PRESUPUESTO GENERAL

Expressed in the preceding section are indigenous conceptualisations of literacies

other than the skills of reading and writing of

alphabetic script and the skills of speaking and listening in the dominant language. Indigenous scholars face the challenge of re-asserting the value and validity – the legitimacy – of

To understand

the validity of

other literacies,

it is necessary

to be able to

conceive of

worlds in which

other

(currently

devalued)

literacies

are valued

equally – if not

more – than

conventional

literacy.

or set of symbols used to write the language) to write something (an enduring artefact) for the purpose of assigning and conveying meaning through it to an audience (perhaps themselves or others who share knowledge of that orthographic system and the language it represents). In the case of other literacies, people produce enduring visible signs (such as the particular patterning in a tattoo, the metaphoric lyrics in song, or the repeated pattern on a tapa cloth in some Pasifika cultures) as a means by which relatively specific ideas may be conveyed to others who are literate in this practice and who perceive and interpret it, and can attribute to it its given meaning (Jimenez & Smith, 2008:39). Moreover, these other modes are often employed concurrently – such as the verbal/oral together with the symbolic.

Understanding the legitimacy of literacies other than reading/writing requires the ability to recognise alphabetic reading and writing not as universals (as is often assumed in the autonomous view of literacy) but as cultural artefacts in and of themselves. Hornberger (1996:9), an advocate of indigenous literacies in the Americas writes; “it is true that alphabetic literacy is only one kind of literacy”, and points to a growing body of scholarly work on indigenous ways of knowing and explorations into “the nature of writing as it relates to drawing, painting, and to speech, performance, and orality”. It is important also, to recognise that: common practices come not from divining

decree, but from choices made sometime, somewhere... , within specific historical and cultural contexts that support

political and economic structures. (Cadiero-

Kaplan & Smith, 2002:378).

To understand the validity of other literacies, it is necessary to be able to conceive of worlds in which other (currently devalued) literacies are valued equally – if not more – than conventional literacy. A Pacific example of the re-conception of literacy in this way is reported by Faraclas (1994) within the context of Papua New Guinea:

Literacy is no longer the power to decode and encode written texts. This is only a peripheral and even nonessential aspect of literacy. For

thousands of Papua New Guineans, literacy has become synonymous with the power to critically read and creatively write the discourses, versions of culture, and other structures and systems that determine how and why we live our lives. …

(cited in van Broekhuizen, n.d.:2).

Pacific nations (within Melanesia, Micronesia and Polynesia) have had exposure to conventional literacy (reading and

writing) from the 19th century, with missionary introduction of literacy in some Pacific nations dating back to the 1830s (Mangubhai & Elley, n.d.: 7). However, preceding and continuing throughout the almost two centuries of written tradition in some Pacific nations, a wide range of indigenous symbol systems, in addition to the spoken word, were used to carry out these very same processes – the conveyance of meaning through the production of an ‘enduring artefact’. The meanings conveyed related to a wide range of life and knowledge domains. Tu’itahi (2009), drawing on his Tongan cultural heritage, identifies some of these indigenous knowledge domains:

 Tala-‘o-tokanga – farming, horticulture

 Tala-‘o-ngatai/toutai – marine, navigation

 Tufunga – architecture, construction, and state craft

 Faito’o – health care and healing system

 Faiva – arts, sports.

Paulsen (2003:25) also reports that

The Native people of Hawaii, the Kanaka Maoli, traditionally used forms of literacy beyond the written word such as hula and oral traditions of storytelling and song (Kanahele, 1979; Kane, 1997; Liliuokalani, 1898). These methods of communication were embedded in the traditional social order and formed a collective experience and understanding for the people.

Understanding and meaning from these and many other indigenous knowledge bases was gathered, generated, interpreted, displayed, shared, and preserved through a range of complex symbol systems within a range of communication modes (visual, oral, gestural, as well as language and print) that constituted ‘texts’ – when ‘text’ is understood as “the complex symbol system people understand

Thus, literacy (in its fullest sense) is by no means new to indigenous peoples.

For centuries Indigenous peoples have had their own distinct understandings, forms, and processes of literacy that provided children with many rich and meaningful daily opportunities to acquire the cultural symbols and intellectual traditions of their local communities.

(Romero- Little, 2006:399).

All too often though, Indigenous literacies are

framed within oral societies and are neglected and viewed as inferior and not suitable for modern life/society (Romero-Little, 2006:399). As

discussed previously, for quite some time in the mid 20th century, Western scholars proposed the so-called “great divide” between those societies that communicated through writing (the “civilised”), and those that did not (the “primitive”). By this reasoning, ‘primitive’ was equated with ‘traditional’ (meaning “rural, communal, magic-religious, non-rational”) and with ‘illiterate’, and it was considered that only

the literacy that existed in the West promised enlightenment and the rise to civilization (Besnier 1995) (Bialostok & Whitman (2006:382).

However, despite this difficult past and slow progress, literature reveals that efforts are clearly underway around the world to validate the daily reality of alternative ‘literacy practices’, ‘texts’ and ways of ‘being literate’ other than the small set recognised and valued by dominant cultures and languages. Hornberger (1996:9) stresses that, “given the dominance of alphabetic literacies in the world today”, the efforts towards the “promotion of indigenous literacies” is vital to ensuring that “indigenous ways of knowing and being are able to survive and contribute to our global society”, and that there is “fuller social participation of hitherto marginalized sectors of society”.

3.7 Work By Māori to (re)Conceptualise