Tuning in to Navajo: The Role of Radio in Native Language Maintenance
by Leighton C. Peterson
This paper discusses the realities of radio in indigenous language maintenance
with a case
study of KTNN, a Navajo language station. The relationship between
audience, language,
and programming is analyzed, and more effective uses of radio are suggested.
Joshua Fishman (1991) and other scholars have noted the influence of
the mass media as a
factor in language choice in the contemporary world. In Native American
communities,
English-language videos, television, and popular music have replaced
storytelling and other
traditional medium, contributing to language shift among many Native
American youth.
However, the last 20 years has also brought a growing number of indigenous-language
media in the United States and Canada, especially radio. This paper
discusses the realities
of radio's role in language maintenance using a case study of KTNN,
the largest
indigenous-language commercial signal in the world, and suggests ways
in which radio can
be utilized more effectively in Navajo-language maintenance.
Allan Bell asserts that "broadcast media play a multiple role--active
as well as passive--in
language standardization...broadcast media reflect the language evaluations
of the society
at large" (1983, p. 29). Standardization is a factor in language maintenance,
yet Navajo has
no accepted standard. However, Navajo-language broadcasters and their
audience are
actively creating a standard through daily programs and subsequent
spirited feedback. Bell
continues to say that "broadcast speech is the most public of languages.
Its hearers are the
largest simultaneous audience of the spoken language" (1983, p. 37).
When discussing
language maintenance, however, it is important to note who the actual
and intended
audience is. My data indicate that Navajo announcers often tailor their
language to an
older, monolingual audience and for various reasons, younger Navajos
do not actively seek
out Navajo-language broadcasts. As the lack of younger listeners will
impact the future of
the language, the relationship between audience, language, and programming
is analyzed
below.
Broadcasting in the Navajo language has been around for quite some time,
although prior to
1972 it was limited to small program blocks on border-town stations
(Keith, 1995, p. 9). In
1972, the first native-owned, native-language station in the country,
KTDB, went on the air
in Navajo from Pine Hill, New Mexico, to serve the Ramah Navajo Reservation.
The current Navajo-language mediascape includes several Navajo-language
radio stations, both publicand private, as well as regular programming
on local Christian radio. Navajo television station NNTV 5 produces around
4-5 hours of Navajo-language programming per week, ranging from current
events to live broadcasts of the Navajo Nation Tribal Council sessions.
While an important aspect of Navajo language broadcasting, NNTV 5 was
received by only
4,300 cable subscribers in 1996, only a small fraction of an estimated
population of
180,000. It was not until the establishment of KTNN Radio in 1986 that
Navajo-language
programming reached the entire Navajo Nation and speakers of all variations
of Navajo.
KTNN AM 660
It has been observed that indigenous people around the world establish
their own media "to
preserve and restore an indigenous language, to improve the self-image
of the minority,
and to change the negative impressions of the minority that are held
by members of the
majority culture" (Browne, 1996, p. 59). In the Navajo case, communication
in the native
language among a widely-dispersed population was a major factor in
the Nation applying for
and receiving a broadcast license. KTNN's mission statement emphasizes
these points:
"This will be the first station that will be owned by, and for the
benefit of, the Navajo
Nation. The programming will emphasize the Navajo culture and life-style
on the
reservation and will in large part be broadcast in the Navajo language"
(Fisher, et al., 1981).
KTNN's 50,000 watt clear signal allows it to broadcast well beyond Navajo
Nation borders, especially at night, reaching cities as far away as Phoenix
and Albuquerque. KTNN's broadcast range and position as "The Voice of the
Navajo Nation" (owned by the Nation) gives KTNN what Pierre Bourdieu (1991)
has termed the "symbolic" power to affect linguistic change, as well as
the unenviable position of being held to a high language standard, even
where no such "standard" exists. In terms of language maintenance, KTNN
is the single-most important broadcaster of the Navajo language.
Audience and programming
Although KTNN has the potential to reach most Navajo speakers, that
does not mean that
they all tune in. In the context of language maintenance, it is important
to have a wide and
diverse audience; however, the audience is determined in part by programming,
i.e. the
need or desire to listen to Navajo-language programs. KTNN's position
as a commercial
station, however, requires that programming be funded through advertising
revenue. This
means that what is best for the language or language maintenance is
not always
considered, as advertisers cater to those they perceive as holding
the purse stringsin this
case parents and grandparents.
KTNN has a Country & Western music format "which fits the life-style
out here on the
Reservation" (K.C.); it also plays traditional and contemporary Native
American music in
regular rotation. Although KTNN is a for-profit commercial radio station,
it is bound to serve the needs of the Navajo people with bilingual broadcasts
of news, livestock reports, the President's report, and public service
announcements (PSAs) for ceremonies, Chapter
meetings, and community events. The music is geared for the 21-60 age
group, and the
Navajo news and livestock reports are of interest mainly to older Navajos.
The PSAs
attract a wide range of listeners, and "when kids want to find out
if school is closed, they'll listen" (K.C.). KTNN's C&W format, however,
does not fit the tastes of many younger Navajos, and they associate KTNN
with "Johns" (a derogatory term for Navajos, especially older Navajos,
who are perceived to be neither traditional nor assimilated, live in the
"sticks," and speak English with a pronounced accent, i.e., "backwoods"
B.K.). Therefore, many youth do not willingly tune in to KTNN's Navajo
broadcasts, "but if they're stuck at home or in the truck with grandma
or their parents, then they have to listen" (K.C.). Some programs, such
as sports broadcasts, which may seem youth-oriented actually are not:
"Broadcasting play by play came about when
a lot of our elders were...calling us at
KTNN and saying, 'Hey, why don't you guys
do it in Navajo? There's a lot of us
who are back at home that would like to know
how our grandkids are doing at
basketball tournaments.' So when we're talking
we talk about the directions in a
game, the 3 point linewe educate our elders
about the game." (R.B.)
Sports play-by-play broadcasts are, however, one way in that KTNN's
programming finds
new uses for the Navajo language. At the same time, Navajo news broadcasts
and feature
stories keep the language relevant in the contemporary world. There
is also programming
designed for the youth, featuring "urban" and dance music. These shows,
however, are
broadcast in English.
Contributing to the lack of a wide youth audience during Navajo broadcasts
is the fact that
many younger listeners may not understand the more "traditional" Navajo
used by some of
KTNN's announcers, many of whom cater to an older, monolingual population:
"In my mind
there are elderly people listening to KTNN, a lot of people who don't
speak English listeningto KTNN, so therefore they are primary in my mind
when I translate from English into Navajo" (M.G.). They talk of listeners
"in the remote areas," "at the hogan level," or "out on the Rez." Therefore,
announcers try to speak accordingly. However, as announcer M.G., who is
in his 40s, put it: "To continuously talk Navajo at a level where the elders
are able to understand is sometimes difficult, and without using the slang...that's
hard."
Language
Former program director T.Y. put it best when he said that "one of the
biggest issues now
facing KTNN is trying to define the type of Navajo that should be spoken."
Changes in the
Navajo language as a result of broadcasting, such as the constant use
of English terms, can
have wide-reaching implications in language maintenance. Furthermore,
announcers must
alter their speech for different audiences, whether using more slang
or more "traditional"
terms. These factors result in a spirited dialogue between broadcasters
and audience on
"proper" on-air language. However, even when "proper" language is used,
problems still
arise: "I find that no matter how descriptive you are in a story, there
is always somebody
who does not quite understand what you just said. They have their own
interpretations" (J.
B.).
The data indicate that KTNN's unique position as a commercial radio
station broadcasting
in an indigenous language requires subtle changes in the way the Navajo
language is used on
the air. This type of Navajo has been described by my consultants as
"Broadcast Navajo":
"Yeah, Broadcast Navajo is different. Broadcast Navajo is a way of
speaking Navajo at a
level where it's brief and to the point, because of the Navajo language
being so difficult"
(T.Y.). Another consultant told me that "when you use the 'formal'
Navajo with the big
vocabulary, it takes about twice as long to say something than with
the 'newer' Navajo. We
call that 'Broadcast Navajo' for our purposes here, because we have
to shorten everything
up" (K.C.). Navajo is a very descriptive language and is not easily
adjusted to fit the time
constraints of 30 second commercials and other unique requirements
of entertainment radio,
especially since most of KTNN's Navajo-language programming is interpreted
directly from
written English copy. "To find DJs to speak this type of Navajo on
the radio is difficult"
(T.Y.).
Many of the DJs at KTNN find it necessary to codeswitch (use English
terms) even where
there is a "traditional" Navajo term available. For example, when faced
with making a
30-second commercial, it is quicker for an announcer to say "Window
Rock" than
Tséghahoodzání; furthermore, it is possible that
neither the announcer nor some members
of the audience will know the Navajo name for Window Rock or other
locations.
Codeswitching among KTNN DJs is especially apparent with numbers, place
names,
addresses, and consumer goods, resulting in a great number of listener
complaints.
Broadcast Navajo is further characterized by speaking quickly using
fillers such as éíyá and
áádóó and incorrect, direct translations
from English.
Scholars have noted that "the public is ultrasensitive about broadcast
language... accusations that certain broadcasters speak incorrectly are
a familiar listener response, usually accompanied by praise for other broadcasters
who are held up as models of good speech" (Bell, 1983, p. 38). This appears
to hold true for the Navajo case as well. Listener complaints about Broadcast
Navajo far outnumber any other listener response, and
they can be passionate: "Why is this morning guy still on the air?
He can't even speak his
own language!" (1994 Letter). "We've been criticized for slaughtering
the language.... our
purpose is obviously to keep the language alive, but how are we keeping
it alive is a
question, because of the grammar usage and the lack of knowledge of
all the words" (K.C.).
Many of these complaints are owing to factors mentioned above, including
Navajo and
English fluency, domain knowledge, and so forth. However, for Navajo--where
there is no
official standard--many complaints are simply caused by regional differences
in the
language:
"What else have we gotten complaints about....
the way we mispronounce words.
There's different dialects across the Reservation,
and some of our announcers are
from the western region and some are from
the eastern region, and the same word
can be pronounced two different ways. And
somebody inevitably will have a
complaint that we didn't put the right inflection
on it or it has a different meaning
from one region to the next." (K.C.)
Newscaster J.B. gave me the following examples:
"Tódilchxóshí is one example.
When I talk about 'pop,' I say tódilchxóshí, which
means 'the water that bubbles.' But in Gallup
area, I notice that they say tólikání,
'the sweet water, the tasty water.' That's
how they say it. And we say damóo
yázhí for Saturday ['little
Sunday'], and some people say yiska!¢ damóo, which
means 'tomorrow is Sunday.' We just have different
translations all the way
across. One of our DJs, when he says land,
he says héya. I say kéya. But he
means kÉyah. But to me, that's the
way he talks, that's his language."
From a language maintenance standpoint, many of the complaints mentioned
above are
legitimate. For example, continued use of English for place names,
numbers, and consumer
goods will likely aid in the demise of their Navajo equivalents. However,
issues relating to
regional dialects are more contentious and may or may not be solved
with a Broadcast
Navajo standard.
Language standards
The way in which KTNN's DJs adapt the Navajo language to a radio format
is largely
individual choice, based in part on language ability in both English
and Navajo, domain
knowledge, and their level of experience with radio broadcasting. This,
of course, leads to a
wide variation in broadcast language. KTNN staff and management discuss
the language
issue at almost every meeting and have mentioned standardization, but,
"it's hard for us to standardize the Navajo
language in a manual that we all take a
look at. We've talked about that, and we've
talked with Navajo Community
College and Rough Rock Demonstration School
on helping us come closer to the
meanings, but we haven't really been able
to formalize anything yet, because it
takes time and money to do that." (K.C.)
Without an official standard to follow, other methods to determine "correct"
or accepted
language use must be found by Navajo-language broadcasters. Browne
(1996) notes that
when language questions arise, indigenous broadcaster seek help from
official outlets such
as language commissions, individual experts, or requests to the audience
for help.
Newscaster J.B. and longtime announcer S.R. were constantly cited as
being the
Navajo-language experts at KTNN (even though they spoke different regional
dialects). J.B.
said she has consulted elders or respected Council delegates herself
for language advice.
However, being "traditional" or an elder does not make one the best
language consultant:
Sportscaster R.B. told me that she could not rely on her grandparents
for proper terminology
and description for basketball play-by-plays "because they don't really
know the sport of
basketball. But the younger generation, they do."
Audience members offer suggestions on language use; one consultant noted
that "if they
hear you say something wrong, they'll come up and tell you, 'Don't
you think it would be
easier to describe it like this?'" (R.B.). J.B. gave me this example
of audience oversight:
"Well, there was one time I lost the word for
'uncle,' and I was talking about this
person in a story whose uncle had some kind
of deal--I forget what the subject
matter was--but I was at a loss for the word
uncle. This was a boy to an uncle.
And so I was trying to figure out what was
the word, what was the proper
language when I was reading it, and I kind
of...bik'is is what I said, which is a
brother. And so then the person called me
and left a message on the phone and
said the right language was bidá'í."
This dialogue between announcers and audience--and between the broadcasters
themselves--is a sign that the language is vital and alive: "People
listen. That [audience
feedback] tells me they are listening and it is a serious matter" (J.B.).
The recursive
relationship between audience, broadcasters, language, and programming
is also creating a
standard for Broadcast Navajo. Whether or not a standard is needed
may never be
answered, but Navajo speakers obviously are passionate about "correct"
language use and
expect their broadcasters to uphold those ideals. When asked who is
the final authority on
correct on-air language use, however, one announcer replied: "My God.
I guess whoever's
talking, which would be us...I guess" (R.B.).
Programming for the future
In order to address KTNN's responsibility towards the Navajo language
and to foster a
younger audience, regular language instruction programming could be
developed. This
programming should be planned in conjunction with Navajo language instructors
in schools
and universities and partially utilize KTNN's existing sports and entertainment
broadcasts
as a vehicle of instruction (i.e., develop pamphlets with basketball
and football terminology
in Navajo so students can follow play-by-play). Furthermore, entertainment
and music
programming in the Navajo language geared towards youth could be implemented.
Younger
Navajo speakers should be the announcers and should be allowed to speak
their own
version of Navajo (with slang).
There is probably no perfect way to appease all of KTNN's listeners.
Nonetheless, KTNN's
announcers are held to a higher standard of the Navajo language, and
KTNN has a
responsibility towards the language. Therefore, several actions could
be taken: 1)
Standardize frequently-encountered terminology in news and entertainment,
agreed upon by
speakers from all parts of the Navajo Nation, 2) Require announcers
to improve language
skills in both Navajo and English when needed as a condition for continued
employment, 3)
Log specific, legitimate listener complaints about Broadcast Navajo
and utilize them in
future language planning and standardization, and 4) Secure grant money
for this on the
basis of maintaining a Native language in the modern world.
Conclusion
In today's world, commercial radio is a necessary and viable communication
outlet for the
Navajo language. Commercial radio helps keep the Navajo language alive
in many domains
with news, sports, and public service broadcasting. It also provides
positive exposure for
the Navajo people and all Native Americans. However, commercial radio
affects the way
Navajo is spoken on the air by DJs and announcers, creating a peculiar
type of Navajo
defined here as "Broadcast Navajo." KTNN helps perpetuate the Navajo
language "simply by keeping it out there on the air" (K.C.). However, it
is also changing the language. Whether
these language changes are being adopted by KTNN's audience would require
a much
deeper study. If one of KTNN's main goals is the preservation and perpetuation
of the
Navajo language, then two issues need to be addressed. First, it should
be determined if a
standard needs to be created for the use of the Navajo language in
the electronic media;
and second, a way must be found to attract the younger generation of
Navajos to
Navajo-language broadcasts.
Note: Data for this paper was collected during 1996-97.
Appreciation goes to Oswald
Werner and the Northwestern University Ethnographic
Field School, William Nichols, and the
staff of KTNN Radio, Window Rock, Navajo Nation, Arizona.
References
Bell, Allan. (1983). Broadcast news as a language standard.
International Journal of the
Sociology of Language, 40, 29-42.
Bourdieu, Pierre. (1991). Language and symbolic power.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Browne, Donald. (1996). Electronic media and indigenous
peoples: A voice of our own?
Ames, IA: Iowa University.
Fisher, Wayland, Cooper, & Leader. (1981). Application
of the Navajo Nation for a new
standard broadcast station at Window Rock, Arizona.
Presented to the Federal
Communications Commission, Washington, DC, March 6,
1981.
Fishman, Joshua A. (1991). Reversing language shift:
Theoretical and empirical foundations
of assistance to threatened languages. Clevedon, UK:
Multilingual Matters.
Keith, Michael C. (1995). Signals in the air: Native
broadcasting in America. Westport, CT:
Praeger.
Young, Robert, & Morgan, Sr., William. (1987).
The Navajo language: A grammar and
colloquial dictionary. Albuquerque, NM: University
of New Mexico. |