Language Revitalization and the Classroom: Video Workshops at an Elementary School in Miyakojima
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The topic of the article is interesting and extremely important; innovative and inspiring pedagogy that would be suitable for language revitalization in a school context. Background information and contextualization of the topic are sufficient. The researcher has been involved in fieldwork in local communities for as long as ten years and must have extensive knowledge of the language situation and its development in various domains.
Experimenting with a new pedagogical approach in the format of video workshops and reporting its results to an academic (and professional) audience is valuable. This approach seems particularly suited to Miyakoan as a spoken vernacular. The author also briefly describes the ingenious process of including the workshops as "Integrated Study" in the school curriculum.
In the Results section (3.) practical and technical information is carefully explained, but the reader does not know how to link the video workshops to the theme of language revitalization. It remains unclear if the pupils are expected/instructed to use (some words/expressions of) Miyakoan in the videos or during the process. It is only in the Discussion section (4.) that it becomes clear that in the word chain game some Miyakoan words were actually used and that children were even encouraged use them in the beginning. (In Table 4 proper names are capitalized, not pronouns.) The manner in which a relaxed and permissive atmosphere was created in the workshops is illuminating and the theoretical link to a "comfortable space" is important.
Section 4.3 on 3rd generation speakers is a valuable contribution. Hawaiian is mentioned as another – successful – example of language revitalization, but perhaps a closer look at other endangered/indigenous languages and pedagogical approaches adopted in relation to them could broaden the scope of the experiments described in this paper and contextualize them in a more global setting.
RQs 1 and 2 are kind of answered from line 536 onwards, but the reader is also expected to deduct the answers from the described experiments. RQ 3 remains somewhat unclear. If it is not within the scope of this paper to answer it, perhaps it could be left out.
In Conclusions (5.) some additional theoretical and other references are still added, but it would be best to find a place for them elsewhere in the paper and concentrate on the findings of this research by linking them to the theoretical issues raised in the beginning. The example of the word chain game with Miyakoan words is illuminating, though, as is the idea of linking the expression "ngyamasu" to language attitudes.
Comment on ethics: The school and project members are named and in some photos children can be easily recognized. The author does not make reference to basic ethical issues, such as permission to conduct fieldwork in the school, name the school and include photos where pupils' faces can be seen.
Comment on the references: Some works cited in the text are missing from the list of references (e.g. Minoura 2003, Smith 2021). Some others are included in the list, but are not cited in the text (e.g. Schulz 2017, Trudgill 1975).
Author Response
I sincerely thank three reviewers with their insightful advice and comments. And I have incorporated them into my revised manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
1) Too many "in the 21st century". Some may be not necessary.
2)In Section 1.3, there is one reason that is not mentioned in this article. Okinawan Teachers Association conducted "speak Japanese campaign" so that the children of Occupied Okinawa could have identity as Japanese citizens. I think this is the main reason.
Author Response
I sincerely thank three reviewers with their insightful advice and comments. And I have incorporated them into my revised manuscript
Reviewer 3 Report
1
The REFERENCES section is seriously inadequate with so many omissions. The author must read the paper line by line and ensure that every citation is referenced. For example, the works by Maher
Maher 2017
Maher and Macdonald
Maher and Yashiro
Fujita-Round and Maher
2.
The author must make a decision. Is it Miyakoan or Miyakoan language. Language naming is important. The author is ambiguous or confused or hesitant or maybe all three. In fact, the author should add one paragraph on the issue of language naming (Miyako dialect or Miyakoan or Miyako language or Miyakoan). Miyakoan language is a misleading term. It suggests Miyakoan 'style'. If the author means the Miyakoan language then that is acceptable. It is not a trivial matter to name a language or name a dialect a language. At the same time the author should place in brackets what she considers the proper name of other languages, p94-5=95.
Okinawa (Okinawan)
Yonaguni (???)
Amami (???)
etc.
3.
The fieldworkers' paradox. line 122. A boy confronts the teacher, "Why is a Tokyo visitor telling us about Miyakoan history?"
The author does not report her answer. Silence. What happened? Did she ignore this question? How did the teacher respond? The author should report this and comment. She should try to answer it herself.
4. line 576
Replace in by at
Author Response
I sincerely thank three reviewers with their insightful advice and comments. And I have incorporated them into my revised manuscript
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
In comparison with the previous version, thelink between the video workshops and the theme of language revitalization has been clarified. That said, it could be stated more clearly in the beginning which particular workshops have a direct link with the theme and how.
Hawaiian is mentioned as a successful example of language revitalization, but a closer look at other endangered/indigenous languages and pedagogical approaches adopted in relation to them could broaden the scope of the experiments described in this paper and contextualize them in a more global setting.
Comment on ethics: The author does not make reference to basic ethical issues (e.g. permission to conduct fieldwork in the school and include photos where pupils' faces can be seen; it is unclear if the author took the photos her/himself).
Additional English language editing is still required.
