota cosmology. The
numbers four and six have particular significance in Lakota traditions: for
instance, the four directions, four primary colors, four divisions of the
sacred, and in many other cultural expressions. The number six signifies
similar aspects and, in the case of the four directions, includes above and
below. The following is a portion of the transcription structured into
quadruplets:
Wica´sa wan Kan´gi-wica´sa waya´ka yuzapi ´ske’.
´Tu´kte ekta heca tipi wan el akipi
ihan´bla´p´sice s’e kuwapi
na ehanni ikce-wica´sa kin “Yu´ka´gal
O´ka´tanpi”
eyapi kin hecaki-cunpi ´ske’.
A
man was captured by the Crow, and held prisoner. They took him to whatever
place the Crow were living, and there they treated him as in a nightmare, and
they did to him what was known in the old days as being tied outstretched.
Yunkan he ´ta´ku kapi owaka´hni´ge kin
lece´tu’; ecin ´tunweni miye i´sta un
heca wanzi wanblake´sni eya´s oyakapi eciya´tanhan lece´tu’.
According
to my understanding of it, that means this; of course you must understand I
have never seen such a thing, but this is judging by descriptions of it.
Is´to nu´pin yu´ka´gal iyaka´s´kapi na
ceca nupin na´kun;
na eya maka yela eya´s sipa ecela
tokecela maka
ica´h´ta´kya he ogna eglepi’.
Hecunpi na ohomni iwakcipi na
yu´ka´ki´zapi ´ske' (Rice, 1994, p. 27).
Both
arms are pulled to an outstretched position and also the legs and the toes
barely touch the ground and in that way they are set up (Rice, 1994, p. 30).
Another feature of the quadruplet is
the use of ´ske’ or ke’ to end phrases within the narrative.
In the opening lines, the storyteller begins with a description of the action
and ends with ´ske’. This signals the
type of traditional story to be told. The use of ´ske’ emphasizes the dramatic and special quality of the story and
heightens the excitement at the introduction. The storyteller also uses the
word yelo, a male gender enclitic
that emphasizes his belief the story is an important one to tell and that he
will try to do his best. He concludes the opening with a statement ending in ´ske’, reinforcing his personal opinion
that this was a most unusual woman. Through the first four quadruplets, the
storyteller uses ´ske’ to end the
quadruplets, gaining the audience's attention by emphasizing the importance of
the story. During the complicating action, the storyteller switches to the less
emphatic endings of ke’, ye’, hecinkte’,
and tka’. This portion of the
narrative describes the wife’s actions and is less important to the meaning of
the story. Near the end of the story, the storyteller returns to the use of ´ske to end the quadruplets,
re-emphasizing the unusual qualities of the woman and the dramatic aspects of
the story.
Another feature of the quadruplets
is the use of terminal glottal stops to signal the end of a phrase. The stops
provide emphasis, narrative pace, and sense of timing (Tedlock, 1983b) for the
listener (or reader). They highlight each quadruplet and accentuate "the
narrative pause with a physical cessation of breath" (Rice, 1992a, p.
285). As the story continues, the use of glottal stops varies between one and
two per quadruplet until the storyteller reaches the twelfth stanza and the only
sextuplet in the poetic organization of the narrative. In this stanza, the
emotional and physical intensity of the husband and wife are the highest and
the last word of every line, with the exception of the fifth line, is marked
with a terminal glottal stop.
Mni´huha wan ni´tiyapehan cegna´k-ya un
na paiyuksa hacocola’.
Ni´ge o´h’ap iyayin na tucuhu kin
yugwe´zap s’e tanin’.
Wanya´kin na un´si´kila un ceya iyaya
tka ca ´tokecela oiglus´pe’.
Inahma s’e toke´ske yuwipi kin ko ables
nazin’;
Ina eya wa´tohanl ´heyap iyayin
na maninl ´sunkakan wicakigle un heciya
ki’ (Rice, 1994, p. 28).
He
wore a breech cloth and binding around his hips, and from there
upward
he was bare; his stomach was caved-in
and
his ribs stood out like ridges.
She
almost cried out for pity on seeing him, but she restrained herself.
Unnoticed
she stood observing just how he was tied on
and when satisfied she left and went back to the horses
(Rice, 1994, p. 31).
In this
stanza, the storyteller is sharing the most emotionally charged sequence of
events for the characters. He describes the intense suffering of the husband
and the wife’s horrified response when she sees the man she loves so dearly
abused and tortured. After the last line of this stanza, the storyteller
returns to the use of one or two glottal stops per quadruplet for the remainder
of the narrative.
Essential for a thorough examination
of the narrative according to Hymes, Tedlock and others is an oral performance.
"The inflections of song, the rhythms of drum and dance, the delicate and
insubstantial gestures of the teller, are impossible to replicate"
(Huntsman, 1992, p. 90), and their absence is certainly missed. Although Lakota
language contains features that help us to gain a sense of timing and pace, the
verbal artistry of the storyteller is missing. Therefore, a limitation of this
level of analysis is the lack of an oral performance that would illuminate
these qualities and provide audience responses.
Lakota Exegesis
The Lakota
transcription was examined for the use of traditional words and phrases and is
discussed in the following areas: 1) the story introduction; 2) use of ´ske' and specific enclitics; 3) naming;
and 4) traditional perspectives.
Story
introduction
The narrative
begins with one of the most basic Lakota concepts, that of kinship. The
storyteller addresses Ella Deloria as tahksi (younger sister). A male relative addresses a female
relative who is younger than himself as tahksi. Using a kin term is a sign of respect that reminds Lakota
people of their Creation Story and that they all come from the same source
(White Hat, Sr., 1999). The notion of relative carries more connotations in
Lakota than in English usage. Relative can connote association by marriage,
respect for an individual, or relative through friendship, as well as blood
relations (U. C., Boulder, 1976; White Hat, Sr. (1999). Although younger sister
in English refers to a sibling within an immediate family, in Lakota this kinship
term is part of a group of terms describing relationships that are gender and
relationship specific. Deloria addresses the storyteller as tiblo ‘elder brother’, and indicates
that he was “the husband of the widow of a certain man who called Vine [Deloria,
Sr.] younger brother” (Rice, 1994, p. 33). In the nineteenth century, it would
not have been proper for the exchange of conversation between a male and female
in their situations, however, when Deloria recorded the story this “code of
practice” had been relaxed (Deloria, 1988; Rice, 1994).
Storytellers and elders are held in
high esteem and listening to them without interrupting is an important sign of
respect. It also is incumbent of the audience to remember the story accurately.
The storyteller alludes to his concentration on listening to the story when he
heard it by saying, “I tried to listen and pay close attention so that I could
tell it to you accurately”. The term yelo
at the end of this sentence is a male gender ending signifying his belief that
this is so, an assertion of which he is fairly certain; thus, emphasizing his
belief that he will do his best. Furthermore, Deloria’s transcription and
subsequent retelling of the story has the same requirements of attentiveness,
which she followed in the regular course of her work.
Use of ´ske'
'it is said'
The
storyteller begins with a declarative sentence, and says this is the story of a
man, a particular man who is unnamed, and is a story from a long time ago. He
uses ´ske’ to end the introduction and
to emphasize the story’s importance as a traditional story.
He lecetu
keyapi’: Wica´sa wah Kan´gi-wica´sa wayaka yuzapi ´ske’
It was like this they say: A man was captured by the Crow
(Rice, 1994, p. 27 & 30).
Deloria indicates that ´ske’ is used particularly with myths
(Rice, 1992a, p. 285), and the storyteller refers to this as an ehanni about an ikce-wica´sa (common man).
In Lakota oral tradition, ehanni
refers to stories of a long time ago, generally creation stories in which the
“principle characters are spirits” (One Feather, 1974, p. 2). Humans were not
created at this time and were not characters in stories. This narrative is most
likely from a category of stories known as ehanni
wicowoyahke, which are stories from the more recent Lakota past. They
are based in historical fact, actual lives of common people, and are documented
in the waníyetu yawa (oral history of
the people) (See One Feather, 1974). Therefore, by telling the audience that
this is ehanni and ending the
sentence with ´ske’, the storyteller
is saying this is an important story because it tells of Lakota recent history
and classifies the type of story to be told.
The use of ´ske’ through the exposition and concluding segments of the story
emphasizes the significance of listening to this historical and traditional
story. Further, the use of ´ske’ at
the end highlights the unique characteristics and unusual qualities of the
woman. This added emphasis does not change the importance of the middle of the
story. It may indicate, however, the lesser importance of the woman’s actions
that lead to her husband’s rescue as opposed to the significance of the story
itself, the woman’s love for her husband, and her bravery and adherence to
Lakota virtues. “Labov’s assumption
that what is said (by yourself or others) will not be the core of the story;
that rather, what is done (by you or others) will be” (Toolan, 1988, p. 157)
may not be an accurate supposition for this narrative. Although the woman’s
actions were important for rescuing her husband, the theme of the story is the
qualities of her character as a Lakota woman that are exemplary, therefore,
this is an important story to retell.
Enclitics
In this
narrative, the storyteller uses enclitics to indicate his feelings on a topic.
Lakota phonemes and morphemes mark a statement of fact or point-of-view of the
speaker, not necessarily temporal references. Past or future tense is inferred
but not constructed within the sentence. In addition, through the use of
enclitics, a speaker can emphasize position or feeling regarding the topic.
They are used in place of inflection typical of English language speakers. For
instance, a Lakota speaker does not use rising inflection at the end of a
sentence to indicate a question. The use of the enclitic hé performs this function within sentences.
Hanhépi
kin ya?ú pi kte
sni hé?
Tonight the
come you all potential negative question
‘Aren’t
you coming tonight?’
In this
example the use of kte sni
indicates the speaker’s belief that it might not happen or has the
potential for not happening. It also leaves the decision to the person being
asked since there is the implied potential that the event might not occur.
The storyteller
reinforces the significance of the woman by using terms such as Lakota wihyah 'Lakota woman' to emphasize her importance
in the story. Lakota wihyah is a specific
term of address, signifying the importance of this character to the narrative.
Later, the storyteller indicates his personal belief that she is a very brave
woman by commenting, Lila ohitika nacece
and can´te t’ihze (has a strong heart). Bravery is a culturally defined
virtue, important for men and women.
Terms of address or naming in stanzas
indicate other traditional aspects. Several different terms are used for the
husband throughout the narrative depending on who is speaking. Unlike the more
explicit Lakota wihyah, the storyteller uses wica´sa
wan or ikce-wica´sa (common man)
for the husband. This term has
historical significance, refers to certain creation stories (One Feather,
1974), and is used by Lakota people today in reference to themselves. However,
when the wife’s actions or feelings are involved the storyteller uses hihgna´ku (husband). A wife
would use this term when speaking to someone else about her husband. Yet, when
the wife speaks directly to her husband, the storyteller uses wica´hca (old man), demonstrating their special relationship and her
feelings of deep affection for him. It is a term of endearment and the
traditional way married couples speak to each other (Deloria, 1988). White Hat,
Sr. (1999) indicates wica´hca is a
sign of respect since the term implies that a man has “education,
responsibility, knowledge and experience—the man has achieved wisdom.
Consequently, when a spouse uses [this] term she is honoring him” (p. 49).
Traditional
perspectives
The
storyteller describes how the woman walks around the camp circle to avoid
detection, and uses the terms howokawih´h (outside the camp
circle or circle of tipis) and wicoti kin (inside the camp circle). In this way, the
teller refers to the intelligence and wisdom of the woman who has achieved
responsibility, knowledge and wisdom. Howokowih´h is the area of the camp circle where the wife's presence
would be the least likely to be detected since there would be the fewest people
there to recognize her as an outsider. Further, in plains American Indian
communities the interior of the tent circle has specific ways to be entered and
an outsider is recognized immediately for violating these customs. The woman
uses her intelligence, follows these guidelines and avoids discovery.
Additionally, for the Lakota, the wicoti
kih signifies the safety of family
and community and the greater symbolism in Lakota tradition of cangleska wakah (the sacred
hoop). When the woman makes her final pass around the camp circle, she goes
inside the circle, indicating bravery and daring, and by using the term wicoti kih, the
storyteller may also be alluding to the wife and her husband returning to the
safety of their own camp.
Important personal characteristics are
also addressed. The storyteller discusses the wife's ability to wait patiently
for a chance to help her husband. He says, Ito
ina´hni kes takunl ´cis´cila e´sa iyukcan´sni ecun kinhan oyuspanukte tka, meaning
she did not let sadness or pain at his suffering overwhelm her actions, but
continued with patience to do small things that wouldn't be noticed. More
generally, she was stoic and in control of her emotions so that she might be of
the greatest help to her husband in this dire predicament. She continued in a
small way, controlling her actions, moving carefully, and remaining patient. To
do this, she assumed an appropriate Lakota woman's role, demonstrating patience
while providing comfort and nurturance to a child.
References to Lakota cultural beliefs,
perspectives and values are embedded within the narrative. The most significant
reference is to the four Lakota virtues: respect, generosity, wisdom, and
bravery or fortitude. The woman exemplifies all of these virtues and
demonstrates qualities Lakota women should strive to achieve. She shows respect
for her husband by the way she treats him and honors his place in her life. She
respects herself and does not succumb to needless crying over what she has
lost, but instead, takes two horses and goes out to find her husband. She
generously gives of herself through her efforts and desire to save him. She
develops a plan that requires wisdom, patience and restraint so that she is not
discovered. If she fails, both will be lost, but as the storyteller says, she
"must not have dwelt on this" issue. Instead, she pursues her goal
slowly, cautiously and with patience. Finally, she exemplifies a brave Lakota
woman with a strong heart (can´te t’ihze) who is able to endure suffering and to see a loved one
suffer without dwelling on herself or her emotions. It is through her respect,
bravery, generosity, and wisdom that they both are saved.
In “A Sioux Rescued by his Wife” the
affective responses and emotions of the main character are emphasized. Her
actions are a response to her strong feelings for her husband, and true to
Lakota philosophy, the importance was not in how she was able to accomplish the
rescue, the importance was in the completion of an unselfish act based on her
love and generosity. These are significant aspects of Lakota culture, which are
present in the Lakota narrative and add meaning and depth to an interpretation
of the text.
This paper presents multiple
perspectives of a Lakota story using a variety of methods and analyses for
interpretation. Each of these methods
illuminated aspects of language and culture through narrative content and
context. The methods, as Dell Hymes (1986) notes, are only a means "to the
understanding of human purposes and needs, and their satisfaction; ... an
indispensable means, but only a means, and not that understanding itself"
(p. 70), other perspectives and interpretations remain. However, we are better
able to view the multiple layers embedded in the text through the use of
structural, poetic and traditional knowledge frames. We cannot hope to provide
all interpretations or cover every aspect. Every audience and storyteller is
unique, however, through analyses such as this we can glimpse at the complexity
of language and story for conveying multiple dimensions and cultural practices.
Similar to stories and narratives, this paper frames the characters experiences
as well as conveys the complex relationships and multi-layered aspects of time,
place and circumstance. We also can begin to appreciate the necessity for
further study, translation and reflection on cultural narratives as avenues to
worlds different from our own.
Stories and narratives conveyed in the
languages of First Peoples provide insights into culture and worldview through
the vehicle of language. Often in American Indian communities, and with greater
frequency as Native languages are lost, the first language of American Indian
students is English. Heritage languages are used with less frequency by each
subsequent generation, and when they are gone “a great void will be left in the
universe that will never be filled” (Littlebear, 1997, p. xv). The necessity to
maintain and support Native languages cannot be minimized, and it is more
important than ever to study, learn and reflect on their complexity. “The
elders who speak these languages have so much to tell us about the vocabulary
of different kinds of knowledge, about the world views expressed in the way
utterances are put together, the infinite number of ways that people have of
constructing their lives” (Hinton, 1994, p.13). Yet, Native languages still
struggle to be valued. "The fact that their languages had value ... that
Indians had a literature of great significance took longest to be
acknowledged" (Swann, 1992, p. xiii). Multiple agendas, literary
interpretation, and missionary zeal infused the narratives with elements that
are difficult, if not impossible, to extract from the texts. Early translations
of American Indian songs and stories often did not include accurate
transcriptions, and meanings were derived from interpreters with limited
capabilities. Only within the past thirty years have American Indian languages,
literature, and music been regarded as intelligent and insightful. Even more
incredibly, not until 1992 was the American Indian Languages Act passed,
mandating Native American language study for Native students in grades k-12.
Ostensibly, sixty-five years after Ella Deloria transcribed “A Sioux Captive Rescued by his Wife”.
However, through Deloria’s transcriptions we are able to appreciate some of the
strength of character, affect, and distinctive qualities that are part of
Lakota language, and illuminated in the voices of storytellers.
Language offers us possibilities for thinking of things in new ways, and these possibilities are “about the lessons in humanity that we learn through language” (Hinton, 1994, p. 19). Only through knowledge of other ways can we broaden the dialogue to include a range of meanings and interpretations. For teachers, an awareness and understanding of differences in culture and cognitive styles is a necessity, particularly in American Indian communities since these needs have been diminished in the past. For all students, supporting a multiplicity of perspectives is important to strengthen the teaching and learning process. In depth analysis of narratives and stories is a way of engaging others in multi-layered experience and bridging differences that are difficult to accomplish without the benefit of this pleasing format. This paper provides some of the significant aspects of language and culture that are present in a Lakota narrative that can be lost or minimized through translation. It may cause us to wonder when we hear stories in a language with which we are unfamiliar, “What are we missing and what have we understood?” When we hear the same story translated into English, we might ask the same question
Basso, Keith. H. (1996). Wisdom
sits in places: landscape and language among the Western Apache.
Albuquerque, NM: U. of New Mexico Press.
Bauman, Richard. (1977). Verbal art as performance. Prospect
Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.
Boas, Franz & Deloria, Ella C.
(1941). Dakota grammar. Reprt. 1982.
Vermillion, SD: Dakota.
Bruner, Jerome S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Bruner, Jerome S. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Buechel, Eugene, S. J. (1970). Dictionary-oie wowanpi wan of the Teton Sioux. Pine Ridge, SD: Red Cloud Indian School, Inc.
Dauenhauer, Nora M. & Dauenhauer, Richard. (1990). Haa tuwuna’agu yi’s: For healing our spirit. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.
Delgado-Gaitan, Concha. & Trueba, Henry. (1991). Crossing cultural borders. New York:
Falmer.
Deloria, Ella C. (1932). Dakota texts. Rpt. 1974. New York: AMS
Press.
Deloria, Ella C. (1998). Speaking of Indians. Lincoln: University
of Nebraska Press.
Deloria, Ella C. (1988/1990). Waterlily. Lincoln: University of
Nebraska Press.
Deloria, Vine, Jr., (1999). Forward. In
Albert White Hat Sr., Reading and writing
the Lakota language, edited by Jael Kampfe. (pp.xi-xii). Salt Lake City:
University of Utah Press.
DeMallie, Raymond. (1990). Afterword.
In E. C. Deloria, Waterlily,
(233-244). Lincoln: U. of Nebraska Press.
Dyson, Ann H. & Genishi, Celia.
(1994). The need for story: Cultural
diversity in classroom and community. Urbana, IL: National Council of
Teachers of English.
Fasold, Ralph. (1990). Sociolinguistics of language: Introduction
to sociolinguistics, Volume II. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, Inc.
Greenfield, Patricia. (1994).
Independence and interdependence as developmental scripts: implications for
theory, research and practice. In P. Greenfield & R. Cocking, (Eds.), Cross-cultural roots of minority child
development, (pp. 1-21). Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum.
Hinton,
Leanne. (1994). Flutes of fire. Berkeley,
CA: Heyday Books.
Hornberger, Nancy. (1992). Verse
analysis of "The Condor and the Sheperdess". In Brian Swann, (Ed.), On the translation of Native American
literatures, 441-469. Wash., DC: Smithsonian.
Huntsman, Jeffrey F. (1983).
Traditional Native American literature: The translation dilemma. In Brian Swann
(Ed.), Smoothing the ground, 87-100.
Berkeley: U. of California.
Hymes, Dell. (1981). In vain I tried to tell you.
Philadelphia: U. of Pennsylvania.
Hymes, Dell. (1982). Narrative form as
a “grammar” of experience: Native American’s and a glimpse of English. Journal of Education. 64/2: 121-142.
Hymes, Dell. (1986). Models of the
interaction of language and social life. In John Gumperz & Dell Hymes
(Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics. New
York: Basil Blackwell, Inc.
Hymes, Dell H. (1994). Ethnopoetics,
oral-formulaic theory . Oral Tradition, 9/2:
330-370.
Labov, William. (1972). Language in the inner city. Philadelphia: U. of Pennsylvania.
Littlebear, Richard E. (1997). Preface.
In Gina Cantoni, (Ed.), Stabilizing
Indigenous languages, (pp.xiii-xv) Flagstaff: Center for Excellence in
Education, Northern Arizona University.
Martin, Kathleen J. (2000). "Oh, I have a story”:
narrative as a teacher's classroom model. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 16, 349-363.
One Feather, Vivian. (1972). Ehanni Ohunkakan: A curriculum material
resource unit. Pine Ridge, SD: Oglala Sioux Cultural Center & Black
Hills State.
Rice, Julian. (1992a). Narrative styles
in Dakota texts. In Brian Swann, (Ed.), On
the translation of Native American literatures, 276-292. Wash., DC:
Smithsonian Institution.
Rice, Julian. (Ed.). (1992b). Deer women and elk men. Albuquerque: U.
of New Mexico.
Rice, Julian. (Ed.). (1993). Ella Deloria’s Iron Hawk. Albuquerque: U. of New Mexico.
Rice, Julian. (Ed.). (1994). Ella Deloria’s the Buffalo People.
Albuquerque: U. of New Mexico.
Swann, Brian. (Ed.). (1992). On the translation of Native American
literatures. Wash., DC: Smithsonian Institution.
Tedlock, Dennis. (1983a). The spoken word and the work of translation.
Philadelphia: U. of Pennsylvania.
Tedlock, Dennis. (1983b). On the
translation of style in oral narrative. In Brian Swann (Ed.), Smoothing the ground, (pp. 57-77).
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Toolan, Michael. (1988). Narrative: A critical linguistic introduction.
NY: Routledge.
University of Colorado, Boulder.
(1976). Beginning Lakhota: Vol. I-II.
Boulder, CO: University of Colorado Lakota Project.
Witherall, Carol. & Noddings, Nel. (Eds.). (1991). Stories lives tell: narrative and dialogue
in education. New York: Teachers College Press.
White Hat Sr., Albert. (1999). Reading and writing the Lakota language-Lakota iyapi un wowapi nahan yawapi.
Edited by Jael Kampfe. Salt Lake City: U. of Utah.
[1] All of the Lakota and English texts in this paper are used for descriptive and explanative purposes and are the work of Ella C. Deloria, in Julian Rice (Ed.), (1994), Ella Deloria’s The Buffalo People. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico.