Landscape in Language: A Transdisciplinary Workshop

景观是人类体验的基本组成部分。然而，直到最近，对人类环境的这些更大部分的研究在各个学科之间都是支离破碎的，而且经常被附加到对更近的环境的研究中。该奖项支持一个跨学科研讨会，该研讨会将汇集一系列关于景观如何用语言表现的观点，以及这揭示了人与土地的关系。讲习班参与者将讨论几个关键问题。地理特征的界定、分类和命名是否存在跨文化和跨语言的差异？不同语言之间有哪些相似之处，差异又有多大？以地形表示的另类世界观能否用于生产适合文化的地理信息系统（GIS）？研讨会将讨论这些及相关问题，并涉及来自不同学科的二十多位学者：人类学家、地理学家、信息科学家、语言学家、哲学家等。该研讨会将建立在“民族生理学”研究项目（David Mark， Andrew Turk和David Stea）和荷兰尼梅亨马克斯普朗克心理语言学研究所（MPI）的研究人员（Stephen Levinson， Niclas Burenhult等）的长期合作基础上，该研究所是语言和思想跨文化变化研究的主要中心。MPI语言和认知小组的研究人员最近总结了一系列在不同地理位置用九种语言的景观术语（和地名）的案例研究。这两个小组的研究人员组成了研讨会的组委会。其余受邀参与者来自其他机构和学科，被选中是为了补充MPI和“民族地理学”参与者的优势。为了确保“新鲜血液”和替代观点的存在，剩余的参与者将从响应公开征集的研究人员中选出。研讨会将结合标准的论文报告和讨论会以及实地经验。实地考察将为理论和原理的讨论提供基础。大部分会议将在亚利桑那州切利峡谷口纳瓦霍保留地的钦勒举行。该项目还将包括在纳瓦霍族的首府窗口岩（Window Rock）停留半天，在那里我们计划让讲习班参与者与负责地理信息系统或文化保护的部落官员会面。在研讨会的其他会议上，与会者将总结他们最近的工作并讨论研究主题，包括：景观术语的语义；地名（地名）的作用与构成topophilia;概念框架（本体）；以及与本地制图和地理信息系统的关系。讨论会旨在就研究问题和优先事项达成共识。这些应包括但不限于：用于跨语言比较景观术语和概念的本体；可能影响语言群体采用和使用的术语和概念性质的因素；文化的精神层面与景观术语和地名的关系研究方法，尤指实地研究方法；并讨论了研究的伦理维度，以及它对参与研究的土著社区的潜在价值。研讨会的成果将包括语言、文化和景观之间关系的研究重点。我们期待在研讨会期间对这一重要的研究课题产生新的见解，并激活新的研究项目，以推进人们如何概念化和交流景观的知识。讲习班的成果还应改进计算机化土著地理信息系统和制图系统的理论基础。研讨会还将为记录和保存与景观相关的特定领域语言和文化的方法做出贡献。来自多个学科的早期职业学者的参与以及研讨会出版物（可能是期刊的特刊）也将产生更广泛的影响。在招聘早期职业参与者时将强调多样性。在纳瓦霍保留地举办大部分研讨会将有助于当地经济，并为美国原住民学生和其他人提供参加研讨会的机会。

The landscape is a fundamental component of the human experience. Yet until recently, the study of these larger parts of the human environment has been fragmented among the disciplines and often has been appended to studies of more proximate environments. This award supports a transdisciplinary workshop that will bring together a range of perspectives on how landscape is represented in language, and what this reveals about the relationships of people to the land. Workshop participants will address several key questions. Are there cross-cultural and cross-linguistic variations in the delimitation, classification, and naming of geographic features? What are the similarities across languages, and how great are the differences? Can alternative world-views, as expressed in representations of landforms, be utilized to produce appropriate culturally-specific Geographic Information Systems (GIS)? The workshop will discuss these and related questions and involve about two dozen scholars from a range of disciplines: anthropologists, geographers, information scientists, linguists, philosophers, and others. The workshop will build on the long-term collaboration between the 'Ethnophysiography' research project (David Mark, Andrew Turk and David Stea) and researchers at the Max Planck Institution (MPI) for Psycholinguistics in Nijmegen (Netherlands) (Stephen Levinson, Niclas Burenhult, and others), a leading center for research on cross-cultural variations in language and thought. Researchers in the MPI's Language and Cognition Group have recently concluded a set of case studies of landscape terms (and place names) in nine languages in a wide variety of geographic locations. Researchers from those two groups constitute the workshop organizing committee. The remaining invited participants are from other institutions and disciplines, selected to compliment the strengths of the MPI and 'Ethnophysiography' participants. To ensure the presence of 'new blood' and alternative perspectives, the remaining participants will be selected from researchers who respond to an open call for participation. The workshop will combine standard paper presentations and discussion sessions with field experiences. The field trips will provide grounding for the discussions of theory and principles. The majority of the meeting will be held at Chinle, Arizona, on the Navajo Reservation, at the mouth of Canyon de Chelly. The program also will include a half day in Window Rock, capital of the Navajo Nation, where we plan for workshop participants to meet with tribal officials with responsibilities related to GIS or to cultural preservation. At the workshop's other sessions, participants will summarize their recent work and discuss research themes, including: semantics of landscape terms; the role and construction of geographic names (toponyms); topophilia; conceptual frameworks (ontologies); and relations to indigenous mapping and GIS. Discussion sessions will aim to reach consensus on research issues and priorities. These should include, but not be limited to: ontologies for comparing landscape terms and concepts cross-linguistically; factors that may influence the nature of terms and concepts adopted and used by a speech community; relationships of spiritual aspects of culture to landscape terms and toponyms; research methods, especially field methods; and discussion of ethical dimensions of the research, and its potential value to the indigenous communities involved in the research. Outcomes of the workshop will include research priorities for the study of the relationships between language, culture, and landscape. We expect new insights on this important research topic to arise during the workshop and to activate new research programs that will advance knowledge of how people conceptualize and communicate about the landscape. Workshop outcomes also should improve the theoretical basis for computerized Indigenous GIS and mapping systems. The workshop also will contribute to methods for documenting and preserving domain-specific language and culture related to landscape. Broader impact also will result from the participation of early career scholars from several disciplines, and from workshop publications (likely a special issue of a journal). Diversity will be emphasized in the recruitment of the early-career participants. Holding the majority of the workshop on the Navajo Reservation will contribute to the local economy and provide opportunities for native-American students and others to participate in the workshop.