Developing a Māori language mathematics lexicon: challenges for corpus planning in indigenous language contexts

Abstract

Over the last 25 years, there has been significant modernisation and elaboration of the Māori language mathematics lexicon and register to support the teaching of (Western) mathematics as a component of Māori-medium schooling. These developments are situated within the wider Māori language revitalisation movement in Aotearoa/New Zealand, of which Māori-medium education is a central component. A feature of the initial development of a Māori mathematics lexicon was the informal approach taken, involving elders, teachers and community working together to establish a corpus of appropriate terms, rather than any formal language planning approach. Subsequently, two state agencies, Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori (the Māori Language Commission) and the New Zealand Ministry of Education assumed a formal role in the standardisation and elaboration process. Due to limitations in resources and expertise, the Commission eventually withdrew from the process of developing the specialised lexicon for schooling and, in their absence, ongoing lexical development was entrusted to a group of Māori-medium mathematics educators (Te Ohu Pāngarau) and closely linked to the Ministry of Education's numeracy strategies. However, the process of linguistic modernisation of the Māori language to support the teaching of school subjects such as mathematics has since raised a number of conflicting tensions and linguistic issues, particularly among the older generation of Māori language speakers. This paper explores the process of development and the at-times conflicting linguistic ideologies which influenced the lexication and codification of the Māori-medium mathematics terminology. It also specifically examines the roles, policies and beliefs of the agents, including the two state agencies, involved in the process, charting the connections between micro, meso and macro language policy and practices in this context.

Keywords:

• Māori language revitalisation
• Māori-medium education
• mathematics lexicon
• corpus planning
• pāngarau

Notes on contributors

Tony Trinick is Associate Dean Māori in the Faculty of Education, and Principal Lecturer in Te Puna Wānanga, The University of Auckland. His work has focused on narratives and issues associated with the modernising of a minority endangered indigenous language to teach mathematics, curriculum development and working with pre-service and teachers in indigenous schools.

Stephen May is Deputy Dean for Research in the Faculty of Education and a professor of Education in Te Puna Wānanga, The University of Auckland. His work encompasses, among other things, language rights, language policy and planning and indigenous language revitalisation.

Notes

1. For example, in 1930, a survey of Māori children estimated that approximately 97% spoke only te reo Māori at home. By 1960, this had dropped to 26% (May, 2005).

2. This arose, in turn, from a 1985 to 1986 ruling of the Waitangi Tribunal. The Tribunal is a quasi-government organisation, established in 1975, with the aim of addressing and, where necessary, recommending redress for, actions or omissions of the Crown (New Zealand Government) towards Māori as a result of colonisation (Hayward & Wheen, 2004; May, 2010). In this particular ruling (Waitangi Tribunal, 1986), the Waitangi Tribunal concluded that te reo Mäori was a taonga (treasured possession) and therefore had a guaranteed right to protection and recognition within New Zealand law – leading subsequently to its official recognition.

3. Indeed, this remains the case to the present day, although there was a draft national languages plan developed in the early 1990s (Waite 1992) that was never subsequently implemented (May, 2002).

4. Neoliberal ideologies have underpinned similar developments in state mathematics curricula in public schools in the USA and Great Britain in recent times (Tienken, 2011).

5. This ideology of linguistic purism, along with the preoccupation with corpus development more generally, was associated most closely with Te Taura Whiri's first commissioner, Timoti Karetu. After his resignation, along with a number of other key staff, in the late 1990s, Te Taura turned its focus to other areas of language policy (particularly, status language planning; see May, 2012). Where Te Taura Whiri has continued its more limited involvement in corpus development over the last decade or so, it has also adopted a more pragmatic approach (Keegan, 2005). However, the early influence of linguistic purism still left an indelible imprint on the subsequent development of the pängarau curriculum.