Language Learning Forum: Indigenous lang

Print Page | Close Window

Indigenous lang - cultural appropriation

Printed From: How-to-learn-any-language.com
Forum Name: General discussion
Forum Discription: Discussion about language learning for people who study languages on their own.
URL: http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40375
Printed Date: 21 July 2021 at 4:32pm

Posted By: cathrynm
Subject: Indigenous lang - cultural appropriation
Date Posted: 26 April 2015 at 4:35am

Is learning indigenous language cultural appropriation? I can guess how this crowd is going to come down on this issue, but I thought I'd post here anyway, just to stimulate a little thought on this.

Honestly, myself, I can kind of see the issue, though I don't want to be absolutist about it. Around the world, these communities are hugely threatened and denied resources, and I'm sure it's quite frustrating to run into someone coming in with a missionary type attitude. If you're going to learn these languages, that means seeking these communities and coming to some kind of agreement about the nature of the relationship.

http://www.thelanguagedocumentationcrowd.org/blog/ 2014/8/14/is-learning-a-minorityindigenous-language-of-anoth er-culture-a-form-of-cultural-appropriation - http://www.thelanguagedocumentationcrowd.org/blog/2014/8/14/ is-learning-a-minorityindigenous-language-of-another-culture -a-form-of-cultural-appropriation

Replies:

Cultural appropriation? Isn't the beauty of having different cultures that they can be shared and lived by others?

In fact, if the views of the majority of the indigenous people are accurately described in that article, then in my opinion those cultures and languages deserve to die out.

Next, all of the Latino immigrants in America will speak out against people learning Spanish.
sillygoose1 on 26 April 2015

We might think all languages and cultures should be shared, but that's for us to decide. That's the thing.
cathrynm on 26 April 2015

Learning something is not an act of cultural appropriation. Surely it is a complete absurdity to say that we are
wrong to learn about other cultures out of genuine interest. Typically we are chided for being ignorant and
indifferent about how other cultures work!

However, knowledge is power, and it seems that some people are conflating the act of learning with the act of
learning and then doing something. There are many things you can do with a language once you've learned it,
some of which are not problematic (thinking about how human language works in general, writing about the
origins of words in your own language which has some loanwords from the indigenous language), some of which
are cultural appropriation (using it to construct catchphrases and slogans used in commercial or other self-
interest, and that caricature the culture), and some of which are worth discussing (teaching it to other people,
writing books in it).

cathrynm wrote:

We might think all languages and cultures should be shared, but that's for us to decide. That's the thing.

It's not for individuals to decide whether other individuals who speak the same language may or may not share
that language with outsiders. People have the right not to cooperate with the documentation of their language,
but they don't have the right to prevent others from doing so. They certainly don't have the right to suppress the
study of the language after it has been documented.

Similarly, each individual has the right to participate or not in academic research on their language. But if other
speakers choose to participate in such research, those individuals have no reasonable claim that their own rights
are being violated.
robarb on 26 April 2015

In the past, people in certain place had policies of assimilation. People are supposed to blend into the
mainstream culture. There was a documentary last week on the Hispanics in Texas on PBS. In the past,
students were forbidden to speak Spanish in school. They were discouraged to use their language at home.
Nowadays people have a different perception about being bilingual and multilingual as something that will
keep your mind active and slow the onset of dementia.
shk00design on 26 April 2015

Wow, I feel personally saddened when I hear this type of attitude (as quoted in url:http://m.chronicle.com/article/Comanche-Nation-College-T ries/139631, "Comanche Nation College Tries to Rescue a Lost Tribal Language", Katherine Mangan, June 09, 2013):

"People here are protective of the Comanche language...They [the tribeʻs elders] aren't too crazy about white people coming in and learning it." (Todd McDaniels)

“I don’t think it’s important for more people to speak the language. It’s important for our people to speak it.” (Sandra Karty)

I truly sympathize with the victims of cultural and linguistic oppression, especially when it spans generations of pain and loss, but I have no time at all for genuine racial hatred and xenophobia. Returning hatred for hatred is an ugly and unprogressive thing that leads to nothing but dead ends, and I don't feel it has any rightful place in this day and age. We need to move beyond this.

For example, I'm half-Irish myself by birth, and I'm currently trying to learn Irish as a second language as an adult. I wasn't born in Ireland, therefore I'm not strictly indigenous, and my mother and grandparents certainly didn't grow up speaking Irish at home as native speakers, so I'm not sure if I even qualify as a heritage speaker either. However I was raised by a very Irish mother, lived in Ireland as a child for a time, have lots of Irish family, and have acquired a big bagful of Irish mannerisms and ways of thinking or talking along the way - and all that's part of my identity. Furthermore, I love Irish culture and language, and want to not only keep it alive, but see it grow, thrive, and blossom for years to come (it would be terribly sad to let such a unique and amazing perspective of the world fade away after two millennia). But do I have a right to learn Irish as a non-indigenous learner according to this article?

Here's another example...I've lived in Hawai'i for almost 3 years, and am currently studying Hawaiian at the local university. I do this, not simply on a white "haole's" whim, but out of the deepest respect for Hawaiian people, culture, and tradition. I get involved as much in the local community as I can, learn about and pay respect to the ancient history and cultural roots of the language, and seek to better understand the Hawaiian perspective of the world both around and within a living community of speakers. I don't see anyone playing the part of the oppressive colonial missionary in any of my classes or these Hawaiian events; just a bunch of friendly kānaka (people) bound together as one big ʻohana (family), trying to keep the language alive and relevant, as well as vibrant and adaptive to the times, and yet true to its roots and the values and beliefs of the kūpuna (ancestors). If it weren't for the wonderful efforts that originated from partnerships between a number of non-native preservationists and native speakers in the 1970s, I don't know what might be left of the Hawaiian language by now. Yet should I now stop learning Hawaiian, simply because I have white skin?

Yes, languages change over time, just as communities and even the very landscapes that nurture them change over time. Just take a look at how English has developed through the 11th to 15th century, or how the volcanic islands of Hawaiʻi are still changing and growing, a living ʻāina (land). Look how English is changing within the context of a diverse and rich variety of Englishes around the world, and the way technology, in hand with new and social media, transforms so many aspects of it further. What should we do? Resist all change and let everything that went before die out? And who should be the privileged shareholders of a language? Just people with a certain percentage of "pure blood" or a certain shade of skin colour - what is this, the House of Slytherine? Sorry to vent, but I'm right on the same page as sillygoose1 in the post above, "Isn't the beauty of having different cultures that they can be shared and lived by others?"

Teango on 26 April 2015

Teango wrote:

"People here are protective of the Comanche language...They [the tribeʻs elders] aren't too crazy about white people coming in and learning it." (Todd McDaniels)

As someone who's been studying Ojibwe for a few years now, I can say that I've run into this attitude a couple of times. But I've also run into Ojibwe people that are fine with it too.

The bigger problem is actually finding people that can speak the language. Most of the Ojibwe people around these parts don't really know the language themselves, except for a few words and language related to ceremonial things (and there are many - I live between two Ojibwe reservations). I have a good friend that is half Ojibwe from her father's side, and she will readily tell you that her father actively shielded her from the language and a lot of the culture, due to his own upbringing (sent to boarding school where kids were harshly punished for speaking Ojibwe.) She now has some mild interest in the language herself, but not really enough to actually learn it.

I do think there is good news as far as a new generation of kids learning the language though. There are several immersion schools for kids that teach solely in Ojibwe, and if you go a bit further north of me, there are even bilingual signs in a couple of the towns. These kids are being taught that the language can and should be used for communication, not just ceremonial gatherings. While I don't think the language will ever reach the usage seen in the 1800s between Ojibwe and whites (it was sort of a lingua franca around the great lakes), it's encouraging that these immersion schools are admitting kids of all races.

R.
==
hrhenry on 26 April 2015

sillygoose1 wrote:

In fact, if the views of the majority of the indigenous people are accurately described in that article, then in my opinion those cultures and languages deserve to die out.

Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends.

I'd say it's a case of oppression giving you some minor perks. Like http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/psysociety/2013/04/02/be nevolent-sexism/ - benevolent sexism for example. The upside of speaking a "weird and incomprehensible" language is that it can become secret and/or sacred. If the people had been treated respectfully from the beginning, the language simply wouldn't have developed such a status.
Serpent on 26 April 2015

I wanted to use that bloody quote. You took the words from my mouth.

As for the language, the community that speaks it has the right to decide what to do with
it. If they don't want it spread, they don't - but of course that will have consequences.
If that is their choice, so be it. We don't have to understand it. We may feel more
morally enlightened, maybe we even are right in our considerations; but it is not up to
us to decide.
tarvos on 26 April 2015

Serpent wrote:

sillygoose1 wrote:

In fact, if the views of the majority of the indigenous people are accurately described in that article, then in my opinion those cultures and languages deserve to die out.

But who are they to say that only so and so people can learn it? If there are learning materials available for it, obviously at least one of their own people disagreed with that ideology when they helped write a course for said language.

It's no one's fault from this era how they were treated in the past. Most white Americans' ancestors immigrated here in the 18/1900s. For them to be so xenophobic and short sighted that they can say only certain people should learn their language is incredibly backwards thinking. What about other minorities for example? Are they "allowed" to learn it?
sillygoose1 on 26 April 2015

Remember that your language is an important part of your identity, in this case as a Native American. I think it's undisputed that Native American culture has been endangered by white culture since the first settlers arrived. A lot of things which were unique to the way of living of many Native American peoples have been lost and so has a big part of their identity.

Their language, being completely different from English or even Spanish, is one of the few things they still perceive as "their own", as the one thing that gives them their identity. Some white guys trying to learn their language might be perceived as unwelcome intrusion in their community, taking away from them the one thing which makes them feel Comanche, Ojibwe, Sioux or whatever.

Telling them they have no right to decide with whom they want to share their identity is patronising and obnoxious. Not wanting to share one's cultural identity with other people might be narrow-minded, but it's absolutely understandable given the history of Native American people and European settlers.

For my part, I'm starting to learn Hebrew right now and although I hope I would be welcome in Israel and that my efforts to understand Israeli culture and language would be appreciated, I nevertheless wouldn't be surprised if some Israelis would react irritatedly and maybe even cautious to a German learning their language. Germans and Jews have a more than complicated history and although we all want to leave the past behind us, we can't do so by decree. A person's or a people's experiences are their experiences and they can't simply forget and ignore them.

Telling them they have no right to feel the way they feel is, once again, patronizing and hurtful. You might convince them of your pure intentions slowly and carefully, but you can't tell them they have no right to keep their culture to themselves when their experience tells them otherwise. In other words, everything they had has been taken from them, so why should they want to share the one thing that belongs genuinely to them without fearing it might be taken from them as well?
Josquin on 26 April 2015

Josquin wrote:

Remember that your language is an important part of your identity, in this case as a Native American.

Their language, being completely different from English or even Spanish, is one of the few things they still perceive as "their own", as the one thing that gives them their identity. Some white guys trying to learn their language might be perceived as unwelcome intrusion in their community.

Yes, language can be part of your identity. But what you're saying is that if you have a particular skin colour X, then you're not allowed to learn language Y. But who decided this rule? For example, suppose some people saw me speaking Spanish, and they sincerely felt in their heart that my ability to speak Spanish was intruding on their identity (since my skin colour is different from theirs). Does that mean that I am not allowed to learn Spanish anymore? Does it mean that my interest in the language and ability to understand it is somehow insensitive to them or something? Obviously that's ridiculous. Anyone is allowed to learn Spanish if he or she wants to. The only difference between Spanish and tribal languages is the population count of the language communities. Is there a particular number of speakers that a language community must have before it becomes "permitted" for non-native speakers to also study that language!??

chaotic_thought on 26 April 2015

Have you even bothered to read my post before commenting? If not, please do so. It's not about skin colour or number of speakers, but about the history two language communities share. Obviously, some Native Americans don't trust Whites because of the experiences their people made with them. That has nothing to do with anything you asked.

Also, I didn't say learning the language was intrusive per se. I said telling a community that they have no right to keep their language to themselves was patronizing. Once again, please read my post before randomly commenting!

Thank you.

EDIT: By the way, the obvious difference between Spanish and a tribal language is that the first is a major world language spoken by billions of people, while the latter are minority languages spoken within a country that has a different official language. These minorities may have been oppressed by the majority, as is the case with Native Americans. That's the real problem here. Ignoring their feelings is simply insensitive.
Josquin on 26 April 2015

But that brings me back to my other point. Would they think it's ok for non-whites to learn their languages and be accepted into their culture? People have to get over the imperialistic past and move on. Sure, in a perfect world everyone would've stayed in their own continents centuries ago and maybe there would be a bit more peace in the world but that's not the case. If we want to make the best of what we have today and everyone wants to claim to be "tolerant" and "multicultural", that's what we need to be. No exceptions.

In that article, they expressed straight up racism and xenophobia against at least one whole race with at least a billion people spread across different continents with different backgrounds and that's extremely backwards behavior.

sillygoose1 on 26 April 2015

This is an interesting discussion. I am not Jewish nor Hispanic, yet I am learning Ladino (Djudeo Espanyol). There are, according to estimates, about 100,000 people left in the world who can speak the language and none of them are monolingual.

My interactions with Ladino speakers have been exclusively via the written word. The ones I have corresponded with are pleased to see someone from outside their community taking an interest in their language and culture. They have nothing to fear from me "usurping" their culture. I won't be writing songs, starting a blog or writing a book in Ladino. I just want to learn more about a people and culture I admire.

Ladino is on its last legs with a primarily elderly population left as the last speakers. There are efforts underway to maintain the language as a living means of communication within the community. There are online magazines, a forum- ladinokomunita and rising academic interest. As a non-heritage speaker, I don't feel the need to participate in the Ladinokomunita forum as actively as I do here. For me, I think that would be inappropriate. If I knew or met someone in person who spoke Ladino, I would love to have the opportunity to engage with them in their language and to learn from them.

In a culture where a language is tied as closely to identity as to religion, I can only go so far, even sharing a skin color. Not being Jewish, there is only so much I can understand on a deep level. Ladino was born out of the Jewish diaspora expelled from Iberia in the 15th and 16th centuries. It was influenced to a large extent by a multilingual society in the Ottoman Empire- Hebrew, Arabic, Turkish, Greek, Italian and French to some extent. I speak none of those languages and know none of the nuances, nor do I have a deep enough understanding of Judaism to fully play with Ladino in the way a native-speaker can.

If the language were listed here on the forum, I would move it to basic fluency, but I will never be as advanced in Ladino as I am in my other languages. I am content with learning about a bygone culture that kept itself together after a horrible injustice and maintained (and maintaining) their traditions and language by taking what they liked from the cultures and languages around them. Does appreciation make me a usurper? I don't think so. If I tried to be high-profile and claim to be on an equal level to them (as I cannot), most likely it would.

Most of the Native American languages in the US do not have the literary history that Ladino has nor speakers numbering in the low six figure range. Those interested in reviving Native American languages are trying to reintroduce a language that has already truly died as an actively spoken one or may have a native speaker range in single or double digits left at most. In this situation, a learner from outside the culture and one from within, start out at the same level. It could perhaps be possible that the outside learners/speakers could be close to equal or, conceivably, outnumber those from within the language's own culture, given the low numbers of people in th pool of those interested in learning. Then, in that case, whose language is it? I think that's where the rub is.

I don't believe that should stop an outsider from learning or studying a Native American language because of intellectual curiosity. I do believe that those who do so should not try to claim equality with those who want to make their ancestors languages live again amongst their own people in a way that is most meaningful to them. So, do the "owners" get to choose who learns their language? Obviously, if materials are freely available, no. They do get to choose with whom they wish to interact. So while I may be free to download a Comanche course and learning materials, I may not be welcome to go to the reservation and attend classes and interact. At least not while the language revitalization is nascent.

I recently posted here about http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?T ID=40282&PN=1&TPN=1#532739 - the revival of an 'extinct' language-Manx . I wouldn't feel any qualms about learning Manx. My daughter was born on the Isle of Man and she and her brother have Manx heritage from their mother who is half Manx. It would extend my horizons in the same way my other languages have done. The Manx schools that are teaching in the language are open to anyone of any heritage. So, I don't think that my speaking Manx would be an issue on the IOM. It is also, like Ladino part of a Western culture.

The Native American fears come from a long history of usurpation. Remember, the indigenous population of the Americas started out with the whole continent of America (North and South) and are now left only with small pockets of territory remaining. Still, that being said, I don't think Native American tribes have too much to worry about when it comes to outsiders usurping their languages. The track record of beginners is that most people fail at language-learning even with all the resources in the world at their fingertips. The odds of outsiders without a huge motivation surpassing those within the culture who do have the motivation to honor their own people and learn a language that is part of their history and their own identity are pretty slim, indeed.
iguanamon on 26 April 2015

sillygoose1 wrote:

But that brings me back to my other point. Would they think it's ok for non-whites to learn their languages and be accepted into their culture?

I'm quite sure they wouldn't.

Quote:

People have to get over the imperialistic past and move on. Sure, in a perfect world everyone would've stayed in their own continents centuries ago and maybe there would be a bit more peace in the world but that's not the case. If we want to make the best of what we have today and everyone wants to claim to be "tolerant" and "multicultural", that's what we need to be. No exceptions.

As I said, we all strive to forget the past, but we can't tell anybody to do so. Moving on is the one thing, but that doesn't mean that the past can be forgotten and is over once and for all. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way.

Of course, it would be positive if Native Americans and WASPs could forgive each other, but Native Americans are disadvantaged till this very day. As I said, it's patronizing to tell an underprivileged person to forgive all the harm that was done to them when you are in a priviledged position yourself.

This brings me to the next point:

Quote:

In that article, they expressed straight up racism and xenophobia against at least one whole race with at least a billion people spread across different continents with different backgrounds and that's extremely backwards behavior.

The problem with racism, sexism, and every other -ism is that it's not racism if you have prejudices against the privileged group that oppresses the minority. The Native Americans are not discriminating against WASPs, they are trying to protect themselves (and their language and identity) against them.

Also, you need to understand traditional cultures, which may not share the same values you have. That's the whole point of intercultural contact and diplomacy and crucial when dealing with non-Western cultures. You can't expect everybody to share your own world view and values. Expecting them to act according to your mindset is, once again, patronizing.

That was the whole point of the article the OP linked to. You might simply want to dabble in a language, because you think it's exotic and you somehow like it. But what you don't understand is what it means to the people whose native language it is. We as Westerners tend to forget that there are very different cultures with very different mindsets on this planet, so simply learning a language, even in order to document it, might be intrusive or patronizing if you don't really care for the culture it belongs to.
Josquin on 26 April 2015

Quote:

People have to get over the imperialistic past and move on. Sure, in a perfect
world everyone would've stayed in their own continents centuries ago and maybe there
would be a bit more peace in the world but that's not the case. If we want to make the
best of what we have today and everyone wants to claim to be "tolerant" and
"multicultural", that's what we need to be. No exceptions.

There's a fallacy here. Tolerancy implies you let people hold their opinions and let
them live with them as they see fit within their own communities. If a community wants
to be isolated because of bad experiences with imperialism and colonialism, that is
their good right. Whether that is actually beneficial for the survival of their
language is another story.

Indeed, no exceptions.
tarvos on 27 April 2015

tarvos wrote:

Quote:

People have to get over the imperialistic past and move on. Sure, in a perfect
world everyone would've stayed in their own continents centuries ago and maybe there
would be a bit more peace in the world but that's not the case. If we want to make the
best of what we have today and everyone wants to claim to be "tolerant" and
"multicultural", that's what we need to be. No exceptions.

But how are they being tolerant towards others? Denying a whole race to learn about their language and culture? I've never heard not once in my life that someone shouldn't be allowed to connect with another culture and people just because of their physical features. How can this even be justifiable to anyone? If they would have said "we don't want anyone outside of our culture..." instead of just "whites", then fine I can understand that. But what the article is stating is that they only have this rancor and resent towards white people and that they are the only exclusion. Maybe it's just specific tribes or the 1-2 stated in the article, who knows.
sillygoose1 on 27 April 2015

White people are just not used to being excluded. Not that anyone prevents them from connecting with the culture. To me it's not that different from not letting outsiders into a certain part of a church/temple or keeping men out of women-only spaces (regardless of whether there's a corresponding space for males).

I also think they used white to mean "non-indigenous", "of European origin". So if there's any racism, it's towards the non-white people who identify as European, not towards the whites they're lumped together with. Note the source: a language documentation site. They simply assume a basic understanding of privilege and oppression. It's just like here on HTLAL we mention monolingual Americans and we know exactly what we mean. Nobody is getting defensive and screaming how not all Americans are monolingual, or how it's okay for them to be monolingual because everyone speaks English. In fact many Anglophones here are a tad dramatic in their embarrassment.
Serpent on 27 April 2015

Me personally I swim in embarassment of the Anglophone linguistic problems, let us
call it, but then I wonder, as someone who is mixed of non-white and "Caucasian" if
Spanish is considered "white", how would it be considered to learn those languages for
people who are of mixed heritage of being part ethnicity of the "imperialists" and the
"non-imperialists"?

Personally I think that in this case, I do not know how they can feel if you
really want to learn their language, like Navajo, Mapuche, Iroquois, etc. and you tell
no one about it if you just learn it for your own interest. I think, jowever, that the
main point could possibly be that, there have been certain ways in which the learning
of their language has been used as a gateway to manipulation. Perhaps they feel that
in the past, they initially felt good that a non-native who had zero connection to the
culture and language learnt it and communicated with them, but then they ended up
finding out that said person learnt the language to communicate with the people not to
help them, but to trick them on the part of the imperialistic cause as they see it.
This is just a guess of course, but maybe it could somehow play some part in this bad
sentiment that they feel.

As a very general example, if let us say, someone from the imperialist side learnt one
of these languages in the 1800s or so, or even in present day. Then instead of trying
to use the language to help their culture, said person tries to use the language as a
tool by trying to convert all of the people of that language into one of the religions
that is practised by the imperialists. I think that this might be an example of why
some might feel suspicious of the modern-day imperialists learning their language.

Of course then it could follow that those who want to learn the language do so and try
to communicate and enter the culture of the native speakers. Then they ask why is
someone completely foreign to the entire culture even doing so. The learner says that
it is for interest and to communicate with the people. Then the native speakers can
say, "But what is what the other person said at first too"
1e4e6 on 27 April 2015

This is a very interesting notion!

Language is not land, nor is it culture (entirely). At its core, it's simply a way
for humans to communicate with one another. So stealing it or appropriating it is a
very interesting idea. Yes, language and culture are highly related at times, but
they are not one in the same. I definitely understand some peoples' hesitation for
outsiders to learn it; when your language has in-group privilege, especially when
that is in response to a greater, "prestige" dialect or another language, you tend to
get protective. Hence why slurs can be reclaimed by minorities, but not used by
outsiders (n-word by african americans and f-word by gays). This can happen with
minority languages as well - a gadje appearing in a gypsy settlement that speaks
fluent Romany would most likely be met with suspision, or a RP businessman attempting
his best Cockney lilt. But, the fact that language does intertwine with culture so
much complicates things; I personally am in the camp, especially when it comes to
minority and endangered languages, that having more people learning them is
beneficial. Nowadays, most people learning Comanche, Cherokee, or Chuckchi are going
to be doing it because of benevolent ideals. In order to save these tongues, I would
imagine having outsiders learning them would be met with positive reactions and not
vitriol.
Gallo1801 on 27 April 2015

I guess for me at least I feel like they can believe whatever they want. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I mean honestly, I would be surprised if non heritage speakers numbered more than the thousands (or even the hundreds) for any of those given languages. So it's not exactly a pandemic they're facing in this regards. People generally learn a language to communicate and participate in a culture - given the vast majority of indigenous peoples (in the US at least, and obviously less so for uncontacted or remote tribes) are bilingual there is fairly little need to learn it outside of curiosity - which means the amount of people learning it would be very miniscule.
basica on 27 April 2015

sillygoose1 wrote:

But how are they being tolerant towards others? Denying a whole race to learn about
their language and culture? I've never heard not once in my life that someone
shouldn't be allowed to connect with another culture and people just because of their
physical features. How can this even be justifiable to anyone? If they would have said
"we don't want anyone outside of our culture..." instead of just "whites", then fine I
can understand that. But what the article is stating is that they only have this
rancor and resent towards white people and that they are the only exclusion. Maybe
it's just specific tribes or the 1-2 stated in the article, who knows.

Even if they are intolerant, you must be tolerant; otherwise the situation will get
worse, not better. We have a duty to at least be tolerant towards them and show our
good intentions; reacting with more rancour will not help our cause.

@Gallo1802: Of course it is better if we could study them, and we often do. The point
is not whether it's better culturally (I 100% agree that it is), the thing is that I
don't agree that we can make that choice as a country for a certain minority,
because it violates their individual rights not to spread knowledge of that language.
This is exactly what they would view as imperialist, because it violates their
idea of autonomy.
tarvos on 27 April 2015

I think the main problem isn't a lack of tolerance but a lack of trust. Native Americans have their historical reasons not to trust white people and that's what's reflected in these quotes.

Of course, you think of yourself as a tolerant being and that you deserve to be treated with tolerance as well. And that's of course perfectly right. But you'll always be a stranger to some people who don't know you're a tolerant person, so they might mistrust you for some reason.

Americans aren't used to such situations, but for Germans, this feeling is well-known. In France, we're the "sales boches", in the Netherlands we're the "moffen", in Poland we're the "kurwy niemcy" and so on. It's gotten better, but Germans still aren't very popular abroad and might even be called "Nazis" by some people. When our president delivered a speech in front of the Israeli parliament, the deputies used to be warned that he would speak in the language of Hitler and Goebbels to them.

People who don't know you will always treat you according to stereotypes about your nationality or race. That's sad, but that's the way it is. So, you can't simply demand that people trust you, you need to earn their trust.
Josquin on 27 April 2015

... alas, living languages are not devoid of people. Oh no, the horror of having to deal with actual, living, breathing humans who have their own feelings, experiences, values!
Bao on 27 April 2015